Why would they lie?

"And God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God's image he created him; male and female he created them". Genesis 1:27 

Jesus repeatedly cited the Scriptures as authoritative, often prefacing his points by saying: "It is written." (Matthew 4:4, 7, 10; Luke 19:46) Clearly, Jesus considered the Scriptures to be inspired by God and factual. In prayer to God, he said: "Your word is truth." John 17:17.  He therefore not only cited scripture as his authority but also stamped the above verse (Genesis 1:27) and taught it as truth confirming the genesis account when he said.

"Did YOU not read that he who created them from [the] beginning made them male and female and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh'?  So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together let no man put apart". Matthew 19:4-6

"For all those people here who think evolution is wrong, a myth, or whatever, why would so many scientists say it's true?"

Why would even more people say God is true but many of you won't believe that? That's the same logical argument right there. Why did they in the court of law (scopes trial) use piltdown man as evidence of evulotuion and then after the trial it was proven a hoax? It was all a lie. I'm not saying all evolutionists are liars in the sense of piltdown man but when they deny God being the creator they certianly are lying to themselves.

Originally posted by Project 86
I'm not saying all evolutionists are liars in the sense of piltdown man but when they deny God being the creator they certianly are lying to themselves.

Click to expand...

There are many Christian scientists who work in biology, geology, astrophysics, and other sciences who accept evolution and an old earth. There are also scientists from other religious faiths that work in these areas as well. Are these scientists trying to deny the God that they worship when they go to church? The acceptance of evolution and and old earth does not correspond to lack of religious faith or beliefs.

In the united states, I would imagine that the majority of scientists and students who accept evolution would consider themselves Christian. This is why the "evolution is used to deny God" argument simply doesn't work. Many have reconciled it with there faith and have no conflict.


Your comments on Piltdown man and the Scopes trial are in error. No physical evidence was presented or discussed at the trial. Piltdown Man was mentioned by two experts in affidavits, and in each case Piltdown was given no special status. The sense of the affidavits indicates that Piltdown Man was considered to be anomalous.

http://www.antievolution.org/topics/law/scopes/scopes.html

Originally posted by Project 86
"For all those people here who think evolution is wrong, a myth, or whatever, why would so many scientists say it's true?"

Why would even more people say God is true but many of you won't believe that? That's the same logical argument right there. Why did they in the court of law (scopes trial) use piltdown man as evidence of evulotuion and then after the trial it was proven a hoax? It was all a lie. I'm not saying all evolutionists are liars in the sense of piltdown man but when they deny God being the creator they certianly are lying to themselves.

Click to expand...

No one is lying to themself cause no one knows if there is a god so no one is lying to themself. With only a book saying that there is a god an no other "evidence" or "proof" it's not lying.

If you don't understand this who cares I am sleepy and my eyes are almost closed.

Project 86: "For all those people here who think evolution is wrong, a myth, or whatever, why would so many scientists say it's true?"

Why would even more people say God is true but many of you won't believe that? That's the same logical argument right there.

Click to expand...

Au contraire. Scientists are in the business of discovering how things work via the scientific method. Their business is to formulate and destroy scientific theories. The work they do and the observations they make are repeatable. Theists, on the other hand, have no universal method of discovering their truths. What theists do to confirm their faith is unrepeatable, or, at very least, they are unable to articulate the conditions necessary to repeat them. It is completely inaccurate to compare theists and scientists, and thus it is decidedly not the same argument.

Project 86: Why did they in the court of law (scopes trial) use piltdown man as evidence of evulotuion and then after the trial it was proven a hoax? It was all a lie.

Click to expand...

Perhaps because they didn't know it was a hoax?

How does this even relate to the topic at hand? Are you claiming that the international scientific community has been hoaxed for 150 years? By whom?

Project 86: I'm not saying all evolutionists are liars in the sense of piltdown man but when they deny God being the creator they certianly are lying to themselves.

Click to expand...

Scientists do not automatically "deny God being the creator." Where did you get that idea?

Further, this doesn't answer the question--why are they lying, if indeed they are?

Originally posted by Humanista
That humans only use a fraction of their brain is an urban myth.

I used to assume it was true too, because everyone repeats it. But it's NOT true! 



http://www.snopes.com/index.html

Type in brain and it will take you to the Ten Percent Myth

Click to expand...

