Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Only 'Chrisitian' ID Makes Logical Sense?
Philip
Member (Idle past 4723 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 1 of 15 (9253)
05-06-2002 2:17 AM


Creationism is the theory that man, the earth, and the rest of the universe were originally created rather than randomly exploding from nothingness into chance existence. We reside on the surface of a small superbly crafted, autonomous self regulating space vehicle. Together with survival, conquest and death we bear witness to beauty, fragrances, love and music. Think about this. Mathematics, philosophy, springtime, depravity, farming, courtship, quasars, and bubble gum; all came from nothingness?, formed by chance...? (www.creationism.org)
But, is this overly-simplistic ID creationist ‘theory’ satisfactory to explain ‘cursed’, ‘mutant’ (vestigiloid) and other destructive appearances that would seem unbefitting an All-Perfect-All-Benign Intelligent Designer? How might it resolve cancerous and destructive observations: i.e., ‘mutants’, ‘entropy’, ‘self-deception’, ‘depravity’, ‘sin’, and especially those ‘sarcastic jests’ observed to metastasize everywhere, like ‘mutant’ drug resistant microbes, ‘AIDS’, ‘pedophilia’, ‘terrorism’, and numerous ‘cruel pranks’ observed in the animal kingdom. Thus, a supportive (apologetic) hypothesis seems necessary for the creationist, one that demonstrates ‘redemptive’ observations on all levels that appear to atone for ‘sin-cursed’ ones. This then might increase the credibility of an All-Perfect-All-Benign Intelligent Designer model.
HYPOTHESIS: A ‘CHRIST CRUCIFIED-FOR-SIN-RISEN-FROM-THE-DEAD’ INTELLIGENT DESIGNER MODEL: The whole creation, to varying degrees, participates in: (A) the vicarious sufferings of a Christ-God and (B) a ‘quickening’ of a Christ-God on all levels (see Methods). All levels of this our (A) ‘cursed’ and (B) ’regenerated’ existence, and all sciences, follow this same multi-tiered ID model, and reflects again (A) a cursed creation that is (B) ‘groping’ (‘hoping’) for ‘restoration’. Ultimately the phenomenon would account for a human faith that commiserates with (A) a Christ’s vicarious sufferings to save from sins, and (B) the same Christ’s glorious ‘enlivening’ of all things.
Biblically,
--written in the Book of Life of the Lamb (Christ) slain from the foundation of the world. Rev.13.8 (KJV), Acts 2.23, i.e., foreordained/predestined (Rom 8.29)
--All creation is waiting eagerly for that future day when God will reveal his sons. Against its will, everything on earth was subjected to God’s curse, but because of him (Christ) that subjected the same in hope. All creation anticipates the day when it will join God’s children in glorious freedom from death and decay. For we know that all creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. (Rom. 8.19-22 NLT Bible and KJV Bible)
METHODS, TESTING:
To analyze data of a few (A) ‘SIN-CURSED’ appearing observations, and (B) ‘REDEMPTION’ appearing observations, within six (6) categories of observable reality.
The term ‘sin-cursed’ will refer to all apparently destructive, painful, antagonistic events, befitting ‘wretched men’, etc. that appear to curse our existence. The term ‘redemption’ should be used to denote observations that appear ‘restorative’, ‘renewing, ‘healing’, ‘recuperating’, etc., and not merely opposite observations.
These six categories of observed data are chosen because of their ubiquitous and multi-tiered palpability by man. They are:
I. Creation (space-time continuum) per se
II. Universal expansion/cosmogenesis
III. Geology and botanical expansion
IV. Luminaries / astronomy
V. Zoological expansion
VI. Higher life forms/man
Testing is done by analyzing the observations systematically, by comparing and contrasting (A) and (B) above. Inferences will be drawn to determine whether or not the model ‘fits’ ubiquitously for all cosmic observations per se, and then, to support or negate the ‘Christ-Crucified’ Designer motif. Critiques should follow, i.e., to attempt to demonstrate consistencies and/or inconsistencies of the hypothesis.
DATA (OBSERVED):
I. CREATION (SPACE-TIME CONTINUUM) PER SE
A) A great and terrible appearing darkness, formlessness, and void exists.
--A ‘cold’ yet ‘hellish’ outer darkness is seen to inundate >99% of universe. Temperatures are near absolute zero. No life-forms are detectable therein.
--Science and mathematics (to a great extent) appear useless in such a void.
B) The phenomenon light is observed/detected — electromagnetic radiation.
--‘Brightness’ and ‘Warmth’ is seen and felt here amidst the great ‘darkness’ of space.
--Sophisticated science with mathematically measurable parameters, are now detectable, including, ‘special relativistic phenomenon’ (‘E=MC2’).
