Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is Intelligent Design a Bad Scientific Theory or a Non-Scientific Theory?
Tech Central Station ^ | 11/10/2005 | Uriah Kriegel

Posted on 11/10/2005 4:43:24 AM PST by Nicholas Conradin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 701-750751-800801-850851-863 last
To: LogicWings
Proving the cause of gravity, and that it exists are two different things.

An in stating that gravity "exists" has science thereby proven gravity to be anything less than supernatural?

851 posted on 12/11/2005 5:45:47 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 850 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
However, "you can't prove a negative" has the unfortunate property that it is a negative. . .

And of course, if you cannot prove this statement, then it is without meaning: a self-negating statement.

You are Conflating proving "statements" false with proving there is no physical evidence for that which does not exist.

852 posted on 12/11/2005 5:56:21 PM PST by LogicWings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 849 | View Replies]

To: SalukiLawyer

BTTT


853 posted on 12/11/2005 6:03:53 PM PST by 185JHP ( "The thing thou purposest shall come to pass: And over all thy ways the light shall shine.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: SalukiLawyer

BTTT


854 posted on 12/11/2005 6:06:44 PM PST by 185JHP ( "The thing thou purposest shall come to pass: And over all thy ways the light shall shine.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: 185JHP

Hi, just curious why you pinged me twice on your BTTT on the ID/Evolution thread. Anything in particular that requires my attention? :-)


855 posted on 12/11/2005 6:23:29 PM PST by SalukiLawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 854 | View Replies]

To: SalukiLawyer

The double ping was a mistake. The BTTT was b/c I liked the way you stated the situation as it exists. FReegards


856 posted on 12/11/2005 6:31:41 PM PST by 185JHP ( "The thing thou purposest shall come to pass: And over all thy ways the light shall shine.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 855 | View Replies]

To: LogicWings
You are Conflating proving "statements" false with proving there is no physical evidence for that which does not exist.

I am merely asking you to prove your statement. You've been blustering for a few weeks now.

857 posted on 12/11/2005 7:22:11 PM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 852 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
I am merely asking you to prove your statement.

Prove that I haven't.

858 posted on 12/21/2005 5:35:49 PM PST by LogicWings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 857 | View Replies]

To: LogicWings

Cop-out. Not unexpected.


859 posted on 12/21/2005 6:51:24 PM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 858 | View Replies]

To: Nicholas Conradin

ID is an excellent scientific theory. It is, in fact, the only true theory that will soon replace the pseudo theory of evolution.

Evolution is all speculation with zero speciation.


860 posted on 12/21/2005 6:55:36 PM PST by Baraonda (Demographic is destiny. Don't hire 3rd world illegal aliens nor support businesses that hire them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
Please put me on the Creationist ping list.

The other list, which shall not be mentioned, is too intollerant and extremely anti-Christian.

Thank you and...

Merry Christmas

861 posted on 12/21/2005 7:07:57 PM PST by Baraonda (Demographic is destiny. Don't hire 3rd world illegal aliens nor support businesses that hire them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
Cop-out. Not unexpected.

No, I was demonstrating that if there is no evidence - the assertion cannot be refuted. This is why the Burden of Proof is upon the person who makes the statement, there must be some level of evidence to justify the assertion. (Unicorns exist, ID is science.)

Saying that natural process "cannot" have produced "irreducible complexity" Begs the Question that it cannot and asserts a premise for which there can be no evidence, Proving the Negative. You have to prove that a Negative can be Proved, not the other way around. The Burden of Proof is upon you.

I am not so naive as to think there is anything that I could write here that you would accept as "proof."

But then again, I don't have anything to prove.

862 posted on 12/29/2005 7:31:52 PM PST by LogicWings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 859 | View Replies]

To: LogicWings
No, I was demonstrating that if there is no evidence - the assertion cannot be refuted.

By saying "there is no evidence," you have asserted a "negative" which, by your own claims, YOU CANNOT PROVE.

This is why the Burden of Proof is upon the person who makes the statement, there must be some level of evidence to justify the assertion.

And golly, you just made "the assertion." So the burden, sir, is on you.

(Unicorns exist, ID is science.)

This is called "changing the subject." You have made a specific assertion (which, btw, is demonstrably wrong). You've repeated it many times, and gotten downright insulting about it. But you've never proved your statement. So please: prove your stattement that "you can't prove a negative."

By my count this is at least ten times now that I've asked you to provide that simple little proof. Are you going to put up, or shut up?

863 posted on 12/30/2005 7:35:21 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 862 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 701-750751-800801-850851-863 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson