In response to my previous post, “Evolution vs God.”
Response #1: “There is a plethora of evidence for common descent. Abiogenesis is an infant science however, but evolution doesn’t explain origin of life, just diversity of life.”
There is a plethora of evidence that can be interpreted in various ways by different scientists and observers.
Common descent can not be observed or tested, therefore it is not science.
Abiogenesis can not be observed or tested, therefore it is not science.
Yes, you are right, Darwinian Evolution is one possible explanation for the diversity of life. But, as we can not test or observe the principles of Macroevolution that take place over millions of years, it is not science.
Response #2: “It doesn’t take faith to know that life today looks very different from life 65,000,000 years ago when dinosaurs were traipsing around and there are were no humans at all.
It is not a personal philosophy if I can explain every aspect of what I believe with evidence.”
As you can not test or observe what life looked like 65 million years ago your belief is not science. It is a personal philosophy if you can not directly test and observe a hypothesis.
You can gather evidence and data to support your philosophy (untested, unobservable hypotheses), but that doesn’t mean your philosophy suddenly turns into a science.
By your own arguement, advocates of Intelligent Design or Biblical Creation could do the exact same thing. They can gather evidence and data to support their philosophy, but as the scientific community has said over-and-over, that does not turn a philosophy into science.
Response #3: “Oh for crying out loud, your DNA in 99.9 percent the same as a chimpanzee, and the split in the family tree was the change in Chromosome # 2.”
As you can not test or observe that there was a split in the family tree between humans and chimpanzees then that assertion is a philsophy not science.
As you can not test or observe chromosome #2 become one when two others fused together then that is a philosophy not science. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes and great apes have 24 pairs. Therefore the observable and testable evidence points to humans and great apes not being descended from one common ancestor. It is not science to impose your philosophy on directly observable and testable evidence.
Response #4: “There are no scientific theories that are any more credible before [or the] moments immediately after the big bang. Multiverse for one, is just as unobservable as an intelligent creator that exists outside the universe. Take your pick, but know it’s by faith in creative/imaginative scientists or theology.”
Exactly. As they are untestable and unobservable by the scientific method they are philosophy and not science.
I’m amazed some scientists, who are supposed to be smart, can’t see their own fallacy. Then they persecute other groups with just as viable philosophies.