Shortest Proof for Creationism?

[Subduction Zone]

Perhaps the best proof of creation is for someone to name anything that exists that was not designed and built by someone who had to knowledge and power to design and build it. A house was designed and built. A car or computer or cell phone was designed and built. But a living animal which is a million times more complex than a house or car just came into being all by itself?

We understand how life evolves. It is not that big of a problem. You are using an argument from ignorant, a logical fallacy. Instead of doing that you should be trying to learn how biologists know what they know.

 

[questfortruth]

That is patently false. What is a "kind"?



That is patently false. What is a "kind"?

Suppose, that life on Earth has begun 7000 B.C. One of the first organisms was item A. It has multiplied itself into the multitude of all trees. These trees and item A had no sexual relation to other lifeforms during all history of the universe, future, and past.

Well, such a structure of trees that have ever existed and have one last common ancestor (LCA is the item A) God has named "kind of trees". Another LCA, item B has been multiplying without sexual relation to other lifeforms and item A, and has produced all cats in the history of the universe. Then this multitude of cats God has named cat-kind. The number of LCA-s is the number of kinds of life, which are on the planet. In Darwinian evolution, however, there is only one LCA, so there is only one kind: Earthlings. If we will discover life on Mars with Marsian LCA, they will add the second kind: Marsians. About the kinds in the Bible: Genesis, chapter 1.

Your view is wrong according to almost all established science. It's not a matter of evolution/creation, it's a matter of relatedness. You're confusing them.

Please name the two items that I am confusing together.

 

[questfortruth]

We understand how life evolves. It is not that big of a problem. You are using an argument from ignorant, a logical fallacy. Instead of doing that you should be trying to learn how biologists know what they know.

There have already been countless attempts to falsify the theory for a century and a half. It hasn't been done.

Specific mechanisms have been proposed and falsified, but the evolution is a fact that has never been falsified by any methodologically valid research.

So, the Theory of Evolution has failed to relate to Popper's falsifiability criterion.
If a theory has lost the potential to be falsified, it is no longer a scientific theory,
neither scientific fact.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So, the Theory of Evolution has failed to relate to Popper's falsifiability criterion.
If a theory has lost the potential to be falsified, it is no longer a scientific theory,
neither scientific fact.

What makes you say that? It is potentially falsifiable.

What you do not understand is that a theory that is correct could still be falsified if it is wrong, but since it is not that event will not happen.

 

[questfortruth]

What you do not understand is that a theory that is correct could still be falsified if it is wrong, but since it is not that event will not happen.

If it can not happen even in principle, then the Evolution has lost potential to be falsified.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If it can not happen even in principle, then the Evolution has lost potential to be falsified.

Nope. You misunderstand what the word "falsifiable" means. You seem to think that an idea has to be wrong to be falsifiable. That is not the case.

Where did you get that crazy idea from in the first place?

 

[blü 2]

Perhaps the best proof of creation is for someone to name anything that exists that was not designed and built by someone who had to knowledge and power to design and build it. A house was designed and built. A car or computer or cell phone was designed and built. But a living animal which is a million times more complex than a house or car just came into being all by itself?

No, of course not,

It's the result of some 3.7 billion years of trial and error, based on a very simple observation: the genes that most aid survival are the genes most likely to be represented in future generations.

It's called 'evolution', and the science of evolution ─ the modern "theory of evolution" ─ is the overarching theory of biology. Perhaps you've heard of it?

I gave a rough summary of the evolution of us, modern Homo sapiens sapiens, in #79 above. You might like to consider it.

 

[questfortruth]

Nope. You misunderstand what the word "falsifiable" means. You seem to think that an idea has to be wrong to be falsifiable. That is not the case.

Where did you get that crazy idea from in the first place?

I repeat, if the Theory of Evolution can not be proven wrong, it is wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I repeat, if the Theory of Evolution can not be proven wrong, it is wrong.

And you do not seem to understand. If it was wrong the tests still exist and would show it to be wrong. Guess what? It does not appear to be wrong and you still do not understand the concept of falsification.

