Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-24-2019 3:31 AM
18 online now:
dwise1, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (3 members, 15 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 857,532 Year: 12,568/19,786 Month: 2,349/2,641 Week: 304/554 Day: 2/104 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
67
8
910
...
21NextFF
Author Topic:   YEC approaches to empirical investigation
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1822 days)
Posts: 1154
From: San Diego, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 106 of 303 (242648)
09-12-2005 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by CK
09-12-2005 3:37 PM


Re: YECism can't get past the facts
Sorry, I should be more careful with words:

There is an empirical method available to YECs.

I think part of the problem is that YECs on the whole don't know how to do empirical investigation. Another problem is that people get the idea that science is the only empirical manner in which to proceed.

My point is to clear up what's available to YECs, point out the properties of the methodology, and to say HERE, go do your thing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by CK, posted 09-12-2005 3:37 PM CK has not yet responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 304 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 107 of 303 (242651)
09-12-2005 3:55 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by Faith
09-12-2005 3:15 PM


Re: Forensic Science
It isn't a matter of being at odds, it's a matter of the one point of view demanding that the other give up its very reason for being.

I don't this is quite right. I'm sure some might think this way, but not all. I certainly don't demand you give up your faith or your beliefs. The only time I have any problems with creationists is when they make sweeping statements or try to convince less educated people using hokey maths or science.

That is to say - if you want to stand up and say 'I don't believe in evolution, it runs against my Holy Book...' or whatever that is fine. Saying that 'Evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics' is something else. When that happens, the creationists are told why they are wrong, since they have attempted to prove a scientific principle to be in fault using another scientific principle.

Yes but the reason for this site is the science debate.

Mostly, yes. Most people come here to fight the faux-science sprouted by creationists, and to learn more about the Theory. Discussing science with axioms based in religious faith doesn't interest many, though it has peaked my interest. Try evolutionfairytale, or evolutionisdead websites if you want that kind of discussion perhaps they will be better suited for you.

What site is that? I read the creationist sites but the message boards don't usually look very interesting.

Fred's site has a forum. I'm banned from it, and as far as I can see, there is only one evolutionist still allowed to post. Evolutionisdead is mostly a dead forum, but might be of interest.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 3:15 PM Faith has not yet responded

CK
Member (Idle past 2328 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 108 of 303 (242656)
09-12-2005 4:07 PM


Well let's put up or shut up
We can discuss those meta issues forever - let's see the practical outcome of trying this methodology.

I suggest one thread and a limited number of people - why don't we re-run an existing thread and see if the outcome differs in some significant manner from it's previous version?


DominionSeraph
Member (Idle past 2955 days)
Posts: 365
From: on High
Joined: 01-26-2005


Message 109 of 303 (242658)
09-12-2005 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Faith
09-12-2005 3:33 PM


Re: Forensic Science
Faith writes:

Yes, you think "evidence" trumps God Himself.

No. I just don't care.
What might be true is irrelevant. I only seek to explain what I see.
If the evidence has been faked by God, I don't care. Being deceived by a god wouldn't put a dent in my ego.
If the true relationship between the evidence is too complex to unravel, I don't care. Old-Earth works. And if a god set up the universe so that a 99th percentile human can't recognize that the Earth is young, I can take being set up for such failure in stride.
If my eyes are deceiving me, I don't care. Again, I only seek to explain what I see. I don't care what might exist in some hypothetical world that I cannot see.

I'm a pragmatist. I go with what works, and reject that which doesn't. And YEC doesn't work.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 3:33 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 4:35 PM DominionSeraph has not yet responded

Modulous
Member (Idle past 304 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 110 of 303 (242660)
09-12-2005 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Faith
09-12-2005 3:33 PM


God's autobiography is more reliable than the dramatization
Yes, you think "evidence" trumps God Himself. This is the whole point. Unfortunately the evidence you allow to discredit God is not anywhere near all that trustworthy, certainly not divine and far from absolute.

I think you might misrepresent your opponents here. IIRC jar's position is that God's creation itself and what we can learn from it, 'trumps' a written account of a copy of a copy of an old oral story told by a prophet, recounted by fallen fallible sinners.

My position is also very different from your characterization. And other positions are that God doesn't exist so evidence doesn't 'trump' anything, evidence is just evidence.

In the interests of this thread, it would be nice if you could try and accurately understand the position held by 'the other side'.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 3:33 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 4:26 PM Modulous has responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 32229
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 111 of 303 (242662)
09-12-2005 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Jazzns
09-12-2005 3:17 PM


Re: YECism can't get past the facts
Bunch of straw men there Jazz.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Jazzns, posted 09-12-2005 3:17 PM Jazzns has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Jazzns, posted 09-12-2005 4:30 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 32229
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 112 of 303 (242664)
09-12-2005 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Modulous
09-12-2005 4:13 PM


Re: God's autobiography is more reliable than the dramatization
Yes, you think "evidence" trumps God Himself. This is the whole point. Unfortunately the evidence you allow to discredit God is not anywhere near all that trustworthy, certainly not divine and far from absolute.

