Contributions of Creationism/Intelligent Design to Science

Axioms are self-evident assumptions. Without the observable axiom, science cannot function properly. If scientists cannot observe reality or if they observe it incorrectly, then all scientific theories are suspect. Fortunately, this axiom is self-evident to most.

Today science does not understand how life originated. The better science understands the nature of the problems associated with the origin of life the more mysterious life’s origin becomes. Today, every theory concerning the origin of life suffers from the same problem. The probability of life originating is so small that the extreme age and size of the universe cannot offset the poor odds. The most popular theory concerning the origin of life proposes that life arose as a perpetual motion machine. Yet physics clearly states that perpetual motion cannot exist.

The principles of thermodynamics are so well established, both theoretically and experimentally, that proposals for perpetual motion machines are universally met with disbelief on the part of physicists.


There is of course no scientific law or demonstrable process that would let something evolve from nothing. If there was nothing in the universe to begin with, obviously nothing could happen to cause anything to appear.

The problem is that if you can't get something from nothing, it's pointless thinking you can accurately explain the next step. Juggle the figures any way you like, but without a Creator you are not going to get anything, let alone everything.

YES!! I love this post. You hit the point exactly on target. Entropy is the most self-evident part of the entire universe. A dead acorn will rot in the soil. A live acorn can grow to a giant oak tree. The difference is life, and life is self-evident to anyone who has any degree of sanity. Life is the animation of matter away from entropy. There are no examples, apart from conscious effort, that can demonstrate matter rising away from the flow of entropy. Nothing can rise above its source. Since we are more complicated than the Earth, it is not our source. Our source is above the Earth.

To me, bias against God negates this answer to someone who does not believe in God. They are blinded because their emotion overrides their intellect. This is impenetrability. Two objects cannot occupy the same space. The stronger will push the weaker aside. Bias is a bully to the intellect. This amounts to clinging to the flesh. A believer mortifies the flesh and is able to overcome bias to see clearly.

If our software AI had a chance to reflect on its creator, it would not have the ability to realize our reality apart from direct observation. It could dismiss US out of hand as an impossibility. It would merely be in awe of the fixed and unchangeable laws of the BIOS, not realizing that there is a very reasonable explanation to it all. Computers are not the best example and cannot accurately reflect our God, but it is the best metaphor we can conceive. We are in the image o God, so we mirror Him in everything, including our own artificial creations of silicone and energy.

Originally posted by Faith2011



Axioms are self-evident assumptions. Without the observable axiom, science cannot function properly. If scientists cannot observe reality or if they observe it incorrectly, then all scientific theories are suspect. Fortunately, this axiom is self-evident to most.

Today science does not understand how life originated. The better science understands the nature of the problems associated with the origin of life the more mysterious life’s origin becomes. Today, every theory concerning the origin of life suffers from the same problem. The probability of life originating is so small that the extreme age and size of the universe cannot offset the poor odds. The most popular theory concerning the origin of life proposes that life arose as a perpetual motion machine. Yet physics clearly states that perpetual motion cannot exist.

The principles of thermodynamics are so well established, both theoretically and experimentally, that proposals for perpetual motion machines are universally met with disbelief on the part of physicists.


There is of course no scientific law or demonstrable process that would let something evolve from nothing. If there was nothing in the universe to begin with, obviously nothing could happen to cause anything to appear.

The problem is that if you can't get something from nothing, it's pointless thinking you can accurately explain the next step. Juggle the figures any way you like, but without a Creator you are not going to get anything, let alone everything.

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
There are no examples, apart from conscious effort, that can demonstrate matter rising away from the flow of entropy.

Yes there are. For example the planet Earth. Of course our entropy is decreasing at the price of our star which is providing the necessary energy (and thus increasing in entropy). So, our solar system's entropy is increasing, but the entropy of the inner planets at least is decreasing (for now).

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
YES!! I love this post. You hit the point exactly on target. Entropy is the most self-evident part of the entire universe. A dead acorn will rot in the soil. A live acorn can grow to a giant oak tree. The difference is life, and life is self-evident to anyone who has any degree of sanity. Life is the animation of matter away from entropy. There are no examples, apart from conscious effort, that can demonstrate matter rising away from the flow of entropy. Nothing can rise above its source. Since we are more complicated than the Earth, it is not our source. Our source is above the Earth.

Except that several examples have been given to you of non-living systems overcoming entropy. You're just ignoring them. If you're not willing to address this simple point from multiple posters, nothing else in your posts matters.

Originally posted by Faith2011
Axioms are self-evident assumptions. Without the observable axiom, science cannot function properly. If scientists cannot observe reality or if they observe it incorrectly, then all scientific theories are suspect. Fortunately, this axiom is self-evident to most.

