Deduction reasons to true conclusions with true premises and valid form. The trouble is getting the true premise as a starting point for reasoning.

Induction is the only way to provide true premises through intuition.

Information must come from somewhere.

• God (truth)
• human worldview (deception)
• demonic influence (deception)

Truth only comes from God.

<quote from Real Faith & Reason, vol 2>

Induction is a form of reasoning distinct from deduction. Deduction can lead to knowledge of truth since, with true premises and valid form, the conclusion must be true. Deduction doesn’t add any information to the premises during reasoning. Deduction never produces new information. However, induction adds information to the premises through intuition. Since information must come from somewhere, there must be a source for this information coming through intuition. Here, we again have three sources for the information available through intuition: God, the human worldview, or demonic influence. Godless scientists can’t know which of these three provide the information. So godless induction only hints at a direction for investigation or suggests a hypothesis. When scientists attempt to use the human mind to reason beyond what they observe, the result is uncertain. They must add made-up stuff to get beyond what they observe. That’s why scientists observing the same created world infer radically different conclusions from the same observations.

<end quote>

#RealFaith&Reason

Have you read this FREE book yet? “Real Faith & Reason” gives the absolutely certain proof of the Bible and the God of the Bible and shows how you can have real faith. This is faith that changes situations and transfigures you from glory to glory.

Amazon sells it, but you can get your FREE copy of Real Faith & Reason, which shows the intersection of faith, reason, truth, and sanity.

http://RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf

Science is a gift from God. Humans often turn God’s gifts into idols and worship them and depend on them. Much of science has gone wild and left the foundation of truth because of the philosophy of naturalism. Taking that philosophy as an axiom, scientists come up with unworkable and unprofitable ideas. Darwin brought us a false “science” called evolutionism that continued a godless trend and has led to the current craziness we now see all around us.

<quote from Real Faith & Reason, vol 2>

Scientific Methods

“What passes for scientific methodology is a misrepresentation of what scientists do or ought to do.” ~ P. B. Medawar, Induction and Intuition in Scientific Thought

Contrary to popular belief, there’s no agreement on a single scientific method among philosophers of science, and most scientists could care less about the philosophy of science. If we search the Internet, we find several systems for scientific method, and many of the websites break scientific methods into distinct steps. In general, scientists don’t work that way.

“The definition of ‘science’ has haunted philosophers of science in the 20th century. The approach of Bacon, who is considered the founder of the scientific method, was pretty straightforward: observation → induction → hypothesis → test hypothesis by experiment → proof/disproof → knowledge.” ~ http://creation.com/its-not-science

<end quote>

#RealFaith&Reason

Have you read this FREE book yet? “Real Faith & Reason” gives the absolutely certain proof of the Bible and the God of the Bible and shows how you can have real faith. This is faith that changes situations and transfigures you from glory to glory.

Amazon sells it, but you can get your FREE copy of Real Faith & Reason, which shows the intersection of faith, reason, truth, and sanity.

http://RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf

<quote from Real Faith & Reason, vol 2>

So we see that something strange has happened in the scientific community, but science has never been necessarily accurate even though it’s had a reputation for accuracy. Scientists made pragmatic gains, and those pragmatic gains provided a reputation for accuracy and knowledge. However, pragmatic gains can’t establish truth.

<end quote>

#RealFaith&Reason

Have you read this FREE book yet? “Real Faith & Reason” gives the absolutely certain proof of the Bible and the God of the Bible and shows how you can have real faith. This is faith that changes situations and transfigures you from glory to glory.

Amazon sells it, but you can get your FREE copy of Real Faith & Reason, which shows the intersection of faith, reason, truth, and sanity.

http://RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf

We shouldn’t be surprised that humans are humans. Even scientists are humans. It’s not a conspiracy. It’s not that they decide to be dishonest. It’s human nature. Everyone has a perspective. Everyone has an inner paradigm, a way they think reality is. Sometimes, we even call this inner fake-reality “your reality.” I’ve heard it called, “your truth.” It’s a complete inner fake-reality that seems more real than real reality. Everyone has one.

