Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8972 total)
147 online now:
dwise1, PaulK, Tangle (3 members, 144 visitors)
Newest Member: Howyoudo
Post Volume: Total: 875,500 Year: 7,248/23,288 Month: 1,154/1,214 Week: 166/303 Day: 6/36 Hour: 1/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   My HUGE problem with creationist thinking (re: Which version of creationism)
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16111
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 151 of 336 (637372)
10-15-2011 7:43 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by Chuck77
10-15-2011 7:21 AM


Re: ID and Creationism
Well, maybe that is something you can explain to Professor Sir Fred Hoyle:

All sorts of things need explaining to Fred Hoyle, but unfortunately he's dead.

What does this have to do with anything?

Oh, I know you've heard that a million times. So what, it doesn't make it any less true.

I'm not sure it's even possible for anything to make that less true ... perhaps if you combined it with a dissertation on how the first lemon soufflé was invented by a revolving umbrella-stand named Gerald.

No matter how you spin it, your religion is no different, sorry.

I don't have a religion, and no different from what?

Stephen Meyer has some new research out and it's fascinating. I'll post some of it soon enough and we can discuss it. ID has come a LONG way since Dover. Michael Behe too.

I look forward to it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Chuck77, posted 10-15-2011 7:21 AM Chuck77 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Chuck77, posted 10-15-2011 7:50 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 152 of 336 (637374)
10-15-2011 7:50 AM
Reply to: Message 151 by Dr Adequate
10-15-2011 7:43 AM


Re: ID and Creationism
Condescending as usual.

I look forward to it.

You betcha.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-15-2011 7:43 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

jar
Member
Posts: 32510
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 153 of 336 (637378)
10-15-2011 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by Chuck77
10-15-2011 7:21 AM


Re: ID and Creationism
Chuck, do you see the ellipsis throughout your quote?

Do you know what that means?


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Chuck77, posted 10-15-2011 7:21 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-15-2011 8:10 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1002 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(3)
Message 154 of 336 (637382)
10-15-2011 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 142 by IamJoseph
10-15-2011 5:22 AM


Re: YAWN
Then it was not infinite 10 seconds ago before it expanded.

Math quiz for you.

(infinity) = (infinity)
(infinity)+10= ?

Then you misunderstand what change actually is. Technically, when something is changed - whatever changes it transcends it; the changed entity is no longer. That is the application here. Infinity is not subject to change - that is why everything in the universe is finite - it is subject to change;that is also why there is nothing in the universe which is not subject to change. Without change there can be no death or decay.

Ridiculous.

If you have an infinitely large collection of cue balls, they extend out in rows and columns forever.
You can still take a magic marker and draw an X on one of them.
Drawing an X on a cue ball at your present location does not negate the existence of the rest of the cue balls.

Everything we see in the universe is finite.

Because everything we see is limited by what light can reach us.

If you live in an infinite environment filled with evenly spaces pillars, there is no point at which you can stand where you can see everything.

At all points, some pillars will be blocking your view.

AND, your vision is limited by your ability to distinguish objects at great distance, so even if you could find a vantage point, you can not see further than you can see.

I don't know if you ever played peek-a-bo as a baby, but your mommy was still there even when you couldn't see her.

Your math is poor. The age of the uni X expansion velocity gives a reasonably good ratio of the universe's limits.

Totality. We can observe X amount of the universe, therefore the universe is a certain age. Because the universe is a certain age, then it can only be X big.

It's true that we can not see beyond the background radiation. That does not mean that there is nothing behind the background radiation.

Again, peekaboo. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

Its like finding a car on Mars and allocating it to weird weather patterns.

We can just as easily say:
"Its like finding a pile of eroded gravel at the bottom of a cliff and allocating it to a Jewish Wizard."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by IamJoseph, posted 10-15-2011 5:22 AM IamJoseph has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by IamJoseph, posted 10-15-2011 9:56 AM Nuggin has responded
 Message 161 by IamJoseph, posted 10-15-2011 10:06 AM Nuggin has responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1002 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(5)
Message 155 of 336 (637384)
10-15-2011 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by Chuck77
10-15-2011 5:45 AM


Re: ID and Creationism
Remember now Nuggin, argue the postion and not the person. When you argue the person like you are, it makes it look like you are clueless to the topic and instead are resorting to a low level of debating tactics. Sad bro, sad.

