A good visualization takes a complicated issue and uses clever visual aids to make it more clear. The beauty of the visualization below is that with a few dots and lines, the basic process of science is illuminated from the first gathering of evidence to our closest approximations of truth.
Using this framework, let’s consider an example: evolution.
In the beginning, let’s say that we find fossil evidence of some organism. As we continue to diligently dig through the strata, we find more and more fossils that look slightly different, appearing to come from the same organism. But if these specimens are separated by geologic time, where are the differences coming from and why? We attempt to draw lines of theory between what we have found, positing that some overarching process is causing a change in morphology (namely, natural selection). Other researchers have similar ideas, and they too are offered up as an explanation for the fossils we found. For example, the idea that individual organisms can pass on traits that they acquire during their lifetimes (“Lamarckism”). But as we gather even more evidence (perhaps from genetics or biology), these other theories are ruled out as inconsistent with our observations.
We eventually whittle down our theory of evolution by natural selection to one that both agrees with our observations and experiments and makes the fewest number of assumptions (the famed principle of Occam’s Razor). We then apply our theory to other observations that we make, to see if our theory is consistent and can make predictions about the world. For instance, evolution by natural selection predicts that we will not find a morphologically modern fossil organism in the same geologic strata as an ancient one (think dogs and dinosaurs). Current evolutionary theory has survived such falsification, and gains explanatory strength.
In the end what we are left with is a picture of the world, informed by observation and experiment, that tries to approximate the truth as closely as possible. Most of our scientific theories are not complete, but because they work so well, make testable predictions about the world, and agree with past and present observations, we can assign temporary agreement between them and how the world actually works.
This is amazing! Thank you for posting!
RT sat down to talk to Aleksey Filippenko, an American astrophysicist and professor of astronomy at the University of California, Berkeley, CA.
He was the member of the team that received 2011 Nobel Prize for discovering the dark energy that is speeding up the expansion of the entire universe.
http://www.rt.com/news/universe-physics-laws-energy-329/
I’m not sure what your point is here Steve, but because the rest of the universe (made up of dark matter and dark energy) interacts in a fundamentally different way, there is no lurking explanation that would disprove evolution. The fundamental forces and particles that we understand wholly account for what we can observe in the universe in which we live. A “god of the gaps” argument is a weak one.
I’m not making a point. I’m sharing information from intelligent people.
Well Done Kyle, love the infographic.
Pingback: Lovely infographic on the role of evidence and hypothesis formation. (via @Sci_Phile) «
Evidence of God … Belief
A mental conviction of the truth.
If only that was evidence.
My conviction that Jesus is the Son of God and my savior is not dependent on anyone else believing the same. The fact that “I believe” is enough evidence for me.
Here are two types of evidence for example.
1) Your most trusted friend comes running in the house flush with excitement exclaiming, I JUST SAW A UFO! You go out and see nothing. You can accept his testimony or reject it.
2) Albert Einstein with math in hand says light is bent by gravity.
Years latter he is proven right by astronomers taking pictures of an eclipse.
I don’t think you will find the kind of evidence for God that proved the power of gravity.
You need to Hear the word of God, Believe, then Faith follows.
By the way Mr. Hill, I’m not one that think’s people should push there religious ideas onto anyone else.
Thanks for your post. Very interesting and somewhat Kabbalah looking.
So you are comparing the kind of faith you need to believe that your friend saw an alien (for which there is no physical evidence) to the faith you need to believe in a deity?
Yes.
Only I personalty have more evidence for space craft than for God.
I’v seen them three times in my life.