Terrible news for the Creation Science museum (and Republicans)

Darth Omar said:
...Though I am a Christian I think there’s some merit to the argument that interpreting Genesis limits God in a sense.....
Click to expand...

No shit, Sherlock. Anyone who limits God to a book written by mankind is limiting God. Sure, you're free to believe it was inspired by God, but let's not forget a man actually wrote each section and mankind is a flawed instrument at best.

Consider these ideas: Is there any doubt God created man with a brain? If so, then isn't the expectation that man would use that gift?

God created the Universe and all the natural laws that govern it. Isn't studying God's creation divine work?

If God is all powerful, all knowing and all merciful, then God could have imprinted any special knowledge such as the Bible onto our brains or written it in the stars. This didn't happen. Two reasons why could be 1) God doesn't exist or 2), as I believe, part of the puzzle is to figure out on our own.

The purpose of school is to teach children. What can they learn if they are given all the answers or some kids are treated more special than other kids? I doubt God would be that unmerciful.
 
Darth Omar said:
It helps to assume that human evolution has occurred. As pointed out—and as you tacitly conceded, interpreting fossils is a subjective enterprise. If one *assumes* evolution they are more apt to ‘see it’ in the fossils.

I can’t think of another area of science that operates that way.

And it’s not your fault the Australopithecus——> Man sequence is jumbled. Australopithecus was clearly a kind of ape like animal but the rest are quite arguably human. The one real test of speciation is the interfertility test: if a Homo erectus could mate with a Homo sapiens and produce fertile offspring—they are the same species. But that experiment is impossible so we are forced to speculate.

There is *plenty* to be skeptical about with evolution. And it’s broader and more ‘ambitious’ claims would probably be rejected except there’s nothing to replace it with. At least nothing that can be considered given science’s commitment to philosophical naturalism.
Click to expand...

You do not seem to be practicing skepticism.

You seem to be either directly or tacitly taking the posture that scientific uncertainty somehow provides evidence of providential design.
 
Cypress said:
All areas of science include subjectivity, opinion, and speculation.

Repeatability and self-correction are generally what set science apart from other intellectual endeavors.

Fossils are hard, tangible data. They can be directly observed, measured, compared, tested.

The higgs boson, quarks, and quantum entanglement cannot be observed or even directly detected. No one one has ever seen them. We can only infer their existence by indirect detection and higher mathematics.

I am pretty sure anatomically modern homo sapiens did not overlap in time with homo erectus. To the extent we have homo erectus DNA, it was not by direct procreation, but passed down a genetic pathway through intermediate variants of archaic humans.

I do not see how a reasonable person, using their mental faculties of induction and inference, could possibly look at the four million year record of a progression from archaic human variants up to anatomically modern homo sapiens and still declare that biological evolution is in grave doubt.
Click to expand...

The ‘reasonable person’ argument isn’t very scientific. I don’t see how a reasonable person could ignore the circumstantial evidence for a lab leak of the CCP virus. Neither does Jon Stewart.

Since we can’t run the interfertility test, how do we know that Homo erectus and Homo sapiens are two different species? A leap of faith?
 
Cypress said:
You do not seem to be practicing skepticism.

You seem to be either directly or tacitly taking the posture that scientific uncertainty somehow provides evidence of providential design.
Click to expand...

The other side of that coin is that uncertainty could provide a safe place for philosophical naturalists.

‘We may never know the answers to some of these questions’.
 
Darth Omar said:
The other side of that coin is that uncertainty could provide a safe place for philosophical naturalists.

‘We may never know the answers to some of these questions’.
Click to expand...

A defeatist attitude. Better, more positive to say "the search for answers continues"....but some dipshits aren't content to understand the work involved.
 
Darth Omar said:
The ‘reasonable person’ argument isn’t very scientific. I don’t see how a reasonable person could ignore the circumstantial evidence for a lab leak of the CCP virus. Neither does Jon Stewart.

Since we can’t run the interfertility test, how do we know that Homo erectus and Homo sapiens are two different species? A leap of faith?
Click to expand...

Do you listen to yourself? Agreed, a reasonable person wouldn't ignore the problem, but a reasonable person also understands the meaning of "circumstantial evidence" and reacts reasonably.
 
AProudLefty said:
Accusing someone based on circumstantial evidence is risky.
Click to expand...

Could be. Legally it doesn't mean much internationally. Accusing and proving are two different things. Better to work with the Chinese on this than trying to pin them for the blame.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Could be. Legally it doesn't mean much internationally. Accusing and proving are two different things. Better to work with the Chinese on this than trying to pin them for the blame.
Click to expand...

How do you manage to stay so uninformed?

Regardless of it’s origin, the CCP lied to the world about human to human transmission while they allowed their nationals to board international flights. Oddly, the same thing that would be done had the virus been engineered and released as a bio weapon.

China was the only entity that could have kept it confined within China. And, for whatever reasons, they didn’t.

