What is the Falsification for Abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution?

[VirOptimus]

Fine ... academia was never alive then.

You can believe that, if you want; but don't expect me to.

At least I give them some credit.

I dont understand, do you say that academia is an agent possible of making decisions by itself?

 

[Astrid]

Not playing your arab phone game. You know what you said and I showed your error.

Sure looks like you is playing someone's game

 

[Frank Robert]

This might be of interest to some who are posting here.

Origins of Life with Sean B Carroll |22 April 2021 6pm - 7pm

Does everything happen for a reason or are some things left to chance?

Philosophers and theologians have pondered these questions for millennia, but over the past half-century, startling scientific discoveries have revealed that we live in a world driven by chance. In this talk Sean B Carroll will tell the stories of the mother of all accidents, the accident of all mothers, and much more in an entertaining and awe-inspiring tale of the surprising power of chance in our lives and the world.​

 

[Mr Laurier]

Are you saying academia doesn't bring up Charlemagne as an example of a Christian man?So tradition brings up Charlemagne as a Christian man?And let me guess ... who should answer the call, but Charlemagne and his band of born-again Christians ... right?I've seen Hitler listed among saints too. And you wonder why I'm against academia?And let me guess: Jesus answered their prayers?Lest Mr Martel shut them down?Have I ever mentioned that the Antichrist will come from Europe?So let me get this straight:

People who can neither read nor write, call for help, and help arrives in the form of Charlemagne, who helps them. Then these ignorant peasants fly his banner from their bell towers, and you want me to believe that's acceptable behavior?

Do you find that acceptable behavior?

If not, okay with you if I don't either?

Read my words.

The fact that Mr Shekelgrubber was a devout christian, who waged a holy crusade against godless communism, with the intent to re-settle German christian veterans in the east...
You are against academia because you have convinced yourself that academia is a conspiracy against your god.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Unless I'm mistaken, Charlemagne was a Frenchman, not a Scotsman.

So yes, he was not a true Scotsman.

He wasn't a true Frenchman. There were no Frenchmen yet.

He was a Frank and spoke Frankish. The closest to his language you're likely to hear would be found in places like Lancaster Co., PA.

 

[renniks]

Gods or other supernatural causation would not be accepted in a scientific publication because science deals only with the natural. If you have a natural explanation, no one cares what your personal philosophy or religion are.

So it would not matter if it was proven that God exists, science still could say nothing about it? Totally nonsense. If the first cause is an all powerful force that has always existed, surely science would have to accept it.

 

[Speedwell]

So it would not matter if it was proven that God exists, science still could say nothing about it? Totally nonsense. If the first cause is an all powerful force that has always existed, surely science would have to accept it.

If it was proven that God existed it would be on the basis of empirical evidence and scientists would be glad to accept it. Metaphysical speculation is not empirical evidence and science proffers no opinion of it, pro or con.

 

[renniks]

If it was proven that God existed it would be on the basis of empirical evidence and scientists would be glad to accept it. Metaphysical speculation is not empirical evidence and science proffers no opinion of it, pro or con.

Still doesnt make any sense. Almost everything in science is technically a theory. Why would an all powerful force creating everything not be one of the theories? It's as plausible as a lot of other ones.

 

[Speedwell]

Still doesnt make any sense. Almost everything in science is technically a theory. Why would an all powerful force creating everything not be one of the theories? It's as plausible as a lot of other ones.

Because there is no evidence for it. It's possible and some people find it plausible, but without evidence science can offer no opinion of it one way or the other.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Still doesnt make any sense. Almost everything in science is technically a theory. Why would an all powerful force creating everything not be one of the theories? It's as plausible as a lot of other ones.

As happens here often, you seem to misunderstand the meaning of theory in science.

Science has lots of facts. Facts are things that can be objectively measured. For example, the acceleration of gravity on the surface of the Earth, which birds make life-long pair bonds, the atomic number of carbon, the half-life of titanium-44, the mineral content of fresh lava from Geldingadalir, etc.

Theories are explanations for groups of facts. Theories can be used to predict new facts before they are known. The theory of gravity describes the attraction between two bodies. The germ theory of disease can be used to explain how a previously unknown disease (like COVID-19) is propagated by a microscopic pathogen (SARS-CoV-2)

If a god can be detected by scientific instruments, then it could be a scientific fact. The theory of how it functions might be more difficult to determine.

 

[Astrid]

Still doesnt make any sense. Almost everything in science is technically a theory. Why would an all powerful force creating everything not be one of the theories? It's as plausible as a lot of other ones.

