Evolutionists Appropriating ID?

Originally posted by RJHinds
If you will re-read my post it says there is no problem with Physics.

The problem is when assumptions are made. We are all guilty of making assumptions about things we don't know. It is only when the assumptions are correct that we can get a correct answer no matter how good our calculations and Physics might be.

you say they are making assumptions, they base these 'assumptions' on known physics. so what is wrong with the physics rj, or if you prefer what are they 'assuming' that is incorrect?

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
but you're the only one making assumptions.

No, I am not the only one making assumptions. You are also assuming, incorrectly, that you are more knowledgeable than I am. You are assuming you know things that you only think you know.

Originally posted by RJHinds
No, I am not the only one making assumptions. You are also assuming, incorrectly, that you are more knowledgeable than I am. You are assuming you know things that you only think you know.

Classic troll post

Originally posted by RJHinds
The written records I was referring to was about when World War I occurred. We certainly know the Earth is at least as old as any written records by man. But that does not mean we can know the actual age the universe in that way.

Yet we can at least set a minimum age on the universe. This contradicts statements by you and Kelly that suggest that we can know nothing whatsoever about the age unless we know how it all started.

What I am saying is that it is not as simple as that. The scientist have to make assumptions to calculate and make such statements. One of those assumptions is the locaton of the star in relationship to the Earth has always been the same from the beginning to the end.
No such assumption is made. In fact, it is known that it is not true. But I would be wasting my time trying to explain basic physics to a troll.

Originally posted by RJHinds
No, I am not the only one making assumptions. You are also assuming, incorrectly, that you are more knowledgeable than I am. You are assuming you know things that you only think you know.

i'm not assuming that i am more knowledgeable than you. i know that i'm more knowledgeable than you. this is not in dispute.

now back to your assumption. you are assuming that god exists and that it chose to communicate with some primitive people thousands of years ago. your assumption is based on nothing more than a book of myths written by these primitive people.

scientists make assumptions based on observations, physics, mathematics, etc. and they then proceed to test these assumptions, eliminate bad ones or modify their knowledge as more information is gained.

there are no parallels between your beliefs of primitive nonsense and the advancement of human knowledge.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
i'm not assuming that i am more knowledgeable than you. i know that i'm more knowledgeable than you. this is not in dispute.

now back to your assumption. you are assuming that god exists and that it chose to communicate with some primitive people thousands of years ago. your assumption is based on nothing more than a book of myths written by these ...[text shortened]... o parallels between your beliefs of primitive nonsense and the advancement of human knowledge.

Everyone can make all the assumptions they wish as long as they don't put it out as fact instead of guess work. When scientists do their work they should make it clear as to what they are assuming so people like you and sunhouse know the truth.

P.S. I forgot to mention twhitehead and all the other atheists, who think scientists don't assume anything when they put forward the theory of evolution over creation or intelligent design.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Everyone can make all the assumptions they wish as long as they don't put it out as fact instead of guess work. When scientists do their work they should make it clear as to what they are assuming so people like you and sunhouse know the truth.

To VS, you say: "When scientists do their work they should make it clear as to what they are assuming so people like you and sunhouse know the truth."

Would you be willing to do the same -- make it clear as to what you are assuming -- when you "do your work" here?

Originally posted by JS357
To VS, you say: "When scientists do their work they should make it clear as to what they are assuming so people like you and sunhouse know the truth."

Would you be willing to do the same -- make it clear as to what you are assuming -- when you "do your work" here?

I am not a scientist attempting to establish scientific facts for everyone to accept as true. Belief and faith has always been apart of Christianity. However, logic, reason, and facts are not excluded when we consider what we believe or in Whom we place our faith and trust.

We believe Christ is the Son of God and the Holy Bible has been written by men inspired by God. As the Apostle Paul said, "For we walk by faith, not by sight."
(2 Corinthians 5:7 NKJV)

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Classic troll post

That's what we pay for - thumbs up

Originally posted by RJHinds
Everyone can make all the assumptions they wish as long as they don't put it out as fact instead of guess work. When scientists do their work they should make it clear as to what they are assuming so people like you and sunhouse know the truth.

P.S. I forgot to mention twhitehead and all the other atheists, who think scientists don't assume anything when they put forward the theory of evolution over creation or intelligent design.

if you knew anything at all about science and the scientific process, you would realize that there are no assumptions put forth as facts.

the only ones who make assumptions and declare them as facts are you religionists.

and the theory of evolution has evolved beyond the assumption phase. the theory has been tested and proven. many facts have been discovered from the research. while this is going on, you religionists have discovered nothing new, you've only managed to regress further into your ignorance.

Originally posted by RJHinds
However, logic, reason, and facts are not excluded when we consider what we believe or in Whom we place our faith and trust.

Why is it you think your "faith and trust" trumps scientifically based deductions and assumptions?

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am not a scientist attempting to establish scientific facts for everyone to accept as true. Belief and faith has always been apart of Christianity. However, logic, reason, and facts are not excluded when we consider what we believe or in Whom we place our faith and trust.

We believe Christ is the Son of God and the Holy Bible has been written by men i ...[text shortened]... od. As the Apostle Paul said, "For we walk by faith, not by sight."
(2 Corinthians 5:7 NKJV)

yes, we realize you don't try to establish facts. all you do is make a bunch of whack-a-doodle assumptions based on primitive myths without being able to prove a single one.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
if you knew anything at all about science and the scientific process, you would realize that there are no assumptions put forth as facts.

the only ones who make assumptions and declare them as facts are you religionists.

and the theory of evolution has evolved beyond the assumption phase. the theory has been tested and proven. many facts have been ...[text shortened]... onists have discovered nothing new, you've only managed to regress further into your ignorance.

I studied science in college and we were were required to use the scientific method. We even made hypothesis, which are actually assumptions, and did experiments trying to prove them. A good scientists does not put forward hypothesis (assumptions) as fact.

However, we have some bad scientists that put forward these assumptions as fact. I call them evolutionists. They put forward the hypothesis of evolution and then upgrade it to a theory based on misrepresentations of what they observe in adaptation. Some of them go as far as to claim the hypothesis of evolution is a fact based on what is really adaptation.

The real fact is that there is no evolution for it has never been observed.

Originally posted by FMF
Why is it you think your "faith and trust" trumps scientifically based deductions and assumptions?

I have nothing against scientifically based deductions once the assumptions have been properly tested and established as scientifc facts. I even have faith in trust in good science. But there is another type of faith and trust that deals with spiritual matters that science does not touch with the scientific method. Science tests the truth of physical matters, not spiritual matters.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I studied science in college and we were were required to use the scientific method. We even made hypothesis, which are actually assumptions, and did experiments trying to prove them. A good scientists does not put forward hypothesis (assumptions) as fact.

However, we have some bad scientists that put forward these assumptions as fact. I call them evol ...[text shortened]... eally adaptation.

The real fact is that there is no evolution for it has never been observed.

the real fact is that you don't know much about science or the scientific method. come to think of it, you don't know much about your own religion either. you have no qualifications to make any assumptions on the validity of the theory of evolution.

come back when you get yourself an education, then we'll talk.