Do scientists believe in unicorns?

[Anguspure]

The horn of a unicorn......? Found on a beach. Appears to comes from a large mammal from another land, perhaps something perhaps about the size of a horse.

Unicorns. Who would've thought?

 

[Hieronymus]

I never claimed that my belief in an ID is based on scripture alone. In fact, the Apostle Paul himself tells us that belief in an ID isn't based on scripture. That is why I quoted him. In order to prevent that constant erroneous persistent allegation.

I have discovered the ignore option.

 

[Anguspure]

Some scientists speculate that in an infinitely large universe the emergence of a creature such as the unicorn would be virtually inevitable.

In the same multiverse it would also be unsurprising if a couple of flying missiles suddenly turned into a bowl of Petunias and a Sperm Whale. Welcome to the world of infinite probabilities.

 

[Radrook]

I have discovered the ignore option.

I have discovered the ignore option.

Thanks for the suggestion. However, I don't mind the feedback that I am receiving right now.

 

[Radrook]

In the same multiverse it would also be unsurprising if a couple of flying missiles suddenly turned into a bowl of Petunias and a Sperm Whale. Welcome to the world of infinite probabilities.

Well, that total pandemonium view is only feasible if we assume a cosmos which is totally Godless and living things emerge simply by pure mindless unplanned chance. Fortunately, that is a view which is totally incompatible with Christianity since Christianity teaches that all existence is under the supervision and control of an almighty God who is a God of order and not of confusion.

Of course we are free to hold that view if we wish. But claiming that it is compatible with Christianity is simply untrue.

 

[Radrook]

The horn of a unicorn......? Found on a beach. Appears to comes from a large mammal from another land, perhaps something perhaps about the size of a horse.

Unicorns. Who would've thought?

The cyclops is another mythical creature which was imagined to exist based on the skeletal remains of a animal.

Dwarf elephants

Look at this elephant skull out of context, and you might believe you were looking at the remains of a giant one-eyed beast. In fact, prehistoric dwarf elephants (with skulls much smaller than modern elephants) used to roam the Mediterranean islands, including Crete, Sicily, Malta and Cyprus.

Extinct by the time ancient Greeks encountered their skulls and remains, these elephants are likely the origin of the mythical creature known as Cyclops. The "eye socket" on the skull is actually the central nasal cavity for their trunks.
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/an...staken-for-mythical-creatures/dwarf-elephants

 

[Anguspure]

Well, that total pandemonium view is only feasible if we assume a cosmos which is totally Godless and living things emerge simply by pure mindless unplanned chance. Fortunately, that is a view which is totally incompatible with Christianity since Christianity teaches that all existence is under the supervision and control of an almighty God who is a God of order and not of confusion.

Of course we are free to hold that view if we wish. But claiming that it is compatible with Christianity is simply untrue.

Don't get me wrong I don't hold to the multiverse view, but as Prof. Stephen Clarke points out (

), given a multiverse of infinite probabilities it follows that the greatest conceivable being (Creator God) necessarily exists.
In this way it can be seen that the multiverse that is invoked in order to increase probabilistic resources for the explanation of phenomena sans God in fact makes the existence of God himself not just more probable but necessary.

 

[Anguspure]

The cyclops is another mythical creature which was imagined to exist based on the skeletal remains of a animal.

Perhaps "imagined to exist" is a little unfair to the original proponents of the theory. People have always constructed hypothesis by putting the available evidence together in a way that seems right at the time to produce a picture of what might be. A later resistance to change when influential new evidence becomes apparent can lead to a divergence and the creation of myths and legends but also a misrepresentation of the way in which a story was originally presented often leads to the perception of an over active imagination.

 

[Radrook]

Don't get me wrong I don't hold to the multiverse view, but as Prof. Stephen Clarke points out (

), given a multiverse of infinite probabilities it follows that the greatest conceivable being (Creator God) necessarily exists.
In this way it can be seen that the multiverse that is invoked in order to increase probabilistic resources for the explanation of phenomena sans God in fact makes the existence of God himself not just more probable but necessary.

Actually, it is the concept of infinite probabilities that I find infinitely impossible.
Perhaps because its premise assumes that an interminably, self-perpetuating chaos itself cannot be all-pervasive and that some type of order must somehow and in some mysteriously and mindless way arise from it. To me that is just another form of perpetuating the atheistic abiogenesis idea of indirectly discrediting everything that we are told as Christians to believe in.

 

[AV1611VET]

The description fits a one horned rhino iirc.

Looks aren't everything.

 

[Radrook]

Looks aren't everything.

Very true. However, when such an illustrious historical fellow such as Marco Polo himself vehemently testifies that a Rhino is indeed a genuine unicorn, then a naive virgin in the full-fine bloom of burgeoning womanhood might very well be misled and venture confidently forth in that dubious way. Ornament you say? Her getting getting gored full-flush in the groin would be far worse.

 

[Goonie]

Looks aren't everything.

It's a Rhino http://creationtoday.org/why-does-the-bible-mention-unicorns/

 

[AV1611VET]

I wonder if any virgin was ever confident enough to approach a Rhino in her belief that it was a unicorn.
That would have been a sight to be seen. The rhino pawing the ground preparing to charge and she smilingly approaching with frail, pale hand limply extended in a gesture of friendship and fully confident that her virginity would indeed calm the enraged beast.

Well if she becomes a hood ornament on the snout of a Ceratotherium simum, it would be in spite of the Bible; not with respect to It.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

LOL. It's should have been rhino instead of unicorn since a unicorn by definition has only one horn. It's even speak about one horn will be greater than the other (ten thousands of Ephraim vs thousands of Manasseh) just like you find on a rhino.
No big deal since at that time they understood a unicorn to be a rhino.

I have never noticed that about rhinos before. Thanks for bringing that up.

.....................................................................

.

 

[Hank77]

You're asking someone who believes this:

I'll go you one better. I believe all animals from the garden to after Noah's flood only ate plants. Men only ate plants.

 

[Goonie]

I'll go you one better. I believe all animals from the garden to after Noah's flood only ate plants. Men only ate plants.

So did their teeth change after the flood? A tigers teeth appear to be designed to tear meat not alfafa.

 

[JackRT]

I'll go you one better. I believe all animals from the garden to after Noah's flood only ate plants. Men only ate plants.

Like Rabbi Maimonides I am convinced that most of Genesis is "folklore and borrowed mythology". I value it for the insight and the spiritual lessons that we can glean from it.

 

[Radrook]

Well if she becomes a hood ornament on the snout of a Ceratotherium simum, it would be in spite of the Bible; not with respect to It.

Very true!

 

[Hank77]

Weird double posted.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Very true. However, when such an illustrious historical fellow such as Marco Polo himself vehemently testifies that a Rhino is indeed a genuine unicorn, then a naive virgin in the full-fine bloom of burgeoning womanhood might very well be misled and venture confidently forth in that dubious way. Ornament you say? Her getting getting gored full-flush in the groin would be far worse.

,.

Ask any bullfighter about that ehehe...........

............................

....................

.