[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Ar-Cunin: They are using a flawed hypothesis from the outset - the bible. They are trying to fit their finding into that narrow mould - regardless of the data. If that is science, it is bad science. Like when the Catholic church tried continuesly to modify the view of the universe, so the Earth was at the center, despite observations which showed that Earth circled around the Sun. And I don't doubt that there are 'bad apples' in the scientific comunity (cold fusion and the creation of heavy natural elements are two cases) - but I think that the majority of the scientist are honest - especially since their data will have to be repetable.

The only point I would disagree with here is your assertion that the Bible is a "flawed hypothesis from the outset". I thought the general purpose of the scientific method was to develop a hypothesis and then try to prove or disprove whether it is correct. As long as the researchers are objective about the data collection, testing, and recording...I don't see how any hypothesis could be inherently flawed (although I'm sure you could provide other examples).

On the other hand, if the researchers are starting with the pre-determined conclusion that the Bible is correct and they ignore, discard, or manipulate any data that does not support that conclusion - then I would agree that their methodology IS flawed from the outset.

Good answers to my questions, Ar-Cunin. I hope you're enjoying this as much as I am.

Heirophant - Another very good and informative post.