Welcome to pre-historic.com

Applied predictive science has seen considerable advances in recent times, in relation to both its reliability and the extremely successful utility of its investigations. On the other hand, science that includes narratives about pre‑historic and origins events, although the subject of intensive research, contains a disproportionate quantity of debate and uncertainty. The differences in these scientific fields is what we wish to discuss. 

Predictive  Science and Retrodictive Science are different. Retrodictions are not predictions about the future nor do they include predictive experiments to discover new regularities of nature. Retrodictions are limited to only applying the established regularities of nature to retrodict unique pre-historic events, so it is a type of applied science. 

Sadly most scientists do not show how their narratives (that retrodict pre-historic or origins events) align with the established regularities of nature. This causes reduced reliability. 

Poor reliability has occured because retrodictions have little bearing on the safety or quality of human life since these retrodictions are never used in Engineering, Medicine ect... Thus, there is little incentive to produce reliable results other than the search for truth. This is distinctly opposite to predictive experimental science and predictive applied science in Engineering, Medicine etc… The potential to cause harm to humans in predictive science is a fundamental factor in how predictive science is conducted! 

Interestingly, this means that narratives that retrodict unique pre-historic events can be completely wrong and they will not cause safety harm to people.

Here at Pre-Historic.com we wish to address this by encouraging researchers to demonstrate that their narratives theoretical alignment with the established regularities of nature and thus improve the accuracy and reliability of their narrative.