Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 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:   YEC Problem with Science Above and Beyond Evolution
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 16 of 312 (325016)
06-22-2006 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by subbie
06-22-2006 7:44 PM


Re: "Workaday science"
My opinion is based on evo theory, not experience. If you think that isn't sufficient, you don't get what I'm saying.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by subbie, posted 06-22-2006 7:44 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by subbie, posted 06-22-2006 7:56 PM Faith has replied

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


Message 17 of 312 (325019)
06-22-2006 7:56 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Faith
06-22-2006 7:50 PM


Re: "Workaday science"
So you don't know anything about how science is actually done on a workaday basis, you are simply assuming based on your understanding of evolution, is that what you are saying?

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Faith, posted 06-22-2006 7:50 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Faith, posted 06-22-2006 7:58 PM subbie has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 18 of 312 (325020)
06-22-2006 7:58 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by subbie
06-22-2006 7:56 PM


Re: "Workaday science"
You can do most science without evolution theory. Collecting facts and data and constructing hypotheses of the testable kind is not affected.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by subbie, posted 06-22-2006 7:56 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by arachnophilia, posted 06-22-2006 8:12 PM Faith has replied
 Message 23 by nator, posted 06-22-2006 8:44 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 26 by subbie, posted 06-22-2006 9:20 PM Faith has replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 19 of 312 (325022)
06-22-2006 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Faith
06-22-2006 7:58 PM


a specific example
ok, i can't really make a good over-arching case that, well, it's not just interpretation, but that science is sequential. so let's just examine some of the details of your claim about "just interpretation" and perhaps you can justify how the area of science as a whole works without the "evolutionary" bits.
Sedimentary Geology - principles concerning sedimentary layering, deposition rates, uniformitarianism, and age of formations would all have to be revised.
so i'll start with one particular case that yec "interpretation" requires that we ignore outright: the law of superposition. this is a law, not a principle, and not an interpretation. the evidence of deformations and angular uncomformities requires that this law be true (i'll explain why, if you're fuzzy on the details).
now, yec flood "theory" requires that the law of superposition is false, and all layers were laid down simultaneously. i would like you to describe to me exactly how day-to-day geology is done without this law, as this law is one of the axioms on which geology in general relies. i have some passing familiarity with geological science, but i know you won't believe me when i say that without this law, all modern geologic study breaks down. it is not just "interpretation" it is mountains of evidence that no longer sit properly with anything else -- and to my knowlegde, no creationist as ever explained the evidence that requires this law with a different "interpretation." believe me, i've asked. you're welcome to give it a shot.
Edited by arachnophilia, : typo


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Faith, posted 06-22-2006 7:58 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 06-22-2006 8:17 PM arachnophilia has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 20 of 312 (325024)
06-22-2006 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by arachnophilia
06-22-2006 8:12 PM


Re: a specific example
What a bunch of nonsense. Don't bother me with such stuff.
I've affirmed the law of superposition many times. Of COURSE the layers were not laid down "simultaneously."
Don't be an idiot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by arachnophilia, posted 06-22-2006 8:12 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by arachnophilia, posted 06-22-2006 8:27 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 22 by Discreet Label, posted 06-22-2006 8:40 PM Faith has replied
 Message 24 by AdminSchraf, posted 06-22-2006 8:50 PM Faith has not replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 21 of 312 (325028)
06-22-2006 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Faith
06-22-2006 8:17 PM


Re: a specific example
I've affirmed the law of superposition many times. Of COURSE the layers were not laid down "simultaneously."
ok, that screws "flood geology" then. let's address the next point:
Sedimentary Geology - principles concerning sedimentary layering, deposition rates, uniformitarianism, and age of formations would all have to be revised.
what kind of timeframe do you see for the sequential layering of rock? how quickly was the entire geologic column laid down?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 06-22-2006 8:17 PM Faith has not replied

Discreet Label
Member (Idle past 5063 days)
Posts: 272
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 22 of 312 (325032)
06-22-2006 8:40 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Faith
06-22-2006 8:17 PM


Re: a specific example
You affirm the Law of Superposition, yet you still state that the Great Flood occured via appealing to the genesis story. How do you feel the Great Flood fits or encompasses your understanding of the Law of Superposition?
Actually and I am particulary curious what you consider workaday science. I feel that your statement of collecting, observing and testing data does not adequately address science. Especially when science is extrememly pervasive in 1st world country lifestyles. For example normal kitchen equipment microwaves, ovens electric and gas, cooking gear, refrigerators, detergents, mechanical physics. While these examples represent applied science, they also represent theories present in theoretical science.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 06-22-2006 8:17 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Faith, posted 06-23-2006 11:33 AM Discreet Label has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 23 of 312 (325034)
06-22-2006 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Faith
06-22-2006 7:58 PM