While your if-then statement may be axiomatic, it's not axiomatic that scientists aren't observing reality.

Today science does not understand how life originated. The better science understands the nature of the problems associated with the origin of life the more mysterious life’s origin becomes. Today, every theory concerning the origin of life suffers from the same problem. The probability of life originating is so small that the extreme age and size of the universe cannot offset the poor odds. The most popular theory concerning the origin of life proposes that life arose as a perpetual motion machine. Yet physics clearly states that perpetual motion cannot exist.

Quite the opposite - the better science understand the the nature of the questions associated with the origins of life, the more ways it finds that it could have arisen. And statistical arguments against the abiogenetic formation of life are inherently flawed. The calculated odds of any event occurring are vanishingly small yet, obviously, things happen all of the time. Calculate the odds of any single hand of five cards being dealt - it's 1 in about 3.1x10^8. Yet if your dealt five cards, you're guaranteed to get one of those hands that only has a one-in-three hundred million chance of occurring.

There is of course no scientific law or demonstrable process that would let something evolve from nothing. If there was nothing in the universe to begin with, obviously nothing could happen to cause anything to appear.[

The problem is that if you can't get something from nothing, it's pointless thinking you can accurately explain the next step. Juggle the figures any way you like, but without a Creator you are not going to get anything, let alone everything.

No scientist claims that "something evolved from nothing". But if it's convenient to your strawman argument, keep preaching it.

That is a static cycle as far as we know. The processes are only theory at this point. There is another theory that shows we are in an electric universe and demonstrates the possibility we are looking at physics form the wrong set of assumptions. The sun and Earth are not rising, they are static for the most part. The sun is in an 11 year cycle. The reality is that we really don't know. The Bible gives us the best information we have as to how it all works.

There are endless overlapping cycles that give evidence to a design framework to support life only. This is yet another proof of design and engeneering.

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
There are no examples, apart from conscious effort, that can demonstrate matter rising away from the flow of entropy.

Yes there are. For example the planet Earth. Of course our entropy is decreasing at the price of our star which is providing the necessary energy (and thus increasing in entropy). So, our solar system's entropy is increasing, but the entropy of the inner planets at least is decreasing (for now).

edit on 1-4-2011 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)

The teaching of "young Earth creationism" is one of the reasons why US children will not be able to compete globally due to lack of soild education. I would think that God would be insulted to hear that the complex creation of the universe that he startedbis explained away by "dinosaurs walking with humans" and the Earth being 6000 years old.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by zcflint05


Rightly-Dividing Geology and the Book of Genesis Beyond
the "Gap Theory" of Creationism

Many people think the six creation days in Genesis are a description of the Earth's geologic history. They are not! The geologic record shows that the Earth existed long before the six days and long before Adam. There is a time-gap between the first two verses of Genesis.


Genesis narrative that does not contradict the scientific evidence for an Old Earth. Commonly called the "Gap Theory" or Ruin-Reconstruction interpretation, it is a theological interpretation much older than Darwin's Theory of Evolution. It is based on the Scriptural fact that in the second verse of Genesis, the Holy Bible simply and clearly states that the planet Earth was already here (but in a ruined state) before the Divine process described in those six days even begins. Understanding this Biblical mystery begins with the precise wording of this New Testament cross-reference:

"For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men."
(2 Pet 3:5-7 KJV)

Contrary to popular interpretation, the above passage is NOT a reference to Noah's flood. And the only other place in the Bible where the Earth was covered in waters is Genesis 1:2. The ramifications are obvious: The literal wording suggests that the "heavens and the earth, which are now" (made during the seven days) was not the first-time creation of all things as is traditionally assumed. The Word of God appears to be telling the reader there was a previous populated world on the face of this old Earth before God formed the present world of modern Man. This invalidates the popular Doctrine of Young Earth Creationism.
The Bible itself provides insight into a great mystery in Earth's natural history at what is known as the Pleistocene - Holocene boundary. Science remains at a loss to definitively explain the Ice Age and the anomaly of the mysterious mega fauna extinctions across the face of the Earth about 12,000 to 10,000 Radio Carbon years ago. Geologic evidence from that period indicates extraordinary global massive volcanism, gigantic tidal waves, seismic activity on a vast scale, and extreme temperature swings on the Earth over a geologically brief period of time. It is no coincidence that the Bible at Genesis 1:2 describes the Earth as flooded, desolate, and in darkness in the timeframe closely corresponding to these catastrophic events in the Earth's natural history. Clearly, these two mysteries are linked.

