What is the Falsification for Abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution?

[renniks]

I read their apologetics on a DI, AIG and ICR. It gets difficult at times because the vast majority of their articles are science denial. I also frequent Peaceful Science where there is interaction with knowledgeable Christians, agnostics and atheists that get along. The scientists commenting are accomplished in their fields and some well known theists like WLC contribute to the content from time to time. Here is a topic discussed last month Ken Ham Responds to William Lane Craig at Peaceful Science. As far as visiting creationists labs please tell us where they are and about their experiments if any because there is nothing about them on the creationists websites.

"ICR was established for three main purposes:

Research. ICR conducts laboratory, field, theoretical, and library research on projects that seek to understand the science of origins and Earth history. ICR scientists have conducted multi-year research projects at key locations such as Grand Canyon, Mount St. Helens, Yosemite Valley, and Santa Cruz River Valley in Argentina, and on vital issues like Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth (RATE), Flood-Activated Sedimentation and Tectonics (FAST), the human genome, soft tissue in fossils, and other topics related to geology, genetics, astro/geophysics, paleoclimatology, paleobiochemistry, and much more."

 

[renniks]

Which ones of the thousands support a 6000 year old earth, which ones support the flood, which ones support the exodus, which ones support the book of Job. When it comes to the NT there is some support for Jesus and some of the apostles and that Gehenna was a garbage dump but little else.

There are some interesting books in the bible though like the Song of Solomon and David and Jonathan.

You're being extremely specific, which tells me you know there is plenty that supports the Old testament.
David and Jonathan are not books, they are people.
Genesis

1. Abraham’s home city of Ur was excavated by Sir Leonard Woolley, with surprising evidence of near-luxury.2
   
   
2. The customs of Patriarchal times, as described in the Bible, are endorsed by archaeological finds at such places as Ur, Mari, Boghazkoi, and Nineveh. These were written records from that day—not just put down in writing many centuries later. They bear the marks of eyewitness reporting.
   
   
3. Solomonic cities such as Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer (1 Kings 9:15) have been excavated. Solomon even used similar blueprints for some duplicated buildings.

Just do a Google search. I'm not much for listing pages and pages.

 

[Mr Laurier]

Who?

Fr Georges Lamaitre.
Ordained christian priest

 

[AV1611VET]

Don't blame me. It's not my fault that your Pluto argument is so lame.

So lame that, when I ask you if Pluto was our ninth planet at one time, you say, "No"?

Forget it.

If you're that desperate to keep your science from being embarrassed, it's not worth conversing about it.

 

[Mr Laurier]

But they are. Unless you can show me a half feline, half canine. Not speculation about one that existed millions of years ago.

So the only evidence for evolution, you will accept, is an impossible animal that would, if it existed, refute evolution.

 

[AV1611VET]

Agnosticism simply means I don't know which does not exclude feelings of awe. That probably makes me an enchanted agnostic.

As long as it's pwned, I don't care what flavor of agnosticism it is.

 

[AV1611VET]

Fr Georges Lamaitre.
Ordained christian priest

Got it -- thanks.

 

[Speedwell]

You're being extremely specific, which tells me you know there is plenty that supports the Old testament.
David and Jonathan are not books, they are people.
Genesis

1. Abraham’s home city of Ur was excavated by Sir Leonard Woolley, with surprising evidence of near-luxury.2
   
   
2. The customs of Patriarchal times, as described in the Bible, are endorsed by archaeological finds at such places as Ur, Mari, Boghazkoi, and Nineveh. These were written records from that day—not just put down in writing many centuries later. They bear the marks of eyewitness reporting.
   
   
3. Solomonic cities such as Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer (1 Kings 9:15) have been excavated. Solomon even used similar blueprints for some duplicated buildings.

Just do a Google search. I'm not much for listing pages and pages.

What does any of that prove, except an issue no one disputes: that there are descriptions of real persons and events in the Bible?

 

[Frank Robert]

"ICR was established for three main purposes:

Research. ICR conducts laboratory, field, theoretical, and library research on projects that seek to understand the science of origins and Earth history. ICR scientists have conducted multi-year research projects at key locations such as Grand Canyon, Mount St. Helens, Yosemite Valley, and Santa Cruz River Valley in Argentina, and on vital issues like Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth (RATE), Flood-Activated Sedimentation and Tectonics (FAST), the human genome, soft tissue in fossils, and other topics related to geology, genetics, astro/geophysics, paleoclimatology, paleobiochemistry, and much more."

All of which is science denial with apologetics not science. If you want to claim you are doing science you need to use the scientific method, you can not make up your own method and rules and claim it is science. If you think otherwise tell us what scientific journals they were they peer reviewed and published in.

If you haven't figured it out yet, their apologetics are meant for venerable audiences who are scientifically illiterate.

 

[Frank Robert]

You're being extremely specific, which tells me you know there is plenty that supports the Old testament.
David and Jonathan are not books, they are people.

