Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[Parsimony]

“The sinews of his thighs are knit together.” The T-rex’s femur or thigh is where they found the tissue or collagen/sinew. Do you think this is just a coincidence, or it’s God’s work?

The behemoth ate grass. It wasn't a T-rex.

 

[JM2C]

The point was that metaphorical descriptions can be used to argue any creature existed or into "existence". However when the fossil evidence is in a completely different time period the description is no longer describing what you claim it is.

It is about probability. Dinosaurs existing millions of years ago has evidence, ie fossils and dating. Your view is that is dating is all wrong thus dating methods can not be used and scribblings in a book you take seriously. You just produced the Christian version of Ancient Aliens by inferring verification rather than by falsification as you dismissed the very tools which we could use find the age of fossils. Your view is unfalsifiable thus it pointless. More so anyone can take whatever scribblings they wish to take seriously, question dating methods then invoke the argument from ignorance, your view, which is fallacious thus illogical.

The description of the BEHEMOTH is as literal as it can be. Have not proven anything with any dating methods, the millions and billions of years. All you have are nothing but theories.

 

[JM2C]

Wait, so you accept carbon-14 dating as accurate?

Yes, up to 103,000 years.

The existence of soft tissue does not mean that carbon-14 is present.

Why would you think so? Soft tissues do not require the existence of carbon-14: stable carbon-12 and carbon-13 work just fine.

So, why Dr. Horner refused to test it? It’s not like he is not getting paid, but someone offered him $23,000 USD just to test for 14C.

Even if those soft tissues did turn out to be less than 50,000 years old, it would not falsify evolution anymore than the discovery of living coelacanths falsified evolution. It would not mean that dinosaurs did not live 65 million years ago, but rather that at least that one species managed to survive to much more recent times.

Oh yes it will falsify all the millions and billions of years. Collagens cease to exist after 30,000 years.

 

[JM2C]

The behemoth ate grass. It wasn't a T-rex.

We are talking about dinosaurs, right? All dinosaurs have sinew, right? The collagen was found in the T-rex femur.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

We are talking about dinosaurs, right? All dinosaurs have sinew, right? The collagen was found in the T-rex femur.

SOURCE REQUIRED

 

[outhouse]

PROVIDE CREDIBLE SOURCES.

Because all credible sources say evolution is fact.


We agree that the following evidence-based facts about the origins and evolution of the Earth and of life on this planet have been established by numerous observations and independently derived experimental results from a multitude of scientific disciplines. Even if there are still many open questions about the precise details of evolutionary change, scientific evidence has never contradicted these results:

1. In a universe that has evolved towards its present configuration for some 11 to 15 billion years, our Earth formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago.
2. Since its formation, the Earth – its geology and its environments – has changed under the effect of numerous physical and chemical forces and continues to do so.
3. Life appeared on Earth at least 2.5 billion years ago. The evolution, soon after, of photosynthetic organisms enabled, from at least 2 billion years ago, the slow transformation of the atmosphere to one containing substantial quantities of oxygen. In addition to the release of the oxygen that we breathe, the process of photosynthesis is the ultimate source of fixed energy and food upon which human life on the planet depends.
4. Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin.

 

[Parsimony]

Yes, up to 103,000 years.

What makes you think radiometric dating is accurate when carbon-14 is used but not with uranium-238 or other isotopes?

So, why Dr. Horner refused to test it? It’s not like he is not getting paid, but someone offered him $23,000 USD just to test for 14C.

I don't know what his personal reason for it would be, but scientists are not responsible for testing everything that they are asked to. I imagine this is especially true when the test comes from some fringe topic like young earth creationist. If NASA refused to test a piece of metal that someone claimed came from a UFO, would that automatically mean that NASA was trying to hide something?

Oh yes it will falsify all the millions and billions of years. Collagens cease to exist after 30,000 years.

Not if there is a mechanism that can preserve them for longer (which has already been explained by way of iron particles).

We are talking about dinosaurs, right? All dinosaurs have sinew, right? The collagen was found in the T-rex femur.

All tetrapods have sinew, not just dinosaurs...

 

[SkepticThinker]

He was not asking at all, it’s a rhetoric in the form of a question, not to obtain answers, but meant to make a point based on his next theory, i.e., “the Imperfection of the Geological Record;”

You don’t understand the question at all. It’s like saying: we won’t find them in “countless numbers” because of the “Imperfection of the Geological Record” based on a theory by Charles Lyell’s Principles of Geology.


Therefore, one cannot argue or ask “why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?” because of the “Imperfection of the Geological Record”. It’s a circular theories by Darwin.


Speculate is theorize, but you said “We don't need to "speculate" because the answer is obvious”


What OBVIOUS answer you are talking about? Darwin did not give any specific answer to a RHETORICAL QUESTION, “Why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth”, but another “SPECULATION” OR “THEORY”, and that is, “The Imperfection of the Geological Record”, but you guys kept on digging proofs of fossils to prove the unprovable evolutions.


