- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,205
- 52,658
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
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.
Some things are cute when you're a kid, but when you're an adult they're just tragic. Like believing in Santa Claus or the Easter bunny, at this point in your life they're not so funny anymore.
Kinda pathetic, withall and first to last.Some things are cute when you're a kid, but when you're an adult they're just tragic. Like believing in Santa Claus or the Easter bunny, at this point in your life they're not so funny anymore.
Some things are cute when you're a kid, but when you're an adult they're just tragic. Like believing in Santa Claus or the Easter bunny, at this point in your life they're not so funny anymore.
Kinda pathetic, withall and first to last.
A bad faith response .. as demonstrated by your attempted 'rebuttal' to evidence based inference with your mere gut-feel opinion:I don't have a purpose, SelfSim.
Then you call for a sc-fi fantasy (a time machine) as support for your faith in an equally unreliable retelling of some Sunday-school bible story.... In fact, I know it didn't make the dinosaurs go extinct, because Job mentions dinosaurs later on, as does Isaiah.
Then you call for a sc-fi fantasy ...
Science's purpose is not seeking 'the Truth'.Yes.
On behalf of scientists, who don't know the Truth.
Your post raises a couple of points.And yet there's the pollen from about six months later. Charred material says fire, but the pollen says there were plants around and conditions that allowed them to live. If it's pollen from grasses and maybe plants associated with wildfire recovery, that's not problematic since they tend to be quick growing and may reestablish in that length of time. But if it was from trees, that would mean there wasn't complete wildfires.,
Impact-generated Wildfires
Evidence of impact-generated fires was recovered from K-T boundary sediments before it was understood how the fires were produced. Several types of carbon (fusinite, soot, pyrolitic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, carbonized plant debris, and charcoal) indicated fire had swept over some continental regions. In addition to the soot, there is a biological signature that may reflect the recovery of plants in charred regions. In several locations in the western United States, ferns are the first plants to reappear after the impact, similar to their pioneering occurrence after forest fires today.
Science's purpose is not seeking 'the Truth'.
When did Steven Weinberg embrace God?What's this then?
Stephen Hawking was the most influential know-it-all. In his 1988 mega-bestseller A Brief History of Time, Hawking predicted that physicists would soon find an “ultimate theory” that would explain how our cosmos came into being. He compared this achievement to knowing “the mind of God.” This statement was ironic. Hawking, an atheist, wanted science to eliminate the need for a divine creator.
And these?
Theories of Everything, by John Barrow (1991)
The Mind of God, by Paul Davies (1992)
Dreams of a Final Theory, by Steven Weinberg
When did Steven Weinberg embrace God?
As usual you don't get it.Here's his quote:
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.
I pray he embraced God at one point in his life, because on 23 July 2021, he met Him.
As to the quote itself, what about a bad person that does good?
Can you complete this phrase?
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for bad people to do good - that takes [what]?
As usual you don't get it.
Isn't Weinberg in hell,
... after all you made the highly distasteful remark my sister will burn in hell for being an atheist.
Regardless of what they want, it'll be no better than the last best tested theory.What's this then?
Stephen Hawking was the most influential know-it-all. In his 1988 mega-bestseller A Brief History of Time, Hawking predicted that physicists would soon find an “ultimate theory” that would explain how our cosmos came into being. He compared this achievement to knowing “the mind of God.” This statement was ironic. Hawking, an atheist, wanted science to eliminate the need for a divine creator.
And these?
Theories of Everything, by John Barrow (1991)
The Mind of God, by Paul Davies (1992)
Dreams of a Final Theory, by Steven Weinberg
Weinberg is part of randomness.For the record though, Weinberg is where he is.
Yet more advocation for the state of perpetual (wilful) ignorance ..He may have prayerfully made a deathbed conversion, like Charles Darwin did.
See, whatever these people say (or said) is never regarded as scripture ..
Thank goodness.
No .. thank the scientific process.
On behalf of scientists, who don't know the Truth.
On behalf of scientists, who don't know the Truth.
What about scientists that don't capitalize "truth" except at the beginning of sentences?
I'd say they don't know the Truth.
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?