Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson #fundie

Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson #fundie answersingenesis.org

Because we start from the right foundation, we’re going to get the right answer. Now, one of the things evolutionists commonly challenge us with is, “Well, you’re not scientists. You don’t make testable predictions. You just say ‘God did it, that’s the end of it.” This is a stereotype, a straw man, and it’s not true. For example, the most important question of the evolutionary model is, “How’s evolution supposed to work?” The answer: mutations. Now, young-earth creationists can predict the mutation rate for whatever DNA sequence you want better than the evolutionists can. So, the irony of this, if there’s ever a topic where the evolutionists should excel, that one topic is actually where the creationists are the strongest in terms of the biological model.

21 comments

old comment by Yossarian Lives

You are so appallingly bad at science because you research under the premise that you have the right foundations before you thoroughly analyse the data.

"Now, one of the things evolutionists commonly challenge us with is, “Well, you’re not scientists. You don’t make testable predictions. You just say God did it, that’s the end of it.” This is a stereotype, a straw man, and it’s not true"

Point me to a creationist whose argument doesn't boil down to Goddidit. Creationists spend more of their time trying to refute accredited science instead of making an evidence based case for creationism. It's hard to do so when there is no basis, so I understand.

old comment by Tempus

Now, young-earth creationists can predict the mutation rate for whatever DNA sequence you want better than the evolutionists can.

Then why don't you? Get out there and start making them!

Here's the thing: Darwinian evolution has made testable predictions over the years. Most of those predictions have been tested, repeatedly, and have (arguably, as I'm sure you'd be quick to point out) born fruit. Now, you may choose to argue that the tests used were in error, or that they were the wrong sort of tests. You may even choose to argue that the reason evolution is accepted by the vast, overwhelming majority of the biosciences, genetics, geology and paleontology is because of some sort of mass systemic corruption.

But here's what you're going to have to do, if you want ANYONE outside of your echo-chamber of Christian Young-Earth Creationist supporters to accept the idea that the Noachian Deluge was a real thing, the Earth is less than 10 thousand years old, and everything was recently created by an omnidigent entity:

(1) You're going to have to show exactly HOW the tests used were in error, and you're going to have to use the same framework of science that the natural scientists used to show that evolution is a valid scientific principle. And you're going to have to get used to the idea that your work is going to be picked over and picked apart. Sorry, that's how it works.

(2) You're going to have to design the right sort of tests if the original experiments were conducted in error, and be able to defend and explain your work against all comers in a open forum.

(3) Your theoretical framework MUST be able to take into account ALL observed facts of the natural world, without ad hoc explanations, and prove to the satisfaction of the scientific community that it explains the observed facts better than the existing explanation. If you don't know a particular something, you have to be willing to admit that you don't know at this time, and THEN make a prediction about what future scientists may find, with the full knowledge that, if that something can't be found or that something is found that invalidates a theory, you may have to modify your framework or abandon it entirely. People will hurt your fee-fees if you're wrong. Life is hard, get a helmet. Sorry, that's how it works.

(4) You must then be able to use that framework to make testable, verifiable predictions. Say what you want about John Brown, founder of Zion Oil & Gas, he was at least willing to put his neck on the line to try to find fossil fuels in Israel using old biblical maps and a vague promise in the Bible that Israel was blessed with natural resources. None of the exploration wells they drilled found anything more than tiny traces of hydrocarbons, and they've since abandoned the old Bible maps they were using in favor of actual (!le gasp!) geology to go prospecting in places that had actual petroleum, but they DID actually make a testable prediction using the Old Testament...and had it fail completely.

That happens. Science is hard.

(5) if the system IS that hideously corrupt--that is, there is some sort of vast, overarching scientific conspiracy involving virtually every branch of the sciences and literally millions of people around the world for centuries--to somehow hide the truth of a recent creation, Biblical miracles that sidestep known laws of physics, and a single, giant worldwide flood--you're going to have to find conclusive, convincing evidence that this is a thing that's actually happening. Good luck with that, because if it really DID exist--and it doesn't, because have you SEEN how well the average person can keep a secret?--you'd have better luck proving we're all living in a simulation.

Also, please keep in mind that proving (5) still doesn't get you off the hook--you still have to be able to go through steps 1-4.

Sorry, the other guys had to pay their dues too. You don't get to cut in line. You actually have to do....SCIENCE. You can't just wave a Bible around and say, "IT'S IN THE BIBLE! IT'S IN THE BIBLE!"

Good luck! We're all counting on you, I'm sure.

Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson #fundie answersingenesis.org

21 comments

Confused?