• 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!

Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

T

TheInfiniteLight

Member
Jared Jammer said:
. . . Then Darwinian Evolution is untestable. If intelligent design is unfalsifiable, then Darwinian evolution is unprovable.

Why? Logic 101.

They're opposing answers to the same question, thus, any test for one will inherently test the other.
Any evidence for one will be evidence against the other.
Any proof of one will be proof against the other. proving one will falsify the other (and vice versa).

When Darwinists say we can't falsify the claim that biology is a product of design, they're unwittingly confessing that they can't prove biology is the product of blind nature.

When Darwinists say we can't prove the claim that biology is a product of design, they're unwittingly confessing that they can't falsify the claim that biology is the product of blind nature.

The only reasonable conclusion is that either both are science, or neither is science.

Food for thought. I eagerly await your flimsy excuses.
Click to expand...

The only reasonable conclusion is one acknowledges God and the other acknowledges man's endeavor without any supernatural explanation. To deny the supernatural is to deny the possibility of the world. Do you think all this got here from nothing? foolishness. To deny science is to accept that men interpret knowledge from their own inadequacies, their own faults and failures. Who are these people that exalt scientists and reject God?
 
leibowde84

leibowde84

Veteran Member
TheInfiniteLight said:
Do you think all this got here from nothing? foolishness.
Click to expand...
1. We don't know that "nothing" was ever in existence, as we don't know what existed before the Big Bang.
2. Even if we did know that there was nothing, God is not the only explanation. Our understanding of the cosmos is so utterly limited that it would be "foolish" to assume that anything we don't understand now should be attributed to God or anything supernatural.
 
T

TheInfiniteLight

Member
leibowde84 said:
1. We don't know that "nothing" was ever in existence, as we don't know what existed before the Big Bang.
2. Even if we did know that there was nothing, God is not the only explanation. Our understanding of the cosmos is so utterly limited that it would be "foolish" to assume that anything we don't understand now should be attributed to God or anything supernatural.
Click to expand...

Well if God is not the only explanation,

Then List the explanations:
1. God
2.
3.
...
 
Monk Of Reason

Monk Of Reason

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
TheInfiniteLight said:
Well if God is not the only explanation,
Then List the explanations:
...
Click to expand...
1. We don't know
2. We don't know
3. Possible multiverse
4. But we don't know because the evidence isn't found yet either way.
5. Some people believe some kind of force or entity may have caused it but in no way shape or form is it based on evidence or observed reality. Some may call this god. However this demotes god to the simplest of terms and often strips any identifiers for any specific religion.
 
leibowde84

leibowde84

Veteran Member
TheInfiniteLight said:
Well if God is not the only explanation,

Then List the explanations:
1. God
2.
3.
...
Click to expand...
You obviously didn't read my comment. I said that our current lack of scientific understanding does not make the leap in logic to the assumption that God is responsible valid at all. We just don't know how the universe was initiated YET. That doesn't mean we should give up looking and just settle on God as the answer.
 
leibowde84

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Monk Of Reason said:
1. We don't know
2. We don't know
3. Possible multiverse
4. But we don't know because the evidence isn't found yet either way.
5. Some people believe some kind of force or entity may have caused it but in no way shape or form is it based on evidence or observed reality. Some may call this god. However this demotes god to the simplest of terms and often strips any identifiers for any specific religion.
Click to expand...
Thanks, buddy. I needed some backup. I am in it with Muhammad right now.
 
leibowde84

leibowde84

Veteran Member
TheInfiniteLight said:
Well if God is not the only explanation,

Then List the explanations:
1. God
2.
3.
...
Click to expand...
God, in other words, is not an explanation, it is a "cop-out". It is very well possible that we merely don't have the scientific understanding now (as it is extremely limited), but someday we will. There is absolutely no reason to think that we won't.
 
Deathbydefault

Deathbydefault

Apistevist Asexual Atheist
leibowde84 said:
God, in other words, is not an explanation, it is a "cop-out". It is very well possible that we merely don't have the scientific understanding now (as it is extremely limited), but someday we will. There is absolutely no reason to think that we won't.
Click to expand...

It is a theory of mine, and one that has been stated before I'm sure, that religion is based on fear.
Fear of the unknown.
Fear of others.
Fear of death.

I say that people use their religion to explain away the things they're scared of.
It's also known that people use religion as a control mechanism.
"If you don't do [unreasonable command here] then you'll go to hell".
"God commands you to kill to protect your kings, lest you burn for eternity".