II. UNIVERSAL EXPANSION/COSMOGENESIS
A)
1. Lower skies manifest violent meteorological instability.
--Hurricanes, lightning, tornados, violent storms, etc.
--Pollution has increased and Protective ozone is decreased in the upper atmosphere, etc.
2. An even greater darkness, formlessness, and void seen -- via Doppler waves -- expanding every moment within the universal ‘expanse’.
--Primordial(-like) atmospheric substrates detected on celestial orbs, e.g., CO2 ‘vapor canopies’, obnoxious gases, etc. (i.e., on Venus), appearing uninhabitable.
--Celestial ‘waste’, ‘death’, and ‘decay’ increasingly ubiquitous in the cosmos.
--Increasing cosmic randomization events, increasing entropic destruction.
B)
1. Lower skies manifest overall stabilizing effects.
--Hurricanes, storms, extreme seasonal changes, etc. --> necessary ‘purging’ of detrimental eco-networks.
--Many ozone, pollution catastrophes, etc. averted/post-poned (by ‘fortuitous’ advances in science and recent laws)
2. Universal expanse and expansion detectable as orderly:
--Earthly atmospheric substrates have sustained life for millennia.
--Expansion appears harmonious, symmetrical, well-aligned and proportional in great measure (per se).
--Relative infinitudes (black holes, worm-holes, etc.) are detected in the expanding universe, and with effects that are only explainable via abstract theoretical sciences (e.g., ‘general relativity’, etc.).
III. (1) GEOLOGY AND (2) BOTANICAL EXPANSION
A)
1. Ominous appearing ‘oceans of fire’ detectable below the earth’s strata and ‘oceans of water above’.
--‘Volcanic upheavals’, earthquakes, etc.
--Floods, tidal waves, etc.
2. Innumerable vegetations/fruits decay:
--Rotting, decaying, burning, etc.
--Many grains threaten extinction if neglected by human farming.
--Vicarious failures of harvests.
--Extreme ‘randomization’ forces threaten chaos in eco-systems.
B)
1. Powerful land boundaries/masses
--Geological strata appears to prevent much volcanic and seismic disturbances.
--Continental boundaries appear to prevent global floods of oceans.
2. Botanical treasures appear to be resulting amidst decay of vegetation
--Carbonaceous deposits --> massive global energy for present use.
--Innumerable flowering plants and trees taxonomically replenish/multiply with fruit and/or seeds.
--Technological farming and molecular botany exploitation (by man) --> abundant harvests.
--‘Randomization forces offset by finite taxonomical limitations, defense mechanisms.
IV. SPECIFIC LUMINARIES / ASTRONOMY
A) Innumerable battered moons and other celestial orbs that appear arbitrary and wasted.
--An infinite number of celestial orbs appear damaged, ‘aborted’, useless, pointless, strung out without any apparent purpose, etc.
--Star systems appear to be dying — ‘red dwarfs’, etc.
--An infinitude of planets appear unfavorable to sustain life.
B) Celestial luminaries observed for (diurnal) time-clocks and beneficial cyclic seasonal effects, with other potential appearing uses.
--Peculiar harmonies, symmetries, and proportions are observed in numerous stellar systems. ‘Dish’-like orbital symmetry seen in our lunar rotation and solar system, and most galaxies.
--Stars have a relatively long-appearing life cycle.
--Trans-earth habitation appears remotely promising, at least pending extensive supernatural and/or scientific intervention.
V. ZOOLOGY EXPANSION.
A) Swarms of creatures/life-forms endure ‘violence’ in lands, air, and seas.
--Many incur ‘hard’ sicknesses, often protracted deaths, starvation.
--‘Survival of the fittest’ is seen in vicarious splendor.
--Deleterious DNA mutations increasingly abound.
--‘Hypervariability’ and DNA-‘Mutation spots’ often --> drug ‘resistant’ bacteria .
B) Innumerable life-forms/creatures observed taxonomically ‘multiplied’ to replenish and overcome violent unfavorable conditions.
--Offspring replenish habitats. ‘Graceful’ appearing cadences, dances, noises observable
--Innumerable peculiar appearing and complex ‘niches’ after their kinds are observed.
--‘Sophisticated’ DNA-repair mechanisms correct many DNA mutations.
--Science technology --> superior drugs, technology, etc.
VI. HIGHER LIFE FORMS/MAN
A) Atrocious violence observed in higher life-forms and/or man: E.g.,
--dogs fight cats, snakes ‘charm’ victims, numerous predators instigate ‘terror’.
--Sickness, crying, travailing and groaning amidst all diverse life-forms and man.
--Pedophiliacs, murderers, terrorists
--Wars: Nation against nation, etc.
--Sickness and aging goes on without ceasing. Metastasis and cancer abounds.
--Crying and groaning in all upper life forms.
--Divorce, adultery, fornication, immorality, pornography --> ‘nuclear family’ decay.
--Unrestrained ‘free wills’ appear everywhere to conflict with each other.
B.) Songs of ‘deliverance’ heard among humans. Innumerable and diverse ‘renewals’ observed within creatures:
