Why is naturalism considered scientific and creationism is not ?

[Bumberclyde]

So why did god need 6 days? He a lazy mofo? In I Dream of Jeannie, she would just snap her fingers. Is god not as powerful as Jeannie?

Gods creation might be considered supernatural to you and I but what God created he did it through his natural ability. If you ask me God put a little thought in to his creation.

So he had to think about it?

 

[Youwerecreated]

So why did god need 6 days? He a lazy mofo? In I Dream of Jeannie, she would just snap her fingers. Is god not as powerful as Jeannie?

Gods creation might be considered supernatural to you and I but what God created he did it through his natural ability. If you ask me God put a little thought in to his creation.

So he had to think about it?

Don't all designers think about what they are designing before it's designed ?

 

[Hollie]

Gods creation might be considered supernatural to you and I but what God created he did it through his natural ability. If you ask me God put a little thought in to his creation.

So he had to think about it?

Don't all designers think about what they are designing before it's designed ?

The Greek gawds are vastly more competent designers than your mere three gawds.

 

[Youwerecreated]

So he had to think about it?

Don't all designers think about what they are designing before it's designed ?

The Greek gawds are vastly more competent designers than your mere three gawds.

Really?care to share your thoughts.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Still waiting for someone to step up to the plate on this. Not sure why it was avoided.

would like to give you evidence that is real, and not conjecture that supports the bibles account of creation.

All groups of organisms have mutations, and all groups of organisms have genetic disorders, and theses genetic disorders gets passed to the next generations.

Unless the first life was free of genetic disorders ,that is for each species ,how could a small group survive ? Then you have to acknowledge that every new family would have to overcome these genetic disorders to survive.In smaller populations this would be destructive to that small group.

This fits that all families were created as they were, and through microadaptations and cross breeding is where we get all the diversity in a family group. But I also believe God created many different species within a family group. Each genetic disorder found in each family was due to inheritance. The very thing you claimed was an aid in macroevolution, would destroy small groups refuting the theory.

Remember the creation account is that each family started with a small group. the same would be for evolution so which theory is supported by the facts ?

If all organisms have genetic disorders and passed them on to their offspring for 2.7 billon years can you imagine the number of genetic disorders that would be found in the human gene pool ?

 

[Hollie]

Still waiting for someone to step up to the plate on this. Not sure why it was avoided.

would like to give you evidence that is real, and not conjecture that supports the bibles account of creation.

All groups of organisms have mutations, and all groups of organisms have genetic disorders, and theses genetic disorders gets passed to the next generations.

Unless the first life was free of genetic disorders ,that is for each species ,how could a small group survive ? Then you have to acknowledge that every new family would have to overcome these genetic disorders to survive.In smaller populations this would be destructive to that small group.

This fits that all families were created as they were, and through microadaptations and cross breeding is where we get all the diversity in a family group. But I also believe God created many different species within a family group. Each genetic disorder found in each family was due to inheritance. The very thing you claimed was an aid in macroevolution, would destroy small groups refuting the theory.

Remember the creation account is that each family started with a small group. the same would be for evolution so which theory is supported by the facts ?

If all organisms have genetic disorders and passed them on to their offspring for 2.7 billon years can you imagine the number of genetic disorders that would be found in the human gene pool ?

Other than a need to defend your dogma, I can't imagine why you're asking for explanations that have been provided to you on multiple occasions.

 

[Youwerecreated]

When you get done with that then explain how each family group being small, how would they survive inbreeding unless they were near perfect with no genetic disorders ? This fits the creation model.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Still waiting for someone to step up to the plate on this. Not sure why it was avoided.

would like to give you evidence that is real, and not conjecture that supports the bibles account of creation.

All groups of organisms have mutations, and all groups of organisms have genetic disorders, and theses genetic disorders gets passed to the next generations.

Unless the first life was free of genetic disorders ,that is for each species ,how could a small group survive ? Then you have to acknowledge that every new family would have to overcome these genetic disorders to survive.In smaller populations this would be destructive to that small group.

This fits that all families were created as they were, and through microadaptations and cross breeding is where we get all the diversity in a family group. But I also believe God created many different species within a family group. Each genetic disorder found in each family was due to inheritance. The very thing you claimed was an aid in macroevolution, would destroy small groups refuting the theory.

Remember the creation account is that each family started with a small group. the same would be for evolution so which theory is supported by the facts ?

If all organisms have genetic disorders and passed them on to their offspring for 2.7 billon years can you imagine the number of genetic disorders that would be found in the human gene pool ?

Other than a need to defend your dogma, I can't imagine why you're asking for explanations that have been provided to you on multiple occasions.

Hollie you should try and be honest. I did not ask these questions before.

 

[orogenicman]

Still waiting for someone to step up to the plate on this. Not sure why it was avoided.

would like to give you evidence that is real, and not conjecture that supports the bibles account of creation.

