1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured A simple case for intelligent design

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by leroy, Oct 4, 2018.

  1. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    I agree with your assertion. Can you think of a religious tradition where it's stated that God, seeking to interact with the physical universe, specifically the humans He created, engaged with them hundreds of times, performed works, and ultimately, appeared as a person to interact with people--so influentially, that now, 1/3 of Earth acknowledges this person as God and a further 1/3 regard this person as a prophet? Can you think of a religious tradition that claims its texts detail thousands of facts verifiable in archaeology, by prophecy and by history?
     
  2. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    I see! And here I thought that they are assumptive. Help me out:

    Dark Matter is composed of the following detectable particles or quanta, measured regarding their specific position, direction or momentum:

    Dark Energy " "

    Baloney.
     
  3. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    There are reasonable tests to show the Universe is older than a week, unless God is a prankster who created the Universe with an old appearance. That's one reason I believe the Universe is over 13B years old, however, it's not entirely unreasonable to posit a younger Solar System/Sun/Earth.
     
  4. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    I'm neither a scientist by profession nor a dishonest cheat, so please help me understand:

    The dictionary definition of a hypothesis is "a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation."

    So I could hypothesize any of the following, legitimately:

    1) It should be testable that X is true
    2) It should be testable/verifiable/falsifiable that X is false
    3) It should be " " that X exists
    4) " " X does not exist
    5) " " X may be observed under controlled conditions

    And whatever the hypothesis, we can test to inductively observe as "True" or falsify appropriately as "False" or "More testing needed!".

    The best way to be open-minded about all religious and non-religious claims, in my opinion, is, instead of saying "No! Unscientific! Not true! Stupid!" is to merely assume whatever one is told MIGHT be true, then testing for the expected results.

    For example, you tell me the universe is far older than some Christians say it is, 15+B years instead of 10,000 years... if that is so, I would reasonable expect to find scientific evidence of same, else you are making a philosophical assertion. Over a dozen accepted scientific explorations like light telescopes, radio telescopes, red shift, star observation, etc. show the universe is indeed many billions of years old... therefore I agree with you, the universe isn't only a few thousand years old. The science lines up with the presumption.

    What does not make sense in your post is this sentence:

    "Making such assumptions before you even started to test the hypothesis, only demonstrated the scientist being incompetent, bias and a cheat."

    Every person makes some rough assumptions regarding expected outcomes. That's natural, normative.
     
  5. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    As far as I understand, ID doesn't say, "Here's the designer" but instead, "Complexity argues against a lack of a designer."

    If you see an electronic watch, which is a more reasonable hypothesis:

    "No one made this watch, we should be able to demonstrate/observe that it arose from chemical/physical reactions in nature" or "Intelligent people made this watch, a hypothesis we may be able to test for, which hypothesis comes to mind since the watch has numerals, letters, minute functions, day/night functions, etc. -- all anthropomorphic functions for people to use."
     
  6. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    That is true, it is reasonable in my opinion to search for non-divine physical universe entities via SETI. This is one reason the Bible makes sense to me--it states near its beginning that God made man in His image and that God is a somewhat anthropomorphic, creative intelligence.
     
  7. SkepticThinker

    SkepticThinker Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Messages:
    11,425
    Ratings:
    +5,685
    Can you demonstrate that the specific God you worship has ever done any of that? Like I pointed out, if this God has done these things you say "he" has, then there should definitely be some actual evidence/demonstration of these interactions occurring over and over. I mean, the things you're talking about would be occurring in the physical, material world, where data is quantifiable and testable.

    Nobody has managed to do it yet. But maybe you can?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. SkepticThinker

    SkepticThinker Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Messages:
    11,425
    Ratings:
    +5,685
    Complexity doesn't necessarily indicate design though. How complex is a bookmark, for instance? Or a paperweight? Or a pencil? Those are all designed by humans, yet are quite simple objects.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. ecco

    ecco Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    14,186
    Ratings:
    +7,151
    Religion:
    atheist
    You can't possibly know a god's motivations. You have failed to prove the Universe wasn't created Last Thursday.




    You did not answer the question regarding testing your NO designer falsifiability/testability.
     
  10. ecco

    ecco Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    14,186
    Ratings:
    +7,151
    Religion:
    atheist
    I do believe that you have finally stated something reasonable. Indeed, if we see an electronic watch, the more reasonable hypothesis would be "Intelligent entities made this watch".


    However, we never saw electronic watches prior to two hundred years ago. We did see other things, like trees. So let's substitute "oak tree" for "electronic watch" and check your hypothesis again:

    If you see an oak tree, which is a more reasonable hypothesis:
    "No one made this oak tree, we should be able to demonstrate/observe that it arose from chemical/physical reactions in nature" or "Intelligent people made this oak tree, a hypothesis we may be able to test for,​

    Clearly, one can "demonstrate/observe that it arose from chemical/physical reactions in nature". Clearly there is no need for an IDer or a Creator.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. ecco

    ecco Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Messages:
    14,186
    Ratings:
    +7,151
    Religion:
    atheist
    Mmm. I don't think I'd agree with your comments as regards to pencils. People were making marks on parchment and paper with graphite long before some came up with the idea of a pencil. Then they had to figure out how to make one. Kudos too to the person who quickly recognized the need to attach an eraser.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    43,255
    Ratings:
    +25,886
    Religion:
    Atheist
    The descriptive term "Dark" is also used because there are aspects of Dark Matter and Dark Energy that are unknown.

