Ken Miller: scientist and believeing Catholic

[Hopey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Evolution is falsifiable.


[/ QUOTE ]

Christianity is falsifiable. Produce the bones of Christ.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Christian deep thinker who calls himself "Splendour" made the same argument for the validity of Christianity in another thread recently. I guess you boys are working from the same playbook.

[Hopey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The fact that creationists do not have a falsifiable position should concern them if they want to pretend they are arguing honestly.


[/ QUOTE ]

Aren't you the least bit concerned that evolution is non-falsifiable?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure that God would be capable of convincing us that evolution is bogus. Instead, he seems to have left all of these little clues all over the place that has lead our scientists astray. I guess this is just one of his tests in order to separate the believers from the non-believers.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

I guess you boys are working from the same playbook.


[/ QUOTE ]


Correct. We even have a name for it. It's called the Bible.

[tpir]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Jesus could have easily done and been all the things you claim of him, even if he didn't ascend directly into heaven, no?


[/ QUOTE ]

No wonder I feel like I'm beating my head against a brick wall.

[/ QUOTE ]
It was a serious reply and it points out a large hole in your reasoning process that you refuse to plug. i.e. finding the bones of Jesus vs. not finding the bones of Jesus proves nothing other than "can we find Jesus' bones?"

Put another way, your conditions for "(dis)proving" Christianity and/or biological evolution are unreasonable.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Evolution is falsifiable.


[/ QUOTE ]

Christianity is falsifiable. Produce the bones of Christ.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you just change subjects randomly now, hmmm?

I like how you just generally ignore me now, it lets me know I'm on the right track. This was a clever red herring, this "Christianity is falsifiable" bit. It got the thread derailed for a dozen posts or so. But of course, you made the claim that evolution is non-falsifiable in response to someone saying CREATIONISM is non-falsifiable, not Christianty. I agree with you, Christianity is falsifiable, at least in theory. Finding the bones of Christ ought to do just fine. But that doesn't mean all the tenets of Christianity are similarly falsifiable. Creationism, for instance. Finding the bones of Christ wouldn't falsify creationism. So the rest of this is just a distraction. You also ignored my response to your "what would you accept as proof" question, which neatly demonstrated a pretty critical flaw in your approach. If you are waiting for proof of evolution you will be sorely disappointed, just as anyone would be waiting for proof of anything. We cannot prove evolution, merely pile up evidence and wait for the disproof to come.

[tpir]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Evolution is falsifiable.


[/ QUOTE ]

Christianity is falsifiable. Produce the bones of Christ.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you just change subjects randomly now, hmmm?

[/ QUOTE ]
Typical topic-change dodge. I fall for them all the time though [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img].

These threads would (potentially) go better if we could get rid of this and the answering-questions-with-slightly-related-questions tactic. It turns the discussion into a convoluted series of "oh yeah, what about this!" posts and masks the fact that some of the people involved have no good answers for things they were confronted directly with.

[hitch1978]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Evolution is falsifiable.


[/ QUOTE ]

Christianity is falsifiable. Produce the bones of Christ.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you just change subjects randomly now, hmmm?

[/ QUOTE ]
Typical topic-change dodge. I fall for them all the time though [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img].

These threads would (potentially) go better if we could get rid of this and the answering-questions-with-slightly-related-questions tactic. It turns the discussion into a convoluted series of "oh yeah, what about this!" posts and masks the fact that some of the people involved have no good answers for things they were confronted directly with.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. But almost everyone is guilty of it, including you and me.

[hitch1978]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

* If phylogenetic trees independently inferred from morphology and molecular sequences did not match.


[/ QUOTE ]


I did a thread on this a while back. Made no impression at all. Which is why I think evolution is non-falsifiable.

[/ QUOTE ]

could you post a link?

[Sephus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

if god intentionally made the world "look like" evolution happened


[/ QUOTE ]

He didn't. Man made evolution in his own image.

[/ QUOTE ]

what difference does it make whether he actually did? seriously. who was saying he did? who believes he did?

when i reply to your posts, it's because i'm looking at the point you seem to be making as far as i'm able to tell. what that response looks like, to me, is that you don't give a damn about the point i'm trying to make, you just want to make a new argument of your own.

you made a post implying that there couldn't be a trick, (remember? "where's the trick, where's the trick") because even if, as madnak assumes, the world looks like evolution happened, the same god who would be accused of the trick also said "in the beginning, etc."

but IF god made the world to look like evolution happened, that doesn't mean he also said "in the beginning." this is not about what you believe, it's about what madnak believes. remember, you were asking him "where's the trick?" you were ostensibly pointing out an inconsistency in his own beliefs, not an inconsistency between his beliefs and yours.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

could you post a link?


[/ QUOTE ]
Here