I think you might misrepresent your opponents here. IIRC jar's position is that God's creation itself and what we can learn from it, 'trumps' a written account of a copy of a copy of an old oral story told by a prophet, recounted by fallen fallible sinners.

My position is also very different from your characterization. And other positions are that God doesn't exist so evidence doesn't 'trump' anything, evidence is just evidence.

In the interests of this thread, it would be nice if you could try and accurately understand the position held by 'the other side'.

The evidence I referenced to Rahvin I believe is shared by all on the science side of the debate. Oh maybe that was on the other thread. I'll try to link it then. But the point was that the evidence that is used against God's word is stuff as flimsy as Hutton's simply looking at an unconformity and declaring that it had to have required an OE period of time to form, and the rock-bottom position of all here that is based only on looking at the fossil sequence in the geo column, that of course it demonstrates that one species descended from another. This is pure conjecture and imaginative construct but it is treated as solid science though it has no more authority than human imagination, and it is pitted against the word of God on that flimsy authority and used as a base from which to abuse those who defend God's word against it.

The position held by all of you in common, which I have NOT misrepresented at all, and which in fact your post confirms in spite of yourself, is that the Bible is not to be treated as the literal inerrant authoritative word of God but is open to all manner of human conjecture and interpretation just as the rocks are. But Bible inerrancy is the position I hold and all Biblical YECs hold, as the premise for this debate and for our interest in being here at all, and for it to be discounted is to stack the deck in any so-called debate.

This message has been edited by Faith, 09-12-2005 04:29 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Modulous, posted 09-12-2005 4:13 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Modulous, posted 09-12-2005 5:03 PM Faith has responded

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2112 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 113 of 303 (242666)
09-12-2005 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Faith
09-12-2005 4:18 PM


Re: YECism can't get past the facts
Gotta love replies with substance.

Certainly those instances where you have gotten the facts wrong are a matter of public record. All anyone has to do is return to the threads where you made your statements in ignorance of the facts to see them.

Talking about missing the facts. You cannot even come to grips with the fact that you haven't been aware of the facts in the past. Show me where one of those examples is a mischaracterization. Show me where in those circumstances you actually knew what you were talking about.


No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 4:18 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 4:36 PM Jazzns has responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 32229
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 114 of 303 (242669)
09-12-2005 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by DominionSeraph
09-12-2005 4:11 PM


Re: Forensic Science
Yes, you think "evidence" trumps God Himself.

No. I just don't care.
What might be true is irrelevant. I only seek to explain what I see.
If the evidence has been faked by God, I don't care. Being deceived by a god wouldn't put a dent in my ego.
If the true relationship between the evidence is too complex to unravel, I don't care. Old-Earth works. And if a god set up the universe so that a 99th percentile human can't recognize that the Earth is young, I can take being set up for such failure in stride.
If my eyes are deceiving me, I don't care. Again, I only seek to explain what I see. I don't care what might exist in some hypothetical world that I cannot see.

I'm a pragmatist. I go with what works, and reject that which doesn't. And YEC doesn't work.

It doesn't matter what your particular reason for it is, your position has in common with all the other OE positions here that you are willing to discount God's word, the Biblical revelation, but that is precisely what the YEC's position is based on and to exclude it makes debate impossible, and you quite willing to criticize God Himself (you don't know it's NOT God's word, do you?).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by DominionSeraph, posted 09-12-2005 4:11 PM DominionSeraph has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 32229
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 115 of 303 (242670)
09-12-2005 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Jazzns
09-12-2005 4:30 PM


Re: YECism can't get past the facts
What I am declaring for the record is your misrepresentation of the facts that are on the record.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Jazzns, posted 09-12-2005 4:30 PM Jazzns has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Rahvin, posted 09-12-2005 4:59 PM Faith has responded
 Message 117 by Jazzns, posted 09-12-2005 5:00 PM Faith has responded

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 116 of 303 (242677)
09-12-2005 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Faith
09-12-2005 4:36 PM


Re: YECism can't get past the facts
In reply to your post on another thread:

All you are doing is reiterating the Establishment position, which is not in doubt, but is exactly what I'm saying makes debate here a ridiculous sham. Take any next comment you have to the other thread Ben started, I forget what it's called.

If you consider debate here to be a "sham," then I suggest you go someplace else, where everyone accepts the Bible to be literally true regardless of any evidencce.

Of course, debating there would be pointless for anyone interested in evidence.

Honeslty, Faith, if you don't like the requiremnt of evidence, if you don't like the basic philosophy of science in which everything is falsifiable by observed evidence, you should just leave. You've debated here for a long time, and many of the debates have even been interesting (when you didn't hit the "teh Bible is teh word of GOD! I WIN!" button and leave the discussion in a huff). But if you are unwilling to debate in good faith as per the rules (by allowing an opposing argument to even exist, of all things) then I humble submit that this is not the place for you.

