• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

How do you do creation science research?

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by Delphiki, Sep 8, 2011.

  1. juvenissun

    juvenissun ... and God saw that it was good.

    +776
    Baptist
    Married
    See, that is what an evolutionist can do. It did not address the question.
    I want to compare genomes of "a sequence of" "extinct" apes. It is useless only to compare genomes of modern species. They only show differences, but do not indicate evolution.
     
  2. juvenissun

    juvenissun ... and God saw that it was good.

    +776
    Baptist
    Married
    Same as biology, there are things called mechanism and process. Different mechanism and process will result in different Rate. A faster rate will shorten the time needed to make an object. I don't need to falsify anything. I just need to find an alternative, but faster way to make the same thing.

    Many people said now that Darwinism is wrong. I believe they are right. And I don't think it is hard to argue against any specific case about Darwinism. It is possible that even I can do some.
     
  3. mzungu

    mzungu INVICTUS

    +183
    Atheist
    Married
    Have you turned heathen now? The text in red is blasphemy. Don't you know the answer? In The case you have forgotten here it is:

    CREATIONISM = GOD DID IT CASE CLOSED!

    Swallow your pride and move on ;):wave:^_^^_^^_^
     
  4. Delphiki

    Delphiki Well-Known Member

    +139
    Atheist
    In Relationship
    US-Others
    No. "Spontaneous generation" doesn't necessarily imply a creator.
     
  5. Loudmouth

    Loudmouth Contributor

    +5,953
    Agnostic
    You also need to show that these different mechanisms and processes were responsible for the formation, that they actually exist, and be able to differentiate them from the processes that produce a similar formation at slower rates.

    So what type of geologic formation would be inconsistent with a 10 myo Earth? What type of formation could these mechanisms and processes not produce?

    If your theory is unfalsifiable you need to go back to the drawing board. One of the most important steps in designing a scientific research program is determining what your null hypothesis is. You have to be able to show other scientists that you are able to detect false positives if they exist. The placebo effect is a good example of this. In drug studies, some of the subjects are given a sugar pill. If the drug under investigation has the same or lesser effect than the sugar pill then the drug effect is considered a false positive.

    You also need to construct a dating method of some kind that is objective and justifiable.

    Science is not the process of saying that a theory is falsified. It is about DEMONSTRATING that a theory is falsified. Within the scientific arena, once you have falsified evolution you still need to support creationism with positive evidence. This may not be the case in the theological arena, but it is this way in the scientific arena.
     
  6. Loudmouth

    Loudmouth Contributor

    +5,953
    Agnostic
    How are those differences inconsistent with evolution?
     
  7. Loudmouth

    Loudmouth Contributor

    +5,953
    Agnostic
    Then all you need to show is how God can be used as part of the scientific method. Show how you can create a testable hypothesis based on the actions of God. How do you create a null hypothesis when the hypothesis contains the actions of God?

    If you are not using the scientific method, then there is no science in the equation.

    I am looking forward to you showing me how the two can work together. So far, you have only claimed that they can be used together. I am waiting for you to demonstrate how it is done.

    You first need to show that creationism is a choice. This requires research demonstrating that creationism is a scientifically viable mechanism. Without this work there are zero choices after the falsification of evolution.

    Let's look at this from the opposite direction. All I need to do to prove evolution is to find one piece of evidence that is inconsistent with creationism, correct? As soon as I have disproven creationism it makes evolution true by default, according to your argument. Therefore, radiometric dating of rocks demonstrates that they are older than 10 myo. Creationism is now falsified. Evolution is proven.
     
  8. juvenissun

    juvenissun ... and God saw that it was good.

    +776
    Baptist
    Married
    Not that easy. We do not know what does the the number from the calculation mean. We assume it is, for example 15 m.y. We do not really know it is 15 m.y.. In other word, we do not understand the nature of radiometric decay.

