Share good examples of Christian Science

[1rreducibly Complex]

And that really changes nothing. I've seen enough arguments, read enough arguments and heard enough arguments from creationists to decide for myself that it is not science.

The sad truth is the majority of christians avoid science, fact and truth and simply rely on faith. They rely completely on faith and forget that seeking Christ could imply being a seeker of truth and knowledge.

It leaves them unequipped to know what facts are or argue creationism intelligently from a logical or rational perspective.

You shouldn't judge the scientific validity of creationism by experience.

There's almost no one anywhere in the whole world who is bothering to cite even the most basic science supported creationism.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The sad truth is the majority of christians avoid science, fact and truth and simply rely on faith. They rely completely on faith and forget that seeking Christ could imply being a seeker of truth and knowledge.

It leaves them unequipped to know what facts are or argue creationism intelligently from a logical or rational perspective.

You shouldn't judge the scientific validity of creationism by experience.

There's almost no one anywhere in the whole world who is bothering to cite even the most basic science supported creationism.

Oh please. When you post about creationism on a science forum, except the talk to be about the scientific validity of creationism. If you want creationism to be taken as a science, you better damn well expect people to judge it on the scientific validity.

 

[Shemjaza]

There are many scientific arguments made for creationism dating back to 2005 and earlier. Which the overwhelming majority of christians and atheists have never heard of.

This makes many ideas and arguments appear new. Simply due to the level of christian content normally shared and posted being extremely generic and superficial.



It would be pointless.

People of today do not respect knowledge, truth or God enough to appreciate the value of such content.

A scientific approach is to examine both sides of the debate. Atheists presume to be scientific but only look at one side of the discussion.

What's the point in trying to discuss how good or bad a film documentary was, if you'll never watch it. You're only wasting your time, and the time of others who respond.

Even less convincing than "Watch this video." is "Well, I could tell you, but you wouldn't believe me, so I won't bother."

I've never seen any presentation of Creationism that didn't require taking doctrinal points on faith regardless of evidence. That's why I am dubious about claims of scientific evidence.

 

[1rreducibly Complex]

Oh please. When you post about creationism on a science forum, except the talk to be about the scientific validity of creationism. If you want creationism to be taken as a science, you better damn well expect people to judge it on the scientific validity.

Mmmhmmm.

I doubt many on this forum know enough basic science to comprehend what Einstein meant when he said: "God does not play dice with the universe". They lack the basic science knowledge to understand a simple quotation. Yet imagine they have the knowledge base necessary to put these topics into their proper context? Nope, nope, nope.

Issues relating to creationism, atheism, religion and science have always been rooted in people not comprehending basic science and basic history.

And the worst part of it is, people can't even be bothered to watch a 1 hour documentary on creationism which could represent a step towards helping address these issues.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Mmmhmmm.

I doubt many on this forum know enough science to comprehend what Einstein meant when he said: "God does not play dice with the universe".

Issues relating to creationism, religion and science have always been rooted in people not comprehending basic science and history.

And the worst part of it is, people can't even be bothered to watch a 1 hour documentary on creationism which could be a step towards addressing these issues.

Or maybe because it's like I said when there are no new arguments from creationists and that there is also no need to take creationism seriously as a science because it isn't a science.

 

[1rreducibly Complex]

Even less convincing than "Watch this video." is "Well, I could tell you, but you wouldn't believe me, so I won't bother."

I've never seen any presentation of Creationism that didn't require taking doctrinal points on faith regardless of evidence. That's why I am dubious about claims of scientific evidence.

Or maybe because it's like I said when there are no new arguments from creationists and that there is also no need to take creationism seriously as a science because it isn't a science.

Scientific evidence for creationism resides in the quotation above.

Unfortunately, neither of you know enough basic science to comprehend this.

Which makes things difficult.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Scientific evidence for creationism resides in the quotation above.

Unfortunately, neither of you know enough basic science to comprehend this.

Which makes things difficult.

A quote is not evidence.

 

[Shemjaza]

Mmmhmmm.

