Do creationists critically examine their own ideas (re: creationism)?

[Ophiolite]

I said in my heart, concerning the speech of the sons of man, God will judge them, and that to shew that they are beasts.

Also to them is the event of the sons of man, and the event of the brute; one event befalls them: as is the death of the one, so also the death of the other; and there is one breath to all: and what has the man more than the brute? nothing; for all is vanity.

All [go] to one place; all were formed of the dust, and all will return to dust.

And who has seen the spirit of the sons of man, whether it goes upward? and the spirit of the beast, whether it goes downward to the earth?

Ecc 3:18-22

Right. You'll have to help me out here. Could you point me to the part of your post where you demonstrate that creationists critically examine their ideas? Or, if that wasn't your aim, point me to the part of the post where you demonstrate that creationists don't critically examine their ideas.

 

[AV1611VET]

Right. You'll have to help me out here. Could you point me to the part of your post where you demonstrate that creationists critically examine their ideas? Or, if that wasn't your aim, point me to the part of the post where you demonstrate that creationists don't critically examine their ideas.

God already examined it and pronounced it ...

Genesis 1:31a And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.

Who are we to disagree?

 

[klutedavid]

In the pragmatic Christian atmosphere in which I was raised, striving for an ideal was seen as a positive thing. I have retained that view and as such I don't find the adjective "mere" sits well with "ideal".

I suppose striving to be honest is not such a negative goal in life but striving to be honest at times. Will just make you more and more aware of your own lack of integrity at every point in your life.

We are not saved because we at times have done something wrong to someone else, on the contrary we are saved because that person we see in the mirror. Is a self deceived, self centered, greedy, gluttonous, self righteous person. Christ is saving us from ourselves, Christ did not come to save the righteous but deeply deceived sinners.

The explanations I referred to were attempts to answer the "How", not the "Why". Here you recognise clearly that science has a distinct domain, yet earlier you seemed to be complaining that this was a weakness, when you said "Science makes no attempt to explain why the Big Bang occurred". So, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.

Scientific pursuit will in the end ultimately accelerate the destruction of life on this planet.

Science gives us the ability to alter our environment on a global scale. To rapidly deforest the planet, to build huge unsustainable cities that demand resources on an ever increasing scale.

The worlds population is around seven billion yet the planet may struggle to sustain half that number over the longer term. Science has given us an exploding world population.

Science is rapidly becoming the very enemy of mankind because life itself, is now threatened by these past scientific discoveries and on so many levels.

Our last and only chance is a world wide inquisition commanded by yours truly.

We know that the singularity is a reflection of an inadequate understanding of the earliest moments of the universe. That lack of understanding is why we continue to investigate.

Science is in the deep end and is struggling for air. Sub atomic physics has moved beyond the domain of human understanding and requires they say. An entirely new type of science and especially another form of mathematics. Some educated scientists have already stated that these discoveries may be beyond comprehension. Think string theory and multiple universes!

Do you believe that humanity is, in fact, bounded in their quest for knowledge by God Himself?

Limitations to all human endeavor were established into the creation itself and long ago.
That is why after centuries we seem really no closer to any grand unifying theory, rather the investigation is becoming deeply mysterious.

At present there is no superior scientific explanation available for the existing evidence and observations. Personally, I find Big Bang Theory philosophically unattractive.

I find it scientifically unattractive simply because it is more of a scientific miracle than the metaphysical alternative. The Big Bang openly defies scientific logic in so many ways.

I don't "believe" in it, but I have to - logically - accept it as the best current explanation.

I rejected the Big Bang a long time ago. I repeat, you cannot generate two trillion galaxies from an entity smaller than a ping pong ball. That is physically impossible and contradicts everything science is actually based on.

I will not accept that explanation and I do not care whether we have cannot investigate our origin without it.

Since the explanation is also consistent with Christianity I'm not sure what you have against it. (As a general rule, if an idea doesn't upset a Jesuit, it doesn't upset me.)

