...Do you even believe in Evolution in the first palce?

[Mr Clean]

So, how many scientific laboratory experiments have you conducted in your life? Or, do you just take scientists at their face-value? The latter is the most dangerous; if you cannot reproduce the same experiments as the scientist telling you what truth is, then you are as handicap as the layman. You are held hostage at the scientists of choice.

Held hostage....you like conspiracy theories, don't you. All the scientists in the world aren't in it for the gaining of knowledge and the understanding of the world around us, right? No...they actually spend all that time in white lab coats so that they can discredit god instead...

Give me a break.

For what it is worth, I am a civil engineer by degree and trade, professionally licensed in the states of MO and IL. I've conducted various experiments in various classes throughout my life, as well as participated in research projects in my career. I am an avid "rock hound" and geology buff, and read a lot of science news and articles.

I have not tried repeating every single scientific claim known to man. But then I'm sure there aren't any creationists on this website that know Hebrew and have translated scripture for themselves and dug up archeological information in the Middle East, either.

Ever drive over a bridge? Start, drive, and brake a car? Use a computer or the internet? Drink water from the tap in your house? Take aspirin? Use a light switch? Fly? I bet you didn't verify any of the science in those applications before participating in them. You probably didn't even think about it, subconsciously trusting that it would work. You are more of a naturalist than you realize...

Society tends to stand on the shoulders of those before us, using their knowledge as a base to gather more knowledge. That doesn't invalidate their work. The fact that any scientific experiment CAN be done by you or me to verify it as true is good enough for most people, just as I trust that the scholars that translated ancient writings into modern languages did a pretty good job.

So unless you really want to go THERE, let's find a more suitable avenue to discuss the particulars of this thread....

 

[bhsmte]

No, I am not a "medical professional." But I do know how to test my own blood, and actually run it through a machine myself. Being a physicist affords you incredible opportunities.

Cool!

I'm not sure I would trust the science behind the machine that is giving you the results though.

You must have to wear a lot of different hats if you need to verify (on your own) all of the information we glean from a scientific mean in this world.

 

[Mr Clean]

Of course ... the order in which it occurred; such as whales before land animals.

Whales before land animals. That's funny....

 

[Mr Clean]

Maybe he's thinking of the Mormons who think the garden of Eden is in Jefferson, MO.

Jefferson County, MO or Jefferson City, MO? I've been to both, and I wouldn't call either one Eden personally...

 

[Lollerskates]

Cool!

I'm not sure I would trust the science behind the machine that is giving you the results though.

You must have to wear a lot of different hats if you need to verify (on your own) all of the information we glean from a scientific mean in this world.

"We glean from a scientific mean in this world." And physicist dont?

Yet, I would expect this response from you. You have no idea the overlap biology/chemistry/physics forge. Otherwise, your naive statement would not have been borne.

If you were a scientist, I suspect you would realize chemistry, physics and biology overlap on several topics. The three disciplines are capable of verifying results of their discoveries. Hats? I have a physicist hat. But, perhaps you are on to something. A physicsit must have a Computer science hat, physical chemistry hat, physics hat, and biophysicist hat.

As the saying goes: biologists answer to chemists, chemists answer to physicists , physicists answer to mathematicians, and mathematicians answer to God. If you are interested in what you think is true, then have fun. I know what I can prove. I am not a layperson that is at the whim of science. I have my own knowledge.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'd love the chance to point out the multiple errors in a literal Gen 1 if you would like to go through it sometime...

Been there / done that ... thanks to Frumious Bandersnatch: 2

I appreciate the offer, though ...
`

 

[AV1611VET]

Right after their grammar lesson where they learn the definition of the word "verifiable"...

You think miracles should be verifiable 2500 years after the fact?

 

[pjnlsn]

You think miracles should be verifiable 2500 years after the fact?

You think it not being verifiable makes it true or likely?

Ultimately, as I've said before, the existence of any deity is unlikely and unproven.

 

[AV1611VET]

Whales before land animals. That's funny....

Wait until you see these:

Angiosperms before the sun, and angiosperms before insects!

How are those for funny?

 

[AV1611VET]

Ultimately, as I've said before, the existence of any deity is unlikely and unproven.

I've heard that about eighteen times now.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Wait until you see this one:

Angiosperms before the sun, and angiosperms before insects!

How are those for funny!?

More sad than funny really.

 

[AV1611VET]

More sad than funny really.

Either way ... it took a miracle.

 

[CabVet]

You think miracles should be verifiable 2500 years after the fact?

You think miracles that happened 5 minutes ago are verifiable?

 

[bhsmte]

"We glean from a scientific mean in this world." And physicist dont?

Yet, I would expect this response from you. You have no idea the overlap biology/chemistry/physics forge. Otherwise, your naive statement would not have been borne.

If you were a scientist, I suspect you would realize chemistry, physics and biology overlap on several topics. The three disciplines are capable of verifying results of their discoveries. Hats? I have a physicist hat. But, perhaps you are on to something. A physicsit must have a Computer science hat, physical chemistry hat, physics hat, and biophysicist hat.

As the saying goes: biologists answer to chemists, chemists answer to physicists , physicists answer to mathematicians, and mathematicians answer to God. If you are interested in what you think is true, then have fun. I know what I can prove. I am not a layperson that is at the whim of science. I have my own knowledge.

Wow, quite a rant from someone who claimed someone else shouldn't trust scientific findings because they didn't participate in the experiments. Did I touch a nerve? As I stated, if you trust nothing of science that you can't independently verify with first hand knowledge, you must be a busy man.

And, I have an advanced degree in physiology, so I do know a little bit about how the different areas of science interact, but am certainly no expert in many of them. But, I do enough to state you don't toss out every scientific advancement because you didn't independently verify the results.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Either way ... it took a miracle.

No, it just takes credulousness.

 

[AV1611VET]

You think miracles that happened 5 minutes ago are verifiable?

Oh, but it's good enough to ask for an ...

Example?

... isn't it?

 

[AV1611VET]

No, it just takes credulousness.

Try "omnipotence," chief.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Try omnipotence, chief.

I'd rather not, it's bad for the ego. Leads to all sorts of appalling behaviour, as demonstrated by the lead character in the Bible.

 

[BarryDesborough]

NO. I think miracles neednt be verified. If a miracle happened to you,you should tell it to others. You shouldnt verify it even when others don't believe it.

Then nobody is obliged to agree with you that you are recounting a genuine miracle.

 

[BarryDesborough]

There are always some believe it and some don't believe it . But those who believe it shall be saved.

So you believe.

There's little point discussing it, though, is there? Shall we discuss evolution instead?