Put it this way, even though the theory of evolution keeps passing the tests that could show it to be wrong no one is saying "The theory of evolution is right no matter what". That is what a theist would say about his beliefs. We are still open to the possibility of it being shown to be wrong. It has not happened yet.

By the way, nothing is stopping you from developing a proper test.

 

[Clara Tea]

It's a picture of a dude photoshopped onto a dessicated bundle of roots. It holds about as much usefulness as some dude's abbs photoshopped onto this guy.

It doesn't even really mean or address anything... It's not even remotely relevant to the evidence presented in evolution. I feel like every thread you make is just a takedown of the same strawman over and over.

I have ripply abs too, but I have to jump up and down to make them ripple. Maybe they are not abs, but flabs?

Every fat person can claim to be thin. Every theist can claim that God exists. Every atheist can claim that they don't want to believe in God unless there is proof (which is not the same as saying that they are sure that God doesn't exist...because that, too, would require proof).

Claims mean nothing without proof.

 

[Clara Tea]

ABSTRACT:
1. proof, that there are transitional forms in the modern theory of evolution.
2. statement, that they are not capable of living and surviving.
3. conclusion, that there is God.


Once upon a time, there were no humans on Earth.
But the leading lifeform was bacteria.
Therefore, there are transitional forms between us and bacteria.
Therefore, there are transitional forms (living on the planet) between us in 2021 AD and bacteria some billion years ago.

Later the leading lifeform became underwater plants.
There were no humans on Earth.
Thus, there are transitional forms between us and plants.

Later the leading lifeform became fish.
There were no humans on Earth.
Thus, there are transitional forms between us and fish.

Later the leading lifeform became monkeys.
There were no humans on Earth.
Thus, there are transitional forms between us and monkeys.

But the transitional forms are not capable of living and surviving.

We came to contradiction, therefore there is God.
We came to contradiction, therefore there is God.
We came to contradiction, therefore there is God.

The Biblical God tells, that there are many kinds of beings on the planet.
Theory of Darwin tells, that there is only one single organism in the origin of all life, including humans..
Thus, the Evolution tells an absurd, that there is only humankind on the planet, and no bird-kind, no worm-kind, no plant-kind. Namely, birds are humans too.

Darwin operates with the term species. Such a term is possible if to consider a kind. There are different species within the kind of beings. For example, there are black people and white people.
But they belong to one kind: humankind. Definition of a kind: all beings, who share a common ancestor. So, there is only one kind in the Theory of Evolution. You can name it with any word. But it is easy to remember: humankind. If we would discover organisms on Venus they would be venerian-kind.

According to the Theory of Evolution, there are many species within one kind of beings. There is only one kind on the planet.

According to so-called pseudo-science, there are many kinds of beings, each with its own species.
A kind can contain many species.

Suppose, that life on Earth has begun 7000 B.C. One of the first organisms was item A. It has multiplied itself into the multitude of all trees. It had no sexual relation to other lifeforms during all history of the universe, future, and past. Well, such a structure of trees that have ever existed and have one last common ancestor (LCA is the item A) God has named "kind of trees". Another LCA, item B has been multiplying without sexual relation to other lifeforms and item A, and has produced all cats in the history of the universe. Then this multitude of cats God has named cat-kind. The number of LCA-s is the number of kinds of life, which are on the planet. In Darwinian evolution, however, there is only one LCA, so there is only one kind: Earthlings. If we will discover life on Mars, they will add the second kind: Marsians. About the kinds in the Bible: Genesis, chapter 1.

You claim that in the theory that life evolved from bacteria to complex animals, intermediate creatures died off, therefore God exists.

Isn't this analogous to siphoning gas from a gas tank into a bottle? It started out in the tank (bacteria), then it was in a hose (intermediate), then it was in a bottle (complex animal). The fact that the gas drains from the hose means that God exists (by your logic). I don't see it that way.

DNA is clear evidence of evolution. It shows a transition from one living thing to another.

