What would falsify the theory of evolution?

[BilliardsBall]

But YOU WERE THE ONE WHO BROUGHT UP THE “3 degrees”...

So my questions WERE NOT MOOT.

Your evasions only tell us you have something to hide. Plus, you were extremely rude when I asked legitimate questions.

So how about we start again.

Does any of your degrees have anything to do with science?

Do any of your degree have anything to do with religion? (I'm a Religion Bachelor's from a secular university).

 

[BilliardsBall]

What makes you think that only abiogenesis and evolution tend to order from disorder? It appears that you have no understanding of the Second Law of Thermodynamics at all. Haver you ever seen one of these:

That is not "overcoming entropy". That is such an ignorant phrase. By your incredibly poor definition of "entropy" life itself is impossible. . Those crystals naturally formed from a very disordered state. There was no need of an intelligent being to make them molecule by molecule.

The SLoT only has to do with energy available for work. The poor version that you use only applies to isolated systems. That is a system where no energy can enter or leave the system, no matter can enter or leave the system. The Earth has energy constantly entering and leaving it so it is not an isolated system. Your version of the second law does not apply.

Yes, I am aware of crystal formation. Are you claiming things in general do not tend toward entropy? Would you like me to Gish Gallop 500 forms of entropy here from the natural world?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, I am aware of crystal formation. Are you claiming things in general do not tend toward entropy? Would you like me to Gish Gallop 500 forms of entropy here from the natural world?

No, I am claiming that your understanding of entropy is totally wrong.

In fact your question is alone proves that you do not understand the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do any of your degree have anything to do with religion? (I'm a Religion Bachelor's from a secular university).

How hard are you going to try to prove that you have no clue here?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Do any of your degree have anything to do with religion? (I'm a Religion Bachelor's from a secular university).

You brought up degrees. In a thread about science.
Perhaps you could answer the question posed to you first, as it's the most relevant.

 

[gnostic]

Do any of your degree have anything to do with religion? (I'm a Religion Bachelor's from a secular university).

No.

The question or questions are not about religions, but whether they have anything to do with science or science-related fields.

You said you have 3 degrees, and you have stated this a thread in “Evolution vs Creationism” forum.

Evolution is biology discipline or field that overlapped with other biology fields. For instance, paleontology is the study of fossils that require knowledge in both biology and geology, especially minerals from sediments being directly involved with the fossilization process. But most biology courses and subjects don’t involve in fossils, because most students in biology focused on living and extant organisms, or in recently extinct organisms which have no time to fossilize.

My questions to you were whether any of your qualifications involved directly or indirectly learning biology.

I have already shared mine, that my qualifications are only “applied science” relating to civil engineering and computer science (particularly in programming and network technology).

In computer science the answer is “no” to biology.

In civil engineering, only a little knowledge in biology were required, eg using woods as building materials, and knowing that soils can contain organic matters, eg organic matters in soil can cause deterioration of some types of foundation, eg acid level and salt level can corrode concrete and reinforced concrete foundation, so engineers have to find practical solutions to mitigate deterioration of foundations.

Why do you think before construction can begin, engineers required soil tests to be carried out to find out the acid & alkaline level, salt level, and level of water saturation in soils?

What little biology I have learned in engineering, don’t require me learning about Evolution. Civil engineering only teach every little about biology, but clearly don’t make any engineer students expert in biology. The focus in civil engineering is more focused on physics and maths relating to engineering than in biology.

As you can see I am being very honest with my answers.

Can you give me some honest answers, without you being evasive and without you being rude to me?

Did any of your degrees involve learning any biology?

 

[BilliardsBall]

No, I am claiming that your understanding of entropy is totally wrong.

In fact your question is alone proves that you do not understand the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Your illogic is spiritual, it stems from a rejection of God.

When I wrote "Are you claiming things in general do not tend toward entropy?" you wrote "No, you don't understand entropy," yet by agreeing with my stated question, you acknowledge that I both understand entropy and its prevalence.

"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them." -- Isaiah 8:20

 

[BilliardsBall]

You brought up degrees. In a thread about science.
Perhaps you could answer the question posed to you first, as it's the most relevant.

Or perhaps not, since the poser of the question is as recalcitrant as you.

 

[BilliardsBall]

No.

The question or questions are not about religions, but whether they have anything to do with science or science-related fields.

You said you have 3 degrees, and you have stated this a thread in “Evolution vs Creationism” forum.

Evolution is biology discipline or field that overlapped with other biology fields. For instance, paleontology is the study of fossils that require knowledge in both biology and geology, especially minerals from sediments being directly involved with the fossilization process. But most biology courses and subjects don’t involve in fossils, because most students in biology focused on living and extant organisms, or in recently extinct organisms which have no time to fossilize.

