RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (7) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: AFDave's God Hypothesis, Creation/Evolution Debate< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,06:34   

AFDave's Creator God Hypothesis

I will use the general outline proposed by someone which shares the majority viewpoint on this blog--the 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank--so as not to be accused of "setting my own Creationist Rules for scientific endeavor."  Here's what Lenny said ...

1) Observe some aspect of the universe
2) Form a hypothesis that potentially explains what you have observed
3) Make testable predictions from that hypothesis
4) Make observations and experiments that can test those predictions
5) Modify your hypothesis until it is in accord with all observations and predictions

One thing to keep in mind ... I cannot "prove" the Biblical account of origins and that there is a Creator God any more than you can "prove" that all living things evolved from a common ancestor by random mutation and natural selection.  Neither of us were there to observe either one.  But we can both follow the outline above, then make a "faith" decision in both cases about what we think most reasonable to believe.

Another note ... I will only give my outline, then provide links to my support ... while I like to explain things in my own words and like others to also, someone correctly pointed out that limiting oneself to their own words only is not possible in scientific investigation.  The sources that I deem reliable are AIG, ICR and the TrueOrigins.org archive.  I see "Dr. Dino" being refuted alot on TalkOrigins and some of this may be well deserved.  I do not consider him and certain others to be a responsible spokesman for the Creationist viewpoint.  I also do not claim to be a professional geologist, biologist, genetecist or paleontologist.  I have a Bachelor's Degree in Electrical Engineering, flew supersonic jets in the Air Force and have successfully built and sold a telecommunications business which has allowed me to now pursue non-profit endeavors such as posting to this blog, among other things.  

If you want to see if what I look like (surely this guy must have an eye in the middle of his forehead and a severely red neck), check out my own blog site at airdave.blogspot.com.  I have only published a handful of articles, but I hope to become more active from this point forward ... come on over!

Are you ready?  Here we go ...

1) Observe some aspect of the universe
I make observation of Planet Earth and all of Life within it--that is, everything that has DNA

2) Form a hypothesis -- I don't want any criticism of my hypothesis -- according to the rules above, it can be anything I want it to be.  You can save your criticism for my evidence which purports to support it.

