F
Freddy
Guest
Like…how old the planet might be. Were you happy with your answer?
- Status
B
buffalo
Guest
It is a good question to ask. Science is provisional. Always question, St Paul reminds us.
X
Xarto
Guest
I find it fascinating that it’s mainly America that has an issue with this. I never/rarely hear of this concern over evolution Vs creationism in other countries.
B
buffalo
Guest
Stay tuned. It is happening. Evo proponents cannot hide complexity and the limitations of natural selection and random mutations.
R
Rau
Guest
Fame and fortune await those who can bring down the theory Buff. It will be among the greatest discoveries. As you have found the proof yourself, I urge you to publish first!
Last edited:
X
Xarto
Guest
Why do you think God created rules in science
and the amazing discoveries in Quantum Mechanics etc yet you think Evolution is fake? Next you’ll be telling me the Earth is flat
and the amazing discoveries in Quantum Mechanics etc yet you think Evolution is fake? Next you’ll be telling me the Earth is flat
F
Freddy
Guest
So here’s one. Why do you think the earth is only a few thousand years old?Freddy:
Always question, St Paul reminds us.
B
buffalo
Guest
Royal Society Meeting
Listen to the dialogue at 35:30 minutes.
Late for tea - hilarious…
Listen to the dialogue at 35:30 minutes.
Late for tea - hilarious…
R
rossum
Guest
Why? The ID side has not yet provided us with a tested method of detecting design. Where are the ID papers giving the results of double blind trials of various design detection methods to see how accurate they are?
If you do not have an accurate test then all you have is personal opinion. You do not know if you have an accurate test unless and until you have tested your proposed test methodology on a variety of designed and random test objects and got something like 95% or better accuracy.
Where are the scientifically validated tests for design?
R
rossum
Guest
No, not in school anyway. High schoolers are not trained in the math needed to deal with 11-dimensional manifolds, tensor algebra and the other mathematical tools needed in cosmology.
Have a look at Adamek et al (2020) and see if you think that the average high school pupil would understand the mathematics presented in sections 2 and 3.
O
o_mlly
Guest
Good. If the Big Bang theory as science should not be jettisoned in school then not anywhere. If Big Bang is fits well in a science class then so does Intelligent Design.o_mlly:
No, not in school anyway.
R
rossum
Guest
You were asking about the “banger”. I showed that the level of mathematics needed for such an inquiry is well beyond High School level.
Intelligent Design can be taught in science classes only if there is scientific evidence for it. That means a validated test for the presence of design. So far ID has failed to produce such a test. Various tests have been proposed: Behe’s IC, Dembski’s CSI etc. however none of those proposed tests have been shown to be effective in a double blind trial. Without such a trial the suggested tests cannot be considered scientifically reliable, and as such are not valid for teaching in school science classes.
O
o_mlly
Guest
So you agree that the argument proposed by @Rau is false, i.e., ID does not fit in a science class because it infers a designer who is not subject to any further scientific investigation?
O
o_mlly
Guest
Apparently, your opinion is not shared by high or elementary school teachers.
An 8th grade lesson plan bold enough to insert the word “creation” into the text:
O
o_mlly
Guest
If evolutionists have as robust a theory as they claim then why do they insist incessantly to abort i.e., kill it in the womb, inquiries into Intelligent Design?
While one could understand this irrational insistence from atheist evolutionists – their worldview would collapse – why the Christian blowback? We believe in Divine Providence, to wit:
While one could understand this irrational insistence from atheist evolutionists – their worldview would collapse – why the Christian blowback? We believe in Divine Providence, to wit:
R
rossum
Guest
ID is not false. We know that the Michelson-Morley experiment was intelligently designed by Drs Michelson and Morley. There is a great deal of intelligent design in science, and it is currently taught.
Claims that DNA is designed currently have no scientific evidence to support them. As I pointed out, ID lacks a tested design detector. Absent any scientific evidence then ID is not ready to be taught in school science classes.
It is worth pointing out that ID went about things in the wrong direction. New science starts in universities and research institutions, for example Relativity and Quantum mechanics. From there it spreads into PhD courses and then to lower degree courses. Only after it is well established at BSc level does it begin to spread into schools, initially to AP classes and later to ordinary science classes. New science does not start in ordinary school classrooms where ID is trying to insert itself.
The lack of a reliable test for design is a symptom of this. Devising such a test is what happens in universities and research institutions. Since ID skipped that stage, they do not have the results to be expected from doing that part of the required work.
R
rossum
Guest
OK, I’ll enquire. Where is a reliable test which indicates whether a piece of DNA is designed or not?
Here are two pieces of DNA. One is designed (by myself), the other is randomly generated.
Please apply the recognised general ID test method to determine which is designed:
You will need to show the working of the test of course.
O
o_mlly
Guest
As an historical science, ID qualifies better than Darwinism did in its early stages. And ID is as good as the Big Bang theory in its early development. If both theories were put to the empirical tests that you now wish to impede ID with then we would not have made progress in either. What are you afraid of? If ID false then it will die for lack of progress.
W
whatistrue
Guest
If I understand the point correctly, the two theories you brought up were tested and passed those tests before being taught at the High School level. ID has not yet passed those tests and so needs to stay at the basic research level rather than going into the High School curriculum before it is ready. No one is saying research and inquiry cannot continue; they are saying don’t teach it as a science before it is shown that it really is a science.
- Status