Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can science say anything about a Creator God?
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 46 of 506 (694661)
03-26-2013 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by designtheorist
03-26-2013 2:46 PM


Re: Hi Taq
You say there is no evidence and yet there are 2.2 billion Christians on the planet.
You say there is evidence, and yet my grandfather wears purple socks.
Wait, are we not playing non sequiturs?
We have not yet begun to examine the evidence put forward in the RTB Creation Model.
No, we haven't. You seem content instead to waste your time and ours with an argumentum ad populum.
Disproving the existence of something that is immaterial and all-powerful is not impossible, but it is impossible by scientific means. Science deals with inductive evidence. It is not possible to ever get enough inductive evidence to disprove God. You would have to have infinite knowledge and humans will never have that. It could be that a God, for his own reasons (possibly to cause people to rely on faith), would never allow absolute proof about his existence to be found.
If you're trying to convince us that the scientific method can tell us something about God, then declaring his existence unfalsifiable and then inverting the burden of proof is hardly the right way to go about it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by designtheorist, posted 03-26-2013 2:46 PM designtheorist has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(3)
Message 47 of 506 (694662)
03-26-2013 3:42 PM


Questions Waiting to be Answered
First Caroline Crocker was censored. Except she wasn't.
Then Dawkins was in denial. Except he wasn't.
Then Eugenie Scott claimed science was "limited to direct observations of events occurring in nature or under controlled laboratory conditions." Except she didn't.
DT, could you please stop making new misstatements before correcting the old?
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by designtheorist, posted 03-27-2013 1:18 PM Percy has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


(1)
Message 48 of 506 (694664)
03-26-2013 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by designtheorist
03-26-2013 2:46 PM


Re: Hi Taq
We have not yet begun to examine the evidence put forward in the RTB Creation Model.
It seems to me that most people in this thread agree that evidence from the natural would could contain evidence of the existence of a creator god. We're all ready for you to move past that point and present some.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by designtheorist, posted 03-26-2013 2:46 PM designtheorist has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 49 of 506 (694665)
03-26-2013 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by designtheorist
03-26-2013 2:46 PM


Re: Hi Taq
quote:
Disproving the existence of something that is immaterial and all-powerful is not impossible, but it is impossible by scientific means. Science deals with inductive evidence. It is not possible to ever get enough inductive evidence to disprove God. You would have to have infinite knowledge and humans will never have that. It could be that a God, for his own reasons (possibly to cause people to rely on faith), would never allow absolute proof about his existence to be found.
So the hypothesis of an immaterial all-powerful being is low on explanatory and predictive power.
Score another hit against the RtB model.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by designtheorist, posted 03-26-2013 2:46 PM designtheorist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by designtheorist, posted 03-27-2013 1:08 PM PaulK has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 50 of 506 (694667)
03-26-2013 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by designtheorist
03-26-2013 2:46 PM


Re: Hi Taq
You say there is no evidence and yet there are 2.2 billion Christians on the planet. Is it possible that there is evidence and you have not been convinced by it? We have not yet begun to examine the evidence put forward in the RTB Creation Model.
I say no evidence has ever been presented that there are miracles, the supernatural or any GOD(s) even though I am a Christian.
In addition any evidence that you could present to science could only show that there is NOT supernatural, miracles or GOD(s).
It is possible to disprove a God from deductive logic. That is, if the God in question could be shown to have attributes that are mutually exclusive, then that God could be shown to be logically impossible. That approach to disprove the God of the Bible has been attempted and failed.
Of course that is simply a false statement so filled with errors, omissions and misrepresentations as to be laughable.
First there is no such thing as "The Bible". There are several different mutually exclusive "Bibles"
Second there is no "God of the Bible", rather there are many very different mutually exclusive gods described in any of the different Bibles.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by designtheorist, posted 03-26-2013 2:46 PM designtheorist has not replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2697 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


(1)
Message 51 of 506 (694668)
03-26-2013 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by designtheorist
03-26-2013 1:19 PM