Yes, I am being specific with biblical stories that display humanism. Here is the Bible bearing witness to love between two people of the same gender and of a dialogue between of a young maiden, who longs to be near her lover and enjoy his kisses.

Genesis

1. Abraham’s home city of Ur was excavated by Sir Leonard Woolley, with surprising evidence of near-luxury.2
   
   
2. The customs of Patriarchal times, as described in the Bible, are endorsed by archaeological finds at such places as Ur, Mari, Boghazkoi, and Nineveh. These were written records from that day—not just put down in writing many centuries later. They bear the marks of eyewitness reporting.
   
   
3. Solomonic cities such as Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer (1 Kings 9:15) have been excavated. Solomon even used similar blueprints for some duplicated buildings.

1. No one is doubting that the existence of ancient Jewish temples or towns and cities. What is in dispute are biblical stories that are better understood as metaphor rather than as literal.

 

[Frank Robert]

So the only evidence for evolution, you will accept, is an impossible animal that would, if it existed, refute evolution.

This is one of the childish games that creationist like Ken Ham play that prevents venerable believers from understanding that science and religion are not enemies.

 

[renniks]

So the only evidence for evolution, you will accept, is an impossible animal that would, if it existed, refute evolution.

Why is it impossible? Because a dog and cat can't produce offspring?
Evolutionary ideas propose that animals evolved slowly over millions of years by random chance. But reproduction occurs only within kinds, so one kind did not evolve into a different kind.
What did the imaginary animal that was supposingly the predecessor of dogs and cats breed with that changed the next generation into the felines and canines?

 

[renniks]

Yes, I am being specific with biblical stories that display humanism. Here is the Bible bearing witness to love between two people of the same gender and of a dialogue between of a young maiden, who longs to be near her lover and enjoy his kisses.

Um love between the same gender is called friendship or companionship. There's no indication of anything else with David and Jonathan
And the song of songs is a love poem between two newly married individuals.

 

[renniks]

What does any of that prove, except an issue no one disputes: that there are descriptions of real persons and events in the Bible?

No one doubts? Seriously? There was and is still plenty of doubters. King David was thought to be a mythical person by many historians until evidence proved otherwise.

 

[renniks]

All of which is science denial with apologetics not science.

According to you. Because why? Only because they don't accept your hypothesis of origins. Which doesn't mean they can't use the scientific method.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

So is it a fact that Pluto is our ninth planet? or did that change?

Pluto is tiny, 1/6th the mass of our moon(!); that's why it's a dwarf planet. It's just chance that it hasn't been captured by one of the outer planets, when it would have been just another moon...

 

[Frank Robert]

Why is it impossible? Because a dog and cat can't produce offspring?
Evolutionary ideas propose that animals evolved slowly over millions of years by random chance. But reproduction occurs only within kinds, so one kind did not evolve into a different kind.
What did the imaginary animal that was supposingly the predecessor of dogs and cats breed with that changed the next generation into the felines and canines?

Why the big farce? I explained in a fair about of detail how dogs and cats separated from a common ancestor millions of years ago. Your religious beliefs of a 6000 year old earth alone would prevent you from considering evolution to be true, but it should not prevent you from understanding the mechanisms of evolution. You have been schooled over and over that evolution is not random chance rather it is dependent on selection within its environment. So you can stop the farce now and stop trying to disprove something you are willfully ignorant of. Its not honest.

 

[renniks]

Why the big farce? I explained in a fair about of detail how dogs and cats separated from a common ancestor millions of years ago. Your religious beliefs of a 6000 year old earth alone would prevent you from considering evolution to be true, but it should not prevent you from understanding the mechanisms of evolution. You have been schooled over and over that evolution is not random chance rather it is dependent on selection within its environment. So you can stop the farce now and stop trying to disprove something you are willfully ignorant of. Its not honest.

Of course it's random. What force is picking one mutation over another? Who is doing the selection? If one of our chickens has some random mutation that give it a tumor or one short leg or some other malfunction, that isn't a gain, that's a loss and the end result is just a shortening of it's lifespan. The Xmen don't exist. Look around you.

 

[Speedwell]

According to you. Because why? Only because they don't accept your hypothesis of origins. Which doesn't mean they can't use the scientific method.

They agree not to. It's part of the statement of belief they have to agree to before working with the organization. No evidence can be considered nor conclusion drawn which contradicts a literal interpretation of Genesis. You cannot impose such a preconceived limitation on your work and still be said to be doing science.

 

[sjastro]

According to you. Because why? Only because they don't accept your hypothesis of origins. Which doesn't mean they can't use the scientific method.

They clearly don't use the scientific method.............

 

[Astrid]

Yes, it is much more silly.
We know this due to many pieces of corroborating evidence.
I note that you have studiously ignored the references I have provided, and instead chose to whine about the diagram Speedwell provided.
I suspect that you arguing well above your station.

Indulging someone is easily mistaken for accepting as being
of comparable status.