Embarrassed Creationist

Well, the reason creos don't attack these theories is because at least some aspects of them are part of normal everyday life. Who in his right mind would want to say that germs don't cause disease or that the planets orbit the sun in rectangular orbits?Besides, these other theories do not threaten their I-am-god's-special-child preconception.

Loudmouth has already answered, but my understanding is that while there are still arguments to the contrary which have not been decisively answered, the weight of evidence is clearly in favour of dinosaurian ancestry.

and maybe because this IS the EvC, and evolution is the topic, doy!and i didn't attack anything.

No where did I recall anyone saying you did.

quote:

---

I think that Science and the scietific method are both part of the Positivist Philosophy, and there fore trying to PROVE!

---

There is no 100% proven thing in science, and never has been.

quote:

---

C-Frog and R-Hector both talk about EVIDENCE. evidence leads to proof and there fore DOES PROVE, Science Proves.

---

No, evidence leads to confidence and reliability, not absolute, 100% proof. No matter how well-supported a theory is and no matter how confident we are in it's reliability, it could still be wrong, and must be amenable to falsification.

quote:

---

C-Frog: I don't think that God and Evolution are incompatable (in fact, most catholics i know think that God created the world through evolution). it is unacceptable for me because of faith.

---

Fine, as long as you stay out of the science classroom or legislation based upon your faith, I have no problem.

quote:

---

if something can be proven no faith is needed, if you ever need faith in science, because it is not proving anything it is junk science (like phrenology). if you can't prove it, by repeatable observation it shouldn't be science.

---

Repeatable observations, yes, and also accurate predictions and retrodictions.The ToE has been tested more than just about any theory, and has survived all tests quite well. The mechanismaof Evolution are contested, but the existence of the event is undeniable, like the undeniability of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom combine to make water. It has been that reliable and that well supported, and that many of it's predictions and retrodictions have been borne out.

quote:

---

look i think that creationism is the least likely scenario, but if i am true to my scientific roots, TOE is more likely, but until proven, still wrong.

---

As I said above, nothing in science is ever proven, just supported to a greater or lesser degree.

quote:

---

FAITH, has no place in SCIENCE!

---

Agreed.

The main difference as I see it is that science, or better, the scientific approach, gives you TOOLS to work with;- mathematics, computer modeling, physical evidence in most cases, gas laws, reproducible experiments, formulas to determine end products, instruments, volumes in all the languages of the world with identical information, peer review to expose any errors in submitted work, civilizations that operate from day to day on proven principles, medicine that works (mostly) and surgery that cures. The list of TOOLS goes on.What does Faith offer in the way of tools?Prayer---which might or might not work. Failures are glossed over. How many do you think were praying during plagues, droughts, tsunamis? Why save a sinner and kill a god-fearing man?
The Biblein its many Versions, interpretations, antinomies, errors, corrections, omissions, changes to suit the religious groups in power?
Feelings of exhilaration or peace or pleasure during or after church? Hell, (sorry), I get those from adrenalin or endorphins in action.
Feelings of security or community within a group? I can get that from whatever non-religious community group I pick
Knowledge that you are part of the only religious group that is correct? EVERY religious group, church, sect, splinter community think that they, and only they, are on the right path.
Prophecy? Sort of an open-ended tool, wouldn`t you say?
Study? What if you are studying the wrong Bible?
Group discussions? In view of the wide interpretations, wouldn`t you say the blind are leading the blind?
Internal presence? How do you discern the difference between your own mind`s workings and a supernatural visitor?
Numbers? Then only the Roman Catholic Church is correct.
Archaeology? A scientific discipline, btw. Most of the Bible remains to be proven by archaeology
Wishful thinking? Hey, that could work.

quote:

---

Feelings of exhilaration or peace or pleasure during or after church? Hell, (sorry), I get those from adrenalin or endorphins in action.
Feelings of security or community within a group? I can get that from whatever non-religious community group I pick
Knowledge that you are part of the only religious group that is correct? EVERY religious group, church, sect, splinter community think that they, and only they, are on the right path.

---

You know, I think it is not a good idea to underestimate these items from your list.While you get similar feelings from non-religious groups and activities, large groups of like-minded religious people can do (an have done) incredibly influential things, all due to unwavering, unquestioning belief. Sometimes these deeds are charitable and good, and sometimes they are, um, not.The part that you and I probably could't bring to the party is the "unwavering, unquestioning" part, where the highly religious person can.

so if you commit a murder and it is on video tape, and there are witnesses and physical evidence fingerprints, DNA, etc. then we can only be relaiably confident that you did it, but we wouldn't have 100% proof?yeah right!!!!