    You continuously try to put God into the realm of science (such as hypothesis, falsify, prove, etc.). That is wrong. For example, something God can do, but are like magics to us. So when we study the nature by science, you may close your eyes to things that can not be explained by science. But if you do not, then you should consider God. It is true 1000 years ago. The key fact is that it is still true today. (example: before radiometric dating, we do not understand geology. with radiometric dating now, we still do not understand geology.)

    Since creationism = science + God, then the correct question for you to ask is: what is the content on the "God" part? If you continuously try to jam God into science, then you do not understand that simple definition, and you do not try to understand it.
     
  9. SkyWriting

    SkyWriting The Librarian Supporter

    +7,126
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    I'm going to assume you mean "Scientific Evidence" for a moment:

    There may be no more important issue for authors and reviewers than the question of reproducibility, a bedrock principle in the conduct and validation of experimental science.


    I've always relied on regular Science journals to tell me that all the "kinds" of life on the earth have always existed from the beginning. And Science has never disappointed me. Species are found "Much older than assumed", are found to "evolve faster than anyone imagined they could", are found Ancient and unchanged, are found "co-existing", when thought to be ancestors....on and on. All pointing to a singe creation event with certain kinds of species engineered to adapt to a degrading environment.
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2011
  10. Loudmouth

    Loudmouth Contributor

    +5,953
    Agnostic
    Then you are assuming the conclusion which is very non-scientific.

    You may not, but physicists do. So not only does creationist research require you to assume the conclusion, it appears it also requires you to ignore 100 years of research in physics.

    No, that would be creationists. They are the ones trying to force creationism into the science classroom. Creationists are the ones claiming that creationism is a valid scientific option to evolution.

    If you want to claim that creationism is not scientific and is purely a religious belief then I will agree with you.

    Science does just the opposite. It opens its eyes even wider and looks for an explanation. Creationists do just the opposite. They try to prevent others from finding an answer. Read my signature.

    Why? Name one thing we were ignorant of 200 years ago that is KNOWN to be the product of God's actions? By KNOWN, I mean demonstrable through positive evidence. Name one thing. I can name thousands and thousands of things that we were once ignorant of but is now explained by science and is backed by mountains of empirical and repeatable observations.

    "God did it through magic" has been a complete failure as an explanation for what we are ignorant of.

    Since when do we not understand geology? In 1831, Adam Sedgwick admitted that Noah's flood was falsified. We knew enough 180 years ago to know that creationism was false. Our knowledge of geology has only increased since then.

    No, what is the science content? If you can't show how the scientific method is used then there is no science in the equation. It is creationism = religion. That's it.
     
  11. Loudmouth

    Loudmouth Contributor

    +5,953
    Agnostic
    Evidence please.

    How does this indicate that the species was magically poofed into being by a supernatural deity?

    Name one modern species that is found unchanged in rock that is 500 million years old.

    Just like Europeans are co-existing with Americans even though Europeans are the ancestors of Americans. Yeah, way to think that one through.
     
  12. juvenissun

    juvenissun ... and God saw that it was good.

    +776
    Baptist
    Married
    So you do not agree with my definition.

    That is fine. We just have a different definition on the same term. That is OK. This is a simple and fundamental difference, why would it take you so much trouble to argue on things that have different definition to begin with? That is not very scientific. Is it?

    Creationists interfere the school teaching on science because they think that science education should include more than just science, it should include God in addition to science. The reason is simple: science can answer very few questions. It is not good enough for science education.
     
  13. SkyWriting

    SkyWriting The Librarian Supporter

    +7,126
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    Originally Posted by SkyWriting [​IMG] I've always relied on regular Science journals to tell me that all the "kinds" of life on the earth have always existed from the beginning. And Science has never disappointed me. Species are found "Much older than assumed"
    On the following diagram, a "Creationist Tree" would have some minor branches and no major ones. Support for the "Creation Tree" is any pushing of branches to the left, plus co-existing species.

    The Tree of Life


    Explained above.