(a) There is a God -- My hypothesis is that there is a Super Intelligent, Incredibly Powerful Being -- I choose to call him God -- who has knowledge of scientific laws far more advanced than anything ever discovered by 21st Century humans.  These scientific laws are so powerful that this Being can literally "speak" material things into existence and destroy things with a simple command.  This Being lives "outside of time" and can view what we call "the future" and "the past" with equal ease.
(b) This God created the Cosmos as a specially designed whole, with life and mankind as its fundamental goal and purpose.  This God created mankind with a choice of either doing his will or not doing his will, in a similar way as parents "create" babies knowing full well that their child will either do their will or not do their will.  Christian Theologians commonly call the choice of NOT doing God's will "sin."
© Mankind chose NOT to do God's will very early on (just as all young children choose not to do parents' will), thus prompting God to institute a system for persuading humans to admit their folly and begin doing His will, for "redeeming" humans who choose this path, and for reminding humans that the present physical world is only a "proving ground" or "training camp" for the next world which will be created at a definite point in the future.  These events are commonly called the Fall and the Curse by Christian Theologians.
(d) God allowed the choices of mankind to take their natural course for the most part, intervening in the affairs of men sporadically and briefly.  Most of the "day-to-day management" of Planet Earth was delegated to mankind himself, similar to how modern parents delegate the day-to-day management of their children to a school or a day care center.
(e) The natural result of collective disobedience to the revealed will of God was an extremely corrupt society--i.e. rampant dishonesty, injustice, murder, theft, etc.--which was terminated by God through the agency of a global, life-destroying flood--the Flood of Noah described in Genesis.  
(f) The Global Flood of Noah was an immense cataclysm of enormous tectonic, volcanic and hydraulic upheaval.  It completely reshaped the ante-diluvian world and resulted in massive, worldwide sedimentation and fossilization, mountain range uplift, sea basin lowering, and climate change.  The Flood was survived in a floating ark by 8 humans (four couples) and one or more pairs of terrestrial, air-breathing, genetically rich animals and birds. The diversity we see in the living world today is the result of subsequent geographic separation and isolation of species and natural selection.  
(g) Following the Global Flood, we hypothesize an Ice Age of undetermined duration brought on by the massive climate changes induced by the Flood.  It was during this time that the dinosaurs and many other species died out. Since the time of the Ice Age, the structure of the earth's crust and the climate which followed, has not changed appreciably, and uniformitarian principles may now be applied to geological studies.
(h) We hypothesize a supernatural intervention by God at the Tower of Babel which instantly created several new languages (we think on the order of 12 or so), whereas prior to this event, there was only one language.
(f) The record of these events (except the Ice Age) was dictated to selected individuals such as Adam and Seth and their descendants and carefully recorded on stone tablets, then passed down to successive generations.  Moses eventually received these stone tablets (or copies of them) and composed the book we now call Genesis by compiling these records into one written document.  He then composed his own written record of the events of his own lifetime, resulting in the complete Pentateuch.
(g) God personally dictated the events of the Creation week to the first man, Adam, but then assumed a less active role in the composition of the balance of Genesis and the balance of what is now commonly called the Christian Scriptures.  This role varied from active dictation in an audible voice to less obvious methods--we might call it "planting of thoughts" in the minds of the writers.  This collective process is commonly called the "Inspiration of Scripture" by Christian Theologians.
(h) Many cultures in geographically diverse locations around the world have legends which follow the general outline above.  The reason for the variance we find in the legends is that many of them are simply oral traditions passed down through the generations without the benefit of scrupulous copying of written records that the Christian Scriptures have enjoyed.  Since the Documentary Hypothesis (Graf-Wellhausen Theory) has now been thoroughly discredited, we have good reason to revert to the previously well established hypothesis that Genesis is NOT oral tradition, but rather it is a carefully copied written record of eye-witness accounts.
(i) The Christian Scriptures, i.e. the 66 books of what is commonly called the Holy Bible, are essentially the WRITTEN record of what this Super-Intelligent, Super-Powerful Creator God wanted mankind to know about Himself, His Creation, and His Plans for the Future.
(j) Jesus of Nazareth is the single most influential human being to ever walk Planet Earth.  Also, there are over 300 specific prophecies concerning a supposed "Messiah" figure throughout the Jewish Scriptures -- what Christians call the Old Testament.  These prophecies "just happen" to all converge in the life of one man of history--Jesus of Nazareth. We hypothesize that this Jesus of Nazareth was (and is) the Creator God in human form, just as he claimed to be.
(k) The Christian Scriptures consisting of the Jewish Scriptures plus what is commonly called the New Testament are the most basic and foundational collection of documents for all of mankind's activities on Planet Earth--from scientific endeavor to family activities to government structure.  They also are the only reliable source documents for knowing the future of Planet Earth and Mankind in relation to it.  As such, these Scriptures should be the basis and starting point for all human activities from individual behaviour to family operation to nation building and governance of human affairs to scientific endeavors and the arts.

So now you have the "AFDave Creator God Hypothesis" ... this is my first draft and alomost completely my own words.  While it is true that I have done extensive study, the only sentence to my knowledge "lifted" from an outside source is the first sentence of para (b).  This hypothesis covers many of the main points that I believe should be included, but I would welcome any constructive comments suggesting additions, modifications, or clarifications.

Please remember ... this is MY HYPOTHESIS, and as such, I have only completed Steps (1) and (2) outlined at the first of this post.  Steps (3) - (5) are coming later.

And now ... let the games begin!  (And let the rotten tomatoes fly!;)

I welcome your comments!

