Science - What Is It And What Are Its Limitations? Part I

The words science and scientists have been thrown around quite a bit in my previous blogs.  I have  specifically pointed out the ideas of pseudo-science and humanistic scientists, who have overstepped the disciplines they are qualified for in order to express their personal prejudices.  The situation is so serious that I have dedicated this whole blog to expose it.

In this age of fantastic scientific advances the general public is inclined to put scientists on pedestals and take as pure fact anything they say.  When I see a space shuttle take off and circle the earth I am inclined to do the same thing myself.  It is simply amazing!

However, in my eyes, with the high standing they have attained comes a professional and social responsibility to maintain a level of integrity that is above criticism.  Unfortunately, a number of them, to promote their personal prejudices make claims that they know are outside their fields of expertise.  In doing so they sway public opinion to believe what they want them to.

How do they overstep their disciplines?  To answer that question we have to ask another question:  Exactly what are the limits of their disciplines in the first place?  In other words, what is Science and what is NOT science?

DEFINITION OF SCIENCE

Science has to do with the study of the extant (currently or actually existing) material world around us to gain knowledge about it and discover the natural existing laws as to how it works.  It does this through research which involves observation and experi-mentation of empirical data.  Empirical means that the data is capable (directly available to you) of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment. 

Scientific studies involve drawing tentative assumptions (hypotheses) about the nature of something or how it works and devising tests to see whether those assumptions are correct or not.  As the continual testing of hypotheses result in positive conclusions, then theories about the nature of something or how it works are developed.  A theory consists of a developing plausible body of scientific principles.

Any scientific theory or claim must contain the quality of falsifiability or refutability.  That means that it must contain the logical possibility that it can be shown false by an observation or a physical experiment. That something is "falsifiable" does not mean it is false; rather, that if it is false, then this can be shown by observation or experiment. Another definition of falsifiability is:  Stating assertions in a way that permits them to be tested for truth or falsehood. 

If something is non-falsifiable it can not qualify as a scientific theory.  A glaring example of this is the “theory” of evolution.  It is so full of axioms and other presumptions that it is simply impossible to test it for truth or falsehood.

I hope you will read this definition of “science” over and over again.  In the disciplines of physics, chemistry, astronomy or hydraulics, for example, the proper application of the principles of science has yielded an uncountable body of knowledge and products for our society today.  On the other hand, the improper use of, and manipulation of scientific principles for personal reasons or prejudice, yields half truths and direct misrepresentation of the facts.  Humanistic evolutionistic scientists are directly included within this latter group.

My next blog is a continuation of this one.  It will clarify for you what the limitations of science are.  Those limitations are very important in understanding why, for instance, you don’t buy into the "science" that you evolved from an  ape.  Gads!  It’s amazing to me what many people believe in the name of “science”.  What do you think?  Let me know.  Post your comments on the subject.  See you on the next blog.