--Friendship and ‘praise’ postures are apparent. Fights often cease.
--A travailing woman is observed to ‘cheerfully’ endure her travailing.
--Acts of ‘kindness’ abound and justice is observed to various extents. Abundant ‘love’, ‘forgiveness’, ‘peace’, and ‘patience’ also witnessed.
--Nations have not yet annihilated >1% global inhabitants. ‘Peace’ reigns at times.
--‘Healing’, ‘courage’, ‘Christian-like’ behavior continue. Technological knowledge has increased.
--Songs are composed and sung. Art, writing, and hosts of other ‘joyous’ observations.
--Many ‘courtship’ and ‘marriage’ events continue -- even atheists are observed to ‘marry’ with relatively low divorce rates (i.e., compared to evangelicals).
--Free will seen subservient to forces of ‘love’ (e.g., ‘heroism’, ‘cooperation’, ‘church-meetings’, etc., etc.).
TEST RESULTS: Comparisons of (A) ‘SIN-CURSED’ observations and (B) ‘REDEMPTION’ observations: (A) Innumerable marks of destruction, ‘mutation’, ‘slow death’, and decay seem ubiquitous in the cosmos: ‘Eroding’ systems, ‘cursed’ life-forms, entropic events, and deleterious mutations, indeed, seem ubiquitous to all levels of the cosmos. ‘Mutation spots’ and ‘hypervariability’ in drug resistant bacteria seem to imply ‘dexterous cursedness’ in the design model. ‘Free-will’ itself and the numerous randomization events taking place seem sin-cursed.Indeed, such ‘vexation’, ‘pointlessness’, and ‘uselessness’, etc. seems to fail the All Benign Designer test. Many preliminary observations, thus appear cursed, from a perspective of an intelligent designer.
(B) Yet, the creation/cosmos is observed to be renewed and/or quickened: i.e., with light, ‘seasons’, rains, marriages, etc., as noted in the data in numerous redemptive events occurring on all cosmic levels. The creation/cosmos, creatures/life-forms, and man are ‘saved’ to various extents by innumerable ‘redemptive’ events, including physical and even metaphysical events (i.e., ‘marriage’ events). For each and every sin-cursed observation, another observation may be linked that appears to varying extents, ‘redemptive’.
CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION:
All creation is waiting eagerly for that future day when God will reveal his sons. Against its will, everything on earth was subjected to God’s curse, but because of him (Christ) that subjected the same in hope. All creation anticipates the day when it will join God’s children in glorious freedom from death and decay. For we know that all creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. (Rom. 8.19-22 NLT Bible and KJV Bible). The whole creation groans in pain together until now and shows the effects a ‘travailing’/’vexed’ creation that is ‘longing’ (hoping) for a ‘restoration’ and is presently effected by renewal to varying extents.
The personality behind such an intelligent design (ID) here would commiserate with all ‘sin-cursed’ observations and ‘redemptive’ ones. Such a personality is explicitly apparent in the Christ-Creator model, a Christ who himself became completely ‘sin-cursed’ but ‘risen from the dead’, redeeming the creation thereby. The marks of such redeeming events appear almost omnipresent at this time.
This hypothetical underlying creation mechanism is, in all its essence, the science of a Christ-Crucified-and-Risen Lord. To reject it as ‘non-scientific’, ‘beyond science’, ‘purely religious thinking’, etc. does not invalid it from further scientific inquiry i.e., in the same way that ‘evolutionism’, that misnomer for mutationalism, does not invalidate it from ongoing scientific inquiry.
Perhaps an infinite number of additional ‘redemptive’ observations in our sciences could be found corresponding with an infinite number of ‘sin-cursed’ ones. Yet, there would continue to be a great variability of redemption throughout, as demonstrated above.
This proposed mechanism does appear consistent the ex-nihilo creationist model (‘something out of nothing’). Many doubtless, may suggest it supports the ‘theistic’ ‘evolutional’ model of the creation as well. Many will reject the hypothesis outright. Such a mechanism seems necessary, however, for every creationist, whether Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, etc., to justify his belief in an all-benign ID model.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by edge, posted 05-06-2002 11:06 AM Philip has not replied
 Message 3 by Brad McFall, posted 05-07-2002 12:15 PM Philip has replied
 Message 11 by Brad McFall, posted 05-25-2002 3:18 PM Philip has replied
 Message 13 by nator, posted 02-18-2003 9:18 AM Philip has replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 2 of 15 (9263)
05-06-2002 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Philip
05-06-2002 2:17 AM


