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.
....Wassat?? Your fishbowl analogy doesn't work? Science yields practical outcomes and useful results pretty much all the time?? I'm not sure I heard you right...
Well, point being we can look at all the evidence to see which "opinion" is closer to reality. That's entirely bad news for your presuppositional outlook, so I understand you not wanting to acknowledge we can go the extra steps. I have no doubt your protection mechanisms will kick in and start demanding that reality is somehow not real and all your presuppositional claims will be asserted as somehow true despite all the evidence to the contrary.
and Science disproves your fishbowl Creation presuppositions.
because I don't have it.
wishful thinking at its finest.
Science has nothing to do with any religions, except as much as those religions choose to let it affect them. To the extent they do, Science wins every time. This is a historical fact.
More wishful thinking. Any society that ditches Science, loses out to other civilizations that embrace it. This too, is a fact.
and as soon as you can demonstrate that, we can all be educated for the better, right? I've been waiting to "know" for as long as I've known of the claims that God(s) exist.
Derision and name calling just highlights your lack of substantial evidence against it.
less "found out" and more "asserted" I reckon. I have no doubt there's not an ounce of evidence to support your claim.
As soon as the evidence supports "sin" being a thing that matters in knowing things about reality. Unfortunately for you, there's no need of Science to address individuals' personal religious beliefs.
then support it with evidence. excuse me if I don't hold my breath.
Science is a method for finding out facts about reality and has a definition of what Science is in the same way that Stamp Collecting has a definition Stamp collecting - Wikipedia . You're free to do whatever you like (Scientists do non-science things and hold non-science beliefs all the time) but the definition of Science is what it is, just like you can practice Stamp Collecting (see how it isn't a religion either, btw?) while not doing stamp collecting things too. a "Scientific Journal" is reserved for the results of Scientific endeavour, not for whatever it is that you wish to arbitrarily label "Science". If that could happen, then the Sciences would delve into nonsense in quick order as anything and everything that falls outside the definition of what is Science gets thrust into Science as if it were. Imagine how Stamp Collecting would lose its meaning if you started labelling randomly diverse things such as Base jumping, slot car racing and Sci-fi CGI appreciation as "Stamp Collecting" - actual stamp collectors would literally have a fit with all that excitement thrust upon them.
Odd, given anything that anyone allegedly is scurrying around "frantically trying to cover up the non stop flow of mistakes and false predictions etc." was discovered by other scientists practicing Science, yet we (and yes, even You) embrace the vast majority of the practical benefits of Science and Technology in our everyday lives all the time without complaint. That one thing is found to be incorrect doesn't invalidate the other 999 things we've discovered to be accurate. I know you have to try to paint a picture of the facts that see your position in a better light, but it's a very big canvas that you'll never succeed in hiding, not even from yourself.
What, Education?? That's a nice hat for "Education", but not necessary to practice science - even Theology education graduates wear that hat, not sure if education is your nemesis of course... (I do understand that some religions denounce higher education, and this is sad, and also one of the reasons why I do this)
In this case the poor educated fish thought it was tossing a pebble to the stars. Try to know your limits. Ha.
To be clear, the furthest probes of man in space are less than one little teensy weensy light day away! Ha.
Yet you can't look at the state of earth in the past..the nature. Nor can you look at what time is like in far space. The question seems to be what can you do??
Lurkers, one trait of the religion of science is that it's devotees and disciples do not admit it is a religion.
God's true science will be here. Relax.
Keep knocking.
What, you thought it was man's pureness?
No ability actually, since the religion of science is totally insane and inbred and inward looking.
Cultishly inward. They compare themselves with themselves for themselves.
If stamp collecting claimed that there was no truth in Genesis, well, we might care. We then might take the little time needed to blow them out of the water also.
As much as you would like to Chicken Little us, with claims the sky would fall if we rejected your religion, I have to intercede with reality here. NO benefit we enjoy of any kind whatsoever has anything at all to do with your fables and religion.
Origins science is a non science thing!!!
NONE of which has anything at all to do with your origin fables falsely labeled science.
Really?
Well, name a science book on origins you studied? The writer probably had one.
Wherever anything is from...you see it HERE! You have never been out of the fishbowl to check things out. Less than a measly light day away!!!
Well, a whole lot more than you, it seems, because I have no problem looking at the evidence and it shows your beliefs to be flawed.... to put it nicely...
lol!
I'm sorry, that's not fooling anyone...History is ripe with it. The collapse of Islam in the 12th to 13th century is a clear case in support of it
lol!
non-sequitur?
lol!
lol!
lol!
non-sequitur?
Well, to be clear, Science didn't say that either. Science has found out verifiable things about our universe but your interpretation of your religious text is causing you problems - keep in mind there are more Christians than not who don't have a problem with these Scientific realities.
no, I agree it has to do with Science, not religion. I don't have any religion.
lol!
Science covers reality, not Creation/creationism.
lol!
Seriously, are you not educated? You might as well claim Scientists are Alive! After all, the science you don't like comes from Scientists that are Alive! Just like those Theologians with an education are alive too.
You say that like being educated is a bad thing. Is being alive a bad thing too? However you want to misrepresent it, the fact is, Science is not a religion.
and this statement demonstrates a fundamental failure in understanding how physics works. If it were any different anywhere else in the universe, it would be plainly obvious to us here. Instead, we can make accurate readings of various aspects of the cosmos that we can cross reference to verify expected results. This is how we know the universe is expanding and why we can calculate size, distance and composition of stars.
That is your religion, to color evidences, and the result is a skewed view.
Not my religion or issue. However, last time I checked it seems to be less than collapsed.
