The Bicker Board

[ironyak]

MM - He's an idiot. He knows nothing.

Well every village does need an idiot. Punaweb has to make sure they keep theirs well trained.

[TomK]

All of the stories have the same evidence - the existence of the islands themselves. How can you know how they were made Tom?

You have to be joking. I agree that all the stories have the same evidence, none. I go by the scientific evidence of how the islands were born, not that some god or goddess built them.  There is no evidence that supports that idea. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK208869/

https://education.nationalgeographic.org...-hot-spot/

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/hawaii.html

https://youtu.be/LdlEufZop-Y?si=2uCK5_ZptNU94KT4

[ironyak]

Thank you, I know the hot spot story as well - how do you know it's the truth of what happened? The Plate tectonics theory was only accepted in the 1960s - were all the previous scientific explanations of how the islands were formed wrong before this new story was adopted?

[TomK]

Thank you, I know the hot spot story as well - how do you know it's the truth of what happened? Plate tectonics was only accepted in the 1960s - were all the previous scientific explanations of how the islands were formed wrong before this new story was adopted?

I don't know what the previous scientific explanations were, but it's very common for hypotheses and theories to change over time as new evidence becomes available. That's how the scientific method works. None of the newer evidence points to the islands being created by a god or goddess. IF you want to educate me about the previous ideas about how the islands formed, please go ahead, I'm more than happy to learn new things as long as they are reputable.

[ironyak]

Oh so now it's "hypotheses and theories" about how the islands were formed. So you don't know actually know right?

[TomK]

Oh so now it's "hypotheses and theories" about how the islands were formed. So you don't know actually know right?

Now you're showing some ignorance about science. I go by theories that are supported by evidence. If someone comes up with evidence that shows the theory is wrong, then it gets dropped, and a new hypothesis or theory comes along, based on the latest evidence.

There is no evidence that a god or goddess created the Hawaiian islands. Period. What you are doing is common amongst people who don't understand the scientific method. When people hear or see that science can't prove something, then whatever it is must be caused by god, aliens or some outside agency. And so far, no one has shown the evidence that the Hawaiian islands were created by a god or goddess. Blather away as much as you want, you cannot support the idea that some invisible supernatural being created the islands.

[ironyak]

(Dude hasn't done the basic foundations of science readings like The Limits of Empiricism but wants to lecture others on what they know about the scientific method...)

So cool, you have a theory for island formation based on the current evidence, just like they had a theory in the 1800s about land bridges and sunken continents, and in the early 1900s about volcanic trenches. Theories are cool, but they aren't the truth - they're best guesses based on current evidence. But you weren't there, no one was, so you and everyone else don't know the truth of what happened. This is one of the basic limitations to the scientific method (there are others as well to cover if we ever get out of the first couple pages of this 101 level material).

So, given no one was there to observe how the islands were made, is it possible that they were made in some other fashion than what is proposed by a given theory?

[TomK]

(Dude hasn't done the basic foundations of science readings like The Limits of Empiricism but wants to lecture others on what they know about the scientific method...)

So cool, you have a theory based on the current evidence, just like they had a theory in the 1800s about land bridges and sunken continents, and in the early 1900s about volcanic trenches. Theories are cool, but they aren't the truth - they're best guesses based on current evidence. But you weren't there, no one was, so you and everyone else don't know the truth of what happened. This is one of the basic limitations to the scientific method (there are others as well to cover if we ever get out of the first couple pages of this 101 level material).

So, given no one was there to observe how the islands were made, is it possible that they were made in some other fashion than what is proposed by a given theory?

Of course it's possible, but what evidence shows the creation of the islands occurred differently than the accepted current theory? No one was around to observe a goddess being created, so if your idea is that no one was around to see it happen is legitimate, then you have no evidence Pele existed or was created. So then you have to use real evidence and that's what the scientists have done. Believing in a supernatural deity is not evidence.

[Moderator 2]

People, do you realize fighting and attacks have broken out, we’re in the midst of multiple battle fronts with no discernible end in sight?  This is how you choose to act and react?  This is your response?  

And before the usual suspects jump in to gloat over some breaking of the rules, that this comment isn’t about Puna or Hawaii, let me be clear, I am talking about Puna, and Punaweb.

You are the world. 

[ironyak]

Correct, no one was there to observe these events, so all explanatory theories share the same lack of direct knowledge.

So imagine long ago, a being of immense power dropped a mighty fishook that punctured the seabed floor crust creating a hole into the mantle and over the course of say 28 million years (gods have plenty of time) they slowly drug the crust to the northwest through the Pacific ocean over that volcanic hot spot and the Hawaiian Islands built up, and eroded back in the surf, until the day some seafaring people showed up, noted these details and came up with a explanatory story that fits all the evidence available then and now.

How do you know this is not the truth of what happened?

Edit: Overlapping posts with Mod2 - honestly trying to have a discussion about the limits of science with Tom in the context of Hawaiian geology and religion. Didn't think it was heated or a battle, but if it's not cool, no worries, can cut bait and head back to shore. Cheers!