Modern religion is different, kinda not really.
And all I can do is sit here and say, "get a reality check".
I do not believe life is so fair as to offer eternal paradise or damnation.
But I also don't fear just being another corpse in the dirt either.

It all loops back around to fear.
See this is why I only get like 6 hours of sleep a night...

Logic-Logical-Makes-Sense-Spock-Star-Trek-GIF.gif
 
Monk Of Reason

Monk Of Reason

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Mohammad Nur Syamsu said:
Obviously...... the only thing holding you all together is your craving for (scientific) factual certitude about what is good and evil.
Click to expand...
Actually when one continually bashes one's face against a wall over and over and over with no avail no matter how sense you make and no matter how solid your argument is, it becomes trying. You havent' expressed a single coherent argument for the whole of the time I have seen you on this site. And yet you continue to make these baseless claims as if you have some hollow victory.

You claim I have no subjectivity in the undeniable evidence that I have subjective thoughts and acceptance of subjective concepts.
You claim I am a social Darwinist when I hold positions politically and morally that are impossible to be had if I were a social Darwinist.
You claim that evolution is wrong because it rejects subjectivity. You have yet to explain how it rejects subjectivity and when it has been explained to you in full clarity you simply revert like a broken record back to the same point that has been defeated over and over and over again.
The evidence is real. You are wrong on nearly all accounts. I can't think of one that you are correct in but I am sure, if nothing else it is at least statistically likely that you have said something correct on accident.
 
Last edited:
Deathbydefault

Deathbydefault

Apistevist Asexual Atheist
Monk Of Reason said:
Actually when one continually bashes one's face against a wall over and over and over with no avail no matter how sense you make and no matter how solid your argument is, it becomes trying. You havent' expressed a single coherent argument for the whole of the time I have seen you on this site. And yet you continue to make these baseless claims as if you have some hollow victory.

You claim I have no subjectivity in the undeniable evidence that I have subjective thoughts and acceptance of subjective concepts.
You claim I am a social Darwinist when I hold positions politically and morally that are impossible to be had if I were a social Darwinist.
You claim that evolution is wrong because it rejects subjectivity. You have yet to explain how it rejects subjectivity and when it has been explained to you in full clarity you simply revert like a broken record back to the same point that has been defeated over and over and over again.
The evidence is real. You are wrong on nearly all accounts. I can't think of one that you are wrong in but I am sure, if nothing else it is at least statistically likely that you have said something correct no accident.
Click to expand...


tumblr_m2c0cxYoTW1rqfhi2o1_500.gif
 
M

Mohammad Nur Syamsu

Well-Known Member
Monk Of Reason said:
Actually when one continually bashes one's face against a wall over and over and over with no avail no matter how sense you make and no matter how solid your argument is, it becomes trying. You havent' expressed a single coherent argument for the whole of the time I have seen you on this site. And yet you continue to make these baseless claims as if you have some hollow victory.

You claim I have no subjectivity in the undeniable evidence that I have subjective thoughts and acceptance of subjective concepts.
You claim I am a social Darwinist when I hold positions politically and morally that are impossible to be had if I were a social Darwinist.
You claim that evolution is wrong because it rejects subjectivity. You have yet to explain how it rejects subjectivity and when it has been explained to you in full clarity you simply revert like a broken record back to the same point that has been defeated over and over and over again.
The evidence is real. You are wrong on nearly all accounts. I can't think of one that you are correct in but I am sure, if nothing else it is at least statistically likely that you have said something correct on accident.
Click to expand...

I guess that is the same way we know political correctness is fascism, and not the care and love it pretends to stand for. You take prescriptive applicability from natural selection theory. If you only use natural selection theory to support that good and evil are fact, that is already social darwinism.
 
dust1n

dust1n

Zindīq
TheInfiniteLight said:
To deny science is to accept that men interpret knowledge from their own inadequacies, their own faults and failures.
Click to expand...

Why would I trust this sentiment, if you've just admitted that you interpret knowledge from your own inadequacies, your own faults and your own failures? To deny what you just aid is to accept that you interpret knowledge from your own inadequacies, your own faults and failures.

Who are these people that exalt scientists and reject God?
Click to expand...

God does not exist independent of whether science is true or evolution is true. No need to exalt scientists. Rejecting God can done without any science whatsoever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top