Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Jeddidiah's question?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    It was having such questions that you referred to that was the topic of the thread, which you asserted that evolutionists could or would not answer that was the issue. You failed to provide and clarify those questions in a forum where they could be answered.

    What are the questions that remain unanswered?
    I have one question which I have reiterated in my response to Roy.

    I will now go back to ignoring this thread unless someone at least addresses the actual question.
    Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
      If you want a discussion of the details of my understanding you will have to try elsewhere.
      So once again you have requested specific questions and then refused to answer them. Perhaps the reason you don't get responses to the questions that you ask is because you refuse to reciprocate? Not that this is any surprise. In nearly 30 years of encounters with creationism advocates I have yet to find a single one without blatant double-standards.

      Reasons To Believe has pretty much what my understanding is spelled out. This is why I found your question non-responsive. The question I had, the only question I had was pretty specific. If I agree completely with the fossil record (yes I understand that details change with new information, but the basic outline remains) and that is the basis of my question. I am not interested in running off on some rabbit trails.
      Asking for clarification of your meaning is not a rabbit-trail. Given your evasive and ambiguous style it's a necessary step.
      This is the crux of the matter. I do not care if you understand the background. I have asked this question in the context of a discussion - which I do not care to have here - and it has not been answered. No one even tried to answer it.
      There's that lie again...
      Sure I did not present it as you might like, but I did not initiate this discussion.

      According to my understanding spelled out in the quote above how would you tell the difference?
      I wouldn't, because there would be no difference.

      If your God created all life by fiat to look exactly as if it evolved, then life would look exactly as if it evolved, and no evidence could distinguish the two views. Possibly one could watch life evolving on a small scale and note if any god was spotted tinkering with genes, but given the supposed supernatural powers of gods/leprechauns you'd never be able to prove that they hadn't done their tinkering in a way you couldn't spot.

      Your understanding is completely useless. It's basically a variant of the Omphalos question, or last-Tuesdayism. To successfully differentiate between two proposed hypotheses one needs to determine when/where they have different consequences. Since your hypothesis includes the idea that there are no different consequences it is literally indistinguishable from any alternative by definition, and it's a complete waste of time trying to find any distinguishments. In fact it's a complete waste of time even wondering if they might exist. Your 'question' reduces to [i]'If there is no difference, how can you tell the difference'[i]. It's pure navel-gazing.

      One last thing - your claim to make one less assumption is complete bollocks. No-one assumes that there is a material explanation for everything; it's just that any theory that involves immaterial pixies interfering with experimental equipment is impossible to resolve, so is ignored. On the other hand, you are making one more assumption, and a massive and unnecessary one at that. You are assuming that there is a trickster god.

      Roy

      P.S. The above is of course dependent on my having correctly divined Jedidiah's actual position, which, given his tendency to present incomplete ideas then refuse to elaborate, is not guaranteed.
      Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

      MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
      MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

      seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Roy View Post
        So once again you have requested specific questions and then refused to answer them. Perhaps the reason you don't get responses to the questions that you ask is because you refuse to reciprocate? Not that this is any surprise. In nearly 30 years of encounters with creationism advocates I have yet to find a single one without blatant double-standards.

        Asking for clarification of your meaning is not a rabbit-trail. Given your evasive and ambiguous style it's a necessary step.There's that lie again...I wouldn't, because there would be no difference.

        If your God created all life by fiat to look exactly as if it evolved, then life would look exactly as if it evolved, and no evidence could distinguish the two views. Possibly one could watch life evolving on a small scale and note if any god was spotted tinkering with genes, but given the supposed supernatural powers of gods/leprechauns you'd never be able to prove that they hadn't done their tinkering in a way you couldn't spot.

        Your understanding is completely useless. It's basically a variant of the Omphalos question, or last-Tuesdayism. To successfully differentiate between two proposed hypotheses one needs to determine when/where they have different consequences. Since your hypothesis includes the idea that there are no different consequences it is literally indistinguishable from any alternative by definition, and it's a complete waste of time trying to find any distinguishments. In fact it's a complete waste of time even wondering if they might exist. Your 'question' reduces to [i]'If there is no difference, how can you tell the difference'[i]. It's pure navel-gazing.