Why the old "world that then was" ended, and why God made a new world and modern Man, requires a study into the ancient origins of Satan and the Angels. The Earth has an ancient natural history that can be deciphered from the geologic record, but it also has an equally important ancient spiritual history that can only be deciphered from Rightly-Dividing the Holy Bible. Knowledge of both is required to correctly reconcile Geology and the Book of Genesis.www.kjvbible.org...

No examples have been given. All that have been listed are processes of physical laws in motion, manifesting in cycles of change. Just answer this: An acorn that is living will grow into a tree. An acorn that is dead will rot in the soil. This is an example of reversing entropy through life.

The difference is life. Nothing rises above entropy apart from life and consciousness. The Human mind is a complex engine of change and choice. Consciousness alters what it observes as a separate unit of influence. Take a look at the double slit experiment. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle negates the observations we make regarding the quantum dynamics of matter. No matter how much we think we know, our observations will change the results of what we observe. At best, our observations of matter are a vague notion of the truth.

Change only happens from observation. Go back to the first observer.

Originally posted by iterationzero

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
YES!! I love this post. You hit the point exactly on target. Entropy is the most self-evident part of the entire universe. A dead acorn will rot in the soil. A live acorn can grow to a giant oak tree. The difference is life, and life is self-evident to anyone who has any degree of sanity. Life is the animation of matter away from entropy. There are no examples, apart from conscious effort, that can demonstrate matter rising away from the flow of entropy. Nothing can rise above its source. Since we are more complicated than the Earth, it is not our source. Our source is above the Earth.

Except that several examples have been given to you of non-living systems overcoming entropy. You're just ignoring them. If you're not willing to address this simple point from multiple posters, nothing else in your posts matters.

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
No examples have been given.

This is a blatant lie. That's all that needs to be said.

Originally posted by zcflint05
The teaching of "young Earth creationism" is one of the reasons why US children will not be able to compete globally due to lack of soild education. I would think that God would be insulted to hear that the complex creation of the universe that he startedbis explained away by "dinosaurs walking with humans" and the Earth being 6000 years old.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

Couldn't have said it any better...it's also one of the reasons why there's more honor students in India alone, than there are students in the US.

Saying the earth is only 6000 years old is so beyond lunatic and uneducated, it makes me worry for the public education system. For crying out loud, we can use radiometric dating to date the earth back to 4.5bil years, and the error margin is only around 200mil years. So it's not even that the crazy 6000 year figure is "close", it's off by a ridiculous margin and has ZERO back up evidence.

I'd laugh at the stupidity, but it's really kinda sad given we live in the 21st century

reply to post by Faith2011
Actually extinctions from this era are pretty well understood. Extinctions during the end of glaciation periods are very common. And, not so coincidentally, most extinctions of the last 50,000 years happened in regions where upon humans first migrated to (Americas and Oceanic regions), and the animals obviously were incredibly tame. Humans literally beat them to death with a stick, and likely carried with them some deadly diseases. Similar extinctions have been played out in similar ways during the historical eras. Fossil evidence, comparative scenarios, and some basic logic has deduced as much.

This is why Asia and Africa yet have an abundance of larger mammals, while in the Americas and Oceania larger mammals are for the most part extinct. The former has a history of mammals evolving with humans, and the latter were naive to human behavior.

We didn't evolve from a bunch of feces tossing chimps. There is a big chunk of missing history, and yes it involves a higher power creating us in some way, shape, or form. There is an intelligent design. The confines of both science and religion are keeping the majority of us in the dark. The is a force at work that we don't understand, there are those in positions of power that do. There is a great benefit to those in charge to keep the cloak pulled over our eyes. The greatest sin, is that we aren't skeptical of what we are told. We don't challenge obvious institutions of power who feed us half truths and twisted lies. We don't seek the truth, we only accept what falls in line with what we have been taught. We are guilty of laziness...

sorry about the rant...had a few Jagers....lol

Originally posted by lambs to lions
We didn't evolve from a bunch of feces tossing chimps. There is a big chunk of missing history, and yes it involves a higher power creating us in some way, shape, or form. There is an intelligent design. The confines of both science and religion are keeping the majority of us in the dark. The is a force at work that we don't understand, there are those in positions of power that do. There is a great benefit to those in charge to keep the cloak pulled over our eyes. The greatest sin, is that we aren't skeptical of what we are told. We don't challenge obvious institutions of power who feed us half truths and twisted lies. We don't seek the truth, we only accept what falls in line with what we have been taught. We are guilty of laziness...

sorry about the rant...had a few Jagers....lol

And the objective evidence for your claims consists of....