Thank you for the site dear. I read it but now I will say we should use our common sense. Think of all the great things our brain does. We can remember things from a long time ago, imagine and picture things and so on. Our eyes dont even see in color, its black and white, so our brain is what paints everything around us and stores them. Yet notice how we read it a book we cant remember 200 pages word for word! Well your brain does! Its just than you cant USE all of your brain. See the difference. You might have a dream reciting parts of the book that you totally forgot about. Thats when you yourself are not TRYING TO USE it and think. We cannot use 100% of our brain. We are limited for reasons we dont know yet Think about what we would be like if we could use allllll of it.

God bless

a4c

arab4christ: Thank you for the site dear. I read it but now I will say we should use our common sense.

Click to expand...

Even when it's demonstrably wrong?

arab4christ: Think of all the great things our brain does. We can remember things from a long time ago, imagine and picture things and so on. Our eyes dont even see in color, its black and white, so our brain is what paints everything around us and stores them.

Click to expand...

Um, no. Human eyes see in color.

arab4christ: Yet notice how we read it a book we cant remember 200 pages word for word! Well your brain does!

Click to expand...

Are you just making things up here? Some people can, certainly. Can you prove that everyone does?

arab4christ: Its just than you cant USE all of your brain. See the difference. You might have a dream reciting parts of the book that you totally forgot about. Thats when you yourself are not TRYING TO USE it and think. We cannot use 100% of our brain. We are limited for reasons we dont know yet Think about what we would be like if we could use allllll of it.

Click to expand...

We do use all of it. For crying out loud, read the articles that people post!

I don't think that you stand on very solid ground calling all scientists liars because they don't agree with you. 

"Choose your words carefully, because you may be eating them later."

Originally posted by arab4christ
Thank you for the site dear. I read it but now I will say we should use our common sense. Think of all the great things our brain does. We can remember things from a long time ago, imagine and picture things and so on. Our eyes dont even see in color, its black and white, so our brain is what paints everything around us and stores them. Yet notice how we read it a book we cant remember 200 pages word for word! Well your brain does! Its just than you cant USE all of your brain. See the difference. You might have a dream reciting parts of the book that you totally forgot about. Thats when you yourself are not TRYING TO USE it and think. We cannot use 100% of our brain. We are limited for reasons we dont know yet Think about what we would be like if we could use allllll of it.

God bless

a4c

Click to expand...

Perhaps you should do a bit of reading on how memory is stored, the subconscious and how the eye works (your brain doesn't "paint" anything!) before you declare YOUR "common sense" is useful in ascertaining the answer to scientific questions such as how much of our brains we use. Ever heard of the scientific method? Why do you think it is the gold standard for finding out about the nature of our world as opposed to just thinking about things ("common sense") ? Do you think experimentation, data, falsification and peer review are useful or should computer design, medicine, space travel, etc, just rely on "common sense"?

Originally posted by seesaw
Orihalcon, and Humanista, look at this site.

http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html

Click to expand...

Hey thanks! Very informative.

Do you think it's just a coincidence that he used a SHEEP as an example of the size of 10% of our brains?

What I don't understand is all the people who say they read this stuff, then still cling to the belief of 10% (without any coherent explanation) and these are the same people who will try to trot out what they think are scientific reasons for creationism. IOW, science is dismissable in favor of personal opinion if you disagree with it, but it's your heavy artillary is you think it supports your opinion.

I trust the scientists know more about the brain than I do, so even though I thought for years we only use 10%of our brain, I gave up that notion after reading articles like this one.

Originally posted by seesaw
Orihalcon, and Humanista, look at this site.

http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html

Click to expand...

i learned it in bio class.  not really part of the course, but a side note that my teacher mentioned.  the human brain cannot have every neuron sending a signal at any given time.  some are sending, some receiving, some sitting there waiting for a signal.  about 10% are actually performing an action (sending).  kind of like you have 100 different programs on your computer but you only load a few at a time, but will use them all at different times.

"They don't take it "on faith". "

Well scientifically speaking, all science is based on faith


"If it didn't, you wouldn't have a computer to use or antibiotics to cure you from disease. "

this is also an unscientific statement. Each claim is judged on its own merit, not how well the process worked in the past.

