|
Author
|
Topic: Truth in Science
|
Don Brancato
Member
Member # 417
|
posted 18. September 2002 16:28
Truth in Science
Donald H. Brancato
As a scientist with the only 100% successful clinical application of "tissue engineering" using any kind of stem cells, I am amazed at the harangue and controversy over "intelligent design" consuming the time and energies of so-called scientists. We would all be better stewards of our limited time in seeking the truth by observing the reality surrounding us. History as a reflection of time serves to substantiate or negate our conclusions. From the repetitive validations of fact over time, we postulate an order to explain the constancy of mass, energy, time, and space. We become aware of the immutable laws of nature. The truth of those unchanging laws is confirmed simply by viewing them controlling the totality of the universe. To do otherwise is contrary to the scientific method, and denies those who violate it the right to be called a scientist. True scientists only observe fact, postulate an order or hypothesis to explain their consistently validated observations, and then provide an experimental model to test their theories of organization. If confirmed by applying their hypothesis to predict natural events, there is only an assumption on which further discovery of principles is built. Each truth of nature coming to our awareness, understood only on theory, tested by time itself, allows us to delve deeper into the Order that controls every law of mathematics, every atomic and sub-atomic particle, and every celestial body.
From the perspective of an electrical engineer, each law or formula that has been proven by the absolute constancy of history in predicting natural occurrences, allows us to build on it to advance scientific information. From that valid information, we then postulate our very confined understanding of the immutable order and publish our versions of the laws that, we suggest, regulate reality. Our ultimate question should therefore be, not about the origin of the species, or the age of the universe, or any irrelevant ruminations distracting us from simply searching for the truth, but first about the Creator of the immutable "laws of Nature, and of Nature's God". -Declaration of Independence
The controversies over perceptions of laws are resolved by adherence to fact. Looking only to the scientific method, and the mathematics of probability, the propositions that prescribe order from randomness are dispelled by truth. Though questions such as intelligent design may not be answered by science, false concepts such as evolution may be excluded and ignored by truth alone. There is absolutely no credible evidence revealed by experiment or valid scientific exploration to support the imposition of order without the expenditure of energy, or any maintenance of order unconstained by natural law. It simply does not exist. No fossil record has ever been found to repudiate the conclusions of the laws of probability. Heritability, redundancy, and, fundamentally adhering to the scientific method, even mutation leading to natural selection are questions left unresolved, dispelling the false concept of evolution by scientific history.
An example of the wasteful consumption of "scientists'" time by controversies not simply seeking to follow the scientific method, while not negating the value of always scrutinizing, analyzing, and testing the propositions of the scientific community, is illustrated in the following example.
I can use any everyday activity, but specifically in this example, I choose the activity of trying to enter your own home through a locked door, or better, a door you presume to be locked. First, by history, you assume that the house you are trying to gain access to is your house. This is done without linking a title in your name to a map or any other "proof". You trust history to proceed at your task of opening your door. Again, by the constancy of past experience, you again trust, and insert your key into the lock, and turn it, expecting the lock to unlock. All of this has progressed because you rely on an order that has been repeatedly validated over time. Then, if the door opens your trust is confirmed, and you follow the same path the next time. If the door doesn't unlock, you are left to proceed differently. The first thing you can do is to revalidate the steps you took to get to the point where the pattern or order failed. If it was your car, you would likely check to make sure it really was your car. There are many alternatives and look-alikes, and your impressions or opinions may be mistaken. On the other hand, the route you took to get to your house more than likely supports your presumption that this is your house. Assuming you are in the right place without proof, you might next check to see if you have the right key. Many keys fit the same keyway, but the pins may be different. After checking to see that you have chosen the correct key, rather than presuming that the designer of the lock, by some mysterious method, changed the way the lock works, you conclude that the lock itself or the key may be damaged. Any rational person then looks for a way to bypass the failed mechanism. Having gained entry by some other means, there are still choices. One can ignore the facts, and again try the lock without fixing the problem. You can continue to accomplish your task by another means or path, if available, or you can fix the problem. In no instance, does anyone presume to be able to either create or modify an immutable law or order that led to some non-productive pursuit. Most reasonable people would not ignore the evidence of history or time itself.
We proceed in life guided by a history confirming the immutable natural law, unable to either create or modify it. In science, we seek only to become aware of it, and use the tools it provides us. A true scientist builds on truth to discover additional truth. Time is not wasted proposing rationalizations to support personal views or prejudices. The "design inference" looks only at validated historical evidence that is consistent with our current understanding of the laws of chemistry, physics, and mathematics.
Excerpted and edited by the author from his book, The Attack on America, 2nd Ed., Freedom Press, St. Louis, 2002.
[ 19 September 2002, 01:39: Message edited by: Don Brancato ]
IP: Logged
|
|
Moderator
Administrator
Member # 1
|
posted 19. September 2002 01:17
Don,
Attacks on "humanist agendas" or "the religion of humanism" have no place at ISCID. Furthermore, your post does little or nothing to promote complex systems research.
Please modify your post in accord with the rules of this board or this thread will be closed. Please remove ad-hominem attacks and make substantiative comments toward a productive discussion of complex systems research.
[ 19 September 2002, 01:18: Message edited by: Moderator ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic