What is the Falsification for Abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution?

[renniks]

Wow!!! How about some honesty from creationists?

How many times have you been corrected and instructed that "science is provisional and not proven" and that "science does not claim to have all the answers?"

So quit acting like they all do.

 

[Speedwell]

From GIGOists?

Any honesty you get will come from their belief in what is contained in their data bases.

They may be honest, but honestly wrong.

Which doesn't mean you are right.

 

[AV1611VET]

With regard to the theory that the Grand Canyon was formed in a few weeks 4500 years ago, we have already seen the "black swan."

Either that, or it appeared in an instant when Pangaea was pulled apart.

I submit that the use of the word "formed" will keep one from understanding what happened.

It creates a mental block.

 

[Speedwell]

So quit acting like they all do.

You still don't get it. Let's try another analogy: Right now I am not really sure where my car keys are. I form a theory that they are in my pocket. I test the theory by looking carefully in my pocket, but my car keys are not there and my theory that they are in my pocket is falsified. I still don't know where my car keys are and I don't have to know in order to be sure that they are not in my pocket. If I look somewhere else and still don't find them it does not revive the possibility that they might be in my pocket. The theory that they are in my pocket has been falsified even if I don't formulate another theory about where they might be, or formulate another theory about where they might be which also turns out to be falsified.

An so it is with the theory that the Grand Canyon was formed by a recent global flood. That theory has been falsified long since and no uncertainty about how the canyon was actually formed will revive it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Which doesn't mean you are right.

Have you ever heard me say the Grand Canyon was formed over a period of a few weeks 4500 years ago?

 

[Frank Robert]

So quit acting like they all do.

That is what you believe because it is what you expect because it is what you believe. Ad infinitum!
In other words a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Astrid]

Ranney, in his 2005 book Carving Grand Canyon: Evidence, Theories, and Mystery, said:

"Oddly enough, the Grand Canyon is located in a place where it seemingly shouldn’t be. Some twenty miles east of Grand Canyon Village, the Colorado River turned sharply ninety degrees, from a southern course to a western one and into the heart of the uplifted Kaibab Plateau. . . . It appears to cut right through this uplifted wall of rock, which lies three thousand feet above the adjacent Marble Platform to the east.5

Most geologists believe the uplift occurred before erosion of the canyon into and through the plateau. But that leaves the headwaters of the Colorado River at a lower elevation than the top of that plateau, which indicates the Colorado River could not have carved the Grand Canyon...

If the canyon was eroded by the Colorado River, an enormous delta should be found at the mouth of the river where it empties into the Gulf of California. But the delta contains only a small fraction of this eroded material...
Then there's the fact that the cliffs are not worn like they should be if they had have been there millions of years...

We doubt you've read the book, but,
Again-
So what? What point are you
trying to make?

W. Ranney also wrote
The Grand Canyon, Monument to
An Ancienr Earth.

Read review at least.
"It directly confronts a sector of
Christian belief called young earth
cteationism."

 

[dlamberth]

Go read some of the theories. They have it set from anywhere from 6 million to 17 million years.

"The Grand Canyon may seem to be a simple case of "river carves rock," but to geologists, its formation is still puzzling. Ira Flatow and guests discuss the canyon's mysteries, and the scientific sleuthing being done to solve them—millions of years after the Colorado River carried off the evidence."

"So as you go farther back into the history of this iconic landscape, I think the evidence becomes more fragmentary, and there's much more room for discussion and debate about how we got to where we are now."
(Karl Karlstrom, professor, structural geology and tectonics, University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, N.M.)

Exactly, the Grand Canyon area is very rich in history.

 

[AV1611VET]

An so it is with the theory that the Grand Canyon was formed by a recent global flood. That theory has been falsified long since and no uncertainty about how the canyon was actually formed will revive it.

I don't believe the Grand Canyon was formed by the Flood either.

But just to make a good point you probably won't understand, let me ask you this:

What specific equipment was used to falsify the idea that the Grand Canyon was not formed by the Flood?

(And I'm asking for specific equipment, like thumper trucks and such; not a screen and a half of vague rhetoric.)

 

[Frank Robert]

They sure do not know. So many competing ideas, what else would you call it?

They called hypothesis. Doesn't it follow that if there are recognized competing hypothesis then scientists in effect are not claiming to know everything?

 

[AV1611VET]

Exactly, the Grand Canyon area is very rich in history.

Fake history.

Else they wouldn't be able to make it dovetail in other historical accounts, and there would go their consilience out the door.

 

[Speedwell]

Have you ever heard me say the Grand Canyon was formed over a period of a few weeks 4500 years ago?

No. I was addressing whatever the YEC theory is, and I am aware that you re not a YEC.

 

[AV1611VET]

Doesn't it follow that if there are recognized competing hypothesis then scientists in effect are not claiming to know everything?

They don't need competing theories to realize they don't know anything.

A generation of special children showed them they were wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well I would just like to see some honesty... Instead of everyone claiming that it was all proven facts.

As pointed out from a formal sense nothing is proven in the sciences. Gravity is not "proven". But if one goes by the legal standard of "Proof beyond a reasonable doubt" then it is a proven fact.



Do you want to know how we can know that the Grand Canyon is not young?

 

[AV1611VET]

No. I was addressing whatever the YEC theory is, and I am aware that you re not a YEC.

Okay ... sorry.

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you want to know how we can know that the Grand Canyon is not young?

If some think the Grand Canyon is 70 million years old, I won't dispute that.

But what I will dispute is anyone who says that the Grand Canyon existed prior to around 2345 BC.

Give or take a few years.

 

[Astrid]

They called hypothesis. Doesn't it follow that if there are recognized competing hypothesis then scientists in effect are not claiming to know everything?

Competing ideas on small details are hardly a way
to validate yec.

This "know everything " bit is a complaint with nobody to
pin it on, science side.

We see it all the time from yecs.

"God says/ man says, I'm with God so
I know that all your science falsely so
called is trash,"

 

[Frank Robert]

They don't need competing theories to realize they don't know anything.

You did a excellent job of mangling what I said.

A generation of special children showed them they were wrong.

You are leaving way too much out to make sense of what you are implying.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If the canyon was eroded by the Colorado River, an enormous delta should be found at the mouth of the river where it empties into the Gulf of California. But the delta contains only a small fraction of this eroded material...
Then there's the fact that the cliffs are not worn like they should be if they had have been there millions of years...

You forgot about plate tectonics. The Gulf of California did not exist always in its present form. Many of the sediments are in California's Central Valley. The opening of the Gulf of California is a recent event, geologically. It did not exist when the Grand Canyon first began to form:

The California River and its role in carving Grand Canyon | GSA Bulletin | GeoScienceWorld

 

[Subduction Zone]

So quit acting like they all do.

No one is. The fact that we do not have all of the answers does not mean that we do not have some of the answers. We do not need all of the answers to refute the beliefs of creationists.