Extinctions not asteroid after all, and dino protein real after all...

dad · Aug 4, 2009

uke2se said:
Ok. Science is based on natural laws working the same way all the way back to the Big Bang. It makes predictions based on these laws.

The predictions work.

Thank you for freely admitting that.

The predictions actually do not work. Only in the present. Humble down. Did anyone predict the rings of SN1987a? Or that it was from (supposedly) the sort of stars exploding that they now claim? No. They simply ran computer models (natural only based) to cook up the blue giants, or whatever!
Their predictions work on what makes a better toilet tissue. Whoopee doo.

uke2se · Aug 4, 2009

dad said:
Thank you for freely admitting that.

The predictions actually do not work. Only in the present. Humble down. Did anyone predict the rings of SN1987a? Or that it was from (supposedly) the sort of stars exploding that they now claim? No. They simply ran computer models (natural only based) to cook up the blue giants, or whatever!
Their predictions work on what makes a better toilet tissue. Whoopee doo.

What are you talking about? Are you claiming science can't make predictions? What predictions can your "ideas"* make?

*Note: I use the term "idea" in the loosest possible way.

dad · Aug 4, 2009

uke2se said:
What are you talking about? Are you claiming science can't make predictions? What predictions can your "ideas"* make?

The bible is the bible, as far as predictions go. It wrote the book on it.

The predictions of science are overrated, in box, sort of things.

*Note: I use the term "idea" in the loosest possible way.

Yes, the claims of so called science are loose.

godsmission · Aug 4, 2009

uke2se said:
What predictions can your "ideas"* make?

Dads "ideas" can predict anything he might want or need them to predict, it's one of the perks of his religion, like the different state pasts he creates, it's virtually a 'DIY' make it up as you go along religion, the best kind if you ask me because it gives him everything he will ever need and as he makes it up, who can argue with him?

uke2se · Aug 4, 2009

dad said:
The bible is the bible, as far as predictions go. It wrote the book on it.

And biblical predictions have shown to be unfullfilled time and time again. Do you want a list of a multitude of the biblical predictions that never were fullfilled, or that were just constructed after the fact?

dad said:
The predictions of science are overrated, in box, sort of things.

No, scientific predictions is what built our society. If it weren't for science being able to make predicitions that turned out to be true, you wouldn't be able to respond to this message, nor read it, as there would be no computers. You wouldn't live in a heated house, eating processed food and enjoying an easy life. If we had listened to people like you instead of scientists making predictions based on empirical evidence, we would still be living in mud-huts.

Basically, the evidence of science making working predictions is all around you. You are just ideologically blind to it, as it doesn't fit your preconcieved dogma. Open your eyes, man, and look at the beauty in the universe, so much larger than your tiny God. We live in remarkable times, were we for the first time ever have the technology required to let us look back at the dawn of time, and see the vastness of the universe that we are such a miniscule part of.

dad said:
Yes, the claims of so called science are loose.

I'm sorry, but that wasn't very clever.

uke2se · Aug 4, 2009

godsmission said:
Dads "ideas" can predict anything he might want or need them to predict, it's one of the perks of his religion, like the different state pasts he creates, it's virtually a 'DIY' make it up as you go along religion, the best kind if you ask me because it gives him everything he will ever need.

It's still a severe form of self-delusion that needs to be stomped out, if only for his own sake.

dad · Aug 4, 2009

godsmission said:
Dads "ideas" can predict anything he might want or need them to predict, it's one of the perks of his religion, like the different state pasts he creates, it's virtually a 'DIY' make it up as you go along religion, the best kind if you ask me because it gives him everything he will ever need and as he makes it up, who can argue with him?

'If God be for us, who can be against us' ? Certainly not science, little runt that it is. I do not invent bible predictions, or accounts of what will happen or did happen!

dad · Aug 4, 2009

uke2se said:
And biblical predictions have shown to be unfullfilled time and time again. Do you want a list of a multitude of the biblical predictions that never were fullfilled, or that were just constructed after the fact?

False. 100% accurate!

No, scientific predictions is what built our society. If it weren't for science being able to make predicitions that turned out to be true, you wouldn't be able to respond to this message, nor read it, as there would be no computers. You wouldn't live in a heated house, eating processed food and enjoying an easy life. If we had listened to people like you instead of scientists making predictions based on empirical evidence, we would still be living in mud-huts.

