>So you are really building a model by fitting data with theoretical
>preassumptions... the evolution of man from apes... and that gene
>similarities are proof of evolution. The dating could stand alone as
>data, I agree. The fitting of data with theories in order to develop a
>new theory only results in a bad or false theory.
>
Wait a minute. How can the fitting of data with a theory bring about a bad
theory? I would think that intentionally ensuring that the data does not fit
your explanation would be the shortest route to a bad theory. Is this what
you are suggesting?
Also, every view has presuppositions. Your view, my view, all views. The
creationist has the presuppostion that the Biblical account is true. Even the
classical TE's beleive it is true in the sense that God actually created the
universe. The YEC believes more details are historical but that is their
presupposition. I don't know enough about your views to say what your
presuppositions are but you do have them. Maybe yours is that evolution can
not possibl;y be true.
>That is what evolution often generates... theories layered upon
>theories, not strictly the piecing of data... and thus by your
>definition, successively weaker theories. That is why we have the law of
>parsimony... Occam's razor... to hold us accountable.
>
Who says that Occam was right? Why must nature be simple? Creationists are
always talking about how complex living systems are and how unexplainable.
Shouldn't Occam's razor be applied there?
>Creationism starts with one preassumption... the how... that original
>species were created by God and were not the product of evolution. Data
>is then fit to that model to establish the when, what, and where. A
>much simpler and thus stronger theory by your standards.
>
It is only stronger if it actually accounts for the data. When and where was
the flood? The Biblical account also tells us that after Adam and before us,
there was a flood.
But I must ask. Where exactly in the Bible does it say that evolution didn't
happen? Where does it say "animals reproduce animals after their kind" with
animal as the subject and object of the sentence?
glenn
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm