Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Bill Rea <bill.rea AT canterbury.ac.nz>]

Karl wrote:-

>> Of course historians are not good scientists.
>> Historians study
>> the unobservable past by analyzing surviving
>> records, while science is based
>> on observing the present.

And Tory responded:-

>I have no idea what you mean. Science also studies the
>unobservable past by analyzing surviving records, i.e.
>evidence.

Karl has highly idiosyncratic definitions of things like ``science'',
``evidence'', and a number of other words. When he talks about science
he's not talking about what most of the rest of the world would
understand by that word. You are right. Science, as practiced in the
real world, deals with a vast amount of indirect observation. His
definition is religiously motivated as he wishes to have a definition
which excludes evolution from being science. It just something you need
to be aware of otherwise it is a source of confusion.


Bill Rea, ICT Services, University of Canterbury \_
E-Mail bill.rea AT canterbury.ac.nz                 </   New
Phone +64-3-364-2331, Fax  +64-3-364-2332       /)  Zealand
Unix Systems Administrator                     (/'