--------------
A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST
A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED.
A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED.
http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

  
stephenWells



Posts: 127
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,07:15   

Claiming this is "your hypothesis" is disingenuous; everything you claim here is standard young earth creationism.

Unfortunately, "your" hypothesis is already incompatible with known facts; example, strata sequences and fossil distributions are completely incompatible with catastrophism (global flood). Bear in mind that it's not so long since all scientists were creationists, and only a little longer than that since all astronomers were geocentrists. Ever wondered why everyone changed their opinions? It has a lot to do with evidence.

You use the analogy " Most of the "day-to-day management" of Planet Earth was delegated to mankind himself, similar to how modern parents delegate the day-to-day management of their children to a school or a day care center. " But you're already comparing human behaviour to that of children- e.g. disobedience to God's intentions; so that makes Earth a day car center being run by the children. Where's the adult supervision?

Also, who did Adam's children marry? And why is 98% of our genome shared with chimps?

In short, "your" account of YEC is no more convincing than any other account of YEC.

  
Shirley Knott



Posts: 148
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,07:17   

Utter rubbish.
You go wrong pretty much right from the start.
Any being who "speaks", any being which "causes to come into existence" or acts to "cause to go out of existence" cannot be 'outside of time', since speaking, causing, and acting are inherently and essentially temporal acts.
Thus, your proposed entity fails on consistency grounds.
You might as well define 'god' as a plane euclidean closed geometrical shape with 3 equal length sides which contains no angles.

Next...

hugs,
Shirley Knott

  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,07:24   

Remember ... it's my Hypothesis and it can be anything I want ... the evidence to support it is coming later ...

Return hugs!

--------------
A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST
A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED.
A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED.
http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

  
thurdl01



Posts: 99
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,07:26   

So you ask for our opinions ("I welcome your comments!") but then get to hide behind a shield of "it's only a hypothesis"?  Swanky get up.

  
bourgeois_rage



Posts: 117
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,07:27   

Quote
Where we differ is that I believe you have come to a conclusion from the evidence which is not as well supported as my conclusion is.  

I'll elaborate tomorrow morning as promised!  It's been fun!  See you then!


Yeah, we're all still waiting for that evidence.

--------------
Overwhelming Evidence: Apply directly to the forehead.

   
Flint



Posts: 478
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,07:30   

Assume there's a god
Assume everything we observe is the way it is because god wills it to be that way
Go observe something. Anything.
Was what we observed the way it is and no other way? Yes, it was
Therefore, there's a god.

  
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,08:12   

Quote
I welcome your comments!
I have just one. This is one of those posts that illustrates my oft-stated position that it's impossible to tell the difference between a sincere creationist and a mischievous prankster.
If this is really meant seriously, I have just one question. Have you ever read an actual book* on the topic of evolution?

*(pop-up books don't count)

--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,08:26   

Quote (Russell @ April 27 2006,13:12)
If this is really meant seriously, I have just one question. Have you ever read an actual book* on the topic of evolution?

*(pop-up books don't count)

I'm sure he has.  They have an excellent selection of them for sale at www.drdino.com.

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,08:43   

This is a hypothesis of what, exactly? That explains what, exactly? Does it, for example, explain the hierarchy problem in particle physics? Does it explain the number of dimensions, or the values of any physical constants, or the differences in mass of the various families of subatomic particles? Does it explain the chronological stratification of taxa in sediments? Does it proffer an alternative explanation for radiological data supporting currently-accepted figures for the age of the earth? Does it explain common descent with modification? Does it have anything to say about which came first, the enzyme or the DNA that codes for it?

Regardless of "evidence," I don't see where or how AFDave's "hypothesis" "explains" anything at all. It just seems like a random string of statements that are evidently assumed to be true, but I don't get what explanatory power they're supposed to have.