The existence of the universe and it's mind altering scale is meant to amaze and humble us. We are not meant to try and unravel the mysteries of it's existence or even it's behavior.

Discovering and understanding the facts about a neutron star? Let me just say that I live in a mental asylum and the people that run this mental asylum, have thrown away the keys.

People are selfish, lazy and gluttons to boot. So what did science do? Science gave us labor saving devices and cars. Now everyone is fat, lazy and they eat only fast food.

Remove science and we remove the clear threat to human survival. If we continue with science the game is over.

I already addressed this and provided you with a link to a site that provided an explanation. If you wish a citation to the original research I can try to dig that out for you. Your unattributed quote is outdated.

Fair enough, now explain way dark matter and dark energy.

I thought that we were agreed that science has a specific domain and does not mess with philosophical issues.

Well you may need to tell the scientific world that information because the scientific world, refuses to stay within that domain.

Science gave dangerous narcissistic people nuclear weapons to play with and use those weapons they already have. So if that does not represent a very deep philosophical problem for you, since I'm talking about your very existence. I don't know how you define philosophy and science.

 

[pitabread]

Remove science and we remove the clear threat to human survival.

Why don't you lead by example? Start by ceasing use of all modern conveniences brought about via scientific advancement.

Though I suppose this will be the last we will hear from you if that were the case.

 

[pitabread]

You stated the following in a previous post.

So I asked you what was the first species; since you claimed that science has explained the origin of the species.

I was speaking of species plural. Perhaps a more apt description would be we a scientific explanation for the diversity of species. Is that better?

What you are referring to is the origin of life.

I am not aware that science has explained how life generated from non living matter.

They're working on it. You can find some of the current research here: Szostak Lab: Home

And here is a neat site that explains a probable origin for protocells in laymen terms: Exploring Life's Origins: A Virtual Exhibit

I also asked how many stars there are in the sky because everyone asks that question. Is that a hard question for someone as drilled in scientific understanding as you are?

It's a piece of trivia I have off the top of my head. Have you tried Googling it? I hear Google is a fantastic way to find information for questions one may have.

 

[pitabread]

Creationist do not make those claims pitabread.

God is the one who is telling you that He created these entities and why He created them.

Funny, I'm not speaking to God on these forums am I? All I see are a bunch of other people some of which are creationists.

We are just repeating what He said.

What you are doing is making a claim that is what God said. I don't buy into that; the message I am getting is coming from creationists, ergo it is creationists making the claim.

 

[klutedavid]

Why don't you lead by example? Start by ceasing use of all modern conveniences brought about via scientific advancement.

Though I suppose this will be the last we will hear from you if that were the case.

Is that not the real issue that science gave us.

Our modern scientifically enabled lifestyles that are exhausting and polluting the planet. Aerial photos of our expanding cities show the level of destruction we have inflicted upon our planet.

It may be far too late now to stop our demise as we cannot possibly reverse our ravenous economies.

Turning off my computer now will not in the real world may a lick of difference. We have sealed our fate and science gave us the express delivery.

We cannot stop sea level rise now nor does anyone seriously want to do that. We are far too time pressed now with social media and living life to the max.

 

[JackRT]

Science is morally neutral. It is quite wrong to blame our societal ills on science when the real problem is how we fallible human beings deal with the world we find ourselves in. But having a scapegoat is always a good thing when you are seeking to pass the blame.

 

[Ophiolite]

I suppose striving to be honest is not such a negative goal in life but striving to be honest at times. Will just make you more and more aware of your own lack of integrity at every point in your life.

We are not saved because we at times have done something wrong to someone else, on the contrary we are saved because that person we see in the mirror. Is a self deceived, self centered, greedy, gluttonous, self righteous person. Christ is saving us from ourselves, Christ did not come to save the righteous but deeply deceived sinners.

