Can any creationist tell me ...

[LuisDantas]

even evolution being true there still is an intelligent creative force at the helm of existence. so you would have to eliminate mindless chance from evolution, no miracle primordial soup came up with life, sorry.

There is nothing hinting that way.

 

[idea]

Edison was home schooled, the Wright brothers were high school dropouts, Bill Gates dropped out of college - not sure if anyone ever called them 'scientists'

Stephen Hawking barely left college campus/ academia his whole life and is widely considered the greatest living scientist. Can you name his greatest contribution??
How about Dawkins? Sagan? DeGrasse Tyson?

i.e. we have to make the distinction between science the method- the useful, practical, demonstrable method. And science the academic, theoretical, ideological, and even political opinion.

The method v the label. Historically the two have often been at complete odds.

The theory of evolution from conception to this day, remains an entirely academic theory, it's not demonstrable, it's not contributing to facilitating our interesting discussion!

I think you might be confusing scientists with engineers. Edison, the Wright brothers, Gates, Ford, Tesla - those are all engineers. By definition, scientists do not apply anything. If it's applied, it's engineering.

I agree - if it is not applied, its just about worthless....

There is nothing hinting that way.

our own minds, our own conscience hints that way.

 

[Desert Snake]

...

 

[Desert Snake]

True, global cooling was all the rage when I grew up - theories come and go,

[science] such wholesale returns of conjecture, out of such a trifling investment of fact (Mark Twain)

True, but I wouldn't hinge your entire argument on that theory. That's a subjective thing, I guess.

 

[Desert Snake]

I don't atheists did, was the point- and the explicit reason many preferred static models (no creation = no creator) over the primeval atom

Static model doesn't mean atheist. I believe that God, /self created, created the essentially universe; without using ideas that are contrary to logic of that creation, such as the neccesity of the big bang occurence.

 

[Kemosloby]

In 1859 The Origin of Species hit the stands, and most scientists and thoughtful people were very rapidly persuaded by the power of its arguments and demonstrations.

Though creationism never wholly went away after 1859, it was greatly overshadowed until, in 1961 Whitcomb and Morris published The Genesis Flood, and, particularly in the US, put enthusiasm into the bible literalists' cause again. The book also marks the birth of 'creation science'.

I address this question to creationists here:

If, as creationists say,

─ the theory of evolution is truly wrong, and

─ 'creation science' is valid science

then why, in the 56 years since The Genesis Flood, has creationism put not one single scientific mark, not the tiniest scientific scratch, on the theory of Evolution?

Because the scientific community wont allow there to be a scratch on evolution theory, any such scratches will be rapidly discarded as false.

 

[LuisDantas]

our own minds, our own conscience hints that way.

Perhaps yours. Mine certainly does not.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

why, in the 56 years since The Genesis Flood, has creationism put not one single scientific mark, not the tiniest scientific scratch, on the theory of Evolution?

So you accept abiogenesis then?
That the wonder of your consciousness arises due to a particular arrangement of mud?

 

[LuisDantas]

Because the scientific community wont allow there to be a scratch on evolution theory, any such scratches will be rapidly discarded as false.

That is an outright lie.

 

[Deeje]

@"It Aint Necessarily So

You said.....
Comments like that always remind me of this:

• "You stare into your high definition plasma screen monitor, (Intelligently designed and created) type into your cordless keyboard then hit enter, which causes your computer to convert all that visual data into a binary signal that's processed by millions of precise circuits. (Intelligently and individually designed and created) This is then converted to a frequency modulated signal to reach your wireless router where it is then converted to light waves and sent along a large fiber optics cable to be processed by a super computer on a mass server. (Intelligently designed and created) This sends that bit you typed to a satellite orbiting the earth that was put there through the greatest feats of engineering and science, (by intelligent minds who worked out how to do that using laws that were already put in place by an intelligent mind) all so it could go back through a similar pathway to make it all the way here to my computer monitor 15,000 miles away from you just so you could say, "Science is all a bunch of man made hogwash."- anon. (Science fact is a marvelous thing....science fiction is something else entirely.)

 

[Guy Threepwood]

I think you might be confusing scientists with engineers. Edison, the Wright brothers, Gates, Ford, Tesla - those are all engineers. By definition, scientists do not apply anything. If it's applied, it's engineering.

I agree - if it is not applied, its just about worthless....



our own minds, our own conscience hints that way.

You are right, but that's what I'm saying. Generally where the method is applied, the label is not.. and vice versa

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Static model doesn't mean atheist. I believe that God, /self created, created the essentially universe; without using ideas that are contrary to logic of that creation, such as the neccesity of the big bang occurence.

True, that was their rationale not mine.. but I'd be interested in why you see a creation event like the BB as illogical in creation?- for another thread maybe..

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Because the scientific community wont allow there to be a scratch on evolution theory, any such scratches will be rapidly discarded as false.

