Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8871 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-13-2018 11:42 PM
241 online now:
GDR, Meddle, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), Pressie (4 members, 237 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: paradigm of types
Post Volume:
Total: 841,908 Year: 16,731/29,783 Month: 719/1,956 Week: 222/331 Day: 98/43 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
80818283
84
85Next
Author Topic:   Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?
Porkncheese
Member
Posts: 92
Joined: 08-25-2017


Message 1246 of 1266 (842580)
11-03-2018 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 1217 by RAZD
10-30-2018 4:18 PM


Re: The atheist biologist issue ...
I haven't got the time to lay down an argument to people who lack the reasoning of viewing things from an Agnostics perspective.

Dogma
/ˈdɒɡmə/
noun
a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.
"the dogmas of faith"

Bon dia


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1217 by RAZD, posted 10-30-2018 4:18 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1247 by RAZD, posted 11-03-2018 8:35 AM Porkncheese has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19663
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 1247 of 1266 (842583)
11-03-2018 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 1246 by Porkncheese
11-03-2018 8:13 AM


an Agnostics perspective
I haven't got the time to lay down an argument to people who lack the reasoning of viewing things from an Agnostics perspective.

Consider this: being open-minded to ideas/concepts/opinions but skeptical of claims without objective empirical substantiation. Not gullible, and not ruling out those ideas/concepts/opinions.

Consider the following decision process:

                 question
|
is there sufficient valid
information available to decide
| |
yes no
| |
decide based is a
on empirical decision
valid evidence necessary?
(A) / \
yes no ... but ...
/ | |
decide why make a
based on decide decision
inadequate at this anyway
evidence time? based on
= guess = abstain = opinion
(B) (C) (D)

... what drives people to decide things when you have a lack of evidence and no need to make a decision?

(C) would be the agnostic position on any question (like "is there god/s"). Open-minded to consider the possibility, skeptical because of the meager evidence (essentially anecdotal), willing to wait for further information before deciding.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1246 by Porkncheese, posted 11-03-2018 8:13 AM Porkncheese has not yet responded

  
creation
Member
Posts: 421
Joined: 01-14-2018


Message 1248 of 1266 (842605)
11-03-2018 3:14 PM
Reply to: Message 1245 by RAZD
11-03-2018 1:48 AM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
quote:
Please tell me where Jesus specifically talks about a change in nature --

Wherever Genesis or another part of the bible speaks, He speaks. He talked to Moses and confirmed that things written about the beginning were correct.

Jesus talked about heaven so that involves a change from nature as we know it also. All the miracles He did also show He was not limited by nature.

quote:

We've already covered this, they are conclusions from the evidence, not assumptions. The evidence shows the same types of tree rings indistinguishable from the types of annual rings today: conclusion - they are annual rings, and counting them gives the age/s in years. Every test on the tree rings, from C14 levels to matching historical events has only confirmed they are annual rings.

You have never shown what pre 4500 year rings look like. I seem to recall you appealed that we trust in those who looked at them.

Besides, you are in no position to say what a ring grown in the former nature would look like. You look at them as if they were grown in this nature. ( I guess technically you do not look at them, you trust others who looked at them)

quote:

No, we look at light spectra here and now, and we see the same patterns of light bands in the spectra that match the patterns of elements here and now:

Nothing in the spectra tells us what time is like there. Science also admits it only sees something like 5% of the universe anyhow!

quote:

quote:
The emission spectrum of a chemical element or chemical compound is the spectrum of frequencies of electromagnetic radiation emitted due to an atom or molecule making a transition from a high energy state to a lower energy state.

Emitted here in the fishbowl.

quote:
The photon energy of the emitted photon is equal to the energy difference between the two states.
Here in the fishbowl that may be the case. How would you know it was also equal out there before the light got here, where the light exists under our rules and time? If time did not exist how would something TAKE time to decay or...do anything?

quote:
There are many possible electron transitions for each atom, and each transition has a specific energy difference.

Fishbowl possibilities. There may be more possibilities out in some unknown space and time that we never conceived of.

quote:
This collection of different transitions, leading to different radiated wavelengths, make up an emission spectrum.

Transitions that happen here...transitions that take so much time as time is known and exists here..etc.

quote:
Each element's emission spectrum is unique.

