Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[Shad]

It won't have life if it doesn't have access to outside energy. That much is certain. The way that we can "cheat" the 2nd law of thermodynamics is that there is energy separated into different systems that can leak or affect other systems. Gravity and QM help create the sun and the conditions that separated the earth from the huge amount of energy being produced by the sun. There it creates a separate system within a much larger system (the universe) that can have increased entropy.

An eclipse is not an example of a closed system as it is only blocking part of the Sun's energy not all of it. It is a reduction in energy not an absences of it. As I said there are gravitation forces that are never removed if the Sun or any other massive body is in proximity to the Earth. Without placing Earth in a completely closed system it is still an open system. There is no example of such a body we have found at this time. Consider the theory that stars are formed within nursery nebula so even without a star it is not a closed system as even the matter within the nebula form new starts due to gravity. Hence population I, II and III stars.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

An eclipse is not an example of a closed system as it is only blocking part of the Sun's energy not all of it. It is a reduction in energy not an absences of it.

I was talking about removal of the sun as a provider of entropy. A mere eclipse wouldn't totally remove it.

 

[Shad]

I was talking about removal of the sun as a provider of entropy. A mere eclipse wouldn't totally remove it.

See my previous comment regarding the Sun not being the end all of entropy. Sure the lack of sunlight would harm or kill of most forms of life. The Moon generates gravitation focus which generates energy.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

See my previous comment regarding the Sun not being the end all of entropy.

Indeed. But without the sun I doubt life would be able to continue. The entropy provided from the core of the earth and the renaming systems wouldn't be enough to simply supply the energy we need. Though it could power us for a time.

 

[Shad]

Indeed. But without the sun I doubt life would be able to continue. The entropy provided from the core of the earth and the renaming systems wouldn't be enough to simply supply the energy we need. Though it could power us for a time.

Us as in strictly humans I would agree, for the majority of life too. However disagree with all life as I have a reasonable basis for doing so.

 

[outhouse]

However disagree with all life as I have a reasonable basis for doing so.

Its what science proposes as well.

Like moons with ice and water, life may exist where water is a liquid state despite being far removed from the sun.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Us as in strictly humans I would agree, for the majority of life too. However disagree with all life as I have a reasonable basis for doing so.

Possibly. I can grant you that. I just don't agree.

 

[Shad]

Its what science proposes as well.

Like moons with ice and water, life may exist where water is a liquid state despite being far removed from the sun.

I provide Europa as an example of this point.

 

[outhouse]

I provide Europa as an example of this point.

That was the exact one I was thinking too.

 

[gnostic]

Things you can’t understand is dishonest to you and that is your problem.

If any of the gospels, epistles and other NT books clearly and explicitly stated that Mary was a daughter of Heli or that Joseph was a son-in-law of Heli, I will admit that I'm wrong.

Till that time it is just clumsily excuses by few ignorant Christian apologists that whole this baseless view.

There are no sources within the NT that I know of that state the name of Mary's father. Not a single church traditions that claim of knowing the identity of her father. No where does it state that her ancestors were that of Judah and of David, but Luke 1:5 does link her to possibly as descendant of Aaron, because she was a relative of Elizabeth (1:36), who was mother of John the Baptist.

In this thread alone, you have made demonstrated that you can make wild claims and assumptions, and sometimes with no education or research done.

You are the only Christian I know who made the assumption that the behemoth is a dinosaur, especially the t-Rex, no one else has. You the person I know who believed that t-Rex eat grass. You the only person I know of, who don't know how to read similes.

So far I am not impressed by your education or your intelligence, especially in science or reading literature, or your understanding in history of that time.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Or the word fails to render the definition you wish to apply. A theory means a theory.....evolution is what some people "believe" took place....it is not a fact however, no matter how you mess with the definition.

Adding the word "scientific" only makes it sound like fact. It is a skewing of the true definition....verbal sleight of hand.

This is pure nonsense. Words have different means in different contexts. You know what the word means in a scientific context, or at least you should, at this point.

A scientific theory is the best explanation that best fits the evidence. It is composed of many facts gathered using the scientific method, usually comprised from several different fields of scientific study among multiple different groups of independent researchers, over the course of many years. This has been explained to you many times. You know this. Enough with this rubbish already.

 

[SkepticThinker]

If your pet subject is such a sure thing...an established scientific fact....then why all the whining when someone exposes it as a fraud? It should be water off a duck's back. Nothing I say should have ruffled your feathers...but the fact that it did speaks volumes about your confidence in it.
The very fact that you accuse me of lying is a bit pathetic IMV. Let the evidence speak for itself....what is it saying? Whatever the scientists want it to say.

None of you have substantiated your theory with any real proof. There were no eyewitnesses and all you have is circumstantial evidence and the interpretation of that evidence by your biased science gurus.
That interpretation "might be" or "could be" dead wrong! (Pardon the pun)

Quote mining is lying.

