Originally posted by KingOnPointCan you rephrase that, I don't understand what you are asking?
ProperKnob,
If you are saying that God did not create as it says in Genesis, then why don't you prove it by science to the point of making it "law." Also, do the same of cosmological origin. If Darwin posted that his hypothesis could be debunked, then there is still "proof" that needs to be presented by scientists.
2 edits
Originally posted by KingOnPointSaying that a theory CAN be debunked is not to say that it hasn't been well established according to the best available evidence. ANY scientific claim COULD be debunked by some future evidence. That, so far, is no reason to reject evolution, for which there is a very large body of coherent evidence. Don't get hung up on the word "proof," as if the word meant something immutable and equivalent to Pythagoras' theorem. Scientific claims are never "proven" in THAT sense; they are well-established, but not immutable.
ProperKnob,
If you are saying that God did not create as it says in Genesis, then why don't you prove it by science to the point of making it "law." Also, do the same of cosmological origin. If Darwin posted that his hypothesis could be debunked, then there is still "proof" that needs to be presented by scientists.
Why not make it a law? Because it isn't one. It is a very well-established thesis, at least as well established as that the Earth is round and not flat. But the Earth's being round is also not a law. Nothing says the earth HAS to be round; it just is.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI am agoggle to think that the number of google hits should be the determinant of Absolute Truth in this matter.
All one needs to do is goggle [sic] 'debunking common descent' and one is presented with a plethora of material, a veritable Aladdins cave of goodies!
See the Confirmation Bias thread at this forum....
ProperKnob
I typed:
------------------
If you are saying that God did not create as it says in Genesis, then why don't you prove it by science to the point of making it "law." Also, do the same of cosmological origin. If Darwin posted that his hypothesis could be debunked, then there is still "proof" that needs to be presented by scientists.
--------------------
I want you to duplicate evolution and cosmological explosion. I want you to make them scientific laws. Prove both to us here in the forum, please.
Originally posted by KingOnPointAre you having a laugh?
ProperKnob
I typed:
------------------
If you are saying that God did not create as it says in Genesis, then why don't you prove it by science to the point of making it "law." Also, do the same of cosmological origin. If Darwin posted that his hypothesis could be debunked, then there is still "proof" that needs to be presented by scientists.
-------- ...[text shortened]... xplosion. I want you to make them scientific laws. Prove both to us here in the forum, please.
Originally posted by moonbusJust because there are other 'truth issues' does not mean this one should
There are a million other 'truth issues' which do not carry the emotional charge this issue carries. So there must be some other dimension to it than truth or falsity.
not carry with it emotional charges. As I said evolution for some call into
question the foundation of almost everyone's entire world view, and I'm not
short selling the word 'entire' when it comes to world view.
If evolution cannot do what people believe, take life from a common single
source and change it till we see all the life we see today, what are all the
Atheist to do? If life did indeed start on a sterile world and through
evolution take life from a starting point to what we see today, what are all
the creationist do that take on its face the scripture?
It goes to the heart of how all life should be viewed, does life really have a
designer who has rules and laws, or really its only what want when we
want with respect to our own rules and laws that change over time as we
do?
It goes deep into our personal views about all things at the very foundation
of all of our views. If death is just a natural part of life, why would Jesus
need to die for our sins, because death didn't enter into the world through
sin it was just part of the natural process of life and death!
Kelly
Originally posted by KingOnPointI agree that evolution is not a law and that mere collections (or records) of data are also not laws. But I think we are talking at cross-purposes here. Examples of scientific laws would be: the laws of thermodynamics, the law of the conservation of energy, Einstein's law that mass and energy are convertible famously reduced to e=mc-2, the four laws of electro-magnetism (Ampere's Law, Faraday's Law, ...), Kepler's Laws of planetary motion, etc. No one in the scientific community would claim that the theory of evolution has that sort of status. That does not mean, however, that the theory of evolution is dubious or false or can be summarily dismissed (because it is not a LAW).
Moonbus,
Recording "data" is not "evidence of evolution or cosmological origin." Scientific laws are recorded, and evolution and cosmological origin are not scientific laws. When man takes data and adds his opinion to "data" then it is not to be taken as scientific law.
There is a lot of ground between mere collections of data, on the one hand, and laws on the other.
Think of meteorology, for example: we are pretty good (which is not to say infallible) at predicting local weather conditions based on models of how weather systems develop, and data from ground-based weather stations and satellites. But no one would say that meteorological models and data together constituted scientific laws.
If you are asking for a proof that the cosmos was not created by God, then you are asking for something incoherent. This can no more be proven than it can be proven, for example, that the works of Shakespeare were NOT written by Christopher Marlow or that an earthquake did NOT happen in the year 12 BCE.
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayWhy why why indeed? The Buddhist position is that it does not matter whether the cosmos had an origin or existed from all eternity. Nor would it help one to attain the blessed state if one knew, one way or the other. It may be YOUR deep personal view that it matters, but it isn't everyone's.
Just because there are other 'truth issues' does not mean this one should
not carry with it emotional charges. As I said evolution for some call into
question the foundation of almost everyone's entire world view, and I'm not
short selling the word 'entire' when it comes to world view.
If evolution cannot do what people believe, take life from a commo ...[text shortened]... er into the world through
sin it was just part of the natural process of life and death!
Kelly