Analogies are a bit dangerous but your choice might be instructive.Each of your pieces of evidence are the facts of the matter( video, DNA etc.). These correspond to the individual bones of one fossil, the relationship between DNA, the age of fossils, the relationship between them.However, each single piece of evidence you have given can be wrong or there may be alternative theories which explain them. We pick the best one that seems to fit ALL the available facts. Depending on what we know there will still be a little bit of doubt left.As you may know fingerprints can be matched erroneously (there is some hint that this happens too often).You are still 100% sure that you know who the murderer is and, as a jury member, are ready to convict. Then the defense attorney brings in the accused murderers twin. Are you still 100% sure?In fact, you should not have been before. If each piece of evidence can be wrong there is some chance (perhaps very, very small) that the conclusion is wrong.The analogy has another valid comparison to evolution. We are pretty darn sure that the murder happened. Just as we know that evolution happened.What you, in the jury are trying to determine is how it happened. That is analogous to the fact of evolution occuring and the theory of just how it could happen.The analogy might break down on a quantitive basis if you consider the shear volume of evidence and relationships between all of it in comparison to the miniscule evidence that you would have for any murder case.Edited to correct two dumb spelling mistakes.This message has been edited by NosyNed, 02-28-2005 10:41 AM

Hi Verci. Welcome to EvC, BUT, you've, imo, a lot to learn. First on the list is that you're not impressing anyone here by coming in on your opening post to badmouth your own, i.e. fellow creationists, with generalized charges implying that we're all imbeciles who embarass you, the self implicated smart creationist. When you begin to make sense yourself and cast out the beam in your eye then maybe you can go at removing the little slivers in the eyes of the rest of us. Like facts some of us post which you consider to be wrong?? Pray tell us about some of these wrong facts. Pardon if I've missjudged you, like maybe you're actually a smart evo coming on here trolling as a not-so-smart creo needing enlightment from anyone but one of us embecilic ID creos who hang out here.

---

In Jehovah God's Universe; time, energy and boundless space had no beginning and will have no ending. The universe, by and through him, is, has always been and forever will be intelligently designed, changed and managed by his providence. buzsaw

hey buzsaw thanks for:
1. thread jacking
2. attacking me
3. adding aboslutely nothing to the debate
4. proving my point about credos
5. making me truly ebarrassed to be a credo with credos like you out there.i was in a discussion here, im sorry that you have nothing smart to add or say and you have the maturity of a 14 year old, but please refrain from jaking my thread. we where debating here. go back to the kiddy section, ok thanx.This message has been edited by Vercingetorix, 02-28-2005 09:39 AM

Sorry but your reaction to Buz's post is out of line and out of proportion. You moved from criticism of his content to an attack on his character. We don't need that here from anyone on anyside.Please feel free to challenge the content of anyones posts but let's stay away from attacks on the individual. and are way outside the bounds.Cut it out, now!

---

quote:

---

so if you commit a murder and it is on video tape, and there are witnesses and physical evidence fingerprints, DNA, etc. then we can only be relaiably confident that you did it, but we wouldn't have 100% proof?

---

Video tapes can be doctored using computer technology. Witnesses can be paid off. Physical evidence, such as DNA and fingerprints, can be planted at the scene. We can never be 100% sure that the above DID NOT happen. Therefore, we can never be 100% sure. We can be sure beyond a reasonable doubt, but never 100% sure.

wow now you are drawing straws.
hey what ever you have to tell yourself to make yourself belive the lie, obviously reason has no part of it.and good luck arguing that one in court.This message has been edited by Vercingetorix, 03-01-2005 08:58 AM

ok ok, your right that was not right, but:i guess that thread jacking is cool on this site, so i could go to everythread with my friend, who showed me this site, and jack every thread. we could just talk about things off topic or about what is going on in other threads or aboust baseball spring training.
neato! is thread jacking against the rules?
becuase if it is then why are you enforcing only some of the rules?This message has been edited by Vercingetorix, 03-01-2005 09:22 AMThis message has been edited by Vercingetorix, 03-01-2005 09:34 AM