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.
but non living things can also do things that living things cant do. so by this logic we can say that non living things can evolve and living things cant. see? it work for both directions.But you have already agreed that life can do some things that non-living mechanical things cannot do. Since life can do some things non-living machines cannot do, why can it not be that "evolve" is one of those things?
That is not how logic works.but non living things can also do things that living things cant do. so by this logic we can say that non living things can evolve and living things cant. see? it work for both directions.
uh, and I have also offered reasons for believing the laws of nature were constant.
Do you have any reason at all for believing they changed?
False. False. False. You do not know how many years are involved for any star in the sky. Not only that, but the light and info from all stars is only seen HERE!!!!We know the laws of physics were the same years ago, because the incoming starlight looks exactly like it would look like if the laws were the same when it left the distant stars. How do you explain that?
You are using a TIME measure. 8 months. Not only that, but you are talking about an area where we do not even know that time as we know it exists at all. What 'unfolds' in our time as 8 months, may be extremely different out there in unknown time and space.We know the stars are distant for many reasons. For example take supernova sn1987A. A star exploded in a supernova. The light reached a cloud ring around the star 8 months later and lit up the cloud. On earth we saw the supernova, and then saw the ring around it light up 8 months later. That tells us the ring was 8 light months in radius. Knowing the actual size of the ring, and the apparent size from earth, simple trig tells us it was 169,000 light years away. How do you explain it?
Do you at least accept that the appearances and measurements are all consistent with the laws of physics being the same thoughout the universe?You can't see time. We experience time, and do so only on and near earth and our solar system area. That is the only time we know. You look at light coming in HERE, to our rules and time zone, and you assume that light from some unknown time and space operated always in this time?!
We could get a little more complicated, but I try to avoid that where possible.
The fine structure we see in atoms (from anywhere) is also only seen here. It doesn't matter where the atoms are from, they are only seen here.
False. False. False. You do not know how many years are involved for any star in the sky. Not only that, but the light and info from all stars is only seen HERE!!!!
You are using a TIME measure. 8 months. Not only that, but you are talking about an area where we do not even know that time as we know it exists at all. What 'unfolds' in our time as 8 months, may be extremely different out there in unknown time and space.
Einstein merely started off with the belief and assumption that time and laws and light speed were the same everywhere. Then he did math accordingly. That might be better called special fishbowl relativity.
Do you at least accept that the appearances and measurements are all consistent with the laws of physics being the same thoughout the universe?
Really?but non living things can also do things that living things cant do. so by this logic we can say that non living things can evolve and living things cant.
Okay, I think that clears up the standard you expect scientists to live up to to explain anything:I wouldn't know. I would be surprised if that was not the case though. What causes spin (nuclear)? What causes the strong or weal nuclear force? at exactly is gravity and it's relation to the quantum realities? Etc etc. Unless we knew what these things really were, how could we say what causes them? How would I know if nuclear spin was affected by things like time or something, we have no idea about? If the forces were affected by things we do not know about, then how could we say, that the atomic spin observed HERE or light or etc reflects exactly as it would exist and operate out there in the unknown yonder exactly the same? Yes, we see the atomic signature here from far space light, but for that to have the meaning you think it has all of the aforementioned things would have to also be true. You do not (even begin) to know that!
After all the universe is temporary, and will roll up like a scroll one day soon, to be no more.
All the theories of science about the cosmos are wrong.
the problem is that any fossil cant be consider as evidence for evolution, since we cant prove that those animals evolved from each other.
I wouldn't know. I would be surprised if that was not the case though. What causes spin (nuclear)? What causes the strong or weal nuclear force? at exactly is gravity and it's relation to the quantum realities? Etc etc. Unless we knew what these things really were, how could we say what causes them? How would I know if nuclear spin was affected by things like time or something, we have no idea about? If the forces were affected by things we do not know about, then how could we say, that the atomic spin observed HERE or light or etc reflects exactly as it would exist and operate out there in the unknown yonder exactly the same? Yes, we see the atomic signature here from far space light, but for that to have the meaning you think it has all of the aforementioned things would have to also be true. You do not (even begin) to know that!
After all the universe is temporary, and will roll up like a scroll one day soon, to be no more.
All the theories of science about the cosmos are wrong.
You can't see time. We experience time, and do so only on and near earth and our solar system area. That is the only time we know. You look at light coming in HERE, to our rules and time zone, and you assume that light from some unknown time and space operated always in this time?!
We could get a little more complicated, but I try to avoid that where possible.
The fine structure we see in atoms (from anywhere) is also only seen here. It doesn't matter where the atoms are from, they are only seen here.
False. False. False. You do not know how many years are involved for any star in the sky. Not only that, but the light and info from all stars is only seen HERE!!!!
You are using a TIME measure. 8 months. Not only that, but you are talking about an area where we do not even know that time as we know it exists at all. What 'unfolds' in our time as 8 months, may be extremely different out there in unknown time and space.
Einstein merely started off with the belief and assumption that time and laws and light speed were the same everywhere. Then he did math accordingly. That might be better called special fishbowl relativity.
Dad:
Reads the Bible and has a think and gets a good feeling about how it fits together.
Utterly ignorant false prophets who deal in fables, and pure belief based godless models. The more insane and vile and anti bible the results, the more gleeful they are.Scientists:
Have complete knowledge about every aspect and mechanism of the Universe.
FIrst off: KUDOS for mentioning nuclear spin. I'm impressed.
Second off: You just spent a while paragraph decrying our inability to really "know" anything about these various things then you end it all by decreeing all the science is WRONG.
I wish someone could explain to you how fractally messed up that logic is, but I don't think they could do so for you.
Still, it's fun to see.
Harboring lurid and baseless fantasies about others like that is not a healthy state of mind.
Utterly ignorant false prophets who deal in fables, and pure belief based godless models. The more insane and vile and anti bible the results, the more gleeful they are.
They have long abandoned reason and truth.
Foolishness.
Compares things diligently to the revealed communication from God, checks the reality and veracity of what is truly known, and what portion science claims is belief based...and comes up with knowledge gold.
Utterly ignorant false prophets who deal in fables, and pure belief based godless models. The more insane and vile and anti bible the results, the more gleeful they are.
They have long abandoned reason and truth.
Science and beliefs used by science may be fantasies. A sound, bible balanced world view and a healthy skepticism of man's wisdom is a good thing. By the way, science is not 'others'. Science is a set of beliefs.Harboring lurid and baseless fantasies about others like that is not a healthy state of mind.
If His word was not more than natural, it would not be of value.You have never been able to describe why you are reliable without calling back on your own supernatural powers.
Science does not work in the future or far past in any way. The only science that works is right here and now.Science works, it produces knowledge and technology.
That is my job? So tell us then, if the bible and Jesus are true and accurate, what better way is there to look at origin science assumptions and premises, and beliefs?.. you can't even convince your fellow Young Earth Creationists that your particular version is correct.
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?