Jump to content
IGNORED

bias or unreasonable thinking in science


justme007

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  140
  • Content Per Day:  0.05
  • Reputation:   47
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/07/2016
  • Status:  Offline

I want to say that I pray with compassion for everyone. I pray with compassion for atheists. It is the atheism itself that I find foul evil insane and unacceptable. So, please read the following:  

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2017/11/28/science/birds-beaks-evolution-snails.amp.html

This is the article I accidently stumbled upon. It was on the front page of msn, when I was checking my mail, I think. What does the data discussed in this article prove? That the change that happened in the beaks of these birds, the size of their beaks, and the size of their bodies happened as a response to the introduction of the new snail. I mean if we were to calculate the chances of that happening as a coincidence the chances would be really close to zero. As they would say in court, that fact is beyond any reasonable doubt. The fact that the change of the sizes of the bird's beaks and bodies happened as a direct result of the introduction of the new snail and not because of random genetic mutations is beyond any reasonable doubt for any reasonable person. So, why is this important? Well, because the whole evolution - darwin thing was initially based on exactly the same scenario! darwin went to the Galapagos islands and documented this kind of change in some birds. It wasn't kites, and their food wasn't snails, but it's the same species - birds, and the same kind of change - beak size increase. And that started the whole thing! That's why they wrote all this multitude of insane, evil and false atheistic statements. I am praying for atheists with compassion, but this evil is unacceptable!

Now, how is that connected to being biased/unreasonable/illogical/etc? Well, 1)the above facts prove beyond any doubt the fact that it doesn't take long for a change to happen, when survival of some species depends on that change. It took just one generation for the kites to change. And the whole evolution "theory" is based on the assumption that it all happens very slowly during a very long time. 2) it proves that birds were CREATED with a safeguard mechanism. In case their main source of food suddenly increases in size, their beaks grow. That is a logical conclusion! 3) evolutionists had to admit that and admit that the entire theory is a mistake! Did they do that? No! Why? Because they are unreasonable, or biased, or because of some other reason. I pray for them with compassion and hope that they will give up their sinful ways!

Romans 1:20! We don't need to have any special education, any special knowledge or anything like that. If we pray and believe, it should be visible to everyone without any doubt that we were CREATED! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  46
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  944
  • Content Per Day:  0.22
  • Reputation:   170
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  05/05/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/20/1980

Hi Justme,

interesting what you wrote. Let me assure you I really appreciate being in an environment where most people believe that God created the species via direct miraculous event. This is what I believe, too, and this is what Bible teaches, in my opinion.

And I don't take it for granted that a (Christian) message board follows Bible teaching in this way. I used to post at jesus.de message board and those believing Gen 1-3 in a literal way were just a tiny minority.

 

 

Let's now look at the content of your post, as you seem to take something which seems plausible to you as universal "proof" for a universal creator.

* To me, it seems risky to argue in this way, since the scienctists you call "unreasonable" might have found a very reasonable explanation for this issue, too, in maybe 10 years time only. Then anyone could ask where the proof is... ?

* On the one hand, Romans 1:20 says that nature points to God (my reading of the verse). On the other, this could mean that nature as a whole points to God, whereas an individual happening in nature only points to God in the eyes of a few and and for others it doesn't. We read in Proverbs 25:2 ...

 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter. KJV

I think, God is telling us here that, for each individual miracle, you can't always find the proof for it. He might have concealed the authorship of the miracle in question.

* if a particular miracle would be proven to have been performed by God... then God's existence was proven and we wouldn't live by faith alone. My opinion.

(For we walk by faith, not by sight:) Kor 5:7 KJV

 

Regards,

Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  140
  • Content Per Day:  0.05
  • Reputation:   47
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/07/2016
  • Status:  Offline

On 12/2/2018 at 8:28 AM, thomas t said:

Hi Justme,

interesting what you wrote. Let me assure you I really appreciate being in an environment where most people believe that God created the species via direct miraculous event. This is what I believe, too, and this is what Bible teaches, in my opinion.

And I don't take it for granted that a (Christian) message board follows Bible teaching in this way. I used to post at jesus.de message board and those believing Gen 1-3 in a literal way were just a tiny minority.

 

 

Let's now look at the content of your post, as you seem to take something which seems plausible to you as universal "proof" for a universal creator.

