Subject:
|
Re: Evolution vs Creationism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Jul 2002 20:38:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5176 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> Well, that's not the part that's falsifiable. And, I agree-- if we take the
> absolutemost non-literal translation of the Bible and say 1 day = 8.6
> billion years or what-have-you, then yes, you're right, it may *not* be
> falsifiable. Certainly strict Biblical Creationism is falsifiable, though.
Okay, but it's still not scientific. My claim that I just came back from
the men's room is falsifiable, but that's not really scientific, either.
> they used to believe that Troy was a
> mythical city, dreamed up by someone and recorded by Homer in the Iliad. And
> they used to laugh at the guy who believed Troy was real. But lo and behold,
> the myth of ancient texts proved to have its basis in fact. Does the Bible
> have its basis in fact? Probably some, I'd have to say. The flood story?
> Sure. Creationism? I guess maybe, though I doubt it.
The flood story? the GLOBAL flood story? Not hardly. And anecdotal
examples of failures of science are hardly validation of Creationism as science.
> > But *every* conceivable explanation allows the existence of an omnipotent
> > creator, simply because we have no way to exclude that being. Even if we
> > found some non-creator method, like (oh, I don't know) The Big Bang, people
> > would still say "yeah, but God started it."
>
> What's wrong with letting them say that? If Creationists later want to
> change their story and say that *yes* Evolution happened, but it was all
> under God's hand, why not let them?
They can say it, sure. But recall that the issue is whether Creationism
is scientific (It's not).
> Now, I dunno about microwave radiation, but wasn't the red shift evidence
> *of* and not a prediction *of* the Big Bang? Regardless, even if there were
> no useful information that came out of knowing that the Big Bang happened,
> would it no longer be a scientific discovery?
Well, here are a few others:
"Along with the Hubble expansion and the cosmic microwave background
radiation, one of the pillars of the Big Bang theory is its successful
prediction of the abundances of the light elements deuterium, helium, and
lithium. The Big Bang theory says that when the universe was about 1 second
old and had a temperature of 1010 K, nuclear processes should have started
that eventually yielded certain well-specified abundances for these light
elements (see Table 1). The abundances of these light elements have all been
found to be in agreement with the predictions of Big Bang theory within the
accuracy of the measurements. Even the abundance of lithium relative to
hydrogen, predicted to be 1 part in 10 billion, matches the observations.
Furthermore, the Big Bang theory predicts that the abundances will fit well
only if there are no more than three families of neutrinos-a condition that
was confirmed recently at the Large Electron-Positron (LEP) Collider in
Geneva, Switzerland. Thus, the Big Bang theory's detailed predictions, even
though they are based on the nature of the universe when it was only 1
second old, have been confirmed by observations and experiments."
from http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/cosmology/5.html
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Evolution vs Creationism
|
| (...) I know this ever-so-rarely ever happens, but I think I'm going to switch gears and join your team on this one, based on something that struck me after writing this post: (URL) that the Biblical Creation story *does* have evidence to support (...) (22 years ago, 12-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Evolution vs Creationism
|
| (...) Well, that's not the part that's falsifiable. And, I agree-- if we take the absolutemost non-literal translation of the Bible and say 1 day = 8.6 billion years or what-have-you, then yes, you're right, it may *not* be falsifiable. Certainly (...) (22 years ago, 11-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
395 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
