Jump to content


Photo

Theory Of Creation


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3 replies to this topic

#1 Apathy

Apathy

    Newcomer

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Texas

Posted 02 May 2005 - 02:58 PM

Perhaps those who are more knowledgeable on this can tell me...

The main purpose of a scientific theory is to establish a model that can explain phenomena observed in the natural world. An example is that we find chemical reactions always result in the same amount of mass as when you started. This, along with many other observations led to atomic theory. Now, let's say that some chemical reaction was performed and it seemed as though there was mass produced by the reaction. Initially, this would be seen as an anomaly or faulty experimentation. If other people observed the same results similar conditions, an alteration of atomic theory, or a new model that is completely different from atomic theory, would have to be produced.

However, even if this hypothetical experiment was confirmed, you would not throw out atomic theory as wrong without another theory to replace it. Atomic theory is a very useful model, backed up by massive amounts of observations and provides excellent predictions for the result of reactions that haven't occurred. To replace that, a model that explains all those previous observations plus this new anomaly must be made. It is also helpful if this new model can make predictions on phenomena that haven't yet occurred. An example would be when the periodic table was first produced; it was able to give a reasonably accurate prediction of chemicals that had not yet been discovered.

The question I'm posing for this thread is, what exactly the theory of creation that will replace evolution is. This theory would have to:

1. Explain the fossil record as it stands either by showing that creation occurred multiple times or that all species existed at the same time.

2. Explain genetic modification and propose how responsible it is for alteration in organisms

3. Present a model of interaction that can make predictions about life forms in the way evolution currently does

4. Present a new system of classification (the current Kingdom Phylum Class etc etc. is mostly an evolutionary system)

5. Be experimentally verifiable. If there is no extensive evidence supporting the previous claims, they cannot form a stable theory.

These are 5 criteria that need to be met to overturn evolution, though I'm sure some would argue my list is too short an far too general.

I've listened to many creation v evolution arguments, but an actual creationism theory has never been presented to me. If you have any links to such information I'd appreciate the info

#2 hooberus

hooberus

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Kansas

Posted 02 May 2005 - 03:20 PM

1. Explain the fossil record as it stands either by showing that creation occurred multiple times or that all species existed at the same time.


The book "Evolution the fossils still say No !" by Duane Gish gives predictions of the Biblical creationist model with regards to the fossil record. This model also appears in the anti-creationist book "But is it Science" by Ruse.


2. Explain genetic modification and propose how responsible it is for alteration in organisms


Genetic modification (such as caused by mutations in DNA) is accepted by creationists, however we don't believe that this how all animals came in to being to begin with, but instead look at mutation as errors since the Biblical fall, which produce neutral or generally downward change in organisms.

3. Present a model of interaction that can make predictions about life forms in the way evolution currently does


Could give a specific example?


4. Present a new system of classification (the current Kingdom Phylum Class etc etc. is mostly an evolutionary system)


Actually the above classification system was developed by Linnaeus (a Creationist).

http://en.wikipedia....nnaean_taxonomy

Animals are generally classifed according to a hierarchical classification. There is no need for a new classification system since the classification system is basically empirical.

For a creationist model that deals with the reasons for a nested hierarchy see the book "The Biotic Message" by Walter ReMine.

5. Be experimentally verifiable. If there is no extensive evidence supporting the previous claims, they cannot form a stable theory.


Both creation and evolution (evolution as in the molecules to man sense) deal with events that happened primarily in the unobserved (at least by man) past. Therefore it is difficult to experiment. However predictions can be made based on creationist models that can be subject to experimentation such as 1). an intelligenent desiginer is required for the origin of life (attempt to disprove by aboigenesis experiments) 2). systematic gaps will remain in the fossil record etc.

#3 hooberus

hooberus

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Kansas

Posted 02 May 2005 - 03:37 PM

I've listened to many creation v evolution arguments, but an actual creationism theory has never been presented to me. If you have any links to such information I'd appreciate the info


A Theory of Creation:

http://www.trueorigi.../creatheory.asp

#4 Guest_Admin3_*

Guest_Admin3_*
  • Guests

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:17 PM

I am closing this thread for review.


After reviewing what was said, and how the questions were not actually questions, but demands. Only projects one type of response. One we try to stay away from here at this forum. One that provokes a debate to become an arguement. I realize that other forums permit this type of questioning, but we don't. There are other ways to ask the same questions without the demanding attitude.

It is the attitude this thread projects is the reason it has been closed, and will stay closed. If the thread starter has a problem with this, he can p.m. either me or Fred Williams.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users