The Creationism Falsification Challenge

[dad]

You refuse to accept observations from reality, so there is no convincing you. For people who are rational, there is plenty of evidence.

So you cannot falsify your claimed same state past, and you pretend creation should be able to be falsified by false little men. OK.

The strong nuclear force..prove it was the same or lose your claims!

 

[Loudmouth]

So you cannot falsify your claimed same state past, and you pretend creation should be able to be falsified by false little men. OK.

The strong nuclear force..prove it was the same or lose your claims!

It isn't worth my time to engage people incapable of dealing with reality, people like yourself.

 

[Loudmouth]

Ditto. Yet I stooped to expose your inability to be able to do what you hypocritically demand creation believers do. You thought I expected reasoned discussion from you??

Notice how you can't address the topic of the thread. This thread is here for creationists to show how creationism is falsifiable. If you want to discuss how scientific theories are falsifiable, then start a thread on that subject.

 

[SLP]

That's a heap of a lot of theory on paper.

What if the meteorite itself was made of tektite?

Tektite created in Genesis 1.

Created without argon in it.

No, true creation is clearly outlined in the Bagavhad Gita.

 

[SLP]

So you cannot falsify your claimed same state past, and you pretend creation should be able to be falsified by false little men. OK.

"False little men"?


It seems that the creationist can only thrive by insulting others. Typical.

The strong nuclear force..prove it was the same or lose your claims!

Prove that Yahweh exists.

 

[Astrophile]

That's a heap of a lot of theory on paper.

What if the meteorite itself was made of tektite?

Tektite created in Genesis 1.

Created without argon in it.

First, no tektite has ever been seen to fall as a meteorite. Second, there are no known asteroids whose spectra resemble those of tektites. Third, the compositions of tektites imply that they were produced by the melting of terrestrial sedimentary rocks.

 

[dad]

The accumulation of isotopes that starts when the tektite goes from being liquid to solid. When the meteor strikes it turns solid rock to liquid rock, and ejects it out of the meteor crater. When the rock is liquid, it outgases all of the argon in the molten rock. When the rock resolidifies and rains down on the Earth as a tektite, it has little to no argon. However, the tektite can have potassium, especially a radioactive isotope of potassium with an atomic weight of 40. Potassium-40 decays into Argon-40. Since the tektite starts with no argon, any argon we find had to of come from the decay of Potassium-40. By measuring the history of Potassium-40 decay in the rock, you can determine how long it has been since it solidified from liquid meteor crater ejecta.



In the rock.

That is a theory. You can't prove it or produce the stuff can you?



"
Terrestrial source theory

The overwhelming consensus of Earth and planetary scientists is that tektites consist of terrestrial debris that was ejected during the formation of an impact crater."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tektite

All earth and planet science folks presuppose a same state past, and concoct ALL explanations accordingly. Godlessly, gleefully.

Now the mere presence of materials that are NOW in a decay relationship does not mean anything unless the laws they believe existed did exist. How long must we suffer your statements of faith cross dressed as science?

 

[dad]

I wish I could get away with insulting people and then defend myself by saying "it's not an insult. It's true!"

Exposing the Satanic lie of evolution as the origin of life is not insulting a person, it is dealing with a lie..a theory. But it is interesting to see you wish you could insult people freely.

 

[SLP]

Just another name for science!

Proper descriptions may seem insulting to those who did not realize the state of the sinking ship they were on. I tend to insult the sinking ship, not the folks jumping off it as a general rule.



He did that. Keep up.

Failure, all the way around.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Exposing the Satanic lie of evolution as the origin of life is not insulting a person, it is dealing with a lie..a theory. But it is interesting to see you wish you could insult people freely.

Evolution says nothing about the origin of life, and anyone who thinks it does doesn't understand the material.

 

[dad]

Evolution says nothing about the origin of life, and anyone who thinks it does doesn't understand the material.

I hear that a lot. However I do not think that is the honest way to look at all that is said in the name of 'evolution' You yourself have claimed you share a common parent or ancestor with the flat worm for example. That is pretty well stating the origin as something small but just out of sight. That is the point, that evolution is against creation. No one says that you guys KNOW what the supposed common ancestor was...the issue is that you claim one. The fable of evolution is just always referring to the anti Christ spirit that Christ did not reaaallly create everything including life.

Yes He did. Really. Truly. Madly. Deeply.

 

[Loudmouth]

That is a theory. You can't prove it or produce the stuff can you?

No matter how many observations we produce, you just ignore them. When you are ready to deal with reality instead of fantasy, let us know.

