Why is naturalism considered scientific and creationism is not ?

[Hollie]

Provide the evidence that shows the theory of creation is anti-logic, and take the points on.

IT REQUIRES THE EXISTENCE OF A SUPERNATURAL BEING. First you have to prove the existence of that supernatural being and then prove that it is responsible for creating and managing the entire universe. Until you can prove that, your juvenile arguments are easily dismissed.

Ok then you need proof of this natural process converting non living matter to living matter by your reasoning.

I find a watch on the ground is it natural to assume nature produced that watch or a designer produced that watch. what does the evidence infer ?

Why would we look at animate and inanimate objects differently ?

Are you suggesting that mechanical components are subject to biological reproduction?

I'm not aware that Rolex watches have ever bred to produce a little Rolex.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Until you can prove that there is, they will go on doing so. The ball is in YOUR court. Why do you have such difficulty grasping that simple concept?

There is evidence of purposeful design and that gets ignored. This to is a simple concept.

Science should have no bias but what do we see, a rejection of evidence over presuppositions.

What evidence is there for "purposeful design"?

You would first need to present evidence of designer gawds and then present evidence that the designer gawds intended their designs to function as "designed".

Maybe you're hearing voices from the gods?

Show your evidence.

How bout a sun,moon,atmosphere,oxygen,organs,blood,veins,skeletal structures,food,water. Can you imagine life without any of the above ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

IT REQUIRES THE EXISTENCE OF A SUPERNATURAL BEING. First you have to prove the existence of that supernatural being and then prove that it is responsible for creating and managing the entire universe. Until you can prove that, your juvenile arguments are easily dismissed.

Ok then you need proof of this natural process converting non living matter to living matter by your reasoning.

I find a watch on the ground is it natural to assume nature produced that watch or a designer produced that watch. what does the evidence infer ?

Why would we look at animate and inanimate objects differently ?

Are you suggesting that mechanical components are subject to biological reproduction?

I'm not aware that Rolex watches have ever bred to produce a little Rolex.

Did I say that ? and did you understand the terms animate and inanimate objects ?

Why would we conclude one was designed and the other was not designed ?

 

[YWN666]

Michael Behe was just about laughed out of the courtroom with his Irreducible Complexity nonsense during the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial. I wouldn't hang my hat on anything he says.

I am impressed with a judges knowledge of science in that case

His understanding was leaps and bounds beyond the misguided fools on the school board and the delusional morons at the Discovery Institute.

This is what the judge said in his decision:

Kitzmiller v. Dover: Decision of the Court, Part 3

The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.

and

Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when consid ered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources.

 

[YWN666]

that comprehension problem popping up again? or are you just dodging the statement?

You are denying I said that in other threads and I believe in this one as well. Why did you dodge my question ?

I've never dodge your questions ...you still don't get it ...

I think he gets it. He just won't acknowledge it. Ignorance can be cured. Intentional ignorance like his cannot.

 

[YWN666]

I am impressed with a judges knowledge of science in that case

His understanding was leaps and bounds beyond the misguided fools on the school board and the delusional morons at the Discovery Institute.

Really,I am sure if it's anything like the dover trial that judge had one of the plaintiffs write up his judgement. hardly fair would you agree ?

Bullshit.

 

[Hollie]

Ok then you need proof of this natural process converting non living matter to living matter by your reasoning.

I find a watch on the ground is it natural to assume nature produced that watch or a designer produced that watch. what does the evidence infer ?

Why would we look at animate and inanimate objects differently ?

Are you suggesting that mechanical components are subject to biological reproduction?

I'm not aware that Rolex watches have ever bred to produce a little Rolex.

Did I say that ? and did you understand the terms animate and inanimate objects ?

Do you have a clue as to what you're "saying"?

The watchmaker analogy is stupendously silly. You should understand that mechanical components are different from biological organisms.

Identify for us how you know with certainty that your gods have "designed" existence vs. Zeus having designed existence.... and baby Rolex watches.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I am impressed with a judges knowledge of science in that case

His understanding was leaps and bounds beyond the misguided fools on the school board and the delusional morons at the Discovery Institute.

This is what the judge said in his decision:

Kitzmiller v. Dover: Decision of the Court, Part 3

The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.

and

Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when consid ered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources.

Why would a member of the aclu write his closing statement that also happened to be a member oif the plaintiffs against the defendants the school board.

How do we know this happened because he copied it word for word with the same grammar errors.