False. Process cheese does not prove a same state past, that ALL predictions of science, so called, is based upon! My computer was not in Eden, nor will it be in heaven. In box, short term predictions are not an issue here.

Basically, the evidence of science making working predictions is all around you. You are just ideologically blind to it, as it doesn't fit your preconcieved dogma. Open your eyes, man, and look at the beauty in the universe, so much larger than your tiny God. We live in remarkable times, were we for the first time ever have the technology required to let us look back at the dawn of time, and see the vastness of the universe that we are such a miniscule part of.

Preposterous indeed is the mistaken notion that the temporal state bound physical only science predictions ammount to even the dust on the scales, in the creation debate.

I'm sorry, but that wasn't very clever.

I forgive you, and agree.

godsmission · Aug 4, 2009

uke2se said:
It's still a severe form of self-delusion that needs to be stomped out, if only for his own sake.

I completely agree but unfortunately not everyone is able to live with the fact that this life is all there is,
some people need to manufacture all kinds of scenarios to cope with the inevitability of death and oblivion.

That's why all religions tick all of the boxes for all of the believers, and if anyone should be dissatisfied,
they need only think up a new one and that one will tick all of the boxes.

And apparently it's not called self-delusion any more it's now just called religion.

uke2se · Aug 4, 2009

dad said:
False. 100% accurate!

No, I'm right, and I can prove it: Here's a pretty good list.

This document is also interesting.

dad said:
False. Process cheese does not prove a same state past, that ALL predictions of science, so called, is based upon! My computer was not in Eden, nor will it be in heaven. In box, short term predictions are not an issue here.

All of science is interlinked. All modern applications are based on the same "assumptions", and those are, that the world and universe exist, and that natural laws govern them, and have done so since the beginning of time. If the "assumptions" are wrong, so are the practical applications. As we know the practical applications work, the assumptions are right.

dad said:
Preposterous indeed is the mistaken notion that the temporal state bound physical only science predictions ammount to even the dust on the scales, in the creation debate.

No, your ideas are what are preposterous. They are so rediculous that I doubt anyone would ever take any of it seriously, but for your own sake, I hope you really grow out of this. You can get help for it, as I am pretty sure that your condition is medical.

uke2se · Aug 4, 2009

godsmission said:
I completely agree but unfortunately not everyone is able to live with the fact that this life is all there is,
some people need to manufacture all kinds of scenarios to cope with the inevitability of death and oblivion.

That's why all religions tick all of the boxes for all of the believers, and if anyone should be dissatisfied,
they need only think up a new one and that one will tick all of the boxes.

And apparently it's not called self-delusion any more it's now just called religion.

I have doubts that what dad is suggesting can be called a religion. It's the ramblings of a mad-man, and nothing more. If anyone else was duped into believing it, it might be called a cult, but I think calling it a religion is doing a serious disservice to other religions.

AV1611VET · Aug 4, 2009

dad said:
I say birds evolved into dinos.

Dad, I think this is an excellent point.

Genesis 1:21 said:
And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

Since the Bible mentions birds before It does dinosaurs, it could very well be true.

I was under the impression that dinosaurs came from dragons.

I wouldn't use the term "evolved from" myself, as I'm more of a modified punctuated equilibrium kind of guy.

It could be that the sauropods came from the dragons, and the smaller dinosaurs came from the larger birds (like the Thunderbird?).

It could be that at one time, a dragon laid, say, four eggs; and one hatched a T. Rex, another a Brontosaur, another a Triceratops, and another an Allosaur --- who knows?

In any event, check your reps.

Sophophile · Aug 4, 2009

AV1611VET said:
Dad, I think this is an excellent point.Since the Bible mentions birds before It does dinosaurs, it could very well be true.

Originally Posted by Genesis 1:21

And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

<musing aloud>

I always thought, when I was young and read the Bible through several times, that the phrase "after their kind" was a poetic way of saying "all kinds of ...", and the concept of fixity of kinds never occurred to me.

It was only later, as a teenager and Christian, that I encountered the concept of fixity of kinds from other teenage Christians. They also espoused the concept of "dinosaur bones were buried by God and/or Satan to test our faith." This "check your brains at the door" mentality is what turned me away from the faith before I turned 17.

I had seen dinosaur bones at the museum and handled trilobite fossils with my own hands. Why would anyone argue I should disregard real-world evidence I can see and touch, in favour of merely words and ideas. It is like a blind man lecturing me that the sun doesn't exist -- not very persuasive. As an apologetic or evangelistic effort, it is terrible.