I doubt many on this forum know enough basic science to comprehend what Einstein meant when he said: "God does not play dice with the universe". They lack the basic science knowledge to understand a simple quotation. Yet imagine they have the knowledge base necessary to put these topics into their proper context? Nope, nope, nope.

Issues relating to creationism, atheism, religion and science have always been rooted in people not comprehending basic science and basic history.

And the worst part of it is, people can't even be bothered to watch a 1 hour documentary on creationism which could represent a step towards helping address these issues.

So you had the time to find some inspirational quotes and images of a couple of theists and misquoted pantheist... but can't be bothered to even reference a single piece of scientific evidence for Creationism?

 

[Shemjaza]

Scientific evidence for creationism resides in the quotation above.

Unfortunately, neither of you know enough basic science to comprehend this.

Which makes things difficult.

That is not scientific evidence.

 

[1rreducibly Complex]

A quote is not evidence.

That is not scientific evidence.

What does "God does not play dice with the universe" mean?

Do you understand what he was saying there.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

What does "God does not play dice with the universe" mean?

Do you understand what he was saying there.

I understand that you're waffling and stalling because you can't show how creationism is science.

 

[HIM]

I understand that you're waffling and stalling because you can't show how creationism is science.

So you haven't watched the video either?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

So you haven't watched the video either?

As I said before; I don't need to. Creationism arguments have not changed and they never will. I do not need to watch something that I know will not change my view nor watch someone regurgitate points that I have seen made hundreds of times before and have been shown to be wrong before.

As the late Terry Pratchett said: The problem with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

 

[Shemjaza]

What does "God does not play dice with the universe" mean?

Do you understand what he was saying there.

Yes.

That he didn't accept some of the implications of quantum theory... he was using poetic language.

The guy wasn't even a conventional theist, let alone a Christian.

 

[1rreducibly Complex]

I understand that you're waffling and stalling because you can't show how creationism is science.

Scientific arguments for creationism, shouldn't be a time or energy intensive cause.

It should be basic knowledge, everyone knows.

There's no rush. We'll get there, eventually.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Scientific arguments for creationism, shouldn't be a time or energy intensive cause.

It should be basic knowledge, everyone knows.

There's no rush. We'll get there, eventually.

Except that it's clearly not basic knowledge otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion.

There are no scientific arguments for creationism because creationism isn't science.

 

[HIM]

As I said before; I don't need to. Creationism arguments have not changed and they never will. I do not need to watch something that I know will not change my view nor watch someone regurgitate points that I have seen made hundreds of times before and have been shown to be wrong before.

As the late Terry Pratchett said: The problem with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Then you shouldn’t comment. Apparently your arguments won’t hold up and you know it

 

[1rreducibly Complex]

As the late Terry Pratchett said: The problem with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Life can be a competitive thing. Complete with competing ideologies, competing ideas and competing religious stances.

The real trouble happens in places where people are fooled into thinking competition doesn't occur. In the places where people have been fooled into thinking there is no need for them to question or be skeptical on things.

Yes.

That he didn't accept some of the implications of quantum theory... he was using poetic language.

The guy wasn't even a conventional theist, let alone a Christian.

Einstein had issues with the "spooky action at a distance" element of quantum entanglement.

Which the "God does not play dice with the universe" quotation does not cite.

The quote has nothing to do with quantum mechanics.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Then you shouldn’t comment. Apparently your arguments won’t hold up and you know it

Nice try at psychoanalysis. Shame it holds no wait. Do you really think that I need to watch an hour long video when the thread ISN'T about the video and is a question of "Share good examples of Christian science"?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Life has been a competitive thing. Complete with competing ideologies, competing ideas and competing religious stances.

The real trouble happens in places where people are fooled into thinking competition doesn't occur. In the places where people have been fooled into thinking there is no need for them to question or be skeptical on things.

Really has no bearing on what I said at all. Creationism isn't in a competition with any science because it's not even in the race. It's not even at the starting line. Heck, it's not even in the same state.