What is the Falsification for Abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution?

Estrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
9,548
3,180
39
Hong Kong
✟147,302.00
Country
Hong Kong
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
We are talking about valid reason since that book can be interpreted in many different ways. Your argument here is a Flat Earth argument.
Each creationist is gifted with a different infallible reading of ye good book.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I don't believe that.

That would be an amazing coincidence.

When did that "common era" start?

Without the birth of Jesus, there wouldn't be a consensus, would there?

Is it 2021 CE? 6025 CE? 300,000 CE?

I mean, some use Metric and some use Imperial?

So I'll ask:

What year would it be right now, if Jesus had never been born?

And since I doubt very seriously I'll get an honest straightforward answer, I'd say honest answers would include a variety of answers, based on the event being used for 1 CE.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Tell me your version of the Flood story and I will explain how. If I remember right you believe that false evidence was planted, so perhaps not so much for your version. Of course the lack of geological evidence refutes your version. It is also refuted by biology, for example you do not have to worry about waking up in a seedy hotel bathroom filled with ice missing a kidney. If the Flood of Noah happened this could be a daily event.
I'll withdraw the question, Sub; since you and honesty are strangers.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
We are talking about valid reason since that book can be interpreted in many different ways. Your argument here is a Flat Earth argument.
I seriously doubt a valid answer would be recognizable among the more educated here.
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
I don't believe that.

That would be an amazing coincidence.

When did that "common era" start?

Without the birth of Jesus, there wouldn't be a consensus, would there?

Is it 2021 CE? 6025 CE? 300,000 CE?

I mean, some use Metric and some use Imperial?

So I'll ask:

What year would it be right now, if Jesus had never been born?

And since I doubt very seriously I'll get an honest straightforward answer, I'd say honest answers would include a variety of answers, based on the event being used for 1 CE.
5781
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bradskii
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
We have a whole planet that tells a completely different story.
Then let's see Who breaks the tie, shall we?

Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail?
Aug 19, 2018
15,692
10,592
71
Bondi
✟248,706.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Given that you said this:I would submit the calendar as a noticeable difference.

The calender is based on the birth of a prophet. That you consider Him to the be the son of God is irrelevant. What practical difference would it make to the date if He was or wasn't? What practical difference would it be if we used Socrates instead. Or Ceasar Augustus?

To save you typing, I'll answer that myself. None.

So let's look at more concrete examples. Like gravity. Or the speed of light. Or the Hubble constant. Or the spin of an electron. You decide. Let me know what practical difference there'd be if they were natural v designed?

Actually, I'm going to save you some more typing yet again. You can get yourself a coffee instead. The answer is 'None'. Which doesn't prove or disprove anything. It makes no difference to what you believe or what I believe.

In case you hadn't realised, I'm only asking the question to indicate that you want there to be a difference. Hence your need to find something as opposed to giving the quite reasonable answer, which is 'There would be no practical difference at all.'

You could be an atheist and ask 'What would the world look like if it were designed by God?'
Or you could be a Christian and ask 'What would the world look like if it were entirely natural'.

And the answer to both questions would be 'exactly the same'.
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,213
2,813
Oregon
✟723,381.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
Then let's see Who breaks the tie, shall we?

Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
When it comes to what the Earth is telling us, the Earth can not lie.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Thank you. I wish I could make it a challenge question here, but I'm afraid it would get moved.

Besides, I doubt I'd get very many willing to answer it, as it would demonstrate a division in the classroom.
 
Upvote 0

Estrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
9,548
3,180
39
Hong Kong
✟147,302.00
Country
Hong Kong
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
The calender is based on the birth of a prophet. That you consider Him to the be the son of God is irrelevant. What practical difference would it make to the date if He was or wasn't? What practical difference would it be if we used Socrates instead. Or Ceasar Augustus?

To save you typing, I'll answer that myself. None.

So let's look at more concrete examples. Like gravity. Or the speed of light. Or the Hubble constant. Or the spin of an electron. You decide. Let me know what practical difference there'd be if they were natural v designed?

Actually, I'm going to save you some more typing yet again. You can get yourself a coffee instead. The answer is 'None'. Which doesn't prove or disprove anything. It makes no difference to what you believe or what I believe.

In case you hadn't realised, I'm only asking the question to indicate that you want there to be a difference. Hence your need to find something as opposed to giving the quite reasonable answer, which is 'There would be no practical difference at all.'

You could be an atheist and ask 'What would the world look like if it were designed by God?'
Or you could be a Christian and ask 'What would the world look like if it were entirely natural'.

And the answer to both questions would be 'exactly the same'.

As if different cultures didn't have different calendars.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,213
2,813
Oregon
✟723,381.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
I seriously doubt a valid answer would be recognizable among the more educated here.
Whose valid answer should we listen to? There are so many to choose from. I'll go with the Christians and those who espouse a very old changing Earth that shows no sign of a Noah's flood.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The calender is based on the birth of a prophet. That you consider Him to the be the son of God is irrelevant. What practical difference would it make to the date if He was or wasn't? What practical difference would it be if we used Socrates instead. Or Ceasar Augustus?

To save you typing, I'll answer that myself. None.

So let's look at more concrete examples. Like gravity.
I'm gonna stop right here, Brad.