Scientific pursuit will in the end ultimately accelerate the destruction of life on this planet.

Science gives us the ability to alter our environment on a global scale. To rapidly deforest the planet, to build huge unsustainable cities that demand resources on an ever increasing scale.

The worlds population is around seven billion yet the planet may struggle to sustain half that number over the longer term. Science has given us an exploding world population.

Science is rapidly becoming the very enemy of mankind because life itself, is now threatened by these past scientific discoveries and on so many levels.

Our last and only chance is a world wide inquisition commanded by yours truly.

Science is in the deep end and is struggling for air. Sub atomic physics has moved beyond the domain of human understanding and requires they say. An entirely new type of science and especially another form of mathematics. Some educated scientists have already stated that these discoveries may be beyond comprehension. Think string theory and multiple universes!

Do you believe that humanity is, in fact, bounded in their quest for knowledge by God Himself?

Limitations to all human endeavor were established into the creation itself and long ago.
That is why after centuries we seem really no closer to any grand unifying theory, rather the investigation is becoming deeply mysterious.

I find it scientifically unattractive simply because it is more of a scientific miracle than the metaphysical alternative. The Big Bang openly defies scientific logic in so many ways.

I rejected the Big Bang a long time ago. I repeat, you cannot generate two trillion galaxies from an entity smaller than a ping pong ball. That is physically impossible and contradicts everything science is actually based on.

I will not accept that explanation and I do not care whether we have cannot investigate our origin without it.

The existence of the universe and it's mind altering scale is meant to amaze and humble us. We are not meant to try and unravel the mysteries of it's existence or even it's behavior.

Discovering and understanding the facts about a neutron star? Let me just say that I live in a mental asylum and the people that run this mental asylum, have thrown away the keys.

People are selfish, lazy and gluttons to boot. So what did science do? Science gave us labor saving devices and cars. Now everyone is fat, lazy and they eat only fast food.

Remove science and we remove the clear threat to human survival. If we continue with science the game is over.

Fair enough, now explain way dark matter and dark energy.

Well you may need to tell the scientific world that information because the scientific world, refuses to stay within that domain.

Science gave dangerous narcissistic people nuclear weapons to play with and use those weapons they already have. So if that does not represent a very deep philosophical problem for you, since I'm talking about your very existence. I don't know how you define philosophy and science.

Angst, Anger, Arrogance and Antagonism.

Let me know when you move on to the B's.

 

[Tone]

God already examined it and pronounced it ...

Genesis 1:31a And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.

Who are we to disagree?

I was gonna say, "What has been written...has been written..."!

 

[klutedavid]

Funny, I'm not speaking to God on these forums am I? All I see are a bunch of other people some of which are creationists.



What you are doing is making a claim that is what God said. I don't buy into that; the message I am getting is coming from creationists, ergo it is creationists making the claim.

Most are simply quoting and expanding on what Genesis claims. Some granted are arguing from a young earth premise which I reject outright and which is probably what you are complaining about.

I reject a young earth premise and likewise an the old earth premise also. The whole concept of the understanding of the universe and life is far beyond my pay scale.

We are temporary inhabitants on this dying planet and whether Pluto is a planet or not. In no way has any bearing on my short life.

I care not for the trivial world of science and even less for the exacting and literal interpretation of an ancient text called Genesis.

Mankind has deep unresolved issues which Jesus identified and that is the real ball park where the real game takes place.

 

[klutedavid]

Angst, Anger, Arrogance and Antagonism.

Let me know when you move on to the B's.

OK!

 

[pitabread]

Turning off my computer now will not in the real world may a lick of difference. We have sealed our fate and science gave us the express delivery.

This is what I find so ironic. Those who love to decry science at every opportunity don't seem in much of a hurry to give up the advances brought about via science.

 

[klutedavid]

This is what I find so ironic. Those who love to decry science at every opportunity don't seem in much of a hurry to give up the advances brought about via science.

