Do creationists not know their own Bibles?

[Subduction Zone]

Dictionary definition for the scientific method easily found on Google or in any 5th grade science text book:

"A method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses."

Those who think they understand science, but do not, will easily believe evolution and make data-free claims while they discount and disbelieve easily available hard core data. No use debating there.

Byeeeeee!

I can see that you did not understand your link. Yes, experiment is often a part of the scientific method. But it is not an absolute requirement.

And if you want to play that game every new fossil found is a new "experiment"

EDIT: And why use a general dictionary? You should use scientific sources for scientific definitions.

 

[pitabread]

Those who think they understand science, but do not, will easily believe evolution and make data-free claims while they discount and disbelieve easily available hard core data.

Yes, experiments are part of the scientific method, but the scientific method isn't holistically defined by experiments.

It appears you are reading that definition incorrectly.

Also, dictionaries are also NOT the arbiters of the scientific method. Dictionaries are simply references for how words get used in common speech.

If you really want to understand what the scientific method entails, there is an extensive article on Wikipedia about it: Scientific method - Wikipedia

No use debating there.

You're right, because this isn't a point of debate. Science includes experimentation, but it's not wholly defined by it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yessss?? Your point being...?

Paul didn't die that day.

Neither did Adam.

It is a reference to spiritual death, which is the leading cause of physical death.

 

[driewerf]

Paul didn't die that day.

Neither did Adam.

It is a reference to spiritual death, which is the leading cause of physical death.

Nope

 

[Subduction Zone]

Paul didn't die that day.

Neither did Adam.

It is a reference to spiritual death, which is the leading cause of physical death.

That is quite inventive. Wrong of course, but still inventive.

 

[inquiring mind]

I believe the entire Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and most especially the Gospels.. I believe it to be the inspired and authoritative word of God. the point I am making here is that I am offended by biblical literalists who insist that their reading of Genesis is the only possible one for a Christian to the point of being abusive about it like you just were.

I understand, and I'm glad to hear it. I've re-read my comment several times... sorry, I don't see any abusiveness. And, I've been corrected many times regarding my interpretations of the Bible.

 

[Speedwell]

I understand, and I'm glad to hear it. I've re-read my comment several times... sorry, I don't see any abusiveness. And, I've been corrected many times regarding my interpretations of the Bible.

It's the sly, passive-aggressive questions, "...is it just the OT you do not believe, or do you not even believe the gospels?"

 

[inquiring mind]

Referencing writings or teachings doesn't imply they are interpreting them literally as written or assuming they represent a literal history. There is no basis for that assumption.

For example, if I reference Robin Hood robbing from the rich to give to the poor, that doesn't mean I think Robin Hood was a real person who actually did that.

Hey, Robin Hood (or a version thereof) could have existed… which brings up the point, how do we know anyone in the distant past really existed? Maybe through personally written documents (you could always question their authenticity if they did), maybe through eyewitness accounts (the authenticity and accuracy of those could be questioned as well). Maybe pictures and videos (nope, they can be ‘doctored’ too). And, if you won’t believe what others of their time, who were associated with them, say they said… what have you got about anyone? There were other learned men of the time… where are the eyewitness discounts? The only discounts come from today. So, if Jesus referenced the Creation in a totally unrelated comment, I have every reason to believe He knew it to be so.

 

[JackRT]

he Bible says that flood waters completely covered the whole earth after, for one thing, "the fountains of the deep broke forth." (Did you know there is an ocean below our commonly known oceans, or have you seen the mid Atlantic ridge which looks like it used to be a great crack on the ocean floor? Probably not.).

That "ocean" is not free water but is chemically locked into the rock. Even if we could access it, it would not flow. The Mid-Atlantic Ridge is a chain of active volcanoes that is responsible for pushing the Americas away from Europe and Africa. They are Fountains of the Deep in the sense that they spew lava not water.

 

[LoricaLady]

That "ocean" is not free water but is chemically locked into the rock. Even if we could access it, it would not flow. The Mid-Atlantic Ridge is a chain of active volcanoes that is responsible for pushing the Americas away from Europe and Africa. They are Fountains of the Deep in the sense that they spew lava not water.

I was speaking of something that happened thousands of years ago. You assume that you know all about what geographical changes occured since then. This is the usual theories-are-as-good-as-actual-data approach. Got any actual scientific data to show what was going on then and since then?

"The finding, published in Science, suggests that a reservoir of water is hidden in the Earth's mantle, more than 400 miles below the surface. ... It extends deep into the Earth's interior as the oceanic crust subducts, or slides, under adjoining plates of crust and sinks into the mantle, carrying water with it. "Oct 14, 2019 Smithsonian

"Carrying water with it" does not mean "it would not flow."

From Discover Magazine: " All that water below Earth’s surface isn’t just sitting still: It’s cycling, pulled along as tectonic plates move."

The Bible does not talk about the water "flowing" anyway. It says it "broke forth."

I believe in the Great Flood. If anyone wants more info on it I recommend Georgia Purdom's video Noah's Ark And The Flood. She is a well qualified scientist and presents hard core, observable, scientific data. If you don't believe her, if you maybe don't want to believe in the Bible, or anything I said, up to you.

All I have time for. Sorry.

