Creationist Quackery, Part 150, 001 : Creationists Say Aliens Don't Exist, So Let's Stop Looking!

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

Have you ever seen a trial? Eye-witness testimony from first person accounts is the most powerful evidence there is in swaying opinions.

Legal evidence and scientific evidence aren't the same thing. But even then you are wrong. Even in a trial, objective evidence, like DNA evidence, is the best evidence to use.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
I like science explained in simple terms that consider the contradictions to observations .

And this is why you fail at science. Looking for simple explanations, simple terms, etc is just going to distort your understanding of science. Science isn't simple, and to pretend it is, is intellectually dishonest.

I have never failed at science but do fail to understand it unlike ,I guess you .There are a lot of scientists who fail with their science projects and fail to understand it as well . I did however make a great batch of cookies in my Microwave Oven which is in my lab I call a kitchen . a reply to: Krazysh0t

Well maybe Aliens don’t exist; maybe this planet full of life Is a complete fluke, would explain the Fermi’s Paradox…but saying that a lot of other ideas might explain it too

Either way we aren’t going answer this today

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
I have never failed at science but do fail to understand it unlike ,I guess you .There are a lot of scientists who fail with their science projects and fail to understand it as well . I did however make a great batch of cookies in my Microwave Oven which is in my lab I call a kitchen . a reply to: Krazysh0t

This thread is littered with you failing at science and not just failing to understand it. If you would listen to us about how science works for once, maybe you'd understand it better and could formulate a better argument to debate us with instead of relying on strawmans, quote mining, and old science to debate us.

I am thinking that the institute of scientist have had way more both failures errors at the trade then I ever could .They multiply their chances at failure by making so many theory's that can not all be true . They make new theory's as work projects to feed from the public purse . Not all mind you ,because for many failures they do come up with some success .Which only tells me that not all scientist are created equally . a reply to: Krazysh0t

a reply to: the2ofusr1

This is absurd. I'm not even sure what you are getting at here, but it looks to be some faulty reasoning based on failing at science. AGAIN.

Though at least it isn't the Creation Institute, which has literally failed at EVERY science thing they've done.

You are being nonsensical saying that creation is science .Science is the study of what was created . a reply to: Krazysh0t

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I'M being nonsensical? I am not, nor have I EVER insinuated that Creation science is real science. That is why I said that they failed at science.

Though at least it isn't the Creation Institute, which has literally failed at EVERY science thing they've done.

a reply to: Krazysh0t What is this science thing you speak about ? I didnt know that science was a thing .

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
I am thinking that the institute of scientist have had way more both failures errors at the trade then I ever could .They multiply their chances at failure by making so many theory's that can not all be true . They make new theory's as work projects to feed from the public purse . Not all mind you ,because for many failures they do come up with some success .Which only tells me that not all scientist are created equally . a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'm not trying to be mean, but what you are saying is equivalent to somebody who just learned basic math criticizing calculus and doubting it for being complex and extensive. If you don't understand something, you shouldn't attack it, you should improve your knowledge on the subject so that your points are actually relevant to the subject matter. If you doubt it, learn it and see if your doubts hold weight.

I look at scientist as being fallible ,nothing more nothing less .They make errors that get by peer review and into journals and are sometimes corrected and sometimes not . Am I wrong to think that this happens ? a reply to: Barcs

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Except that's not what you're saying at all. You've been making ignorant and incompetent attacks on a scientific field of study you are ideologically opposed to for no other reason than you take the fanciful and outright ludicrous claims of scripture at face value.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
I look at scientist as being fallible ,nothing more nothing less .They make errors that get by peer review and into journals and are sometimes corrected and sometimes not . Am I wrong to think that this happens ? a reply to: Barcs

Every single person on earth is fallible, including the humans that wrote your holy book. Your point is irrelevant. People aren't claiming science is perfect. Just that it's a good method for learning how things work. Like I said, if you disagree you are welcome to do the research or duplicate the experiments for yourself. That's how science figures out problems, by constantly testing and scrutinizing results, and having numerous people run those same tests. It's not like they they get emotionally connected to an idea and proclaim it as absolute truth like religious folks. You can't just claim the science is wrong because you say so. There is hard data.

I wasn't saying it's not a good way of learning about things .I said errors are made and get past peer review and put into journals .There are lots of subjects that a person could and want to learn that science is not much help .Any one can come up with a theory and collect data to support their theory .It doesn't make the theory true or false but it can still believed . Evolution collects data to support their theory . People believe the theory . I don't . a reply to: Barcs

I have brought other scientific studies and shown that there are other scientist that do not believe in evolution .There are plenty of scientist that do not believe in evolution . I am not alone in that respect . a reply to: GetHyped

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
Any one can come up with a theory and collect data to support their theory .It doesn't make the theory true or false but it can still believed . Evolution collects data to support their theory . People believe the theory . I don't .

If anybody can come up with a scientific theory, then why is there absolutely no god theory or supporting evidence? If anybody can do it, surely just ONE of the billions of Christians worldwide could have come up with the scientific theory of god by now, but nobody has. Theories aren't just thought up out of the blue because they sound good like the majority of religions. There has to first be supporting evidence. You don't seem to understand scientific terminology or anything about it, so why not leave the science to the experts instead of acting like you know more than them? We get it. You're religious and set in your ways. You deny accepted facts in science. We don't care. The facts stand on their own merit. Your anti science ramblings do not. Science isn't about faith. Whether you deny it or not, it still works in today's world.

You are barking up the wrong tree, my friend. Either leave science to the experts, or actually learn about it before you criticize. You aren't accomplishing anything in this thread other than making religious folk look bad. If that is your goal you have succeeded.

Fact of the matter is that nobody can prove that God exist and that is why He said you need to use faith .Anybody foolish enough to think they can, can go for it .See ,we know that science can be proven wrong but I know that nobody can prove God wrong .Science can prove how some of what God created but they probably wont get answers to all their questions .Besides ,science does not ask all the questions about life and death. a reply to: Barcs

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
Fact of the matter is that nobody can prove that God exist and that is why He said you need to use faith .Anybody foolish enough to think they can, can go for it .

What's the difference between something that cannot be shown to exist, and something that doesn't exist?

See ,we know that science can be proven wrong but I know that nobody can prove God wrong.

All of scientific knowledge, or what you claim to know?..........hmm

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
Fact of the matter is that nobody can prove that God exist and that is why He said you need to use faith .Anybody foolish enough to think they can, can go for it .See ,we know that science can be proven wrong but I know that nobody can prove God wrong .Science can prove how some of what God created but they probably wont get answers to all their questions .Besides ,science does not ask all the questions about life and death. a reply to: Barcs

You don't think it is odd that God demands that we all believe in him, gets jealous when we believe in something else, gets angry if we disobey his edicts, uses your "faith" to determine if you go to a good place or a bad place after death, but then NEVER deems to reward that faith with a simple "hello, I exist"? One must be rewarded for faith. If god doesn't want to let us know he exists, I have no need for him. Besides, he acts like a giant baby anyways. "WAAAAAAH my creations won't believe in me and want to believe in some other god/gods! I'll make them pay and send them to eternal torment. All must satisfy my giant ego!"