real life
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 05:20 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
There is a solid body of evidence pointing to evolution


Any evidence that can be interpreted as supporting evolution, can also be interpreted as supporting creation. There is no evidence that 'only evolution explains.'
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 05:20 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
Wrong, Rex. Evolution is not about creation. That is a seperate question.

Right so you cannot neglect that evolution must start with material already here...
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 05:28 pm
Evolution explains only evolution...

Creation explains both creation and allows for evolution...
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 05:42 pm
nick17 wrote:
i cant spell neccaserily


That is ok neither can we (spel that is) welcome to A2K nick. Smile
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 05:46 pm
You can interpret information pointing to evolution as pointing to purple people eaters. Don't make it so. Evolution does not tackle questions relating to creation. Therefore, you can think what you will and scientists won't argue with you. You just can't put it in the science classroom simply because you think it.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 05:55 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
You can interpret information pointing to evolution as pointing to purple people eaters. Don't make it so. Evolution does not tackle questions relating to creation. Therefore, you can think what you will and scientists won't argue with you. You just can't put it in the science classroom simply because you think it.


The problem is, is that scientists do argue against creation being taught because they are trapped in the little evolutionary box.

They should just teach evolution and let "science" teach creation too. But no they want to stomp out creation... I have serious problems with that and I admire the work science has done in evolution. So that should really tell you how objective I am really being. But just because creation is taught in science is not going to make millions of dinosaur bones suddenly disappear... Scientists are frantic for no reason at all..

Then they build a wall and perceive that a spiritual person cannot objectively understand science... This is just too much drama for me an I do not take science serious completely for this reason. They are belligerent about something they KNOW NOTHING about...
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 05:59 pm
Science does not allow creation into the classroom, for simple lack of evidence. You want it in on the strength of pure emotionalism.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:01 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
Science does not allow creation into the classroom, for simple lack of evidence. You want it in on the strength of pure emotionalism.

So you refuse to even acknowledge the "theory of creation"? That is not even objective science...
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:02 pm
There can be no theory without evidence.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:03 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
There can be no theory without evidence.


WRONG, a theory precedes evidence...
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:03 pm
Wrong. Hypothesis precedes evidence.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:05 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
Wrong. Hypothesis precedes evidence.


True, but if we had evidence would we need to "theorize"?
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:06 pm
RexRed wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
There can be no theory without evidence.


WRONG, a theory precedes evidence...


You're talking about a hypothesis. Edgar is talking about scientific theory. They are two different things.

A scientific theory is not the same thing as a hypothesis.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:09 pm
You have the inspiration, based on what you have observed. You seek evidence to build a theory. Finding evidence leads to conclusions based on repeating the process over and over and submitting to peer review. You can't do that with god, because there is no observable evidence.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:09 pm
rosborne979 wrote:
RexRed wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
There can be no theory without evidence.


WRONG, a theory precedes evidence...


You're talking about a hypothesis. Edgar is talking about scientific theory. They are two different things.

A scientific theory is not the same thing as a hypothesis.


A hypothesis is still scientific procedure. Apples and oranges.

A hypothesis is part of a proof.

A theory is based on many proofs...
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:11 pm
Rosborne has it right. You have the hypothesis, but no theory.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:14 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
You have the inspiration, based on what you have observed. You seek evidence to build a theory. Finding evidence leads to conclusions based on repeating the process over and over and submitting to peer review. You can't do that with god, because there is no observable evidence.


The fact that we exist is proof of "creation", can't you see that? Creation is not even a theory... it is evidenced, testable, observable and reliably real...

I would not start a proof of creation that, because we do not exist we were created...

So because we exist that proves we were not created...
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:15 pm
What clearly bothers many Creationists / ID'ers / Religionists about science is not whether science can or can't, will or won't, prove or disprove god, as most of them seem comfortable that science is not going to prove or disprove god.

What clearly bothers many Creationists / ID'ers / Religionists about science is that science has no need or use for god or religion, at all.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:16 pm
You nailed it, Chumly.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 May, 2006 06:17 pm
Chumly wrote:

What clearly bothers many Creationists / ID'ers / Religionists about science is that science has no need or use for god or religion, at all.


That is un proven...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Evolution? How?
  3. » Page 501
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 06/28/2024 at 06:51:04