Yes, the way we see light and info and the way it comes to have to exist here is unique, of course.
quote:

Therefore, spectroscopy can be used to identify the elements in matter of unknown composition.
Fishbowl identification is great. We can identify what things are like here. Some info I suspect would even tell us something about what is out there, before it got here. For example, the elements we see in the spectra. What else is out there, and how elements exactly exist out there and behave out there and unfold in time out there...well, we don't really know of course.

quote:

Similarly, the emission spectra of molecules can be used in chemical analysis of substances.
Each element has their own unique pattern of light bars because of the quantum physics of energy states. When we see the same pattern, we see the signature of those elements. Each element has multiple bands, one for each energy state that produces a photon emission.
Similarly, what energy state we would see elements in here depends on our fishbowl nature/time/rules etc.

quote:
The star light we are seeing them in is from far away in the universe,
How far you have no clue at all, since you need time to exist the same to know distances!

quote:
and thus there is some red shift in the position of the emission spectrum bands, due to the expansion of the universe.
What is responsible for shifted light way out in another time and space is not actually known. You assign fishbowl reasons to all things we see from out of the fishbowl!

quote:
We observe the emission bands, we observe that the pattern of bands and gaps match specific elements here on earth, we observe that they are shifted towards the red end of the spectrum, we observe that this is consistent with great distance and the expansion of the universe. We conclude that this confirms the current model of the universe.
Absurd. Just because something shifts a certain way in fishbowl time and space and laws, does not mean it shifts that way out there.
quote:

Nope, we only need to conclude that the observations are consistent with the current model of the universe and that the red shift is consistent with great distance and the expansion of the universe.
Redshift has meaning here in the fishbowl. That meaning stays here. Trying to assign all redshifted light (or what appears in the fishbowl as redshited light) the fishbowl reasons for shifting is an exercise in belief.

quote:

Except that the evidence supports the conclusion of similar time, as modeled with relativity.
How? How does GR deal with what time is? GR deals with the fishbowl. If we see some star of unknown size or distance that has shifted light when it orbits or something, that does not tell us how long the orbit takes, how big anything is how far away...etc etc.

quote:

So tell me again how this "ONE belief" affects the Egyptian chronology and the tree rings and results in multiple correlations of dates in the Old Kingdom and afterwards.

Your belief makes tree rings look a certain way to you and everything else. If I looked at a ring that you cannot show us a picture of strangely, from 5000 'years' ago, it would look like a ring to me. I would not have to be biased and obsess over how it had to grow in a year in this nature for no reason!

quote:
Be specific:

how does it change the Egyptian chronology
how does it change the tree ring chronology
how does it make these changes and still have multiple correlations


Rings grown in weeks would not represent years, so your so called correlations and chronologies crumble into absurdity.

quote:

Because this is what should be taught in school -- how to demonstrate that a claim is valid.
Yet you offer king lists that have spirits? You offer tree rings you can't show or demonstrate grew in this nature??

Kids...rebel...revolt intellectually...you have been lied to.

Edited by creation, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1245 by RAZD, posted 11-03-2018 1:48 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1249 by Phat, posted 11-03-2018 3:29 PM creation has responded
 Message 1251 by RAZD, posted 11-03-2018 5:01 PM creation has responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 11403
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 1249 of 1266 (842606)
11-03-2018 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 1248 by creation
11-03-2018 3:14 PM


Fishbowl Assumptions

Some questions:

  • What science led us to conclude any difference between where we live (fishbowl) and outside of this?

  • Do we have a measurement as to where the "glass" begins? Is there a point that we have determined to be the edge of this hypothetical fishbowl which you continually mention?

  • Does the Bible mention or imply such a fishbowl?

    I need to know what you have found about the existence, measure, and scope of this hypothesis.


    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1248 by creation, posted 11-03-2018 3:14 PM creation has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 1250 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-03-2018 3:56 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
     Message 1252 by creation, posted 11-04-2018 12:03 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
  • Tanypteryx
    Member
    Posts: 1767
    From: Oregon, USA
    Joined: 08-27-2006
    Member Rating: 3.0


    (2)
    Message 1250 of 1266 (842609)
    11-03-2018 3:56 PM
    Reply to: Message 1249 by Phat
    11-03-2018 3:29 PM


    Re: Fishbowl Assumptions
    Does the Bible mention or imply such a fishbowl?

    There is no way to know what the bible says about anything because it was written on paper made in this nature with ink made in this nature.


