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
The Danger of Creationism
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="Estrid" data-source="post: 76224586" data-attributes="member: 433007"><p>There's no ad hom there.</p><p>And those were typical, or stereotypical creationist talking</p><p>points. PRATTS. Someone needs 1001 times?</p><p>No ad hom in my saying so.</p><p></p><p>Tho you may have slipped a half baked one directed at me.</p><p></p><p>But never mind all that.</p><p></p><p>As for the origin of the universe, that's kind of stereotypical</p><p>too. Usually it boils down to " evolution is false coz you didn't</p><p>see the origin of the universe".</p><p>But creationism v evolution has zero to do with the origin</p><p>of the universe.</p><p></p><p>Creationist "science" is garbage*which may differentiate it</p><p>from some other things. The "historical" v empirical or observational or experimental thing is pretty tiresome as there's no way to tease</p><p>them apart.</p><p></p><p>Of course there's an important element of "who do you trust"</p><p>in doing research and citing papers.</p><p>And you can't test everything.</p><p></p><p>When it really matters, like your medical diagnosis, or, it's</p><p>something in your field of study, of COURSE you don't just assume.</p><p>or trust implicitly. That's a fools game.</p><p></p><p>One is well advised to "Trust but verify" according</p><p>to Ronaldus Magnus.</p><p>I think he was some Roman.</p><p></p><p>* if there's one fact from the creationists contrary to ToE</p><p>please let me know and "garbage" will quickly be replaced</p><p>with someone announcing possibly the greatest scientific discovery</p><p>of all time.</p><p></p><p>ETA. Oh yeah, it was "operational" science.</p><p></p><p>Wasn't sure what that meant so I looked it up.</p><p>It's a term creationists made up.</p><p>Looking further....</p><p></p><p>Ta Da! <a href="https://spiritandtruthonline.org/a-critical-distinction-operational-science-vs-historical-science/" target="_blank">A Critical Distinction – Operational Science vs. Historical Science | Spirit & Truth</a></p><p></p><p>Bus-ted.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Estrid, post: 76224586, member: 433007"] There's no ad hom there. And those were typical, or stereotypical creationist talking points. PRATTS. Someone needs 1001 times? No ad hom in my saying so. Tho you may have slipped a half baked one directed at me. But never mind all that. As for the origin of the universe, that's kind of stereotypical too. Usually it boils down to " evolution is false coz you didn't see the origin of the universe". But creationism v evolution has zero to do with the origin of the universe. Creationist "science" is garbage*which may differentiate it from some other things. The "historical" v empirical or observational or experimental thing is pretty tiresome as there's no way to tease them apart. Of course there's an important element of "who do you trust" in doing research and citing papers. And you can't test everything. When it really matters, like your medical diagnosis, or, it's something in your field of study, of COURSE you don't just assume. or trust implicitly. That's a fools game. One is well advised to "Trust but verify" according to Ronaldus Magnus. I think he was some Roman. * if there's one fact from the creationists contrary to ToE please let me know and "garbage" will quickly be replaced with someone announcing possibly the greatest scientific discovery of all time. ETA. Oh yeah, it was "operational" science. Wasn't sure what that meant so I looked it up. It's a term creationists made up. Looking further.... Ta Da! [URL='https://spiritandtruthonline.org/a-critical-distinction-operational-science-vs-historical-science/']A Critical Distinction – Operational Science vs. Historical Science | Spirit & Truth[/URL] Bus-ted. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
The Danger of Creationism
Top
Bottom