« Back to story "LOL. The Alpha and Omega of Science."

Story Comments

Posted by: memestryker 7 months, 4 weeks ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

100%
memestryker7 months, 4 weeks ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

ccM, I see evidence of "intelligence" everywhere, but not an intelligent "designer" or puppet master, as many world religions assert.

There is ample evidence of energy, as well, but I don't see it as a sentient force acting on the physical world.

I would only reply to your initial question that there is no evidence of creationism, and overwhelming evidence for evolution. Darwinism was a theory at a certain point in time, based on the knowledge available to an individual at that time, so I wouldn't consider comparing creationism and darwinism to be very useful at this point in time.

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
6 Replies

loading ...
- capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user5 Replies
  - 100%
    quackpot7 months, 4 weeks ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    The problem with creationism is that one can not get past the hypothesis stage since it is impossible to test a hypothesis that invokes a magical force that is by definition untestable.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    2 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - 100%
      Tangent0017 months, 4 weeks ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      That's essentially what the judge in the Dover trial said.
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      0 Replies
      
      loading ...
    - capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user
  - 100%
    Tangent0017 months, 4 weeks ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    "Can you disprove the hypothesis of an intelligent designer?"
    
    No. That's one of the reasons it is NOT science. A theory must be falsifiable. Since there is no way to test for the absence of a designer, Creationism is not falsifiable. You see, evolution could be complete and consistent and all Creationism would have to assert is that God made it look that way.
    
    Evolution IS falsifiable. For example, multiple mammal fossils in pre-Cambrian strata with no evidence that the strata has been disturbed, or the existence of a body structure so novel that it cannot be explained through evolutionary processes (like a winged horse). Both would raise serious questions regarding the validity of evolution.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    1 Reply
    
    loading ...
    - capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user