My questions to you were whether any of your qualifications involved directly or indirectly learning biology.

I have already shared mine, that my qualifications are only “applied science” relating to civil engineering and computer science (particularly in programming and network technology).

In computer science the answer is “no” to biology.

In civil engineering, only a little knowledge in biology were required, eg using woods as building materials, and knowing that soils can contain organic matters, eg organic matters in soil can cause deterioration of some types of foundation, eg acid level and salt level can corrode concrete and reinforced concrete foundation, so engineers have to find practical solutions to mitigate deterioration of foundations.

Why do you think before construction can begin, engineers required soil tests to be carried out to find out the acid & alkaline level, salt level, and level of water saturation in soils?

What little biology I have learned in engineering, don’t require me learning about Evolution. Civil engineering only teach every little about biology, but clearly don’t make any engineer students expert in biology. The focus in civil engineering is more focused on physics and maths relating to engineering than in biology.

As you can see I am being very honest with my answers.

Can you give me some honest answers, without you being evasive and without you being rude to me?

Did any of your degrees involve learning any biology?

So, si

No.

The question or questions are not about religions, but whether they have anything to do with science or science-related fields.

You said you have 3 degrees, and you have stated this a thread in “Evolution vs Creationism” forum.

Evolution is biology discipline or field that overlapped with other biology fields. For instance, paleontology is the study of fossils that require knowledge in both biology and geology, especially minerals from sediments being directly involved with the fossilization process. But most biology courses and subjects don’t involve in fossils, because most students in biology focused on living and extant organisms, or in recently extinct organisms which have no time to fossilize.

My questions to you were whether any of your qualifications involved directly or indirectly learning biology.

I have already shared mine, that my qualifications are only “applied science” relating to civil engineering and computer science (particularly in programming and network technology).

In computer science the answer is “no” to biology.

In civil engineering, only a little knowledge in biology were required, eg using woods as building materials, and knowing that soils can contain organic matters, eg organic matters in soil can cause deterioration of some types of foundation, eg acid level and salt level can corrode concrete and reinforced concrete foundation, so engineers have to find practical solutions to mitigate deterioration of foundations.

Why do you think before construction can begin, engineers required soil tests to be carried out to find out the acid & alkaline level, salt level, and level of water saturation in soils?

What little biology I have learned in engineering, don’t require me learning about Evolution. Civil engineering only teach every little about biology, but clearly don’t make any engineer students expert in biology. The focus in civil engineering is more focused on physics and maths relating to engineering than in biology.

As you can see I am being very honest with my answers.

Can you give me some honest answers, without you being evasive and without you being rude to me?

Did any of your degrees involve learning any biology?

Yes, they did. You know I have a Bachelor's of Religion which required university-level biology studies.

I've also been clear that my father taught gifted science classes, presenting me with college level texts at age 5 and up.

I also was a skeptic who knew and defended abiogenesis without God and macro-Evolution before trusting Jesus as a university junior.

If your point is I'm unqualified to speak on biology at a RELIGIOUS forum using LAY terms, you are NOT qualified to discuss religion here, not even a little, as far as I can tell from your both ducking my question and your frequent posts that show an astonishing lack of religious and Bible knowledge and of course--you claim to be one of the few humans who has never encountered God.

We currently post in a forum about my Father, whom you do not even know. Our conversations, therefore, border on the ridiculous.

Did any of your degrees involve learning enough religion to discuss it with people who personally know the living God?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your illogic is spiritual, it stems from a rejection of God.

When I wrote "Are you claiming things in general do not tend toward entropy?" you wrote "No, you don't understand entropy," yet by agreeing with my stated question, you acknowledge that I both understand entropy and its prevalence.

"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them." -- Isaiah 8:20

Nope, and thanks for showing that the Bible is wrong again by quoting it.

Of course "entropy is everywhere". You simply have no understanding at all of what entropy. is. The concept of entropy is real and testable. Your understanding of that concept is garbage. And that is putting it mildly.

Tell us, how do you thin that the fact that entropy is ubiquitous help you and your creationist beliefs?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Or perhaps not, since the poser of the question is as recalcitrant as you.

Um sure. I'll take that as a no then.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Your illogic is spiritual, it stems from a rejection of God.


When I wrote "Are you claiming things in general do not tend toward entropy?" you wrote "No, you don't understand entropy," yet by agreeing with my stated question, you acknowledge that I both understand entropy and its prevalence.

"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them." -- Isaiah 8:20

The "illogic" here, is yours. Where does that come from?

