By those who argue against the YECers' interpretation of the Bible and say that the Bible God is disproven because of evolution.
@It Ain't Necessarily So for example.
Personally I think evolution goes too far in it's "no supernatural input" approach and answers, but yes I wouldn't be...
Now you are showing your faith. The science does not show a deist God unless you extrapolate on what science does show and assume that the gaps are filled up with naturalistic answers.
You go by what the words (translations) say but don't care about the meaning. As long as it does not contradict...
I imagine so that good mutations would be preserved.
Yes in the generally accepted theory of evolution that would probably happen. Whether it would happen in real life is another question.
Maybe some claims of irreducible complexity have been shown to be theoretically false but I doubt that all of them have. IOW the concept has not been debunked.
Maybe this is the case with the repair mechanisms used in Genetics.
But maybe it is possible for the system to have worked...
Garte talks about that aspect between 17:30 and 22 mins nd says that the codon has no chemical connection with the protein it points to and that is why it is abstracts.
So better educated guesses.
But you are right, science is more than educated guess work,,,,,,,,, or should be.
So is it real science to make educated guesses about how the universe and life came to be?
It seems that the problems are not getting less, but are becoming more. Each possible answer provides more questions.
No science is not looking for God,,,,,,,,,, science is looking for an answer in nature.
What came to mind is the flagellum motor.
If you want, you can do the science on it to see if it could work if it was reduced in complexity.
I have also given you a video from the Discovery Institute with Stephen Meyer talking about Michael Behe and his discoveries.
I know they are biased and...
It sounds like an implied incredulity fallacy the way you put it. What he actually said is that the argument for chemical evolution is very weak,,,,,, and he gives some reasons for that. In this way it sound like what a scientist might say if arguing against a hypothesis.
And even if it had...
Yes scientific explanations work well without the need to add a God but that is not the case with origins science, which is imo not true science. It is educated guesses of what might have happened if God did not do it, and it cannot be verified.
I can do that when just discussing things person...
I suppose, yes.
True, each system that protects the accuracy would have had to work or not however and I hear there are quite a few of these systems and they are complicated chemically. It seems to me that they more reasonably would have been put in place as and so protection of the genes and...
It's great that people are telling me about the 1001 logical fallacies that can be made. But to make those fallacies one needs to have made a logical argument. Much of the logical fallacy complaining is made against things that aren't even meant to be logical arguments for or against. And...
True, if there were no evidence then non belief is the logical default. But theists have their own evidence and just because it is not verifiable that does not mean that it is not evidence.
But that's OK you can ignore whatever you want to ignore. You can say that witness evidence is just...
No you don't know that there is no need for anything but a blind, automatic mechanism. Is that idea wishful thinking? I hope not, it would be a depressing wish.
The question is probably whether the watchmaker was or was not blind.
It sounds like you are pointing to the idea that there is no God, even though you deny it.
Science finding out how things work is one thing.
Science telling us how the universe and life came into existence is beyond science telling us how things work, and you don't know that God was not needed...
Which organisation are you referring to?
So you think that ASA is biased because it gives a view of the science as seen from the pov of science that allows for the existence of God.
I would say that their view is relevant also and not to be dismissed just because of their religious...
So one minute you are saying that Sy Garte obviously has cognitive bias and now you are saying that he may not. Make up your mind.
For a start do you think that he was wearing his science hat or religious belief hat in the video and if you say science, then it was probably not biased.
If you say...
Are you making a scientific hypothesis and providing your evidence or are you just making claims and stating your reasonable case from there?
I would say you are doing the latter.
Is that pseudoscience or lies or both, for the sake of denying that a God might exist?
You know that you weren't...