It’s also human nature to go with the flow. Even if we disagree, we’re uncomfortable being the only one making waves. We go along. We insert the group-held fake-reality into our own fake-reality. If mechanisms of coercion exist within the group, that heightens our motivation to shut up and fit in.

A personal fake-reality is powerful for filtering our perceptions. Whatever is outside the bounds of our fake-realities seems, to each of us, crazy, insane, and unreal. Changing fake-realities generally requires a powerful experience. Group-held fake-realities are much harder to change than personal fake-realities.

<quote from Real Faith & Reason, vol 2>

Scientific Bias in Peer Review

Many problems exist with the way that scientists currently do science. And these problems aren’t surprising since scientists are humans, and humans make mistakes. Just like everyone else, scientists sometimes make honest mistakes and sometimes commit outright fraud. Sadly, the peer review process isn’t effectively exposing either of these.

Outright fraud:

Report only the desired results.

Don’t report unwanted results.

Knowingly falsify data.

Misuse statistics.

Choose only methods that will yield the desired result.

Work the problem backward from the desired solution, and make the right assumptions (or tell the right stories) to make it appear that the observations support the target solution.

Adjust numbers to fit the desired result.

Stop checking or retesting once the desired result is achieved.

The system is rigged to protect the status quo.

Those who are loyal to the status quo also control the funding.

Those who are loyal to the status quo control the peer review bodies, in effect, censoring divergent viewpoints.

The peer review process effectively stops those who don’t conform.

Godless politicians have loaded the courts with judges who protect the established system.

Those who are loyal to the status quo use pressure and coercion against those who don’t buy in.

Independent thinkers risk their careers.

The system encourages confirmation bias.

It appears that several forces promote scientific bias. Sometimes, the money motive is more important than reality. For example, scientists make decisions to make sure they keep their funding. Since much of this funding comes from the government, science has become political. Also, personal pride plays a huge role, and personal biases against morality or God come into play. Since these political considerations favor certain desired results, the system is designed to bring pressure to bear against anyone who bucks the system.

<end quote>

#RealFaith&Reason

Have you read this FREE book yet? “Real Faith & Reason” gives the absolutely certain proof of the Bible and the God of the Bible and shows how you can have real faith. This is faith that changes situations and transfigures you from glory to glory.

Amazon sells it, but you can get your FREE copy of Real Faith & Reason, which shows the intersection of faith, reason, truth, and sanity.

http://RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf

<quote from Real Faith & Reason, vol 2>

Politics and Science

Politicians and those with grand schemes for the world use pseudoscience to advance their political goals. Despite the best efforts of those in power, God arranges for the exposure of these plots sometimes, though we can’t know anything that God hasn’t exposed. Ecological alarmism is one area of pseudoscience in which politics drives the claims. Here we’ve seen scheming exposed through emails, but the guilty parties go without punishment, and the controllers of the media make sure to do damage-control whenever God exposes the dishonesty. Powerful gate-keepers punish whistle-blowers and ridicule sincere scientists who point out the shakiness of the science.

<end quote>

#RealFaith&Reason

Have you read this FREE book yet? “Real Faith & Reason” gives the absolutely certain proof of the Bible and the God of the Bible and shows how you can have real faith. This is faith that changes situations and transfigures you from glory to glory.

Amazon sells it, but you can get your FREE copy of Real Faith & Reason, which shows the intersection of faith, reason, truth, and sanity.

http://RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf

<quote from Real Faith & Reason, vol 2>

The Great Cookie Mystery and CSI

Detective Nodacloo rushed into the main lobby of the hotel and saw the large tray of cookies on the glass-topped coffee table next to the green potted ficus tree. “Aha! I’ll solve this mystery, he said loudly, running around and then throwing himself on the floor to look under the couch. “I’m an expert at crime scene investigations, and I have every confidence that science will provide the answer.” Detective Nodacloo was a tall man with darting eyes, wearing the typical CSI uniform, constantly pulling out a small notepad and writing on it with a gold-plated pen that he kept in his shirt pocket.

