Evolution and the myth of "scientific consensus"

[Mr Strawberry]

Example: If Intelligent Design is correct we should see a beginning to our universe. If ID is correct we should see that nothing existed of our universe prior to its existence. How do we test this hypothesis and what experiments do we do to determine if this model is correct? The science of this is to do experiments not unlike those that have already been done. If this model is accurate with the data we discover by experimentation we can determine if ID is supported by the data.

Sorry, I don't see how you test your hypothesis.

 

[Jan Volkes]

Example: If Intelligent Design is correct we should see a beginning to our universe. If ID is correct we should see that nothing existed of our universe prior to its existence. How do we test this hypothesis and what experiments do we do to determine if this model is correct? The science of this is to do experiments not unlike those that have already been done. If this model is accurate with the data we discover by experimentation we can determine if ID is supported by the data.

May I ask what the outcome was?

 

[AV1611VET]

May I ask what the outcome was?

My guess is failure.

There's no machine in existence that can create matter from nothing, raising the amount of mass/energy in the universe accordingly.

Creationism stands on its own merits and science can get lost.

 

[RickG]

See the problem is that there is only Science. Science is science. "Creation Science" is not science "using" creationism. Science is a systemic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observations and experimentation. It uses a standard method. It is used in all Science and involves taking a hypothesis (whatever question needs to be answered) and testing that model.

Example: If Intelligent Design is correct we should see a beginning to our universe. If ID is correct we should see that nothing existed of our universe prior to its existence. How do we test this hypothesis and what experiments do we do to determine if this model is correct? The science of this is to do experiments not unlike those that have already been done. If this model is accurate with the data we discover by experimentation we can determine if ID is supported by the data.

Not unless an ID is observed, verified and the data discovered connect to that ID. Currently, the only connection is to a "singularity".

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Creationism stands on its own merits

It has merits?

 

[Jan Volkes]

Creationism stands on its own merits and science can get lost.

That's a very adult attitude to take.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

That's a very adult attitude to take.

He's enjoying his second childhood.

 

[SkyWriting]

And that would be your layman's opinion, which is quite erroneous. A scientific consensus occurs when the vast majority of published peer review literature supports a specific scientific aspect or theory. It has nothing to do with beliefs of individuals, or groups, whether scientists or the public.

That doesn't sound like a hard number or anything.
60%? 80%? 95%?
Or is the number

your opinion?

 

[AV1611VET]

It has merits?

I can think of 7 billion merits right now?

How many can you think of?

 

[RickG]

That doesn't sound like a hard number or anything.
60%? 80%? 95%?
Or is the number

your opinion?

The accepted opinion of the scientific community.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's a very adult attitude to take.

Do you disagree?

(Maybe it's time to bring my apple challenge back.)

 

[SkyWriting]

The accepted opinion of the scientific community.

That doesn't sound like a hard number or anything.
60%? 80%? 95%?
Or is the number

your opinion?

 

[RickG]

I can think of 7 billion merits right now?

How many can you think of?

Do you have to take your shoes off to count that high?

 

[AV1611VET]

He's enjoying his second childhood.

Are you disagreeing with me that creationism can be tested in a lab?

 

[JacksBratt]

And once again you rely on information gleaned from unreliable sources, I cannot help but notice the links to illuminati/harp/chem trails on the same website. Come back when you have something credible.

Typical Evo response...... I guess the pictures of actual existing monstrosities of engineering are "shopped" too.

When I was young I used to just put my hands over my ears and yell LALALALALLALALALAA!

 

[bhsmte]

That's a very adult attitude to take.

For some it is necessary though, although primitive.

Lets face it, evolution is a real psychological threat to people with certain faith beliefs and like any other threat, it must be warded off at all costs.

 

[AV1611VET]

Lets face it, evolution is a real psychological threat to people with certain faith beliefs and like any other threat, it must be warded off at all costs.

Fair enough.

Let's not jettison science from creationism then.

How about you give me scientific justification for creationism?

(And don't forget testable evidence.)

((Now watch science get jettisoned! ))

Go ahead, bhstme ... I'll hang around and keep an eye on this thread.

 

[bhsmte]

Fair enough.

Let's not jettison science from creationism then.

How about you give me scientific justification for creationism?

(And don't forget testable evidence.)

((Now watch science get jettisoned! ))

Go ahead, bhstme ... I'll hang around and keep an eye on this thread.

Right after you use science to determine whether I was abducted by aliens last night and safely returned to my home.

 

[Oncedeceived]

I was too slow..........

Ahhhh

 

[AV1611VET]

Right after you use science to determine whether I was abducted by aliens last night and safely returned to my home.

That's kinda what I thought.

I'll say it again:

Creationism is not science.

Science can get lost.

If anyone disagrees with me -- let's discuss it.

Unlike some though, let's do it like adults.