Dissecting an actual science article

[TheBear]

Because, a "different state past" is needed. Without it, scientific observations might better represent reality.

 

[dad]

Because, a "different state past" is needed. Without it, scientific observations might better represent reality.

I different future is also needed...so? Got any tough ones now? God can do all that, and if we believe the bible, will change things up again.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Hilarious because it is so obviously faith based. Tell us how assuming that things were not created and operated under current physics for untold millions of years is not faith based??

So, let me get this straight.....
Observing things that exist and using those demonstrably existing things in models about reality is "faith based".

But making assumptions about the existence of undemonstrable, unobservable, unfalsifiable entities like gods is........not?

:-S

 

[DogmaHunter]

I different future is also needed...so? Got any tough ones now? God can do all that, and if we believe the bible, will change things up again.

Create a thread about it when he does.

 

[AirPo]

Looking at an article in a science news site, I noticed it might be a good example to dissect as to the way they arrive at conclusions.

The article is about Mercury. One example of the way they decide on a date for when molten rock appeared is that they used a furnace on earth to heat rock to see when it would now behave a certain way! They then extrapolate that into the unknown past, to declare a way and time that Mercury got it's rocks melted!!
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160627132939.htm

"The team melted the synthetic rocks in a furnace to simulate the point in time when the deposits were lava, and not yet solidified as rock. Then, the researchers dialed the temperature and pressure of the furnace up and down to effectively turn back the clock, simulating the lava's eruption from deep within the planet to the surface, in reverse...

..The experiments indicate that the planet's interior cooled dramatically, over 240 degrees Celsius between 4.2 and 3.7 billion years ago -"

Hilarious!!!

Did we consider creation? What happened when God created the planet? Did anything liquefy or melt? Everything about the so called science claim here shouts religion.

Nice to see you confess that there is such a thing as actual science.

 

[AirPo]

You have failed to show why this should be seen as hilarious.

Exclamation marks do not suffice.

dad threads are hilarious by definition.

 

[dad]

So, let me get this straight.....
Observing things that exist and using those demonstrably existing things in models about reality is "faith based".

So, let me get this straight.....you observe time in the far universe? You observe nature in early earth era?

But making assumptions about the existence of undemonstrable, unobservable, unfalsifiable entities like gods is........not?

God was proven over time, demoed, observed, and tested.

 

[dad]

Nice to see you confess that there is such a thing as actual science. :wsve:

True, the so called science nonsense that pretends to deal with creation issues is a sick little joke.

 

[dad]

Create a thread about it when he does.

His new world comes when He returns. Only those who chose to accept His gift of eternal life will be here to read threads then.

 

[AirPo]

True, the so called science nonsense that pretends to deal with creation issues is a sick little joke.

That's what we've been saying about The HI Theory all these years. Execpt, not sick, and not little.

 

[AirPo]

His new world comes when He returns. Only those who chose to accept His gift of eternal life will be here to read threads then.

In other words faith based, which you seem to hold in contempt.

 

[Gene2memE]

So, let me get this straight.....you observe time in the far universe? You observe nature in early earth era?

Yes. Via proxies.

God was proven over time, demoed, observed, and tested.

Then you'll have no problem providing that proof, supported by observation and evidence and the method of testing used.

 

[DogmaHunter]

So, let me get this straight.....you observe time in the far universe?

Que?

How do you "observe time", right here?

You observe nature in early earth era?

We observe the evidence the past left behind.

God was proven over time, demoed, observed, and tested.

Ok. Sure. Uhu.

Feel free to provide some substance to that claim whenever you're ready.

 

[DogmaHunter]

His new world comes when He returns. Only those who chose to accept His gift of eternal life will be here to read threads then.

Doesn't the rapture work the other way round?

 

[AirPo]

Yes. Via proxies.



Then you'll have no problem providing that proof, supported by observation and evidence and the method of testing used.

It's only so called proof.

 

[dad]

That's what we've been saying about The HI Theory all these years. Execpt, not sick, and not little.

Not anything at all.

 

[dad]

Doesn't the rapture work the other way round?

Even before He comes to take over, it seems the world changes a lot. In the tribulation, the stars fall, sun goes out, angels are on earth, and demons, etc.

 

[dad]

Que?

How do you "observe time", right here?

How do we know it exists here? We experience it. ...here.

We observe the evidence the past left behind.

That says little about the laws that existed.

Feel free to provide some substance to that claim whenever you're ready.

Historical proof abounds.

 

[dad]

Yes. Via proxies.

False all proxies real and invented are HERE and not there.

Then you'll have no problem providing that proof, supported by observation and evidence and the method of testing used.

Even asking for proof shows deep denial of history...and God.

 

[dad]

In other words faith based, which you seem to hold in contempt.

Depends on what is believed in and on.