</musing aloud>

S.

Freodin · Aug 4, 2009

AV1611VET said:
Dad, I think this is an excellent point.Since the Bible mentions birds before It does dinosaurs, it could very well be true.

I was under the impression that dinosaurs came from dragons.

I wouldn't use the term "evolved from" myself, as I'm more of a modified punctuated equilibrium kind of guy.

It could be that the sauropods came from the dragons, and the smaller dinosaurs came from the larger birds (like the Thunderbird?).

It could be that at one time, a dragon laid, say, four eggs; and one hatched a T. Rex, another a Brontosaur, another a Triceratops, and another an Allosaur --- who knows?

In any event, check your reps.

Of course, cats do never ever give birth to dogs... but Brontosaurs and T.Rex were siblings.

Everything but "evolution". Oh, no, never use the bad bad word "evolution".

AV1611VET · Aug 4, 2009

Sophophile said:
I always thought, when I was young and read the Bible through several times, that the phrase "after their kind" was a poetic way of saying "all kinds of ...", and the concept of fixity of kinds never occurred to me.

I define 'kinds' as 'incipients'.

Sophophile said:
It was only later, as a teenager and Christian, that I encountered the concept of fixity of kinds from other teenage Christians. They also espoused the concept of "dinosaur bones were buried by God and/or Satan to test our faith."

Is that all the higher you went as far as 'studying to shew thyself approved unto God?'

Sophophile said:
This "check your brains at the door" mentality is what turned me away from the faith before I turned 17.

Aren't you glad God doesn't have that attitude with us?

Sophophile said:
I had seen dinosaur bones at the museum and handled trilobite fossils with my own hands. Why would anyone argue I should disregard real-world evidence I can see and touch, in favour of merely words and ideas.

Which came first? Those "words and ideas", or the dinosaur bones and trilobite fossils?

Sophophile said:
It is like a blind man lecturing me that the sun doesn't exist -- not very persuasive. As an apologetic or evangelistic effort, it is terrible.

'Blind' and 'not all-seeing' go hand-in-hand against omniscience.

We're all blind, by comparison --- 1.

AV1611VET · Aug 4, 2009

Freodin said:
Everything but "evolution".

Or maybe modified punctuated equilibrium.

uke2se · Aug 4, 2009

AV1611VET said:
In any event, check your reps.

AV, I know you are a somewhat intelligent guy. You are in a tough spot where you have built your life up according to the rigid interpretation of an ancient book, but you do the best you can to go by, justifying the discrepansies and have some fun bantering with us god-less folk. However, I think you are in grave error encouraging dad. I think he's actually ill, and we should not encourage his behaviour.

I say this in all seriousness, and not as a cheap-shot at dad. The guy needs help, and we could spend our time here providing that help.

Hespera · Aug 4, 2009

uke2se said:
AV, I know you are a somewhat intelligent guy. You are in a tough spot where you have built your life up according to the rigid interpretation of an ancient book, but you do the best you can to go by, justifying the discrepansies and have some fun bantering with us god-less folk. However, I think you are in grave error encouraging dad. I think he's actually ill, and we should not encourage his behaviour.

I say this in all seriousness, and not as a cheap-shot at dad. The guy needs help, and we could spend our time here providing that help.

So who are the ones encouraging here? The ones who agree or those who keep someone talking?

uke2se · Aug 4, 2009

Hespera said:
So who are the ones encouraging here? The ones who agree or those who keep someone talking?

I know. I'm not going to adress dad again unless he asks for help.

BananaSlug · Aug 4, 2009

uke2se said:
I know. I'm not going to adress dad again unless he asks for help.

I for once would love to see dad provide evidence for his "different state past". So far our "same state" predictions have worked time and time again. In all of the posts I've read since I've been here I have never once witnessed dad provide evidence to back up his claims. His only defense of his idea is to question science and claim we "do not know".
And then he seems to not want to defend his claims in a formal debate... like he's scared or something.

Extinctions not asteroid after all, and dino protein real after all...

Undefeated!

Active Member

Undefeated!

godsmission

Guest

Active Member

Active Member

Undefeated!

Undefeated!

godsmission

Guest

Active Member

Active Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Newbie

Devout believer in a theologically different God

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Active Member

Junior Member

Active Member

Life is an experiment, experience it!

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency