Intelligent Design

Science And Engineering

Spread the love

Scientist says: Science is the discovery of how things in the natural world work. Engineering is the practical application of scientific discovery.

Engineer says: Engineering is the practical application of scientific discovery. Scientific discovery is simply reverse engineering.

So you see, it’s really all engineering. You either take something that already exists and reverse engineer it (that’s science) or you take the knowledge gained from reverse engineering and create something that doesn’t already exist with it.

12 Replies to “Science And Engineering

  1. 1
    JGuy says:

    Could it be that engineering is reverse science…ie. Discovering things which will exist. :p

  2. 2
    DaveScot says:


    Engineering is science with a crystal ball?

    I kind of like that. I’ve always considered myself prescient! And that word itself is PRE- SCIENCE with only a single random point mutation plus the insertion of a non-coding letter. I really think you’re onto something there.

  3. 3
    P. Phillips says:

    DaveScot, have you read Kicking the Sacred Cow by James P. Hogan? He pretty much said the same thing, and that is how I found out about the work of Lee Spetner (on the Time and Junk DNA threads).

    He wrote in the introduction, which you may read above:

    Engineering and the Truth Fairies

    Science really doesn’t exist. Scientific beliefs are either proved wrong, or else they quickly become engineering. Everything else is untested speculation. —JPH

  4. 4
    Mats says:

    Check out how low Darwinists will go ->
    Bill’s blog is probably the hottest ID blog, so news like those can’t be missed!

  5. 5
    P. Phillips says:

    Mats, John A. Davison may remark, but “Celeste Biever”, seriously? Everything about this seems a parody. Then again, Darwinists are unacknowledged masters of parody with a straight face!

    “A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
    –John A. Davison

    “Darwinian theory is truly risible, John A. Davison quite unsurprisable.”

    — P.S. Phillips

    “If you can’t quote yourself, quote John A. Davison.”
    — P.S. Phillips

  6. 6
    Jehu says:

    Mats, I read that, thanks for the link. It looks like the New Scientist spy never actually showed up at a meeting and so never really did any decent spying. I wonder what she was thinking?

  7. 7
    P. Phillips says:

    Just in – The Spectator review today of Dawkins The God Delusion . You have to register to read the review, but I’ll provide the link and an excerpt. I have quoted Charles Moore, i.e., this essay:

    Now, on to his review, and as I just did, he quotes Shakespeare:

  8. 8
    Emkay says:

    Anyone interested in calling in, Dawkins was advertised to be on NPR’s “Science Friday” program for 10/06/06, promoting and amplifying his “Delusion.”

  9. 9
    DaveScot says:

    P. Phillips

    I must’ve read a good 10 titles from Hogan but the sacred cow wasn’t one of them. I’ve read reviews and synopses and all the cows deserved a good kick as far as I can tell.

  10. 10
    DonaldM says:

    Dave: You must be an engineer?

  11. 11
    Ekstasis says:


    Your thesis is fascinating! I was trying to think up a couple of examples:

    Engineers went to sea, noticed that ships would “come up” over the horizon, and presto, scientists discovered that the earth was round.

    Engineers building homes and docks near the sea observed the tides coincided with the phases of the moon, and presto, scientists discovered that gravity works between large bodies in space.

    Engineers built canals and irrigation ditches, and presto scientists discovered fluid dynamics.

    Engineers out hunting observed that large birds wheeled in circles without falling to the earth, all without a beat of their wings, and presto scientists discovered updrafts.

    Is this the sort of thing you had in mind?

  12. 12
    John A. Davison says:

    Gee, I am sorry to be just a little old retired zoologist and bench scientist myself. Just think of what I could have been if I had only been an engineer. And just think about how much more my several sources could have contributed if only they had been engineers too. It is scary isn’t it?

    It is hard to believe isn’t it?

    I love it so!

    “A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
    John A. Davison

Leave a Reply