I think I've adequately answered your enigma, but you don't want to admit it.

So you just say "none."

Bringing up "the birth of a prophet" after wanting to know how things would be different without God shows desperation.

No God would mean no prophets. :doh:
 
Upvote 0

Mr Laurier

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2021
1,141
366
57
Georgian Bay/Bruce Peninsula
✟31,584.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Yes the post flood ice age.
Maybe something like deep canyons that could not have formed gradually?
Like how the Grand Canyon developed through a major uplift. The river should have flowed around it, but it didn’t.
Why?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
When it comes to what the Earth is telling us, the Earth can not lie.
Then why will she run like a coward when her Creator shows up?

Revelation 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.

She's killed a lot of people since her arrival, hasn't she? now she knows it's time to face the consequences, doesn't she?

1 Corinthians 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
As if different cultures didn't have different calendars.
But they are based on various deities or supernatural events, are they not?

Let's set God and the supernatural aside for the point I'm making and tell me what year it is.

Can't do it though, can you?

That's because, in the back of your mind, you know God exists.

John 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

When Gene Roddenberry created the Star Trek series, he didn't want to include any references to deities or religions.

To his surprise, he found he couldn't do it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Bertrand Russell White

Well-Known Member
Apr 5, 2021
424
78
61
Brockville
✟21,780.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Married
The 'framework' there, (ie: of 'incompleteness'), is flawed by inconsistency and so is ultimately philosophically incompatable with the scientific method. This is a commonly held misconceived philosophy of science.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. ID people do seem to be saying that methodological naturalism is incomplete. From anything I've seen, their statements aren't flawed by inconsistency (unless one assumes methodological naturalism) and not necessarily incompatible with scientific methods (there is no 'one' agreed upon scientific method, as Scientific American discussed a few years ago).

However, I see several major problems for ID people. Their ideas seem to have problems not sounding a lot like god of the gaps arguments, designing experiments and getting evidence that would decisively support an explanation of intelligence, and following many of the non-methodological naturalist assumptions of scientific theories. The current way science is done using a conservative approach by applying methodological naturalism and the different types of scientific methods seems to work fine. I followed the ID movement closely for years and they produced very little useful science and a lot of philosophical musings, political activism and noise - not much more.


'Statements of nature' are statements for informing ourselves (collectively) of the meaning of the term: 'nature', in that sense, we are informing ourselves about our own perceptions/observations. There is no need to say 'what exists beyond' those perceptions/observations - they are our reality. This interpretation restores the consistent basis for the establishment of knowledge of what 'nature' means, in science.

I wouldn't agree here - perceptions are faulty. In science you talk about third person perspective, as first person perspective are unreliable. Observations that are too closely related to first person perspectives introduce all kinds of biases. The value of science is that, when done correctly, can lead to observations and information that is independent of the observer. This is what establishes a consistent framework for understanding what we mean by reality (or nature)

The other interpretation (ie: 'incompleteness'), is an artefact of philosophically held beliefs in Realism - which should be ignorable in properly conducted science .. (and it is).

Not sure what you mean here?
 
Upvote 0

Mr Laurier

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2021
1,141
366
57
Georgian Bay/Bruce Peninsula
✟31,584.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
And what if it was found tomorrow? what then?
Then geologists would announce that they had found a global flood layer.
They would announce that this layer was deposited world wide, even as whole civilizations were experiencing golden ages of progress, culture, art, and law.
They would declare that the evidence baffles them, since it contradicts all the other evidence.
And they would agree that logic itself no longer works.

In my opinion, it would just widen the gap between science and the Bible; making things worse, not better.
Your opinion and $1.50 will buy a cup of takeout coffee

There are some things I don't think were meant to be found, else Satan would use it to his advantage.
How would Satan use a global flood layer to his advantage?

Moses' body is a prime example:
Of?

Deuteronomy 34:5 So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD.
6 And he buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.

So why did God bury Moses, and not Joshua or Caleb? guess who went looking for it?

Jude 1:9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.
???
So pure nonsense then. Ok
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Whose valid answer should we listen to?
You won't hear a thing if you can't accept the validity of the one speaking, will you?

It wouldn't matter if one person spoke to you, or a hundred, if you can't hear validity.
 
Upvote 0

Mr Laurier

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2021
1,141
366
57
Georgian Bay/Bruce Peninsula
✟31,584.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I'm gonna stop right here, Brad.

I think I've adequately answered your enigma, but you don't want to admit it.

So you just say "none."

Bringing up "the birth of a prophet" after wanting to know how things would be different without God shows desperation.

No God would mean no prophets. :doh:

As long as con-men see gullible prey, there will be prophets.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Estrid
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Then geologists would announce that they had found a global flood layer.
They would announce that this layer was deposited world wide, even as whole civilizations were experiencing golden ages of progress, culture, art, and law.
They would declare that the evidence baffles them, since it contradicts all the other evidence.
And they would agree that logic itself no longer works.
Ya ... blame the logic.

It wouldn't occur to them to go back to their drawing boards, would it?

In other words, it wouldn't occur to them that these "whole civilizations that were experiencing their golden ages of progress" just might be wrong, would it?

Of course not.

Not if they can blame it on logic.
 
Upvote 0