What would falsify the theory of evolution?

[YoursTrue]

One has to be ignorant of almost all of science to believe in YEC. And explaining one thing to them won't help as they have a myriad of other question and when you have come to the sixth answer they forgot about the first so they will ask that question again tomorrow.
That's why I offer to teach them from the ground up in Why the Theory of Evolution is True. Part 1: What is Science?. It's not very popular.

What is YEC?

 

[YoursTrue]

When one says "makes more sense to me" and refuses to understand the topic the odds are going to be huge that that person is wrong. Why take such a stance? Why have a belief that God is liar?

You actually do believe that God is a liar, you just do not understand it. Let's say for fun that there is a God. If there is a God, and that god is an honest one, then sciences tells us how he made the universe. How planets formed. How life started. How life changed over time. In fact science pretty much would tell us the same thing that it tells us now. If there is a God science only tells us how God did it.

For your beliefs to be true God would have had to have gone back and planted all sorts of false and misleading evidence that indicates that he did it in another way. That is lying. Even when I believed in God I did not believe that God lies as you clearly do.

Actually not. I was investigating the idea of clades. While conjectures are made, there is no proof (yes, proof) that the theory is true. God is not a liar. Scientists may be.

 

[YoursTrue]

When one says "makes more sense to me" and refuses to understand the topic the odds are going to be huge that that person is wrong. Why take such a stance? Why have a belief that God is liar?

You actually do believe that God is a liar, you just do not understand it. Let's say for fun that there is a God. If there is a God, and that god is an honest one, then sciences tells us how he made the universe. How planets formed. How life started. How life changed over time. In fact science pretty much would tell us the same thing that it tells us now. If there is a God science only tells us how God did it.

For your beliefs to be true God would have had to have gone back and planted all sorts of false and misleading evidence that indicates that he did it in another way. That is lying. Even when I believed in God I did not believe that God lies as you clearly do.

Scientists may say in some cases what they think is true about how things came about*. Since you don't believe there is a God who created the heavens and the earth "in the beginning," you can't say what is true and what is not true about Him.
*In fact, not what they think is true. In many cases, they think maybe it happened that way. They don't know but they figure maybe it happened that way.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually not. I was investigating the idea of clades. While conjectures are made, there is no proof (yes, proof) that the theory is true. God is not a liar. Scientists may be.

There is evidence. There is never "proof" of anything.

And remember, you are afraid to learn what is and is not evidence. So like other deniers of reality you can only be corrected. Like it or not by denying evolution you are calling God a liar.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Scientists may say in some cases what they think is true about how things came about*. Since you don't believe there is a God who created the heavens and the earth "in the beginning," you can't say what is true and what is not true about Him.
*In fact, not what they think is true. In many cases, they think maybe it happened that way. They don't know but they figure maybe it happened that way.

You do not have to believe a myth to be able to reason about it.

 

[gnostic]

The earth came from the supposed "expansion" of the mass considered to be there before it -- expanded, didn't it?

Except the Earth and our Solar System didn’t form until 9 billion years later.

The Earth weren’t around when the earliest stars existed with the young universe, some 300-400 million years after the Big Bang.

9 billion years is a very long time, before the earth formed. The Solar System (including the Earth) from gases and dust and larger objects (planetesimals, asteroids, etc) from death of earlier stars (eg supernova).

Based on the composition of our Sun, it has higher metal contents than the earlier generations of stars.

Note that “metal” in astronomy and astrophysics of stars, have to do with elements heavier than helium, eg nitrogen, oxygen and carbon.

In the earliest generation of stars, the only elements in the very young universe were hydrogen, helium and trace amounts of lithium. So new and young and very massive stars were made mostly of hydrogen, and some helium.

Depending on the mass of the star’s core, Stellar Nucleosynthesis would either fuse hydrogen nuclei into helium, but stars more massive than our sun, can fuse together into nitrogen, oxygen or carbon.

Elements heavier than oxygen, usually occur when stars go through supernova explosions, which can create elements as heavy as iron, during the Supernova Nucleosynthesis.

There were no space dust and there were no planets or asteroids before the earliest stars and the earliest supernovas.

I would suggest that you look up "stellar population" for the generations of stars, and look up "metallicity", to understand what I am saying about "metal" and generations of stars.

