Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-18-2019 3:46 AM
21 online now:
caffeine, Meddle, Tangle (3 members, 18 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 853,983 Year: 9,019/19,786 Month: 1,441/2,119 Week: 201/576 Day: 4/98 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "Creation Science" experiments.
ringo
Member
Posts: 16626
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 302 of 396 (584506)
10-02-2010 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 298 by Just being real
10-02-2010 4:44 AM


Re: How Intelligent Design qualifies as a scientific theory
Just being real writes:

I am saying that apc equals intelligence because to the best of my knowledge no one has ever reported observing apc form by natural unguided processes.


You're saying that all unicorns are pink because nobody has ever observed a unicorn that isn't pink.


"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
This message is a reply to:
 Message 298 by Just being real, posted 10-02-2010 4:44 AM Just being real has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 312 by Just being real, posted 10-04-2010 12:48 PM ringo has not yet responded

ringo
Member
Posts: 16626
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 331 of 396 (585921)
10-10-2010 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 329 by BarackZero
10-10-2010 10:05 AM


BarackZero writes:

There is no "separate form of science," as you claim.


That's the point of the thread. If creationism/ID was science, there would be a whole raft of examples you could give of experiments that they have done already. And yet, none of you even seems to be able to suggest an experiment that could be done to demonstrate creationism/ID.

All creationists ever do is re-interpret data that has been collected by the very scientists that they revile. No experiments = no science.


"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
This message is a reply to:
 Message 329 by BarackZero, posted 10-10-2010 10:05 AM BarackZero has not yet responded

ringo
Member
Posts: 16626
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 377 of 396 (587602)
10-19-2010 5:54 PM
Reply to: Message 373 by Just being real
10-19-2010 3:17 PM


Just being real writes:

Just looking at the circles we see a complex pattern, but we do not recognize the pattern as fulfilling any specific purpose.


"Purpose" seems like a highly subjective way of determining whether or not something is designed.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 373 by Just being real, posted 10-19-2010 3:17 PM Just being real has not yet responded

ringo
Member
Posts: 16626
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 390 of 396 (587742)
10-20-2010 1:57 PM


In Conclusion...
Scientists do experiments every day. They do experiments to test the results of other experiments. They do experiments to decide which other experiments might be worthwhile doing.

If creationism was science, you'd think they'd have a backlog of thousands of ideas for experiments just waiting for funding. But no, creation "science" seems to rest on telling scientists that they're wrong about their own experiments. Creationists hardly ever do their own experiments and when they do, they get the same results as science does (e.g. RATE group).

Creationism is about as sterile as it can be when it comes to doing science or even understanding what it means to do science.


"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019