Do evolutionists silence the critics?

kaotic · #21 23rd December 2002, 03:53 PM

Any Christian who is anti-scientific should nto be towards true science, which as I said in the above post, never contradicts God's Word. What true Christians should be is anti towards your science, the science that is not based on fact but belief, and the science that elevates sceince above the LORD Jesus.

Science is all about facts.

And anyone who rejects God's Word (wether Creation or Christ) is being decieved by Satan and drawn away by selfish desires. Satan has a hold over anyone who rejects the truth.

Satan isn't doing anything to me. And there is christians here that believe in evolution. I guess they are just being lied to, and so are everyone in the wolrd. :rolleyes:

Jerry Smith · #22 23rd December 2002, 04:22 PM

Originally posted by Athlon4all
Any Christian who is anti-scientific should nto be towards true science, which as I said in the above post, never contradicts God's Word.

If good science never contradict's God's word, we could use that fact to finally test whether a literal interpretation of the Bible is, in fact, God's word as so many people claim. Brilliant! Of course, evolution is good science and it is that which the anti-scientific Christians are most fond of being anti-scientific towards. They generally leave well enough alone in other fields.

What true Christians should be is anti towards your science, the science that is not based on fact but belief, and the science that elevates sceince above the LORD Jesus.

Sorry, you must be mistaken. I don't have any personal science - and especially not one like what you describe. That wouldn't even be science. If you run across such a thing, let me know - is it like those perpetual motion fanatics? 

And anyone who rejects God's Word (wether Creation or Christ) is being decieved by Satan and drawn away by selfish desires. Satan has a hold over anyone who rejects the truth.This is true, and thats why you see how degraded the Church is today. But, there still is a believing remnant, that will stand, because we are founded on the Eternal, Living Word of God, Jesus Christ.

That's kind of harsh. I think that creationists are indeed misled, as you suggest, but I don't think many of them are drawn away from the truth as revealed through creation by selfish desires. I think most of them are drawn away by fast-talking con-men  who know how to manipulate an overly literalist bent in a person.

ZiSunka · #23 23rd December 2002, 04:25 PM

Originally posted by Jerry Smith
That's about the best answer I could have hoped to get. Do you travel with lots of scientists or mostly the ones in your university? Which university is it, by the way? Whose lab do you work in? What is your area of research?

I'd like to know if what you see happening every day is representative of the behavior of scientists as a group - that's why I ask..

No university. Government. And I peer review articles prior to publication. And I have a pretty wide circle of peers. My area of research is environmental science.

Jerry Smith · #24 23rd December 2002, 04:34 PM

No university. Government. And I peer review articles prior to publication. And I have a pretty wide circle of peers. My area of research is environmental science.

So, can you give me the name of a creationist paper that was submitted to you and your colleagues that they laughed at and round filed? How many are in your section?

notto · #25 23rd December 2002, 04:58 PM

lambslove,

Would you recommend a paper for publication that requires one of the following for it to assert its conclusions?

1) a radical change in the known laws of physics at sometime in the near past.

2) an unknown force that is tinkering with the results

3) data extrapolation that falls outside of the accuracy and error thresholds of the measurements.

Athlon4all · #26 23rd December 2002, 06:08 PM

Science is all about facts.

I really think that if you look at the processes that are used to optain "proof" of evolution involve guesswork rather than facts. Not to mention the things that indicate a young earth (like current soil production rates, water production rates, the volcanos (based on current eruption rates, if the earth were billions of years old, there would be enogh lava to be equal to the current size of the earth), magnetic field at the moment of creation of the universe based on current degredation rates, and more). Like with radiometric dating. There are so many assumptions (like in Uranium-lead dating, there is the assumption thgat there was all uranium and no lead in the rock when it was made, also that the rate of degredation is constant, and also that none of the byproducts escaped the rock).

Sorry, you must be mistaken. I don't have any personal science - and especially not one like what you describe. That wouldn't even be science. If you run across such a thing, let me know - is it like those perpetual motion fanatics?

See above.

If good science never contradict's God's word, we could use that fact to finally test whether a literal interpretation of the Bible is, in fact, God's word as so many people claim. Brilliant! Of course, evolution is good science and it is that which the anti-scientific Christians are most fond of being anti-scientific towards. They generally leave well enough alone in other fields.

It doesn't. And the example you described, is outside the realm of science. That is determining truth about spiritual things, which can be taught only by the Holy Spirit (I Corinthains 2).