Also look up Nucleosynthesis, how lighter elements can turn into heavier elements, like "proton-proton chain" (eg our Sun) & "CNO cycle", which are the 2 most common "Stellar Nucleosynthesis". There are many other types of Stellar Nucleosynthesis, like "triple-alpha process", which can convert helium nuclei into carbon atom.

And also look up "Supernova Nucleosynthesis".

 

[gnostic]

What is YEC?

Young Earth Creationism.

People (YEC creationists) who take the 6-day creation, literally, and believe that the Earth and the Universe is only 6000 years old.

If that (YEC) were true, you wouldn't be able to see (without telescope) Andromeda Galaxy, which are over 2 million light-year from Earth.

There are lot more galaxies, hundreds or thousands of billion of galaxies in the Observable Universe that are more distant than Andromeda.

 

[gnostic]

Scientists may say in some cases what they think is true about how things came about*. Since you don't believe there is a God who created the heavens and the earth "in the beginning," you can't say what is true and what is not true about Him.
*In fact, not what they think is true. In many cases, they think maybe it happened that way. They don't know but they figure maybe it happened that way.

There are no evidence to support the existence of God, so you are the one who don't know if you are believing in supernatural entity to be real or not.

You are basing your belief in God upon words of Iron Age authors who are no better than the ancient Babylonians, Assyrians and Egyptians who were contemporaries to the Israelites/Jews of the 1st millennium BCE.

They each have their own "creation" myths, that predated the 1st millennium BCE. The earliest existence of the Genesis can only found in fragments from the Babylonian Exile, AND LATER. The only full account of Genesis creation and Flood, of early source can only be found in the Greek translation, the Septuagint.

 

[Heyo]

Young Earth Creationism.

People (YEC creationists) who take the 6-day creation, literally, and believe that the Earth and the Universe is only 6000 years old.

If that (YEC) were true, you wouldn't be able to see (without telescope) Andromeda Galaxy, which are over 2 million light-year from Earth.

There are lot more galaxies, hundreds or thousands of billion of galaxies in the Observable Universe that are more distant than Andromeda.

@YoursTrue

Forget other galaxies, the Milky Way is 200,000 light years across. There are only a few thousand stars less than 6000 light years from earth.

That's why you have to be ignorant of astronomy to believe in YEC.

 

[We Never Know]

@YoursTrue

Forget other galaxies, the Milky Way is 200,000 light years across. There are only a few thousand stars less than 6000 light years from earth.

That's why you have to be ignorant of astronomy to believe in YEC.

Brush up...your numbers are way off.

How Many Stars Within 5000 Light-Years of Earth? There are 340,810 stars within 5,000 light-years of Earth which are visible in a backyard telescope. Of those, 5,084 are brighter than magnitude 6.0 and visible to the naked eye.

How Many Stars Are Within 10,000 Light-Years of Earth?.

 

[Heyo]

Brush up...your numbers are way off.

How Many Stars Within 5000 Light-Years of Earth? There are 340,810 stars within 5,000 light-years of Earth which are visible in a backyard telescope. Of those, 5,084 are brighter than magnitude 6.0 and visible to the naked eye.

How Many Stars Are Within 10,000 Light-Years of Earth?.

Out of an estimated 300 billion in the Milky Way.

 

[We Never Know]

Out of an estimated 300 billion in the Milky Way.

Its a heck of a lot more than a few thousand that you claimed.

 

[gnostic]

Brush up...your numbers are way off.

How Many Stars Within 5000 Light-Years of Earth? There are 340,810 stars within 5,000 light-years of Earth which are visible in a backyard telescope. Of those, 5,084 are brighter than magnitude 6.0 and visible to the naked eye.

How Many Stars Are Within 10,000 Light-Years of Earth?.

Without the telescope, only a couple of thousand stars can be seen in any given location on Earth. The total numbers of stars that can be counted (naked eyes) is only a little over 9000 stars, in both northern & southern hemispheres.

Me, I could only probably see a couple hundred of stars without my glasses.

Of course, it all dependent on the each star’s brightness (luminosity), and how close they are to Earth. Like I said earlier, it also dependent on one’s eyesight.

There are some stars that are very close, and yet we cannot see them with the naked eye, because of their very low luminosity.

