Hello. I'm a new poster here.

Wow Brad that was almost coherrent....(apologies for any errors but the spellchecker is on the fritz...)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
Do you seriously think that no evolution scientists hold a priori?

---

from:
http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/a/apriori.htm"A priori" is a term used to identify a type of knowledge which is obtained independently of experience. A proposition is known a priori if when judged true or false one does not refer to experience. "A priorism" is a philosophical position maintaining that our minds gain knowledge independently of experience through innate ideas or mental faculties. The term a priori is distinguished from a posteriori, which means knowledge gained through the senses and experience. These are the two most common ways in which philosophers argue that humans acquire knowledge."So I would say that were your question limited to a priori notions about evolution then no they hold a posteriori notions.....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
Many scientists already reject the idea that mutation-selection is a sufficient mechanism for evolution, yet they stand by their theory with the HOPE that facts will fill in the gaps later. Not exactly scientific....

---

Who?