Why no evidence FOR creation/ID?

[tas8831]

Been away for a while, come back and see the same 'arguments' against evolution.

And it is always... ALWAYS... 'arguments' against evolution.

NEVER arguments FOR creation/ID.

Analogies to human activity, bible verses, 'problems' with evolution - none of these, not one of them, is evidence FOR creation or ID.


It is almost as if creationists have admitted to themselves, subconsciously, that they cannot actually offer any positive supporting evidence FOR their mere beliefs, and are content to simply attack 'the other.' This is true, whether the creationist is a one-line snark master, or a verbose citation and quote bombing autodidact.

 

[Loudmouth]

Been away for a while, come back and see the same 'arguments' against evolution.

And it is always... ALWAYS... 'arguments' against evolution.

NEVER arguments FOR creation/ID.

You have to keep in mind that the audience for ID/creationism are people who already believe in ID/creationism. They are not trying to convince their audience that ID/creationism is true. What they are trying to do is cast doubt on ideas that threaten their ID/creationist beliefs.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why no evidence FOR creation/ID?

No evidence was generated.

The creation week consisted of a series of miracles over a period of six days that raised the level of mass/energy in the universe from zero to what it is now.

 

[SkyWriting]

Been away for a while, come back and see the same 'arguments' against evolution.

And it is always... ALWAYS... 'arguments' against evolution.

NEVER arguments FOR creation/ID.

Analogies to human activity, bible verses, 'problems' with evolution - none of these, not one of them, is evidence FOR creation or ID.


It is almost as if creationists have admitted to themselves, subconsciously, that they cannot actually offer any positive supporting evidence FOR their mere beliefs, and are content to simply attack 'the other.' This is true, whether the creationist is a one-line snark master, or a verbose citation and quote bombing autodidact.

Any supernatural power is a non repeatable event
and by definition outside of the realms of science.

 

[SkyWriting]

The creation week consisted of a series of miracles over a period of six days that raised the level of mass/energy in the universe from zero to what it is now.

The creation of mass would likely distort time dramatically as well.
Again, impossible to reproduce using the scientific method.

 

[Loudmouth]

Any supernatural power is a non repeatable event
and by definition outside of the realms of science.

A murder is a non-repeatable event, yet we can use science to determine how the murder occurred and who committed the murder. Science can investigate non-repeatable events by looking at the evidence they produce.

 

[SkyWriting]

A murder is a non-repeatable event, yet we can use science to determine how the murder occurred and who committed the murder. Science can investigate non-repeatable events by looking at the evidence they produce.

For example, how "old" was the wine Jesus created?
According to a "scientist" at the party, it was the best
wine he'd tasted. This reveals that a scientist would
not conclude that the wine was only minutes old. It's
a perfectly understandable and forgivable error.

 

[AV1611VET]

A murder is a non-repeatable event, yet we can use science to determine how the murder occurred and who committed the murder. Science can investigate non-repeatable events by looking at the evidence they produce.

In the case of creationism however, your post doesn't apply.

Science has nothing to investigate -- literally nothing.

That's the "ex nihilo" part of creatio ex nihilo.

 

[Loudmouth]

For example, how "old" was the wine Jesus created?

Where is the wine so we can test it?

According to a "scientist" at the party, it was the best
wine he'd tasted. This reveals that a scientist would
not conclude that the wine was only minutes old. It's
a perfectly understandable and forgivable error.

You don't measure the age of wine by tasting it.

 

[Loudmouth]

In the case of creationism however, your post doesn't apply.

Science has nothing to investigate -- literally nothing.

That's the "ex nihilo" part of creatio ex nihilo.

I am looking out the window and I see plenty of stuff that can be tested.

 

[AV1611VET]

Where is the wine so we can test it?

What?

No evidence available?

Looks like you're SOL (short on luck) then.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Been away for a while, come back and see the same 'arguments' against evolution.

And it is always... ALWAYS... 'arguments' against evolution.

NEVER arguments FOR creation/ID.

Analogies to human activity, bible verses, 'problems' with evolution - none of these, not one of them, is evidence FOR creation or ID.


It is almost as if creationists have admitted to themselves, subconsciously, that they cannot actually offer any positive supporting evidence FOR their mere beliefs, and are content to simply attack 'the other.' This is true, whether the creationist is a one-line snark master, or a verbose citation and quote bombing autodidact.

This is why their 'theory' can't make predictions about what we should be looking for.

 

[Loudmouth]

What?

No evidence available?

Looks like you're SOL (short on luck) then.

It isn't me who is out of luck. That would be the people who claim that Jesus made water into wine.

 

[SkyWriting]

Where is the wine so we can test it?

Consumed.

You don't measure the age of wine by tasting it.

Of course experts can:

How to Determine a Wine's Age and Origin (Without Looking at the bottle)
How To Tell The Age Of Wine | IF YOUR EXPENSIVE WINE IS FAKE

 

[SkyWriting]

This is why their 'theory' can't make predictions about what we should be looking for.

Absolutely.

 

[AV1611VET]

I am looking out the window and I see plenty of stuff that can be tested.

Only to a point -- then your myopic science hits a snag it can't get around.

Let's make it tougher: much tougher.

It's the end of Day One of the creation week.

The only physical object in existence is a mass of sea water in the hollow of God's hand.

If one drop of that water was transported forward in time and put right in front of your for testing, what evidence would you look for to conclude it came into existence ex nihilo?

I say you have no evidence whatsoever.

What say you?

 

[Loudmouth]

Consumed.


Of course experts can:

How to Determine a Wine's Age and Origin (Without Looking at the bottle)
How To Tell The Age Of Wine | IF YOUR EXPENSIVE WINE IS FAKE

That's not how scientists measure age.

What would the 14C content of the wine be? Would the wine contain breakdown of yeast cells, even though yeast cells were never used to create the alcohol in the wine?

 

[SkyWriting]

It isn't me who is out of luck. That would be the people who claim that Jesus made water into wine.

The story was captured in writing by a witness that seems to be trustworthy.
That how we evaluate all historical records.

 

[Loudmouth]

Only to a point -- then your myopic science hits a snag it can't get around.

What snag?

Let's make it tougher: much tougher.

It's the end of Day One of the creation week.

The only physical object in existence is a mass of sea water in the hollow of God's hand.

If one drop of that water was transported forward in time and put right in front of your for testing, what evidence would you look for to conclude it came into existence ex nihilo?

I say you have no evidence whatsoever.

What say you?

I say that you are making it all up.

 

[Loudmouth]

I was captured in writing by a witness that seems to be trustworthy.
That how we evaluate all historical records.

That's how we evaluate the myths of all cultures.