God of the Gaps (well then, how did...")

[westwall]

I told you the definition I was using for "faith" you can use "trust" instead or "confidence" if you prefer:
View attachment 999611

100%?

See above, we can use "trust" if you like going forward, or just "belief" but you objected that too if I recall.

Hmmm

Yes, you use the definition of faith that deals SPECIFICALLY with religion.

Belief in something for which there is no evidence.

Nothing is 100% accurate, but instruments that are well made are extremely close.

Close enough that you need extremely advanced instruments to better them.

Hmmmm, what?

It is a fact that the 737 Max problems are the result of bean counters and their desire to cut costs to an extreme. And the bean counters were allowed to take over by DEI hires.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Yes, you use the definition of faith that deals SPECIFICALLY with religion.

That's not correct, here it is again:

Belief in something for which there is no evidence.

No, "evidence" is not part of that definition, it says "proof". Did you not know that "evidence" and "proof" have different meanings?

Nothing is 100% accurate, but instruments that are well made are extremely close.

That's another statement belief, how did you prove that there is nothing that's 100% accurate?

Close enough that you need extremely advanced instruments to better them.

Let me ask, do you understand the difference between deductive and inductive reasoning?

 

[westwall]

That's not correct, here it is again:

View attachment 999627

No, "evidence" is not part of that definition, it says "proof". Did you not know that "evidence" and "proof" have different meanings?

That's another statement belief, how did you prove that there is nothing that's 100% accurate?

Let me ask, do you understand the difference between deductive and inductive reasoning?

Present evidence for a god.

 

[Grumblenuts]

acerbic, acrimonious, antagonistic, belligerent, bloviating blowhard, cantankerous crank, curmudgeonly cock, disagreeable dick, faultfinding grouch, killjoy, churlish malcontent, misanthrope,​

pugnacious pissant, rancorous rat shit, supercilious shit bucket?​

Nah..

Definitions from Oxford Languages
gas·bag
noun

1. 1.
   derogatory•informal
   a person who talks too much, typically about unimportant things.
   "wearisome gasbags with delusions of grandeur"
   
   
2. 2.
   the container holding the gas in a balloon or airship.
   "the giant gasbag takes three weeks to inflate"

 

[scruffy]

Here is some interesting information related to the Cambrian explosion.

Apparently, the moon was once 12,000 miles farther away than it is now. Causing Earth's days to be about 2 hours longer.

Earth's days once got 2 hours longer — and that may have triggered one of the biggest evolutionary explosions in history, study suggests

The moon once drifted thousands of miles farther away, and Earth's days got 2.2 hours longer, a new study finds.

www.space.com

The time frame overlaps with the Cambrian explosion.

 

[scruffy]

Here's some creationist nonsense for Sherlock Holmes

This is but one example, there are many

Probability and Order Versus Evolution

One of the strongest direct evidences for special creation is the existence of innumerable highly complex systems in the universe, systems composed of components occurring in a pattern of "order" rather than disorder. Creationists maintain that highly ordered systems could not arise by chance...

www.icr.org

 

[Grumblenuts]

^^^

Can you cite the article that contains the disputed math?

Emphasis upon "creationist nonsense"

 

[Grumblenuts]

Proteins are not defined solely by the order of constituent amino acids.

Did someone suggest otherwise? I had a dog once. It died.

The Shape and Structure of Proteins - Molecular Biology of the Cell - NCBI Bookshelf

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[ding]

Proteins are not defined solely by the order of constituent amino acids.

I think the key point that they are overlooking is where proteins and amino acids come from.

 

[westwall]

Here is some interesting information related to the Cambrian explosion.

Apparently, the moon was once 12,000 miles farther away than it is now. Causing Earth's days to be about 2 hours longer.

Earth's days once got 2 hours longer — and that may have triggered one of the biggest evolutionary explosions in history, study suggests

The moon once drifted thousands of miles farther away, and Earth's days got 2.2 hours longer, a new study finds.

www.space.com

The time frame overlaps with the Cambrian explosion.

How do they explain the Moon changing orbit?

What is the mechanism for that?

All I see is yet more computer generated fiction.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Did someone suggest otherwise? I had a dog once. It died.

The Shape and Structure of Proteins - Molecular Biology of the Cell - NCBI Bookshelf

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Yes he did, he implied that the number of distinct parts is all that describes a protein.

 

[Grumblenuts]

he implied

You inferred. Huge difference.

 

[scruffy]

^^^

Emphasis upon "creationist nonsense"

The creationist math nonsense is directly contradicted by overwhelming amounts of easily repeatable evidence.

But I prefer to highlight the fact that it's just plain old bad math. It doesn't need to be disproven, it's already wrong right out of the starting gate.

 

[Grumblenuts]

By way of example, suppose that one were to program a computer to generate 100 random digits. There would be 10^100 equally likely possible outcomes. The probability of any given outcome would thus be 10^-100. Applying the creationist "law of chance", we would have to conclude that any conceivable outcome, because it has a probability less than 1 in 10^50, is literally impossible, having no chance of occurring and thus having a probability of 0 (see the Huse quote above). But clearly no event can have a probability of 1 in 10^100 and a probability of 0 (unless we think that 1/10^100 = 0, which is as false as the claim that 2 + 2 = 5). Moreover, since the conceivable outcomes are what mathematicians call mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive, the sum of all their individual probabilities must equal 1, which they cannot do if they are all 0.

Fortunately, one need only carry out this experiment to see the anti-evolutionists' version of this "law of chance" falsified.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

The creationist math nonsense is directly contradicted by overwhelming amounts of easily repeatable evidence.

Nonsense is nonsense whoever be the source.

But I prefer to highlight the fact that it's just plain old bad math. It doesn't need to be disproven, it's already wrong right out of the starting gate.

John Lennox is Prof of Mathematics at Oxford University, here's a list of some of his published papers, oh and he's a creationist.

 

[scruffy]

Nonsense is nonsense whoever be the source.

John Lennox is Prof of Mathematics at Oxford University, here's a list of some of his published papers, oh and he's a creationist.

I don't care if he's Einstein himself, if he claims odds of 10^180 he's a plain old idiot and that's the end of the story

Chains of 8-12 peptides form in FOUR WEEKS under natural conditions.

Some of those creationist morons are just brain dead.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I don't care if he's Einstein himself, if he claims odds of 10^180 he's a plain old idiot and that's the end of the story

Chains of 8-12 peptides form in FOUR WEEKS under natural conditions.

Some of those creationist morons are just brain dead.

Yes I agree just as some atheist morons are brain dead.

 

[Grumblenuts]

I think it is fair to say that it has been decided, by an Oxford vote no less, that there is no god.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Decided yes, people choose their beliefs, that's why they're called beliefs.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Yes, despite the esteemed Oxford scientific community voting you wrong, you retain faith that you're right and share original arguments.