Evidence for God from Science

I think he is dogmatically saying that anything that is evidence for evolution is evidence for creationism.

Which of course, does not address the issue at all.

Thinker: I'll make you a deal. I'll answer the portions of your post that are somewhat on topic: ***How do you know for a hardcore fact that we have CONSISTENT TRANSITIONAL forms for ANY species? Is there proof? Candidates are not proof.*** Never said they were. Nor can anything in science be proven...

Hi August, here are my replies to your questions: ***1. Please show how arranging fossils in a lineage is a falsifiable hypothesis.*** Scientists are often very proud individuals. So much so that view their activities as social scientists as pure science. That question hits at the very heart of the ...

I'm going to reserve the right to not respond to Thinker's post. However, I will respond to Jbuza and August. Jbuza first (simply because my e-journal access is down atm) ***So evolutionary theory proves itself, this is great.*** I did not say that. The predictions made through evolutionary models l...

Your brother had a deer come and talk to him?
?
Was your brother on meth?

Matt

One of the principle aspects of the Godhead is the all-powerful nature of God. Thus, God can implement any system He wishes into His creation. This includes evolutionary mechanisms for organism development. If this does not follow, then this violates a foundation of the Christian belief. Yet, some i...

Thinker: ***How then can we really know for a fact that we evolved and animals? Seems more like a different species that died out long ago to me. So many evolutionists making these assumptions that they claim as fact when they don't even hold any*** We can never directly, empirically observe our evo...

***The fossil record doesn't show in between forms.*** Remember, the fossil record of intermediate forms (esp. any creature with bone) is a pre-requisite for evolutionary theory. There is no way to experimentally falsify a fossil as being transitional. Instead, they need to meet a reasonable standar...

It is true that many theories work from the presupposition that common descent is correct. This is hard to avoid. It is additionally true that one premise within the current science paradigm is that the "universe is primarily orderly". This premise is in opposition with an intervening high...

Hi August: My framework is quite structured in its evaluation of scripture. I really do make an earnest effort to avoid "picking and choosing". The Bible would only be subservient to modern science if I thought the Bible was trying to address these issues. Since I don't use the Bible to di...

Here you go Jbuza: Refutations and Elaborations: ***Evolution is not science when it insulates itself from critique*** It does not insulate itself though. There are numerous evolution journals that continuously attack evolutionary mechanisms. Bashing other scientist's models is often how evolutionar...

Wow, usually when people copy and paste material, the initial material is pretty good. I'm glad Jbuza feels free to ignore this standard.

Hmmm, perhaps the school you attended should have indoctrinated the concept of grammar (instead of leaving the option open to your own personal exploration). All kidding aside: 1. Strawman 2. Red Herring 3. Ignoratio Elenchi (Missing the Point) 4. Ad Hominem 5. Ad Ignorantium Shall i go on? You addr...

I guess we can categorize the laws into types. Certainly conduct and dietary laws have changed. Moral laws do seem static; perhaps I should have been more specific with which I meant. To re-iterate a concept I offered before, the physical interventions that God presents do not have modern concordanc...

August: I would call it a hypothesis for now...there is no scientific evidence to support it. And as a scientific hypothesis, it requires the ability to be tested. Otherwise it is a philosophical argument. Yes, complex and specific information is one possible test criteria. It should be interesting ...