In
message 226 of the Global Flood Evidence topic
roxrkool writes:
Geologists didn't just blindly think up these divisions one day at the lab and then head out to the field to prove themselves right.
In reply, Faith writes:
No, they didn't, but they have been working under the handicap of the ASSUMPTIONS already laid down in the field and cannot think outside that box, which means that all their thinking has gone into finding an explanation that fits those preconceptions. And it seems to me that as a matter of sheer empirical fact the fit is just some kind of theoretical exercise that ignores the main problem I'm talking about.
{abe: AND HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE given that these are smart people? BECAUSE
THERE IS NOTHING TESTABLE ABOUT ANY OF THIS. IT IS NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, BUT AN EXERCISE IN IMAGINATION.}
(my emphasis)
I have seen the statement about the lack of ability to test past events before and not just from her. Although, it sounds semi-logical on the surface, there are some things done now that would not be allowed if this statement were wholly true.
What is it about these events that make them untestable?
What does "Testable" mean to creationists with respect to this statement? Is it the same meaning as that of scientists who study ancient events?
I would like to dissect this statement on testability from the creationists point of view, and understand the reasoning that is used to come up with this position.
™ Version 4.2