Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[gnostic]

cmoff it, Lemaitre practically single handedly showed the atheist consensus on the origin of the universe to be a load of crap, and died in relative obscurity, not even a nobel prize for the greatest scientific discovery of all time... institutions don't hand out awards for being embarrassed. But more to the point, he didn't want the books sales, TV shows and awards like pop scientists Hawking and Dawkins , boring old science was far more valuable to him.

Except that Lemaitre wasn't the only one to contribute to the Big Bang theory (he actually called it the hypothesis of "primeval atom").

Alexander Friedmann was the one who actually first proposed the expanding universe. And behind the BB theory was the underlying concept of general relativity by Einstein. Then there is Edwin Hubble, who contribute his own calculation in the budding theory.

I do agree that Lemaitre was a pioneer, but only one of several contemporary physicists who had contributed to the BB. But that doesn't mean Lemaitre's paper on primeval atom was completely right. Even more important than Lemaitre's contribution was that of George Gamow, on the hot Big Bang and on BB Nucleosynthesis. And it was Gamow who predicted how the early stars were formed.

You are making as if Lemaitre did all the work by himself, but the fact of matter is that he didn't. Like I said he was one contributor out of many. No one here is denying Lemaitre's contribution, but you are denying others who have contribute to this cosmology.

If anything, Gamow's contribution is the one that have contribute to better understanding of the universe.

 

[jonathan180iq]

SOURCE REQUIRED

Just went to google. Just went to wiki. Didn't find jack squat to support your argument. Can we call it a loss for you and move on or do you plan on supporting something you state?

Controversial T. Rex Soft Tissue Find Finally Explained

This is what he's talking about. But he continuously fails to read anything other than creationist apologetics for such a find...I've addressed this with him 3-4 times and he keeps harping about conspiracies or other such nonsense.

 

[JM2C]

If one talks to a historian who's expertise is on early Roman history, they scoff at the supposed census that supposedly necessitated Joseph and Mary having to go to Bethlehem. First of all, there's no emphasis of a census being taken at that time even though there are records of other census before and after that time period, plus people did not have to travel to where they were born in order to register. It would be illogical for so many in that region to have to travel sometimes great distances to do just register as it would be highly disruptive and economically foolish.

I guess one of the reason for the census, beside for tax purposes, is for the genealogical record. If you’re from NY or a registered voter from NY and winters in Florida, does this mean you are a Floridian and not a New Yorker? Where ever the census is, and that is, NY.

In the case of Joseph and Mary, both from the tribe of Judah, in the line of David, they have to register in Judea, “to the city of David which is called Bethlehem”

LK 2:4 Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David,
LK 2:5 in order to register along with Mary, who was engaged to him, and was with child.

Instead, many Christian theologians tend to take that narrative as being a subjective approach to draw a parallel between David and Jesus.

When you said “draw a parallel”, did you mean analogy or comparison between David and Jesus?

 

[JM2C]

What do you have to say about ERVs and the fossil record, then?

What is ERVs? Tell me something about

 

[jonathan180iq]

I've always found it amusing that when discussing the fact that a virgin woman was supposedly pregnant with a magic baby, the focus somehow gets tossed over to whether or not the census took place when it did, or how someone would have registered.... We're talking about a pregnant virgin filled with magic baby sauce.... I'm fairly certain that the problems with the validity of the story don't hinge on the statistics taken from the census.

 

[JM2C]

Xenocrysts have different properties from the parent rock they are contained in. This allows them to be identified if they are present. Dates derived from homogenous samples (which do not contain xenocrysts) can therefore be taken as accurate.

Would xenocrysts give the right age or would it be the same as the phenocrysts?

The problem is, both minerals have excess argon. Was it because of argon occlusion within the minerals?

“The second possibility is that so-called "excess argon" could have become trapped in the Mount St. Helens magma. This is where we find the bulk of the confusing complexity in Austin's paper and in those of his critics. The papers all go into great detail describing the various ways that argon-containing compounds can be incorporated into magma. These include the occlusion of xenoliths and xenocrysts, which are basically contaminants from existing old rocks that get mixed in with the magma; and phenocrysts, which are crystals of all sorts of different minerals that form inside the rock in different ways depending on how quickly the magma cools.“ -Skeptoid

The problem with these minerals is the excess argon that did not gassed out so some have more argon than the others and therefore should give different ages.

The basic assumption is, natural occurring argon should gassed out, but because of argon occlusion into these minerals, xenocrysts and phenocrysts, it gave different ages on the geochron, but testing the whole rock where it reset to zero is shown 350,000 years in just ten years. That’s the main point of the argument.

When did it set to zero? There shouldn’t be any presence of radiogenic argon when the rock formed or set to zero, but because of excess argon or argon occlusion within the minerals, xenocrysts and phenocrysts, geochron gave different ages on these minerals.

 

[JM2C]

I've always found it amusing that when discussing the fact that a virgin woman was supposedly pregnant with a magic baby, the focus somehow gets tossed over to whether or not the census took place when it did, or how someone would have registered.... We're talking about a pregnant virgin filled with magic baby sauce.... I'm fairly certain that the problems with the validity of the story don't hinge on the statistics taken from the census.

Nothing as funny as molecules-to-man

 

[JM2C]

Since we are referring to Job 40:15 the sources of the Hippo's tremendous power and energy are noted to be in the hips, and in the tendons of its belly, or the muscles of its back and its belly ( verse 16 ).


The tail being like cedar: Is fairly short, thus likely the animal can set its thick tail so rigidly upright or swing it about like a tree.


The sinews of its thighs are interwoven so that the fiber and tendons of muscles of it thighs are twisted together and braided like powerful cables - see verse 17.

