nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 836:
Line 836: + + + + + +
→Legitimate views: Did natural selection come about by chance?
Looking at language, vocabulary, idioms, etc is science, but we already know that you stick to a very limited view of science. Essentially, you want to use all the tools and techniques commonly used in science for yourself, to get from the evidence to "reasonably certain conclusions". But you don't want scientists to use the same tools and methods to get to reasonably certain conclusion? Using your own standard, you too will have to admit that you never heard a native speaker of old semitic languages such as Aramaic, but of course you won't hold this against yourself, only against scholars that disagree with you. It seems like you feel the need to measure with two measures to be able to defend your position. [[User:Order|Order]] 12:43, 21 December 2007 (EST)
Looking at language, vocabulary, idioms, etc is science, but we already know that you stick to a very limited view of science. Essentially, you want to use all the tools and techniques commonly used in science for yourself, to get from the evidence to "reasonably certain conclusions". But you don't want scientists to use the same tools and methods to get to reasonably certain conclusion? Using your own standard, you too will have to admit that you never heard a native speaker of old semitic languages such as Aramaic, but of course you won't hold this against yourself, only against scholars that disagree with you. It seems like you feel the need to measure with two measures to be able to defend your position. [[User:Order|Order]] 12:43, 21 December 2007 (EST)
:I'm not sure exactly what was in my mind with my comment about the moon. But it was probably that the precise details could change, just as with you. But no, if the claim about the moon's age increased by 30 million years, it wouldn't change much: both the old and new figures would be wrong. But more to the point, ''any'' such date is based on assumptions that I would reject. But you didn't answer my equivalent question to you. I asked what if a new age ''did'' affect your core beliefs. I'll refine the question further in light or your question to me. What if new evidence showed it to be 6,000 years old?
: "''Selection refers to the observation that the frequency of genetic traits that lead to a better adaptation of the phenotype to the environment will increase in the gene pool over time.''": Yes, but why is this the way it happens? Was this selection process designed or did it occur by chance? Your argument is based on the assumption that this process came into being by chance. No, I'm not proposing theistic evolution. I'm proposing theistic ''creation'' (not that there can really be any other kind).
: I don't have a very limited view of science, but I don't credit it with being able to perform miracles (e.g. test something that is not available to test).
: I ''do'' want people to use all the same tools to get to reasonably certain conclusions. But those tools include using reliable historical documents such as the Bible, instead of ''a priori'' excluding them for philosophical reasons, then claiming that as 'science'.
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:36, 29 December 2007 (EST)
===Motivations===
===Motivations===