Oh really?

Let's look at your quotes over the last two posts, shall we?

you seem ignorant

you can stop being ignorant.

You are not at all worth taking serious

You are a complete and utter joke

Your a sad individual.

really can;t believe the level of your maturity.

That's 6 insults in about 5 LINES of total text. And one of those lines was "and".

I'm reminded of something someone once told me:

Remember now Nuggin, argue the postion and not the person. When you argue the person like you are, it makes it look like you are clueless to the topic and instead are resorting to a low level of debating tactics. Sad bro, sad.

So, Chucky, I'm going to quote Chucky here and tell you -
You look like you are clueless on the topic and instead are resorting to low level debate tactics.

Sad bro, sad.

..... owned.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Chuck77, posted 10-15-2011 5:45 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1002 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(3)
Message 156 of 336 (637385)
10-15-2011 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by Chuck77
10-15-2011 5:51 AM


Re: ID and Creationism
It has nothing to do with the ID theory, incidently. You know?

Technically, nothing has anything to do with "ID theory". There is no "ID theory".

There's "ID theology".
There's "ID PR"

But there's not "theory" of ID.

There's no ID experiments.
There's no ID falsifiability.
There's no ID predictions.
There's no ID mechanism.
There's no ID limitations.

Here's a tip:
Don't use terms like "theory" if you don't know what they mean.

Someone on the thread. Can't quite remember who.... oh, right. YOU.... seems to like playing dictionary.

Well, go look up "scientific theory" and then bury your head in the sand.

I await your predictably sad reply.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Chuck77, posted 10-15-2011 5:51 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2177 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


(1)
Message 157 of 336 (637389)
10-15-2011 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by Nuggin
10-15-2011 9:44 AM


Re: YAWN
No such thing as Infinity Plus 10 or minus 10. Your slight of hand casino science only proves my case: your infinity was not infinity 10 seconds ago. Plus/Minus Infinity is also a contradiction in terms.

Why not reconsider it before being on auto-defense. Think 'ABSOLUTE' finite instead, and by a process of elimination decide what other explanation can be subscribed to the emergence of the universe, if any, other than creationism. Be assured I won't go on auto-defense and treat an intelligent answer respectfully. Hint: Its a scientific issuee, not a theological one! Just because we cannot prove infinity in a vase, it does not mean we must thereby accept a totally unscientific premise never seen anywhere, which itself is unprovable. The sound premise applies.

Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Nuggin, posted 10-15-2011 9:44 AM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by Nuggin, posted 10-15-2011 10:01 AM IamJoseph has responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1002 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(2)
Message 158 of 336 (637390)
10-15-2011 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by Chuck77
10-15-2011 7:21 AM


"Less true"
Oh, I know you've heard that a million times. So what, it doesn't make it any less true.

A little math for you.

Something can't be "less true" when it's 0% true.

He's wrong. Repeating him doesn't make him right no matter how desperately you want him to be.

I eagerly await your childish reply.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Chuck77, posted 10-15-2011 7:21 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1002 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(2)
Message 159 of 336 (637391)
10-15-2011 10:01 AM
Reply to: Message 157 by IamJoseph
10-15-2011 9:56 AM


Re: YAWN
No such thing as Infinity Plus 10 or minus 10.

Because the answer would still be infinity.

You are hooked on this idea that there can not be change within an infinite system.

That's wrong.

Repeating what you believe doesn't make it right.

Infinity is not required to be static.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by IamJoseph, posted 10-15-2011 9:56 AM IamJoseph has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by IamJoseph, posted 10-15-2011 10:18 AM Nuggin has responded

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 7051
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005


(2)
Message 160 of 336 (637392)
10-15-2011 10:01 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by Chuck77
10-15-2011 5:51 AM


Re: ID and Creationism
As Nuggin said there is no ID theory as theory as understood as a scientific theory. I post this link occassionally so that those ignorant of what the term means can be enlightened.

quote:
Theory: A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers.

http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

If you want to pursue that ID has a Theory please show how it is. Please tell us related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Chuck77, posted 10-15-2011 5:51 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2177 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


(1)
Message 161 of 336 (637395)
10-15-2011 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by Nuggin
10-15-2011 9:44 AM


Re: YAWN
quote:
We can just as easily say:
"Its like finding a pile of eroded gravel at the bottom of a cliff and allocating it to a Jewish Wizard."


