Why is naturalism considered scientific and creationism is not ?

[daws101]

Which proves my point, and confirms what David Gorski has said.

You were making the claim to the opposite of how evolutionary medicine plays such an important role in medicine.

I was not making a claim. I was pointing out the fact that the theory of evolution has advanced medical science far beyond where it would be without it. And that is true. "The evolutionary approach has driven important advances in our understanding of antibiotic resistance,[1] cancer,[2] autoimmune disease,[3] and anatomy". And while it is true that medical schools have been "slower to integrate evolutionary approaches because of limitations on what can be added to existing medical curricula" that has not diminished medical research using evolutionary approaches.

if you hadn't noticed YWC will argue minutia...especially after he's had his ass handed to him.
btw excellent job!

 

[Uncensored2008]

there you go again, you do not believe the earth is even close to 2.7billion years old which precludes you from making any reasoned statement about events or conditions in a era you don't believe ever happened.
there is no evidence of an intelligently guided process. where's god's barcode or copyright?
your use of the word randomness is an intentionally false depiction of processes and conditions you don't believe occurred.
in other words shut the fuck up...till you have a clue.

Psst, sparky?

The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, based on radiographic testing.

Where the hell did you come up with 2.7?

 

[Hollie]

Counterexamples to Evolution


The theory of evolution does not permit the existence of any counterexamples. If any one of the 48 counterexamples listed below is correct, then the theory of evolution fails. Moreover, even if there is merely a 5% chance that each of these counterexamples is correct (and the odds are far higher than that[2]), then the probability that the theory of evolution is true is less than 9%.

Counterexamples to Evolution - Conservapedia

Gee whiz. There's less than a 9% chance that evolution is true?

I suppose I'll need to trash all that earth science, chemistry, paleontology, geology, physics, etc., I've been poisoned with and read the various bibles. I've long had a suspicion that the earth really is flat. I'm convinced that the bibles are the only books anyone needs to read.

 

[Hollie]

there you go again, you do not believe the earth is even close to 2.7billion years old which precludes you from making any reasoned statement about events or conditions in a era you don't believe ever happened.
there is no evidence of an intelligently guided process. where's god's barcode or copyright?
your use of the word randomness is an intentionally false depiction of processes and conditions you don't believe occurred.
in other words shut the fuck up...till you have a clue.

Psst, sparky?

The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, based on radiographic testing.

Where the hell did you come up with 2.7?

False. The earth is less than 10k years old. If you had studied your lessons at the madrassah, you would know that.

 

[daws101]

there you go again, you do not believe the earth is even close to 2.7billion years old which precludes you from making any reasoned statement about events or conditions in a era you don't believe ever happened.
there is no evidence of an intelligently guided process. where's god's barcode or copyright?
your use of the word randomness is an intentionally false depiction of processes and conditions you don't believe occurred.
in other words shut the fuck up...till you have a clue.

Psst, sparky?

The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, based on radiographic testing.

Where the hell did you come up with 2.7?

I didn't shit head...once again you make an ass out of yourself..

 

[daws101]

there you go again, you do not believe the earth is even close to 2.7billion years old which precludes you from making any reasoned statement about events or conditions in a era you don't believe ever happened.
there is no evidence of an intelligently guided process. where's god's barcode or copyright?
your use of the word randomness is an intentionally false depiction of processes and conditions you don't believe occurred.
in other words shut the fuck up...till you have a clue.

Psst, sparky?

The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, based on radiographic testing.

Where the hell did you come up with 2.7?

try reading post#2478..

 

[Uncensored2008]

False. The earth is less than 10k years old. If you had studied your lessons at the madrassah, you would know that.

IF he had said 6,000 - would at least know where he came up with it.

But 2.7? That seems an arbitrary figure. But Daws has trouble with things like simple facts.

I really wish he'd join the other side.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I didn't shit head...once again you make an ass out of yourself..