But again, the point is there is *already* sufficient grounds to blame the CCP for the pandemic. But our leaders lack the balls to do it, so yeah.

61 in three...two...one.
 
Darth Omar said:
How do you manage to stay so uninformed?

Regardless of it’s origin, the CCP lied to the world about human to human transmission while they allowed their nationals to board international flights. Oddly, the same thing that would be done had the virus been engineered and released as a bio weapon.

China was the only entity that could have kept it confined within China. And, for whatever reasons, they didn’t.

But again, the point is there is *already* sufficient grounds to blame the CCP for the pandemic. But our leaders lack the balls to do it, so yeah.

61 in three...two...one.
Click to expand...

They did try to confine it. Hence the reason for bricking up the entrances to stores and other places.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
No shit, Sherlock. Anyone who limits God to a book written by mankind is limiting God. Sure, you're free to believe it was inspired by God, but let's not forget a man actually wrote each section and mankind is a flawed instrument at best.

Consider these ideas: Is there any doubt God created man with a brain? If so, then isn't the expectation that man would use that gift?

God created the Universe and all the natural laws that govern it. Isn't studying God's creation divine work?

If God is all powerful, all knowing and all merciful, then God could have imprinted any special knowledge such as the Bible onto our brains or written it in the stars. This didn't happen. Two reasons why could be 1) God doesn't exist or 2), as I believe, part of the puzzle is to figure out on our own.

The purpose of school is to teach children. What can they learn if they are given all the answers or some kids are treated more special than other kids? I doubt God would be that unmerciful.
Click to expand...

The purpose of schools is *education* but that’s another can of worms.

We are created in the image of God with brains that far surpass anything else found in nature. Even dolphins don’t almost nearly discover Algebra or any of the other things that are *uniquely* human.

There’s not a gap between man and his nearest competitor in brain power—it’s more of a gaping chasm. Evolution isn’t supposed to work that way, right? What do you deduce from that?

And absolutely, our brains were given to us to use.

But none of this proves man had a less evolved ancestor or gives the slightest clue about how life arose from lifeless chemistry. *Assuming* it can or ever did. It only demonstrates that the ‘God theory’ is very much alive and well even in the 21st century.

Darwin would be surprised.
 
Darth Omar said:
The purpose of schools is *education* but that’s another can of worms.

We are created in the image of God with brains that far surpass anything else found in nature. Even dolphins don’t almost nearly discover Algebra or any of the other things that are *uniquely* human.

There’s not a gap between man and his nearest competitor in brain power—it’s more of a gaping chasm. Evolution isn’t supposed to work that way, right? What do you deduce from that?

And absolutely, our brains were given to us to use.

But none of this proves man had a less evolved ancestor or gives the slightest clue about how life arose from lifeless chemistry. *Assuming* it can or ever did. It only demonstrates that the ‘God theory’ is very much alive and well even in the 21st century.

Darwin would be surprised.
Click to expand...

It does work that way when man kills off the competition. The biggest killer of man is man. Why do you think that "chasm" exists? Man kills anything that's a threat to him if possible...including other men.

Evolution and biochemistry are two different subjects, but I understand why you'd want to move the goal posts.

Are you saying God couldn't have designed evolution as described by human research? Are you saying God couldn't have done it?

As for the spark of life. A big UNKNOWN. Anyone who says they do know is a fucking moron. Are you saying you do know?
 
Dutch Uncle said:
It does work that way when man kills off the competition. The biggest killer of man is man. Why do you think that "chasm" exists? Man kills anything that's a threat to him if possible...including other men.

Evolution and biochemistry are two different subjects, but I understand why you'd want to move the goal posts.

Are you saying God couldn't have designed evolution as described by human research? Are you saying God couldn't have done it?

As for the spark of life. A big UNKNOWN. Anyone who says they do know is a fucking moron. Are you saying you do know?
Click to expand...

Where are these mysterious ‘other men’ you speak of lol?

One of the common criticisms of evolution is that much of it ends up as story telling. What the *evidence* says is man doesn’t have a close second in terms of brain power. You invoke mysterious ‘men’ [think about what you just said] while others would invoke God.

It needs an explanation and not a story.

God could absolutely have used evolution. In fact, He could have front-loaded genomes to where mutations that lead to morphological change aren’t random but are triggered by environmental stressors. Who knows.

We should remain open to all possibilities.
 
Darth Omar said:
Where are these mysterious ‘other men’ you speak of lol?

One of the common criticisms of evolution is that much of it ends up as story telling. What the *evidence* says is man doesn’t have a close second in terms of brain power. You invoke mysterious ‘men’ [think about what you just said] while others would invoke God.

It needs an explanation and not a story.

God could absolutely have used evolution. In fact, He could have front-loaded genomes to where mutations that lead to morphological change aren’t random but are triggered by environmental stressors. Who knows.

We should remain open to all possibilities.
Click to expand...

Evolution is true with or without God.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top