 

[We Never Know]

Without the telescope, only a couple of thousand stars can be seen in any given location on Earth. The total numbers of stars that can be counted (naked eyes) is only a little over 9000 stars, in both northern & southern hemispheres.

Me, I could only probably see a couple hundred of stars without my glasses.

Of course, it all dependent on the each star’s brightness (luminosity), and how close they are to Earth. Like I said earlier, it also dependent on one’s eyesight.

There are some stars that are very close, and yet we cannot see them with the naked eye, because of their very low luminosity.

"Without the telescope, only a couple of thousand stars can be seen in any given location on Earth. The total numbers of stars that can be counted (naked eyes) is only a little over 9000 stars, in both northern & southern hemispheres."

That wasn't the claim

[/QUOTE

Forget other galaxies, the Milky Way is 200,000 light years across. [B]There are only a few thousand stars less than 6000 light years from earth.[/B]

That's why you have to be ignorant of astronomy to believe in YEC.

 

[Heyo]

That wasn't the claim

Yep, the numbers were far off but the conclusion stays the same. You have to be ignorant of astronomy to believe in YEC.

 

[gnostic]

Its a heck of a lot more than a few thousand that you claimed.

It doesn’t matter if it is a few thousand or hundred of thousands.

The fact remain, that there are many billions of stars we don’t see, BEYOND the radius of 6000 light-year.

And I am talking about NAKED-EYE OBSERVATIONS, hence WITHOUT binoculars or telescopes, like what ancient and medieval star gazers did.

If stars are beyond the limitations of the naked-eye, then it would refute YEC’s claims that the universe being 6000 years old.

If you are looking at Andromeda Galaxy WITHOUT A TELESCOPE, then what you are really seeing is Andromeda about 2 million years in the past. It take light 2 million to reach our eye. That would debunk Genesis 1:1, that god created Earth as the same time he created the heavens, which some creationists claimed that “heavens” equate with the “universe”.

My own point that what we know about astronomy today, would debunk any claim by YEC creationists that the universe is only 6000 years old.

 

[We Never Know]

It doesn’t matter if it is a few thousand or hundred of thousands.

The fact remain, that there are many billions of stars we don’t see, BEYOND the radius of 6000 light-year.

And I am talking about NAKED-EYE OBSERVATIONS, hence WITHOUT binoculars or telescopes, like what ancient and medieval star gazers did.

If stars are beyond the limitations of the naked-eye, then it would refute YEC’s claims that the universe being 6000 years old.

If you are looking at Andromeda Galaxy WITHOUT A TELESCOPE, then what you are really seeing is Andromeda about 2 million years in the past. It take light 2 million to reach our eye. That would debunk Genesis 1:1, that god created Earth as the same time he created the heavens, which some creationists claimed that “heavens” equate with the “universe”.

You are off track from the claim and replies but do continue on if it pleases you.

 

[We Never Know]

Yep, the numbers were far off but the conclusion stays the same. You have to be ignorant of astronomy to believe in YEC.

Absolutely

 

[Dan From Smithville]

What is YEC?

Ain't if fun to stay at the YEC, aye?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I have read many articles, both in scientific literature as well as answers here. So let me be perfectly clear if possible. And yes, I am not a scientist as you are. Your training is much deeper.
I do not think or believe that everything that happens is from God. I am centering this now around the theory of evolution. For instance, there are genetic laws, if I can use that word, that are in effect, and mutations happen. That does not mean that every growth is specifically designated by God, but rather by natural forces.

I'm a little confused. If some things are by natural forces and some things are by God, how do you determine the difference if it can be?

As far as my personal religious views, ultimately, I have to consider myself a creationist also. Though not one that believes that Genesis recounts a literal description of that creation or one that I can support with evidence. What I can support with evidence derives from natural events. There is my faith and the facts. The facts show me what I consider as the Work of God, but my faith tells me that I do not understand and perhaps cannot understand how God might have carried out his creation. To deny His work in favor of how other people want to believe and build a doctrine that they demand by fiat that all must follow, to me seems the height of hubris.

However, the creation of life and the evolution of life are two different subjects. I do not consider on reason and evidence that the evolution of life dictates how that life originated. It only matters that it did. My personal religious views do not demand that others believe as I do, but they also do not interfere with a rational explanation of the evidence and reasoning found in the theoretical explanations of the diversity and relationships of living things.