 

[YWN666]

Yes they have. They have been going on the presupposition that there is no designer.

Until you can prove that there is, they will go on doing so. The ball is in YOUR court. Why do you have such difficulty grasping that simple concept?

There is evidence of purposeful design and that gets ignored. This to is a simple concept.

What YOU consider valid evidence is nothing of the sort.

 

[Hollie]

His understanding was leaps and bounds beyond the misguided fools on the school board and the delusional morons at the Discovery Institute.

Really,I am sure if it's anything like the dover trial that judge had one of the plaintiffs write up his judgement. hardly fair would you agree ?

Bullshit.

When his arguments crash to the ground in flames, he retreats to conspiracy theories.

 

[YWN666]

What do you to go by to determine that the origins of life was a product of chaos converted to order ? Or that the origins of natural processes were produced by unguided naturalism?

I think it is obvious why you're dodging your obligation to prove your assertions.

I have never believed order can come from chaotic systems.

And you're dodging again. Who do you think you're fooling?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Oh and one more thing it was not won on the basis of science but because of the constitution. A key phrase that came from a letter written by Jefferson. I am sure I don't have to remind you of that phrase. The aclu should be a big enough hint.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Until you can prove that there is, they will go on doing so. The ball is in YOUR court. Why do you have such difficulty grasping that simple concept?

There is evidence of purposeful design and that gets ignored. This to is a simple concept.

What YOU consider valid evidence is nothing of the sort.

So we have differing opinions mine come from observation and logic.

 

[Hollie]

His understanding was leaps and bounds beyond the misguided fools on the school board and the delusional morons at the Discovery Institute.

This is what the judge said in his decision:

Kitzmiller v. Dover: Decision of the Court, Part 3

The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.

and

Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when consid ered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources.

Why would a member of the aclu write his closing statement that also happened to be a member oif the plaintiffs against the defendants the school board.

How do we know this happened because he copied it word for word with the same grammar errors.

Are the black helicopters also circling overhead?

 

[YWN666]

His understanding was leaps and bounds beyond the misguided fools on the school board and the delusional morons at the Discovery Institute.

This is what the judge said in his decision:

Kitzmiller v. Dover: Decision of the Court, Part 3

The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.

and

Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when consid ered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources.

Why would a member of the aclu write his closing statement that also happened to be a member oif the plaintiffs against the defendants the school board.

How do we know this happened because he copied it word for word with the same grammar errors.

Here is another assertion that you will run away from supporting. Documentation, please?

Even if such a thing were true, the judge is not going to affix his signature to something he does not agree with. Let's see your proof.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I think it is obvious why you're dodging your obligation to prove your assertions.

I have never believed order can come from chaotic systems.

And you're dodging again. Who do you think you're fooling?

No I'm not.

 

[YWN666]

Really,I am sure if it's anything like the dover trial that judge had one of the plaintiffs write up his judgement. hardly fair would you agree ?

Bullshit.

When his arguments crash to the ground in flames, he retreats to conspiracy theories.

I've had more intelligent debates with my 10 year old nephew.

 

[Hollie]

Oh and one more thing it was not won on the basis of science but because of the constitution. A key phrase that came from a letter written by Jefferson. I am sure I don't have to remind you of that phrase. The aclu should be a big enough hint.

Oh darn. Not that constitution and science buggaring things up again.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You are denying I said that in other threads and I believe in this one as well. Why did you dodge my question ?

I've never dodge your questions ...you still don't get it ...

I think he gets it. He just won't acknowledge it. Ignorance can be cured. Intentional ignorance like his cannot.

You really don't understand that creationists and ID'ERS agree on many things however we disagree on a few things ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

This is what the judge said in his decision:

Kitzmiller v. Dover: Decision of the Court, Part 3

The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.

and

Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when consid ered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources.

Why would a member of the aclu write his closing statement that also happened to be a member oif the plaintiffs against the defendants the school board.

How do we know this happened because he copied it word for word with the same grammar errors.

Here is another assertion that you will run away from supporting. Documentation, please?

Even if such a thing were true, the judge is not going to affix his signature to something he does not agree with. Let's see your proof.

I don't run from anything. If I am wrong I am a big enough person to admit it. I will not admit I am wrong until it is proven just like you so stop with the rhetoric.

CSC - A Comparison of Judge Jones' Opinion in Kitzmiller v. Dover with Plaintiffs? Proposed ?Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law?