Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Main Differences Between the Three Origin Sciences

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Main Differences Between the Three Origin Sciences

    Evolution Science relies upon atoms, genes, matter, time, space, etc to form it's doctrine.

    Intelligent Design science does not need to rely upon matter, time and space to form it's doctrine, but cannot accept God (a perfect being) as it's designer. This is due to corruption within the genetic code (cancer, disease, death, etc). Intelligent Design states genetic code can be corrupted because of errors in the code. Thus, the Designer is not perfect.

    Creation Science does not need to rely upon matter, time, space, etc for it's doctrine. Creation science notes that genetic code comes from an intelligence (due to the scientific laws of information). However, this code can change to be beneficial to the survival of species. This is evidence of an intelligently designed genome to "know" the proper change in the genetic code to survive. In addition Creation Science also notes that certain genetic changes results in cancer, disease, death, etc. This is due to the fall of man (human imperfection). The wages of sin is death.

    Thus, the only only doctrines that can explain the origin of genetic code is intelligent design and creation science. Evolution science fails this test.

    The only doctrines to explain information in the genetic code are intelligent design and creation science. Evolution fails this as well.

    The doctrines that explain why beneficial and and non-benificial genetic changes occur are creation science, intelligent design, and evolution science.

    The only doctrine that explain how a perfect intelligence can create our genome is creation science.

    Look at all of these, and please explain which origin science can answer all of these questions.

    It is only creation science. Second place is intelligent design. In last place is evolution science.

    Evolution science has to rely upon an already created genome to continue. Evolution science cannot explain the creation of the genome. However, intelligent design and creation science can explain this.

    For those who care about all truth will understand. Those who live in deception will complain.

    Thus, let the complaining begin....

  • #2
    "Creation science" is an oxymoron. And we know that information can be generated by natural processes. It is not a conserved quantity. The "scientific laws of information" exist only in Gitt's imagination.
    Regards, HRG.

    "The universe doesn't care what happens to its inhabitants, but its inhabitants do" (Tyrrho).

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by cpacman1 View Post
      Evolution Science relies upon atoms, genes, matter, time, space, etc to form it's doctrine.
      Your "Evolution science" remains a fantasy you have spun from nothing.
      Anything that is science, must by definition reject doctrine.


      When evil is powerful, good men are silenced.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by HRG View Post
        "Creation science" is an oxymoron. And we know that information can be generated by natural processes. It is not a conserved quantity. The "scientific laws of information" exist only in Gitt's imagination.
        Nothing caused everything according to your failed superstitions.

        Your people can't demonstrate abiogenesis and are just not bright enough to grasp it and a multitude of deal breakers.

        Do you know why?

        Comment


        • #5

          Darwin is liked by evolutionists because he liberated science from the straitjacket of observation and opened the door to storytellers. This gave professional evolutionists job security so they can wander through biology labs as if they belong there. --- David Coppedge

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by cpacman1 View Post
            Evolution Science relies upon atoms, genes, matter, time, space, etc to form it's doctrine.
            Another Christian who sees religion as inferior to science; "doctrine" is part of religion. You are trying to criticise the science of evolution by making it look like the religion of evolution. It is absurd for a religious person to place science above religion.

            We have scientific evidence of the existence of atoms, genes, matter, time and space, so evolution is based on well evidenced entities.

            Intelligent Design science does not need to rely upon matter, time and space to form it's doctrine, but cannot accept God (a perfect being) as it's designer. This is due to corruption within the genetic code (cancer, disease, death, etc). Intelligent Design states genetic code can be corrupted because of errors in the code. Thus, the Designer is not perfect.
            Intelligent Design has no scientific evidence of the existence of its proposed designer. The existence of its designer would refute ID's claim that certain complex things require design: what designed their complex designer? ID is not based on any well evidenced entity.

            Creation Science does not need to rely upon matter, time, space, etc for it's doctrine.
            Which is why Creation Science is theology, not science and does not belong in a science discussion. Science deals with space, time, energy and matter. Or do you have scientific evidence of the existence of your proposed creator? Care to prove the existence of Vishnu to us? After all, there is more than one proposed creator around.
            The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

            Comment


            • #7
              Your people lie to you.

              Darweenie dogma
              Originally posted by rossum View Post

              Another Christian who sees religion as inferior to science; "doctrine" is part of religion. You are trying to criticise the science of evolution by making it look like the religion of evolution. It is absurd for a religious person to place science above religion.

              We have scientific evidence of the existence of atoms, genes, matter, time and space, so evolution is based on well evidenced entities.



              Intelligent Design has no scientific evidence of the existence of its proposed designer. The existence of its designer would refute ID's claim that certain complex things require design: what designed their complex designer? ID is not based on any well evidenced entity.



