Prove creationism...I'll shut up!

Prove to me that creationism is the true origin of life without mentioning these:

[list]
[*]god
[*]bible
[*]jesus
[*]religion
[*]evolution
[*]anything to do with the above

[/list]

Originally posted by xyz revolution
Prove to me that creationism is the true origin of life without mentioning these:

[list]
[*]god
[*]bible
[*]jesus
[*]religion
[*]evolution
[*]anything to do with the above

[/list]

Evolution is Creation.

Yes it is..............Now look what you did, you made him shut up........

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Evolution is Creation.

Originally posted by xyz revolution
I know that. But christians don't. I mean that Intelligent Design thing. The one true creator. It cannot be described without the bible which is why it isn't a science. To say it was all created at an instant craps all over development of beings.

Intelligent Design is just a code word for Christianity.

ID isn't science because it doesn't adhere to the scientific method. The real problem therein is that it isn't falsifiable.

Also, it violates Ocham's Razor and it's just a political move to integrate pseudoscience, proreligious theories into public school systems, which is never a good thing.

Originally posted by Wesker
ID isn't science because it doesn't adhere to the scientific method. The real problem therein is that it isn't [b]falsifiable.

Also, it violates Ocham's Razor and it's just a political move to integrate pseudoscience, proreligious theories into public school systems, which is never a good thing. [/B]

Texas: no.
Louisiana: no.
Missippi: no.
Alabama: no.
Georgia: yes.

see the pattern?

Evolution-changes as we learn more. Begins with observation, then moves on to hypothesis, testing and debate. It never stops researching untill everything is explained.

ID-is rigid. It begins with fiction, then moves onto asserting, insisting, twisting the facts and even TORTURING those who disagree.

what christians don't understand that from the beginning Darwin said we're like this because of the environment we live in, and we develop over time to fit this environment better.

Sciences that support evolution: Biology, History, Geography, Psychology, Psychiatry, Physics, Chemisty, Technology and many more.

Sciences that support ID: ...

Originally posted by xyz revolution
Prove to me that creationism is the true origin of life without mentioning these:

[list]
[*]god
[*]bible
[*]jesus
[*]religion
[*]evolution
[*]anything to do with the above
[/list]

Not that I disagree with your intent, but isn't that kinda like asking, Prove evolution w/o mentioning scientific method or evidence?

Originally posted by Mindship
Not that I disagree with your intent, but isn't that kinda like asking, Prove evolution w/o mentioning scientific method or evidence?

Not really. To prove anything requires either overwhelming empirical evidence or overwhelming rational evidence or both. Really, scientific theory isn't "proven"; it's the best answer out there with all the information we have. That's why it's falsifiable; it can be disproved with new information. ID can't because it's built on intangible and unprovable claims.

So you couldn't prove either of them without resorting to the scientific method AND best provided evidence.

exactly, and by definition, the only theories that can be included in a science class are theories that can be proven or tested with the scientific method. Dogma and mythology can't.

Of course. A lot of supporters of ID think it's an attack on the existance of God or religion, but it isn't; it's just prudence.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
exactly, and by definition, the only theories that can be included in a science class are theories that can be proven or tested with the scientific method. Dogma and mythology can't.

Dogma and Mythology should not be considered to be science because they have different functions then science.

i think the only way to prove creation would be to determine god's composition.

All rational thought is counter-religious. What's your point?

my point is that's the only way to end this thread. prove god's composition and wether its parts function as particles, waves, or both.

Originally posted by Mindship
Not that I disagree with your intent, but isn't that kinda like asking, Prove evolution w/o mentioning scientific method or evidence?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Dogma and Mythology should not be considered to be science because they have different functions then science.

This thread was actually targeted for religious audiences, but I like having allies. 😄 also, evolution=development. To disprove evolution you're disproving development.

Originally posted by Wesker
Not really. To prove anything requires either overwhelming empirical evidence or overwhelming rational evidence or both. Really, scientific theory isn't "proven"; it's the best answer out there with all the information we have. That's why it's falsifiable; it can be disproved with new information. ID can't because it's built on intangible and unprovable claims.

So you couldn't prove either of them without resorting to the scientific method AND best provided evidence.

I couldn't agree more. It just seems that, since creationists use God as the basis for their position, to say you can't mention that is taking away a major underpinning, the way a rational evaluation of empirical evidence is a crucial underpinning to advancing (or disproving) scientific theories.

The opening statement of this thread just struck me like, Prove you can high-jump w/o using your legs.

Perhaps it would've been better to simply say, Prove creationism using scientific method (ie, that which provides the best "as if" in understanding way the world works).

Yeah, but then most people would assume that Creationism does follow the method, even though it doesn't.

creationism says that father and mother aren't your creator. It says god is.

I was created by my parents, who were dreated by their parents and so on and so on. as this happens, our lives change because of new dangers, new experiences and so on. So by a long period of time, a monkey can turn into an ape and a human. God doesn't just wave a wand and create us to test if we're good enough to live with him.

Reproduction is evolution. Are you going to say giving birth is wrong aswell?

Not that I agree with Intelligent design, but science and religion are not so different. For example, prove to me that science is right without meantioning these :

- scientific method