Summations Only

Again, what is the evidence for Creationism and you do understand that what reality does do is totally refute any Biblical flood or Young Earth nonsense?Where is the evidence for The Science in Creationism?If all animals were created at the same time, why are no human fossils or human constructed objects ever found in any of the layers containing dinosaur fossils?What is the mechanism, model, process, procedure or thingamabob that explains what is seen in reality?

and still all we have gotten from the Creationists is whining and assertions that standard theories are wrong and yet not one shred of evidence, no model, no method, no process, no procedure, no indication that there is any Science in Creationism.No wonder Young Earth, the Biblical Flood, Creationism and Intelligent Design are DOA and tossed by all but the lunatic fringe into the trash bin of history.

While Newton developed his laws by reasoning he also took further steps to test that reasoning and did so by turning to an early example of multi-disciplinary peer review.

quote:

---

To test his hypothesis of universal gravitation, Newton wrote Flamsteed to ask if Saturn had been observed to slow down upon passing Jupiter. The surprised Flamsteed replied that an effect had indeed been observed, and it was closely predicted by the calculations Newton had provided. Newton's equations were further confirmed by observing the shape of the Earth to be oblate spheroidal, as Newton claimed it should be, rather than prolate spheroidal, as claimed by the Cartesians. Newton's equations also described the motion of Moon by successive approximations, and correctly predicted the return of Halley's Comet. Newton also correctly formulated and solved the first ever problem in the calculus of variations which involved finding the surface of revolution which would give minimum resistance to flow (assuming a specific drag law).

---

From hereHe went yet one step further and established a method, a process, a procedure, a mechanism or thingamabob to be used.

quote:

---

Newton presented his methodology as a set of four rules for scientific reasoning. These rules were stated in the Principia and proposed that (1) we are to admit no more causes of natural things such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances, (2) the same natural effects must be assigned to the same causes, (3) qualities of bodies are to be esteemed as universal, and (4) propositions deduced from observation of phenomena should be viewed as accurate until other phenomena contradict them.

---

And it is those latter steps, a method, a process, a procedure, a mechanism or thingamabob to be used and the independent testing and verification that we keep asking for and that Creationists simply have not yet provided.Not Ever!

Here is a simplified explanation Faith that requires almost no mathematics.Evolution has been going on for over three billion years here on this earth with no indication of it stopping.Now what is the mechanism, model, process, procedure or thingamabob in Creationism that explains what is seen in reality?

It seems you are as ignorant of the Bible as you are of reality or science or the English language.'Taint no such thing as Roman's 1:20 Dawn. Had you ever actually read the Bible you would know it was Romans (a plural of Roman) and not Roman's (a possessive of Roman).This might seem nitpiking but it is actually the very heart of the matter; you seem totally unable to use words correctly. You use purpose when the example shows function, the word design when your example only shows order, you claim cause when you show only that something exists and science when your example only shows dogma.Your only theory seems to be that some god or outside intelligent entity must be included.Yet you never show any evidence of that god or outside intelligence.Never do you provide the model, method, process, procedure or thingamabob to test for the existence of that god or outside intelligence. The best you have proposed is that it looks designed to you and so there must be a designer. You offer no reason there must be a god or outside intelligence designing what you say looks designed.Worse, when you ask if "that looks designed" often the response your get is "No, it looks evolved."AbE:Sorry Mod, this was meant as a reply to Dawn, not you.Mea CulpaEdited by jar, : see AbE:

How do you know the evo explanations are wrong?AbE: Since the whole shebang has not run out of genetic diversity in the over three BILLION years that life has been evolving on the Earth, why would you think it must stop?Edited by jar, : see AbE:

Since the whole shebang has not run out of genetic diversity in the over three BILLION years that life has been evolving on the Earth, why would you think it must stop?Now what is the mechanism, model, process, procedure or thingamabob in Creationism that explains what is seen in reality?Faith, we are approaching 1000 posts in just this thread and so far no one has shown any evidence of any Science in Creationism and only admissions that Creationism has nothing to do with Science and is only driven by dogma of a peculiar interpretation of the Bible not recognized by any major Christian denomination.

Yet you fail to address the heart of what I posted so let's try again.

quote:

---

Your only theory seems to be that some god or outside intelligent entity must be included.

​

Yet you never show any evidence of that god or outside intelligence.

​

Never do you provide the model, method, process, procedure or thingamabob to test for the existence of that god or outside intelligence. The best you have proposed is that it looks designed to you and so there must be a designer. You offer no reason there must be a god or outside intelligence designing what you say looks designed.

​

Worse, when you ask if "that looks designed" often the response your get is "No, it looks evolved."

---

The topic that YOU started was "The Science in Creationism".Yet you have not shown any examples of science in Creationism.You made a claim that that was what you were going to do but have utterly failed (as has every other Creationist) to show that there is any science in Creationism.We still wait.Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

Once again it was clear that there is NO science in Creationism, no connection between Creationism and reality and only a slight connection to an extra Biblical interpretation that is actually refuted by what is really written in the Bible stories; and that Creationism as science of any nature has been abandoned and is opposed by all major Christian Denominations.Despite repeated pleadings to show any model, method, evidence, process, procedure or thingamabob that might indicate any science in Creationism or designer or god, no such model, method, evidence, process, procedure or thingamabob was provided.Creationism is simply Dead on Arrival, valueless except as an example of sloppy thinking and as worthless as Young Earth or Biblical Flood Geology.The issue of Creation versus Evolution has been resolved and Creationism has rightly been tossed on the trash heap of history.

One other issue that has been presented by Creationists is that there is some Secular Humanist Fundamentalist point of view versus some other (as expected from Creationists) unspecified point of view.Of course that is simply yet another misrepresentation by Creationists.Opposition to the false doctrine that Creationism is Science comes from theists as well as non-theists and in fact from every major US Christian Denomination as clearly shown by the Clergy Letter Project which is currently endorsed by over 13,000 Christian Clergy, over 500 Rabbis, over 400 Unitarian Universalists and even Buddhist monks.Creationism is simply a false doctrine marketed under false colors as an attempt to get a very strange Christian minority's dogma introduced into Public Schools. It is nothing but carny con games and snake oil medicine-man spiels.From the 1981 Pastoral Letter issued by The Rt. Rev. Bennett J. Sims, Episcopal Bishop of Atlanta titled A Pastoral Statement on Creation and Evolution:

quote:

---

Legislation is pending before the Georgia State Legislature which calls for the public financing and teaching of Scientific Creationism as a counter understanding to Evolution, wherever the evolutionary view is taught in the public schools.

​

Scientific Creationism understands the cosmos and the world to have originated as the Bible describes the process in the opening chapters of Genesis.

​

The 74th Annual Council of the Diocese of Atlanta, in formal action on January 31, 1981, acted without a dissenting vote to oppose by resolution any action by the Georgia Legislature to impose the teaching of Scientific Creationism on the public school system. A copy of the resolution is attached to this Pastoral.

​

...

​

If the world is not God's, the most eloquent or belligerent arguments will not make it so. If it is God's world, and this is the first declaration of our creed, then faith has no fear of anything the world itself reveals to the searching eye of science.

​

Insistence upon dated and partially contradictory statements of how as conditions for true belief in the why of creation cannot qualify either as faithful religion or as intelligent science. Neither evolution over an immensity of time nor the work done in a sixday week are articles of the creeds. It is a symptom of fearful and unsound religion to contend with one another as if they were. Historic creedal Christianity joyfully insists on God as sovereign and frees the human spirit to trust and seek that sovereignty in a world full of surprises.

---