Darwin was like saying WE DO NOT HAVE ANY GEOLOGICAL RECORD because of “The Imperfection of the Geological Record”, so do not look for the ‘MISSING LINKS” because you won’t FIND them, but you guys kept of digging them fossils and all you guys found are nothing but HOAXES with ridiculous, almost comical, ages on them.

This statement is so off base, it's completely absurd. And wrong

 

[SkepticThinker]

Evolutionists evidences were proven to be nothing but hoaxes. You could read them all over the internet, from Lucy to the Nebraska man, they all hoaxes.

What evidence I can show you that God created everything?

GENESIS 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

What evidence can I show you that man did not come from apes?

GENESIS 1:27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

Why should words from the Bible count as evidence, or hold any weight at all? Especially in light of empirical evidence to the contrary.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Why would you think a deity would be uninterested in the results of creating a world with the instructions for life to occur and change and adapt? Maybe your conception of god would have no interest in such things, but a curious god might. A scientist god, for lack of a better word. I don't believe in gods, but I could easily conceive of a god that would logically do such things. I see creating a world with the parameters set for life and then letting it flourish simply as a result of the processes in place as no less logical than creating a world that is "very good" and allowing it to descend into death and sin even when the creator holds the power to return it to goodness. In fact, I see it as far more logical.

It's always interesting to me how many theists refuse to get past their old books and look at the evidence presented in the universe they believe their deity created. I was taught ToE in Catholic school. I didn't meet a theist who rejected the ToE until I became involved in religious discussion forums. It boggles my mind that people are so hung up on their own interpretation of a deity being correct that they would ignore the blatant piles of evidence spanning over 150 years in favor of their own suppositions.

I take your point, and it's a good one- that a curious creative intelligence might 'enjoy' initiating a system and seeing where it leads, although that would assume mere curiosity as opposed to the greater motive, the greater power of explanation of a specific purpose, goal. And when the objective, observed result- again is a single sentient being capable of appreciating the rest of creation from within and giving thanks for it... bizarre fluke is always possible, but design seems a less improbable explanation to me.

There is a more technical argument also, where the mere parameters for life create just that- the simplest replicators, not sentient beings- but what could be a greater achievement of creative intelligence than creative intelligence itself?

Classical physics had far more 'blatant piles' of evidence, so much so to be declared 'immutable' making God redundant as a complete explanation for the physical world.

Only silly 'theists' with their old books dared believe the physical universe required deeper, mysterious, unpredictable mechanisms to account for the world we see around us

It was also academically fashionable for longer than evolution has been. I don't ignore it, I scrutinize it, as Planck, a skeptic of atheism, scrutinized classical physics, do you?

 

[outhouse]

perhaps that experiment was already tried and the creator realized that some 'tweaking' was required for more interesting results?

What is a creator? To date that is not a supportable position in any academic sense.

So far it looks to be man made mythology when people found out the literal interpretation of biblical mythology did not happen as written. So this new mythology was invented to keep their deity's power from slipping away.


Evolution Is fact and there is no evidence at all for any divine intervention in any aspect of nature. Not any part.

 

[gnostic]

Did you know that Dr. Alan Grant, the paleontologist in Jurassic Park movie is Dr. Horner, the one with the T-rex, the one who refused to test his T-rex with Carbon 14 dating method?

Taking LSD while watching Jurassic Park. Is that a joke?

You wouldn't use Carbon 14 for t-rex, because the accuracy of C14 is only 40,000 years. T-rex die out 65 million years ago. Using C14 on t-rex would give false reading.

Scientists would know already know about C14 dating method have limitations; they have known the limitations of c14 for decades.

What do you don't understand?

If I describe an elephant I would probably use a tree to describe the height. I did not say 130 feet but it can grow up to 130 feet.

JOB 40:17 “He bends his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are knit together.

Cedar can grow up to 130 feet and that is just the tail of this Behemoth.

Job 40:17 does not state anywhere the length of the behemoth's tail. It only say the tail is flexible as cedar, which when you think about it, is not very bendable at all.

Where does is say anything about the length of tail?

One again, you are twisting verse to fit your warped logic.

 

[gnostic]

The behemoth ate grass. It wasn't a T-rex.

We are talking about dinosaurs, right? All dinosaurs have sinew, right? The collagen was found in the T-rex femur.

You are the one who brought up behemoth in Job 40. And you are the one who brought up t-rex.

how is this for details?

JOB 40:15 “Behold now, Behemoth, which I made as well as you; He eats grass like an ox.

It would seem to me that you are linking behemoth to Tyrannosaurus rex.

T-rex is carnivore dinosaurs. They wouldn't eat grass, because they are meat eaters.

Tyrannosaurus rex is indeed a dinosaur, but not all dinosaurs are Tyrannosaurus rex.

You don't know anything about dinosaurs, and it would seem that you don't know what a Tyrannosaurus rex is, nor know what they eat.

Again, it would seem that your own education is seriously lacking. You don't know much about T-rex, and you don't know what they eat. One thing is certain, T-rex don't eat grass, because plants are not part of their diet.

 

[gnostic]

Only silly 'theists' with their old books dared believe the physical universe required deeper, mysterious, unpredictable mechanisms to account for the world we see around us

The physical world do hold a lot of mysteries, and sure you scrutinize whatever science theory, but the problem is questioning science, but people like you, trying to replace science with superstitions and ancient books of myths that have no idea what science is.