There is no evidence that supports Genesis.

All groups of organisms have mutations, and all groups of organisms have genetic disorders, and theses genetic disorders gets passed to the next generations.

Many of them don't because they are severe enough that the organism doesn't survive. But not all mutations have negative outcomes. Many mutations don't do anything at all. But YWC, you have to look at entire populations, not family groups. If even 30% of a species has a specific genetic disorder that is severe enough to cause death, that still leaves a 60% survival rate. Most species produce more offspring than needed to replace themselves, because most will never survive.

Unless the first life was free of genetic disorders ,that is for each species ,how could a small group survive ?

First life? What? What makes you think any particular species is a small group?

Then you have to acknowledge that every new family would have to overcome these genetic disorders to survive.In smaller populations this would be destructive to that small group.

Ever hear of a concept called extinction?

This fits that all families were created as they were, and through microadaptations and cross breeding is where we get all the diversity in a family group. But I also believe God created many different species within a family group. Each genetic disorder found in each family was due to inheritance. The very thing you claimed was an aid in macroevolution, would destroy small groups refuting the theory.

Utter Nonsense. This is what happens when you make shit up. Try learning how genetics works.

Remember the creation account is that each family started with a small group. the same would be for evolution so which theory is supported by the facts ?

If all organisms have genetic disorders and passed them on to their offspring for 2.7 billon years can you imagine the number of genetic disorders that would be found in the human gene pool ?

That isn't the way it works. You just flunked genetics 101.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Still waiting for someone to step up to the plate on this. Not sure why it was avoided.

would like to give you evidence that is real, and not conjecture that supports the bibles account of creation.

There is no evidence that supports Genesis.

All groups of organisms have mutations, and all groups of organisms have genetic disorders, and theses genetic disorders gets passed to the next generations.

Many of them don't because they are severe enough that the organism doesn't survive. But not all mutations have negative outcomes. Many mutations don't do anything at all. But YWC, you have to look at entire populations, not family groups. If even 30% of a species has a specific genetic disorder that is severe enough to cause death, that still leaves a 60% survival rate. Most species produce more offspring than needed to replace themselves, because most will never survive.



First life? What? What makes you think any particular species is a small group?



Ever hear of a concept called extinction?

This fits that all families were created as they were, and through microadaptations and cross breeding is where we get all the diversity in a family group. But I also believe God created many different species within a family group. Each genetic disorder found in each family was due to inheritance. The very thing you claimed was an aid in macroevolution, would destroy small groups refuting the theory.

Utter Nonsense. This is what happens when you make shit up. Try learning how genetics works.

Remember the creation account is that each family started with a small group. the same would be for evolution so which theory is supported by the facts ?

If all organisms have genetic disorders and passed them on to their offspring for 2.7 billon years can you imagine the number of genetic disorders that would be found in the human gene pool ?

That isn't the way it works. You just flunked genetics 101.

You're too funny. That is why I asked the questions you know the threat it would be to a small group. Why would I think that a completely new kind of organism would start out with a large group ?who is making shit up ? These new kinds not only had to over come genetic disorder but inbreeding in small groups.

 

[Hollie]

Still waiting for someone to step up to the plate on this. Not sure why it was avoided.

would like to give you evidence that is real, and not conjecture that supports the bibles account of creation.

There is no evidence that supports Genesis.



Many of them don't because they are severe enough that the organism doesn't survive. But not all mutations have negative outcomes. Many mutations don't do anything at all. But YWC, you have to look at entire populations, not family groups. If even 30% of a species has a specific genetic disorder that is severe enough to cause death, that still leaves a 60% survival rate. Most species produce more offspring than needed to replace themselves, because most will never survive.



First life? What? What makes you think any particular species is a small group?



Ever hear of a concept called extinction?



Utter Nonsense. This is what happens when you make shit up. Try learning how genetics works.

Remember the creation account is that each family started with a small group. the same would be for evolution so which theory is supported by the facts ?

If all organisms have genetic disorders and passed them on to their offspring for 2.7 billon years can you imagine the number of genetic disorders that would be found in the human gene pool ?

That isn't the way it works. You just flunked genetics 101.

You're too funny. That is why I asked the questions you know the threat it would be to a small group. Why would I think that a completely new kind of organism would start out with a large group ?who is making shit up ? These new kinds not only had to over come genetic disorder but inbreeding in small groups.

Speaking of "kinds" (a meaningless term in science), wouldn't inbreeding have affected the population that resulted from Noah and his immediate family tasked with re-populating the planet... after the flood... which there is no evidence for?

Why do your gawds allow such... "immoral" behavior?

 

[daws101]

So why did god need 6 days? He a lazy mofo? In I Dream of Jeannie, she would just snap her fingers. Is god not as powerful as Jeannie?