I think we should just turn this one over to Brad...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Philip, posted 05-06-2002 2:17 AM Philip has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Brad McFall, posted 05-09-2002 12:09 PM edge has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 3 of 15 (9315)
05-07-2002 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Philip
05-06-2002 2:17 AM


I will do a double take and not a double cross on this but know that for the time being I had two illegit childs and the immorality of this all escaped me for some "natural" flavor that was not an aromatic. Phil, I will re-read this readily.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Philip, posted 05-06-2002 2:17 AM Philip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Philip, posted 05-07-2002 9:54 PM Brad McFall has not replied

  
Philip
Member (Idle past 4723 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 4 of 15 (9338)
05-07-2002 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Brad McFall
05-07-2002 12:15 PM


Your wit is poetic; methinks I wish I had half a cup or so. Thanks for your consideration, Brad, look forward to your critique, criticisms, etc. when feasible.
As always, I welcome criticisms by any of you (lurkers) on this and other perhaps ‘extreme’ 'redemptionist' hypotheses of the cosmos.
--Philip

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Brad McFall, posted 05-07-2002 12:15 PM Brad McFall has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Percy, posted 05-07-2002 10:37 PM Philip has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 5 of 15 (9339)
05-07-2002 10:37 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Philip
05-07-2002 9:54 PM


Before I could comment you'd have to state your argument in clearer terms. I can't figure out where you're coming from. Sorry.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Philip, posted 05-07-2002 9:54 PM Philip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Joe Meert, posted 05-07-2002 11:46 PM Percy has not replied
 Message 7 by Philip, posted 05-08-2002 1:11 AM Percy has replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5680 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 6 of 15 (9341)
05-07-2002 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Percy
05-07-2002 10:37 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Percipient:
Before I could comment you'd have to state your argument in clearer terms. I can't figure out where you're coming from. Sorry.
--Percy

Yes, you gotta know something is wrong when someone actually claims to understand McFall!
Cheers
Joe Meert