Scientists have looked long and hard to find a "missing link" between humans and monkeys. Frankly, I don't think that there is one. It is clear from the missing chromosome that two of the monkey chromosomes merged into one. That one change could very well have made the radical transition from a monkey to a human. Even so, once a human child is born of monkey parents, it has to mate somehow. I suppose that it must have mated with existing apes (which is hard to do because it is missing a chromosome). It is the same reason, that today, humans can't mate with monkeys. However, there might be a statistical slim chance that such a mating might occur. If so, then the human offspring would be human and able to mate with each other.

Transitional forms are able to live for a while, but eventually natural selection makes the better suited creature win out. However, I suppose that it is statistically possible that the worse creature might win out instead.

It seems obvious that all life evolved from one original living thing. Otherwise, there would be living things on earth today that have different DNA. But Darwin argued that species find a niche and adapt to fill it. Thus, there are many kinds of finches, and some have adapted to eat certain bugs while others have adapted differently.

One life form evolved into trees, the other into cats. You'd think that a tree would someday get stuck in a cat.

 

[McBell]

So, the Theory of Evolution has failed to relate to Popper's falsifiability criterion.
If a theory has lost the potential to be falsified, it is no longer a scientific theory,
neither scientific fact.

For all your patting yourself on the back about how smart you are in science and math and you screw this up this badly?

 

[Tiberius]

Perhaps the best proof of creation is for someone to name anything that exists that was not designed and built by someone who had to knowledge and power to design and build it. A house was designed and built. A car or computer or cell phone was designed and built. But a living animal which is a million times more complex than a house or car just came into being all by itself?

You don't understand evolution, do you?

 

[viole]

Therefore, there are transitional forms (living on the planet) between us in 2021 AD and bacteria some billion years ago.

There are many transitional forms between you, being one second old, and you being a few decades old. Ergo, God exists.

And if that God exists, we would be confident humans are not in His image, unless He also does not get logic.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Clara Tea]

Transitional fossil - Wikipedia

Link: Transitional fossil has traits of its ancestor and descendant.

Though the transitional animal went extinct, that doesn't mean that God exists. It merely means that the fossilized bones exist.

 

[Clara Tea]

There are many transitional forms between you, being one second old, and you being a few decades old. Ergo, God exists.

And if that God exists, we would be confident humans are not in His image, unless He also does not get logic.

Ciao

- viole

Good analogy.

 

[Aštra’el]

The shortest “proof” of Creationism is this:

Videogames, and the rate at which they have been evolving, will (if we do not go extinct first) inevitably lead to humans designing their own artificial universes indistinguishable from (this) reality.

 

[wellwisher]

Evolution has wonderful predictive value.
An example is applying it to...
Genetic algorithm - Wikipedia
But what of the alternative, ie, "God did it"?

Evolution is a good correlation but not a good theory . It is a curve drawn through many data points. As more data points appear, in the present or from the past, the curve is adjusted and extended.

The problem is the best curve does not touch all the points but rather depends on margin of error. To make the curve appear smooth the points only need to be near the curve. This makes it hard to make accurate prediction since one does not know the future margin of error, and the future data may not touch the curve. Observations after the fact, correlate better. One can fine tune the curve to make it fit or make an excuse to justify the margin.

Another problem is connected to biology based classification and cataloging. Domesticated dogs and wild dogs are both classified as canines since they share the same dog DNA. However, there is a big difference in their brains and personalities . Domestic dogs were created via their interaction/selection with humans, and did not suddenly appear through a genetic mutation. Wolves do not mutated into domestic dogs. However, domesticate dogs released in the wild often become ferrel.

Adam and Eve were created since their genesis was not biological. All the rest of the people in the bible were produced through biological procreation. This includes Jesus. The bible makes it clear that Adam and Eve were created/domesticated. They had human DNA like the caveman, but had different brains and personalities than had been natural.

Science has shown that the invention of writing appeared in the same time era as the bible claim of the domestication/creation of Adam and Eve. A new type of human appeared that was not natural or wild but domesticated for the needs of civilization. In the beginning was the word and word was God ; let domestication begin.