* To me, it seems risky to argue in this way, since the scienctists you call "unreasonable" might have found a very reasonable explanation for this issue, too, in maybe 10 years time only. Then anyone could ask where the proof is... ?

* On the one hand, Romans 1:20 says that nature points to God (my reading of the verse). On the other, this could mean that nature as a whole points to God, whereas an individual happening in nature only points to God in the eyes of a few and and for others it doesn't. We read in Proverbs 25:2 ...

 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter. KJV

I think, God is telling us here that, for each individual miracle, you can't always find the proof for it. He might have concealed the authorship of the miracle in question.

* if a particular miracle would be proven to have been performed by God... then God's existence was proven and we wouldn't live by faith alone. My opinion.

(For we walk by faith, not by sight:) Kor 5:7 KJV

 

Regards,

Thomas

Hello, Thomas, pray and believe, dear friend!

You said that the unreasonable "scientists" might have found a reasonable explanation. That is impossible in this case. 

Here is what is going on: 

The very basic and fundamental law of logic, or I don't know what it is called officially, states: if A implies B and B implies C than A implies C.

A:

"An observation that suggested that when the main food source of birds increases in size then their beaks tend to increase in generations to come."

B:

"Suggestion that A happens during some very long time"

C :

"The multitude of statements/"theories"/etc that take B as a given"

The way I see It, C is what is known today collectively and informally as "the evolution". I haven't been studying any of the members of the "class C" for fear of sin, after I learned THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But what happened was, now we clearly see that B is not true! I mean it is an observed fact that the beaks grew in only a decade! And, A has been proven to be true as well, by these very same observations. So, here is what we have: 

A is true, B is not true - both have been proven by observations.

With B not true any statement based on B being true, is in turn not true. 

All that "theory of evolution " - the set of Cs - (C1, C2, ....), whatever they are, all imply that B is true, but B is not true! Thusly, the entire set is false!

Dear friend, I have for you! There is nothing that "scientists" could possibly know that could make any of the statements in class C true! That would contradict the very fundamental logic - a part of the very foundation of our world!

They must admit that! They must admit that all the statements mentioned above, all those "C statements" are untrue!

Dear friend, look at what kind of evil atheism leads to! Remember Nuremberg trials? During those trials one of the captured defendants admitted that "C statements" lead to the rise of all that nazi abomination! At least once that was admitted as a given! Look all criminals, liers, evil doers, are there any true Christians among them? Or ask yourself this, be honest to yourself: is there any meaning in life whatsoever, if one doesn't believe? Isn't it empty and hopeless and wrong? But worry not my friend, there IS GOOD NEWS!!!!!!!!!! 

Go to shroud.com - that's how I started believing when I was 13!

And also, take a look at this:

https://www.shroud.com/latebrak.htm#debunk

Dear friend, there is overwhelming evidence that proves beyond any doubt that there is no place for atheism in our world! All around us! 

My reply is getting a bit too long. I would also like to talk about The Bible quotes mentioned above. I would also like to work on listing the multitude of evidence that I mentioned, that I have been blessed with understanding and witnessing!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  140
  • Content Per Day:  0.05
  • Reputation:   47
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/07/2016
  • Status:  Offline

On 12/2/2018 at 8:32 AM, maryjayne said:

and, of course, only the birds with the correctly shaped beaks would survive to breed the next generation, the rest would stave to death or not have sufficient nourishment to breed, so no evolution is needed.

Great observation!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  36
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  657
  • Content Per Day:  0.33
  • Reputation:   244
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/05/2018
  • Status:  Offline

On November 30, 2018 at 12:50 AM, justme007 said:

 It took just one generation for the kites to change. And the whole evolution "theory" is based on the assumption that it all happens very slowly during a very long time. 2) it proves that birds were CREATED with a safeguard mechanism. In case their main source of food suddenly increases in size, their beaks grow. That is a logical conclusion! 3) evolutionists had to admit that and admit that the entire theory is a mistake! Did they do that? No! Why? Because they are unreasonable, or biased, or because of some other reason.

The article is poorly-worded but no beaks grew! Birds with bigger beaks outcompeted with their fellow kites due to their larger beaks being better adapted to get at seeds inside of tough cones. This feature is dominant just like right-handedness is dominant (>85% of population).

 

8-12% of the kite population had larger beaks in just two generations. So what? 

