• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Search results

  1. Zosimus

    Creationists: How do you test for "truth"?

    This claim requires us to make several questionable assumptions. 1. That our current theories are closer to the real 'truth' than previous theories were. Yet, we still haven't gotten past a basic definition of truth that we can all agree on. 2. That this progress is a result of science, as...
  2. Zosimus

    Creationists: How do you test for "truth"?

    Great! Let's start there. What test or observation could I make that would tend to show the 'correspondence' theory of truth to be false? Of course, that's an extremely simplistic and unrealistic situation. If you have theory T that makes predictions P, and P is not detected you know that...
  3. Zosimus

    Creationists: How do you test for "truth"?

    You're mixing up your concepts. There is a difference between verificationism and correspondence truth. Let's return to the original post in which we find that the OP said: "... truth can in principle be objectively verified..." By making that statement and by asserting correspondence truth, the...
  4. Zosimus

    Creationists: How do you test for "truth"?

    That's what you think too. If I said that I had a pink elephant living happily in my 4' x 4' room, you would not believe that because: A) You think all elephants are gray B) You think that elephants don't fit into 4' x 4' rooms. So this new statement is known to be false because it doesn't...
  5. Zosimus

    Creationists: How do you test for "truth"?

    Oh you mean, for example, The Coherence Theory of Truth? If it is part of a coherent belief system then it is not only meaningful but also true. I see. So electrons exist because you can detect their effects and, by extension, them. I'm sure Christians will argue that God can be detected...
  6. Zosimus

    Creationists: How do you test for "truth"?

    Oh, I see. You have your own definition of truth, and you ask us to embrace it with blind faith. John 14:6 -- I found that within 10 seconds on Google. All right. For the sake of argument, let's use your definition. Electrons do not exist. Dark matter does not exist. Dark energy does not...
  7. Zosimus

    Intelligent Design Isn't So Intelligent

    There are some people who maintain that cars have been intelligently designed. However, this common misconception flies in the face of all we know about cars. Here are some of the top known flaws in cars today: 1. Too many cylinders. Although some cars use a three-cylinder engine, most cars...
  8. Zosimus

    Creationists: How do you test for "truth"?

    Oh this looks like an interesting thread! It doesn't talk about evolution though. Still, I think I'll chime in. I positively laughed out loud at the long string of nonsensical logical fallacies that you put forward with (I assume) a straight face! It's hard to know where to begin, but let's...
  9. Zosimus

    "Scientists Turn Alligator Scales into Primitive ‘Feathers’"

    I don't think so, but, for the sake of argument, let's say that "this adaptation fits perfectly with common descent." So what? Is this relevant somehow? Like what if I point out that archaeological discoveries are consistent with things written in the Bible. Does that mean that we should all...
  10. Zosimus

    Evolution Observed

    Well, the only person who is talking about magic is you. And you are doing so in order to set up a straw man that you can later knock down. It is fundamentally dishonest, and you should be ashamed of yourself for doing so. Now drop and give me 20. No, I'm not off on a weird tangent. You claimed...
  11. Zosimus

    Evolution Observed

    I read your link with interest, but the word "magic" didn't appear in it anywhere. Are you sure you've read the link you posted? Methodological naturalism is not a belief that events can be explained without relying on magic. Methodological naturalism is not a belief but a method. It involves...
  12. Zosimus

    "Scientists Turn Alligator Scales into Primitive ‘Feathers’"

    Again, I wanted to address the logical arguments in your post, but there aren't any. Simply saying "It seems to me that..." is not a logical argument. Someone could easily say "It seems to me that the the Koran is the truest book ever written by the hand of Allah." No one cares what it seems to...
  13. Zosimus

    "Scientists Turn Alligator Scales into Primitive ‘Feathers’"

    Straw man is two words, btw. At any rate, the point is that you are committing the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent. I doubt that, but I'm willing to entertain the notion. What was your a priori probability, your a posteriori probability, and how did you calculate the change? Yes...
  14. Zosimus

    "Scientists Turn Alligator Scales into Primitive ‘Feathers’"

    I wanted to respond to the arguments made in your post. Unfortunately, it doesn't contain any. You see, many organisms come with multiple genetic profiles pre-installed. It is merely a matter of which one is active. Take the three-spined stickleback for example. Some live in marine (salt-water)...
  15. Zosimus

    "Scientists Turn Alligator Scales into Primitive ‘Feathers’"

    Well, opinions cannot be ignorant. Opinions can neither learn nor forget things. Your comment is nothing more than an attempt to circumvent forum rules and call me ignorant. However, your claim is unfounded. I post a YouTube video in which Richard Dawkins himself calls his brand of evolution...
  16. Zosimus

    "Scientists Turn Alligator Scales into Primitive ‘Feathers’"

    Yes. And there's a reason astrologists calculate star charts. You said "I believe the point was that it supports reptile/bird common ancestry." Praytell, how exactly do you think that the study supports reptile/bird common ancestry? I ignored no question. I have already answered your question...
  17. Zosimus

    "Scientists Turn Alligator Scales into Primitive ‘Feathers’"

    Why would I argue against natural selection? You are saying that the species that produce offspring are the species that produce offspring. This is not disputable. It's also a worthless observation. No, I think it is YOU who does not understand. You have committed a logical fallacy. You reason...
  18. Zosimus

    "Scientists Turn Alligator Scales into Primitive ‘Feathers’"

    Would you like to ignore me? Fine. I'll call it a victory.
  19. Zosimus

    "Scientists Turn Alligator Scales into Primitive ‘Feathers’"

    Yes, most tautologies are observable. However, since my point had nothing to do with your comment, I wonder why you bothered to include said comment. You can use any word you want. The concept is the point. Imagine that fruit flies come "pre-installed" or whatever word you want to use with...
  20. Zosimus

    "Scientists Turn Alligator Scales into Primitive ‘Feathers’"

    Talk about moving the goalposts! No, simply showing that some things can happen without human intervention in no way proves what you wrongly call "evolution" and what I will hereinafter call neo-Darwinism. You see, neo-Darwinism postulates that birds with big beaks arrive on islands where big...
Top