Cheers btw

reply to post by lambs to lions


Oh, and just fyi, we didn't evolve from chimps...we share a common ancestor

The theory of evolution doesn't claim we evolved from chimps...

reply to post by lambs to lions

Originally posted by lambs to lions
We didn't evolve from a bunch of feces tossing chimps.

You're right...and nobody is saying we evolved from chimps, we just share a common ancestor with them...and frankly, that's not the topic of this thread. This thread is a request for people to show how creationism/intelligent design contributed something (anything) to science.

There is a big chunk of missing history, and yes it involves a higher power creating us in some way, shape, or form.

[citation needed]

There is an intelligent design.

[citation needed]

...and the rest is typical conspiracy theory stuff about how there is something being kept from us...from someone who doesn't clearly understand how the scientific community functions. If you knew anything about how scientists work you'd realize that keeping scientific information private is very very difficult.



Anyway, treat this as a general bump: What has creationism/intelligent design contributed to science?

reply to post by SuperiorEd

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
We can test the Bible on its science.

Ah, one of these again....and trust me, it fails.

Light/Wave duality. Genesis 1 / John 1

Where is the mention of particle/wave duality in light in Genesis 1 or John 1?

All things are made of sub-atomic particles too small to see. Hebrews 11:3

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Translation: things were made of the "word of God".

Time had a beginning. 1 Timothy 1:8-9

...not definitively agreed upon...and it's a T/F question. 50/50 chance isn't exactly going to impress anyone.

The stars are too great in number to count. Genesis 15:5, Jeremiah 33:32, Hebrews 11:12

...according to the Bible the stars are small lights set into a physical sphere. Genesis 1

All matter is made from what is not seen. Hebrews 11:3

Wow, you're already repeating yourself

Shape of the earth. Isaiah 40:22 [It is] he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof [are] as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

...that's the shape of the sky, not the shape of the Earth. The Earth is a circle, not an oblate spheroid according to the Bible.

Hey look, I actually seem to have addressed this not too long ago because blueletterbible.org still has that verse saved in my search history.

The earth moves in a large orbit. Psalms 19:4-6

...talks about the sun moving.

Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,
Which [is] as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, [and] rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
His going forth [is] from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

Last I checked, the Earth moves around the sun, not the other way around.

Light travels in paths, darkness does not. Job 38:19

Where [is] the way [where] light dwelleth? and [as for] darkness, where [is] the place thereof,

I'm sorry, but how does that say that light 'travels in paths'? It merely is a question asking where light dwells. And it's not that big of a deal to figure out that darkness is an absence of light rather than a thing in itself.

The Universe is expanded from its original size. Isaiah 42:5, 45:12, 44:24, 48:13, 51:13

...no, these passages say that god stretched out the heavens...not that they expanded from their original size. And the heavens being referred to are still something which are locked in a physical dome above the Earth...like a tent.

The North Pole and the fact that Earth floats freely. Job 26:7

He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, [and] hangeth the earth upon nothing.

I'm sorry, but what does that have to do with the north pole? Last time I checked...there's a big snowy place over there, it isn't really empty. And the Earth doesn't 'float freely', it's locked in orbit around the sun by gravity.

Life is in the blood. Leviticus 17:11-14

Tell that to bacteria. Life isn't in the blood, life isn't even so much of a 'thing'. Sure, blood is useful for those things that have it and those things that have it can't live without it...but they also can't live without their lungs.
It's not that odd for a culture to realize that a person is going to die if they bleed out.

Blood coagulates on the 8th day after birth. Not discovered until 1935. Genesis 17:12

No, that's a ritual for circumcision, not a discovery of coagulation. And circumcision is a dangerous and unnecessary process of genital mutilation which removes functioning nerve tissue.

Jews and Arabs descend from one man. Genesis. Y Chromosomes and DNA testing proves this.

...I'm sorry, but everyone descends from the same guy if you go back far enough. Of course, that same book also gives a specific time frame...and I've yet to see a study that shows that Jews and Arabs descended from the same individual man at a specific point in the last few thousand years.

Laughter can promote healing. Proverbs 17:22

Depression is harmful. Proverbs 17:22

A merry heart doeth good [like] a medicine: but a broken spirit drieth the bones.

...um...this is sort of just a basic observation anyway, isn't it? I've never really heard of any culture anywhere in the world that thinks that gloomy thoughts promote healing or are healthy.

The Jet Stream. Ecclesiastes 1:6 Not discovered until WWII

Ugh..not this one again. How does this passage describe the jet stream?

The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.

This passage is describing all wind as acting in a circuit for some reason...and it's preceded by the blatantly false passage:

1:5

The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.

