Is YEC science? Is is even really a theory?

[Astrid]

And yet you don't see that these aren't "pillars". (some of them are facts, some of them are components of theories, ...)



OK, you clearly don't understand how we do science.


See other posts. As I noted abiogenesis is not the basis of any science, not even biology.



1. Redshift *is* part of the evidence for the BB.
2. "echo", do you mean background radiation?
3. The BB theory is only about 100 years old. It is not a 13 billion-year-old theory.
4. The BB isn't a theory about the *formation* of the universe if you mean "creation" or "start". It is a theory about the "development" of the universe from the expansion from a hot dense state.
5. We have enormous amounts of evidence behind the BB.
6 "true" or "not true" is not a question science addresses, but the the basics of the BB are very well established.


I'll let some other poster tear apart your misunderstandings about geology.



Not irrelevant, but the most important part of my argument. It grids your argument to dust and blows it away with the slightest puff of air. I'm not surprised that you didn't get it.

Your claim was that these 4 things were the pillars upon which science rests, yet for these sciences THEY JUST DON'T MATTER. These sciences would work just fine if a god had created the world and the laws of physics 6000 years ago. This means that the so-called "pillars of science" are not actually so.

No doubt I will decline the
invitation. When someone goes
off on the "assumptions and
speculations" thing on any topic,
conversation is over.

 

[Bradskii]

Disingenuous because Genesis does not say how nor did I ever imply it did.

Gimme a break. Genesis says exactly how. It says that He did it by an act of supernatural creation. No natural processes whatsoever. What's your take on that...gee, I really don't know how He does it!

Are you trying to convince yourself? 'Cos you sure aren't convincing anyone else.

 

[Shemjaza]

In other words, there are no facts that directly support this hypothesis, there is no way of supporting or demonstrating it with the empirical method and there are a few speculations about how the current hypothesis might work but nothing concrete. Thanks for supporting what I said here.

Not, not "In other words, there are no facts" because that would be a lie.

The facts that the research is based on are facts about the physical world. They aren't literary and philosophical conjecture it's research into the form and function of the chemistry of the modern and ancient world.

There are facts that can be related to Big Bang for example (red shift and background echo) but nothing conclusive. Abiogenesis does not even qualify as a theory in your view so we agree on that. Saying all the theories were fact-free was erroneous of me but the basic notion that the factual basis of the other theories is very weak remains and that nothing can be conclusively proven is pretty much unchallengeable.

No it's absolutely challengeable because there is extensive evidence for the Big Bang theory that conclusively demonstrates trends on a macro scale and evidence about long scale space and time variation across the universe.

The only fact free statement here is "factual basis of the other theories is very weak" when the only detail you even attack is a hypotheses that was never even described as a theory.

I have read the same books and even shared your view at one point. Now it just does not seem that convincing. It is all about how you put the known facts together and the overall perspective you take. We are never going to agree on this and you cannot prove me wrong.

You can't reason someone out of an idea they didn't reason themselves into.

You may have read books, but without any evidence it's just your personal religious conviction.

There has been geological studies for literal centuries demonstrating problem with your beliefs... your have been, in any common use of the term, proven wrong.

Miracles are by definition rare and exceptional events that do not conform to generic patterns. The scientific method seeks to duplicate in controlled conditions the effect of certain patterns and combinations of ingredients and circumstances. No scientist will ever duplicate a miracle so it will never be something within the scientific scope that can be measured and analyzed in a scientific way. But the lame man walks, the cancer patient is healed and the blind man sees nonetheless. But if even one miracle occurs what that says is that the scientific way of looking at the world is insufficient to explain it and must recognize the limits of the effectiveness of its analysis of the world. Since miracles do occur, science is a limited perspective on reality.

That's the assertion, but if you can't demonstrate that they happen then you can't use science's inability to demonstrate it as an argument.

You also ignored the specific point I made. It wasn't just that miracles are necessary for a YEC narrative, it's miracles that specifically mimic a old Earth and an evolutionary history of life.

You could have a considerable diversity of genes carried through from the ancient world by the original 3 sons of Noah and their wives inherited from the previous world, given lifespans, ages of procreation, and the fact that a great-grandfather could remarry and reproduce, there is great scope for diversity and masking any bottlenecks. So maybe YEC scientists are wrong about there being any evidence of a bottleneck. We do not have an accurate 'before the flood' picture of human genetic diversity and the post-flood situation, would by creationist definitions be spread out. I might agree with your science and still hold a creationist viewpoint here.

Blatantly false.

We don't need to know anything about preflood genetics to see that there is only so much genetic diversity you can fit in four people.

Each trait in a sexual organism has one gene from each parent, so Noah, Mrs. Noah and the three girls along for the ride demonstrate the total genetic diversity of humanity in the narrative... from an era after the initial cities were being built in the Middle East (and elsewhere).

It's much, much worse with the animal species with only two individuals.

Whole clumps of existing earth with their features could be included in sedimentary rock. The flood event is without analogy.

Not true.

We have floods, tsunamis and deep ocean behaviors to trivially study the mechanical effects of water.