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Percy, posted 05-07-2002 10:37 PM Percy has not replied

  
Philip
Member (Idle past 4723 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 7 of 15 (9344)
05-08-2002 1:11 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Percy
05-07-2002 10:37 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Percipient:
Before I could comment you'd have to state your argument in clearer terms. I can't figure out where you're coming from.
--Percy

Thanks for your, and Joe’s input.
Every job (intelligent design (ID)) is a self-portrait of the person that does it., is an oft heard saying.
ID is oversimplified by many ‘scientific’ creationists. Their model often fails to hypothesize any kind of ‘self-portrait’, ‘personality’ or ‘reality’ behind the ID. Their ‘portrait’ behind the ID, methinks, should consist of the hypothetical/theoretical science of the ‘Christ-crucified and risen from the dead’ i.e., based on the broad observed ‘DATA’ I cited (above).
In sum, behold the ‘creationist’ hypothesis/hypotheses for dispute:
1) ‘SIN-CURSED’ and ‘REDEMPTIVE’ OBSERVATIONS are UBIQUITOUS in nature (again, see some of the ‘Data’ observations above).
2) CLEARLY, all these ‘sin-cursed’ and ‘redemptive’ observations are a SELF-PORTRAIT (reflection) of a CHRIST ‘CURSED’ AND ‘RISEN’ FROM THE DEAD.
This Christ containing creationist model, alone, seems a most viable creationist model for the cosmos, as it does seem to adequately rebuke ‘scientific’ ‘scoffers’ and Babylonian myths. Thus, the Christ as such would be hypothesized as being an integral part of the ‘ID-designer-complex’ (the ‘God-head’, in Christian terms).
This thread is a (generalized) response to other threads that criticize the ID model as ‘unbefitting’ a ‘benign intelligent designer’ and to those ‘scoffers’ who unwittingly refer to Genesis 1 as mere ‘mythology’, ‘folklore’, and old-wives (old-husbands) fables.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Percy, posted 05-07-2002 10:37 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Percy, posted 05-08-2002 1:55 AM Philip has not replied
 Message 9 by Quetzal, posted 05-08-2002 5:01 AM Philip has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 8 of 15 (9347)
05-08-2002 1:55 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Philip
05-08-2002 1:11 AM


Sorry, I still don't get it, but that's okay. My interest in debate ceases when the religious basis of Creationism, or ID in this case, is conceded. I'm primarily concerned with the threat to science education, and I'm not too worried about a Christ-based version of ID being introduced into the classroom.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Philip, posted 05-08-2002 1:11 AM Philip has not replied

  
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5872 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 9 of 15 (9350)
05-08-2002 5:01 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Philip
05-08-2002 1:11 AM


Thank you, Philip. You've made an observation on which I have often contested with ID proponents: to wit, the nature of the Designer.
quote:
ID is oversimplified by many ‘scientific’ creationists. Their model often fails to hypothesize any kind of ‘self-portrait’, ‘personality’ or ‘reality’ behind the ID. Their ‘portrait’ behind the ID, methinks, should consist of the hypothetical/theoretical science of the ‘Christ-crucified and risen from the dead’ i.e., based on the broad observed ‘DATA’ I cited (above).
Having resolved the question quite clearly - that the Designer is in fact the Christian deity - I leave you to your fascinating theory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Philip, posted 05-08-2002 1:11 AM Philip has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 10 of 15 (9425)
05-09-2002 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by edge
05-06-2002 11:06 AM