Hydrological Cycle Job 36:27-28, Amos 9:6

Condensation is an easy phenomenon to understand...but the full hydrological cycle is not explained in those passages. And Amos 9:6 has nothing to do with that:

[It is] he that buildeth his stories in the heaven, and hath founded his troop in the earth; he that calleth for the waters of the sea, and poureth them out upon the face of the earth: The LORD [is] his name.

Air has weight. Job 28:25

No, the word in that passage is wind, not air. And it refers to how strong the wind blows.
Just check out every single translation of the passage.

Anthropic Principle Isaiah 45:18, Genesis 1:23-27, Job 40:15-24

Do you even know what the anthropic principle is?

Entropy Psalms 102:25-26, Isaiah 51:6, Hebrews 1:10-11

Entropy has to do with transfer of energy within a system, not with things falling into decay. Of course, you're a creationist, you don't get what entropy is.

Prediction of modern TV, Internet, Satellite. Revelations 11:7-11

What, because the people of the world saw all the dead bodies? I'm sorry, but there isn't a damn mention of anything near a tv, internet, satellites, or anything else of that nature.

Oceans circulate in currents and paths. Psalm 8:8, Isaiah 43:16

...a coastal people understand currents? Oh wow.

There are springs that originate on the ocean floor. Job 38:16, Jonah 2:5-6

...there aren't.

Mountains and valleys on the ocean floor. Job 38:16, Jonah 2:5-6 The Challenger expedition (1873-1876)

Job:

Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?

...I'm sorry, but what does that have to do with mountains or valleys?

The important part in Jonah is one line:

I went down to the bottoms of the mountains

...bottoms of mountains...so the bottoms of mountains can be underwater...um...nothing to do with underwater mountains though.
And Jonah is the story where a guy didn't suffocate in the stomach of a big fish...

Prediction of mass transportation and exponential expansion of knowledge. The word increase in this verse means multiply and not add to. The word 'watirbeh' "and shall multiply"

Daniel 12:4

4 But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge.”

...wow...people will increase in knowledge over time? How is that a prediction of anything? It was someone telling Daniel to hide the scroll because there are 'many' people who travel trying to increase their understanding.



Now let's test the other passages where the Bible gets all sorts of things wrong:

Plants existed before the Sun and Moon (Genesis 1:11-16)

The Earth is created before the Sun (Genesis 1)
...actually, to just shorten this: The order of events in Genesis 1 is wrong

The Sun and Moon are set in a physical firmament above the Earth (Genesis 1:16-17)

The Moon is a/produces light (Genesis 1:16, Isaiah 13:10)

Global flood (Genesis..mentioned several other times in later books)

Humanity at a time of civilization which would have enabled large scale construction projects shared a single language (Genesis 11)

Diverse language happened instantly rather than gradually (Genesis 11)

The Hebrew population in Egypt somehow goes from dozens to millions in a few hundred years. (Exodus)

Hares and coneys are ruminants (Leviticus 11:5-6)

God's cure for lepers (Leviticus 14:2-52)

Snakebites are cured by a brass serpent on a pole (Numbers 21:8)

Giants (way too many passages Numbers, Deuteronomy, 2 Samuel, Amos)

Dragons (Deuteronomy 32:33, Psalms 148:7)

The Sun apparently moves and can be made to stand still so that people can sneak attack others at night (Joshua 10:12-13)

The Earth has pillars...I guess instead of being hung it's placed.(1 Samuel 2:8, Job 9:6,26:11,38:4-6...actually, a lot of places)

Pi = 3(1 Kings 7:23, 2 Chronicles 4:2)

Either the Earth stopped rotating and moved backward a bit or the Sun moved backward on its own...well, we know what the Bible says about the relationship between the two. (2 Kings 20:11)

The Earth doesn't move.(1 Chronicles 16:30, Job 38:4-6, Psalms 93:1, 96:10...and a lot of other places where it mentions that the Earth is set on foundations)

People think in their heart (Esther 6:6, Isaiah 10:7)

Ostriches are apparently entirely inattentive parents (Job 39:13-16)

The Sun moves around the Earth (Psalms 19:4-6)

Snails melt (Psalms 58:8)

The Earth has four corners (Isaiah 11:12, Ezekial 7:2)

Lots of fantastical creatures used to exist including satyrs, cockatrices, fiery flying serpents, etc (Isaiah)

The Earth is definitively flat (Daniel 4:10-11, 20)

The stars are tiny objects that can fall out of the sky and be stomped upon (Daniel 8:10)

...and that's without even getting into the New Testament.