This is a compilation of posts, which focus on the philosophy of science. These posts will cover a broad spectrum within the philosophy of science ranging from multiverse scenarios, scientific theory, epistemology, and metaphysics.
- MA Philosophy Thesis: “The Fine-Tuning of Nomic Behavior in Multiverse Scenarios”
- Natural Law and Scientific Explanation
- Science and Efficient Causation
- Which Comes First, Philosophy or Science?
- The Postulates of Special Relativity
- There’s No Such Thing as Creation Science–There’s Just Science
- Time Travel and Bilking Arguments
- “It’s Just a Theory”–What’s a Scientific Theory?
- Exceptions to a Finite Universe
- Teleology in Science
- Duhemian Science
- The Relationship Between Philosophy and Science
- The History of the Multiverse and the Philosophy of Science
- Where’s the Line of Demarcation Between Science and Pseudoscience?
- Miracles and the Modern Worldview
- Mass-Density Link Simpliciter
- Scientific Nihilism
- Q&A 10: The Problem of Defining Science
- Q&A 6: Scientism and Inference to the Best Explanation
- The Quantum Universe and the Universal Wave Function
- The History and Macro-Ontology of the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Physics
read more »





Michael Ruse classifies creation science as pseudoscience. Additionally, what makes creation science so unattractive is that it is completely void of the possibility of being falsifiable unless the antecedent conditions (the interpretation) have been falsified. This makes the issue of accounting for anomalies so absurd that creation science doesn’t really account for anomalies; rather, it produces extreme ad hoc explanations to account for contradictions to its theory. There’s a distinction between anomalies and refutations. Refutations are falsifiers. Additionally, scientific theories are true regardless of any religious understanding. Religious belief, like I mentioned earlier, begs the question on certain scientific matters. Religious belief, when used as a hermeneutic for interpreting scientific data and developing scientific theories, is also a controversial methodology. Its appeal to method isn’t necessarily objective (as close to objectivity can be) and is not commonly accepted (though not to be used as an argumentum ad populum). 
These posts are related to the evolution/ID debate as well as biblical hermeneutics concerning the doctrine of creation.