Its bones in its legs are as strong as tubes of copper thus being able to support its great body weight. The bones and ribs are like wrought-iron rods - see verse 18.

The Hippo's immense consumption of food is alluded to in verse 20. and mention is made of it relaxing under the thorny lotus trees or concealing itself in a swampy place- like beneath the shade of the poplars - verses 21,22.

Even when a river overflows its banks, the Hippo does Not panic because it can still keep its head above the water level and swim against even the force of a deluge - verse 23.

If you can find an animal with a longer tail than the hippo you could probably win this argument, but insisting that a hippo has a “tail like a cedar”, to whom you are appealing to?

 

[jonathan180iq]

Nothing as funny as molecules-to-man

How about molecules to more complex molecules? That happens, right?

How about complex molecules to polymers? That happens, right?

How about polymers to cells? That happens, right?

How about cells to organisms? That happens, right?

How about organisms to more complex organisms? That happens, right?

How about man being a complex organism? That's true, right?

LOL. It's hilarious.

 

[JM2C]

"We don't know how collagen can survive that long, therefore it can't" is an example of the argument from ignorance. There is already massive evidence that the Earth and life on it are very old.Different radiometric dating techniques corraborate each other, as well as non-radiometric techniques like varves, ice cores and genetic clocks. It is therefore exceedingly more likely that the collagen is very old than all of these dating techniques being wrong.


If it had been tested (preferably by multiple labs), was found to be only a few thousand years old, didn't conflict with other dating methods used on the fossil, and various sources of error had been ruled out, then I would accept that it was a few thousand years old. So how about you?

If it was tested and found to be too old to date with C-14, would you have accepted those results?

YES!

You said that already but have not explained the relevance.

Tendons are outside of the bone. The collagen was found inside the bone. What's the relevance and what does it have to do with proving that the behemoth was a dinosaur? As I said before, even if it was a dinosaur that would not disprove evolution any more than the discovery of a living coelacanth disproved it. All that would prove is that at least some non-avian dinosaurs survived into the human era. Evolution does not say that such a thing cannot happen.

Palaeontologists will have to revise their theories on the end of the dinosaurs, the KT extinction.

 

[JM2C]

No surprise.


You think a lot outside education and academia.


PROVIDE SOURCES You make to many pseudo scientific claims

education and academia. Will you let go of these words please. The reason why you and I and the others are here is because we are not in school studying these things. Our main source of info is google and wiki so please stop pretending you went to school to study any of these things we are talking about.

 

[JM2C]

Where is yours????????



You can only attack the status quo.


Your other issue is you have no replacement hypothesis for evolution. Nothing at all. Maybe pseudo science and mythology at best, see if that ever makes academia.

Don’t worry I understand you quite very well. You need attention! Ok, I’m on, you went to school..no problem here..so what’s next? More rhetoric? That’s not evidence…..

 

[JM2C]

LOL


Provide sources.

Your unbelief is my source

 

[JM2C]

No. If a scientist demonstrated that dinosaurs existed less than 50,000 years ago, they would undoubtedly get the Nobel prize.

Carbon dating only, meaning; he would give it to a lab that does carbon dating.

 

[JM2C]

No, it isn't. There is insufficient carbon in the sample for it to be accurately dated.

Exaclty! So, why he wouldn’t do it? Because he knew it was dateable. Have you ever thought that dating this soft tissue with 14C would greatly favor evolutionist if it found not dateable at all? This would be the end of the debate between creationists and evolutionists. I think you guys should push it harder than the creationist to test this with 14C.

 

[JM2C]

Exactly what he said - it would lead to dishonest people like you jumping on the result of less than 50,000 years and using it as evidence of your position - despite the fact that there is no reason to assume such a date would be accurate.

Dr. Horner would be the one who will send it to a lab and not the creationist.

 

[JM2C]

Where is your evidence?

I think the right words are “OUR EVIDENCE”. Our evidence is in Dr. Mary Schweitzer’s lab.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I think the right words are “OUR EVIDENCE”. Our evidence is in Dr. Mary Schweitzer’s lab.

Mysteriously Intact T. Rex Tissue Finally Explained : Discovery News

 

[metis]

I guess one of the reason for the census, beside for tax purposes, is for the genealogical record. If you’re from NY or a registered voter from NY and winters in Florida, does this mean you are a Floridian and not a New Yorker? Where ever the census is, and that is, NY.

In the case of Joseph and Mary, both from the tribe of Judah, in the line of David, they have to register in Judea, “to the city of David which is called Bethlehem”

But that's not how the Romans conducted their censuses, according to Roman historians. Essentially one signed up where they lived but also stated where they were originally from. To do it the way as cited in the gospels not only doesn't make sense from that perspective, but it also doesn;t make sense that the Romans, who were demanding of acquiring more tax revenues, would have people travel sometimes significant distances to register. Also, a reminder that they tell us that there was no census on record taken at near that time slot in eretz Israel. No matter how one may look at it, it simply doesn't add up if taken literally.

When you said “draw a parallel”, did you mean analogy or comparison between David and Jesus?

Yes. David was one of our most respected leaders, so drawing a parallel between him and Jesus makes sense in that context. BTW, the geneological argument doesn't add up either if taken literally, but that's another discussion for another day. What's more important is the symbolism that I believe is being reflected, and traditional Jewish writings do this a great deal.

 

[dust1n]

If that was too 'mined' I can expand the quote if it helps

In the Cambrian strata of rocks, vintage about 600 million years (evolutionists are now dating the beginning of the Cambrian at about 530 million years), are the oldest in which we find most of the major invertebrate groups. And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history.

I mean, there is no reason to really go over this again, when it has already been addressed, more than once, apparently.