Introducing a page on Creationism

Creationism

Creationism is the philosophical position that the Earth and universe and life were created by God or some other supreme being. It is common for Evolutionists to equate Creation Science with Creationism but they are not equivalent to each other. Creationism is a philosophical position while Creation Science is a scientific discipline based on Creationism. Understanding this difference is critical to understand the enter Origins issue, since it is the same difference as exists between Evolution and Naturalism.

An introduction to the Genesis Science Mission Online Store

Genesis Science Mission Online Store

Genesis Science Mission Online Store is a Science, creation science and Christian Online Store It is the store section of Genesis Science Mission with Books, e-books, video’s and a new down laudable video section. Coming soon will be a software section.

A look at Science the Search for Knowledge

Science the Search for Knowledge

This page provides a description of science and what it really is. Most of the content is in an embedded video. This is a page on the Genesis Science Mission creation science web site that describes the nature of science.

Knowing what science is and is not is critical to understanding the issues raised by science. This page shows that there are those who try to make science a search for purely naturalistic explanations rather than a search for knowledge. When science is forced into this naturalistic box it becomes a slave to a particular philosophical world view rather than pursuing genuine knowledge.

The discussion on this page seeks to provide a description of science that is frees from that is not bound to a particular world view.

Introducing Genesis Science Mission

Genesis Science Mission

Genesis Science Mission is an interactive Creation Science experience that presents and illustrates both General and Creation Science principles through video and interactive material. The site is under development and so more is being added to it on a regular bases.

 

 

The interactive material helps improve your understanding of scientific principles by allowing you to play with them in fun and safe manner.

Scientific Proof that the Supernatural Exists

It has been repeatedly claimed that there is no scientifically valid evidence for the supernatural; however this claim has been in the absence of a scientific definition of supernatural. It a previous article (A Scientific Definition of Supernatural ) I made the case that a supernatural event would then be any event that has a caused out side the Universe.

Based on this definition there is a scientifically recognized even that without question has to be a supernatural event. The prime evidence for this event it the fact you exist to read this article. The supernatural event I am referring to is the beginning of Universe. The fact that the universe had a beginning is a well established scientific fact.

Now regardless of how the Universe actually began it had to be started from outside itself. This is evident from the fact that until the universe existed there was no inside the universe and so the cause that started the universe had to be out side of it.

The fore the beginning of the Universe by definition has to be a supernatural event.

Declaration of a Scientific Definition of the Supernatural

Is science capable of considering and studying the supernatural? Answering this question requires there to be a scientific definition of supernatural. Unfortunately no official scientific definition of supernatural has ever been established. The reason this is the fact that there is the desire on the part of the scientific establishment to keep any consideration of the supernatural out of science. 

To find a scientific definition of supernatural it is necessary to start with a standard dictionary definition of supernatural.  According to The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language the primary definition of supernatural is “Of or relating to existence outside the natural world.”

Since the natural world consists of ther entire universe, it is logical to rephrase this definition as “Of or relating to existence outside the Universe.” This makes for a perfect scientific definition of supernatural.

So here is a perfect scientific definition of supernatural.

Supernatural: Of or relating to existence outside the Universe.
Supernatural event: Aany event that has a caused out side the Universe.

Now while this definition allows for an influence by a supernatural intelligence such as God, it does not intrinsically require that there be any intelligents involved an would include totally mechanistic causes from out side the universe.

Reference Science and the Supernatural

Understanding Inductive Reasoning

Inductive reasoning: Reasoning that draws a general conclusion based on a set of examples.

Basic pattern of Inductive Reasoning

a, b, c, d, e, f, g and h are part of group A.

a, b, c, d, e, f, g and h have property G.

All member of group A have property G.

In Science it starts with observations and sees the patterns in the observations developing a hypothesis as general description of the observations.

The benefits of Inductive Reasoning are that it allows for general conclusions to be drawn from specific observations evidence, allowing conclusions based on patterns in observations and evidence.

Problems with Inductive Reasoning include the possibility that the sample size may be too small for a general conclusion. It is prone to being affected by philosophical assumptions and biases in selection of sample, in the patterns recognized, and in conclusions drawn from those

Understanding Deductive Reasoning

Deductive reasoning: Reasoning that starts with a given set premises and draws a conclusion.

