A falsifiable test Re: AiG bites the dust

From: Walter Hicks (wallyshoes@mindspring.com)
Date: Mon Sep 30 2002 - 19:59:44 EDT

  • Next message: Dawsonzhu@aol.com: "Re: Did Peter walk on water?"

    John Burgeson wrote:

    > But I hasten to add that science is not performed in the settings of
    > debates, but in the establishment of falsifiable models which explain the
    > the known data and are always subject to falsification by the exhibition of
    > contrary data. When I attended the ICR seminar in the summer of 1988, four
    > days of lectures and Qs and As, I challenged my friend, Dr. Gish, on several
    > occasions to specify what kind of experiment or scientific discovery could,
    > at least in principle, falsify either the "young earth" or the "global
    > flood." Neither he, nor Dr. Morris, nor Ken Ham were able to address this
    > question. But if you were to ask ANY scientist about any particular
    > scientific model what would, in principle, falsify that model, I am
    > confident you would get a very quick and easyto understand answer.

    Hi Burgy,

    Since you know these people personally, I have a suggestion to make for a
    falsifiable test. It is simpler in my analogy of a computer programmer, but let
    me do it more directly at this time.

    If the earth is only some few thousands of years old, then the data
    suggested by
    science is incorrect. The reason that things žappearÓ to be old is because the
    Lord just created them that way Ů to show His Glory Ů or for other reasons. (I
    could suggest a few in my computer model)

    In the above case and supported by AiG and ICR , _only_ mankind is
    the object to
    the Lord's intent in this universe.

    Therefore, all attempts to find other intelligence in this universe are
    completely doomed to failure.

    Hence, The SETI activity is a žfalsifiableÓ criterion. If SETI ever reveals an
    extra terrestrial intelligence, then a young earth has been falsified. Other
    wise it has not.

    Whatcha think about them for apples?


    Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>

    In any consistent theory, there must exist true but not provable statements. (Godel's Theorem)

    You can only find the truth with logic If you have already found the truth without it. (G.K. Chesterton) ===================================

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Sep 30 2002 - 22:39:04 EDT