Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[JM2C]

Nebraska man was not a hoax. I don't know what crazy source you got that from. He was incorrectly categorized and was later re-categorized. It was a real fossil with a correct age.

Built an entire man from a pig’s tooth is not a hoax?

This drawing of nebraska man was formed in the minds of evolutionists from a pig tooth.

 

[JM2C]

The soft tissue samples are amazing and great. However there is no evidence to suggest that they are young. If they did do the test they would get crazy wonky numbers that were wrong. Which is what the creationist camp is banking on.

Creationist do not have the samples in their hands. They are in Mary Schweitzer’s lab, an evolutionist. Always remember this, Creationist do not have the upper hand here, but the evolutionist because they have the samples.

Have you ever thought that it would do the evolutionist a big favor if it found that it was not dateable by 14C? You probably thinking that there is a possibility that it might be dated by 14C and that would prove all those millions of years of evolution were nothing but lies, right? People are always afraid to find the truth.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

You conflate creation with the term science uses. Thus creation is only an opinion not a fact. Your argument collapses since a premise is unsound.

In creation theory the mechanism of origins is choosing. That means whatever you can see in the universe is chosen, and since with choices there are always alternatives, what exists presently could alternatively also not have been chosen to be.

There is no error in creationism, the history of social darwinism shows there is a fundamental error in natural selection theory confusing ought with is, confusing opinion with fact.

 

[JM2C]

Anything else? What about the tens of thousands of other fossils found? Just fakes or were they buried by satan?

The pattern is there so the assumption should be the same, right? I not really sure if satan would do such thing because his line of work is just to make people believe in lies.

Burying false evidence is a possibility. When Dr. Johanson found Lucy he got about 2 weeks before his funds dried up.

Roy Holt asked "How far away from Lucy did you find the knee?" It was very difficult, but Johanson did manage to remember that it was found "60 to 70 meters [over 200 feet] lower in the strata and two to three kilometers [1.24-1.86 miles] away." "Then, why are you so sure it belonged to Lucy?"

Answer: "Anatomical similarity." If that is "science" to Johanson, it is little wonder why he says it is so tentative.

“Anatomical similarity” according to Dr. Johanson but read the transcript from PBS http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts...

DON JOHANSON: "The ape that stood up, it was a revolutionary idea. We needed Owen Lovejoy's expertise again, because

(1) the evidence wasn't quite adding up. The knee looked human,

(2) but the shape of her hip didn't.

(3) Superficially, her hip resembled a chimpanzee's, which meant that

(4) Lucy couldn't possibly have walked like a modern human."

Four testimonials from the man who discovered it.

JOHANSON: "After Lucy died, some of her bones lying in the mud, must have been crushed or broken, perhaps by animals browsing at the lake shore."

OWEN LOVEJOY: "This has caused the two bones, in fact, to fit together so well that they're in an anatomically impossible position."

Meaning: "Impossible for a human, right?

JOHANSON: "The perfect fit was an allusion that made Lucy's hip bones seems to flair out like a chimps. But all was not lost. Lovejoy decided he could restore the pelvis to its natural shape. He didn't want to tamper with the original, so he made a copy in plaster. He cut the damaged pieces out and put them back together the way they were before Lucy died. It was a tricky job, but after taking the kink out of the pelvis, it all fit together perfectly, like a three-dimensional jigsaw puzzle. As a result, the angle of the hip looks nothing like a chimps, but a lot like ours. Anatomically at least, Lucy could stand like a human."

Get that? After using a Dremel tool to remove the entire sections from the pelvis, Voila !!; it was bi-pedal.

JOHANSON: "Had they begun to develop a human-size brain to go with their human walk? Lucy couldn't help us there. Her skull was almost entirely missing. So knowing the exact size of Lucy's brain was the crucial bit of missing evidence. But from the few skull fragments we had, it looked surprisingly small. "

 

[David M]

We went thru with this already. K-Ar dating methods were not really accurate based on the test of Mt. St Helen’s igneous rocks.

No. As you were repeatedly shown Austin's Mt St Helen's results were fraudulent.

 

[Parsimony]

We went thru with this already. K-Ar dating methods were not really accurate based on the test of Mt. St Helen’s igneous rocks.

Again, I ask: was the sample taken from Mt. St. Helens homogeneous? Was it tested using machines which can reliably date material so young? Was the sample ensured to not contain xenocrysts? Was the sample located by and tested by individuals trained to do this kind of work? If this answer to any of those questions is "no" then your conclusion becomes highly suspect. It is doubly suspect because different dating methods have been shown to be in agreement with each other.

 

[David M]

Built an entire man from a pig’s tooth is not a hoax?
View attachment 9480
This drawing of nebraska man was formed in the minds of evolutionists from a pig tooth.

A lie, one of so many that you repeat without fact checking them.

