Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Ow my....
Amazing to see that people still say such things.
I haven't had time to read the whole thread but can anyone direct me to the post where some original creation research was presented?
No matter, I find that science is out to prove itself rather than look for the real truth. This all started when mankind wrote in stone their idea of truth. Now, anything that contradicts it is ridiculed and anything at all that can be bent to prove the hoax of evolution is held at the top of the list and shouted from the rooftops as solid truth.
Peer review has lost it's punch, lost it's validity, lost it's integrity.
You actually think it is an assumption. It isn't. We can observe the universe expanding. It is a scientific conclusion backed by evidence, not an assumption.
Talk about a complete lack of reasoning, your posts are perfect examples. You don't even understand what an assumption is.
Well, you are talking about someone who thinks that, "open your eyes and look around you" is original research.
Seriously? It was first observed by Hubble in the 1920s. It's measurable. Are you saying the universe is stagnant, not expanding?You have GOT to be kidding me, of course it's ( an expanding universe) assumption.
Seriously? It was first observed by Hubble in the 1920s. It's measurable. Are you saying the universe is stagnant, not expanding?
In other words you deny the big bang. I guess the entire astronomical community are just a bunch of blithering idiots then.Not at all, I'm saying it's assumption that because it's expanding now doesn't equate to it all started with expansion as was claimed.
Mainly lost souls in search of the Truth.I guess the entire astronomical community are just a bunch of blithering idiots then.
You have GOT to be kidding me, of course it's assumption.
. . . ..
You actually think it is an assumption.
.......this person actually thinks assuming something expanded somewhere as a beginning to it all rates as a scientific theory. I stick with my guns on my definition of theory and it's usage here.
You have GOT to be kidding me, of course it's assumption.
Psalm 104:2 Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain:The universe is factually, demonstrably, verifiably, observably expanding.
Psalm 104:2 Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain:
Confirmed (not discovered ... confirmed) by the Hubble telescope.
Thats probably because the word EXPAND is confusing you.The expanding universe looks nothing like a "curtain", not even in a far reaching analogy.
I agree, however, a bunch of people backing a myth is no way to do science. Science chases the truth. It does not try to support a preconceived theory and reject anything that doesn't fit the predetermined idea.But there is so much nonsense out there that would utterly clog the journals if it were simply printed whenever submitted. Somebody, somewhere, has to weed out the clear nonsense, there's no choice, there is so much of it.
I agree, however, a bunch of people backing a myth is no way to do science. Science chases the truth. It does not try to support a preconceived theory and reject anything that doesn't fit the predetermined idea.
Not at all, I'm saying it's assumption that because it's expanding now doesn't equate to it all started with expansion as was claimed.
Actually, it's not funny. It's quite sad. Peer review is losing it's "validity". So is science.
Science used to look at all the data, all the observations were considered as the scientist searched for the truth. Peer review was in place so that a new discovery could be seen by all and thus "reviewed" to see if it correlated with the findings of other scientists and their observations. Everything was heading for the big picture, the real truth of this world. Everyone was open to new ideas and you could get quite a name if you found something new.
The thing is, we have now got a solid fact based truth of how the world got to where it is. It's age and how the creatures and humans ended up here. This "fact" that is taught everywhere is "evolution". Somewhere it went from a theory taught along side creation, to being the one and only possibility for everything we see when we get up in the morning or stare at a starry sky...The elusive "truth" was found.
PROBLEM.... now, if you are a scientist and your are gathering information and tabulating data... it becomes quite a problem if you discover something that is going to be difficult to fit in the "truth" that academia is teaching and drumming into everyone's head. You discover something.... it just won't fit the model. But, you retest and find it to be true. Do you dare present this new observation? Hardly... you will be scoffed at, ridiculed, funding will be stopped, careers ruined.. credibility...lost. Any paper will be ripped to shreds by the hive mind.
So, you have a choice. Cover it up, lose it, distort it so that it fits. Skew the results or forget it all together.
Now, on the other hand, a paper of vague credibility that fits the present day model, will be welcomed with open arms and you will be patted on the back for such a superb job. If your work is close but not a perfect fit, someone else out there will be happy to show you the way to mold it into the model.
What I am saying is that scientist today are looking, more, for proof of the existing dogma instead of looking at the observations and letting the truth unfold. The are out to prove a concept at whatever cost.
Why have we veered from this foundational necessity of science? Pour water on the ground and see where it flows... but oh no.......... that's not where the water should have went, according to the past predictions. So, you carve up the land, digging here, mounding there and in the end the water flows just where it was predicted to flow........ Not the true path but that's not what matters.
Science is no longer a quest for truth. It is a bunch of egg heads picking up the pieces they want and leaving behind anything that could cause difficulty in putting the truth together.
Peer review becomes "pal" review. A bunch of good 'ol boys patting each other on the back, keeping the funding and gravy train rolling, maintaining their "good" names and fancy labs. Keeping their supporters and investors happy while the truth, well the truth is not important.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?