That's kind of harsh. I think that creationists are indeed misled, as you suggest, but I don't think many of them are drawn away from the truth as revealed through creation by selfish desires. I think most of them are drawn away by fast-talking con-men who know how to manipulate an overly literalist bent in a person.

What I said isn't happy, but its what the Bible teaches. James 1:13-14 says "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed." And it is clear in the Bible that it is Satan is the one who tempts man (I Corinthians 10:13, Matthew 4:1) to sin.

Satan isn't doing anything to me. And there is christians here that believe in evolution. I guess they are just being lied to, and so are everyone in the wolrd.

See above, and it doesn't matter what Christians say, all that matters is what the LORD says, and there is not one indication of Evolution in the Bible. Some can pull out interpretations to indicate a much other earth than the Literal Genesis...but there is absoltely no indication of Evolution in the Bible, and the Bible quite contrary, rejects the idea that God used Evolution to create the earth. Romans 5:12 says that death entered the world by man, and Genesis 3:14-19 in the curse put on man because of sin, God tells Adam that because of his sin, he shall "return to the dust." This is clearly speaking of the physical body dieing. This is completly incompatible with Evolution. Evolution requires death before man evolves, and thus before man could've ever sinned to bring physical death (for not just man, but animals too) into the world.

Jerry Smith · #27 23rd December 2002, 06:17 PM

It doesn't. And the example you described, is outside the realm of science. That is determining truth about spiritual things, which can be taught only by the Holy Spirit (I Corinthains 2).

You said true science never contradicts God's Word. If that is true, then we can use the following logic:

Evolution is true science (all hand-waving aside, we all know this. If you don't already, it will be easy for you to find out.)

Evolution contradicts certain hyper-literal interpretations of the Bible.

We can therefore conclude that if your first premise is true, then it must follow that certain hyper-literal interpretations of the Bible must not be God's word.

The logic is unavoidable.

Jerry Smith · #28 23rd December 2002, 06:18 PM

What I said isn't happy, but its what the Bible teaches. James 1:13-14 says "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed." And it is clear in the Bible that it is Satan is the one who tempts man (I Corinthians 10:13, Matthew 4:1) to sin.

Well, perhaps the misunderstandings the creationists are so full of are not sin -- perhaps they are just honest mistakes. I wouldn't be so quick to condemn them myself.

Jerry Smith · #29 23rd December 2002, 06:39 PM

There are so many assumptions (like in Uranium-lead dating, there is the assumption thgat there was all uranium and no lead in the rock when it was made, also that the rate of degredation is constant, and also that none of the byproducts escaped the rock).

Radiometric dating methods do each require certain initial conditions and are generally only employed where we can safely assume that those initial conditions were in place. However, there are methods for identifying those few times when the assumptions are incorrect. You should learn what Christians believe about radiometric dating. Here is a good place to start:

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

About the lava remark - its clear you have been subjected to an especially cunning creationist & I understand why you have fallen for his or her sales pitch. Go back to them and ask them to explain erosion and subduction...

Or just ask them about Morton's Demon

Seriously guy -- you are being led astray.

Athlon4all · #30 23rd December 2002, 08:13 PM

I have skimmed over that article about radiometric dating and...I will trust my source, Bob Jones University about it because the person who wrote it claims that the earth is Billions of years old, which is false. If it was showing Radiometric dating methods to give dates no higher than 10,000 years then I might be intersted, but it doesn't, he still claims sadly, like most "Christians", that the earth is billions of years old.

About the lava remark - its clear you have been subjected to an especially cunning creationist & I understand why you have fallen for his or her sales pitch. Go back to them and ask them to explain erosion and subduction...

Again, I'll trust Bob Jones University, who havbe the correct bias based on what the Bible teaches.

Or just ask them about Morton's Demon

Honestly, I wills ay that I am not an "expert" like you and many people on this forum are in your personal beliefs, but, I guarantee you that as I do learn more about the universe, no evidence that anyone shows me will convince me of Evolution because the Bible clearly states that it is not true.

As I have said before, Evolution, and Creationism, while are nearly the opposites of each other, are similar in one regard. Those who support them are supported by faith and then the believers in them interprete all the physical evidence according to that belief. If I were a sceintist, I would look at the exact same evidence you do, and would arrive at a Biblical Creationist conclusion. everyone is always going to interprete evidence based on their bias, and I don't think I can convince you that you are being decieved. I think only the Holy Spirit can. The LORD is knocking on the door of your heart, and I pray you will be convicted by the Holy Spirit.