bushwacked Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 If I convert, can I haphazardly call everyone my friend? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 If I convert, can I haphazardly call everyone my friend? Yes, you could. But I think you should know that no one really likes you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 Everyone agrees that there are holes in the evolution theory but it is obvious that evolution is the only theory that you'd ever consider. Its been asked again and again in this post for the creationists to provide a testable example of creationism. Just as soon as someone does that, I'll be able to consider it. Until then, its nothing more than a literal interpretation of the Bible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 If I convert, can I haphazardly call everyone my friend? Yes friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 Its been asked again and again in this post for the creationists to provide a testable example of creationism. Just as soon as someone does that, I'll be able to consider it. Until then, its nothing more than a literal interpretation of the Bible. What do you want a formula? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montster Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 If I convert, can I haphazardly call everyone my friend? Yes, you could. But I think you should know that no one really likes you. i like i like soup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 What do you want a formula? No, he wants something like: A testable implication of the Creation Hypothesis is that fossil records should indicate evidence that complex life forms existed at the same time as the earliest non-complex life forms. There should be no evidence that only the least complex life organisms existed existed at the earliest times in earth's history and that complex organisms came about over time. In other words, we should expect to see, say, monkey fossils interspersed with ameoba fossils in the oldest rocks that contain fossils on earth. That is a clear testable implication of the Creation Hypothesis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Love Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 I can't believe that I've been away long enough to completely miss this round of evolution vs. creationism debates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Like Soup Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 Yes, you could. But I think you should know that no one really likes you. Yes friend. Hey That doesn't count since I knew you before the "Transformation"! i like i like soup. :blushing: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 (edited) No, he wants something like: A testable implication of the Creation Hypothesis is that fossil records should indicate evidence that complex life forms existed at the same time as the earliest non-complex life forms. There should be no evidence that only the least complex life organisms existed existed at the earliest times in earth's history and that complex organisms came about over time. In other words, we should expect to see, say, monkey fossils interspersed with ameoba fossils in the oldest rocks that contain fossils on earth. That is a clear testable implication of the Creation Hypothesis. I'll answer your question for both evolution and creationism, I'll start with evolution. The theory of evolution, though often presented as an established fact, is up to the present time only an unverified hypothesis. Under the discipline of science, a theory must posses at leat three essential properties to establish it as fact: data, observation and repeatability. Since evolution cannot provide data linking evolution of one kind to another, or prove through data examination (such as fossils) a transition, then the evolutionary scheme remains a hypothesis. It should be noted that those who hold to the involvement of a supernatural forces in man's origin, also have only established a hypothesis, when examined in light of the preequisites of science. Edited November 23, 2007 by Jumpin Johnies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 the evolutionary scheme remains a hypothesis. That is inaccurate. It's hard to discuss when some of us are using terms in their strict scientific sense while I'm trying to figure out of others are using the common "slang" type terms or are just completely misinformed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 That is inaccurate. It's hard to discuss when some of us are using terms in their strict scientific sense while I'm trying to figure out of others are using the common "slang" type terms or are just completely misinformed. My posting described what three elements are needed for something to become a theory, are you confused? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 You people have been going on for 21 pages about this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ill Nuts Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 You people have been going on for 21 pages about this? i sure do like pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 You people have been going on for 21 pages about this? It's only 13 pages if you maximize the posts per page parameter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 I am right, you are wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 I'll answer your question for both evolution and creationism, I'll start with evolution. The theory of evolution, though often presented as an established fact, is up to the present time only an unverified hypothesis. Under the discipline of science, a theory must posses at leat three essential properties to establish it as fact: data, observation and repeatability. Since evolution cannot provide data linking evolution of one kind to another, or prove through data examination (such as fossils) a transition, then the evolutionary scheme remains a hypothesis. It should be noted that those who hold to the involvement of a supernatural forces in man's origin, also have only established a hypothesis, when examined in light of the preequisites of science. Well this is just false. There is a great deal of data for evolution that has been posted time and again in this thread. You have attacked much of it, yet not posted one piece of evidence for creationism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 Well this is just false. There is a great deal of data for evolution that has been posted time and again in this thread. You have attacked much of it, yet not posted one piece of evidence for creationism. Maybe you could be so kind as to pointing out to us the answers to the three criteria of evolution being considered a theory. I've posted plenty of evidence of creationism, it's in the Scriptures, you've probably noth bothered to look into it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 Maybe you could be so kind as to pointing out to us the answers to the three criteria of evolution being considered a theory. I've posted plenty of evidence of creationism, it's in the Scriptures, you've probably noth bothered to look into it though. Your evidence is hearsay, effectively. You can choose to call it the evidence of eyewitnesses.....and up to a very limited point where there is contemporaneous accounting, you might be right. Otherwise all there is is the reported prophecies and acts of people who were written about hundreds of years later. That's called belief and there's nothing wrong with that but evidence it is not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 Seriously, 21 pages? People who advocate creationism are delusional. That's the summary of the conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 i like i like soup. :blushing: ghey. is it okay to be ghey in a thread discussing the bible? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 Here are two requirements for a scientific theory by Stephen Hawking: According to Stephen Hawking in A Brief History of Time, "a theory is a good theory if it satisfies two requirements: It must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model which contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make definite predictions about the results of future observations". He goes on to state, "any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis; you can never prove it. No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory. On the other hand, you can disprove a theory by finding even a single observation which disagrees with the predictions of the theory". The theory of evolution meets both these criteria. Those on the evolution side KNOW they cannot prove the theory beyond all possible doubt but can prove beyond a reasonable doubt. You, OTOH, JJ, have no chance because you don't have a theory, you have faith. On that subject, if God did reveal himself, he would be a fact and therefore require no faith. And without faith, God is nothing. Therefore, if God is shown to exist, he immediately won't. *Apologies to the great philosopher Oolon Colluphid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 24, 2007 Share Posted November 24, 2007 Seriously, 21 pages? People who advocate creationism are delusional. That's the summary of the conversation. Well, you see....there is no proof of "macro evolution" and you all act like it's a fact.................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted November 24, 2007 Share Posted November 24, 2007 Here are two requirements for a scientific theory by Stephen Hawking:The theory of evolution meets both these criteria. Those on the evolution side KNOW they cannot prove the theory beyond all possible doubt but can prove beyond a reasonable doubt. You, OTOH, JJ, have no chance because you don't have a theory, you have faith. On that subject, if God did reveal himself, he would be a fact and therefore require no faith. And without faith, God is nothing. Therefore, if God is shown to exist, he immediately won't. *Apologies to the great philosopher Oolon Colluphid. I was asking for the three common elements needed for something to be considered a theory. Stephen Hawking simply made up his own rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted November 24, 2007 Share Posted November 24, 2007 Seriously, 21 pages? People who advocate creationism are delusional. That's the summary of the conversation. I'm sorry you feel that way, friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.