10 Oct '08 16:23>
Originally posted by NemesioI do not think he does either, but we will see.
Sorry, PBE6. I don't understand the question.
Kelly
Originally posted by FabianFnasWow real input from you, wrong input but real nonetheless.
In the first two postings your hypothesis is that god exists. Then it's no science. You cannot ever use scientific methods to prove god's existance. You cannot bring science into religion. Therefore this thread is about religion.
Bring this to Spiritual Forum, dear moderators! Please...
Originally posted by joneveryNo!
Now I see what you’re getting at, any unknown variable is God
Originally posted by KellyJayThat's not true. Eladar said "You think you know God's intentions?". That wasn't the question. My question was what would a menagerie design by God look like. If anyone wants to answer the question, they can feel free. As I've said elsewhere in this thread, I don't like asking "gotcha!!" questions. It's a rhetorical device that gets us nowhere closer to the truth.
So as soon as you get a creationist to answer you tell him to shut
his pie hole and you want to learn how a creationist thinks? I do not
think you are being very honest here. He gave you a valid place to
begin, design requires intent and you blew that off without a second
thought.
Kelly
Originally posted by PBE6The answers to these questions don't turn out to be actual answers. At best they are answers with variables attached to them...like a math answer.
Created by me, your new God. Everybody pissed? Good. Now, let's do some detective work instead of bickering.
Question:
Let's assume that God the Intelligent Designer designed all the living creatures of the world according to His plan. This is our model. Now, what predictions could we make about such a world using this model? That is, how would we e the data, so a "wrong" answer here doesn't kill the model.
Get cracking, Creationists!
Originally posted by EladarOh really? If you assume God created the earth and you assume that the current conditions on earth are what he intended, then you should be able to examine the data between the time the earth was created until today and then examine and look for patterns over that time frame. From this, you should be able to make predictions if you can find long term trends during your analysis.
Do you think you know God's intentions? Without understanding intentions, it is impossible to make predictions.
Originally posted by EladarThe importance would lie in the predictions made by the person answering. For instance, if my model assumes that God designs every structure of the body perfectly, then we could check body structures to see if they're all the same. I know for a fact that they are not, and we don't even have to take a sojourn into the rest of the animal kingdom, just check your nose against your neighbour's! So now the task would be to try and describe why God would design the same structure differently in different bodies, which will require more assumptions which we can test, etc...
[b] My question was what would a menagerie design by God look like. If anyone wants to answer the question, they can feel free.
Anyone can answer the question, but the answer would have no importance. It would just be someone's opinion.[/b]
Originally posted by Palynka…Some gods are even claimed to have been observed with the naked eye. For such gods, it would also have been possible to observe them through a telescope. ..….
[b]Can you, for example, “observe” a “god” through a telescope?
Some gods are even claimed to have been observed with the naked eye. For such gods, it would also have been possible to observe them through a telescope.
Can you perform an experiment that would demonstrate the existence of a “god”?
For any god that has a tangible effect on the w s.
It is true for all “gods”
FAIL.
PS: Please read up on the meaning of "all".[/b]
Originally posted by PBE6I still dispute that it can be dismissed as a valid hypothesis so easily. I never said the claim was unverifiable, that is a totally different thing. I only said that we may not be able to predict what sort of animals God might create.
Now, if no predictions can be made about God and what sort of living beings God would create, that actually does rule it out as a valid hypothesis - it reduces that statement to a unsubstantiated claim. As I mentioned in the "Evolution of the eye" thread, abductive reasoning is the rational comparison amongst and selection of the most probable hypothesi ...[text shortened]... tionists from asserting "everything would be designed as we see it now", a clear tautology.
Originally posted by PBE6Or, if god or God, take your pick, does it think at all? Does a god have to be a thinker?
Well then, it seems that Intelligent Design can never be brought to the level of a hypothesis, because we can't know what God thinks! Exactly the point I was trying to make.
Intelligent Design is not science. Case closed.
Originally posted by twhiteheadTo demonstrate my argument, please predict what sort of life forms evolution might produce on an alien planet.
I still dispute that it can be dismissed as a valid hypothesis so easily. I never said the claim was unverifiable, that is a totally different thing. I only said that we may not be able to predict what sort of animals God might create.
To demonstrate my argument, please predict what sort of life forms evolution might produce on an alien planet. We shal ...[text shortened]... , can we rule out evolution as a reasonable hypothesis for any alien life forms we may discover?
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonMy God, your stupidity is legendary.
[b]…Some gods are even claimed to have been observed with the naked eye. For such gods, it would also have been possible to observe them through a telescope. ..….
So can this be verified in the modern day?
Which way must we point our telescope to see “god”? is there any way of knowing which way to point? -if there is no practical way of eit ...[text shortened]... n -else how would we know it “can be“?) scientifically shown to exist using scientific method?[/b]