Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
How do you do creation science research?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Loudmouth" data-source="post: 58574424" data-attributes="member: 11790"><p>Then you are assuming the conclusion which is very non-scientific.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>If you want to claim that creationism is not scientific and is purely a religious belief then I will agree with you.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>"God did it through magic" has been a complete failure as an explanation for what we are ignorant of.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Loudmouth, post: 58574424, member: 11790"] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
How do you do creation science research?
Top
Bottom