Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,455 Year: 3,712/9,624 Month: 583/974 Week: 196/276 Day: 36/34 Hour: 2/14


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   what is a scientific theory of creation
redstang281
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 58 (4214)
02-12-2002 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by lbhandli
02-11-2002 8:12 PM


quote:
Originally posted by lbhandli:
Apparently no one is going to provide a scientific theory of creation.
It should have:
1) testable hypotheses
2) confirming evidence
3) potential falsifications
Now, if creationism is science this should be a trivial exercise.
Cheers,
Larry

I think this is the most common misunderstanding by evolutionists.
The belief of creation is not provable, it's a faith. The idea is that all science fits with the Biblical account of creation without compromising the clear teachings of the Bible.
Now if we apply your laws to the theory of evolution we will find that evolution is not a science either.
Non of the evolution theorys could stand up to any of these. (keep in mind microevolution is testible and is part of creation)
It should have:
1) testable hypotheses
2) confirming evidence
3) potential falsifications
Here's some important quotes:
2. 'In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion;
almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared
to 'bend' their observations to fit in with it.'
H.S. Lipson, FRS (Professor of Physics, University of Manchester,
UK), 'A physicist looks at evolution'. Physics Bulletin, vol. 31,
1980, p.138
3. 'The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is
thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an
unproved theory - is it then a science or a faith? Belief in the
theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special
creation - both are concepts which believers know to be true but
neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof.'
(L. Harrison Matthews, FRS, Introduction to Darwin's The Origin of
Species, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1971, p.xi.
4. 'One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current
wisdom a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance
and natural causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not
faith has not yet been written.'
(Hubert P. Yockey [Army Pulse Radiation Facility, Aberdeen Proving
Ground, Maryland, USA], 'A calculation of the probability of
spontaneous biogenesis by information theory'. Journal of Theoretical
Biology, vol.67, 1977, p.396

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by lbhandli, posted 02-11-2002 8:12 PM lbhandli has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by LudvanB, posted 02-12-2002 9:21 AM redstang281 has not replied
 Message 10 by Peter, posted 02-12-2002 9:30 AM redstang281 has not replied
 Message 11 by toff, posted 02-12-2002 10:02 AM redstang281 has not replied
 Message 15 by lbhandli, posted 02-12-2002 2:40 PM redstang281 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024