I guess if Dave's hypothesis shows anything, it's that you don't need to understand the scientific method to become an engineer, or to fly supersonic jets. I guess I'm not supposed to criticise Dave's hypothesis before I see the evidence to support it, if his hypothesis has no explanatory power to begin with, then what's the point of even looking at the supporting evidence?

And, just out of curiosity: where did Cain's and Abel's wives come from?

--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity

"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

  
Ved



Posts: 398
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,09:22   

Cain and Abel married chimps, of course. That explains why we share 98 percent of our DNA with them.

  
C.J.O'Brien



Posts: 395
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,09:43   

Quote
Form a hypothesis -- I don't want any criticism of my hypothesis -- according to the rules above, it can be anything I want it to be.  You can save your criticism for my evidence which purports to support it.


Okay. It can be anything you want it to be, but by the same token, we are justified in rejecting it out of hand if it is epistemologically inferior to other hypotheses, which yours clearly is, based on parsimony and the logic of explanation.

When we say a hypothesis potentially explains a phenomenon, we say that it describes the phenomenon in terms of other phenomena that are well-understood, and simpler than the phenomenon we are purporting to explain. "God" is simply not an explanation. No testable predictions follow from 'an omnipotent being, who could have done anything at all, did this.' So, evidence aside, it's just a loser of a hypothesis.

Further, it completely abuses the principle of parsimony, which leads us to accept for consideration the hypothesis that asks us to make the fewest and the best supported assumptions. Yours assumes the existence of a being with 'the basic skill set' to construct an entire universe. A huge assumption that you can only support with the very same 'evidence' that you will use to support the hypothesis itself. Circular reasoning such as this will get you exactly nowhere.

Logic alone doesn't give us answers. It tells us where to look for them. Application of sound logic has served the sciences well, and that is why 'Godidit' is no longer allowed. Science ends where creationism begins, and tortured attemps such as this to pretend it's not so do exactly zero to advance anyone's knowledge or understanding. Quit wasting your time.

--------------
The is the beauty of being me- anything that any man does I can understand.
--Joe G

  
C.J.O'Brien



Posts: 395
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,09:54   

If Dave, or anyone else, is interested in a longer discussion of parsimony and creationist "explanations," check out Occam's Hammer.

--------------
The is the beauty of being me- anything that any man does I can understand.
--Joe G

  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,10:06   

[quote=afdave,April 27 2006,11:34][/quote]
OK, so, you "don't want any criticism of your hypothesis", but you "welcome our comments"? What do you want, praise?  ???

Anyway... I'll pretend this "hypothesis" is original, and I'll also respect the fact that the next steps are yet to come (I reeeally want to see those). For now, I'd just appreciate some clarifications:

Quote
These scientific laws are so powerful that this Being can literally "speak" material things into existence and destroy things with a simple command

What do you mean by "speak"? Does this entity have a need to use words? What are these words exactly? In your hypothesis, I mean. Does this entity even have a mouth, and if so, why? It obviously is in no need of food or breathing. And why do you refer to it as "He"? Does it have a gender, and if yes, why?
Quote
This God created the Cosmos as a specially designed whole, with life and mankind as its fundamental goal and purpose.  This God created mankind with a choice of either doing his will or not doing his will, in a similar way as parents "create" babies knowing full well that their child will either do their will or not do their will.  Christian Theologians commonly call the choice of NOT doing God's will "sin."

Since your hypothesis delves into the "mind" of this entity, can you also explain the reasons it did this? For fun? Because it felt alone? Superiority complex, what? You may of course claim ignorance, but remember that your hypothesis already assumes full knowledge of the motives of this entity to create the universe- making humans. Isn't inconsistency to stop there?
Quote
Mankind chose NOT to do God's will very early on (just as all young children choose not to do parents' will), thus prompting God to institute a system for persuading humans to admit their folly and begin doing His will, for "redeeming" humans who choose this path, and for reminding humans that the present physical world is only a "proving ground" or "training camp" for the next world which will be created at a definite point in the future.

