Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Creationists: How exactly did the fall of man change biological organisms?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Job 33:6" data-source="post: 76114174" data-attributes="member: 399299"><p>I think that to specifically answer your question, I would say yes we have developed some concepts and logic around the theory of gravity. We certainly can develop logical premises and arguments around the theory of gravity.</p><p>1. Earth's Gravity pulls all objects within it's gravitational field toward its center of mass at 9.8m/s^2.</p><p>2. A meteor exists within Earth's gravitational pull.</p><p>3. It logically follows that the meteor therefore plummets toward the earth at 9.8m/s^2. And so it is.</p><p></p><p>Is this not development of logic based on observations?</p><p></p><p>Or it doesn't have to be a meteor It could be any object that happens to be in the sky.</p><p></p><p>And we could add extra premises relating to their not being wind or friction with the atmosphere.</p><p></p><p>But the point is that the premises are constructed upon our understanding of the universe which is ever unfolding.</p><p></p><p>Things that seem illogical today maybe logical in the future if we were to discover things that would allow us to construct our premises in more expansive ways.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Job 33:6, post: 76114174, member: 399299"] I think that to specifically answer your question, I would say yes we have developed some concepts and logic around the theory of gravity. We certainly can develop logical premises and arguments around the theory of gravity. 1. Earth's Gravity pulls all objects within it's gravitational field toward its center of mass at 9.8m/s^2. 2. A meteor exists within Earth's gravitational pull. 3. It logically follows that the meteor therefore plummets toward the earth at 9.8m/s^2. And so it is. Is this not development of logic based on observations? Or it doesn't have to be a meteor It could be any object that happens to be in the sky. And we could add extra premises relating to their not being wind or friction with the atmosphere. But the point is that the premises are constructed upon our understanding of the universe which is ever unfolding. Things that seem illogical today maybe logical in the future if we were to discover things that would allow us to construct our premises in more expansive ways. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Creationists: How exactly did the fall of man change biological organisms?
Top
Bottom