Gods creation might be considered supernatural to you and I but what God created he did it through his natural ability. If you ask me God put a little thought in to his creation.

that answer is why nobody who has thoughts asks you!

 

[daws101]

How, then, is creationism—as opposed to “naturalism,” defined as “a philosophical viewpoint according to which everything arises from natural properties and causes, and supernatural or spiritual explanations are excluded or discounted”—scientific? Admittedly, the answer depends on how you define “scientific.” Too often, “science” and “naturalism” are considered one and the same, leaving creationist views out by definition. Such a definition requires an irrational reverence of naturalism. Science is defined as “the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.” Nothing requires science, in and of itself, to be naturalistic. Naturalism, like creationism, requires a series of presuppositions that are not generated by experiments. They are not extrapolated from data or derived from test results. These philosophical presuppositions are accepted before any data is ever taken. Because both naturalism and creationism are strongly influenced by presuppositions that are neither provable nor testable, and enter into the discussion well before the facts do, it is fair to say that creationism is at least as scientific as naturalism.

Is creationism scientific?

When I hear someone is a creationist, I know I can make them believe almost anything I want. I can sell them the Brooklyn Bridge!

"Creationism" is based on the fiction of the Bible, and has no substantiation from any other source. That's what makes it fiction. Science requires verification of facts from more than one credible source of information. While believers in Creationism are usually poorly educated, I would not throw out Christianity just because of the creationism flaw. There are some good ideas to be had in the Bible, starting with the Golden Rule. Great advice as a way to live your life.

See the movie Inherit the Wind, you can understand the truth of science and evolution in about two hours.
​

​

Poorly educated ? Many Creationists have attended secular schools so do you blame the institutions ?

another big fucking deal response.
like yourself THAT MINISCULE amount of creationists tossed reality out like a chamber pot in favor of a comforting fantasy.

 

[daws101]

When you get done with that then explain how each family group being small, how would they survive inbreeding unless they were near perfect with no genetic disorders ? This fits the creation model.

since the human race did not
begin with the mythical two people you wish it did and as the creation myth is a myth.
you can claim anything you want
in reality genetic disorders are part of nature.
and the sister fucking you wish happened never did.

 

[daws101]

Still waiting for someone to step up to the plate on this. Not sure why it was avoided.

would like to give you evidence that is real, and not conjecture that supports the bibles account of creation.

All groups of organisms have mutations, and all groups of organisms have genetic disorders, and theses genetic disorders gets passed to the next generations.

Unless the first life was free of genetic disorders ,that is for each species ,how could a small group survive ? Then you have to acknowledge that every new family would have to overcome these genetic disorders to survive.In smaller populations this would be destructive to that small group.

This fits that all families were created as they were, and through microadaptations and cross breeding is where we get all the diversity in a family group. But I also believe God created many different species within a family group. Each genetic disorder found in each family was due to inheritance. The very thing you claimed was an aid in macroevolution, would destroy small groups refuting the theory.

Remember the creation account is that each family started with a small group. the same would be for evolution so which theory is supported by the facts ?

If all organisms have genetic disorders and passed them on to their offspring for 2.7 billon years can you imagine the number of genetic disorders that would be found in the human gene pool ?

Other than a need to defend your dogma, I can't imagine why you're asking for explanations that have been provided to you on multiple occasions.

Hollie you should try and be honest. I did not ask these questions before.

yes you did. just not in the same way.
so either you're being as dishonest as you always are or you're having memory issues ?

 

[orogenicman]

Still waiting for someone to step up to the plate on this. Not sure why it was avoided.

would like to give you evidence that is real, and not conjecture that supports the bibles account of creation.

There is no evidence that supports Genesis.



Many of them don't because they are severe enough that the organism doesn't survive. But not all mutations have negative outcomes. Many mutations don't do anything at all. But YWC, you have to look at entire populations, not family groups. If even 30% of a species has a specific genetic disorder that is severe enough to cause death, that still leaves a 60% survival rate. Most species produce more offspring than needed to replace themselves, because most will never survive.



First life? What? What makes you think any particular species is a small group?



Ever hear of a concept called extinction?



Utter Nonsense. This is what happens when you make shit up. Try learning how genetics works.

Remember the creation account is that each family started with a small group. the same would be for evolution so which theory is supported by the facts ?

If all organisms have genetic disorders and passed them on to their offspring for 2.7 billon years can you imagine the number of genetic disorders that would be found in the human gene pool ?

That isn't the way it works. You just flunked genetics 101.

You're too funny. That is why I asked the questions you know the threat it would be to a small group. Why would I think that a completely new kind of organism would start out with a large group ?who is making shit up ? These new kinds not only had to over come genetic disorder but inbreeding in small groups.