 

[SkepticThinker]

That you have a belief...just like I do.....a belief that you cannot prove conclusively.
200 years of men trying to understand creation can be called science, but they have never disproved the existence of a Creator. He is the inventor of all science. Men have only begun to scratch the surface of scientific knowledge, yet the first thing they do is try to eliminate belief in the one who made them. Biting the hand that feeds you is not a smart move even by an animal.


Proselytizing who? I was addressing you. Are you thinking of becoming a JW?



Neither do you.

BYW, I'm not a dude.

Hogwash.

Do yourself a favour and look up Francis Collins - he's the physician-geneticist who is head of the NIH who also happens to be an evangelical Christian. He fully accepts the theory of evolution and rejects young earth creationism and intelligent design. I seriously doubt he is trying to eliminate belief in god.

 

[gnostic]

Let me ask you since we are talking about NT and the Gospel of Matthew and since you are a self-proclaimed GENIIUS and GNOSTIC [who thinks he knows everything] maybe you guys can explain this.

MT 1:23 “BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD AND SHALL BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL,” which translated means, “GOD WITH US.”


ISA 7:14 “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.

We have already gotten so sidetracked on this thread, that no as talked about intelligent design nor evolution. We have gone in directions, with entropy/thermodynamics, behemoth/dinosaurs, on governorship and census of Quirinius, Mary's unknown father, the original language of the NT. None of which, relate to ID or evolution.

And now, you wanted to bring another unrelated topic to this thread?

Why not a new topic, JM2C on just about Isaiah's sign?

 

[JayJayDee]

This is pure nonsense. Words have different means in different contexts. You know what the word means in a scientific context, or at least you should, at this point.

What was the meaning of the word "theory" before science changed it? Making the word mean something else doesn't change a supposition into a fact...no matter how much science or time you throw at it. All science has are "could have's" and "might have's"...hardly the language of facts. It is a belief about what they think may have taken place...pure and simple. No real facts necessary...just flash a few credentials and people will swallow everything you say. And they reckon we are sheep.

A scientific theory is the best explanation that best fits the evidence. It is composed of many facts gathered using the scientific method, usually comprised from several different fields of scientific study among multiple different groups of independent researchers, over the course of many years. This has been explained to you many times. You know this. Enough with this rubbish already.

All of this relies on interpretation of "evidence" by those who already have a conclusion in mind and see what they want to see in the said "evidence". Bias rarely produces an objective finding in anything. This is what evolutionist will not admit.

 

[David M]

You don’t consider Middle Ages [5th to the 15th century] antiquity? Read your post againThen you misrepresent yourself by saying “in a patchy way up to 1000 years ago” or maybe the other 500 years were just like those people who like to meander along celebrating ignorance. You really can’t hide where you came from, can you? When you think you have this royal blood when in fact you are just the same like the Bohemians wandering around celebrating ignorance.

No one with a proper education considers the Middle Ages to be Antiquity.

The Middle Ages cover a period from about 1000 AD at the very latest (most class it as around 500BC) to 1450 AD, Antiquity is classed as being prior to the Middle Ages which means pre-1000AD as a minimum. So no, 500 years ago is not antiquity and nor is 1,000 years ago. My family surname arrived in the UK in 1066 AD and can be traced a little bit further back in Normandy, no royal blood involved just a invading descendant of some Vikings.

So as usual the only person celebrating ignorance is you.

 

[JayJayDee]

Hogwash.

Do yourself a favour and look up Francis Collins - he's the physician-geneticist who is head of the NIH who also happens to be an evangelical Christian. He fully accepts the theory of evolution and rejects young earth creationism and intelligent design. I seriously doubt he is trying to eliminate belief in god.

Do yourself a favor and point out a real Christian who is not swayed by his peers in the scientific community into defecting from belief in the Creator God as the intelligence behind all the design in nature. Either we are believers or we are defectors. I am not a defector and I see through through the whole charade that science is touting. There is a cunning deceiver at work in the world and he has been very successful from the beginning by exploiting the frailty of the human ego. You think there is no peer pressure in the scientific world? Think again.

 

[outhouse]

All of this relies on interpretation of "evidence"

And theology is what? interpretation of mythology?

We have factual evidence.

You have biased faith.

 

[outhouse]

. You think there is no peer pressure in the scientific world?

If your making claims of scientific bias, you have NOTHING but unsubstantiated rhetoric to back your claims.

 

[outhouse]

Do yourself a favor and point out a real Christian who is not swayed by his peers in the scientific community into defecting from belief in the Creator God as the intelligence behind all the design in nature

You have to have evidence to support that position.

Scientifically your deity does not exist outside mythology BECAUSE there is no evidence what so ever to test.