One could sit in a box with little holes in it and have little colored lenses covering those holes, and look at stars I suppose, and think they had the universe mapped out. Science has never been out of the box! It also uses belief based filters to interpret all light and info from outside the box. Pitiful.
Your denial doesn't change anything. I also find religions that admit they are such to be more honest than the cultish ones that wear some other phony face.
Science specializes in denying creation via it's own belief system. They also seem to think that trying to use the word reality falsely is of some benefit to their dark fable production system.
That mantra that you repeated several times in this post alone is actually a marker that you are of that religion. Denial is part of it.
lol!Rome collapsed too, several times in fact. Have you been there lately?
One could, but it doesn't mean one did. More wishful thinking...
Projection at its finest.
Science does no such thing. Scientists make up the widest array of beliefs, religions and worldviews, all coming to a consensus on reality. I understand it can be a scary thought for someone invested in a belief that is disconnected from reality and trivially demonstrated to be incorrect.
The exact same scientific method that led to those better bridges, planes and phones for you, also gives us the age of earth and the universe as well as evolution and our common ancestry with all living things on this planet. Reality is a funny thing, it doesn't just cease to exist if you don't like it.
Well, best you hand in your better bridges, planes and phones on your way out, and go live a survivalists life in the scrub somewhere. The Science that gives us all of these things, is pervasive in every aspect of our lives - from the food you eat to the medical breakthroughs, longer lives, our knowledge of the universe and our place in it, etc. In fact, the very physics that tells us our universe and earth is in the order of billions of years old, is how we have computers and phones - wow!
that's gotta be some weapons grade compartmentalisation right there! If it wasn't the case, then we wouldn't be communicating on this forum right now... how does that even work in your head?? lol!...and yet, he continues...
So...what was the point again?
Rome collapsed too, several times in fact. Have you been there lately?
None of them can incorporate their views into science, they must play by the rules.
Evos really should be fined for even using the word reality.
False. Origins stories and applying earth physics to the far past have zero to do with anything real in this world or anywhere else.
Not even remotely related actually. No plane flies on evo juice.
I do. It is a danger to life on earth, and also has some merits that serve mankind. It has no value in the creation debate, but has been shown to be pure religion.
Well, it seems to me you disagreed that by not staying up to speed on scientific progress and research, you'd be opening yourself up to falling behind and becoming overrun by other more powerful and technologically savvy civilisations. I noted that history is ripe with such instances. That they recover and carry on doesn't change the fact.
Well, of Course. If I come along to your church, am I good to incorporate my scientific views into your religious rituals? Would I still be practicing your religion if I'm praising the research progress and increased knowledge thanks to scientists? Am I good to preach the latest scientific findings to the congregation so they might join me in thanking the universities and research projects that enable this furthering of knowledge and technical progress?
Many cultures have their own holy texts, not your scripture... They all have their own versions of the supernatural that isn't concordant to yours.
lol! so your argument is: "I don't like it."?and you're wrong. See, that was easy... Perhaps try providing some evidence on why all the evidence we already have is wrong, then we can revisit.
Agreed, though the physics that enables solid state electronics to work is literally the same physics that tells us we can see far away things in the universe and that they are billions of light years away and have been around for billions of years. so either your electronics don't work and we're not talking over a world-wide interconnected network made up of electronic devices, or the universe is billions of years old and life evolved here over ~3.8billion years too.
lol!As soon as I have evidence to support your claims, I just might. Your beliefs don't seem to explain all the evidence that contradicts your religious interpretations, let alone the complete lack of evidence for it in the first place. I don't have a religion, but Science (still not being a belief system let alone a religion) doesn't have to explain God or Scripture or creation, or anything that doesn't manifest here in reality, because it isn't a religion or world view, so you can have your theology and Science too. I have my world view and I can accept the findings of Science no problem - I don't subscribe to a system of belief that requires me to shutter out anything in reality I don't like. Many others with and without theologies (including other Christians) are the same and can accept the findings of our scientific endeavour just as easy as I can, some theologians here on this forum even work in scientific research.
Oh? Germany seems to have been gung ho on education in the ww2 era. Greece was quite intellectually oriented I think. Britain was not exactly a slouch on learning when the sun never set on her empire...etc.
I don't recall Jesus asking us to be all up on the fables of man.
So? At Babel, there were many of these or the beginnings of these religions. That does not save man. Nor does his own wisdom (with some demonic aid) of science.
If they start by admitting they have no clue what they are talking about we could talk.
Nothing you offered deals with either nature on earth in the distant past, nor the nature of time in the far universe. Revisit your claim you offered something.
Not at all. You simply run it all through the lenses of earth physics. The billions of years claim requires time to exist out there as it does here exactly. You have no clue that is the case. None. Your billions of years chants are empty of value, and meaning. Nothing more than a religious mantra and statement of belief.
No connection between your dream time and electronics. Sorry.
We could call it the fishbowl method! It works fine IN THE FISHBOWL!
No evidence contradicts my beliefs at all. Not a sliver or scintilla.
There goes that inevitable mantra again...it betrays your religion! I mean I can see you guys coming like glow in the dark dolls. What is funny is that you think you are incognito! Ha.
It can't begin to, so don't make it sound like it just can't be bothered!!
Science devotees really should be fined for even using that word reality. Science invented it's own fables and fantasies and called them reality. We need a new word.
Hmm, modern birds can we say, not a transition at all????
Modern fowl don't have teeth.Hmm, modern birds can we say, not a transition at all????
That it has teeth is not surprising or novel at all.... Just a feature of the avian lineage.... especially sea and water fowl.
