Digit
Senior Veteran
Hello Metherion,
Also, people hark on about the presupposition issue, in that real science doesn't have any presuppositions. This is a complete fallacy. In fact, no one can bring up how creationist scientists ignore data that doesn't adhere to the historical account of Genesis (it's not scientific fact, it explains no workings, no testable theories of any kind) it simply says God created our world and describes it, and we are trying to figure out the how and confirm it. Afterall if it's untrue, it's in all our best interests to find out about it now.
Back to data verification and theories though. Secular science, ie, science that does not account for God's hand in creation does the same thing:
“Take black matter, for example. As fate would have it, the most recent and popular theories in physics just don’t work. It’s not as if there are some loose threads around the edges; the theories don’t work at all. If they did, the universe would instantaneously fall in on itself or fly apart. Now those of us who are not astrophysicists would probably do something like discard the theories. Not astrophysicists. They readjust the uncooperative universe to fit their theories, postulating a gigantic quantity of invisible gravity-producing stuff they call black matter, even though it’s not black and maybe not even matter. And there you are. Just like that, the modern, popular theories are back in business.
I can imagine that readers new to physics and its way of doing things might be skeptical, but those of us who are higher up in the world of science feel nothing but anticipation in all this theorizing. It could, after all, be a step toward a newer and even sillier putty.”
Roger L. Welsch, “Astrophys Ed”, Natural History, February 1994, p. 25
I'm going to skip the rest of your post, because at the end of the day this isn't the place for debate about this topic, the issue I and many like me have, is as such:
1) We are supposed to be God's people, rejecting anything that doesn't come from faith (according to scripture) testing everything, holding on to the good that we find (Thessalonions). Yet it seems we are very eager to remove God's part in creation. Evolution isn't such a complicated theory that God could not have found a way to describe it in Genesis.
2) Something doesn't add up. One of the reasons I didn't respond to each of your points is that I've done this all before. I post. You post. I post... etc. It doesn't get anywhere, unless we are a specialist in several fields, at some stage we are going to have to rely on the facts presented to us by others. In that regard:
"If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence."
Bertran Russell
3) We are constantly hearing how proving a theory false, is as exciting as proving it true, yet we see no evidence of this. Creationism has been blacklisted as a pseudo-science, and we've already seen as above, how the hipocrisy runs through that statement. Apparently people would jump at the opportunity to disprove evolution, but they aren't. Why? Why not? Why are we clinging so tightly to a theory that doesn't require God at all? Why are we not presenting all alternatives, why are we not highlighting the issues, the holes and gaps in the theory and providing students with some alternatives, which whilst aren't as wholly testable, are still very new and are being worked on.
Lastly:
4) Imagine if we could prove a young Earth. What would that mean for us Christians, it would suddenly give a tremendous amount of backing to our faith, and dare I suggest the number of souls saved as a result would sky-rocket, as evolutionary theory is something that is constantly thrown in our faces as a reason why God is a fairy-tale. We support this, and some of us have adopted theistic-evolution, why do we show such intolerance for a belief and study when it could gain us so much. It's very confusing.
I do understand how some of this is our fault. In that some creationists are quite out there, but we are constantly told not to judge, and if someone goes around saying, "Creationism or Hell!" we have to realise that message isn't back by scripture. We need to separate these things, and hold on to the good (the theory), whilst discarding that which doesn't come from faith (the intolerance).
That's my two cents, personally I am really looking forward to the following years of study and work done in this area, I think it's quite exciting, regardless of the outcome. Christ is still my banner, and I would hope that in that at least, we can find unity, afterall it's the most important thing in the world.
Cheers,
Digit
The science does not differ, merely the axiom. This is a really old claim by those who don't agree with creationism. It's pseudo-science, because it's presupposition differs. You may say that science doesn't need presuppositions, but all logical thought does, it's the basis from which we work. Creationism doesn't take away from the fields you mentioned, it's not replacing the scientific model, it uses the same science, we all have the same evidence and facts to work with. If a doctor measures the blood-sugar level, with differing methods, he will always reach the same result, yet dating methods aren't as robust, they disagree quite largely in some instances, and too are based on axioms about our world. That radioactive decay is constant, despite it being seen that it isn't under certain circumstances.Nope. The problem is believing that a book of Hebrew mythology is literal scientific fact and trying to get that belief to usurp legitimate science that is integral for biology and thus things like medicine
Also, people hark on about the presupposition issue, in that real science doesn't have any presuppositions. This is a complete fallacy. In fact, no one can bring up how creationist scientists ignore data that doesn't adhere to the historical account of Genesis (it's not scientific fact, it explains no workings, no testable theories of any kind) it simply says God created our world and describes it, and we are trying to figure out the how and confirm it. Afterall if it's untrue, it's in all our best interests to find out about it now.