Ah, the meanies were hacking the board and changing your posts again, got it....

 

[daws101]

False. The earth is less than 10k years old. If you had studied your lessons at the madrassah, you would know that.

IF he had said 6,000 - would at least know where he came up with it.

But 2.7? That seems an arbitrary figure. But Daws has trouble with things like simple facts.

I really wish he'd join the other side.

you just keep thinkin that.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Hollie;7684194
Actually, it just isn't true that the gods are the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. The number of religions and gods that have come and gone are evidence of that.

What is comical is your insistence that your gods are the " real" gods for no other reasons than parentage and place of birth. For you, the gods are the Christian gods. Had you been born in India to Hindu parents, you would, almost certainly be worshipping (and imposing) very different gods. It's just a fact that for the majority of religious people, their religion has nothing to do with faith but rather, is nothing more than a function of adopting the biases and traditions of their cultural norms.

And yet there are Christians in India, China, Russia, Egypt etc.
I could have been born anywhere and would know the God of Abraham.
Actually it is true, from beginning to end.
Religions and gods do come and go, but what Christ said will never pass away. Christians have God, not gods.
I have provided several reasons for belief in God. Your assessment is limited, not my post.
You would have us believe that If there was an explosion in a printing shop, when the dust cleared an unabridged dictionary would be the result. You're comical.

God said He was light. Want to talk about what science simply can't explain?
How light make decisions.

 

[daws101]

I didn't shit head...once again you make an ass out of yourself..

Ah, the meanies were hacking the board and changing your posts again, got it....

right...beleive that lie... and don't take any responsibility for your douchebaggery.
btw you never did tell me who everybody was?

 

[daws101]

And yet there are Christians in India, China, Russia, Egypt etc.
I could have been born anywhere and would know the God of Abraham.
Actually it is true, from beginning to end.
Religions and gods do come and go, but what Christ said will never pass away. Christians have God, not gods.
I have provided several reasons for belief in God. Your assessment is limited, not my post.
You would have us believe that If there was an explosion in a printing shop, when the dust cleared an unabridged dictionary would be the result. You're comical.

God said He was light. Want to talk about what science simply can't explain?
How light make decisions?

by passing the subjective justification that most of your thread consists of ..
where did you get the idea that light (A form of radiation) was intelligent?
how does light make decisions?

 

[orogenicman]

there you go again, you do not believe the earth is even close to 2.7billion years old which precludes you from making any reasoned statement about events or conditions in a era you don't believe ever happened.
there is no evidence of an intelligently guided process. where's god's barcode or copyright?
your use of the word randomness is an intentionally false depiction of processes and conditions you don't believe occurred.
in other words shut the fuck up...till you have a clue.

Psst, sparky?

The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, based on radiographic testing.

Where the hell did you come up with 2.7?

He was referring to the age of life on Earth, not the age of the Earth. 2.7 - 3.5 is the currently accepted range. Further research will likely narrow he range.

 

[Youwerecreated]

What one reader (David Gorski) had to say about your last article:

Evolutionary medicine

Evolutionary medicine or Darwinian medicine is the application of modern evolutionary theory to understanding health and disease. The goal of evolutionary medicine is to understand why people get sick, not simply how they get sick. Modern medical research and practice has focused on the molecular and physiological mechanisms underlying health and disease, while evolutionary medicine focuses on the question of why evolution has shaped these mechanisms in ways that may leave us susceptible to disease. The evolutionary approach has driven important advances in our understanding of antibiotic resistance,[1] cancer,[2] autoimmune disease,[3] and anatomy.[4] Medical schools have been slower to integrate evolutionary approaches because of limitations on what can be added to existing medical curricula.[5]

Evolutionary medicine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tell us again how the 2nd Law makes evolution on Earth impossible, because it's a closed system.

