The role of vegetation in creationism

[lasthero]

No need to invoke the supernatural and I am not asking anyone to.

Then don't complain about scientists going for natural explanations.

 

[EternalDragon]

Then don't complain about scientists going for natural explanations.

ID is a natural explanation. But they won't allow it.

 

[lasthero]

ID is a natural explanation.

No, it isn't. It's a completely untestable, unfaslsifiable premise with zero predictive power.

But they won't allow it.

They don't allow hollow earthers, geocentrists, holistic medicine and a lot of other things. Suck for you and them.

 

[EternalDragon]

No, it isn't. It's a completely untestable, unfaslsifiable premise with zero predictive power.

They don't allow hollow earthers, geocentrists, holistic medicine and a lot of other things. Suck for you and them.

Completely wrong. It is testable and falsifiable.

What is intelligent design?

Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Through the study and analysis of a system's components, a design theorist is able to determine whether various natural structures are the product of chance, natural law, intelligent design, or some combination thereof. Such research is conducted by observing the types of information produced when intelligent agents act. Scientists then seek to find objects which have those same types of informational properties which we commonly know come from intelligence. Intelligent design has applied these scientific methods to detect design in irreducibly complex biological structures, the complex and specified information content in DNA, the life-sustaining physical architecture of the universe, and the geologically rapid origin of biological diversity in the fossil record during the Cambrian explosion approximately 530 million years ago.

The scientific method is commonly described as a four-step process involving observations, hypothesis, experiments, and conclusion. Intelligent design begins with the observation that intelligent agents produce complex and specified information (CSI). Design theorists hypothesize that if a natural object was designed, it will contain high levels of CSI. Scientists then perform experimental tests upon natural objects to determine if they contain complex and specified information. One easily testable form of CSI is irreducible complexity, which can be discovered by experimentally reverse-engineering biological structures to see if they require all of their parts to function. When ID researchers find irreducible complexity in biology, they conclude that such structures were designed.

 

[lasthero]

Completely wrong. It is testable and falsifiable

Okay, let's test it.

I have two rocks. One is just a normal rock. The other was a rock that I beat, carved and molded to look like the other. To the naked eye, they're just rocks. How would you detect which rock was designed and which was which?

Also, you ignored part of what I said. What predictive models does ID allow us to make?

 

[Shemjaza]

the geologically rapid origin of biological diversity in the fossil record during the Cambrian explosion approximately 530 million years ago.

530 million years since the Cambrian explosion? You'll excuse me if I think you are being dishonest ED... aren't you a YEC?

Intelligent design begins with the observation that intelligent agents produce complex and specified information (CSI). Design theorists hypothesize that if a natural object was designed, it will contain high levels of CSI.

I notice that CSI doesn't have a metric or an objective method of measuring.

One easily testable form of CSI is irreducible complexity, which can be discovered by experimentally reverse-engineering biological structures to see if they require all of their parts to function. When ID researchers find irreducible complexity in biology, they conclude that such structures were designed.

This concept doesn't produce a measurable or objective unit of CSI.

In addition it is flawed in that it assumes that all aspects of a structure must have their original purpose rather then something that readapted to a different cooperative purpose with other structures. I've seen this described as scaffolding.

In conclusion, sure it's science... if you think astrology is science.

 

[EternalDragon]

530 million years since the Cambrian explosion? You'll excuse me if I think you are being dishonest ED... aren't you a YEC?

That is a quote from Intelligent Design explaining what ID theory is. I should have placed the link.

I don't recall identifying myself as a YEC.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Exactly. The creationst that allows only supernatural explanations or starts with the premise has already decided where the evidence will lead them.

PsychoSarah: I need to invoke my deity. Although you may not, I believe that the God of the bible is a living, intelligent entity.

Mistakes corrected. You really should proofread your posts before submitting them

 

[Bungle_Bear]

The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Through the study and analysis of a system's components, a design theorist is able to determine whether various natural structures are the product of chance, natural law, intelligent design, or some combination thereof. Such research is conducted by observing the types of information produced when intelligent agents act..

The most enormous assumption of the ID school (and most counter arguments) is that humans are "intelligent". All that is happening here is humans saying "that's how I'd do it, so it is/isn't intelligent." It can't be proven one way or the other so it's a complete non-starter. Do you think it possible for humans to prove we are either the most intelligent life form possible or the universal equivalent of dribbling imbeciles?

 

[Shemjaza]

That is a quote from Intelligent Design explaining what ID theory is. I should have placed the link.

I don't recall identifying myself as a YEC.

My apologies then.
Could you explain what you do believe in then?

 

[bhsmte]

My apologies then.
Could you explain what you do believe in then?

I thought ED was a YEC believer as well.

I am curious as to what ED does believe in. I am sure he has a belief as to how old the universe and earth is and how long humans have been on earth.

 

[EternalDragon]

I thought ED was a YEC believer as well.

I am curious as to what ED does believe in. I am sure he has a belief as to how old the universe and earth is and how long humans have been on earth.

I believe in and trust God's words.

 

[Shemjaza]

I believe in and trust God's words.

Not an answer.

 

[bhsmte]

I believe in and trust God's words.

Great.

Now, how old do you believe the earth and universe to be ED?

Or, do you have no clue?

 

[lasthero]

I don't recall identifying myself as a YEC.

Well, let's see, ED. In a conversation with Rick G, you laid this out about your beliefs.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7829780-24/#post65919231

Definition = maturity without history
Method = creatio ex nihilo
Unique features:
requires omnipotence
laws of science not in effect
occurred BC4004 (according to Ussher's dating)
no evidence left behind
no scarring, no fossils
completed in 6 days (on purpose)
Described in detail in Genesis 1
Witnessed by the angels

It seems like you have a very firm idea of the age of the Earth, here. Are you recanting that, now?

I'd also like to point out this post.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7785924/#post64443659

Where, when Merrily said that the Earth was made in 4004 BC, you responded:

Looks good except for the fossils. They were buried by flood waters long after day 5. And not all in the ordered layers people think they are found in.

Going from this, it kinda seems like you are a YEC.

 

[EternalDragon]

Well, let's see, ED. In a conversation with Rick G, you laid this out about your beliefs.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7829780-24/#post65919231



It seems like you have a very firm idea of the age of the Earth, here. Are you recanting that, now?

I'd also like to point out this post.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7785924/#post64443659

Where, when Merrily said that the Earth was made in 4004 BC, you responded:

Going from this, it kinda seems like you are a YEC.

That was what AV posted. I was commenting, reminding people that
it was what we were discussing. I don't see anywhere in those links
where I stated any age of the earth or universe.

And I won't, as no one really knows for sure. From details I have seen
from science, the universe and earth appear very young. (Not millions
of years old.)

 

[lasthero]

That was what AV posted. I was commenting, reminding people that
it was what we were discussing. I don't see anywhere in those links
where I stated any age of the earth or universe.

And I won't, as no one really knows for sure. From details I have seen
from science, the universe and earth appear very young. (Not millions
of years old.)

Merrily very clearly stated in his post that the Earth was made in 4004 BC. You agreed with him. It's all there in black and white.

From details I have seen
from science, the universe and earth appear very young. (Not millions
of years old.)

And no, it's billions of years old. And there's plenty of evidence for it. You can stomp your hands and cover your ears, but it won't go away.