Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-17-2019 9:14 AM
28 online now:
caffeine, JonF, Stile, Tangle (4 members, 24 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 853,896 Year: 8,932/19,786 Month: 1,354/2,119 Week: 114/576 Day: 15/99 Hour: 0/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
Author Topic:   On the difference between Science and ID or Biblical Creationism
DominionSeraph
Member (Idle past 2918 days)
Posts: 365
From: on High
Joined: 01-26-2005


Message 16 of 23 (420654)
09-08-2007 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Dr Adequate
09-08-2007 5:26 PM


Re: Predictability...
Dr Adequate writes:

Anything can be "readily assimilated" into a framework which makes absolutely no predictions.

... and doesn't need a mechanism.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-08-2007 5:26 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30980
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 17 of 23 (420880)
09-10-2007 12:00 AM


Bump
Bump to see if anyone wishes or is able to show how ID can be predictive as was the Periodic Table.


Aslan is not a Tame Lion
  
Volunteer
Junior Member (Idle past 4072 days)
Posts: 21
From: Tennessee
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 18 of 23 (441270)
12-16-2007 10:43 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by jar
09-07-2007 1:17 PM


Theory vs Law
How can the theory of evolution be reconciled with the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics? It seems to me that we must reject one or the other.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jar, posted 09-07-2007 1:17 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 12-16-2007 10:47 PM Volunteer has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30980
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 19 of 23 (441272)
12-16-2007 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Volunteer
12-16-2007 10:43 PM


Re: Theory vs Law
Topic.

If you want to bring up that old PRATT I suggest you search the board for the MANY times it has been discussed and laughed over.

The topic of this thread is:

"The question is, what predictive qualities of either ID or Biblical Creationism stand out as examples of prediction in the same manner as Mendeleev's Periodic Table allowed predictions of the characteristics of both known and yet to be discovered elements?"

from Message 1.


Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Volunteer, posted 12-16-2007 10:43 PM Volunteer has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Volunteer, posted 12-16-2007 10:57 PM jar has responded

  
Volunteer
Junior Member (Idle past 4072 days)
Posts: 21
From: Tennessee
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 20 of 23 (441274)
12-16-2007 10:57 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by jar
12-16-2007 10:47 PM


Re: Theory vs Law
I understand. You can't answer so you ridicule. Sorry about being in the wrong place, I'm new at this.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 12-16-2007 10:47 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by molbiogirl, posted 12-16-2007 11:12 PM Volunteer has not yet responded
 Message 22 by jar, posted 12-16-2007 11:14 PM Volunteer has not yet responded
 Message 23 by jar, posted 12-17-2007 10:19 AM Volunteer has not yet responded

  
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 805 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 21 of 23 (441280)
12-16-2007 11:12 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Volunteer
12-16-2007 10:57 PM


Re: Theory vs Law
You must understand, Vol.

1. PRATT = Point Refuted A Thousand Times = a common phrase used by posters of online debating forums, and refers specifically to any argument that has, as the name suggests, been refuted time and time again. This is particularly frequent in 'Creation vs Evolution' forums. (Definition from Wiki.)

2. Many of us here have been arguing with creos for years.

3. Any quote you swipe off some creo site (AIG, ICR, etc.) has been beaten to DEATH.

4. Any newbie that swoops in on a dead-for-3-months thread and drops a one line PRATT is more than likely a hit and run creo. IOW, maybe one, maybe two posts and we never hear from them again.

5. Unlike other sites, EvC has a set of rules (see link above) and we try our best to stick to 'em. So. The Second Law of Thermodynamics ... hell, any of the 3 laws ... is OT in this thread unless you can manage to tie it/them to the OP.

Capiche?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Volunteer, posted 12-16-2007 10:57 PM Volunteer has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30980
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 22 of 23 (441281)
12-16-2007 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Volunteer
12-16-2007 10:57 PM


Re: Theory vs Law
Well you have to remember that many of us are NOT new to this. The 2nd. Law of Thermodynamics has nothing to do with the Theory of Evolution, it has been discussed here at EvC a brazillion times which is why it is considered a PRATT (Points Refuted a Thousand Times) and it is also off topic for this thread.

If someone has been telling you that it is an issue they are either ignorant of what the 2nd. Law of Thermodynamics says or if it was from someone who was supposedly not ignorant, say a teacher or website, then they were lying to you.

For answers begin by reading the following threads:

Second Law of Thermodynamics
A Question about Evolution (2nd Law of Thermodynamics)
2nd Law and Open / Closed Systems
Is evolution the only thing to contradict the Second law of Thermodynamics?
Thermodynamics
Thermodynamics, Abiogenesis and Evolution

Once you work through those, if you still think it is of any importance, you can propose yet another thread to address it.


Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Volunteer, posted 12-16-2007 10:57 PM Volunteer has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30980
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 23 of 23 (441369)
12-17-2007 10:19 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Volunteer
12-16-2007 10:57 PM


One more suggestion.
If you would actually like to support Creationism or ID or any model other than the current models, it is necessary to actually present a model that supports your position and not just try to attack another.

If for example, you really could find something that absolutely destroyed the current TOE, all that would mean is the the current model must needs to be reexamined to find explanations for the disparity. It adds no weight or support to any other model.

To support Creationism or IDism you need to present testable models that at the very minimum, explain what is seen better than the current models.

For help and guidance on that, read message 1 in How can "Creationism" be supported?.


Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Volunteer, posted 12-16-2007 10:57 PM Volunteer has not yet responded

  
Prev1
2
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019