Obviously- aka the peer pressure review system. But I'm an optimist, it can and does slow scientific progress, but it can't stop it

"A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
Max Planck

 

[Ponder This]

@"It Aint Necessarily So

You said.....
Comments like that always remind me of this:

• "You stare into your high definition plasma screen monitor, (Intelligently designed and created) type into your cordless keyboard then hit enter, which causes your computer to convert all that visual data into a binary signal that's processed by millions of precise circuits. (Intelligently and individually designed and created) This is then converted to a frequency modulated signal to reach your wireless router where it is then converted to light waves and sent along a large fiber optics cable to be processed by a super computer on a mass server. (Intelligently designed and created) This sends that bit you typed to a satellite orbiting the earth that was put there through the greatest feats of engineering and science, (by intelligent minds who worked out how to do that using laws that were already put in place by an intelligent mind) all so it could go back through a similar pathway to make it all the way here to my computer monitor 15,000 miles away from you just so you could say, "Science is all a bunch of man made hogwash."- anon. (Science fact is a marvelous thing....science fiction is something else entirely.)

Now if only we could really say what intelligence is.
If it is simply the outcome of a mechanical determined process, an inevitable consequence of biochemical reactions, then how can we call it intelligence? And if we can't actually call it intelligence, then how can we say that it intelligently designs anything?

9 Inventions Made by Mistake
Famous Failures

 

[Kemosloby]

Obviously- aka the peer pressure review system. But I'm an optimist, it can and does slow scientific progress, but it can't stop it

"A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
Max Planck

Dunno, evolution theory has been around as long as I have. It's evolved some though, from it's humble beginnings of dinosaurs and monkey men, to mean just about everything that changes, real or imagined.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Dunno, evolution theory has been around as long as I have. It's evolved some though, from it's humble beginnings of dinosaurs and monkey men, to mean just about everything that changes, real or imagined.

That's true, if we define evolution as merely change in life over time, we all agree- including Gensesis- even down to such details as animal life appearing first in the ocean, and culminating with man..

Doing so by millions of lucky accidents... it's worth remembering that very few people believe this anyway outside of a small group of academia- who's record is hardly stellar.

19% in teh US believe in Darwinism (according to Gallup)

Also classical physics was around longer than evolution, and was far more directly observable, testable etc. I think like Piltdown man & global cooling, academics will just pretend it was never a big deal and they were always kinda secretly skeptical anyway!

 

[Kemosloby]

That's true, if we define evolution as merely change in life over time, we all agree- including Gensesis- even down to such details as animal life appearing first in the ocean, and culminating with man..

Doing so by millions of lucky accidents... it's worth remembering that very few people believe this anyway outside of a small group of academia- who's record is hardly stellar.

19% in teh US believe in Darwinism (according to Gallup)

Also classical physics was around longer than evolution, and was far more directly observable, testable etc. I think like Piltdown man & global cooling, academics will just pretend it was never a big deal and they were always kinda secretly skeptical anyway!

Not to be picky but Genesis does not say man evolved from the animals. It says God put Adam in the garden and sent the animals to Adam to be named as God created them. People think it has to be one way or another, but why can't it be both ways. As in other ways scripture says God has done things, There is a natural way, evolution and a miraculous way creation. The fact is God could do any combination of those ways.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Not to be picky but Genesis does not say man evolved from the animals. It says God put Adam in the garden and sent the animals to Adam to be named as God created them. People think it has to be one way or another, but why can't it be both ways. As in other ways scripture says God has done things, There is a natural way, evolution and a miraculous way creation. The fact is God could do any combination of those ways.

Agreed, I meant in the sense that the distribution of life on Earth changed, in distinct stages- as Genesis describes and the fossil record shows, not slow gradual metamorphosis as proposed by Darwinism.

And yes, he's God, it's his creation, reality ultimately reflects his will, not our attempts to understand it at this point!

 

[blü 2]

Guy Threepwood

But real science has come a long way since then!​

It has indeed. The facts and the theory of evolution have been enormously boosted by prodigious numbers of significant fossil finds, and on top that the superbooster of genetic science and constantly improving tools for it ─ all of which have accorded with the principles of the theory and advanced it further.

Belief in Darwin's theory of evolution (a purely natural process without God) is about 19% in the U.S. according to Gallup, and much lower elsewhere, so apparently it's arguments are not all that convincing.​

Truth isn't democratic. The earth isn't flat, the lady isn't a witch, smoking kills and the world is hotting up.

BUT : I was hoping you'd explain to me why, if evolution is false, and creation science is real science, creationism has totally ─ and I mean totally ─ failed to show the slightest scientific flaw in the theory of evolution.

What's the answer?

 

[blü 2]

Muslim-UK

If GOD planned and designed, then ALL of Creation is very special.​

I find it pretty special even without the condition you mention.