Faith, you're a very well-read individual with excellent writing skills. I have enjoyed many of your posts (even though I very rarely agreed with you). But every debate requires that both sides be prepared to admit defeat if proven wrong, even if neither debator believes they are wrong. Your insistance that non-literallists take the Biblie's infallibility as a given is like telling us to admit that black is white, or us telling you to admit that there is no God. It creates a sensation not unlike banging one's head against a brick wall repeatedly. If we cannot all proceed from a mutually falsifiable position, we are doomed to perpetual frustration, and nobody wants that.

Would it be so hard to say "I conceed because I cannot refute your points at this time, but this in no way alters my personal position. I believe the Bible trumps all, but I cannot provide outside evidence at this time to refute your position. Should I uncover further evidence in my favor in the future, I will return to the debate." ?


Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 4:36 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 5:53 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2112 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 117 of 303 (242680)
09-12-2005 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Faith
09-12-2005 4:36 PM


Re: YECism can't get past the facts
Sorry but if you are going to make claims like that you are going to have to bring more than just your assertion.

Fact: Mutations happen.
Fact: Novel mutations happen.
Fact: Law of original horizontality
Fact: Burried river, canyon, island topography.
Fact: Fossil and structure strain.
Fact: High profile structures erode faster.

All of these are in contrast to claims you have made since you have been here. You did not know these facts or else you would have not made statements to the contrary. You cannot argue the facts. You have yet to demonstrate that you know anything about science except for what has been shown to you here at this forum.


No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 4:36 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 5:15 PM Jazzns has responded

Modulous
Member (Idle past 304 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 118 of 303 (242682)
09-12-2005 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Faith
09-12-2005 4:26 PM


Re: God's autobiography is more reliable than the dramatization
But the point was that the evidence that is used against God's word...

No, the evidence isn't used against God's word (though some do use it in that manner) the evidence is for an old earth which just happens to disagree with your interpretation of God's word. Some people believe that the Word is written in the Creation and the Holy Bible is a history of fallen men trying to understand the Creation and reconcile themselves with God.

The position held by all of you in common...is that the Bible is not to be treated as the literal inerrant authoritative word of God but is open to all manner of human conjecture and interpretation just as the rocks are

Not true. It can be treated in that way if you so choose, but it isn't the only way it can be legitimately treated. And given that you are as fallible as any of mankind, you cannot know which is the right way. It is entirely fine to view the Holy Bible as you wish. However, your opponents believe that the Holy Bible can viewed in a different manner...and indeed they do. The Holy Bible is open to interpretation, and if you don't think it is, then you haven't seen the centuries of debate that has gone into interpreting it....the wars, the alliances etc

You might be right, Faith, in your interpretations. You might be wrong too.

. But Bible inerrancy is the position I hold and all Biblical YECs hold, as the premise for this debate and for our interest in being here at all, and for it to be discounted is to stack the deck in any so-called debate.

Indeed, I'm happy to accept the premise. I've said so several times. If you want a debate to start with that as an axiom, I'm happy to watch it progress. Of course, it is stacking the deck in your favour, to further discussion and debate...but I'm happy the debate is being had, I think it will help things around here tremendously.

I hope it all gets off the ground, I'm very interested to see where it leads :)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 4:26 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Faith, posted 09-12-2005 5:11 PM Modulous has responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 32229
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 119 of 303 (242684)
09-12-2005 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Modulous
09-12-2005 5:03 PM


Re: God's autobiography is more reliable than the dramatization
First let me say that I generally appreciate your attitude and your willingness to accept the YEC premise, which I should have said before.

No, the evidence isn't used against God's word (though some do use it in that manner) the evidence is for an old earth which just happens to disagree with your interpretation of God's word.

But the evidence IS used against God's word, because the evidence is trusted as if it were something final and authoritative, and the fact that it contradicts God's word is simply overridden, and this even though the "evidence" is no more than what mere imagination comes up with, such as Hutton's view that uncomformities MUST have taken ages to form just because he couldn't imagine the mechanics by which it happened otherwise -- nothing tested, no experiments, no scientific method involved at all. And the same with the fossil sequence -- it is taken as evidence for evolution based ONLY on its LOOKING LIKE a sequence -- sheer imagination. So much for scientific rigor.

However, even if the evidence were better than this, knowing that it contradicts the Bible makes accepting it over the Bible using it against God's word.

This message has been edited by Faith, 09-12-2005 05:11 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Modulous, posted 09-12-2005 5:03 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by Modulous, posted 09-12-2005 5:40 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 32229
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 120 of 303 (242686)
09-12-2005 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by Jazzns
09-12-2005 5:00 PM


Re: YECism can't get past the facts
You are just building more and more straw men. I have not disputed anything on your list, I've even asserted original horizontality myself. Interpretation is what the argument is about, not facts, and I don't even dispute the interpretation in some of those cases. Please stop misrepresenting me.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Jazzns, posted 09-12-2005 5:00 PM Jazzns has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Jazzns, posted 09-12-2005 5:21 PM Faith has responded

  
Prev1
...
67
8
910
...
21NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019