If I gave it up you would have no one to talk to.

Science is embedded in our societies now and is impossible to give up. I have lived my entire life, hand in hand, with all manner of scientific inventions. I would not survive very well without it.

That is not to say that science is good for the planet and our health, because science is not environmentally friendly.

You cannot possibly argue that the latest forecast of the future extinction of a million species, is not directly the result of the application of science in our lives. If you can argue the case in support of science, then my friend by all means go ahead.

 

[JackRT]

You cannot possibly argue that the latest forecast of the future extinction of a million species, is not directly the result of the application of science in our lives. If you can argue the case in support of science, then my friend by all means go ahead.

It could equally well be argued that bit is a result of both the misapplication of science and the denial of science. It is a human failing not a fault of science.

 

[klutedavid]

It could equally well be argued that bit is a result of both the misapplication of science and the denial of science. It is a human failing not a fault of science.

The misapplication of science?

I don't think I read your reply properly.

The denial of science?

Science is about the generation of advanced weaponry, artificial foods, pollution on a global scale, telecommunications (social media), e.t.c.

Don't blame science you say, science is the very fuel that is burning the planet. Make no mistake about this my friend, scientific research is funded by corporations and with one goal, PROFIT. If you think scientific research is there to improve mankind somehow, then you are seriously mistaken.

Incidentally, half of the government scientific funding is on defense in the USA. The USA and many other countries collect huge revenue from the sale of military weaponry around the world.

We can't stop our destructive advancement because we are absorbed with our own ambitions and fulfilling our selfish dreams.

Science is the main culprit and especially scientific research that is aimed at gaining the competitive edge in a host of areas.

Who is running this circus?

Do you for even a moment, honestly believe that scientific research will be funded for altruistic purposes?

 

[JackRT]

Don't blame science you say, science is the very fuel that is burning the planet. Make no mistake about this my friend, scientific research is funded by corporations and with one goal, PROFIT. If you think scientific research is there to improve mankind somehow, then you are seriously mistaken.

Science is about trying to understand our physical world and how it works based on observation and logic. Make no mistake about this my friend, like any other human endeavor, science can be perverted by greed and power and PROFIT. That is not a problem with science itself, it is a human problem. Your scapegoat is not science --- it is human nature itself.

 

[pitabread]

That is not to say that science is good for the planet and our health, because science is not environmentally friendly.

Science is simply a methodology for learning about our universe and a body of knowledge that results from that methodology. To lay all the ills of the world at the feet of science is overly myopic.

You cannot possibly argue that the latest forecast of the future extinction of a million species, is not directly the result of the application of science in our lives. If you can argue the case in support of science, then my friend by all means go ahead.

Oh, the current extinction event that we are in is direct result of technological advancements allowing for an unprecedented explosion of humans on this planet.

At the same time though, even the identification of such an extinction event is in the purview of science. Without which, we wouldn't even know the impact that we are having as a species.

The question is what we as a collective species are prepared to do about it.

 

[pitabread]

Science is about the generation of advanced weaponry, artificial foods, pollution on a global scale, telecommunications (social media), e.t.c.

Er, no... as mentioned, science is methodology for learning about our universe. While the knowledge gained from scientific investigation can certainly be applied to things like weapons or GM foods, etc, it isn't strictly the reason all science is performed.

Just winding back in discoveries in physics, for example, early physicists could hardly have foreseen that the discovery of atoms would one day result in nuclear bombs.

 

[JackRT]

While the knowledge gained from scientific investigation can certainly be applied to things like weapons or GM foods, etc, it isn't strictly the reason all science is performed.

Linking weapons and GM foods is an unlikely and unfortunate association if only in their objectives. Humanity has been in the business of genetically modifying foods for ten thousand years or more. There is hardly a foodstuff in any marketplace that has not been genetically modified and that is a very good thing because without it we could not even feed ourselves.