 

[SkepticThinker]

So, si


Yes, they did. You know I have a Bachelor's of Religion which required university-level biology studies.

I've also been clear that my father taught gifted science classes, presenting me with college level texts at age 5 and up.

My dad was a plumber. I went to a lot of job sites with him when I was a kid. That doesn't make me a plumber though, does it?

I also was a skeptic who knew and defended abiogenesis without God and macro-Evolution before trusting Jesus as a university junior.

Your reference to "macroevolution" seems to indicate that you have been arguing from a religious standpoint since Day One, given that is the position from which the argument about distinctions between "macroevolution" and "microevolution" originate from.

If your point is I'm unqualified to speak on biology at a RELIGIOUS forum using LAY terms, you are NOT qualified to discuss religion here, not even a little, as far as I can tell from your both ducking my question and your frequent posts that show an astonishing lack of religious and Bible knowledge and of course--

Dude, this thread is about what would falsify the theory of evolution. And again, you're the one who brought up degrees so you don't get to act all indignant now when it's thrown back at you.

you claim to be one of the few humans who has never encountered God.

So what? Of all the humans who have claimed to have encountered God, how many claim to have seen the exact God you believe in? How many claim encounters with other gods you don't believe in? Countless people have claimed encountered with aliens and ghosts as well. Again, so what? Claims aren't evidence.

We currently post in a forum about my Father, whom you do not even know. Our conversations, therefore, border on the ridiculous.

Your Father? Where can we find your Father? Please show him to us and we'll believe too. I want to believe in as many true things as possible, and not believe in as many false things as possible. So, hit me with the evidence.

Did any of your degrees involve learning enough religion to discuss it with people who personally know the living God?

Have you ever demonstrated that you actually "know the living God?" Has anyone? Why is a degree necessary to make such a claim?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You brought up degrees. In a thread about science.
Perhaps you could answer the question posed to you first, as it's the most relevant.

Good luck. I repeated the same questions several times and received responses, but no answers.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Your illogic is spiritual, it stems from a rejection of God.

When I wrote "Are you claiming things in general do not tend toward entropy?" you wrote "No, you don't understand entropy," yet by agreeing with my stated question, you acknowledge that I both understand entropy and its prevalence.

"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them." -- Isaiah 8:20

Do you understand entropy? Can you explain it to me, since I don't have a degree in religious studies, but my folks did have a lot of science books in the house when I was growing up?

 

[Heyo]

Do you understand entropy? Can you explain it to me, since I don't have a degree in religious studies, but my folks did have a lot of science books in the house when I was growing up?

Explaining entropy? That's a very high bar. A physics professor who does YouTube videos, i.e. proficient at explaining things, needed 3 attempts until he was satisfied.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Explaining entropy? That's a very high bar. A physics professor who does YouTube videos, i.e. proficient at explaining things, needed 3 attempts until he was satisfied.

The one that creationists use makes evolution impossible. Unfortunately for them it also makes life impossible. If you are living you can pretty easily see that that explanation must be wrong.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Explaining entropy? That's a very high bar. A physics professor who does YouTube videos, i.e. proficient at explaining things, needed 3 attempts until he was satisfied.

Even on the first try from a physicist, I imagine I would get more explanation than creationists that think they learned all there is to know about science when they were children.

I agree with @Subduction Zone, the entropy that creationists use precludes biological evolution and living things too.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Good luck. I repeated the same questions several times and received responses, but no answers.

Been there. Done that. Bought the t-shirt.

 

[gnostic]

So, si


Yes, they did. You know I have a Bachelor's of Religion which required university-level biology studies.

I've also been clear that my father taught gifted science classes, presenting me with college level texts at age 5 and up.

I also was a skeptic who knew and defended abiogenesis without God and macro-Evolution before trusting Jesus as a university junior.

If your point is I'm unqualified to speak on biology at a RELIGIOUS forum using LAY terms, you are NOT qualified to discuss religion here, not even a little, as far as I can tell from your both ducking my question and your frequent posts that show an astonishing lack of religious and Bible knowledge and of course--you claim to be one of the few humans who has never encountered God.

We currently post in a forum about my Father, whom you do not even know. Our conversations, therefore, border on the ridiculous.

Did any of your degrees involve learning enough religion to discuss it with people who personally know the living God?

* sigh *

Now I regret asking you the question, because all I am getting from you is ridiculous answer that I have to have a degree in religion to have opinions in religion...

Since, when do people needs to have a degree in religion? So if Christians have no degree in religion, they cannot have opinions about what they believe in?

Don’t bother to answer these questions, because I am getting hostile condescension from you.