Re: "Workaday science"
quote:
You can do most science without evolution theory. Collecting facts and data and constructing hypotheses of the testable kind is not affected.
Like what kinds of science?
Can you give some examples of some general lines of inquiry, or specific phenomena if you like, which do not touch in the least upon the ToE?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Faith, posted 06-22-2006 7:58 PM Faith has not replied

AdminSchraf
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 312 (325035)
06-22-2006 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Faith
06-22-2006 8:17 PM


Faith, you are out of line
quote:
What a bunch of nonsense. Don't bother me with such stuff.
I've affirmed the law of superposition many times. Of COURSE the layers were not laid down "simultaneously."
Don't be an idiot.
Name calling is unacceptable here at EvC.
I will remind you that Forum rule #10 is as follows:
Always treat other members with respect. Argue the position, not the person. Avoid abusive, harassing and invasive behavior. Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics.
Usually, in a well-conducted debate, speakers are either emotionally uncommitted or can preserve sufficient detachment to maintain a coolly academic approach.
-- Encylopedia Brittanica, on debate
Please don't give me a reason.
Edited by AdminSchraf, : changed subtitle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 06-22-2006 8:17 PM Faith has not replied

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 25 of 312 (325037)
06-22-2006 9:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by anglagard
06-03-2006 11:41 PM


Topic could've been titled "All non-biol. evolutionary processes" - Closing soon
anglagard writes:
Thank you. Hope the topic is not too broad.
Yes, I'm real slow getting on this one, but better late than never.
The content of message 1 is a nice little summary of the many conflicts between mainstream science and young Earth creationism, and as such it is essentially a perfect example of a topic having way too many highly diverse subthemes.
In other words, the topic a WAY TOO BROAD. Sorry AdminNWR, but this one should never have been promoted.
Will leave open a bit longer for messages in preparation and closing remarks.
Topic closing in 15 minutes. Those who don't agree with my opinion and actions may respond at "Thread...", link below.
Adminnemooseus

New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, [thread=-19,-112], [thread=-17,-45], [thread=-19,-337], [thread=-14,-1073]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by anglagard, posted 06-03-2006 11:41 PM anglagard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by anglagard, posted 06-22-2006 9:38 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied
 Message 28 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-22-2006 9:46 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

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


Message 26 of 312 (325038)
06-22-2006 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Faith
06-22-2006 7:58 PM


Re: "Workaday science"
Scientists don't begin every day with a blank page. Every field of science has innumerable facts, theories and laws that are taken as established by those working in the field. The point of the OP is that, if YEC is true, many the underlying facts, theories and laws in every one of those fields will have to be abandoned.
You demonstrate a deeply flawed understanding of science of you truly believe that it wouldn't make any difference.

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Faith, posted 06-22-2006 7:58 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Faith, posted 06-23-2006 1:52 AM subbie has replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 27 of 312 (325042)
06-22-2006 9:38 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Adminnemooseus
06-22-2006 9:15 PM


Re: Topic could've been titled "All non-biol. evolutionary processes" - Closing soon
Violation of Rules to post, sorry
Edited by anglagard, : Asking where
Edited by anglagard, : Emotion
Edited by anglagard, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-22-2006 9:15 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 28 of 312 (325048)
06-22-2006 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Adminnemooseus
06-22-2006 9:15 PM


Way to diverse of a topic - Closing down
See my previous message also.
If anyone wishes to pursue one of the many themes of message 1, please find and appropriate existing topic or propose a new one.
Need to respond to this action? The "Thread..." topic, link below, is the place to go.
Adminnemooseus
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Change ID.

New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, [thread=-19,-112], [thread=-17,-45], [thread=-19,-337], [thread=-14,-1073]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-22-2006 9:15 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 29 of 312 (325122)
06-23-2006 1:34 AM


Topic reopened
There has been discussion related to my closing of this topic, here, here, and here.
Almost all of the other opinions are that I was wrong in closing this topic. I think all those opinions are wrong and that this topic is a disaster area in the making, but the micro-masses have spoken.
Topic reopened.
Adminnemooseus

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by AdminNWR, posted 06-23-2006 1:38 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied

AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 312 (325125)
06-23-2006 1:38 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Adminnemooseus
06-23-2006 1:34 AM


Let's refocus
Thanks for reopening.
At the time of closing, the posting was a little hectic. Let's see if we can refocus for the balance of the thread.
Faith has suggested that "workaday science" would not be affected. It might be helpful if some of the science contributors to the thread could give examples of how workaday science would be affected.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-23-2006 1:34 AM Adminnemooseus 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