The bible contained wonderful stories and myths, but you shouldn't confuse the bible having any scientific merits, because there are no scientific merits inside it.

Science, not only require EVIDENCES, it required EXPLANATIONS on how the world work. The bible doesn't explain anything.

Lots of it contained exaggeration, like stopping the movement of Sun, during battle (still don't remember if it is Exodus or Joshua). The bible contain unrealistic events, that only believers and the naive would take literally.

A) is not the Sun moving, but the Earth rotating.
B) And you can't stop Earth from rotating and then jump-start it again.​

The bible is also not good at history. Very little is accurate.

For example, the gospels of both Matthew and Luke state that Mary was pregnant and Jesus was born in the time of Herod the Great, but Luke also state during these event with Mary and Jesus taking place, was the census of Quirinius.

In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered. 2 This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria.

The problem is that Publius Sulpicius Quirinius was never governor of Syria while Herod was still alive; he didn't become legate of Syria until 6 CE, 10 years after Herod's death.

6 CE was the time that Augustus had Archelaus exiled from Judaea, and Judaea became a new province. The census took place in 6 CE, not before Herod's death. And 2nd, Luke indicated that the census in "all the world". Now I believing what Luke meant that all the people of the provinces should registered, meaning just the Roman empire.

This is highly unlikely to have taken place. The reason for registration for census taking place, is for new province. Judaea being actually small and unimportant province would only require those living in Judaea to register. It would be highly unlikely Augustus would order census for all provinces.

 

[JM2C]

SOURCE REQUIRED

Google or Wiki

 

[JM2C]

All tetrapods have sinew, not just dinosaurs...

Did you know that the word "Behemoth" is plural? We all have collagen. Gravity pulls us down really quick if we don’t have enough collagen.

 

[JM2C]

It's possible to determine whether a system has remained closed or not. Isochron plots and mixing plots reveal this. If the plots show that the system has allowed isotopes to escape or enter, then the scientists know not to trust the age results as accurate. If the plots show no opening of the system, then they know the resulting age is reliable.

The equipment at the laboratory you mention cannot accurately measure K-Ar dates for very young samples. Secondly, the dacite sample was not homogeneous, meaning that any xenocrysts in the sample would make it appear older than it actually was. Xenocrysts are solid crystals that once existed in liquefied rock. They can therefore be significantly older than the flow which contains them. It is also known that xenocrysts can become open systems due to their high temperature environment. That would further throw off accurate calculations:CD013.1: K-Ar dating of Mt. St. Helens dacite

The phenocryst minerals gave different ages. The question is, if all the phenocryst minerals were tested by K-Ar dating method and gave different ages, then how accurate are the ages from different lava flows around the world using K-Ar dating method?

 

[JM2C]

You wouldn't use Carbon 14 for t-rex, because the accuracy of C14 is only 40,000 years. T-rex die out 65 million years ago. Using C14 on t-rex would give false reading.
Scientists would know already know about C14 dating method have limitations; they have known the limitations of c14 for decades.
What do you don't understand?

What makes you think radiometric dating is accurate when carbon-14 is used but not with uranium-238 or other isotopes?

I don't know what his personal reason for it would be, but scientists are not responsible for testing everything that they are asked to. I imagine this is especially true when the test comes from some fringe topic like young earth creationist. If NASA refused to test a piece of metal that someone claimed came from a UFO, would that automatically mean that NASA was trying to hide something?

Not if there is a mechanism that can preserve them for longer (which has already been explained by way of iron particles).

Iron particles is one of the many excuses of the evolutionists. You should watch this video and see it yourself why Dr. Horner refused to test it with 14C.

Bob Enyart calls Jack Horner about carbon dating a T-rex fossil

 

[JM2C]

You are the one who brought up behemoth in Job 40. And you are the one who brought up t-rex.

Really? How quickly you forgot.

Job 38 and 40 just showed utterly uneducated God and the author are. It showed God as superstitious as Job and the author.

Behemoth is plural

 

[JM2C]

It would seem to me that you are linking behemoth to Tyrannosaurus rex.


T-rex is carnivore dinosaurs. They wouldn't eat grass, because they are meat eaters.


Tyrannosaurus rex is indeed a dinosaur, but not all dinosaurs are Tyrannosaurus rex.


You don't know anything about dinosaurs, and it would seem that you don't know what a Tyrannosaurus rex is, nor know what they eat.


Again, it would seem that your own education is seriously lacking. You don't know much about T-rex, and you don't know what they eat. One thing is certain, T-rex don't eat grass, because plants are not part of their diet.

Where did you learn this? Because they have sharp teeth and claws and watching too much sci-fi and Jurassic Park, the natural thinking therefore should be, they all eat meat. Did you see them eating meat, beside watching TV, your favorite pastime? Where is your proof? I do have proof the dinosaurs eat grass. Here we go again.

JOB 40:15 “Behold now, Behemoth, which I made as well as you; He eats grass like an ox.