Page 1 of 166 1231151101 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 1653

Thread: Testing Creationism.

  1. #1

    Default Testing Creationism.

    Any scientific idea needs to be testable. Creationists as a rule do not understand science and can't see the importance of answering the question:

    "What reasonable test would show creationism to be false if it was wrong?"

    That is one of the reasons that creationism is not a scientific idea. There are no tests that have been proposed for it. There are ad hoc explanations of recent observations that they have, but one would be hard pressed to find creation ideas in the world of biology that have been proposed for unanswered questions.

    Here is an example of a scientist giving examples of tests that creationism fails. Does anyone have any arguments against this video? Do any creationists have reasonable tests for their beliefs?


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,815
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    In general, I think it's safe to say that Creationists don't care that Creationism is not testable. It's a belief; not a science.

    Regarding the video....I question some of his points. For example, the genes for teeth in chickens, and legs in whales. How does this claim get substantiated?

    And he claims that humans have genes for fully functioning tails....with vertebra, and these are sometimes expressed? My understanding is that is false. One of us is wrong. I'm not sure which. A brief search turns up a reference to a true tail in a neonate from 1999....but the abstract was inaccessible or nonexistent. My understanding is that the tail issue has been addressed and is not actually a vestige.
    If you want to get to heaven; you've got to raise a little hell. If you want to know a secret, you've got promise not to tell.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Nuneaton
    Posts
    7,911
    Blog Entries
    9

    Default

    S.Z,

    You are still assumiing that Creationist = Genesis creation.

    You are wrong

    Creationist = God created. It does not specify the methology.

    Richard Gillett
    I am an unworthy servant. But someone had to stand up and be counted.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Gillett View Post
    S.Z,

    You are still assumiing that Creationist = Genesis creation.

    You are wrong

    Creationist = God created. It does not specify the methology.

    Richard Gillett
    No, I am not. It is simply the most common view of creationism. Yes we all know that you have your own false beliefs. But there is no scientific evidence of a god's presence at all. If you accept reality, but claim that your god had a hand in it I don't mind that much. All that matters is that you realize that the Genesis account is purely mythical.

    If you want to claim that there is any science at all behind your views you must find a way to properly test them. In other words, what reasonable test would show you to be wrong if your beliefs were wrong?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Nuneaton
    Posts
    7,911
    Blog Entries
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subduction Zone View Post
    No, I am not. It is simply the most common view of creationism.


    No, it is not as uncommon as you think. Just because it is unusual here does not make it unusual. It is neither my idea, nor particularly unique.

    And unless you can prove that God does not exist there is no evidence that you can give to disprove it.



    Richard Gillett

    PS I wonder if you know the real meaning of "mythical"?
    I am an unworthy servant. But someone had to stand up and be counted.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Gillett View Post
    No, it is not as uncommon as you think. Just because it is unusual here does not make it unusual. It is neither my idea, nor particularly unique.

    And unless you can prove that God does not exist there is no evidence that you can give to disprove it.



    Richard Gillett

    PS I wonder if you know the real meaning of "mythical"?
    You have it backwards as usual. If you want to claim that a god was involved then the burden of proof is upon you. But it seems as usual you are afraid to even go into details into your personal beliefs. When someone is too cowardly to even state what he believes he has already admitted defeat.

    And of course I understand the meaning of mythical. You have always been the one that could never support his claims here, not me.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Nuneaton
    Posts
    7,911
    Blog Entries
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subduction Zone View Post
    You have it backwards as usual. If you want to claim that a god was involved then the burden of proof is upon you. But it seems as usual you are afraid to even go into details into your personal beliefs. When someone is too cowardly to even state what he believes he has already admitted defeat.

    And of course I understand the meaning of mythical. You have always been the one that could never support his claims here, not me.
    Faith is not about proof.

    There is no burden of proof.

    And you do not want / need details about my personal beleifs. They cannot help you if you are unwilling to accept them as valid.

    And you have not proved that you understand what a myth is either.

    Richard Gillett
    I am an unworthy servant. But someone had to stand up and be counted.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Gillett View Post
    Faith is not about proof.

    There is no burden of proof.

    And you do not want / need details about my personal beleifs. They cannot help you if you are unwilling to accept them as valid.

    And you have not proved that you understand what a myth is either.

    Richard Gillett
    I really don't care too much about your personal delusions. I really don't even know what you believe since you are too cowardly to lay out your beliefs clearly. And if you want me to show that I understand what mythological means you have to answer some questions first. Or are you simply another creationist that won't put their money where there mouth is. I asked you some questions first. Once you answer them then you can ask some of me.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Nuneaton
    Posts
    7,911
    Blog Entries
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subduction Zone View Post
    I really don't care too much about your personal delusions. I really don't even know what you believe since you are too cowardly to lay out your beliefs clearly. And if you want me to show that I understand what mythological means you have to answer some questions first. Or are you simply another creationist that won't put their money where there mouth is. I asked you some questions first. Once you answer them then you can ask some of me.
    No need to be rude.

    I answered all that I had to. And I am not the one insulting and belittling. I have laid out my beliefs for you more times than I can remember, once more will not change anything. You know perfectly well what I believe anyway, but because it involves God you call it delusional. And you have just stated that you don't care anyway.

    So if you want this discussion to continue you can explain what you understand a myth is. I have a feeling that it is also derogatory and innaccurate, like your OP.

    Richard Gillett

    PS TOE cannot be tested in the manner that your OP suggests, so this whole charade is pointless.
    I am an unworthy servant. But someone had to stand up and be counted.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Gillett View Post
    No need to be rude.

    I answered all that I had to. And I am not the one insulting and belittling. I have laid out my beliefs for you more times than I can remember, once more will not change anything. You know perfectly well what I believe anyway, but because it involves God you call it delusional. And you have just stated that you don't care anyway.

    So if you want this discussion to continue you can explain what you understand a myth is. I have a feeling that it is also derogatory and innaccurate, like your OP.

    Richard Gillett

    PS TOE cannot be tested in the manner that your OP suggests, so this whole charade is pointless.
    You earned the rudeness so you should not complain. And no, you have only given rather vague descriptions of your beliefs. And of course the TOE can be and has been tested. The video was rather clear. If you did not understand certain points in it you should have said so. There is a reason that there are so very very few scientists that do not accept the theory of evolution.

    If you did not want to contribute why did you even respond? Spamming the thread with nonsense was rude on your part too.

    ETA: And dodging questions is rude too. I asked you several first. You keep playing this childish game of never defending your false beliefs. If you want answers to questions you need to answer those asked of you first.

Page 1 of 166 1231151101 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •