Why no evidence FOR creation/ID?

[dmmesdale]

I wonder if he thinks his magical use of the word magical will magically make the scientific evidence magically go away.

Why don't you just impress us all by pulling out all that conclusive scientific evidence for a common ancestor between apes and man. That magical nonhuman creature?

 

[lesliedellow]

So they can't use overall?

And where would dmmesdale get his overall figure from? Why, he would pluck it out of thin air, making damn sure it gave him the result he wanted.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Please quote your source and support your stand that the cosmos could be created from nothing
and that we can test your theory with the goal of disproving it.

It's neither my stand nor my theory. As I already explained, it's a feature of a number of origin hypotheses. They're predictions or extrapolations of the principles of quantum mechanics I linked to in earlier posts.

There's little point getting into the physics of these models, it's way too esoteric. But here's another readable description: A Universe From Nothing.

The most popular version of such hypotheses is that of physicist Lawrence Krauss, who has written a book about it. Here is a link of a talk he gave on it: YouTube.

Here's a very brief article surveying the field, and mentioning potential ways to test the hypotheses: Much Ado About Nothing.

 

[SkyWriting]

However, the flaw in this argument is that, consistent with the best-tested, and most successful theory of how our reality behaves, matter (and antimatter) does appear out of 'nothing' - when 'nothing' means 'a state without matter or forces, only quantum fields' (which is usually what is meant when physicists talk of 'nothing').

Please quote your source and support your best tested theory that matter appears from nothing and created our Cosmos. I'd like to test your favorite theory with the intention of proving it wrong.

"Special Pleading" on my part means I will ignore any evidence that proves it can happen.
"Special Pleading" on your part means you will ignore this next passage:

19 For what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Please quote your source and support your stand.

I'm sorry you're having difficulty understanding my posts, but I've already addressed that.

 

[SkyWriting]

I'm sorry you're having difficulty understanding my posts, but I've already addressed that.

Please quote your source and explain something from nothing in scientific or layman's terms. Not cite your source, though that's important as well.
Sorry my request was not explained well enough.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please quote your source and explain something from nothing in scientific or layman's terms. Not cite your source, though that's important as well.
Sorry my request was not explained well enough.

The idea is a bit complex and is explained in layman's terms in the video that he linked.

 

[SkyWriting]

The idea is a bit complex and is explained in layman's terms in the video that he linked.

The video was offline and would not play.
I provided a working vid...but it was not entertaining enough for me.
What I did see was pure marketing. And I have a degree in marketing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The video was offline and would not play.

It works fine for me. Are you using a computer? It might now work on a phone or laptop. I will embed it here for you:

I provided a working vid...but it was not entertaining enough for me.
What I did see was pure marketing. And I have a degree in marketing.

Well there's your problem. (bolding mine). No marketing in the video that was provided to you.

 

[sfs]

Is that conclusive or theoretical? Your model asserts a common ancestor between apes and man when you don't know what the creature was nor is there any DNA.

I said nothing about common ancestry. I'm relying entirely on observed genetic variation in contemporary humans. That variation is inconsistent with a recent expansion from a very small population. You just cannot get the variation from a small population.

My response refuted your claim with actual data. Now you're confused?

Yeah, I'm confused. Because your response didn't refute my claim, or even have anything obvious to do with it.

If there is a 2% growth in parts of Africa which doubles every 35 years then it is not because of unlimited resources like we have in the west.

Their growth rate has not been substantially limited by a shortage of resources (by which I mean food).

So we cannot look at it overall?

Sure, we can look at it overall. Looked at overall, populations almost never grow exponentially for very long. So why are you assuming the human population has grown exponentially for thousands of years?

It sounds to me like you are making excuses.

Pointing out that your model is certain to be wrong is "making excuses"? How about instead of empty accusations, you provide some empirical evidence to support your model? Where is the evidence that the humans population was growing at the same rate 1000 years ago as today? 2000 years ago?

 

[Kylie]

What is your source for experiments regarding quantum fluctuations creating matter out of nothing, if not special pleading?

Most people are spiritual and believe in an intelligence bigger than themselves, so it's not a small group.

"In quantum physics, a quantum fluctuation (or quantum vacuum fluctuation or vacuum fluctuation) is the temporary change in the amount of energy in a point in space, as explained in Werner Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.

This allows the creation of particle-antiparticle pairs of virtual particles."​

Quantum fluctuation - Wikipedia

 

[lesliedellow]

Empirical evidence of Quantum fluctuations is to be found in the Casimir effect.

 

[SkyWriting]

"In quantum physics, a quantum fluctuation (or quantum vacuum fluctuation or vacuum fluctuation) is the temporary change in the amount of energy in a point in space, as explained in Werner Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.
This allows the creation of particle-antiparticle pairs of virtual particles."​

Quantum fluctuation - Wikipedia

Empirical evidence of Quantum fluctuations is to be found in the Casimir effect.

Being temporary, how much time do you calculate we have left before the quantum wave reverses and all existence is sucked over to the other side?

 

[SkyWriting]

No marketing in the video that was provided to you.

Marketing principals use methods of persuasion and influence.
There are certain sequences of provided information that are tuned to instill authority.
A person can be "bribed" using information they know, and tieing it to the "promoted" idea
to make is sound plausible.
There are 30 more "triggers".

Everything is marketing.

 

[AV1611VET]

Everything is marketing.

Have you ever studied color psychology?

There's a reason Burger King's sign is red, yellow, and blue.

 

[SkyWriting]

Have you ever studied color psychology?

There's a reason Burger King's sign is red, yellow, and blue.

Absolutely. The interior colors determine how much you eat and how fast.
Colors set the mood for many things. We also have learned what we don't know.
The mood of people in McDonalds is different from the mood inside Wendy's.
So the same color choices will have different effects based on the population
of differing mixes of people. There are some common effects, and fewer
universal ones.

 

[tas8831]

No evidence was generated.

The creation week consisted of a series of miracles over a period of six days that raised the level of mass/energy in the universe from zero to what it is now.

Baseless, fantasy-based assertions and question begging also do not count as evidence.

So sorry.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Marketing principals use methods of persuasion and influence.
There are certain sequences of provided information that are tuned to instill authority.
A person can be "bribed" using information they know, and tieing it to the "promoted" idea
to make is sound plausible.
There are 30 more "triggers".

Everything is marketing.

And yet you could not identify any.

 

[tas8831]

A myth is simply a fact you choose to not believe.

Do you believe the creation myth of Norse mythology?

It is just a fact you choose not to believe.

 

[AV1611VET]

Baseless, fantasy-based assertions and question begging also do not count as evidence.

Who said they did?