O
Oolon_Colluphid
Guest
Edwin Taraba:
But you’re correct that we cannot observe creation.
Until a scientist sees a river cut a valley, one tiny lump of sediment at a time, in a laboratory with each step of the way documented and recorded and repeated by independent laboratories, geologists have no basis for their whole subject.
Until a scientist creates, from subatomic particles, a star and proceeds to observe its lifecycle, in a laboratory with each step of the way documented and recorded and repeated by independent laboratories, astrophysicists have no basis to their whole subject.
Until a scientist creates, from chemicals, a virus, in a laboratory with each step of the way documented and recorded and repeated by independent laboratories, virologists have no basis to their whole subject.
Until a scientist creates, from chemicals, a pet cat, in a laboratory with each step of the way documented and recorded and repeated by independent laboratories, vets have no basis to their whole subject.
Time to cut the **** Edwin. Address the evidence, or quit making unsubstantiated allegations.
Not only can we observe evolution, we have observed it. We have observed it small-scale in human lifetimes, and we can observe it large-scale over millions of years by looking at the traces of past life and the forms of modern life. Traces and forms which would be different if the creation hypothesis were correct.
But you’re correct that we cannot observe creation.
No it does not. It requires repeated testability. Experiments are just one way to perform tests of hypotheses. Every time a fossil hominine is found, it tests our hypotheses about the course of human evolution.
Therefore creation is not a scientific hypothesis. Glad you realise this.
Of course I believe that God has supernatural power (or would if I believed in such things at all, which is beside the point). You are still confusing ‘could’ and ‘did’. Shame on you.
Take your hog elsewhere please. It won’t wash with me.
Until a scientist sees a river cut a valley, one tiny lump of sediment at a time, in a laboratory with each step of the way documented and recorded and repeated by independent laboratories, geologists have no basis for their whole subject.
Until a scientist creates, from subatomic particles, a star and proceeds to observe its lifecycle, in a laboratory with each step of the way documented and recorded and repeated by independent laboratories, astrophysicists have no basis to their whole subject.
Until a scientist creates, from chemicals, a virus, in a laboratory with each step of the way documented and recorded and repeated by independent laboratories, virologists have no basis to their whole subject.
Until a scientist creates, from chemicals, a pet cat, in a laboratory with each step of the way documented and recorded and repeated by independent laboratories, vets have no basis to their whole subject.
More porcine cleansing. What do the mountains of evidence we have – and which you refuse to address – do, if not substantiate it?
Time to cut the **** Edwin. Address the evidence, or quit making unsubstantiated allegations.
I have several Craig and other debates I’d like to send you and anyone else who wants them.
I find it fascinating myself since it does intersect with the faith (Adam/Eve, the Fall, original sin, etc) and I need to personally work out the theological objections.