Do creationists critically examine their own ideas (re: creationism)?

[Kylie]

If the moon is a light, what causes the light to go out during a lunar eclipse?

Someone turns the switch to "Off".

 

[Tone]

Someone turns the switch to "Off".

You know there is light that the human eye can't perceive right?

 

[Kylie]

You know there is light that the human eye can't perceive right?

1. Way to miss the joke.
2. Yes I do know that there are forms of light that the human eye can't perceive. We've never detected the moon emitting any of those forms of light. Of course, if you can show me a valid source showing the moon emits any kind of light, please feel free to share it and I will adjust my views accordingly.

 

[Astrophile]

1. Way to miss the joke.
2. Yes I do know that there are forms of light that the human eye can't perceive. We've never detected the moon emitting any of those forms of light. Of course, if you can show me a valid source showing the moon emits any kind of light, please feel free to share it and I will adjust my views accordingly.

The Moon does emit infrared light, but only because it is heated by the Sun. Also, if God created the Moon to emit forms of light that are invisible to human eyes there wouldn't be much point in calling it a light.

 

[Kylie]

The Moon does emit infrared light, but only because it is heated by the Sun.

I'd hardly say that counts as being a lightsource though...

 

[xianghua]

Why cant we find 51243?

so if i will show you such a case you will admit that evolution is false because evolution doesnt predict such a fossil?

 

[xianghua]

I think that you mean that since common similarity can point to a common designer, it can't be used as evidence for common descent. However, this argument begs the question, since it assumes the existence of a designer; you need to have independent evidence for a designer for the argument to be valid.

first its also true for evolution. since we assume that common similarity is the result of common descent. second: we do have evidence for design.

It does not make sense for a designer to design similar anatomies and genomes for animals that live in such different environments,

why not? why a car is similar to an airplane in many ways?

 

[Jimmy D]

so if i will show you such a case you will admit that evolution is false because evolution doesnt predict such a fossil?

For Pete's sake.

You've been posting your "example" for years now. It's been explained to you countless times why it does not falsify evolution.

Seriously, what's wrong with you?

 

[xianghua]

For Pete's sake.

You've been posting your "example" for years now. It's been explained to you countless times why it does not falsify evolution.

Seriously, what's wrong with you?

it seems that he think differently.

 

[HitchSlap]

it seems that he think differently.

 

[xianghua]

nobel prize? a good joke:Christian Scientist Fired for Challenging Evolution Awarded Financial Settlement

 

[Ophiolite]

nobel prize? a good joke:Christian Scientist Fired for Challenging Evolution Awarded Financial Settlement

Armitage's work was not even the first step (or any step) in the disproof of evolution. It was - possibly - a useful study in the elucidation of "soft tissue" preservation in deep time.

From the little I have read on the matter it appears that the University was either precipitate, ill-informed, or incompetent in their decision to dismiss. However, that has no bearing upon the strength of evolutionary theory: at worst it shows that university faculty are human and like all humans can, at times, be petty.

From the linked report, note the anger of Armitage's supervisor who stormed into the lab and declared "We will not tolerate your religion in this department!” This rather suggests there had been an ongoing, perhaps long standing problem with Armitage pushing his religious beliefs to the annoyance of his colleagues. I suspect that might be the underlying cause of the dismissal.

 

[HitchSlap]

nobel prize? a good joke:Christian Scientist Fired for Challenging Evolution Awarded Financial Settlement

No longer fettered by the university, so what’s stopping him now.

 

[Astrophile]

first its also true for evolution, since we assume that common similarity is the result of common descent.

In that case, similarity can't be used to distinguish between common design and common descent, so it is not evidence for either hypothesis.

second: we do have evidence for design.

What is this evidence?

why not? why a car is similar to an airplane in many ways?

Is it really? Cars don't have wings (with ailerons or flaps), tailplanes or rudders. Cars change direction by turning their front wheels, not by banking. Cars don't fly, so they don't need to have wings to provide lift, whereas aeroplanes do need wings for that purpose. In what way is a car so similar to an aircraft that one would have to deduce that it was designed by modifying a flying machine rather than being designed from the start as a wheeled vehicle that was intended to travel along roads?

 

[Tone]

I'd hardly say that counts as being a lightsource though...

Do you think we have the capability to detect all light?

 

[Astrophile]

Do you think we have the capability to detect all light?

Yes. Scientists have developed the ability to detect all forms of electromagnetic radiation, from gamma-rays to ELF radio waves.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Do you think we have the capability to detect all light?

Yes. Scientists have developed the ability to detect all forms of electromagnetic radiation, from gamma-rays to ELF radio waves.

And, of course, as someone else pointed out, if the EM emissions are not part of the spectrum the human eye can detect, it's not much of a light.

So, yeah, we don't need to invent something to detect 'light'; we have eyeballs.

 

[Tone]

Yes. Scientists have developed the ability to detect all forms of electromagnetic radiation, from gamma-rays to ELF radio waves.

How would they know that it is indeed all forms?

 

[Kylie]

Do you think we have the capability to detect all light?

It doesn't matter.

Because if the moon is emitting light of any kind, whether it's a kind we can detect or not, it must be using energy to do so. Such energy production will be detectable, as it is with the sun. Even the radioactivity that keeps the Earth's core molten is detectable. I'm not aware of any indication of energy production on the moon. If the moon is not producing energy, then it can't possibly be emitting light.

 

[Tone]

It doesn't matter.

Because if the moon is emitting light of any kind, whether it's a kind we can detect or not, it must be using energy to do so. Such energy production will be detectable, as it is with the sun. Even the radioactivity that keeps the Earth's core molten is detectable. I'm not aware of any indication of energy production on the moon. If the moon is not producing energy, then it can't possibly be emitting light.

There's no electromagnetic sphere around the moon?