What is a fact?

Of course Science operates in absolutes . stop being pretentious .
Your OP proposition is silly .
The Bible is a fact
What it says represents a belief system , incapable of proof .
However , you wish to believe in it .
That's fine .
End of discussion .

 

Me being pretentious? You should argue your point with those of your ilk who argue against what you are saying. So far, two others have indicated that science does not operate in the realm of absolutes.

Check out the 2.c. definition of 'fact' as pointed out at the early part of this thread.

 

The experiment gives the same results regardless of when in time it is performed.

What time the experiment is performed is not an experimental condition.

Within experimental error there are absolutes.

Apparently you have never done any experimental science so I shall humor you.
http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistryquickreview/a/experror.htm

Experimental conditions were the same. The time at which the experiment is conducted is recorded but it is not an experimental condition.

The freezing point of water remains the same regardless of the time of day the experiment is conducted and only an idiot would think otherwise.

 

Granny says a fact is information that is provable or supported by evidence to be true.

 

Wrong again. Date and time stamp for the experiment is a condition of the experiment. You specified 'same conditions'. Impossible.

If there is a margin of error, then there are no absolutes.

Seemingly you are making another argument through ignorance. Suggesting that you know something about me that you have no means of proving.

Of course time is a condition of the experiment. Time is required for the experiment to be conducted.

Now you are saying that there are absolutes and that science does operate within the realm of absolutes, when previously you stated that science does not operate within the realm of absolutes. Direct contradiction of your previous claim.

 

Some of those scientists making claims about absolutes, then should have listened to Granny.

 

I specified the same "experimental conditions".

The length of time to conduct and experiment is different. This can easily be repeated.

Absolutes within experimental error. I dont expect you will be able to understand but think of it like this.

If you state that a plane will travel a certain distance and land on a runway the distance is not an absolute. As long as the plane travels the distance within a certain error, the plane will absolutely land on the runway.

The fact that you arrived at your destination is an absolute. The fact that there was a certain amount of error in the distance from point A, to point B, does not change the absolute that you arrived at your destination.

Science allows for experimental error but the results produced can be absolute.

 

Yes you did "specify the same experimental conditions". One of those conditions would be the date and time of the experiment. Once an experiment is conducted under a specified set of conditions, those same conditions cannot be replicated because of the condition of 'time'.

Duration of an experiment can indeed be repeated. However, the conditions would still be different than the original experiment because of the date and time stamps. You could make conditions that are similar but you cannot replicate the 'same' conditions.

Am I supposed to be concerned about what you expect and what you don't expect?

Not necessarily. The scientists responsible for the launch, the path of navigation, and the return of the spacecraft Challenger made such predictions using all their powers of Numerology, and they failed, killing all the crew members. You see, you just attempted to establish another absolute condition but did not take all the evidence into consideration. Shame on you.

Tell that to the family members of the Challenger.

The death of the crew members of the Challenger are in fact absolutes that can be afforded to the numerological prowess of the scientific community.

 

It has been explained to you that the time at which the experiment was conducted is not an "experimental condition".

Only a bumbling idiot Troll thinks that the results of a freezing point of water experiment change because the experiment was conducted at 5 am instead of 6 am.

More trolling and disingenuous idiocy.

If you do not take the subject seriously then just say so.

 

You are simply in denial. Show me any experiment which can be conducted without the use of the element (condition) of time. Either put up or shut up. You are the one that is saying that time is not an element (condition) of the experiment.

 

Science does not operate on absolutes. It operators on high probabilities.

This usually what you receive from the OP – silly stupid nonsense that doesn't make much sense to normal people. The OP should buy a few kites and save us the trouble.

The bible is far from fact. The bible is pure fiction.

 

High probabilities? That sounds like a part of the Numerology that was practiced by some ancient religions. It also sounds like guesswork. Ya know... This or that has a high probability of being true, but we are not sure, so we will just say that it is true because there is a high probability.

Attacking the thread. Seems to me that there is a clause in the TOS which prohibits such conduct.

You cannot be serious. I have a Bible laying here on my desk. My senses tell me that the Bible is a fact and not a fiction. Hmmmm.

 

How do you deal with someone who says "I believe that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is true and real"?

We know the Protocols were a hoax. But he believes them to be true and real. Where to from here?