How did humans disobey this entity exactly? Did it apply some rules that were broken, and how important were they, for their breaking to have such a disastrous result?
And if, like you said, this entity lived "outside time", in the past and the future alike, shouldn't it know that mankind would disobey it in the first place, when it made them, and take steps to prevent this instead of resorting to turning the whole universe into a reforming institute later on? Or did it actually know all this beforehand, and this is just an elaborate game it plays with us?
Quote
The natural result of collective disobedience to the revealed will of God was an extremely corrupt society--i.e. rampant dishonesty, injustice, murder, theft, etc.--which was terminated by God through the agency of a global, life-destroying flood--the Flood of Noah described in Genesis.

Now, since this entity knew this was going to happen anyway (being outside time and all) WHY did it let humans (as the world's "managers") to take it that far? And if leaving humans on their own was important somehow, why didn't it leave it that way instead of destroying its whole creation to restart? Something it must have already known, from the beginning of time, of course. Is this some kind of strange game for this being?
Quote
The Global Flood of Noah was an immense cataclysm of enormous tectonic, volcanic and hydraulic upheaval.  It completely reshaped the ante-diluvian world and resulted in massive, worldwide sedimentation and fossilization, mountain range uplift, sea basin lowering, and climate change.  The Flood was survived in a floating ark by 8 humans (four couples) and one or more pairs of terrestrial, air-breathing, genetically rich animals and birds. The diversity we see in the living world today is the result of subsequent geographic separation and isolation of species and natural selection.  

Now, wasn't this being able to do practically anything? It did create the world, after all. If it wanted to get rid of all the bad fruit for some reason, why all the mess? Couldn't it simply zap all the bad guys to nonexistence, instead of destroying almost all its creation, and devising some copious and risky plan involving floating wood? Does your hypothesis justify, in any way, such an illogical action from an all-knowing, all- powerful being?
Quote
Following the Global Flood, we hypothesize an Ice Age of undetermined duration brought on by the massive climate changes induced by the Flood.  It was during this time that the dinosaurs and many other species died out. Since the time of the Ice Age, the structure of the earth's crust and the climate which followed, has not changed appreciably, and uniformitarian principles may now be applied to geological studies.

Everything you say here is in obvious disagreement with reality itself, but, like I said, these criticisms come with the later steps in your "theory", so I'll let it pass for now. Let's focus on your hypothesis:
Quote
We hypothesize a supernatural intervention by God at the Tower of Babel which instantly created several new languages (we think on the order of 12 or so), whereas prior to this event, there was only one language.

Hmm... Is there a proposed reason for this new trick of your entity? Was it getting bored? If it wanted people to speak differently, Wouldn't it make it so from the beginning? If it punished them for something they did, then, again, being all-knowing, wouldn't it know it would come to pass from the beginning and prevent it? Why wait for something it knows will happen, just to enforce a punishment? Is this entity a sadist?
Quote
Many cultures in geographically diverse locations around the world have legends which follow the general outline above.  The reason for the variance we find in the legends is that many of them are simply oral traditions passed down through the generations without the benefit of scrupulous copying of written records that the Christian Scriptures have enjoyed.  Since the Documentary Hypothesis (Graf-Wellhausen Theory) has now been thoroughly discredited, we have good reason to revert to the previously well established hypothesis that Genesis is NOT oral tradition, but rather it is a carefully copied written record of eye-witness accounts.

Saying that ancient jews had written documents when nations like the Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Greeks, Minoans, Chinese etc did not is a gross inaccuracy... Ok, ok. just the hypothesis now, sorry. :)
Quote
We hypothesize that this Jesus of Nazareth was (and is) the Creator God in human form, just as he claimed to be.

Is this person the entity itself? The creator? Then, your hypothesis is suspiciously near some old Christian heresy I've heard of- Monophysitism. Anyway, why did this entity come to this world to die? What was gained? Or is this another game?


