Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Can creationism make verifiable predictions? Can creationism be considered in the same realm as science? [Spirituality & Religion]

For something to be a scientific theory, it [i]must[/i] be [i]predictive[/i].
That is to say, it must be able to specifically predict something which has not yet been observed.

Evolution theory can and [i]has[/i] done this.
For example, Tiktaalik.
It was predicted that an organism demonstrating certain features would be found in a geological layer representing a certain time period.
And that prediction was validated.

What verifiable predictions can a creation-based world view make?
CharlieZ · 70-79, M
It certainly give us predictive tools!!
You can predict with no fail that our SW creationist will post nonsense, avoid factual evidence and, in the end, insult.
QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M
Nobody’s managed to come up with any kind of predictive or otherwise falsifiable statement so far.
@QuixoticSoul


Not that i'm aware of anyway
Carazaa · F
In the Bible God tells us the beginning, and the ending of History. We know the future because God told us how its going to end in His Word. But not only that, he has given us the signs to prepare us for the events.

To summarize God created the world, and the animals, and made man in His image. Man sinned like a prostitute we lust after everything except God, and fell away from God, So God cursed all of the creation. We can not get good standing again ever. .

We can't do anything at all. So God purchased us back to himself, when he redeemed us with his own blood. He was the slaughtered lamb to take away our sins, like he showed in the stories of the Jews who were told to slaughter a lamb as a sacrifice to Him at passover. It is a prediction of the cross of Jesus, the ultimate lamb who takes away our sins. So we can passover to heaven. And in revelations Jesus tells us that he is coming to judge the living and the dead soon. To repent and be faithful and warn people of coming doom. And he predicted all the signs of the last generation. We are that generation now.

We don't know all that from scientific research, we just have to read and it has all come true what was predicted in the past. So if we know the Bible is trustworthy because we have experienced it, then we can trust it to be true in the future. But not only that. But as a person trusts more and more, the more you can know for certain that this book is from God not from man. Because if you put your whole life on what it says because you have nothing to lose, it turns out so great every time. It is trustworthy. God means what He says. So "Creationism" if you want to call it that is trusting in what God did, and because the Bible stories have come true, we can expect them to come true here any day now. I know Jesus is coming any day!
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@Carazaa Amen, sister, amen.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
It already is.
@GodSpeed63

No i'm really just trying to get you to give me a straight answer.
It's like pulling teeth with you lol

I'm going to assume then, that you [i]are[/i] in fact referring to your question about how john knew.
I already answered you. He didn't know and this microchip business doesn't even properly fulfill the requirements of the prophecy.

Now, unless you're going to continue stalling, you can make a case for why the microchip thing DOES fully address the prophecy.
Unless you just read this on the internet and accepted it at face value....
QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M
@Pikachu I forsee.... a world where you cannot buy or sell... without money.
@QuixoticSoul

Amazing!
I predict that it fails to predict.
JoeyFoxx · 51-55, M
How do you define "predict"? Tiktaalik was really a confirmation of the existence of an intermediate species.

The question you are posing seems to be asking for a scientific explanation of creationism and I haven't once heard anyone say that creationism is a scientific theory.
@NorthernBear

In order for it to be a distinction [i]with[/i] a difference, there must be some practical distinction here.

What's an example of a scientific prediction which could not be considered an inference?
NorthernBear · 51-55, M
Yeah, I was being ironic and intentionally chose a pair of synonyms to compare it to. 🙂
@NorthernBear

lol i get ya.
I just didn't want to talk about the differences between typhoons and tornadoes lol
NorthernBear · 51-55, M
The rapture 😁
@NorthernBear

lol well i think that one fails obviously given that people have been predicting it for literally centuries.
KaiserSolze · 46-50, F
@Pikachu it's "raptor" as in velocor and therefore creationism is proved, spelling mistakes cause such problems.
@KaiserSolze


lol ah that makes more sense
infiniterealism · 51-55, M
If our world was not predictable to some extent we couldn't survive. Our survival have something to do with the fact that we can predict things and make decisions. But that doesn't mean that it was not created.
@infiniterealism


Well that's true but it's also beside the point.

This is not a question that can demonstrate that god doesn't exist or that our universe wasn't created.
It's a question that asks if a creation model can supply any demonstrable predictions.
infiniterealism · 51-55, M
@Pikachu It cannot supply any demonstrable predictions because if this universe was created it must have done so by methods that is outside of the rules that governs this universe.
KaiserSolze · 46-50, F
Pikachu I didn't know you were so philosophical.
@KaiserSolze


Yeah man. I have onion style layers😉
KaiserSolze · 46-50, F
@Pikachu my thoughts on this subject are why can't it be both?
@KaiserSolze

Well it can't be both depending on how you define the terms.

If you interpret creationism to mean that there is a ultimately a god responsible for life on this planet then it is not falsifiable and may therefore be true.

If you interpret creationism to mean that all animals were created in their present form over a period of a week then creation and evolution ARE mutually exclusive.

 
Post Comment