    Only Igneous and some metamorphic rocks can be dated. (Lava)
    There are no species in Lava. I'm not saying that the dating is accurate. Just that true believers, like yourself, place much faith in their guesstimates.
    Fortunately for us, scientists have no bias when seeking the truth:

    "We came into the project extremely biased against the idea of gene flow," said Harvard Medical School's David Reich, one of the study's authors, who specializes in examining the relationship between human populations using genomic data.
     
  14. SkyWriting

    SkyWriting The Librarian Supporter

    +7,126
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others

    It has no effect on me or anyone I've ever had contact with, is the logical answer.
    Pure indifference.


    - If God created man from dust, then why is there still dust?
    It has multiple uses, is the logical answer.

    - How can God just be created from nothing?
    He wasn't created, is the logical answer.

    - If you believe in God and the bible, where do you get your morals from?
    "Parents" is the " "

    - Why do you want to keep religion in our government when the United States was obviously founded on atheist beliefs?
    Per Jefferson, our Government is "powered by the governed" and the founders are now dead.

    About them dead guys:
    Of the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence,
    nearly half (24) held seminary or Bible school degrees.

    John Adams - "Suppose a nation...should take the Bible for their only law Book...what a Paradise would this region be."

    Thomas Jefferson - "I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ."

    John Hancock - "Resistance to tyranny becomes the Christian and social duty of each individual...your dependence on God, nobly defend those rights which heaven gave, and no man ought to take from us."

    Benjamin Franklin - "Here is my Creed. I believe in one God, the Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by His Providence. That He ought to be worshipped...As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals and his religion, as he left them to us, is the best the world ever saw, or is likely to see;



    Samuel Adams-
    James Madison

    Roger Sherman

    Benjamin Rush

    John Witherspoon

    Alexander Hamilton

    Patrick Henry

    John Jay



    - Why do you want to ban atheism from schools?
    A clear straw man. I can't find any general support for the idea anywhere.

    - Why are you so intolerant of Judaism?

    You mean like my good friends for 20 years?
    Granted, I've only been to temple a couple times.
    I don't call that intolerant.

    You mean why doesn't the US support Israel?
    Support for Israel in U.S. at 63%, Near Record High
     
  15. Davian

    Davian fallible

    +1,159
    Ignostic
    Married
    "Here is my Creed: I believe in one God, Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by his Providence. That he ought to be worshipped. That the most acceptable Service we can render to him, is doing Good to his other Children. That the Soul of Man is immortal, and will be treated with Justice in another Life respecting its Conduct in this. These I take to be the fundamental Principles of all sound Religion, and I regard them as you do, in whatever Sect I meet with them. As to Jesus of Nazareth, my Opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the System of Morals and his Religion as he left them to us, the best the World ever saw, or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupting Changes, and I have with most of the present Dissenters in England, some Doubts as to his Divinity" - Benjamin Franklin

    I saw that you forgot to include that last bit.
     
  16. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET BELIEVE IN MIRACLES Supporter

    +41,599
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    We certainly see Ben's problem here, don't we?
     
  17. Nathan Poe

    Nathan Poe Well-Known Member

    +1,589
    Agnostic
    US-Democrat
    You have no use for him -- clearly, that's your problem, not his.
     
  18. TerranceL

    TerranceL Sarcasm is kind of an art isn't it?

    +4,549
    Atheist
    Single
    US-Libertarian
    The answer to the OP is easy.

    You start with a conclusion then fabricate the evidence. When your evidence is challenged claim that you need "special knowledge" to understand it.
     
  19. Davian

    Davian fallible

    +1,159
    Ignostic
    Married
    I'm just a newbie here, and would not hazard a guess at what you are thinking. Please elucidate.
     
  20. Jazer

    Jazer Guest

    +0
    Fern has not changed. Even before I know anything at all, I could tell looking at a fern that it was very old compared to most everything else in the world we live in.

    So tell me that part again about why some things change and some things do not change.
     
Loading...