Has to, does it so well!

(Doan tell bear!)

aiz sowwy if may opeeneeonated sewf be aw-fence-if, ai getz a tach to a topic and no be lettin go, laik kitteh on belly rubbin hooman-paw.

(Until teh next hot topic, anyway!)

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/4/27/03541/2520

“…All the statements of empirical science (or all ‘meaningful’ statements) must be capable of being finally decided, with respect to their truth and falsity; we shall say that they must be ‘conclusively decidable’. This means that their form must be such that to verify them and to falsify them must both be logically possible. Thus Schlick says: ‘…a genuine statement must be capable of conclusive verification’; and Waismann says still more clearly: ‘If there is no possible way to determine whether a statement is true then that statement has no meaning whatsoever. For the meaning of a statement is the method of its verification” (17)

Intelligent Design obviously does not fit this criterion. As should be clear by now, there is little if any evidence for Intelligent Design, but this does not prove it to be false. It is, in fact, impossible to prove it false. However unlikely it is that some form of intelligence created the universe, there is no way to verify or falsify the claim. God is invisible, we are told. He is undetectable. This is in contrast to Darwinism, which could easily be falsified if it were shown that some creature just appeared out of thin air, without any ancestors (though this may be difficult to prove, it would not be impossible). Therefore, Intelligent Design fails the test of falsifiability, and is therefore not a valid scientific theory.

And I have never heard this figure of 95% percent before. I think it would depend on your experiment, what would be considered a confirmed hypothesis.

And I don’t really feel like continuing this discussion, so I probably won’t reply to what you say next.

Cheers

Hopez u be feelin bettr soon.

iz cryiin tu nao…

i can has intelligent spelchek?

N Ah kan sooooo rellayte to dah lolspeak in dah reel lyfe, eberwan at offyce nao dere standard introdukkschaun eez “Oh hai!” and followed bai ah “Hao joo?” and wen we getz stuff in dah inboxx we sez “DO NOT WANT” or if’n sumwan bein teasin joo sai “Joo eez vry PLEH todai” or “Joo eez full of FAIL – go awai…” and also “Pls tu nawt b tuchin mah schtuff ktxbai” is vry popoolarz. Also dah “mah reports, Ah has dem, lett mee show dem tu u.” Kiddehs luvrls lolspeak tu – Ah r steppmumz n has all growed keeds n dey all answer fone nao as “Oh hai!” (was vry funnee callin home n heerin dis, Ah sed to self – Ah has infekkted mah local popoolaschaun, mah werk heer eez done!) Nao dey dun eben queschaun dis at werk or home, makes mee vry happee, butt Ah kno Ah weel b sayin dis att mostt unoppertune tyme dat will has much funnee! (N mebbe embarass tu but eef funnee Ah weel nawt kare so mausch!)

N Ah rly rly rly rly has to watch mah emails. “Pls tu b sine eenk n b sendin bakk promptlee” hmmm, DELETE DELETE DELETE…

^^

mebbe eef dah older generaschaunz had ICHC dey wud has much more funnee n WIN n laff,

(((all dah peeps owt dere who has grumps, imagine hao grumpeh dey b wifout joo!!!)))

mai dad be super grumpee an onlee 65. Indeed, he wuz BORNDED grumpee!

want to gib/get snorgles but he wud bitez me, LOL!

no stuffee bear gonna fix his attitude.

I noes it bees hard, ManfredMom.

Dem ol grouchchee dads r hard on us wemmens.

Iffn u run unner cubbers wid kitteh, pls to gib it hugz fur me!

tanks.

I begz of u.

Lissen.

Wen u not unnerstan a post, please not too be gibben a vote yet. Go and invesstugate dat statemunt….den, yu jus mant fand dat u LAKS dat statemnt. Letz not bee so hastee too bee gibben teh low votez, K?

makes mee sad too see teh low votez.

Kthxbai.

At what point does intelegent design in any way actually employ the scientific method in it’s theory. (which is the definition of scientific: that it uses the scientific method, all of it, to observe, test, and confirm)

If there is no evidence or tests ( risky tests, designed to succed only if the specifc condition being tested is true, with no less than a 95% success rate, as that is the standard to which all scientific experimentation is held) supporting thier theory then, no matter how someone protests that they are being scientific, they are falling short.

To this same standard of proof is held physics, astronomy, geology, biology, and so on, and should be held such as homeopathy, mentalism, astrology, and intelegent design.

Reely, I had a bad speerienze on anudder site todai ware I shot mah mouf off an shuddun hab. Den I gotz attacked. An ah sed “ah is runnin awai!!” But I snuck and lookded an dere was sum reel nice peeples sed sum reel sweet stuffs….I wuz tuched an surprahzed.

I sai dis as a preelude tu dis: I lub dis site SO MUCH. Dere is much pleh and DO NOT WANT! out dere in teh wurld, and wen I comez here, dere IS no pleh, jus nice peeples like Janet and Manfreds Mom and Crazy Cat Lady and manee manee udders who makes me happee. I knows I nebber gonna sees no nastee hatefull flamez and udder stuffs. I comez here and it is like hebben.

I nebber talks like dis befor, it is so much fun! It is spillin into my eberydai talk wuntz in a while ef I not karefull…I tink mah fambly goin to smack me upside teh head soon…LOL!
Tanks u.

Kthxbai.
*blushes n runs*

I hate to make my first few posts turn this direction, though. =(

Nope, no joke here! Thanks to all! Blessings and Prayers for those needing it!

Hmm, maybe I could read (comment) on new ones in the morning, and read old ones in afternoon…..

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/06/060613-cat-bear.html

dis kitteh nawt lacking in sef-esteam, but may be lil stoopy (he is deklawd, eben!)

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/06/060613-cat-bear.html

dis kitteh has no lack of self esteam, but maybe a lil bit stoopy (he is deklawd eben!)