Justin Thyme was watching all this activity. He had a feeling that Cookie Baker made the cookies, though he didn’t know exactly how Cookie made them or got them to the table.

Detective Nodacloo suddenly shouted, “I’ve solved the great cookie mystery. I know where they came from. It’s simple. Since only Nat Causes can do anything, Nat Causes must have created the cookies.”

Justin said quietly, “I always thought Cookie Baker made cookies.”

Detective Nodacloo jumped up and shouted, “How naïve of you! That’s like saying Santa Clause brought the cookies.” The lobby shook as Nodacloo stamped his foot.

Cowering and whimpering under his breath, Justin said, “But Nat Causes doesn’t have any of the ingredients for making cookies.”

“It’s obvious,” Nodacloo said as he pulled out his magnifying glass and camera, snapping pictures in fast succession. “I follow the evidence, and only Nat Causes could have possibly baked the cookies.”

“But Nat Causes can’t bake,” said Justin.

Nodacloo stood to his full height and glared at Justin. “Of course Nat Causes can bake. He baked these cookies, didn’t he? How else could we explain these cookies? The evidence speaks for itself. Not a single crime scene investigator disagrees.”

Bang! Bang! Bang!

Justin jumped. “What was that?”

“Nothing! You heard nothing,” said Nodacloo

Bang! Bang!

“There it is again,” said Justin. “It’s coming from the closet.”

Justin jumped toward the closet door, but Detective Nodacloo blocked him before he could get there.

Bang! Bang! Bang!

By superhuman effort, Justin wiggled past Nodacloo and opened the closet door. “It’s Detective Cy Intist,” said Justin as he stared at a gagged Cy Intist with his knees in his chest tied up on the floor of the closet with coats hanging in his face. Justin pulled the gag out of Cy’s mouth and started to untie him. “Who tied you up and gagged you this way?”

“I don’t know,” replied Cy. “I was working on the cookie case, trying to find out how those cookies got on the table. I interviewed Cookie Baker and came back here when someone grabbed me from behind, tied me up, and threw me in the closet. It happened so fast that I didn’t have a chance to see who did it.”

As Justin worked to untie Cy, Nodacloo seemed to be working against him, accidentally stepping on his fingers, falling into him, and ridiculing him. Finally, Justin untied the last knot and Cy was free.

“I’m so glad you let me out of the closet. It was terrible listening to Nodacloo making all these claims when I have some more information,” said Cy, dusting off his pants and coat. “I think I picked up a few dust bunnies from the closet floor.”

“What do you mean by more information? You don’t have any information. I have science and evidence. All you have is belief,” Nodacloo said as he tried to push Cy backward.

“Don’t be silly. We both have the same observations, and we can both do the same experiments,” said Cy, expertly dodging Nodacloo’s attack.

“But what can you predict? My predictions prove that Nat Causes made the cookies and put them on the table. For instance, if Nat Causes made the cookies, I would predict footprints, and I have observed footprints,” said Nodacloo. He was now standing arms crossed, as if in judgment, with a severe scowl and one eyebrow raised.

“Those footprints could be from Nat Causes or Cookie Baker. That doesn’t prove anything.”

“Oh yes, it does. You don’t know how science works. You aren’t a real crime scene investigator.”

“What makes you think I’m not a real crime scene investigator?”

“You don’t believe that Nat Causes baked the cookies, and all crime scene investigators believe that Nat Causes baked the Cookies. Therefore, you aren’t a real crime scene investigator. Simple logic!”

“That’s ridiculous,” said Cy. “I’ve talked to Cookie Baker, and he says that he baked the cookies and put them on the table. Did you interview Cookie Baker, Detective Nodacloo?”

“No need to. I don’t believe Cookie Baker exists. I tried to call him once and didn’t get an answer. Therefore, he’s just a figment of your imagination.”

Justin kept looking from one to the other not knowing who to believe. He wondered if this confusion is what science is all about.