Back to data verification and theories though. Secular science, ie, science that does not account for God's hand in creation does the same thing:
“Take black matter, for example. As fate would have it, the most recent and popular theories in physics just don’t work. It’s not as if there are some loose threads around the edges; the theories don’t work at all. If they did, the universe would instantaneously fall in on itself or fly apart. Now those of us who are not astrophysicists would probably do something like discard the theories. Not astrophysicists. They readjust the uncooperative universe to fit their theories, postulating a gigantic quantity of invisible gravity-producing stuff they call black matter, even though it’s not black and maybe not even matter. And there you are. Just like that, the modern, popular theories are back in business.
I can imagine that readers new to physics and its way of doing things might be skeptical, but those of us who are higher up in the world of science feel nothing but anticipation in all this theorizing. It could, after all, be a step toward a newer and even sillier putty.”
Roger L. Welsch, “Astrophys Ed”, Natural History, February 1994, p. 25
Sure thing.@ digit:
1. I don't know enough about the earth magnetic field decaying to talk about it. Mind providing your sources?
It hasn't been receding at a constant rate. It's rate has been getting more and more constant over time, but it hasn't ever been constant.According to Nasa, the moon is ~380,000 kilometers away. It is also receding at 3.8 cm/year. if it has been receding at a constant rate all that time, over 1.2 billion years it would have moved 4.56 billion centimeters.
I'm going to skip the rest of your post, because at the end of the day this isn't the place for debate about this topic, the issue I and many like me have, is as such:
1) We are supposed to be God's people, rejecting anything that doesn't come from faith (according to scripture) testing everything, holding on to the good that we find (Thessalonions). Yet it seems we are very eager to remove God's part in creation. Evolution isn't such a complicated theory that God could not have found a way to describe it in Genesis.
2) Something doesn't add up. One of the reasons I didn't respond to each of your points is that I've done this all before. I post. You post. I post... etc. It doesn't get anywhere, unless we are a specialist in several fields, at some stage we are going to have to rely on the facts presented to us by others. In that regard:
"If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence."
Bertran Russell
3) We are constantly hearing how proving a theory false, is as exciting as proving it true, yet we see no evidence of this. Creationism has been blacklisted as a pseudo-science, and we've already seen as above, how the hipocrisy runs through that statement. Apparently people would jump at the opportunity to disprove evolution, but they aren't. Why? Why not? Why are we clinging so tightly to a theory that doesn't require God at all? Why are we not presenting all alternatives, why are we not highlighting the issues, the holes and gaps in the theory and providing students with some alternatives, which whilst aren't as wholly testable, are still very new and are being worked on.
Lastly:
4) Imagine if we could prove a young Earth. What would that mean for us Christians, it would suddenly give a tremendous amount of backing to our faith, and dare I suggest the number of souls saved as a result would sky-rocket, as evolutionary theory is something that is constantly thrown in our faces as a reason why God is a fairy-tale. We support this, and some of us have adopted theistic-evolution, why do we show such intolerance for a belief and study when it could gain us so much. It's very confusing.
I do understand how some of this is our fault. In that some creationists are quite out there, but we are constantly told not to judge, and if someone goes around saying, "Creationism or Hell!" we have to realise that message isn't back by scripture. We need to separate these things, and hold on to the good (the theory), whilst discarding that which doesn't come from faith (the intolerance).
That's my two cents, personally I am really looking forward to the following years of study and work done in this area, I think it's quite exciting, regardless of the outcome. Christ is still my banner, and I would hope that in that at least, we can find unity, afterall it's the most important thing in the world.
Cheers,
Digit
Upvote
0