There are of course many other questions, like f.e. how many humans were first created, how many survived the flood, and how humanity came from all those.... This could go on... And frankly it's pointless. I know you can easily answer all these questions, afd. "God works in mysterious ways". "Who are we to read the Lord's mind"? "It is so because so it was written, and the writing is true because the writing says so". And you know, all those answers work well- with religious indoctrination.
But you see, when you try to twist your indoctrination to look like a scientific hypothesis, like you do now, you just can't wave all logical inconcistencies off and be done with it. You have to adress them. That's why "mysterious ways" is totally useless as a justification. So is "You'll burn in he11 heathen".



PS. Sorry, "You have my prayers" is no good either.

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
Reluctant Cannibal



Posts: 36
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,11:07   

Your hypothesis, afdave, is nothing more and nothing less than a restatement of the contemporary YEC  interpretation of the Bible, particularly the Old Testament. Clearly your adherence to these beliefs takes precedence over your observations of the world.

Please don't tell us that your religious beliefs did not come first in arriving at your conclusions. That would be dishonest.

  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,11:18   

Excellent questions ... I think I will be able to answer many of them without recourse to "God works in mysterious ways" type answers ...

Any more questions anyone?

--------------
A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST
A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED.
A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED.
http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,11:31   

Quote (bourgeois_rage @ April 27 2006,12:27)
Quote
Where we differ is that I believe you have come to a conclusion from the evidence which is not as well supported as my conclusion is.  

I'll elaborate tomorrow morning as promised!  It's been fun!  See you then!


Yeah, we're all still waiting for that evidence.

Yup. AFDave will convince us all that Genesis is literally true, evolution never happened and that the Earth is 6,000 years old, when no one else could before. Yup.

Quote
If this is really meant seriously, I have just one question. Have you ever read an actual book* on the topic of evolution?

*(pop-up books don't count)


Does Jack Chick's Big Daddy count?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Flint



Posts: 478
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,11:33   

Yes, why bother going through these motions? All they do is make reasonable people suspicious.

Why not just simply say "Here are my religious beliefs. I hold these beliefs to be Truth as I see it. The bible says it, I believe it, that settles it for me."

If you were to do this, I submit that everyone here would understand and accept this position. Maybe even respect it, at least in the way that Dawkins respects Kurt Wise's explicit admission that evidence can never be relevant to his beliefs.

That sort of position can be honest without the need to be rational. Beliefs such as yours cannot be BOTH honest and rational; attempting to pretend to rationality only undermines your honesty while adding nothing rational to your beliefs. Is this what you really want?

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,11:45   

Quote
Many cultures in geographically diverse locations around the world have legends which follow the general outline above.  The reason for the variance we find in the legends is that many of them are simply oral traditions passed down through the generations without the benefit of scrupulous copying of written records that the Christian Scriptures have enjoyed.  Since the Documentary Hypothesis (Graf-Wellhausen Theory) has now been thoroughly discredited, we have good reason to revert to the previously well established hypothesis that Genesis is NOT oral tradition, but rather it is a carefully copied written record of eye-witness accounts.


Wow. Just wow. Some people can convince themselves of anything they need to, can't they?

"We have good reason to revert to the previously well established hypothesis"... Um, no. It's not 'well-established'. It's not proven in any scholarly sense. Period.

Many Asian countries have written histories, both religious and secular, that are as old as Genesis, and yet bear absolutely no relation to anything in the Old Testament. Why do you assume they are wrong and the Old Testament is right?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,11:46   

Quote
I'll elaborate tomorrow morning as promised!  It's been fun!  See you then!


Did he mean that in Genesis Time?

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,12:32   

No ... probably won't convince you, Arden, but there are others ... remember a guy named C.S. Lewis?  Probably more skeptical than you and he ended up as a Christian apologist ... ditto for Josh McDowell, Lee Stroebel and a host of others ...

Hmmm ... Arden Chatfield, the next great Christian apologist ... I like it!