OK, let me stay with the first paragraph.
I had seen Freeman Dyson Lecture and at that time I knew that I could do a better job than him decribing the biology of outer space. Implicit then I KNEW when Stu kaufmann talked with me that he did a paper BEcause He knew he could do a better job than Freeman immediately cancelled all my reading in theoritical biology I was planning. I was planning to master the journal. What resulted was not inner space of outer bio-exploration but JD Murray putting out a text on BIO-mathmatics. Not very good result for the effort. Medawar would have been shown to have done this much already and Woodger set up the logic language needed to go forward. Instead because of random events in academia people in NYC thought the guy from Philly was not cheese but the next best thing beyond Snow's two worlds.
The problem will be the amount of the DIFFERNCE of para-dia- and magnetic stuff in computers as we go out orbit. The trajectory needs less brit and more french fluid for the starch on Jay 's lendo shirt for the time we play with luxuray for Gohst busters are not flying here. We need ALL legacy to migrate Logic and logic only to objects transitioning the dynamically approved less global but humanly ethical approach to this step. But we can not step off earth as long as the surface is flat. 3-D may not even exist but though we may be here anthropologically socially we are not and putting a nano right size angle iron on an adders den aldler can not add says nothing for the English Dept that is to some extent intermingled with the sage philosophy school. The future will be in moving the base line of business to only competition between GLASNOSS AND GPS or Chinese equivalnet with all military only dealing with not shooting down satatlites but with negotiationis on the number per country and the UN transformed equitably country for country to mitigate only disputes of statalitie parbolas to hyperbolas ie no getting into parents childerns mind but on this outer space.
If some one does not like it for religious purposes they can compete for the technos to go beyond the satalites if they wish but Earth must remain as green as it is. We will know this by color sensors objectively enough to inform thoughs who still claim the four sides are flat.
Sounds like fiction but it is the future and not too far aways

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by edge, posted 05-06-2002 11:06 AM edge has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 11 of 15 (10359)
05-25-2002 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Philip
05-06-2002 2:17 AM


As for the "cursed mutant" covering by ID such would be possible without Mayrs' ultimate/proximate essentially but then I would need to show how to properly apportion d^2 between e^2 and h^2 as KITCHER is used to supply some coversation in Panbiogeography but not an infinite possibility --)do able.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Philip, posted 05-06-2002 2:17 AM Philip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Philip, posted 05-26-2002 9:39 PM Brad McFall has not replied

  
Philip
Member (Idle past 4723 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 12 of 15 (10382)
05-26-2002 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Brad McFall
05-25-2002 3:18 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Brad McFall:
...properly apportion d^2 between e^2 and h^2 as KITCHER is used to supply some coversation in Panbiogeography but not an infinite possibility --)do able.
--Thanks for this all-penetrative mathamatic re-affirmation.
Phil

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Brad McFall, posted 05-25-2002 3:18 PM Brad McFall has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 13 of 15 (32546)
02-18-2003 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Philip
05-06-2002 2:17 AM


Philip, you need a section called "DEFINITION OF TERMS" in which you explain, with examples, exactly what you mean when you use each of the words in quotations in your theory.
Otherwise, you are simply doing what you have always done; making up a lot of flowery words that don't mean anything and saying, "See! What I say is true!", or, "See, Evolution isn't possible".
Serioulsly, this is even loopier than your usual stuff; have you started to write yourself prescriptions for happy pills or something?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Philip, posted 05-06-2002 2:17 AM Philip has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Philip, posted 02-19-2003 3:00 AM nator has replied

  
Philip
Member (Idle past 4723 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 14 of 15 (32632)
02-19-2003 3:00 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by nator
02-18-2003 9:18 AM