Dog breeders have been trying to breed domestic dogs with wolves for decades to make a super domestic dog for military purposes. They can breed wolves and German Shepherds due to both having dog DNA,but the litters that appear are too wild to train as well as a German Shepherd. All the possible expected genetic combinations do not appear from this breeding. The domestication process added a wild card from outside not part of the DNA; Epigenetic modification.

 

[Revoltingest]

Evolution is a good correlation but not a good theory . It is a curve drawn through many data points. As more data points appear, in the present or from the past, the curve is adjusted and extended.
The problem is the best curve does not touch all the points but rather depends on margin of error. To make the curve appear smooth the points only need to be near the curve. This makes it hard to make accurate prediction since one does not know the future margin of error, and the future data may not touch the curve. Observations after the fact, correlate better. One can fine tune the curve to make it fit or make an excuse to justify the margin.

This lacks detail & relevance.

Another problem is connected to biology based classification and cataloging. Domesticated dogs and wild dogs are both classified as canines since they share the same dog DNA. However, there is a big difference in their brains and personalities . Domestic dogs were created via their interaction/selection with humans, and did not suddenly appear through a genetic mutation. Wolves do not mutated into domestic dogs. However, domesticate dogs released in the wild often become ferrel.

Selective breeding is argument neither for nor against evolution.

Adam and Eve were created since their genesis was not biological. All the rest of the people in the bible were produced through biological procreation. This includes Jesus. The bible makes it clear that Adam and Eve were created/domesticated. They had human DNA like the caveman, but had different brains and personalities than had been natural.

This is merely unsupported belief.
Not a theory.
Not factual.
And full of dependence upon un-demonstrable magic.

Science has shown that the invention of writing appeared in the same time era as the bible claim of the domestication/creation of Adam and Eve. A new type of human appeared that was not natural or wild but domesticated for the needs of civilization. .

Writing preceded the Bible by many centuries.
Ref...
History of writing - Wikipedia

Dog breeders have been trying to breed domestic dogs with wolves for decades to make a super domestic dog for military purposes. They can breed wolves and German Shepherds due to both having dog DNA,but the litters that appear are too wild to train as well as a German Shepherd. All the possible expected genetic combinations do not appear from this breeding. The domestication process added a wild card from outside not part of the DNA; Epigenetic modification.

This has bearing on evolution how?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Evolution is a good correlation but not a good theory . It is a curve drawn through many data points. As more data points appear, in the present or from the past, the curve is adjusted and extended.

The problem is the best curve does not touch all the points but rather depends on margin of error. To make the curve appear smooth the points only need to be near the curve. This makes it hard to make accurate prediction since one does not know the future margin of error, and the future data may not touch the curve. Observations after the fact, correlate better. One can fine tune the curve to make it fit or make an excuse to justify the margin.

Another problem is connected to biology based classification and cataloging. Domesticated dogs and wild dogs are both classified as canines since they share the same dog DNA. However, there is a big difference in their brains and personalities . Domestic dogs were created via their interaction/selection with humans, and did not suddenly appear through a genetic mutation. Wolves do not mutated into domestic dogs. However, domesticate dogs released in the wild often become ferrel.

Adam and Eve were created since their genesis was not biological. All the rest of the people in the bible were produced through biological procreation. This includes Jesus. The bible makes it clear that Adam and Eve were created/domesticated. They had human DNA like the caveman, but had different brains and personalities than had been natural.

Science has shown that the invention of writing appeared in the same time era as the bible claim of the domestication/creation of Adam and Eve. A new type of human appeared that was not natural or wild but domesticated for the needs of civilization. In the beginning was the word and word was God ; let domestication begin.

Dog breeders have been trying to breed domestic dogs with wolves for decades to make a super domestic dog for military purposes. They can breed wolves and German Shepherds due to both having dog DNA,but the litters that appear are too wild to train as well as a German Shepherd. All the possible expected genetic combinations do not appear from this breeding. The domestication process added a wild card from outside not part of the DNA; Epigenetic modification.

Hand waving and your own personal beliefs is not reason. Do you have any evidence against the theory of evolution? Do you even know what evidence is in the first place?

And of course, Adam and Eve were mythical. Your book of myths is not evidence.