|
Author
|
Topic: Does ID follow the scientific method?
|
jar
Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
what is the method to differentiate design from nondesign
Dawn Bertot writes: It would be silly to assume that IDers use some strange method different to the SM or any other thinking person Why? You have consistently failed to tell us what method you use to tell designed objects from non-designed objects. Edited by jar, : fix sub-title
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 60 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-19-2010 2:36 AM | | Dawn Bertot has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
Message 94 of 325 (592324)
11-19-2010 1:51 PM
|
Reply to: Message 88 by Coyote
11-19-2010 12:20 PM
|
|
Re: Design vs. non-design
An important point that I think needs to be stressed is that determining if something is designed involves observing and testing the methods and practices. For example, in the case of stone tools scientists observe knapping practices, even perform knapping, to see exactly what are the characteristics of a hand made stone tool as opposed to a natural occurring rock or chip. It is this step, actually observing how the designer created the artifact that is missing in the IDM.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 88 by Coyote, posted 11-19-2010 12:20 PM | | Coyote has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 96 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-19-2010 8:40 PM | | jar has seen this message but not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Question everything
Ill give you a chance to be honest as well. Please demonstrate why any of the initial or complex examinations of the IDM, are not a scientific investigation method You have not yet addressed the issue of how IDM uses any processes or procedures so it is impossible for use to address IDM at all. As I pointed out back in Message 77 "You have consistently failed to tell us what method you use to tell designed objects from non-designed objects." And as I pointed out in Message 94 :
quote:
An important point that I think needs to be stressed is that determining if something is designed involves observing and testing the methods and practices. For example, in the case of stone tools scientists observe knapping practices, even perform knapping, to see exactly what are the characteristics of a hand made stone tool as opposed to a natural occurring rock or chip. It is this step, actually observing how the designer created the artifact that is missing in the IDM.
Tell us how the IDM investigates how the designer actually effects change.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Still just empty assertions and claims.
Tell us how the IDM investigates how the designer actually effects change.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Still just empty assertions and claims.
No, you have not supported your position and I have repeatedly shown you why, but I will repeat it yet again. As I pointed out in Message 77 and in Message 94 and in Message 128, the scientific method actually goes and observes, tests and replicates design processes to determine the different results between a designed object like a stone tool and a naturally occurring one.
quote:
An important point that I think needs to be stressed is that determining if something is designed involves observing and testing the methods and practices. For example, in the case of stone tools scientists observe knapping practices, even perform knapping, to see exactly what are the characteristics of a hand made stone tool as opposed to a natural occurring rock or chip. It is this step, actually observing how the designer created the artifact that is missing in the IDM.
Now yet again I ask as I asked in Message 132:
quote:
Tell us how the IDM investigates how the designer actually effects change.
How does IDM actually investigate how the designer effects change?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 172 of 325 (592601)
11-20-2010 7:18 PM
|
Reply to: Message 171 by alschwin
11-20-2010 7:14 PM
|
|
Re: Question everything
Of course. Not just evolutionists but Christians and Jews and Cosmologists all believe that "time, space and matter has not always existed", and in fact, that is exactly what the evidence seems to show.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 171 by alschwin, posted 11-20-2010 7:14 PM | | alschwin has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Why IDM is not science.
No, you have not supported your position and I have repeatedly shown you why, but I will repeat it yet again. As I pointed out in Message 77 and in Message 94 and in Message 128, the scientific method actually goes and observes, tests and replicates design processes to determine the different results between a designed object like a stone tool and a naturally occurring one.
quote:
An important point that I think needs to be stressed is that determining if something is designed involves observing and testing the methods and practices. For example, in the case of stone tools scientists observe knapping practices, even perform knapping, to see exactly what are the characteristics of a hand made stone tool as opposed to a natural occurring rock or chip. It is this step, actually observing how the designer created the artifact that is missing in the IDM.
Now yet again I ask as I asked in Message 132:
quote:
Tell us how the IDM investigates how the designer actually effects change.
How does IDM actually investigate how the designer effects change?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 256 of 325 (592910)
11-22-2010 6:40 PM
|
Reply to: Message 254 by Buzsaw
11-22-2010 6:25 PM
|
|
Moller and Wyatt did no science.