Re: Hi Blue Jay
Hi, DT.
designtheorist writes:
Yes, that's true. But we have not gotten to the evidence yet. That comes later.
I don't understand why it's so important to separate this debate into all these different phases.
You stated flatly in the last thread that you didn't expect a consensus, we didn't reach one, you left prematurely, and everybody was left wondering what the point of it was.
Are your expectations for this thread the same?
You seem to think that it's vital that we get these preliminary debates out of the way before we move on to the big debate. But, if we don't reach a consensus on any of these threads, we haven't really gotten them out of the way. So, it seems rather pointless to separate them like this.
designtheorist writes:
Let me ask you. What is the minimum amount of scientific evidence on the supernatural that would cause you to begin a spiritual journey like the one Allan Sandage and Hugh Ross began?
I don't know. If I knew what evidence in favor of the supernatural would look like, that would seem to imply that I know enough about how the supernatural works to make predictions based on it. But, I'm relatively confident that I don't have the slightest idea how the supernatural would work if it existed.
So, I can't make predictions nor give you any indication of what evidence might make me believe in the supernatural.

-Blue Jay, Ph.D.*
*Yeah, it's real
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by designtheorist, posted 03-26-2013 1:19 PM designtheorist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by designtheorist, posted 03-27-2013 1:37 PM Blue Jay has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(4)
Message 52 of 506 (694669)
03-26-2013 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by designtheorist
03-26-2013 2:46 PM


Re: Hi Taq
You say there is no evidence and yet there are 2.2 billion Christians on the planet. Is it possible that there is evidence and you have not been convinced by it?
Why don't you just present the evidence? Another post from a theist with zero evidence for a deity.
If you were to sit on a jury, the instructions from the judge would be to put aside any preconceptions, wait until all the evidence is in and then weigh all the evidence both for and against.
THEN PRESENT THE EVIDENCE!!! What are you waiting for?
Disproving the existence of something that is immaterial and all-powerful is not impossible, but it is impossible by scientific means.
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."--Christopher Hitchens

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by designtheorist, posted 03-26-2013 2:46 PM designtheorist has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-26-2013 5:28 PM Taq has not replied
 Message 57 by NoNukes, posted 03-26-2013 8:25 PM Taq has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 53 of 506 (694670)
03-26-2013 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Taq
03-26-2013 5:02 PM


Re: Hi Taq
THEN PRESENT THE EVIDENCE!!! What are you waiting for?
Yeah, it's like watching the Dance Of The Seven Veils. But without the same expectation of seeing something interesting when the last veil comes off.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Taq, posted 03-26-2013 5:02 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by PaulK, posted 03-26-2013 5:36 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 54 of 506 (694671)
03-26-2013 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Dr Adequate
03-26-2013 5:28 PM


Re: Hi Taq
Don't forget that we're still waiting for his "easy" demonstration from Message 203 But apparently he's bailed on that thread.
I have to wonder what his "demonstration" was going to be. A "proof" that infinity is finite ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-26-2013 5:28 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Taq, posted 03-26-2013 5:43 PM PaulK has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 55 of 506 (694673)
03-26-2013 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by PaulK
03-26-2013 5:36 PM


Re: Hi Taq
I have to wonder what his "demonstration" was going to be. A "proof" that infinity is finite ?
A much more enjoyable demonstration of proof:

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by PaulK, posted 03-26-2013 5:36 PM PaulK has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


(1)
Message 56 of 506 (694674)
03-26-2013 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by designtheorist
03-26-2013 2:46 PM


Re: Hi Taq
We have not yet begun to examine the evidence put forward in the RTB Creation Model.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by designtheorist, posted 03-26-2013 2:46 PM designtheorist has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 506 (694677)
03-26-2013 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Taq
03-26-2013 5:02 PM


Re: Hi Taq
Why don't you just present the evidence? Another post from a theist with zero evidence for a deity.
These threads won't be providing any such evidence. Instead you will be facing attempts to show using Ross's heuristics that RtB is more likely valid than empiricism based theories. But do not expect any direct attempts to validate non-science. If designtheorist could pull that off, he would not be bothering with this stuff.
We know that Christians accept Christianity by faith because such faith is the pathway Jesus offers. I accept Christianity by faith. But I also know that Hebrews 11:1 is poetic language. Faith is not empirical.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Taq, posted 03-26-2013 5:02 PM Taq has not replied

  
designtheorist
Member (Idle past 3832 days)
Posts: 390
From: Irvine, CA, United States
Joined: 09-15-2011


