15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense [THE FINAL DEBUNKING]

Scientific American ^ | 17 June 2002 | John Rennie

[That Subliminal Kid]

It wouldn't rule it out. It would simply show that natural processes are prefectly capable of doing what the ID'ers say requires an intelligent agent.

[Dimensio]

If it doesn't rule out ID, then it doesn't falsify ID.

[jlogajan]

It was a complete sentence with a subject and a predicate.

Well, true enough. Yet it made no sense. It was a strawman suffering from anemia. It was a non-sequitur. No rational person would have drawn that conclusion from anything she said. It was bizarre. It proved nothing. So yeah, it was like f.christian in a number of ways.

[That Subliminal Kid]

Remind me again why God has to work within the laws of physics? Also tell me exactly why, assuming he did, we would know it? I mean, really. If this God character created the laws of physics, I'd say he can probably do whatever he wants with them and we'd be none the wiser, but what do I know?

[Physicist]

It certainly can not be more of a "neurotic disorder" than what you share with us, Dimentio.

Ouch! The old "I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I", and with a barbed sobriquet to boot. Best to admit defeat, Dimensio; your position has crumbled like a bride's piecrust before this onslaught.

[Junior]

In what way am I "hostile to Christianity"?

By being an atheist.

Isn't this similar to the argument the Nazis used to persecute the Jews? It wasn't because of something they did, it was because of something they were.

[That Subliminal Kid]

Sure it does. You changed the subject. It doesn't rule out the existance of God. It falsifies the premise of ID.

[AndrewC]

What? Are you on the same meds as f.christian???

Coming from someone who brings Athena and Thor to the table, I consider that hilarious.

[That Subliminal Kid]

Lots of people here, especially Jlogajan, are very hostile towards people of faith. If you can't see that then pardon the insult, but you sir are blind.

[jlogajan]

it is evolution that cannot be falsified

Actually it can be. Out of order fossil layering would disprove evolution right quick. The alleged cases of out of order fossils turned out not to be out of order.

[AndrewC]

It's sad.

Why?

[Dimensio]

I once offered a short list of things that could falsify evolution. PatrickHenry followed up with a few more samples.

Some of the responses were amusing, to the effect that my examples wouldn't falsify a particular strawman version of evolution and thus didn't count.

[That Subliminal Kid]

Out of order fossil layering would disprove evolution right quick

There have already been fossils found in layers they should not have been found in. It was chalked up to the movement of sediments and ground shifts. Evolution is a natural extension of science. Science will conclude it regardless of any fact because science assumes all phenomena are natural, and that time has passed. Give these two facts, science cannot but conclude that life arose over time due to natural processes.

[Dimensio]

It falsifies the premise of ID.

Er, I asked if finding such would rule out ID, not God. If the main premise of ID is "X is impossible", then observing X would certainly falsify ID. Of course, "X is impossible" is not exactly the best foundation for any scientific theory. It's always best to start with "Y is observed, and here's our best attempt to explain it".

[AndrewC]

Ad hominem is a fallacy of irrelevance. Both behavior and name calling are irrelevant. Logical arguments stand or fall on their own merits and have nothing to do with the personalities or characteristics of those who argue for or against them.

Tell that to general_re and junior.

[jlogajan]

I'd say he can probably do whatever he wants with them and we'd be none the wiser

Hence he doesn't intervene in the universe on a daily basis in a manner that violates know physics (or known evolution.) If he changes history, he tidies up all the loose ends -- everybody's memories are replaced, etc. Momentum is balance, mass/energy is conserved, time reordered. Fine fine. Yet he never violates known physics as far as he allows it to be viewed by humans. It is almost as if he wants you to believe that the universe proceeds along materialistic lines alone without intervention.

[Taiwan Bocks]

Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.

Many reading hate me just because I believe in Jesus, the Christ.
According to the Word of God, that's my sign that I'm on the right track!!

Then when I say He created everything in six days, many of you say I am a fool.
According to the Word of God, that's my sign that I'm on the right track!!

[That Subliminal Kid]

The saddest part of all of this is that the "free thinkers", the "rationalists", or as we know them the naturalists, cannot even admit to us, let alone to themselves, that this entire thing is a ponzi scheme.

I like science. I think science is wonderful, but I also recognize what science is, what it supposes about reality, and what the limitations of science are.

It should be obvious to anyone that evolution cannot and will not ever be falsified.

Science assumes 1) all things are natural, and 2) events happen in a sequential order we call time

How can science possibly conclude anything other than evolution?? Life arose over time due to a natural process.

Duh! It's like, so totally obvious, dude.

[Junior]

Anything can be chalked up to "chance did it".

Beep. Circle takes the square. The mechanisms put forth by evolution are quite testable: Does genetic isolation lead to speciation? Let's take a bunch of ocean worms from the west coast and keep them in a lab in Woods Hole for 30 years and then check the results -- voila! The worms no longer breed with their original population. There is nothing about "chance" in evolutionary theory. Mutations may be random, but the selection of what mutations hang around is far from random.

[Physicist]

The problem, as I see it, is that many of those that promote the theory of evolution do so at the expense of my religion. That is truly the part that makes me sick.

My motto is that the universe is the way it is, and not the way we would wish it to be.

What is making you sick is that reality doesn't conform to your religion. That would make me sick, too. But if that is the case, it isn't reality that is the problem (the universe is the way it is) but rather your conception of religion. Why would you cling to a belief system that is making you sick? It's unhealthy, and worse, it's unnecessary. Most people have no trouble reconciling their religion with scientific fact.