Why evolution isn't scientific

[dad]

Yet another thread in which nonscientists tell scientists how to do their jobs.

We are supposed to tell them how to do their jobs? Or point out that they don't know how to do them?

In any case if we are to tell them, I might as well get in on the action here. Scientists who deal in origin issues...resign, repent, and recycle your grants into some good causes

 

[dad]

Educating oneself, is a choice.

What we educate ourselves with is another choice.

 

[the iconoclast]

There are several good resources on the ToE available online. Use google.

Open your mind, learn basic science.

Hello there

In order to acheive the same level of reality as you, what basic science do you recommend for me to grasp?

Why should you not open your mind to Jesus?

Cheers

 

[the iconoclast]

What we educate ourselves with is another choice.

Yah!!!!!! Hello @dad

 

[dad]

Well, no, but if you're seriously suggesting that virtually all of the world's scientists are lying about evolution, then yes, I'm saying that's completely nuts..

I doubt many are lying about origins. I don't think they are that smart! (to know truth from fiction)

 

[the iconoclast]

Educating oneself, is a choice.

Hello my dear

What does bhsmte mean?

 

[bhsmte]

Hello my dear

What does bhsmte mean?

Its top secret.

 

[the iconoclast]

Its top secret.

Hey there. Fair enough, lets make it a game. Can you give me a clue?

I could be wrong, but I don't believe I am. You see, I was a Christian for most of my life and then one learns things during their life, it can change what they believe, or don't believe. I don't do well, pretending to believe something, on some empty threat.

What did you learn that changed your position and or beliefs?

Cheers

 

[Kylie]

I doubt may are lying about origins. I don't think they are that smart! (to know truth from fiction)

You owe me a new irony meter, mine just exploded.

 

[dad]

You owe me a new irony meter, mine just exploded.

I actually do not find origin sciences smart at all. It is religion and the inductees and indoctrinated so called science folks at the helm really have no possibility whatsoever of coming to a knowledge of the truth. How smart can that be?

 

[Kylie]

I actually do not find origin sciences smart at all. It is religion and the inductees and indoctrinated so called science folks at the helm really have no possibility whatsoever of coming to a knowledge of the truth. How smart can that be?

True, I agree there.

But your views about science in general are just plain wrong.

 

[xianghua]

So your support for IC is "a designer can do anything they want"? Unfalsifiable assertions are neither scientific nor evidence. You really have no idea, do you?

what are you talking about? im talking about designer that can change things. again: like mutations. so if human cant make a complex system stepwise (when every step is functional by itself) what make you think that its possible without design?

 

[xianghua]

You claimed it was an analogy and it isn't, because the relevant features are not analogous; cars don't evolve. Therefore it's irrelevant.

actually in this case the car can be change by the designer. so it can evolve (can be change actually). therefore the analogy is great.

 

[Speedwell]

actually in this case the car can be change by the designer. so it can evolve (can be change actually). therefore the analogy is great.

Cars change by random variation and natural selection??? Which cars are these?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

actually in this case the car can be change by the designer. so it can evolve (can be change actually). therefore the analogy is great.

Cars don't evolve via heritable variation and natural selection in whole populations, which is the explanatory mechanism for the relevant changes.

We've been through this several times before; I'm not wasting any more time on it. You're either incapable of grasping a simple explanation, which is very sad, or you're trolling, which is pathetic.

 

[pitabread]

actually in this case the car can be change by the designer. so it can evolve (can be change actually). therefore the analogy is great.

It's a bad analogy because it's based on Equivocation. Specifically the word "evolve" means something different when applied to living things versus non-living things.

You state that English isn't your first language. It might help to learn that words in English can have different meanings depending on the context.

 

[dad]

True, I agree there.

But your views about science in general are just plain wrong.

Thanks, judge for the ruling.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I actually do not find origin sciences smart at all. It is religion and the inductees and indoctrinated so called science folks at the helm really have no possibility whatsoever of coming to a knowledge of the truth. How smart can that be?

As smart as adherents of any other religions?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

what are you talking about? im talking about designer that can change things. again: like mutations.

Indeed. That's your claim ("a designer can change anything they want"). This is unfalsifiable, not scientific and not evidence.

so if human cant make a complex system stepwise (when every step is functional by itself) what make you think that its possible without design?

Who, other than you, has said a human can't make a complex system stepwise? Others have given examples of exactly that happening. Are you struggling to understand or just being dishonest?

 

[dad]

As smart as adherents of any other religions?

Not as smart as those who believe Jesus with child like faith. Since according to Scripture they can NEVER ever ever possible come to a knowledge of the truth, how smart is that!?