Deductive reasoning goes from general to specific by starting with a given set premises and draws conclusions from them. The conclusions are only as valid as the premises that are used and it only one false premise can produce a false conclusion. In a valid deductive argument its truth necessarily follows from the starting premises and it is sound if the argument is valid and all of its premises are true other wise it is considered unsound.

A common form of deductive reasoning is called a syllogism It has three parts.

All X has y.

A general characteristic of a category of objects.

A is X.

The object under discussion belongs to that category

A has y.

The conclusion that the object under discussion has that general characteristic.

Deductive reasoning is that it is heavily dependent on the validity of premises that are used. Premises may be facts derived from observation or a totally philosophical assumption.

For example proponents of the Big Bang Cosmology. All observations of the universe are constant with the Earth being near the center so starting with the philosophical assumption that we are totally the result of natural process; as opposed to being created by God; it is a logically valid conclusion that we can not be in a special place in the universe such as the center. So the invented an explanation for the evidence is to eliminate the center by making all locations seem to be at the center. If we were created by God then we could easily be near the center of the universe. This is why Creationists and Evolutionists can look at the same evidence and draw totally different conclusions.

Deductive reasoning is a very useful tool of reasoning however it does have its difficulties. It depends heavily on the accuracy its starting premises. However flawed premises result in flawed conclusions. These difficulties need to be properly understood to properly understand scientific statements including those of both Creationists and Evolutionists.

Logic it’s Reasonable

Logic is the set of principles and rules for reasoning. When used correctly and given the right starting point one will arrive at the correct conclusion.

 Deductive reasoning is reasoning that starts with a given set premises and draws a conclusion. Inductivereasoning is reasoning that draws a general conclusion based on a set of examples. So deductive reasoning goes from general principles to specific conclusions. Inductive reasoning goes from specific principles to general conclusions. Both forms of logic are used in science.

 Deductive and Inductive reasoning are different and even opposite concepts but in practice deductive and inductive reasoning are often used together even without knowing it.  For example one may be drawing a general conclusion form observed evidence (induction) based on general principles called assumptions. (deduction)

Logical fallacies are mistakes in reasoning and can be both deliberate and accidental. It is important to avoid them since they resultant in erroneous conclusions.

The Burden of Proof in Debate in Science

Burden of Proof:  The obligation of a party to provide sufficient evidence in support of thir side of a dispute or issue.

In practical meaning the term “burden of proof” is actually a little strong because it implies the need to prove beyond a doubt. In practice it is really the burden of evidence. The side that has the burden of proof is obligated to provide evidence to back up their view point.

Determining the burden of proof is not always easy to do because it varies in different circumstances and changes in the course of the discussion.

Criteria for Finding the Burden of Proof

In general the burden of proof goes to the party making the claim. An American criminal trial is a good example of this since the prosecution has the burden of proof since the defendant is assumed innocent until proven guilty. This however is not an absolute rule since some circumstance can change the burden of proof to some one denying a claim. A party making the new claim about an accepted idea has the burden of proof. For example those claiming that the Apollo Moon landings did not really happen have the Burden of proof.

Burden of Proof fallacy

 Burden of Proof fallacy is the process of wrongfully trying to switch the burden of proof to your opponent. For example proponents of abiogenesis need to prove that it is possible because we already know that intelligence can produce complex organized systems because we already do it, though not to the degree of life. On the other hand no real evidence for abiogenesis has been produced just unproven stories about how it could have happened.

Real Burden of Proof switching.

The Burden of Proof can legitimately switch sides when new arguments have been made or evidence presented. If the opposition wishes to dispute the new evidence or argument, they have the burden of proof in doing so. Hence the burden of proof has switched.

A Discussion On Debate in Science

Debate: a formal interactive discussion of opposing ideas on a specific topic.

In science debate is a way of dealing with disputes over theory since both sides get to make their case. An example of this is debates on Creation Vs Evolution how ever it seldom actually settles the dispute.

Benefits are that both sides get to make their case and get to a chance to learn about the other side as well as their own. It works best when both sides are given equal footing respect which doses not always happen.

The problem is that debate seldom actually settles the dispute and one side can actually get insulting ruining the discussion. In practice it is only as useful as the participants’ ability to learn from it. If no one learns anything from a debate it’s a waste of time.