...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
V88 and the Western Atlantic Modal Haplotype
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: IGENEA used screen shots to test their theory. [/QUOTE]screen shots don't test a theory. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: IGENEA used screen shots to test their theory. [/QUOTE]show us the screen shots so we know you're not lying Again [b]an Argument from ignorance is a fallacy in logic. It asserts that a) a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or b)a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. [/b] ^ those are both wrong [QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: If a theory can not be falsified through the variables (evidenc) associated with the theory it is confirmed. [/QUOTE]^ This is a type of Argument from ignorance of type a) a) a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or ^ This is wrong and this is your method [/qb][/QUOTE]Stop Making Stuff Up. IGENEA used screen shots to test their theory. lioness Your arguments lack congruence. This is not an appeal to ignorance as you imply. The phrase "the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence", does not apply in this case. The evidence is King Tut's genetics test results. [b] The Egyptians have the genetics test results. As a result, if IGENEA is wrong they have the genetics evidence to prove otherwise. [/b] Evidence is not equivocal. Evidence is the matter that both validates and invalidates a theory. In science, proof does not exist. Proof only exist in a court of law, where a Judge determines what is or what is not proof. Research is the foundation of good science, or knowing in general. There are four methods of 1) Method of tenacity (one holds firmly to the truth, because "they know it" to be true); 2) method of authority (the method of established belief, i.e., the Bible or the "experts" says it, it is so); 3) method of intuition (the method where a proposition agrees with reason, but not necessarily with experience); and 4) the method of science (the method of attaining knowledge which calls for self-correction). To explain R1b as the genome of King Tut, we have to use the scientific method which calls for hypothesis testing, not only supported by experimentation, but also that of alternative plausible hypotheses that, may place doubt on the original hypothesis. The aim of science is theory construction (F.N. Kirlinger, Foundations of behavior research, (1986) pp.6-10; R. Braithwaite, Scientific explanation, (1955) pp.1-10). A theory is a set of interrelated constructs, propositions and definitions, that provide a systematic understanding of phenomena by outlining relations among a group of variables that explain and predict phenomena. Scientific inquiry involves issues of theory construction, control and experimentation. Scientific knowledge must rest on testing, rather than mere induction which can be defined as inferences of laws and generalizations, derived from observation. Karl Popper in The Logic of Scientific Discovery, rejects this form of logical validity based solely on inference and conjecture (pp. 33-65). Popper maintains that confirmation in science, is arrived at through falsification. . [IMG]https://research-methodology.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Deductive-approach-deductive-reasoning.png[/IMG] . Therefore to confirm a theory in science one test the theory through rigorous attempts at falsification. In falsification the researcher uses cultural, linguistic, anthropological and historical evidence to invalidate a proposed theory. If a theory can not be falsified through the variables (evidenc) associated with the theory it is confirmed. It can only be disconfirmed when new generalizations (based on evidence) associated with the original theory fail to survive attempts at falsification. In science you either confirm, or disconfirm a theory. A valid theory has abundant evidence supporting that theory, and remains valid as long as it is not disconfirmed by a researcher who provides counter evidence, that nullifies the evidence which supported the original theory. In short, science centers on conjecture and refutations. One makes a theory and provides evidence to support the theory. The more evidence you present in support of a theory confirms the validity of your hypothesis. If, another researcher presents more evidence that falsifies the theory, the theory must be rejected. Thusly evidence is not equivocal. Evidence will determine both the validity and lack of validity for a theory. [b] . . IGENEA claimed Tut was R1b, based on the published screen shots of Tut’s genetics test. No counter genomic evidence has been presented to dispute IGENEA. The IGENEA theory remains valid until their theory is disconfirmed.[/b] [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3