    What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

    One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

    If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

    The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1249 by Phat, posted 11-03-2018 3:29 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

    Replies to this message:
     Message 1253 by creation, posted 11-04-2018 12:04 PM Tanypteryx has responded

        
    RAZD
    Member
    Posts: 19663
    From: the other end of the sidewalk
    Joined: 03-14-2004
    Member Rating: 2.9


    (3)
    Message 1251 of 1266 (842613)
    11-03-2018 5:01 PM
    Reply to: Message 1248 by creation
    11-03-2018 3:14 PM


    Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
    quote:
    Please tell me where Jesus specifically talks about a change in nature --

    Wherever Genesis or another part of the bible speaks, He speaks. He talked to Moses and confirmed that things written about the beginning were correct.

    Jesus talked about heaven so that involves a change from nature as we know it also. All the miracles He did also show He was not limited by nature.

    So you have no reference to a time when nature changed, no documentation that anything close to what you claim about a change in nature, no objective empirical evidence.

    All you have is your fantasy based on claims you make about what the bible says.

    Lots of Babble response with nothing new requires no repeated discussion when you haven't provided squat to substantiate your position and you haven't dealt with the evidence.

    Rings grown in weeks would not represent years, ...

    Correct ...

    ... Because they would not look like annual years, and you would need several every day (one every 4 minutes) while you have no way to make such rings with sufficient growth pattern to simulate actual annual rings. And this doesn't address the changes in C14 from ring to ring. This is pure escapist fantasy on your part.

    ... your so called correlations and chronologies crumble into absurdity.

    And yet you have not shown why or how that happens, all you have done is deny evidence and then post a repeated assertion with nothing new.

    Fail^2

    But it might be a candidate for discussion in a class on escapist fiction.

    Enjoy


    we are limited in our ability to understand
    by our ability to understand
    RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
    ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
    to share.


    Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1248 by creation, posted 11-03-2018 3:14 PM creation has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 1254 by creation, posted 11-04-2018 12:09 PM RAZD has responded

      
    creation
    Member
    Posts: 421
    Joined: 01-14-2018


    Message 1252 of 1266 (842633)
    11-04-2018 12:03 PM
    Reply to: Message 1249 by Phat
    11-03-2018 3:29 PM


    Re: Fishbowl Assumptions
    Science does not lead. It follows. If something is unknown...it is not science. When you do not know...why blame science for leading you there?

    As for the fishbowl, that simply refers to the area man knows and has been to even via probes. So basically the solar system and area. Not even a lousy single light DAY away!

    Ha

    Edited by creation, : No reason given.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1249 by Phat, posted 11-03-2018 3:29 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

        
    creation
    Member
    Posts: 421
    Joined: 01-14-2018


    Message 1253 of 1266 (842634)
    11-04-2018 12:04 PM
    Reply to: Message 1250 by Tanypteryx
    11-03-2018 3:56 PM


    Re: Fishbowl Assumptions
    God is not from this nature and time.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1250 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-03-2018 3:56 PM Tanypteryx has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 1256 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-04-2018 1:06 PM creation has not yet responded

        
    creation
    Member
    Posts: 421
    Joined: 01-14-2018


    Message 1254 of 1266 (842635)
    11-04-2018 12:09 PM
    Reply to: Message 1251 by RAZD
    11-03-2018 5:01 PM


    Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
    Wrong. The document of Scripture tells us when things started to really be different.

    As I deduce things, it was likely at the time of Babel, in the days of Peleg, possibly when he was six years old, which may have been about 107 years after the flood.

    As for what rings grown is some former unknown nature would look like...sorry, your opinion cannot be based in any fact. Find something you know about and talk about that.

    Your 'correlations' have been shown to all rest on the concept/belief that this present nature existed all the while. The correlations therefore, obviously are no better than that belief.

    Edited by creation, : No reason given.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1251 by RAZD, posted 11-03-2018 5:01 PM RAZD has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 1255 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-04-2018 1:02 PM creation has responded
     Message 1258 by RAZD, posted 11-04-2018 1:38 PM creation has responded
     Message 1259 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-04-2018 1:56 PM creation has not yet responded

        
    Tanypteryx
    Member
    Posts: 1767
    From: Oregon, USA
    Joined: 08-27-2006
    Member Rating: 3.0


    Message 1255 of 1266 (842644)
    11-04-2018 1:02 PM
    Reply to: Message 1254 by creation
    11-04-2018 12:09 PM


    Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
    Your 'correlations' have been shown to all rest on the concept/belief that this present nature existed all the while.

    No they haven't, at least not by you. You are the only person asserting this without a shred of evidence to back it up. It is pure fictional fantasy.

    The document of Scripture tells us when things started to really be different.

    Fiction.

    As I deduce things, it was likely at the time of Babel, in the days of Peleg, possibly when he was six years old, which may have been about 107 years after the flood.