    So why do you think that they are baloney? You need to be very careful when you use such terms. There is far less evidence for your beliefs, are you saying that they are baloney too? Hmm, we may finally be agreeing on something.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    20,704
    Ratings:
    +24,752
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Once again, we don't know the specific composition, but we can still map out dark matter is. We use gravity to measure their specific location.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. gnostic

    gnostic The Lost One

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,754
    Ratings:
    +5,216
    Religion:
    Pi π
    You still don’t understand, billiardsball.

    A “falsifiable” hypothesis only determine that scientists can perform some sort of future or proposed experiments, to test the hypothesis.

    A falsifiable hypothesis doesn’t mean the hypothesis is true. It only determine the hypothesis is “testable”.

    Do you understand the difference between “testable” and “tested”?

    They are not the same thing.

    Being testable (or falsifiable) mean you can perform a test on the hypothesis. You haven’t tested the hypothesis yet.

    Being “tested” means you have already performed the experiments for the hypothesis. It is only AFTER the tests, will the test results demonstrate the hypothesis to be true or false.

    Your logic here -

    Your logic here isn’t test or experiment. It is merely you applying some false rules as what is falsifiable and what has been tested, in a illogical circular reasoning.

    Science isn’t about so much as being open-minded, but being open that any hypothesis you write up, could be wrong, when rigorously and repeatedly tested.

    Falsifiability mean refutability. If you can potentially test or refute your hypothesis, then you are doing your job as scientist, which clearly you are not.

    I am not a scientist too, and I have so many times before. My background is more in the engineering side. But as an engineer, I know the importance of testings. You would test soil, you would test the foundation, you would test materials being use for construction, and you test the engineering design or blueprint.

    I understand why scientists needs to test their hypotheses or theories. You apparently don’t.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    I would think the predictive prophecy exceeds all statistical likelihood:

    1) People have persecuted Jews for millennia
    2) Even the "churches" who killed Jews worship one Jew

    ...
    Nations to spend their wealth on raising churches and memorials to Messiah: "The Gentiles shall come to your light, And kings to the brightness of your rising." ... The wealth of the Gentiles shall come to you. -Isaiah 60:3

    ...
    Incense burned in Messiah's name worldwide: "For from the rising of the sun,

    even to its going down, My name shall be great among the Gentiles; In every

    place incense shall be offered to My name, And a pure offering; For My name

    shall be great among the nations," says the Lord of hosts."-Malachi 1:11


    ...

    Jews scattered for rejection of Messiah: "The Gentiles shall know that the

    house of Israel went into captivity for their iniquity; because they were

    unfaithful to Me, therefore I hid My face from them. I gave them into the

    hand of their enemies, and they all fell by the sword."-Ezekiel 39:23


    ...
    Messiah from a woman and hidden, also despised by Israel. "...The Lord has

    called Me from the womb; From the matrix of My mother He has made mention of

    My name. And He has made My mouth like a sharp sword; In the shadow of His

    hand He has hidden Me, And made Me a polished shaft; In His quiver He has

    hidden Me." ... "It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant, To

    raise up the tribes of Jacob, And to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I

    will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, That You should be My

    salvation to the ends of the earth. Thus says the Lord, The Redeemer of

    Israel, their Holy One, To Him whom man despises, To Him whom the nation

    abhors, To the Servant of rulers: "Kings shall see and arise, Princes also

    shall worship, Because of the Lord who is faithful, The Holy One of Israel;

    And He has chosen You."-Isaiah 49:1-7




    Which Jewish person, from the House of David, made secretly inside a woman's

    womb, who lived in Galilee and was despised by [most of] Israel, has

    worldwide worshippers (from among all the Gentiles who spend their wealth in

    His name and service) and came to earth to be rejected just before Israel

    was scattered in 70 AD?
     
  16. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    How complex is one DNA strand?

    How complex is a "simple cell"?

    How complex is a unicellular animal?

    How complex is a human?

    Which is more complex in its operations, a Cray supercomputer or a human mind?
     
  17. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    Clearly, scientists are wholly unable to replicate how the original tree/original one-celled animals/plant progenitors arose.
     
  18. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    I said the response was baloney. However, any assertion that dark matter/dark energy has been inductively observed IS baloney.
     
  19. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    And gravity, of course, is composed of gravitons. Where can I see a photo of gravitons?

    PS. Don't answer, I'm being rhetorical.
     
  20. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,468
    Ratings:
    +839
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    No, it's simple.

    An hypothesis needs to be just what you said, but first must be conceived, mentally, first, the scientist(s) hypothesizes, then they ask themselves what is testable in that frame of reference.

    Hypothesis - The Bible, since it is an ancient set of documents, yet ones covering many peoples, leaders, tribes and places, if it is valid, should concur with archaeology.

    Proven.
     
Loading...