 

If if we look at 3 inferences:

 

YEC, ID, OEC (God uses secondary causes through evolution) the data gathered can be equally explained by all three inferences.

 

What the evolutionist (especially someone defending naturalism (godless variety of evolution) has to demonstrate is the creation of a new species. So our kite must keep growing beak size until it becomes a toucan! The zebra must directionally turn into a giraffe. We have countless examples of oscillation around a norm. What we lack in the extreme is scientific data of directionality.

When we see faster than anticipated results we don't abandon gradualism. We ask, "Is our model of gradualism too narrow given this new data?"

There are outliers (data that doesn't comport to the predicted outcome) in every experiment! We certainly don't turn and say, "Well, since that doesn't fit perfectly, I must throw out my model and affirm some other hypothesis. It just means that your relationship between independent and dependent variables is more complex than your model suggests. 

So while this data does nothing to support a YEC model let alone prove that to be the proper theory. It does nothing to support directional speciation which is necessary if we are to beleive NeoDarwinian evolution is the best explanation for population and variation of life we currently see on Earth.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  46
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  944
  • Content Per Day:  0.22
  • Reputation:   170
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  05/05/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/20/1980

On ‎12‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 12:27 AM, justme007 said:

The very basic and fundamental law of logic, or I don't know what it is called officially, states: if A implies B and B implies C than A implies C.

A:

"An observation that suggested that when the main food source of birds increases in size then their beaks tend to increase in generations to come."

B:

"Suggestion that A happens during some very long time"

C :

"The multitude of statements/"theories"/etc that take B as a given"

The way I see It, C is what is known today collectively and informally as "the evolution". I haven't been studying any of the members of the "class C" for fear of sin, after I learned THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But what happened was, now we clearly see that B is not true! I mean it is an observed fact that the beaks grew in only a decade! And, A has been proven to be true as well, by these very same observations. So, here is what we have: 

A is true, B is not true - both have been proven by observations.

With B not true any statement based on B being true, is in turn not true. 

All that "theory of evolution " - the set of Cs - (C1, C2, ....), whatever they are, all imply that B is true, but B is not true! Thusly, the entire set is false!

Dear friend, I have for you! There is nothing that "scientists" could possibly know that could make any of the statements in class C true! That would contradict the very fundamental logic - a part of the very foundation of our world!

Hi Just me,

please excuse me for the delay in replying you. I had other posts I really felt strongly about and I had some things to do in my professional life.

Actually, any reasoning such as "I can prove God using some smart logic" can't work in my opinion. I reject anything like that, please don't take it personally. If it worked - I mean the logic - then God certainly would have announced this opportunity of proving Him in His Bible, already many years ago.

By the way, there has been a thread about whether or not the shroud can be serving es evidence for Jesus in this forum.

I only read of Him coming back soon:

 For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.
 
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  140
  • Content Per Day:  0.05
  • Reputation:   47
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/07/2016
  • Status:  Offline

13 hours ago, thomas t said:

Hi Just me,

please excuse me for the delay in replying you. I had other posts I really felt strongly about and I had some things to do in my professional life.

Actually, any reasoning such as "I can prove God using some smart logic" can't work in my opinion. I reject anything like that, please don't take it personally. If it worked - I mean the logic - then God certainly would have announced this opportunity of proving Him in His Bible, already many years ago.

By the way, there has been a thread about whether or not the shroud can be serving es evidence for Jesus in this forum.

I only read of Him coming back soon:

 For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.
 
 
 

Dear brother, immediately a few verses came to mind:

Please take a look at 1st Kings 19:11-12. What do you think about the end of The Verse 12?

... effort and zeal, effort and zeal, effort and zeal.... If we are giving everything we have to THE LORD!!!!!!!!!! our hearts, our minds, our time, our thoughts, then we will be BLESSED with the superb joy that will keep us alive and rejuvenate us! That joy is found in Deuteronomy 8:3! We will be able to see THE BREAD OF LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!! And we will see THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!! And THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!! WILL SET us free!

Speaking of what you wrote here, please take a look, I published these 2 posts here recently - finding prophecies that came true in The Bible:

There is a lot more I want to talk about, that I was BLESSED with noticing. By the way, it has a lot to do with The Above Chapter - 1 Kings 19. 

What I mean is that if we live in such a way that the only meaning of our life could be found in Psalms 1:2 and Ecclesiastes 12:13, than we will be able to find what we never thought possible!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...