What Constitutes a Scientific Explanation?

Genetics is a after the fact thing. Its only recording what biology after the fact records. Any tale of it is only guessing. its silent on biological change.
Biology must be about biological processes with results. So figuring out the origins of biology results must be done with evidence from the processes. they don’t, indeed impossible i think, do this.
They only do forensics after the fact. Then sin and claim they did biological investigation.
genetics is no more biological evidence for biological processes than anatomy data is.
Biology origin research must be about gooy things in test tubes etc. Not about pickaxes and dynamite in the wilderness. As it it today!

Could you explain why evidence measured after the fact is only guessing? If a forensic scientist uses DNA gathered at a crime scene, and finds that it matches the DNA of the defendant, is that just guessing because the evidence was gathered after the event?

Last I checked, events in the past leave evidence that we can measure in the present. I don’t see why we can’t use that evidence to test hypotheses about those past events.

Its not evidence after the fact but because its after the fact its only data evidence. not evidence for process or origin of the data.
DNA of a crime suspect etc is not after the fact but is the fact.
Your facts are not about process but only results. the process is the objective. so it needs other evidence.

Rational people in the real world consider it evidence. More to the point, we can be sufficiently confident that this evidence disproves your claims due to the fact that you try so hard to make it go away.

1 Like

I never know why people say this or that person is rational. Surely its not about who agrees with you. Say it ain’t so.
Your wrong about my desire to make evidence vanish.
I see my point as a excellent point that evolutionism does not deal with biological processes but only the results FROM biological processes. After the fact. YET they use the after the fact DATA to make claims they are using biological evidence for processes!!!
Indeed its impossible to have biological evidence for past and gone processes and actions.
thats too bad.
Don’t say evolutionism is a scientific biological theory.
Its just a untested hypothesis.
All the claimed evidences always turns out to be comparative subjects. After the fact jazz.

There is no such thing as evolutionism.

If you are saying that we can’t test hypotheses by doing experiments, then you are rejecting all of science. Is that what you are saying?

The evidence is all around us. The universe doesn’t disappear and then reappear every microsecond. Past events leave evidence in the present. That’s how reality works.


Yes we can do experiments. Thats another point but no experiments are done on past processes and events. YES past things leave results. yet not the process to the result. thats the error of evolutionist thinking.

Every experiment is done on past processes and events. Your results are always gathered after an event has occurred.