<end quote>

#RealFaith&Reason

Have you read this FREE book yet? “Real Faith & Reason” gives the absolutely certain proof of the Bible and the God of the Bible and shows how you can have real faith. This is faith that changes situations and transfigures you from glory to glory.

Amazon sells it, but you can get your FREE copy of Real Faith & Reason, which shows the intersection of faith, reason, truth, and sanity.

http://RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf

<quote from Real Faith & Reason, vol 2>

Scientific Theories

Some people think that theories lead to knowledge since theories attempt to explain what we can’t observe. They add imaginative ideas to what’s known, but imagination isn’t the same as knowledge. We’ll look into theories more carefully in the section called Theories as a Way of Knowing.

<end quote>

#RealFaith&Reason

Have you read this FREE book yet? “Real Faith & Reason” gives the absolutely certain proof of the Bible and the God of the Bible and shows how you can have real faith. This is faith that changes situations and transfigures you from glory to glory.

Amazon sells it, but you can get your FREE copy of Real Faith & Reason, which shows the intersection of faith, reason, truth, and sanity.

http://RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf

<quote from Real Faith & Reason, vol 2>

Predictions and Science

Scientists sometimes tell a story about predictions, and it’s partly true but completely confused. It’s confused because it doesn’t explain the difference between types of predictions. Below is a list of several types of predictions:

• Tables of data that make it possible to predict what will work to build a car, a plane, a wiring circuit, a chemical formula, a building, or anything else we’ve made before
• Tables of data that make it possible to predict what might work to make something we’ve never made before
• Tables of data and historical documents from which we can make predictions that we can test
• Postdictions that someone calls “predictions”
• Phantom predictions using some form of flimflam
• Affirming the consequent fallacies and Texas sharpshooter fallacies, thinking that predictions prove theories

We’ll investigate these thoroughly in the section called Predictability as a Way of Knowing.

<end quote>

#RealFaith&Reason

Have you read this FREE book yet? “Real Faith & Reason” gives the absolutely certain proof of the Bible and the God of the Bible and shows how you can have real faith. This is faith that changes situations and transfigures you from glory to glory.

Amazon sells it, but you can get your FREE copy of Real Faith & Reason, which shows the intersection of faith, reason, truth, and sanity.

http://RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf

<quote from Real Faith & Reason, vol 2>

Dr. Charles Jackson says it’s OK to make up a story or have a thought experiment, but it’s not OK to forget that made-up stuff is made-up stuff. And it’s not OK to think that a story is a reality. ^{(Watch the video at https://youtu.be/HUbjlK1CJ_Q)}

<end quote>

#RealFaith&Reason

Have you read this FREE book yet? “Real Faith & Reason” gives the absolutely certain proof of the Bible and the God of the Bible and shows how you can have real faith. This is faith that changes situations and transfigures you from glory to glory.

Amazon sells it, but you can get your FREE copy of Real Faith & Reason, which shows the intersection of faith, reason, truth, and sanity.

http://RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf

<quote from Real Faith & Reason, vol 2>

Well, the ungodly scientists say that they know the age of these rocks but not by observation. They know because the age fits their overall story about how the earth came into existence. We know storytelling can’t prove anything. So they tell a story that “proves” the age of the rocks, and then they test radiometric dating against the story. They haven’t validated against something they observed. Instead, they compared the radiometric dating method’s results against their biased expectations.

They’ll also point out that dating methods must be tested on several samples, discarding the results that don’t match the expected age. But that’s not science. It’s flimflam. If we tested the Law of Gravity, and every fifth time an object floated in the air, we wouldn’t have the Law of Gravity as we know it. Fortunately, we test the Law of Gravity by observing, and observation confirms the Law of Gravity. Radiometric dating methods fail when tested on rocks of known age.

<end quote>

#RealFaith&Reason

Have you read this FREE book yet? “Real Faith & Reason” gives the absolutely certain proof of the Bible and the God of the Bible and shows how you can have real faith. This is faith that changes situations and transfigures you from glory to glory.

Amazon sells it, but you can get your FREE copy of Real Faith & Reason, which shows the intersection of faith, reason, truth, and sanity.

http://RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf