44
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 112:
Line 112: + + +
Talk:Essay:A Challenge to Creationists (view source)
Revision as of 16:10, June 17, 2008
, 16:10, June 17, 2008→Very well, I will explain why the burden of proof is on creationism.
:There is a fundamental flaw in your argument. The first two examples of a dragon or a fairy are not supernatural beings. God is a supernatural being. --[[User:Ymmotrojam|Ymmotrojam]] 11:55, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
:There is a fundamental flaw in your argument. The first two examples of a dragon or a fairy are not supernatural beings. God is a supernatural being. --[[User:Ymmotrojam|Ymmotrojam]] 11:55, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
:I didn't fully explain myself. What I mean is that the laws of science demand a being that is outside of nature to create nature (as said above, matter and energy cannot create themselves). For a proper example to be constructed, it must consist of all supernatural entities. --[[User:Ymmotrojam|Ymmotrojam]] 12:05, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
:I didn't fully explain myself. What I mean is that the laws of science demand a being that is outside of nature to create nature (as said above, matter and energy cannot create themselves). For a proper example to be constructed, it must consist of all supernatural entities. --[[User:Ymmotrojam|Ymmotrojam]] 12:05, 17 June 2008 (EDT)
::Okay, fair enough, but outside of the story, where the significance of the story lies, there ARE hundreds of stories involving supernatural beings and ONLY those supernatural beings. The point is, since they're all unfalsifiable, they can't be proven false. But since none of the stories can accomodate the others, they can't all be true. So since unfalsifiability is a common trait with all creation stories, you need more. You need to PROVE it to be true.
--[[User:JackSmith|JackSmith]] 12:10, 17 June 2008 (EDT)