Message 58 of 506 (694700)
03-27-2013 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Taq
03-26-2013 1:21 PM


Re: What Supernatural?
In the biological realm, a creator God would be best evidenced by the appearance of modern animals in the Cambrian and a lack of a nested hierarchy.
I'm glad to hear you say this. Some of the evidence to be presented will relate to the Cambrian.
If a thousand foot deity came down from the clouds and threw lightning at my feet I am sure I would also be quite convinced.
Yes, but this is closer to maximum evidence. If the God of the Bible is the Creator, then we can expect that He will not make himself to obvious in nature. When Jesus spoke to doubting Thomas he said "Thomas, because you have seen me you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." John 20:29. You don't have to believe the verse is inspired by God, but you need to understand that when Christians who are scientists look for evidence of God, they do not expect to see 1000 foot deities throwing lightning. The next time we see Christ visibly, the time for faith will be over because the test we are currently will be over.
Just ask yourself, what about the Cambrian would be so surprising that it would cause me to begin a spiritual journey? Is there anything I might learn about the Big Bang that would cause me to read the Bible? How finely-tuned does the universe have to be before I start looking into Christianity?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Taq, posted 03-26-2013 1:21 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Tangle, posted 03-27-2013 12:30 PM designtheorist has not replied
 Message 63 by ringo, posted 03-27-2013 1:14 PM designtheorist has not replied
 Message 64 by Taq, posted 03-27-2013 1:15 PM designtheorist has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 59 of 506 (694702)
03-27-2013 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by designtheorist
03-27-2013 12:15 PM


Re: What Supernatural?
designtheorist writes:
If the God of the Bible is the Creator, then we can expect that He will not make himself to obvious in nature.
You seem to have forgotten a few things.
Burning bushes
Pillars of salt
Manic bears
Lazarus
Floods
Plagues
Famines
Parting of Seas
Virgin births
Resurrections
Walking on water
Loaves and fishes
Water and wine
etc etc etc
Just ask yourself, what about the Cambrian would be so surprising that it would cause me to begin a spiritual journey? Is there anything I might learn about the Big Bang that would cause me to read the Bible? How finely-tuned does the universe have to be before I start looking into Christianity?
Haven't you picked up the vibe yet? We're all sick of this priestly teasing - we've lost patience with it; get on with your claim before we all go elsewhere.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by designtheorist, posted 03-27-2013 12:15 PM designtheorist has not replied

  
designtheorist
Member (Idle past 3832 days)
Posts: 390
From: Irvine, CA, United States
Joined: 09-15-2011


Message 60 of 506 (694705)
03-27-2013 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Straggler
03-26-2013 2:02 PM


Hi Straggler
Science investigates that which can be detected. Science is a method for investigation.
If supernatural entities can be detected then we can apply the methods of science to investigate them.
These are reasonable statements. Let's probe a little deeper. Science has detected both dark matter and dark energy. We believe they exist because we can see their effects. We can attempt to apply methods to investigate dark matter and dark energy but they are distant and it's difficult to progress. We cannot control them or examine them in a laboratory. Special laboratories have been established to study dark matter, but dark matter is not present in the lab. Is it hot dark matter, cold dark matter or something we haven't thought of yet. Some are suggesting it isn't even matter at all.
The point is there is something there and it needs to be investigated. Inquiring minds want to know.
There are similarities here to God. Assume for a moment that scientific methods can demonstrate God's effects in creation. We will get to the evidence soon but I want to do a thought experience now. Assume further that this Creator God is the God of the Bible - immaterial, omniscient and omnipresent. He is all around us but impossible to measure or verify using normal scientific methods. Would you pursue other means of inquiry to learn more about this Creator God? If scientific methods were not up to the task of learning more about the Creator God whose effects we can see scientifically, would you be willing to read the Bible or go to church to learn more? This is the approach Allan Sandage chose and I think it is a reasonable and rational response to the evidence.
What do you think? Is it possible science can show evidence of God's effects in creation? Would it matter to you if it could?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Straggler, posted 03-26-2013 2:02 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Taq, posted 03-27-2013 1:19 PM designtheorist has not replied
 Message 82 by Straggler, posted 03-27-2013 2:22 PM designtheorist has not replied
 Message 85 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-27-2013 2:52 PM designtheorist has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024