        One last thing - your claim to make one less assumption is complete bollocks. No-one assumes that there is a material explanation for everything; it's just that any theory that involves immaterial pixies interfering with experimental equipment is impossible to resolve, so is ignored. On the other hand, you are making one more assumption, and a massive and unnecessary one at that. You are assuming that there is a trickster god.

        Roy

        P.S. The above is of course dependent on my having correctly divined Jedidiah's actual position, which, given his tendency to present incomplete ideas then refuse to elaborate, is not guaranteed.
        I apologize for the apparent inconsistency. It was not intentional dishonesty. I admit to being a poor communicator. I was only interested in questions regarding the specifics which you have addressed. Again sorry for my failure to communicate effectively.
        Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
          I apologize for the apparent inconsistency. It was not intentional dishonesty. I admit to being a poor communicator. I was only interested in questions regarding the specifics which you have addressed. Again sorry for my failure to communicate effectively.
          ETA: While you do not like my question, you are the first to try to answer. My point is that science should be an effort to discover the actual answers. It should not bar certain classes of answers simply because they do not fit the definition of science as set out by some folks. It is possible that evolution is the answer, but the fact that the two answers cannot be separated is not justification for throwing out one answer.
          Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
            It is possible that evolution is the answer, but the fact that the two answers cannot be separated is not justification for throwing out one answer.
            It's not that the two answers cannot be separated, it's that one of them is based on it not being separable from the other.
            I apologize for the apparent inconsistency. It was not intentional dishonesty. I admit to being a poor communicator. I was only interested in questions regarding the specifics which you have addressed. Again sorry for my failure to communicate effectively.
            There's no need to apologise for being a poor communicator. If you want to apologise, try apologising for your unnecessary behaviour, such as wasting everyone's time by soliciting questions you had no intention to answer.

            Roy
            Last edited by Roy; 05-24-2015, 02:20 PM.
            Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

            MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
            MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

            seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
              I apologize for the apparent inconsistency. It was not intentional dishonesty. I admit to being a poor communicator. I was only interested in questions regarding the specifics which you have addressed. Again sorry for my failure to communicate effectively.
              ETA: While you do not like my question, you are the first to try to answer. My point is that science should be an effort to discover the actual answers. It should not bar certain classes of answers simply because they do not fit the definition of science as set out by some folks. It is possible that evolution is the answer, but the fact that the two answers cannot be separated is not justification for throwing out one answer.
              Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Roy View Post
                It's not that the two answers cannot be separated, it's that one of them is based on it not being separable from the other.
                Not really true. My understanding came from my attempt to bring two things I believed together. Again as I said, if the Bible is true it cannot contradict any other truth.

                There's no need to apologise for being a poor communicator. If you want to apologise, try apologising for your unnecessary behaviour, such as wasting everyone's time by soliciting questions you had no intention to answer.
                Roy, please remember that I was dragged into this discussion, I did not start it. And that was part of what I was apologizing for.
                Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                  Not really true. My understanding came from my attempt to bring two things I believed together. Again as I said, if the Bible is true it cannot contradict any other truth.
                  Which is in contradiction, to your prior assertions. Therefore the Bible is not true.

                  Originally posted by Jedidiah
                  I agree with the modern scientific understanding of the nature of the world and the rest of the universe (as far as that goes).
                  Roy, please remember that I was dragged into this discussion, I did not start it. And that was part of what I was apologizing for.
                  You asked this in a thread where evolutionists cannot respond.

                  Originally posted by Jedidiah
                  The days in Genesis were long undefined periods of time. What is normally seen as various evolved organisms are all individual fiat creations of God. I have asked in the past how one could tell the difference between this and evolution. Evolutionists have never answered me.
                  The fact that Genesis can possibly refer to long periods of time does not help. Nothing else matches the science of evolution and natural history.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    This discussion is over. You can play alone here.
                    Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                    Comment

                    Related Threads

                    Collapse

                    Topics Statistics Last Post
                    Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                    48 responses
                    135 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post Sparko
                    by Sparko
                     
                    Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                    16 responses
                    74 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post shunyadragon  
                    Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                    6 responses
                    48 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post shunyadragon  
                    Working...
                    X