"Evolution is one of the most robust theories in all of science---"

Yup, and I think one of the most wrongly accepted ones

"We have over 150 years of collective research "proving" evolution "

I already explained this, maybe you missed it. People have been explaining lots of things longer then 150 years and we still dont' know everything, so what? More time doesn't mean more answers. It just means more time.

"But that's besides the point."

No, its not beside the point at all. Evolution is the most peer-pressured into believing thing in exsistance.

No, its not beside the point at all. Evolution is the most peer-pressured into believing thing in exsistance.

Click to expand...

Huh? peer-pressured I wasn't peer-pressured and I bet everyone on this board that believes in evolution wasn't peer-pressured into believing in it. I accepted it cause there is a lot of evidence for it. I bet the same is for everyone here that believes in evolution or they accepted it for almost the same reason.

Originally posted by Outspoken
[BI already explained this, maybe you missed it. People have been explaining lots of things longer then 150 years and we still dont' know everything, so what? More time doesn't mean more answers. It just means more time.[/B]

Click to expand...

we still don't know everything.  wowee.  like you're going to know ANYTHING if you stay behind a rock and deny the advancement of knowledge.  took us a few thousand years to realize the earth was round, but since we don't know everything about the universe, why don't we just forget all of it?  stick with the old beliefs that the world is flat and rests on the backs of 4 elephants?  what we don't know can't hurt us?

Evolution has about as much proof as einstein's theory of relativity.  we can't individually see its effects, we can use some extremely advanced machinery (that probably less than .01% of the population know how to actually use or interpret) to check, but it explains a whole lot of the universe rather well.
the only arguments that go against evolution are the problems that evolutionists run into, that creationists immediately jump on.  i have yet to see any formal paper on proof or solid evidence of creationism, besides quoting the bible (which is, sorry to say, just a book) or saying 'since the theory of evolution can't prove this, we must be right...'  if you do find such a publication, please inform me.

"Huh? peer-pressured I wasn't peer-pressured"

You're not out in the scientific community.

"Evolution has about as much proof as einstein's theory of relativity. "

If you say so, I disagree. there is more against evolution then there is against relativity.

"the only arguments that go against evolution are the problems that evolutionists run into, that creationists immediately jump on. i have yet to see any formal paper on proof or solid evidence of creationism"

this is irrelvant. We are talking about evolution, not an alternate theory. Scieince doesn't go with the worst theory out there, it goes with no theory if all of them are bad. Your bias for evolution shows clear here.

Originally posted by Outspoken
" Evolution is the most peer-pressured into believing thing in exsistance.

Click to expand...

Yeah, with all that "you're going to hell if you don't believe in it" stuff. Wait, I must be thinking of something else. Scientists don't say that.

Again, there are many Christians and people of other faiths who accept evolution and have no problem reconciling it with their faith. Are you suggesting that these scientists are subject to peer-pressure?

I never felt any peer pressure to accept evolution, in fact, the pressure was just the opposite. After researching and reading the studies and data, including Origins, I could come to no other rational conclusion other than that the theory has merit and is supported by the observations that are made. After studying geology and physics, I could come to no other conclusion that that the earth is old.

This is something I have been able to reconcile with my faith. To suggest that this is due to peer pressure is ridiculous. I have made up my own mind and in fact most of my "peers" have no thoughts on it at all, they simply don't look at it one way or the other (they are not interested in this particular area of science).

To suggest that a theory that has been described as the cornerstone to modern biology is simply in place due to peer pressure is riduculous. Science works to solve problems and describe the natural world, nothing else.

Is geology and the mainstream findings that show that the earth is old held in place by the same pressure? How about astrophysics and cosmology that show us that the universe is old?

Is all of science simply based on "peer-pressure". Talk about conspiracy theories. Its amazing.

Hundreds of thousands of research hours which produce
thousands of documented research papers,
produced by thousands of scientists,
in hundreds of countries,
by people of a dozen different faiths and beliefs,
all done because of peer-pressure,
and for what?
To convince an unsuspecting public that there is no Christian God.

I think I'll pass.

Yeah Notto, it is one of the weaker arguments. Funny thing is, I'm currently a grad student (Biology, soon to graduate) and my advisor is a Christian as is the only other grad student working in the lab....if anything, I get pressured to go with one of them to church on Sundays .