What is the Falsification for Abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution?

[Mr Laurier]

Just "child in the womb" relabeled to "fetus," and L'Aquila labeled "safe."

That's all.

No.
Just lawyers arguing that a woman is a person, vs other lawyers arguing that a woman is an incubator.
And lawyers arguing that Volcanology must be infallible, vs lawyers arguing that it CAN'T be infallible.

 

[renniks]

No, thats nor how science works. Isnt there some kind of rule about lying in your religion?

It would be incredibly naive to assume it doesn't happen. In every kind of career imaginably, lying happens on a regular basis to advance up the ladder.

 

[VirOptimus]

It would be incredibly naive to assume it doesn't happen. In every kind of career imaginably, lying happens on a regular basis to advance up the ladder.

And?

 

[AV1611VET]

FAITH is a highest virtue.

Either that, or charity is.

1 Corinthians 13:13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

Believe, the more absurd the better, as a recent thread here promoted.

In spite of what the Bible says?

2 Peter 1:5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;

Unbelievers firewall faith, make virtue subjective, and start out with knowledge.

Most believers tend to start out with faith, then jump a step and add knowledge to their faith, instead of to virtue.

 

[Astrid]

No, I believe in part, because of all the evidence pointing to God existing. There is no evidence for the absence of a Creator.

" evidence" only if one has decided ahead of time.
Allah, this or that other god.

Are you clinging to your false claim of systemic
professional malpractice on the part of all researchers?

Do you recognize the opposite approaches of science
and religion?

 

[Astrid]

Those are all interesting opinions, but what makes you think that they are widely held or normative?

Coz only a scientist rhat seem to say what
a creo wants to hear is credible.

 

[Astrid]

Lol, knowing one's career can and will be ruined by not accepting Darwinism, no doubt fuels many to modify their findings.

Surely you are aware that is just a quip.
As a response it is unrealistic and totally inadequate.
I'm hoping you are capable of something more substantial.

 

[Speedwell]

No, I believe in part, because of all the evidence pointing to God existing. There is no evidence for the absence of a Creator.

But there is plenty of evidence for the absence of creationism, which is what we are discussing, after all.

 

[Speedwell]

Lol, knowing one's career can and will be ruined by not accepting Darwinism, no doubt fuels many to modify their findings.

What does the Bible you are so fond of say about slander?

 

[Astrid]

What does the Bible you are so fond of say about slander?

Or bearing false witness.

Among the many things so deranged about this weird
assumption is that if anyone ever came up with something
that "needed to" be changed it would mean they'd found the
key to world wide fame as one of the greatest of all time,
the one who disproved TOE,

Yet by our friends reckoning, many people
make these stuunnning discoveries, but the
researchers commit fraud to hide them.
And the institutions themselves are modeled after
the church that excommunicates heretics.

Naive? In the extreme.
Slander is nowhere near an adequate word
for such ridiculous and insulting claims.

 

[AV1611VET]

But there is plenty of evidence for the absence of creationism,

Well, for one thing, scientists consider it "magic," not "miracles."

Thus they are going about it from the wrong perspective.

Since they think it's magic ... and magic uses smoke and mirrors ... they look for physical evidence.

An ion trail, plasma cloud, time quartz, something.

Then they find this thing they call the cosmic background radiation, but apply it to cosmic evolution.

Then they wonder why they have no evidence for the absence of creationism.

When cosmic evolution has first dibs on anything that is found, mental blocks form.

 

[Frank Robert]

Wouldn't it be nice if science had some organization it was accountable to for?

There is no need for an organization to be accountable to, scientists are already accountable to their peers. Their articles are peer reviewed and even more unbending is scientific hypotheses can be tested and falsified. Wouldn't it be of value if biblical interpretations could be put under a similar microscope.

 

[VirOptimus]

Well, for one thing, scientists consider it "magic," not "miracles."

Thus they are going about it from the wrong perspective.

Since they think it's magic ... and magic uses smoke and mirrors ... they look for physical evidence.

An ion trail, plasma cloud, time quartz, something.

Then they find this thing they call the cosmic background radiation, but apply it to cosmic evolution.

Then they wonder why they have no evidence for the absence of creationism.

When cosmic evolution has first dibs on anything that is found, mental blocks form.

No, thats not how it works.

 

[Astrid]

There is no need for an organization to be accountable to, scientists are already accountable to their peers. Their articles are peer reviewed and even more unbending is scientific hypotheses can be tested and falsified. Wouldn't it be of value if biblical interpretations could be put under a similar microscope.

Now, you just want to end religion.

 

[renniks]

" evidence" only if one has decided ahead of time.
Allah, this or that other god.

Are you clinging to your false claim of systemic
professional malpractice on the part of all researchers?

 

[VirOptimus]

I'm not allowed to say "science" can be a religion, so I can't answer that question.

And you just did again, bye bye.

 

[Astrid]

I'm not allowed to say "science" can be a religion, so I can't answer that question.

I can't say I am disappointed in you but I had a slim hope,

Bye

 

[renniks]

What does the Bible you are so fond of say about slander?

Slander? It happens in every field. So assuming evolution science is different would be foolish. And it's no secret that people questioning the norm get bashed by their peers.

 

[renniks]

And you just did again, bye bye.

No, I didn't say any such thing.

 

[VirOptimus]

Slander? It happens in every field. So assuming evolution science is different would be foolish. And it's no secret that people questioning the norm get bashed by their peers.

Its every scientists wet dream to falsify the theory of evolution. Fame, money and a name in historybooks would be assured.