 

[pitabread]

I believe in the Great Flood. If anyone wants more info on it I recommend Georgia Purdom's video Noah's Ark And The Flood. She is a well qualified scientist and presents hard core, observable, scientific data.

Dr. Purdom is a molecular geneticist. Why would you go to a molecular geneticist for questions regarding geology?

It's a little bit like going to your dentist for advice on your tax filings.

It's also worth noting that she works for Answers in Genesis and is therefore required to adhere to a faith statement that eschews legitimate scientific inquiry.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I was speaking of something that happened thousands of years ago. You assume that you know all about what geographical changes occured since then. This is the usual theories-are-as-good-as-actual-data approach. Got any actual scientific data to show what was going on then and since then?

"The finding, published in Science, suggests that a reservoir of water is hidden in the Earth's mantle, more than 400 miles below the surface. ... It extends deep into the Earth's interior as the oceanic crust subducts, or slides, under adjoining plates of crust and sinks into the mantle, carrying water with it. "Oct 14, 2019 Smithsonian

"Carrying water with it" does not mean "it would not flow."

From Discover Magazine: " All that water below Earth’s surface isn’t just sitting still: It’s cycling, pulled along as tectonic plates move."

The Bible does not talk about the water "flowing" anyway. It says it "broke forth."

I believe in the Great Flood. If anyone wants more info on it I recommend Georgia Purdom's video Noah's Ark And The Flood. She is a well qualified scientist and presents hard core, observable, scientific data. If you don't believe her, if you maybe don't want to believe in the Bible, or anything I said, up to you.

All I have time for. Sorry.

That is not liquid water. In fact it is incredibly dry. Try squeezing the water out of drywall and tell me how much luck that you have.

Do you know how we know that there was no flood as portrayed in Genesis?

 

[LoricaLady]

Dr. Purdom is a molecular geneticist. Why would you go to a molecular geneticist for questions regarding geology?

It's a little bit like going to your dentist for advice on your tax filings.

It's also worth noting that she works for Answers in Genesis and is therefore required to adhere to a faith statement that eschews legitimate scientific inquiry.

Why would I listen to you about anything, about details of so called evolution, about the Bible or about the Creator? Do you think I assume you are some well qualified expert in any of those areas?

The data is what counts. Georgia Purdom has access to it as we all do and because of her scientific background she is well able to articulate what the data shows. Again, you are not a scientist and yet you feel free to expound as if you know all about science. Try not to have double standards.

I really don't want to trade posts with you. As someone above said you seem to be big time trying to troll.

 

[pitabread]

Why would I listen to you about anything, about details of so called evolution, about the Bible or about the Creator?

I didn't ask you to listen to me about evolution, the Bible or the Creator.

The data is what counts. Georgia Purdom has access to it as we all do and because of her scientific background she is well able to articulate what the data shows. Again, you are not a scientist and yet you feel free to expound as if you know all about science. Try not to have double standards.

If I wanted to learn about topics related to geology, I would seek out the views of geologists.

I wouldn't go to a molecular geneticist bound by a faith statement requiring that they eschew scientific conclusions that contradict pre-determined religious beliefs as required by their employment by a religious ministry.

That would just be silly.

I really don't want to trade posts with you.

Then don't. I don't control what you do.

As someone above said you seem to be big time trying to troll.

Eh, I've been called worse. And I'll take being called a troll over threats of hellfire and eternal damnation.

 

[LoricaLady]

That is not liquid water. In fact it is incredibly dry. Try squeezing the water out of drywall and tell me how much luck that you have.

Do you know how we know that there was no flood as portrayed in Genesis?

I have researched many sources on this topic. They say things like "fresh water sea" below the oceans. No one says anything about dry water. Gee, dry water. Water that is not liquid. Hmmmm....That would be a first.

I have no time for such exchanges.

Sorry but I will respond to no more of your posts.

 

[LoricaLady]

P.S. I like to be very accurate in what I say, and to do my homework fully. So I stand at least partially corrected. Cosmetically in industry, at least, I see there is something called "dry water." That's cutsey, not accurate. Of course water by definition is never dry.

As for the sub ocean seas being made of "dry water" that is not what I am seeing. If I am wrong - oh well. Again, we don't know what was happening thousands of years ago. I know Who did though. I trust Him not the ever changing theories and opinions of those who like to attack the Bible.

 

[LoricaLady]

................

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have researched many sources on this topic. They say things like "fresh water sea" below the oceans. No one says anything about dry water. Gee, dry water. Water that is not liquid. Hmmmm....That would be a first.

I have no time for such exchanges.

Sorry but I will respond to no more of your posts.

That is a pity. You might have learned something. You misunderstood the articles that you read, or they were poorly written. And my drywall comparison was right on the mark. There is far more water in drywall than there is in the mantle rock that you read about. And I can prove that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

................

That is hilarious.

 

[Subduction Zone]

P.S. I like to be very accurate in what I say, and to do my homework fully. So I stand at least partially corrected. Cosmetically in industry, at least, I see there is something called "dry water." That's cutsey, not accurate. Of course water by definition is never dry.

As for the sub ocean seas being made of "dry water" that is not what I am seeing. If I am wrong - oh well. Again, we don't know what was happening thousands of years ago. I know Who did though. I trust Him not the ever changing theories and opinions of those who like to attack the Bible.

Let's discuss those articles that you clearly did not understand.