              Which is why Creation Science is theology, not science and does not belong in a science discussion. Science deals with space, time, energy and matter. Or do you have scientific evidence of the existence of your proposed creator? Care to prove the existence of Vishnu to us? After all, there is more than one proposed creator around.
              Takes a lot of religious faith to believe in magic mutations.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by HRG View Post
                "Creation science" is an oxymoron. And we know that information can be generated by natural processes. It is not a conserved quantity. The "scientific laws of information" exist only in Gitt's imagination.
                How did adenine, thymine, cytosine and guanine come into existence to create genetic information?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Nouveau View Post
                  Your people lie to you.
                  So Nouveau = your people. Thanks for the clarification.
                  "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by cpacman1 View Post
                    How did adenine, thymine, cytosine and guanine come into existence to create genetic information?
                    Certainly. See these two papers:

                    Becker et al. (2016) A high-yielding, strictly regioselective prebiotic purine nucleoside formation pathway.

                    Powner et al. (2009) RNA pyrimidine synthesis.

                    Those give us uracil as well as ACGT so we have RNA (ACGU) as well as DNA (ACGT)..

                    Did you not bother to check first whether or not science had already answered your question before you asked it? If you want to ask a 'gotcha' question then you need to check first that it really is a gotcha question. If it isn't then you are going to be the one with egg on your face.

                    Now show us where your divinely created adenine, thymine, cytosine, guanine and uracil are.

                    Scientific abiogenesis is well ahead of creationism.
                    The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by cpacman1 View Post
                      It is only creation science. Second place is intelligent design. In last place is evolution science.
                      I'd like to add a fourth explanation, if I may.

                      Creation miracles.

                      Creation science is a contradiction in terms.

                      Intelligent design relies on science to explain itself -- thus it cheapens itself.

                      Evolution is a lie of the Devil, who got Darwin to write, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life; and got Hitler to write its sequel, My Struggles.

                      Creation miracles, on the other hand, takes the creation week out of the hands of natural explanation, where it doesn't belong in the first place.

                      In creation science, we common people are at the mercy of scientists to explain how things started out.

                      And scientists today -- with a very few exceptions -- are enemies of God and His people.

                      Science gave us eugenics.
                      THE BIBLE SAYS IT, THAT SETTLES IT.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by AV1611VET View Post

                        I'd like to add a fourth explanation, if I may.

                        Creation miracles.

                        Creation science is a contradiction in terms.

                        Intelligent design relies on science to explain itself -- thus it cheapens itself.
                        Ok...

                        Evolution is a lie of the Devil, who got Darwin to write, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life; and got Hitler to write its sequel, My Struggles.
                        The Devil remains as imaginary as always.
                        And since Darwin never wrote "The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life". And Hitler's "Mein Kampf" (my struggle) singular, is in no way a sequil to anything Darwin wrote.... You appear to be once again caught in the same false claim you make over and over.
                        Why do you refuse to remain corrected?

                        Creation miracles, on the other hand, takes the creation week out of the hands of natural explanation, where it doesn't belong in the first place.

                        In creation science, we common people are at the mercy of scientists to explain how things started out.
                        Ok..... If you choose to not learn, I suppose you must depend on others to do your thinking.

                        And scientists today -- with a very few exceptions -- are enemies of God and His people.
                        Nope.
                        And what is "His people"?


                        Science gave us eugenics.
                        Nope, Try again.
                        Eugenics started with Sparta's quest to breed the perfect soldiers.
                        It was geo-politics, not science.
                        Science demonstrated the utter absurdity of eugenics. Such that only religious and political fanatics continue to promote it.
                        When evil is powerful, good men are silenced.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by D Laurier View Post
                          And what is "His people"?
                          Galatians 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
                          THE BIBLE SAYS IT, THAT SETTLES IT.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by D Laurier View Post
                            Science demonstrated the utter absurdity of eugenics.
                            Sometimes mother nature beats scientists to the punch.

                            Demonstrating how wrong they were, after the fact.

                            Remember Thalidomide? the Challenger?

                            Other times, scientists are just too gung-ho to get another discovery on the front page.

                            Remember Nebraska Man?

                            Other times, scientists are just ... well ... unwise; and mother nature has to teach them a lesson.

                            Remember the Hindenburg? the Deepwater Horizon? the Florida footbridge?

                            Other times, scientists just make products that are detrimental to our health, but are protected by the law.

                            Beer? Wine? Tobacco?

                            Other times, scientists change words in the Bible to get crimes legalized.

                            Abortion?
                            THE BIBLE SAYS IT, THAT SETTLES IT.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by AV1611VET View Post
                              Sometimes mother nature beats scientists to the punch.
                              Sometimes mother nature beats theologians to the punch.

                              Remember Harold Camping? What about the Great Disappointment?

                              Demonstrating how wrong they were, after the fact.
                              Exactly what I was going to say.

                              Other times, scientists just make products that are detrimental to our health, but are protected by the law.

                              Beer? Wine? Tobacco?
                              Erm... The miracle at Cana? What did Jesus and the Apostles drink at the Last Supper?

                              Foot... Aim... Fire!
                              The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X