That picture was drawn by an artist and published in a magazine. No scientist was involved in the process at all. In fact AT THE TIME the scientist who misidentified the tooth stated that the picture had no scientific relevance:

"a figment of the imagination of no scientific value, and undoubtedly inaccurate"

 

[JM2C]

Considering there is no evidence of a virgin birth beside the very books claiming there was one I can dismiss it just as easily as anyone or any number of people claiming they were born of a virgin. Just as people do with Krishna, Karna, Horus, Romulus, etc. Find a sample of Jesus', Mary's and Josephs blood so we can compare genetic markers.

They don’t have a system back then to keep any DNA and even if someone is claiming today that s/he has the same blood as the Lord Jesus, how are you are going to compare their blood if there was no blood samples from the Lord Jesus to compare it with? Common sense is saying, you can’t, right? Does it refute anything as far as what the Gospel of Matthew was saying about the virgin birth? NO, It does not. You are looking for something that is obviously not there, i.e., the DNA of the Lord Jesus, and make this as a proof of your argument that there was no virgin birth at all because of the absence of the DNA.

 

[outhouse]

We went thru with this already. K-Ar dating methods were not really accurate based on the test of Mt. St Helen’s igneous rocks.

Your point is irrelevant.

 

[outhouse]

Built an entire man from a pig’s tooth is not a hoax?

You need to know what your actually talking about

From its initial description, Hesperopithecus was regarded as an inconclusive find by a large portion of the scientific community.

the identity of H. haroldcookii did not achieve general acceptance in the scientific community

 

[outhouse]

After using a Dremel tool to remove the entire sections from the pelvis,

Quote mining only can hurt your credibility.

Lucy is not up for debate, it is a factual previous species that serves as an example of human evolution which is factual..

The skeleton shows evidence of small skull capacity akin to that of apes and of bipedal upright walk akin to that of humans, supporting the debated view that bipedalism preceded increase in brain size in human evolution.[6][7]

 

[outhouse]

IT is obvious this topic is over the head of many here.



Johanson recovered Lucy's left innominate bone and sacrum. Though the sacrum was remarkably well preserved, the innominate was distorted, leading to two different reconstructions. The first reconstruction had little iliac flare and virtually no anterior wrap, creating an ilium that greatly resembled that of an ape. However, this reconstruction proved to be faulty, as the superior pubic rami would not have been able to connect if the right ilium was identical to the left.

A later reconstruction by Tim White showed a broad iliac flare and a definite anterior wrap, indicating that Lucy had an unusually broad inner acetabular distance and unusually long superior pubic rami. Her pubic arch was over 90 degrees, similar to modern human females. Her acetabulum, however, was small and primitive.

 

[JM2C]

All of which can be corrected by proof reading, which I did not do, and using a proper keyboard rather than a tiny one on my phone. This is different from confusing the words bend and length as synonyms after linking a lexicon for the words in their language. Also notice the key difference in our responses? I admit to my mistakes, you did not. More so you have used examples not directly related to the topic while my example was. So yet another deflection away from your mistake thus a red herring and a tu quoque fallacy. My grammar and spelling in the end has nothing to do with my argument, is not a counter-argument nor render my argument invalid.


Tu quoque - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bend - definition of Bend by The Free Dictionary

length - definition of length by The Free Dictionary

You have to remember that you were questioning my grammar when it was your grammar that should be in question, right? “You seems have had” 5th graders don’t talk like that anymore. There is no excuse for that and please do not blame the tiny keyboard in the cell phone.

 

[outhouse]

You have to remember

That evolution is fact, and its not up for debate because of some peoples fanaticism.

 

[outhouse]

Lord Jesus

I doubt you even know his real name.

Or that lord was just a man who was the head of a household back then.

 

[JM2C]

Again, I ask: was the sample taken from Mt. St. Helens homogeneous? Was it tested using machines which can reliably date material so young? Was the sample ensured tonotcontain xenocrysts? Was the sample located by and tested by individuals trained to do this kind of work? If this answer to any of those questions is "no" then your conclusion becomes highly suspect. It is doubly suspect because different dating methods have been shown to be in agreement with each other.

I think we are just going in circle here. Tell me the difference between xenocryst and phenocryst?

 

[JM2C]

Agreed.

There is plenty of evidence in the NT for Jesus divinity. Just because the trinity slowly evolved hundreds of years later, does not mean there is no evidence in support.

You see here how you agreed on one thing and then you disagree from it on your another statement.

I doubt you even know his real name.

Or that lord was just a man who was the head of a household back then.

Tell me should I believe your next statement?

 

[JM2C]

That evolution is fact, and its not up for debate because of some peoples fanaticism.

You mean pack of lies

 

[JM2C]

That evolution is fact, and its not up for debate because of some peoples fanaticism.

Read Post 2100 and see the truth....

 

[JM2C]

No. As you were repeatedly shown Austin's Mt St Helen's results were fraudulent.

It was the K-Ar dating method and not Dr. Austin's