Buz writes: Here's one example. Assemble all of the data in the Biblical Record about the alleged Exodus. As explorer/researcher Ron Wyatt, Lennart Moller and others have done, go on expeditions to research the area which the Biblical Historical Record cites as the region of the alleged event. Document the supportive evidences which are discovered, etc. Why do the SM scientists such as National Geographic's Robert Ballard and other secularists have no interest in either falsifying the alleged evidence or verifying it? Because even if that was true (which it is not, Moller and Wyatt never found or presented any evidence and only falsified data) it has NOTHING to do with an ID Methodology or Intelligent Design. You have not yet addressed the issue of how IDM uses any processes or procedures so it is impossible for us to address IDM at all. As I pointed out back in Message 77 "You (Dawn Bertot) have consistently failed to tell us what method you use to tell designed objects from non-designed objects." And as I pointed out in Message 94 :
quote:
An important point that I think needs to be stressed is that determining if something is designed involves observing and testing the methods and practices. For example, in the case of stone tools scientists observe knapping practices, even perform knapping, to see exactly what are the characteristics of a hand made stone tool as opposed to a natural occurring rock or chip. It is this step, actually observing how the designer created the artifact that is missing in the IDM.
Tell us how the IDM investigates how the designer actually effects change. Show us exactly how the designer effects change. Until you can do that, nonsense like the mythological Exodus or Flood are irrelevant. Stop trying to create yet another attractive rabbit hole by pointing towards things that never happened and books that are totally irrelevant to the topic.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 254 by Buzsaw, posted 11-22-2010 6:25 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 272 of 325 (593037)
11-23-2010 9:37 PM
|
Reply to: Message 269 by Buzsaw
11-23-2010 9:15 PM
|
|
Try for once to be on topic and provide some support for your position
Buz, the Biblical Exodus is as usual just another of your totally irrelevant to a topic misdirection tactic as well as having been totally refuted time after time, most recently in Did the Biblical Exodus ever happen?, yet another thread where you simply ran away as each and EVERY supposed piece of evidence you presented was shown to be either nonexistent or just plain false. And the "metaphysical science methodology" is just another example of you stringing words together and thinking they have some meaning and another attempt to create an attractive rabbit hole in the vain hope that folk won't expect you to support your position for once. When you can present the model showing exactly how your imaginary metaphysical fantasy effects change, then perhaps it will be worth something more than a quiet chuckle.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 269 by Buzsaw, posted 11-23-2010 9:15 PM | | Buzsaw has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 274 by Buzsaw, posted 11-23-2010 10:00 PM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 277 of 325 (593051)
11-23-2010 10:16 PM
|
Reply to: Message 274 by Buzsaw
11-23-2010 10:00 PM
|
|
Re: Opine Pertaining Pertinent Points Posted, Please
Well Buz, I did that in the very post you are replying to. "Opine Pertaining Pertinent Points Posted, Please" Sheesh Buz, yet more nonsense crap. I'll post it again in case you missed it.
quote:
Buz, the Biblical Exodus is as usual just another of your totally irrelevant to a topic misdirection tactic as well as having been totally refuted time after time, most recently in Did the Biblical Exodus ever happen?, yet another thread where you simply ran away as each and EVERY supposed piece of evidence you presented was shown to be either nonexistent or just plain false. And the "metaphysical science methodology" is just another example of you stringing words together and thinking they have some meaning and another attempt to create an attractive rabbit hole in the vain hope that folk won't expect you to support your position for once. When you can present the model showing exactly how your imaginary metaphysical fantasy effects change, then perhaps it will be worth something more than a quiet chuckle.
The points are simple, most anyone can understand them. First, the imagined exodus, in addition to being just a myth, is irrelevant to the topic and just another attempt by you to misdirect folks attention and direct them down another attractive rabbit hole. Second, "metaphysical science methodology" just plain don't exist until you can provide the method and model for your imaginary metaphysical critter to effect change. When you can present the model showing exactly how your imaginary metaphysical fantasy effects change, then perhaps it will be worth something more than a quiet chuckle. But I predict that once again you will simply avoid addressing the issue or supporting your position as always. Edited by jar, : appalin spallin
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 274 by Buzsaw, posted 11-23-2010 10:00 PM | | Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 280 of 325 (593060)
11-23-2010 10:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 278 by Buzsaw
11-23-2010 10:34 PM
|
|
So provide the support for once Buz!!!!!!!
Buz writes: I'm reinforcing Dawn's position by explaining how the metaphysical Science Method (MSM) is a more complete science methodology than the biased scientific methodology (MS). MSM researches all sciences, both physical and metaphysical whereas MS limits their methodology to the physical. Thus the MSM is the more complete and non-biased science methodology. Good, then can you explain the model and methods that the metaphysical critter effects change?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 278 by Buzsaw, posted 11-23-2010 10:34 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2