|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,786 Year: 4,043/9,624 Month: 914/974 Week: 241/286 Day: 2/46 Hour: 2/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The consequences of "Evolution is false" | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Creationists have often made the claim that Evolution is not based upon facts or is not well-supported by the evidence.
I see several logical consequences to this situation, and I'd like our Creationists to address them. I'll list them below. 1) Scientists are liars and conspire to defraud the public 2) Scientists are incompetent at doing science Most of the time, Creationists don't really put forth these statements in such bold language, but they are, indeed, the logical consequence to the claim that they make; that Evolution is not supported by the evidence or is false. One thing I have never seen a Creationist address adequately is the fact that science, including Biology, as an endeavor is cumulative and progressive. That is, all current scientific work is based upon past work. If concept A, is discovered, replicated, and overall shown to be reliable, this will lead to concept B, which is based upon what we know about A. If B also turns out to be reliable, this is also confirmation of concept A. And so on, and so on and so on... If the Theory of Evolution is completely false and not supported by any evidence whatsoever (only "speculation and wishful thinking"), then how is it that the study of Biology has been able to progress at all in the last 150 years? The ToE is utterly foundational to all of the life sciences and much medical research, so if it was so very wrong, all predictions based upon it should fail. Research using it as a guide should never advance much, if at all. How is it that predictions keep being made based upon the ToE that are subsequently borne out? Are scientists really all liars and crooks, maintaining an elaborate deception on not only an unwitting public but also upon the entire scientific community? Or, are Biologists simply so incredibly poor at doing science that they don't realize that all of their experiments have failed? Is it Science?, please.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: No, you haven't adequately addressed this claim, Faith. You have never addressed the issue of how it is that current scientific work can continue to progress if it is all based upon an utter falsehood perpetuated only through indoctrination or habit. You have never addressed the concept of science being cumulative and progressive; with concepts A, B, and C being the basis of concepts D, E, and F, and so on. Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: But isn't that what you asked for back on page 1 when you wrote:
quote: Crash is discussing exactly the sort of "particulars" you said you wanted to be provided to you in order for the discussion to make sense. Faith, what you seem to have been suggesting is that scientists can do science in isolation from theory, or even from the work of other scientists, past or present. How do you suggest that a Biologist just starting out today figure out what to study and how to study it, if she doesn't refer to theory, or to the work of those who have come before her? Just what is your understanding of the role of theory in the work of research scientists?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: It's because you frequently write things like this:
link to message #14 quote: I know that you were making a comment upon the notion that religious ideas were based upon fallacies, but you made it quite clear that you believe both the ToE and the above mentioned idea about religions to be void of facts and merely an "imaginitive construct". You have claimed that the ToE, which is the theoretical foundation, the very bedrock of all of the life sciences, is a mere "factless imaginative construct" and scientists are utterly unconcerned with this lack of factual basis. If you believe that the ToE is nothing more than a "factless imaginative construct", it must be true that any scientist who accepts it must be incompetent at doing science, or else they would have seen that it was false, wouldn't they? Every single time I see that you've made this claim, I promise you that I will ask you to explain why it is that you believe that scientists are utterly incompetent at doing science, or are maybe just dunderheaded simpletons.
quote: According to you, scienctists accept evolution because: They can't compensate for bias at all, which is what scientists are trained to do in experimental design. They aren't motivated to question assumptions or find weaknesses in theories, which is what scientists are trained to do. They simply accept certain bits of information as true instead of investigating and testing to see if they really are correct, which is what scientists are trained to do. They refuse to allow their personal spiritual beliefs in God to be included in empirical research, simply because science is not designed to detect or utilize any supernatural "stuff". All of this adds up to scientists being really terrible at doing science, according to you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: You said it, not me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Throwing a few mudballs while you run away from arguments you can't address, kiddo?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: That is an oversimplification that twists FliesOnly's and my point, which is:
After more than 150 years of conducting scientific research related to the ToE, and still having a segment of the population saying that it is all wrong because it contradicts their "beliefs" or disagrees with their "faith", it's really not much of an assumption to conclude that these individuals must hold scientists in very low regard...to the level of incompetence. Or worse yet, being liars. Creationists say that scientists are completely wrong about the ToE. They say that scientists are completely wrong about the foundational theory of all of the life sciences. IF scientists really are completely wrong about the foundation of their entire field, and have been wrong for 150 years, then what other conclusion can one come to than they are really bad at doing science, or that they are fully aware that their rheory doesn't hold water and have been lying about it all this time? If those two scenarios sound silly to you, it's because they ARE silly. However, those are the two most plausible logical conclusions of the creationist stance that the ToE is completely wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
You are a god, Dr. A.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Do you also reject the Atomic Theory of Matter because of it's "social implications"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Yeah. It really is pretty difficult to have a scientific discussion if you refuse to play by scientific rules. It would be like trying to play official-rules baseball with someone who insists upon being able to use ghost runners and a tee to hold the ball for them while they are at bat.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: What deception?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Then you should never go to the doctor ever again, since what they do is science-based. You shouldn't fly in planes or ride in cars, either, for the same reason. Better stop using the computer, too.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Such as?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2196 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
I really don't want this question to be overlooked:
You claimed:
quote: And then I replied:
Such as?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024