No, you cannot pose that as an analogy. Genesis, unlike other ancient writings, includes names, places, dates, numbers, rivers, mountains, geneologies and 1000's of such identifiable stats. Wizards are not brave enough to do that - they cannot put such stiff on the table and have them vindicated 1000's of years later. No one has aside from Genesis. The first recording of the River Tigris and Mount Ararat are listed in their correct locations with amazing aeriel photography directions. Do you have an analogy another writing can match that?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Nuggin, posted 10-15-2011 9:44 AM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by Coragyps, posted 10-15-2011 11:37 AM IamJoseph has responded
 Message 166 by Nuggin, posted 10-15-2011 11:48 AM IamJoseph has responded

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2177 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


(1)
Message 162 of 336 (637399)
10-15-2011 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by Nuggin
10-15-2011 10:01 AM


Re: YAWN
quote:
Infinity is not required to be static.

You don't understand. The term static or unstatic is subject to something else being present, equally old and fastidious. But that would also mean the first entity was not infinite - because infinite occupies all finite space, and existed before space emerged. It is thereby not possible to have 'TWO' infinite entities, thus polytheism is wrong and only ONE can apply.

When one nominates static [changes], without realizing it they are talking about a 'finite' entity only. In contrast, the only mark of infinity is 'change'. Think of an infinite mouse and a finite elephant: if the mouse can be squashed it means it was not infinite; if the mouse prevails the elephant which is later dead, it means the elephant was finite. Only 'change' impacts here.

Further, the only way one can describe infinity 3000 years ago, is to say:
I KNOW YOUR GREAT GRAND PARENTS - THEY BECAME OLD THEN DIED AWAY - BUT I HAVE NOT CHANGED.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by Nuggin, posted 10-15-2011 10:01 AM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Panda, posted 10-15-2011 11:18 AM IamJoseph has responded
 Message 167 by Nuggin, posted 10-15-2011 11:51 AM IamJoseph has responded

Panda
Member (Idle past 2222 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


(2)
Message 163 of 336 (637408)
10-15-2011 11:18 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by IamJoseph
10-15-2011 10:18 AM


Re: YAWN
IamJ writes:

It is thereby not possible to have 'TWO' infinite entities


How many even integers are there?
How many odd integers are there?

IamJ writes:

I KNOW YOUR GREAT GRAND PARENTS - THEY BECAME OLD THEN DIED AWAY - BUT I HAVE NOT CHANGED.


I know from experience that when you capitalise your scripture it means you are making it up.

Edited by Panda, : No reason given.


If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by IamJoseph, posted 10-15-2011 10:18 AM IamJoseph has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by IamJoseph, posted 10-15-2011 8:04 PM Panda has not yet responded

Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5495
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 164 of 336 (637410)
10-15-2011 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 161 by IamJoseph
10-15-2011 10:06 AM


Re: YAWN
The first recording of the River Tigris and Mount Ararat are listed in their correct locations with amazing aeriel photography directions.

There's no aeriel photography at all in either of my King James or RSV. Could you scan what's in your version and post it here?


"The Christian church, in its attitude toward science, shows the mind of a more or less enlightened man of the Thirteenth Century. It no longer believes that the earth is flat, but it is still convinced that prayer can cure after medicine fails." H L Mencken

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by IamJoseph, posted 10-15-2011 10:06 AM IamJoseph has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by IamJoseph, posted 10-15-2011 8:00 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1002 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(3)
Message 165 of 336 (637411)
10-15-2011 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by IamJoseph
10-15-2011 5:30 AM


Re: ID and Creationism
I accept the Genesis claim as scientific

That doesn't make it scientific.

In order for the claim to be scientific, you would have to be able to present an experiment through which we could falsify at least one of the mechanisms behind the claim.

What mechanisms are given in Genesis?
What experiment can we run to test one of those mechanisms?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by IamJoseph, posted 10-15-2011 5:30 AM IamJoseph has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by IamJoseph, posted 10-15-2011 7:52 PM Nuggin has responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020