Because you don't understand a thing about population dynamics, much less genetics. A species with a low population count and a high mutation rate is not likely going to survive long. But that is not the situation with most species. It's a friggin red herring.

 

[daws101]

There is no evidence that supports Genesis.



Many of them don't because they are severe enough that the organism doesn't survive. But not all mutations have negative outcomes. Many mutations don't do anything at all. But YWC, you have to look at entire populations, not family groups. If even 30% of a species has a specific genetic disorder that is severe enough to cause death, that still leaves a 60% survival rate. Most species produce more offspring than needed to replace themselves, because most will never survive.



First life? What? What makes you think any particular species is a small group?



Ever hear of a concept called extinction?



Utter Nonsense. This is what happens when you make shit up. Try learning how genetics works.



That isn't the way it works. You just flunked genetics 101.

You're too funny. That is why I asked the questions you know the threat it would be to a small group. Why would I think that a completely new kind of organism would start out with a large group ?who is making shit up ? These new kinds not only had to over come genetic disorder but inbreeding in small groups.

Because you don't understand a thing about population dynamics, much less genetics. A species with a low population count and a high mutation rate is not likely going to survive long. But that is not the situation with most species. It's a friggin red herring.

not if you're laboring under the delusion that god did it.

 

[Youwerecreated]

There is no evidence that supports Genesis.



Many of them don't because they are severe enough that the organism doesn't survive. But not all mutations have negative outcomes. Many mutations don't do anything at all. But YWC, you have to look at entire populations, not family groups. If even 30% of a species has a specific genetic disorder that is severe enough to cause death, that still leaves a 60% survival rate. Most species produce more offspring than needed to replace themselves, because most will never survive.



First life? What? What makes you think any particular species is a small group?



Ever hear of a concept called extinction?



Utter Nonsense. This is what happens when you make shit up. Try learning how genetics works.



That isn't the way it works. You just flunked genetics 101.

You're too funny. That is why I asked the questions you know the threat it would be to a small group. Why would I think that a completely new kind of organism would start out with a large group ?who is making shit up ? These new kinds not only had to over come genetic disorder but inbreeding in small groups.

Because you don't understand a thing about population dynamics, much less genetics. A species with a low population count and a high mutation rate is not likely going to survive long. But that is not the situation with most species. It's a friggin red herring.

Population dynamics ? how in the world are you gonna study something you can't observe

Do you realize how stupid what you're insinuating is. How long do you think two completely different kinds hang around each other once they diverge ? You look in the animal kingdom notice how mostly keep to themselves ?

Where do all the genetic disorders go ? if all organisms were related every friggen genetic disorder would wind up getting passed on.do you think they just disappear ? Don't tell me what I understand and do understand when you can't even offer a rational rebuttal.

Humans alone have 6,000 genetic disorders that are inherited. You can't even come close to matching that number with beneficial mutations. If you understood mutation fixation, you would understand what a problem that is being able to point to more harmful mutations vs beneficial mutations.

 

[Youwerecreated]

When you get done with that then explain how each family group being small, how would they survive inbreeding unless they were near perfect with no genetic disorders ? This fits the creation model.

since the human race did not
begin with the mythical two people you wish it did and as the creation myth is a myth.
you can claim anything you want
in reality genetic disorders are part of nature.
and the sister fucking you wish happened never did.

Hey slapdick, how do you know ? after all they believe it was so unlikely that a cell could fully form to begin with that they said all things originated from one cell but they admit ignorance on this issue as well.

 

[Youwerecreated]

There is no evidence that supports Genesis.



Many of them don't because they are severe enough that the organism doesn't survive. But not all mutations have negative outcomes. Many mutations don't do anything at all. But YWC, you have to look at entire populations, not family groups. If even 30% of a species has a specific genetic disorder that is severe enough to cause death, that still leaves a 60% survival rate. Most species produce more offspring than needed to replace themselves, because most will never survive.



First life? What? What makes you think any particular species is a small group?



Ever hear of a concept called extinction?



Utter Nonsense. This is what happens when you make shit up. Try learning how genetics works.



That isn't the way it works. You just flunked genetics 101.

You're too funny. That is why I asked the questions you know the threat it would be to a small group. Why would I think that a completely new kind of organism would start out with a large group ?who is making shit up ? These new kinds not only had to over come genetic disorder but inbreeding in small groups.

Speaking of "kinds" (a meaningless term in science), wouldn't inbreeding have affected the population that resulted from Noah and his immediate family tasked with re-populating the planet... after the flood... which there is no evidence for?

Why do your gawds allow such... "immoral" behavior?

Here you go troll!

genre
noun \ˈzhän-rə, ˈzhäⁿ-; ˈzhäⁿr; ˈjän-rə\
1
: a category of artistic, musical, or literary composition characterized by a particular style, form, or content
2
: kind, sort

genous
Web definitions
kind (type) (suffix).