 

[Loudmouth]

I am a creation believer and I am telling you that falsification is not applicable.

Then you can not claim to have evidence. That's the way it works. All you can claim to have is a dogmatic belief.

 

[dad]

No matter how many observations we produce, you just ignore them. When you are ready to deal with reality instead of fantasy, let us know.

"
Terrestrial source theory

The overwhelming consensus of Earth and planetary scientists is that tektites consist of terrestrial debris that was ejected during the formation of an impact crater."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tektite

All earth and planet science folks presuppose a same state past, and concoct ALL explanations accordingly. Godlessly, gleefully.

Now the mere presence of materials that are NOW in a decay relationship does not mean anything unless the laws they believe existed did exist. How long must we suffer your statements of faith?


Rather than dodge as you usually do, deal with the issue at hand. Have you produced the stuff or not?

 

[Mediate]

I have all the evidence you do and history and Scripture. Your dogmatic beliefs that you spray painted the evidence with are all that is at issue! You are in denial.

To be honest, science is foreign to you. Your picture mocks Einstein, and your tagline asserts a holy man from two millennia ago is the source of all the actual protons in the universe. You don't even understand the distinction between philosophical definitions of light in a moral paradigm, and what is a physical photon.

Your arguments are moot.

 

[Mediate]

Nope. Light has many forms. Our electromagnetic spectrum in our time and space is not the only way light can exist The opinion of science is short sighted and you are proud of it apparently. Come on over to the informed and deep side.

Physical light, by definition, is photons. Photons are photons. That's it.

Photons don't originate two thousand years ago with a holy man visited by Zoroastrian and Mystic priests at his birth who used the word ''light'' as a mechanism by which one can be ''enlightened'', and who professed to have come to ''shine his light upon the world''. Jesus ''light'' is not photons, it is the sensation of ones' eyes opening in realization of oneself in relation to everything else. "Seeing the light", becoming "awake".

Metaphor.

 

[Mediate]

That is not it, that is just the limit of your comprehension. New Jerusalem will be lit from God, who is the light of it, and there will be no need of the (silly little photon as we know it) light of the sun!




Yes. He spoke and there was the type of light we know! There was not light before that. After the fall, the only light we knew and know today is photon light in our sphere of time and space. That doesn't mean that is all there is! Science is thick as a brick on the topic of light.


Nonsense. Some silly little self realization is not what lights the universe and New Jerusalem in the bible! It is real true light in all it's fullness and glory. We won't even need the 'light of the sun' or 'photons as we now know them'.

Science is like a toddler playing in a sandbox when it comes to any depth or truth. Shallow. Small. Ignorant. Insolent. Preachy. Pushy. Puny. Puddle piddlers!

Jesus wasn't a Christian. The Magi weren't Jews, Yahweh wasn't the original God-concept, the "light" wasn't something Jesus learned in Judaism, the promised land isn't physical, the Jerusalem to come isn't a stone city, and the creator of the universe isn't concerned with torturing humans after careful observance of the minutiae of their behavior.

Yahweh is the blood-God, born of El, the God of the mountain. Neither are relevant to Jesus' teachings other than that he made sure to speak in vernacular transcendent of anything historically attributed to either of them up until that point.

Jesus didn't believe in Judaism. He was a Nazarene, visited by Zoroastrian or perhaps Hindu mystics. You really don't seem to understand the book you base your beliefs off, nor scientific facts.

 

[SkyWriting]

So, I'm not trying to avoid all your other questions. It's just that they're tangential to my point.

Others cannot dictate how you respond.
Only cover points you feel are important.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I hear that a lot. However I do not think that is the honest way to look at all that is said in the name of 'evolution' You yourself have claimed you share a common parent or ancestor with the flat worm for example. That is pretty well stating the origin as something small but just out of sight. That is the point, that evolution is against creation. No one says that you guys KNOW what the supposed common ancestor was...the issue is that you claim one. The fable of evolution is just always referring to the anti Christ spirit that Christ did not reaaallly create everything including life.

Yes He did. Really. Truly. Madly. Deeply.

You act as if we couldn't have been created by both a deity and by evolution without being created directly in human form. Which I don't understand why you have a problem with that.

 

[dad]

You act as if we couldn't have been created by both a deity and by evolution without being created directly in human form. Which I don't understand why you have a problem with that.

Here is why..I believe the bible indicates from cover to cover that in creation week, Jesus formed a man and from him also made a woman for him. Not some pretend creation where some phantom supposed force hid out and watched mighty evolution go to work!