A world wide flood is an unheard of level of destruction never seen since the beginning of complex life, let alone since the begining of civillisation.

It is a pretty light show. Reading into the fact that the lights pop in and out of existence does not imply deceit of any kind, just purposes we have not worked out yet. But it would require a supernatural explanation here to explain why our perception of what was out there dropped from near-instantaneous to that of light-speed following the fall.

Just making up ideas like instantaneous light or different physics to hand wave physical evidence to support your religious conviction isn't convincing.

In addition it doesn't answer the question about events after the fall or after the flood.

If I create a light show that's intermixed with visible real events that's inherently manipulative and dishonest.

As I said, so what, you cannot do anything with that knowledge, least of all create biological organisms from chemistry, so there is no real scientific understanding here.

Not true, a detailed understanding of the interactions of basic chemistry and the makeup of life is a useful field of study in general without offering an explanation for the origin opf life.

This has to be taken case by case and there are doubts about every so called piece of evidence here that has been used to dispute timespans.

Yeah you have doubts and disputes... but no evidence.

 

[driewerf]

Darwin's Evolutionary Tree

Science has progressed "a tiny little bit" since 1859.
You should try to actualize your knowledge .

 

[driewerf]

We can't even post the Ten Commandments on the courthouse lawn, or others will want equal airtime with the cults.

Equality before the law. For some that is very hard to understand.

 

[Astrid]

Equality before the law. For some that is very hard to understand.

True. The Christians who want to be
more equal than anyone else, with special
deals in violation of the constitution, say.

The Equality some fools seem to want would
actually have cults of every sort subsidized to
preach in publicly funded arenas.

 

[AV1611VET]

Science has progressed "a tiny little bit" since 1859.
You should try to actualize your knowledge .

I'm simply comparing "Darwin's Tree with God's Bushes."

If you want to drop "Darwin's Tree," I'll drop "God's Bushes."

 

[AV1611VET]

Equality before the law. For some that is very hard to understand.

Yup.

Thanks for the QED.

Give Allah equality with JEHOVAH.

 

[AV1611VET]

The Equality some fools seem to want would actually have cults of every sort subsidized to preach in publicly funded arenas.

You know why that is?

Because academia thinks these other characters are gods, and refuses to acknowledge them as fallen angels.

That's why they want God out of the public eye, else we should have to include Allah, Quetzalcoatl, and Thor as co-equal.

How would you like it if Hong Kong wanted to consider John Lee Ka-chiu's enemies his cohorts, and then refuse to put up any references to John Lee Ka-chiu in public, because they would have to put his "friends" up as well?

 

[driewerf]

Yup.

Thanks for the QED.

Give Allah equality with JEHOVAH.

Nope.
Give the American Allah worshipers equal rights as the American Jehovah worshipers. And the Vishnu worshipers and the Ahura Mazda worshipers and all the other worshipers. And people who don't worship at all.

 

[AV1611VET]

Give the American Allah worshipers equal rights as the American Jehovah worshipers.

That's neat.

Give the worshipers equal rights to worship something you have no clue what is.

That's like finding a suspicious package in the hallway and playing catch with it.

 

[dlamberth]

Yup.

Thanks for the QED.

Give Allah equality with JEHOVAH.

America gives ALL people, regardless of their religion or none, equal rights.

 

[dlamberth]

That's neat.

Give the worshipers equal rights to worship something you have no clue what is.

It's wrong to judge another, especially if one has no clue what it is that they are judging.

That's like finding a suspicious package in the hallway and playing catch with it.

What's suspicious to you may be crystal clear to another.

 

[AV1611VET]

America gives ALL people, regardless of their religion or none, equal rights.

And in our classrooms, America gives ALL spiritual entities, regardless of their true identities or none, equal airtime.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's wrong to judge another, especially if one has no clue what it is that they are judging.

What's suspicious to you may be crystal clear to another.

Tell that to the judge who sentenced Shoko Asahara to prison for worshiping Shakti in Aum Shinrikyo ("supreme truth").

He didn't like his deity being just a figurehead, and wanted to worship her the way she was meant to be worshiped.

So he did something about it.

Do you know what religion considers the United States as "Great Satan" and Israel as "Lesser Satan"?

The same religion academia thinks should have equal airtime with Christianity.

So much for your "crystal clarity."

 

[Astrid]

Yet another skeptic that believe science falsifies miracles.

A falsehood wrapped in a quip is unworthy of you.

 

[Hans Blaster]

And in our classrooms, America gives ALL spiritual entities, regardless of their true identities or none, equal airtime.

Yes, equally none.

 

[Astrid]

Yes, equally none.

As it should be, though many a
faux- patriots wants the Constitution
rewritten to favour them and theirs above
the law of the land.

 

[AV1611VET]

As it should be, though many a faux-patriots ...

You're a real class act, you know that?

 

[Diamond72]

Gimme a break. Genesis says exactly how. It says that He did it by an act of supernatural creation

The Bible does not say that at all. Never once is the word: "supernatural" in the Bible. People need to quit adding words that are not there and make an attempt to understand the words that are there. We know God uses the laws of science to create. The more science we know, the better we are going to understand our Bible.