Creation vs. Evolution

[lamont]

ah, i see... "falsifiable" means "discreditable" or "impeachable?"

Well, it means you can make a prediction using the theory and then test it, and if it fails (and the failure stands up to scrutiny) then the theory fails. Falsifiable theories are at the heart of all scientific theories. If a theory is not falsifiable then it is not scientific.

A major misunderstanding of evolutionists actually seems to be that they think that science is all about debate and argumentation. Really its all about coming up with theories that you can falsify. The "god created globular clusters 10,000 years ago looking just like they're 10+ billion years old" notion of Creationism is not scientific because there is no way of falsifying it short of dying and having God go "surprise!"

And actually one thing about scientific theories are that they cannot ever be proven true, they can only be proven false. The best you can do is have well-tested theories that have never failed. This is true for every scientific theory from Gravitation to Evolution...

 

[H2Andy]

i got you ... i was familiar with the concept, hadn't quite heard the word used that way

 

[mislav]

I so wish this thread was a poll. It would be interesting to see the results of this debate.

Having been familiar with the scientific evidence of evolution since the very early days, I've been an evolutionist all my life. In fact, I remember to this day the amazement I felt when I first encountered a guy at the high school who told me how he doesn't believe in evolution theory because he sees no monkeys coming down from the trees becoming humans lately. I honestly couldn't believe anyone would make such a claim in this day and age.

I've also had a good friend of mine going through a being born again experience and hitting me with a "Earth is only a few thousand years old" argument. And that's after he worked as a voluntary guide to a local prehistoric cave pointing out the fossil of a tooth of a cave bear dating back to middle paleolithic to the visitors - even to me once!

Thanks to Lamont, Andy and Biscuit for having such knowledgeable replies. I agree with this line of thinking and believe in it, but not as in a blind faith kind of way.

Thanks to Mike Ferrara for providing an excellent insight into what the creationist theory is all about.

 

[AlexMDiver]

I so wish this thread was a poll. It would be interesting to see the results of this debate.

Having been familiar with the scientific evidence of evolution since the very early days, I've been an evolutionist all my life. In fact, I remember to this day the amazement I felt when I first encountered a guy at the high school who told me how he doesn't believe in evolution theory because he sees no monkeys coming down from the trees becoming humans lately. I honestly couldn't believe anyone would make such a claim in this day and age.

I've also had a good friend of mine going through a being born again experience and hitting me with a "Earth is only a few thousand years old" argument. And that's after he worked as a voluntary guide to a local prehistoric cave pointing out the fossil of a tooth of a cave bear dating back to middle paleolithic to the visitors - even to me once!

Thanks to Lamont, Andy and Biscuit for having such knowledgeable replies. I agree with this line of thinking and believe in it, but not as in a blind faith kind of way.

Thanks to Mike Ferrara for providing an excellent insight into what the creationist theory is all about.

I feel sorry for your friend and his bizarre change in views.

I believe deep down many creationist know they that they are talking nonsense, yet it is their incredible need for some salvation and guidance that overrules this. They need the creationism part to be true otherwise the other stuff can't be true as well, an this is most probably what they hang on to most. It is either all or nothing for them. Hence the bizarre argumentation, it always reminds me of someone arguing a point due to an other motive entirely. Do they really care if the earth is 6000 years old or not? Does it change anyones life? They are arguing for eternal life to be true or whatever else is important to them by taking the bible literally.

But sampling some of the creationist views here in this thread it really does not surprise me that some of the crazy things are going on in this world, especially regarding fundamentalism.
If people are not prepared to give up an inch on how old the earth is, how do you expect peace in the middle east any time soon.

The romans had this view on religion:
Religion is generally regarded by the uneducated as true, by the educated as false and by the emperors and ruling class as very useful.

 

[AlexMDiver]

I'm sorry, but DIR was divinely revealed in its entirety to GI3 and passed down to the WKPP. This whole evolutionary hogarthian theory is heresy spread by the evil pizza-stained northeast wreck divers and their rebreather diving star wars bar scene bretheren. We're going to have to persecute you now...

I expect an inquisition anytime soon. Will you be using the normal torture routine or just burning at the stake?

 

[lamont]

I expect an inquisition anytime soon. Will you be using the normal torture routine or just burning at the stake?

worse, we'll make you dive with a pink snorkel....

 

[AlexMDiver]

Ok, I herewith fully acknowledge the creator GI3, son of DIR.

Believe it or not, I used to have a neon-yellow and pink wetsuit in the early 90s. Good thing they evolved into black.

 

[Warthaug]

I expect an inquisition anytime soon. Will you be using the normal torture routine or just burning at the stake?

If I have my choice . . . whips & chains.

Oh, baby

 

[Green_Manelishi]

I feel sorry for your friend and his bizarre change in views.

I believe deep down many creationist know they that they are talking nonsense, yet it is their incredible need for some salvation and guidance that overrules this. They need the creationism part to be true otherwise the other stuff can't be true as well, an this is most probably what they hang on to most. It is either all or nothing for them. Hence the bizarre argumentation, it always reminds me of someone arguing a point due to an other motive entirely. Do they really care if the earth is 6000 years old or not? Does it change anyones life? They are arguing for eternal life to be true or whatever else is important to them by taking the bible literally.

But sampling some of the creationist views here in this thread it really does not surprise me that some of the crazy things are going on in this world, especially regarding fundamentalism.
If people are not prepared to give up an inch on how old the earth is, how do you expect peace in the middle east any time soon.

The romans had this view on religion:
Religion is generally regarded by the uneducated as true, by the educated as false and by the emperors and ruling class as very useful.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Perhaps your friend has realized there is more to life and that he's not the result of a fortunate series of events that "just happened". Good for him.

You believe? :shakehead

I believe that evolutionists embrace the belief there is no God, so there is ultimately nothing except death then ...

Pray you are correct. Forever is a long time.

 

[Green_Manelishi]

Well, it means you can make a prediction using the theory and then test it, and if it fails (and the failure stands up to scrutiny) then the theory fails. Falsifiable theories are at the heart of all scientific theories. If a theory is not falsifiable then it is not scientific.

A major misunderstanding of evolutionists actually seems to be that they think that science is all about debate and argumentation. Really its all about coming up with theories that you can falsify. The "god created globular clusters 10,000 years ago looking just like they're 10+ billion years old" notion of Creationism is not scientific because there is no way of falsifying it short of dying and having God go "surprise!"

And actually one thing about scientific theories are that they cannot ever be proven true, they can only be proven false. The best you can do is have well-tested theories that have never failed. This is true for every scientific theory from Gravitation to Evolution...

It is curious though that gravity can be tested and observed, "real time". Macro-evolution (the subject of our discussion) cannot be tested and has not been observed.

What has been observed is speciation and you leap to the conclusion that is "proof" of changes in class, family, etc. even though it has not been observed. You point to the fossil record, events that happened long ago and were not observed, as your "evidence" that macro-evolution occured.

I'd say the evidence is just as likely to indicate intelligent design of a plethora of life; some with eyes, some blind, some with wings, some with fins, flippers, legs, lungs, etc. Oh, but that would not be scientific because it relies on the supernatural while evolution relies on chance.