Give us a god- fact.

 

[Astrid]

So it would not matter if it was proven that God exists, science still could say nothing about it? Totally nonsense. If the first cause is an all powerful force that has always existed, surely science would have to accept it.

If "first cause" is even anything besides philosophical
speculation, which, for all that science is decided for
what may be fancied as speculation, the whole concept of
"God" is the speculation of all time.

 

[driewerf]

I'm not obligated to accept Charlemagne as a brother in Christ. If you consider that a "No True Scotsman Fallacy," that's your prerogative.

Others pointed out the "no true scotsman fallacy" that you produced, and your childish behaviour after that from post n° 831 to roughly 852. So there is no need for that anymore.
i want to point out that that kind of behaviour pushes people away from christianity. You don't need to admit. Just need to think about it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Give us a god- fact.

Sure:

1. Time divided into BC and AD.
2. Organizations such as the Red Cross and Salvation Army.
3. Hospitals built by Christian organizations.
4. Beautiful Christian artwork, edifices, statuary and literature.
5. IN GOD WE TRUST on our coins and UNDER GOD in our pledge of allegiance.
6. The Ten Commandments and other literature displayed in public.
7. Christmas & Easter
8. Symbols on bumper stickers and flags.
9. Public debates in the name of Christianity.
10. Crosses and billboards erected to testify of Jesus Christ.

 

[Speedwell]

Sure:

1. Time divided into BC and AD.
2. Organizations such as the Red Cross and Salvation Army.
3. Hospitals built by Christian organizations.
4. Beautiful Christian artwork, edifices, statuary and literature.
5. IN GOD WE TRUST on our coins and UNDER GOD in our pledge of allegiance.
6. The Ten Commandments and other literature displayed in public.
7. Christmas & Easter
8. Symbols on bumper stickers and flags.
9. Public debates in the name of Christianity.
10. Crosses and billboards erected to testify of Jesus Christ.

None of those are facts about God. They are facts about people who believe in one particular god.

 

[AV1611VET]

Others pointed out the "no true scotsman fallacy" that you produced, and your childish behaviour after that from post n° 831 to roughly 852. So there is no need for that anymore.
i want to point out that that kind of behaviour pushes people away from christianity. You don't need to admit. Just need to think about it.

That "No True Scotsman Fallacy" accusation was pulled out of thin air, in my opinion, just to handwave away my points; and, frankly, didn't set well with me.

The accusation didn't even "fit the crime."

The fact is, I am not obligated to accept Charlemagne as a brother in Christ; and if that means I'm appealing to the No True Scotsman Fallacy, then someone's grabbing at straws to disagree with me.

 

[AV1611VET]

None of those are facts about God. They are facts about people who believe in one particular god.

Then why did Jesus appeal to cause-and-effect to convince John the Baptist that He was the Messiah?

John the Baptist was in prison, and he sent two of his disciples to Jesus to ask Him if He was who He said He was.

Note Jesus' response:

Luke 7:22 Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.

Go tell Estrid what things he has seen and heard:

1. Time divided into BC and AD.
2. Organizations such as the Red Cross and Salvation Army.
3. Hospitals built by Christian organizations.
4. Beautiful Christian artwork, edifices, statuary and literature.
5. IN GOD WE TRUST on our coins and UNDER GOD in our pledge of allegiance.
6. The Ten Commandments and other literature displayed in public.
7. Christmas & Easter
8. Symbols on bumper stickers and flags.
9. Public debates in the name of Christianity.
10. Crosses and billboards erected to testify of Jesus Christ.

 

[renniks]

Theories are explanations for groups of facts.

Until the facts are found to be, in fact, mistakes. Then they have to come up with new " facts"
So, there are no facts in reality.

 

[renniks]

Because there is no evidence for it. It's possible and some people find it plausible, but without evidence science can offer no opinion of it one way or the other.

Nonsense.
As physicists investigate the most fundamental characteristics of nature, they’re tackling issues that have long been the province of philosophers and theologians: Is the universe infinite and eternal? Why does it seem to follow mathematical laws, and are those laws inevitable? And, the most important, why does the universe exist? Why is there something instead of nothing?
Quantum theory is now the foundation of particle physics, and the theory has revealed aspects of nature that seem supernatural: the act of observing something can apparently alter its reality, for example. Science can certainly speak about these issues and should.

 

[renniks]

Give us a god- fact.

There's everything instead of nothing. Science doesn't know why.
They claim energy became matter. I can tell you where the energy came from.