--------------
A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST
A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED.
A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED.
http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

  
steve_h



Posts: 535
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,12:52   

A Tenner (Sterling) says we never get (3)-(5). Possibly on account of us being too rude,  not deserving of the truth, or similar. (Max. 1 taker)

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,13:17   

Quote (afdave @ April 27 2006,17:32)
No ... probably won't convince you, Arden, but there are others ... remember a guy named C.S. Lewis?  Probably more skeptical than you and he ended up as a Christian apologist ... ditto for Josh McDowell, Lee Stroebel and a host of others ...

Hmmm ... Arden Chatfield, the next great Christian apologist ... I like it!

No offense, AFDave, and I honestly have nothing against you for being a Christian, but the basic fact is, you're trying to convince a bunch of well educated and well informed people with no evidence. You're presenting your beliefs as something that can be emperically proven, and they simply can't. If they could, others would have done so LONG ago. People don't believe in the Book of Genesis because it's scientifically proven -- they believe in it because they choose to.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,14:10   

No, Arlen, there are mountains of evidence ... maybe not evidence to your liking ... but there is evidence alright, and my guess is you've probably seen alot of it already ...

But that's OK, I'll be giving it again ...

--------------
A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST
A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED.
A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED.
http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,14:19   

Quote (afdave @ April 27 2006,19:10)
No, Arlen, there are mountains of evidence ... maybe not evidence to your liking ... but there is evidence alright, and my guess is you've probably seen alot of it already ...

But that's OK, I'll be giving it again ...

"God said so, it's in the Bible" is not 'evidence', Dave.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,14:22   

Quote (afdave @ April 27 2006,19:10)
... but there is evidence alright, and my guess is you've probably seen alot of it already ...

But that's OK, I'll be giving it again ...

*sigh*

As strange as it may seem to you, afdave, I completely agree.
I'm sure there's not going to be a shred of "evidence" in your reasoning, that we haven't seen a bajillion times already.

But by all means, go on. Surprise me.


Oh, and I almost forgot:
Quote
I think I will be able to answer many of them without recourse to "God works in mysterious ways" type answers ...


Um, you're gonna have to answer all of them that way, Dave. This is supposed to be a scientific hypothesis, remember?

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1815
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,14:49   

Just a reminder AFDave:

What happens to an Air Force pilot who flies into a zero-zero fog at night, and every last one of his instruments (altimeter, air speed, artificial horizon, etc.) indicates the aircraft is in a rapidly descending spiral, but the pilot decides to ignore all that empirical scientific data and trust his inner balance that tells him he's flying straight and level?

Think about it.

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
Michael Tuite



Posts: 12
Joined: Nov. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,15:23   

Hello afdave,
I don't anticipate that you'll get much traction here with the evidence you present and I can't imagine you expect to; nor, however, do I expect this will deter you. So, before the ritualized but necessary debunking begins, I do have a question for you that gets to your fundamental motivation: Why is it important to you that the bible be inerrant? Is it because if god is not the creator then he is not the redeemer and there may be no prospect of being reunited with your loved ones after death?

Thanks,
Michael

  
thurdl01



Posts: 99
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,15:29   

Quote (afdave @ April 27 2006,20:10)
No, Arlen, there are mountains of evidence ... maybe not evidence to your liking ... but there is evidence alright, and my guess is you've probably seen alot of it already ...

But that's OK, I'll be giving it again ...

We're waiting.

  
Chris Hyland



Posts: 705
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 27 2006,16:37   

Quote
Remember ... it's my Hypothesis and it can be anything I want ... the evidence to support it is coming later ...
Dave, we don't have a probelm with there being a god. Please don't try to present evidence for a young earth or a global flood, it's not funny any more. That being said, if you believe the bible is the innerant word of god, and no evidence will change your mind, we will respect you for that.

  
  198 replies since April 27 2006,06:34 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (7) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]