...Wow, you finally got around to rebutting my scientific workup. The hypothesis is crude, the methods are crude, the workup is crude, etc., but not absolutely "loopy" as you would accuse it. You're working up absolutes again, like a YEC even.
You seem to mistake loopiness for crudeness, in my view.
"Philip, you need a section called "DEFINITION OF TERMS" in which you explain, with examples, exactly what you mean when you use each of the words in quotations in your theory."
--There you go again, exacting this, exacting that, straining at a knat. I'm not a fully ripened professor of all the exquisite details of metaphysical events. Besides, you don't have to destroy the whole because parts of it are crude or loopy. That might reflect extreme antagonistic bias on your part.
You say:
"Otherwise, you are simply doing what you have always done; making up a lot of flowery words that don't mean anything and saying, "See! What I say is true!", or, "See, Evolution isn't possible".
--Every man and woman has a story to tell, a viewpoint, albeit with corruptness of vision, corruptness of science, etc. What if I use or misuse the scientific method to try to honestly hypothesize cursed and redemptive events based on the data?
--Until you yourself take the time to use the scientific method to originate your own gospel view of the cosmos, you're merely prating with my words for no obtainable truth whatsoever.
--Now Schraf, you know I'm a firm believer in the ToE, NS, etc. as it applies to the last few thousand years especially.
"Serioulsly, this is even loopier than your usual stuff; have you started to write yourself prescriptions for happy pills or something?"
--Finally, you've at least corrected your hyper-dogmatic assertions and stated "loopier", a more relative and appropriate rebuttal. As I've written in so foolish or flippant manner as you've described, I am whatever I am, regretful and/or by God's grace.
--In sum, I suppose we'll be dragging this burden out against each other repeatedly, your guilt trip and mine, this neurotic chase of terms, this denial of life's shame via empirical and/or metaphysical paradigms and crutches. 'Hope we make some headway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by nator, posted 02-18-2003 9:18 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by nator, posted 02-20-2003 3:08 PM Philip has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 15 of 15 (32749)
02-20-2003 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Philip
02-19-2003 3:00 AM


quote:
...Wow, you finally got around to rebutting my scientific workup. The hypothesis is crude, the methods are crude, the workup is crude, etc., but not absolutely "loopy" as you would accuse it. You're working up absolutes again, like a YEC even.
You seem to mistake loopiness for crudeness, in my view.
"Crude" would indicate, "not very well worked out and tentative".
It could also mean "really frigging confusing to the point of being meaningless."
quote:
"Philip, you need a section called "DEFINITION OF TERMS" in which you explain, with examples, exactly what you mean when you use each of the words in quotations in your theory."
--There you go again, exacting this, exacting that, straining at a knat.
Gee, call me crazy, but didn't you use the word "LOGIC" in the subject heading? Ususally logic requires strict definitions of terms, correct?
quote:
I'm not a fully ripened professor of all the exquisite details of metaphysical events. Besides, you don't have to destroy the whole because parts of it are crude or loopy. That might reflect extreme antagonistic bias on your part.
I'd have to get all of those definitions of the terms you are using before I could even come close to understanding what you are trying to point out, and only then could I have any hope of determining if the "logic" as you have put forth had any merit.
quote:
You say:
"Otherwise, you are simply doing what you have always done; making up a lot of flowery words that don't mean anything and saying, "See! What I say is true!", or, "See, Evolution isn't possible".
--Every man and woman has a story to tell, a viewpoint, albeit with corruptness of vision, corruptness of science, etc. What if I use or misuse the scientific method to try to honestly hypothesize cursed and redemptive events based on the data?
You are free to do what you want, of course, but if you post it to a public message forum you might expect to get a response.
quote:
--Until you yourself take the time to use the scientific method to originate your own gospel view of the cosmos, you're merely prating with my words for no obtainable truth whatsoever.
This makes no sense whatsoever, sorry.
quote:
--Now Schraf, you know I'm a firm believer in the ToE, NS, etc. as it applies to the last few thousand years especially.
No you're not. You deny evolution left and right, and how impossible it is.
quote:
A: "Serioulsly, this is even loopier than your usual stuff; have you started to write yourself prescriptions for happy pills or something?"
--Finally, you've at least corrected your hyper-dogmatic assertions and stated "loopier", a more relative and appropriate rebuttal.
So, you approve of my gentle ad hominem attack over my typically more specific and exacting rebuttals?
That explains a lot.
quote:
As I've written in so foolish or flippant manner as you've described, I am whatever I am, regretful and/or by God's grace.
Well, yes, you write in a extremely imprecise, unscientific way.
quote:
--In sum, I suppose we'll be dragging this burden out against each other repeatedly, your guilt trip and mine, this neurotic chase of terms, this denial of life's shame via empirical and/or metaphysical paradigms and crutches. 'Hope we make some headway.
Ummmm, don't really know what the above means.
Just let me know when you want to talk in scientific terms, Philip. Otherwise, it's not all that interesting to me, sorry.
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 02-20-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Philip, posted 02-19-2003 3:00 AM Philip 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