    Fiction.

    As for what rings grown is some former unknown nature would look like...sorry, your opinion cannot be based in any fact.

    some former unknown nature = fiction.

    Find something you know about and talk about that.

    The irony, it burns brightly.


    What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

    One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

    If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

    The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1254 by creation, posted 11-04-2018 12:09 PM creation has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 1260 by creation, posted 11-08-2018 3:48 PM Tanypteryx has responded

        
    Tanypteryx
    Member
    Posts: 1767
    From: Oregon, USA
    Joined: 08-27-2006
    Member Rating: 3.0


    Message 1256 of 1266 (842645)
    11-04-2018 1:06 PM
    Reply to: Message 1253 by creation
    11-04-2018 12:04 PM


    Re: Fishbowl Assumptions
    God is not from this nature and time.

    Ok, good. Can I quote you?


    What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

    One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

    If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

    The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1253 by creation, posted 11-04-2018 12:04 PM creation has not yet responded

        
    ringo
    Member
    Posts: 15567
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005
    Member Rating: 1.6


    Message 1257 of 1266 (842649)
    11-04-2018 1:11 PM
    Reply to: Message 1240 by creation
    11-02-2018 5:38 PM


    Re: This is a thread about what should be taught in school
    creation writes:

    Your false prophesy is of no worth.


    It isn't prophecy. It's history. Creationism is dead.

    And our geese will blot out the sun.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1240 by creation, posted 11-02-2018 5:38 PM creation has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 1261 by creation, posted 11-08-2018 3:50 PM ringo has responded

      
    RAZD
    Member
    Posts: 19663
    From: the other end of the sidewalk
    Joined: 03-14-2004
    Member Rating: 2.9


    (2)
    Message 1258 of 1266 (842655)
    11-04-2018 1:38 PM
    Reply to: Message 1254 by creation
    11-04-2018 12:09 PM


    Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
    Wrong. The document of Scripture tells us when things started to really be different.

    But you can't find dates and documentation (evidence) of these purported changes ... that make them rather useless in a science thread.

    As I deduce things, ...

    ie - make up.

    ... it was likely at the time of Babel, in the days of Peleg, possibly when he was six years old, which may have been about 107 years after the flood.

    This is you making stuff up that is not supported, listing mythological people, places and events that have no evidentiary basis. Like all your assertions.

    As for what rings grown is some former unknown nature would look like...sorry, your opinion cannot be based in any fact. Find something you know about and talk about that.

    Your 'correlations' have been shown to all rest on the concept/belief that this present nature existed all the while. The correlations therefore, obviously are no better than that belief.

    Your repeated and repeated assertions (nothing new here folks) are not founded on any objective empirical evidence, nor have you demonstrated that there was a former nature, or that the correlations are based on belief rather than observed fact.

    Fail

    Your post is another in a line of meaningless babble that accomplishes nothing except to show how bankrupt creationist arguments are and how they are unable to refute science.

    What we should teach in school is how to learn the facts supported by evidence and how to tell real probability from pure hogwash.

    You're giving them a prime example of pure hogwash.

    Enjoy


    we are limited in our ability to understand
    by our ability to understand
    RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
    ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
    to share.


    Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1254 by creation, posted 11-04-2018 12:09 PM creation has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 1262 by creation, posted 11-08-2018 3:57 PM RAZD has responded

      
    Dr Adequate
    Member
    Posts: 16052
    Joined: 07-20-2006
    Member Rating: 3.3


    Message 1259 of 1266 (842659)
    11-04-2018 1:56 PM
    Reply to: Message 1254 by creation
    11-04-2018 12:09 PM


    Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
    As with so many creationists, your prescriptions for how science should be done would annihilate the whole of science. Just so you can ignore dendrochronology! Really, couldn't you find some way to question the results of dendrochronology that doesn't involve attacking it for being science?
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1254 by creation, posted 11-04-2018 12:09 PM creation has not yet responded

      
    creation
    Member
    Posts: 421
    Joined: 01-14-2018


    Message 1260 of 1266 (842810)
    11-08-2018 3:48 PM
    Reply to: Message 1255 by Tanypteryx
    11-04-2018 1:02 PM


    Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
    Show us any so called correlation then, that does not rest on the premise of a same nature in the past? Ha. You lose.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1255 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-04-2018 1:02 PM Tanypteryx has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 1263 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-08-2018 4:23 PM creation has not yet responded

        
    RewPrev1
    ...
    80818283
    84
    85Next
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018