Science cannot be Christian or Islamic or atheist; Science is Science
This is a rebuttal to an article published at 23:19, January 12, 2013, by a person who calls him/herself NewOperative under the heading Christian Science
The fact of the matter is: Science can’t be Christian or atheist or Islamic; science is science. Calling any science ‘Christian Science’ is an oxymoron.
Science follows a scientific method appropriate to the subject. According to Oxford Dictionaries, the general method to be employed to be called scientific, is:
a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses:
criticism is the backbone of the scientific method
[in plural]: the process is based on presently valid scientific methods
When a person doesn’t follow that method, that person does not do science. If they pretend to do ‘science’ without following that method, it’s called pseudoscience.
The moment a person reads his or her ‘science’ from a Holy Book, that person doesn’t do science. Thus, the term ‘Christian science’ is an oxymoron.
In another comment from NewOperative, placed January 13, 2013, at 10:00, NewOperative writes:
Fact: we can see evolution to some degree in species.
We’ve seen new species evolving, right in front of our very eyes; both in laboratories and in nature. Speciation has been observes both directly and indirectly.
We have instances of speciation, directly observed:
Thus, what NewOperative called a fact was not a fact at all, but an untruth always propagated by creationists. Propaganda. An untruth. A lie. Creationists always state untruths and always repeat those untruths, no matter how many times they are shown that they did not tell the truth. New Operative also wrote:
Fact: the theory of evolution is in contrast with certain laws of nature.
Creationists keep on claiming this on their religious websites, but I’ve never seen any scientist claiming this in any scientific journal.
Creationists normally refer to the second Law of Thermodynamics when claiming this. Seeing that NewOperative was very vague, I’ll refer to the second law of thermodynamics the creationists always lie about. The theory of evolution certainly does not contravene this scientific law. The fact that creationists keep on repeating their lie all the time, says a lot about creationist methods. Lying is all they have.
The only fact we could obtain from the article from NewOperative is that his sources lied about science and then he repeats those untruths.
What does this make him/her?