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.
Unless coal and oil were embedded into God's creation as "easter eggs," to be found at the appropriate time.The billions of tons of coal prove its rsre
Proof it didnt happen beats lack of evidenceI have no religious belief about Noah's flood, however, I do have knowledge of the absence of evidence for a worldwide flood.
So do I.I do have knowledge of the absence of evidence for a worldwide flood.
You want a "super good demo of scientific thinking"?Super good demo of scientific thinking, that is not.
I never said the evidence was dishonest.You can easily look up polystrate fossils but your beliefs in creationists' nonsense will prevent you from accepting that the evidence is honest.
I believe white cliffs and meandering rivers are evidence of the Flood.
White cliffs are evidence of the clean-up; and meandering rivers are evidence of the waters being evacuated off the earth.
The bible is not a science book therefore for science go with the evidence whether you are Christian, atheist or agnostic.You believe, other many other Christians believe differently. It mostly comes down to which denomination you were born and brought up in.
Psalm 104:7 At thy rebuke they fled; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away.
Psalm 104:8 They go up by the mountains; they go down by the valleys unto the place which thou hast founded for them.Here's my "failure to differentiate," as you call it:
1. Bible says x, Science says x = go with x
2. Bible says x, Science says y = go with x
3. Bible says x, Science says ø = go with x
4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
5. Bible says ø, Science says ø = free to speculate on your own
Prime Directive: Under no circumstances whatsoever is the Bible to be contradicted No comment.
Should Eve have said that to Adam, when she couldn't find a scar on his side, where she came from?Proof it didn't happen beats lack of evidence.
I am glad that you clarified that.I never said the evidence was dishonest.
In fact, I believe they're sincere.
But sincerely wrong.
The bible is not a science book therefore for science go with the evidence whether you are Christian, atheist or agnostic.
There are a couple of instances where I think scientists were deliberately wrong on purpose, but for the most part, I believe true scientists are a gift from God.I am glad that you clarified that.
The bible is not a science book therefore for science go with the evidence whether you are Christian, atheist or agnostic.
Going with the evidence for science is in reality the default.What?
Nup, don't buy any of it. I've been over this subject too many times.
Just one of a number of resources I refer to. CEH – Creation Evolution Headlines
Also........
The Elephant in the Living Room
Writer George V. Caylor interviewed Sam, a molecular biologist. George asked Sam about his work. Sam said he and his team were scientific detectives, working with DNA and tracking down the cause of disease. Here is their published conversation.
G: “Sounds like pretty complicated work.”
S: “You can’t imagine how complicated!”
G: “Try me.”
S: “I’m a bit like an editor, trying to find a spelling mistake inside a document larger than four complete sets of Encyclopedia Britannica. Seventy volumes, thousands and thousands of pages of small print words.”
G: “With the computer power, you can just use ‘spell check’!”
S: “There is no ‘spell check’ because we don’t know yet how
the words are supposed to be spelled. We don’t even know
for sure which language. And it’s not just the ‘spelling error’
we’re looking for. If any of the punctuation is out of place, or
a space out of place, or a grammatical error, we have a
mutation that will cause a disease.”
G: “So how do you do it?”
S: “We are learning as we go. We have already ‘read’ over two articles in that encyclopedia, and located some typos. It should get easier as time goes by.”
G: “How did all that information happen to get there?”
S: “Do you mean, did it just happen? Did it evolve?”
G: “Bingo. Do you believe that the information evolved?”
S: “George, nobody I know in my profession truly believes it evolved. It was engineered by ‘genius beyond genius,’ and such information could not have been written any other way. The paper and ink did not write the book. Knowing what we know, it is ridiculous to think otherwise. A bit like Neil Armstrong believing the moon is made of green cheese. He’s been there!”
G: “Have you ever stated that in a public lecture, or in any public writings?”
S: “No. It all just evolved.”
G: “What? You just told me —?”
S: “Just stop right there. To be a molecular biologist requires one to hold on to two insanities at all times. One, it would be insane to believe in evolution when you can see the truth for yourself. Two, it would be insane to say you don’t believe in evolution. All government work, research grants, papers, big college lectures—everything would stop. I’d be out of a job, or relegated to the outer fringes where I couldn’t earn a decent living.” [emphasis added]
G: “I hate to say it, Sam, but that sounds intellectually
dishonest.”
S: “The work I do in genetic research is honorable. We will find the cures to many of mankind’s worst diseases. But in the meantime, we have to live with the ‘elephant in the living room’.”
G: “What elephant?”
S: “Design. It’s like the elephant in the living room. It moves around, takes up an enormous amount of space, loudly trumpets, bumps into us, knocks things over, eats a ton of hay, and smells like an elephant. And yet we have to swear it isn’t there!”
Video unavailable - but I think it was the shuttle accident - an error of management after the engineers pleaded with them to postpone the launch - on scientific judgement of risk based on the available data.You want a "super good demo of scientific thinking"?
Here you go:
I said "scientific THINKING".So, bad management, good science.
The scientific thinking was spot on; the management thinking was a mess.I said "scientific THINKING".
Well, insane, probably not in most cases. I prefer the term deluded. Stupid? Ignorant more like it. When the evolution myth is promoted exclusively in all educational facilities and the Creation account dismissed as "religion", I expect little else. You think that the quoted interview is the only reason? There is vastly more.So you don't have evidence... you have an alleged interview with someone who says they are an expert who says they have evidence.
That's ridiculous.
The conversation is one giant "Evidence from flawed analogy".
It's not a response to a single bit of evidence, what it is, is one giant accusation that all evolutionary biologists are some combination of craven, stupid and insane.
That is you bearing false witness on your neighbours.
...and the Creation account dismissed as "religion"...
Truth is truth, no matter the source. The Bible is not a religious text. It is God's word. And God's word is Truth. It is not a scientific treatise but it does state categorically that God created all things.The one in the bible? Hmm. I think I would have used 'classified' as opposed to dismissed. And seeing as the account is from a religious text I think it's reasonable to class it as 'religion'. How would you class it?
I said "dismissed" because that's how many evolutionists treat people who do not agree with them. I was taught both creation and evolution high school science. In Australia, even Christian schools are forced to teach evolution as science and are not permitted to teach creation as an alternative. What are evolutionists afraid of? Truth? What does it matter?
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?