mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
So if I can use the method of proof to show that proof has a limit, then what?
-
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!
What would falsify the theory of evolution?
- Thread starter leroy
- Start date
So if I can use the method of proof to show that proof has a limit, then what?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
How would you do that? Don't conflate Goedel's work. That applies to math.
gnostic
The Lost One
Excuse me, you can disagree with evidence and you disagree with the analysis, but you cannot say there are no evidence.
Most biologists are not paleontologists, so you would find that biology students don’t study paleontology or work on fossils.
And fossils aren’t the only evidence for evolution.
Most biologists work on modern and extant species, so evidence are largely involve with DNA testing and genome comparisons & analysis.
Denying the existence of evidence is just childish, dishonest and ignorant.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I'll say this again -- DNA and fossil remains do not prove that evolution without intelligent means occurred. It proves that DNA existed and that some dinosaurs may have had feathers, that is, assuming those imprints denoted feathers. It does not prove evolution. Please do not use the argument that there is no "proof" in these things. Because again -- DNA in bones and fossil remains do not demonstrate/evidence/or prove that these creatures happened by evolution via natural selection. The Bible says that in the "beginning," God made the heavens and the earth. Period. It doesn't go into HOW He did it. And it makes sense to me now that God Almighty is the one enabling life. Just to set the record straight again as far as I am concerned, I was not always a believer that God is the one responsible for life.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Please drop the word prove. Also you appear to be claiming that God is a liar.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I looked at the article you presented from wiki and again -- while I read what it says, there is no proof (yes, I'm going to use that word) that these organisms came about by natural selection. In fact, thinking about growth, life, and breath, it in no way suggests to me that God is not involved in the life process. The Bible says that He created these various ones "in the beginning." Thank you for the article.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Why do you say that I appear to be claiming that God is a liar. About what?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
It does not say that. They are evidence.
Why does reality bother you see much? That appears to be the act of one who is weak in faith. Faithful Christians believe in God even if he used evolution.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
About how life came about. For the Genesis myth to be literally true God would have to be a liar.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
@Subduction Zone And no, sometimes I will not refrain from using the word proof or prove. Insofar as evidence to those that believe in the process of evolution by natural selection, that's their way of looking at it. No proof needed. 
For them, just to make it clear. So I will say again -- the "evidence" does not support the conclusion insofar as I am concerned. Not you. And not those who are firm believers in the process of evolution. However -- despite fossil remains, DNA, and feather imprints, again -- guess what? These do not prove or even evidence that these things happened by natural selection or -- evolution.
For them, just to make it clear. So I will say again -- the "evidence" does not support the conclusion insofar as I am concerned. Not you. And not those who are firm believers in the process of evolution. However -- despite fossil remains, DNA, and feather imprints, again -- guess what? These do not prove or even evidence that these things happened by natural selection or -- evolution.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
They are (may be) evidence that at a certain point in time dinosaurs (?) had feathers?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
A rational person uses evidence.@Subduction Zone And no, sometimes I will not refrain from using the word proof or prove. Insofar as evidence to those that believe in the process of evolution by natural selection, that's their way of looking at it. No proof needed.
There is no way to "prove" anything. That is why it is an improper term. Scientists don't use it because they have to keep an open mind. But if you want to use the legal definition of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" then evolution was proven a long time ago.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
There is no doubt that some (actually many) dinosaurs had feathers. They still have them today.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, one step at time. Do you accept causation and that you are caused by something else? Note you could do David Hume and claim that causation is psychological in the mind.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I accept causation because it can be tested.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
@Subduction Zone et al, I have a lot of things to do now and so will be (may be) back later. I say may be because anything can happen from now until the time I would like to come back. Car crashes, slips and falls, someone killing me, etc.
So if you all want to keep arguing about this, yes, I'll just keep saying that the theory of evolution doesn't hold water with me. Anymore. It used to. But not now. Not because those considered in the dinosaur category had feathers or no feathers, but because no longer accept the idea (absolute conjecture) that life came about by -- chance, magic, or better explained by science, a meeting of molecules from water or maybe that water came about by magnetic chance from somewhere, etc. and etc. So you guys, have a good day.
So if you all want to keep arguing about this, yes, I'll just keep saying that the theory of evolution doesn't hold water with me. Anymore. It used to. But not now. Not because those considered in the dinosaur category had feathers or no feathers, but because no longer accept the idea (absolute conjecture) that life came about by -- chance, magic, or better explained by science, a meeting of molecules from water or maybe that water came about by magnetic chance from somewhere, etc. and etc. So you guys, have a good day.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
OK, I really have to go. But why do you say that, can you please be more explicit? Or is it like evolution? Say anything type thing without proof, backup, or evidence that can or cannot be put into a category. I must restrain myself and not look at any more answers now. Later.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
That is only because you actively keep yourself ignorant. Apparently by fear. If you weren't afraid you would learn what is and what is not evidence and see that it all supports evolution. I know, evidence scares you. For their to be that much evidence and for evolution to be false God would have had to have planted it. That would make him a liar.@Subduction Zone et al, I have a lot of things to do now and so will be (may be) back later. I say may be because anything can happen from now until the time I would like to come back. Car crashes, slips and falls, someone killing me, etc.
So if you all want to keep arguing about this, yes, I'll just keep saying that the theory of evolution doesn't hold water with me. Anymore. It used to. But not now. Not because those considered in the dinosaur category had feathers or no feathers, but because no longer accept the idea (absolute conjecture) that life came about by -- chance, magic, or better explained by science, a meeting of molecules from water or maybe that water came about by magnetic chance from somewhere, etc. and etc. So you guys, have a good day.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
God would have had to have planted endless false evidence in an attempt to mislead people. That is lying.OK, I really have to go. But why do you say that, can you please be more explicit? Or is it like evolution? Say anything type thing without proof, backup, or evidence that can or cannot be put into a category. I must restrain myself and not look at any more answers now. Later.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Then here we go.
You are caused by something else independent of your mind. But we know, that 1st person experiences are sometimes hallucination.
In effect objective reality can cause unreal experiences. So how do you know, that this is not the case now?
There are many versions of that in practice, but here it is general.
Real objective universe -> you experience you as real.
Not real objective universe -> you experience you as real.
That is the problem. I can't prove even with evidence that I live in a real objective universe. But that is not unique to me, hence this:
"
Naturalism's axiomatic assumptions[edit]
All scientific study inescapably builds on at least some essential assumptions that are untested by scientific processes.[43][44] Kuhn concurs that all science is based on an approved agenda of unprovable assumptions about the character of the universe, rather than merely on empirical facts. These assumptions—a paradigm—comprise a collection of beliefs, values and techniques that are held by a given scientific community, which legitimize their systems and set the limitations to their investigation.[45] For naturalists, nature is the only reality, the only paradigm. There is no such thing as 'supernatural'. The scientific method is to be used to investigate all reality,[46] and Naturalism is the implicit philosophy of working scientists.[47] ..."
Philosophy of science - Wikipedia