Because the earth would have been exp more and more disorder for almost 2 billion years. Tell me how order and complexity arose after that long of disorder ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Counterexamples to Evolution


The theory of evolution does not permit the existence of any counterexamples. If any one of the 48 counterexamples listed below is correct, then the theory of evolution fails. Moreover, even if there is merely a 5% chance that each of these counterexamples is correct (and the odds are far higher than that[2]), then the probability that the theory of evolution is true is less than 9%.

Counterexamples to Evolution - Conservapedia

the Question evolution! campaign by Creation Ministries International is a worldwide campaign which poses 15 questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer.[1] The 15 questions posed to evolutionists can be found HERE.


so much for scientific objectivity and credibility.

So scientists do not question their own theories ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

there you go again, you do not believe the earth is even close to 2.7billion years old which precludes you from making any reasoned statement about events or conditions in a era you don't believe ever happened.
there is no evidence of an intelligently guided process. where's god's barcode or copyright?
your use of the word randomness is an intentionally false depiction of processes and conditions you don't believe occurred.
in other words shut the fuck up...till you have a clue.

Psst, sparky?

The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, based on radiographic testing.

Where the hell did you come up with 2.7?

When did life supposedly appear on earth ? some say earlier in time.

That must have went over his head.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Which proves my point, and confirms what David Gorski has said.

You were making the claim to the opposite of how evolutionary medicine plays such an important role in medicine.

I was not making a claim. I was pointing out the fact that the theory of evolution has advanced medical science far beyond where it would be without it. And that is true. "The evolutionary approach has driven important advances in our understanding of antibiotic resistance,[1] cancer,[2] autoimmune disease,[3] and anatomy". And while it is true that medical schools have been "slower to integrate evolutionary approaches because of limitations on what can be added to existing medical curricula" that has not diminished medical research using evolutionary approaches.

That is your opinion, there are others that don't agree with it. What did they add to the curricula according to the source ?

Hell the medical researchers and evolutionists were at odds with each other.

 

[daws101]

Evolutionary medicine

Evolutionary medicine or Darwinian medicine is the application of modern evolutionary theory to understanding health and disease. The goal of evolutionary medicine is to understand why people get sick, not simply how they get sick. Modern medical research and practice has focused on the molecular and physiological mechanisms underlying health and disease, while evolutionary medicine focuses on the question of why evolution has shaped these mechanisms in ways that may leave us susceptible to disease. The evolutionary approach has driven important advances in our understanding of antibiotic resistance,[1] cancer,[2] autoimmune disease,[3] and anatomy.[4] Medical schools have been slower to integrate evolutionary approaches because of limitations on what can be added to existing medical curricula.[5]

Evolutionary medicine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tell us again how the 2nd Law makes evolution on Earth impossible, because it's a closed system.

Because the earth would have been exp more and more disorder for almost 2 billion years. Tell me how order and complexity arose after that long of disorder ?

specious conjecture.

 

[daws101]

Counterexamples to Evolution


The theory of evolution does not permit the existence of any counterexamples. If any one of the 48 counterexamples listed below is correct, then the theory of evolution fails. Moreover, even if there is merely a 5% chance that each of these counterexamples is correct (and the odds are far higher than that[2]), then the probability that the theory of evolution is true is less than 9%.

Counterexamples to Evolution - Conservapedia

the Question evolution! campaign by Creation Ministries International is a worldwide campaign which poses 15 questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer.[1] The 15 questions posed to evolutionists can be found HERE.


so much for scientific objectivity and credibility.

So scientists do not question their own theories ?

yes they do .on the other hand what you posted are not questions they are leading statement with a forgone conclusion..aka trick questions from a biased source...

 

[Youwerecreated]

False. The earth is less than 10k years old. If you had studied your lessons at the madrassah, you would know that.

IF he had said 6,000 - would at least know where he came up with it.

But 2.7? That seems an arbitrary figure. But Daws has trouble with things like simple facts.

I really wish he'd join the other side.

We don't need or want him discussing the issues.