The Scientific Method For Beginners

Dear Dr Adequate,I happened onto this string and had to respond. Forgive me for saying so; however, you are committing some of the same fallacies that many (on both sides of the discussion) are guilty of.Mainly, your lumping all creationist into one small box and because these few ridiculous argument are easily dismissed you think that the entire Creation argument should be summarily dismissed.The only real problem with that argument is that not all Creationists are giving these un-scientific (and sometimes plain dumb) reasons to not believe in Evolution.Secondly, (and again, both sides are guilty of this) many times we fail to define exactly what we are talking about. I’ll give you an example:A. I am a Creationist, I do not believe in Evolution. {General, Bland, Imprecise}B. I am an Old-Earth Creationist, I can see that the ‘Macro-Evolution Hypostasis’ does not fit the observations I have made in the world I see around me. {Precise, succinct, Clear-cut}As to your How do creationists live with the failure of their "scientific method"?(I) You are right that many (and I stress ‘Many’ —not all-) Creationists are only concerned with their dogma. However, I have seen the same with Naturalists. If we are to dismiss the Creationists because they defend their dogma at all costs then we should also dismiss the Evolutionists because many of them also defend their dogma at all costs.(II) I agree with what you say here, with two exceptions. A. again, not all Creationists do this. B. You presume that the Creation modal is wrong. In other words you start off saying ‘There is no God, therefore, there is no evidence for God’.I would like to close with this a question. Do you believe in the ‘Big Bang’?

Dear Dr Adequate,Thank you for welcoming me to ‘the forums’. I hope to prove to be an interesting challenge in our discussions; however, I do not want to mislead anyone; I have been a member for some time. I had to create a new account because someone hacked into my old one and changed my password and e-mail address. Sounds like you’re lumping All Creationist into one box to me. Even in your rebuttal your say: Unless I do not speak or read English as well as I thought I did; you just lumped all Creationists into the All Creationist use dumb unscientific arguments category with this one sentence. If they don’t use those dumb unscientific arguments then they use other dumb unscientific arguments.Even your Headline, Creationists Versus The Scientific Method, lumps all creationists into the All Creationist use dumb unscientific arguments category. (I.E. you’re saying that ‘Creationism’ is the antithesis of what the Scientific Method represents. Or, in other words, if you are a ‘Creationist’ you’re, by definition, ‘unscientific’.)Of Course this makes it easer (for you) to dismiss those of us that actually use the ‘Scientific Method’ to show the fallacies of Naturalism (Macro-Evolution).The really ironic thing is that I have yet to see ‘Evolutionist’ properly use the Scientific Method on any of the points I have made and proven me wrong. Actually I have had all of the people, who have doggedly argued against the things I have posted on these forums, either resorted to ‘name calling’ or what they ‘do’ or ‘do not’ believe to try rebutting my arguments; as I stated in the last paragraph. So, yes the Evolutionists I have dealt with have " defend their dogma at all costs". No logical argument, no scientific fact, no evince provided has swayed them. In response to my question: Do you believe in the ‘Big Bang’?So, you agree that the universe had a beginning? If so then I would ask you to take a few days and think of some of the ramifications of the universe having a beginning. Please, use the ‘Scientific Method’ to define conditions that must exist inside, and outside, of the universe if ‘in fact’ the universe has existed only for some 14+ billion years.Then, using the ‘Scientific Method’, we can discus whether ‘Creationism’ is more likely or if ‘Macro-Evolution’ is. Is this not how we should discus these things? Not calling each other names, but, working together to come to some conclusions with input from all interested parties?