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.
I didnt intent to give that impression. As you can see from my post when I say they predicted this and they will probably be wrong again I am talking about those behind the predictions. Brightmoon was saying Creationists and believers in God believe anything the bible says so he was referring to the people behind the faith as being stupid. I was merely pointing out that the people behind science can also believe in things that some would say is unreal or unverifiable and I guess stupid and it is often because it cannot be verified that they can come up with far fetched ideas and make up new ideas and predictions loosely based on indirect evidence that could mean anything and then call it science which is false. But becuaseit is labelled under the tag science for some reason people situp and believe anything without question. I also call that faith. At least religion acknowledges that it is faith based and there is no scientific verification for it.But in your original post, the one I responded to, you made it sound like science proving itself wrong was a bad thing.
When you use the term that believers say “I got this Book here and I believe everything in it - even the stupid stuff.” Scientists can’t do that" you are comparing apples and oranges and being naieve. Scientists can do that. You are confusing the topic of science with the humans behind it.
The bible is not a scientific book and is not measured that way so that is a fruitless exercise. Creationists are not the only ones who believe in what you say is stupid stuff. The core of all faith is the resurrection of Christ and his life and miracles. Science would also say this is non-verifiable yet millions upon millions of people believe this, many who are supporters of evolution, scientists and intelligent coherent people, some in the past founded our greatest theories, are they all stupid ?.
My point was that there is also a worldview about science where people believe just about whatever is claimed is right without question which also requires faith. The claim that just because it is science that it can never be influenced by humans who have a tendency to believe in things without verification is naive. The subject of science itself may seek the truth and only stand if verified and therefore things need to be questioned is correct. But those behind it do not always act that way and in fact, there is a dominant worldview that can permeate our teaching institutions that promotes a certain world views that is just as much indoctrinated as religion.
So yes it is good to keep on searching for verification but I think even more prominent is that the humans behind science are basing scientific discoveries on faith in a world view and using that as a way to support their atheism. They have a blinkered view that there can only be certain outcomes that can be predicted which affects their predictions and that is why they get it so wrong so often.
a van is also a combination between a car and a truck. but it doesnt prove any evolution. right?
What you claimed to 'know' was incoherent (i.e. was nonsense by the commonly accepted meanings of the words you used). When asked to explain, you obfuscated and evaded. We've seen this kind of behaviour before, so it's no great surprise, but worth pointing out.I tell people what I know related to the issue raised in the OP. This is what you called to "make a claim".
Accept it or not is your business, not mine. I have no obligation to explain anything to anyone here. If you like to question/discuss, I am always here to fully answer what you questioned.
The first point is obvious; the second is slightly disturbing - you don't know me to love me; to love me on the basis of some forum posts is a bit sad and creepy.I do this for two reasons: 1. love myself; 2. love you. I don't care if you accept what I said or not. And I don't care if you want to understand it or not.
a van is also a combination between a car and a truck. but it doesnt prove any evolution. right?
Do you actually ignore the content of every response to your posts?a van is also a combination between a car and a truck. but it doesnt prove any evolution. right?
I didnt intent to give that impression. As you can see from my post when I say they predicted this and they will probably be wrong again I am talking about those behind the predictions. Brightmoon was saying Creationists and believers in God believe anything the bible says so he was referring to the people behind the faith as being stupid. I was merely pointing out that the people behind science can also believe in things that some would say is unreal or unverifiable and I guess stupid and it is often because it cannot be verified that they can come up with far fetched ideas and make up new ideas and predictions loosely based on indirect evidence that could mean anything and then call it science which is false. But becuaseit is labelled under the tag science for some reason people situp and believe anything without question. I also call that faith. At least religion acknowledges that it is faith based and there is no scientific verification for it.
What you claimed to 'know' was incoherent (i.e. was nonsense by the commonly accepted meanings of the words you used). When asked to explain, you obfuscated and evaded. We've seen this kind of behaviour before, so it's no great surprise, but worth pointing out.
I have never do that. I ALWAYS fully answer a specific question. (or no answer at all to some unworthy ones). Just ask to explain a big idea is not good. For example, please explain Christianity. I do not intend to give answer more than the question asked. The question has to be specific. Vague question only deserves a vague answer.
For example, this reply FULLY refuted your accusation which is hi-lighted.
I tell people what I know related to the issue raised in the OP. This is what you called to "make a claim".
Accept it or not is your business, not mine. I have no obligation to explain anything to anyone here. If you like to question/discuss, I am always here to fully answer what you questioned. If you still don't understand and don't want to ask any more question, then you can go. I accomplished what I originally want to do: tell you what I know.
I do this for two reasons: 1. love myself; 2. love you. I don't care if you accept what I said or not. And I don't care if you want to understand it or not.
a van is also a combination between a car and a truck. but it doesnt prove any evolution. right?
I have never do that. I ALWAYS fully answer a specific question. (or no answer at all to some unworthy ones). Just ask to explain a big idea is not good. For example, please explain Christianity. I do not intend to give answer more than the question asked. The question has to be specific. Vague question only deserves a vague answer.
For example, this reply FULLY refuted your accusation which is hi-lighted.
I can feel the love already...Vague question only deserves a vague answer.
For example, this reply FULLY refuted your accusation which is hi-lighted.
Count my reply as a form of love. Some won't get it.I can feel the love already...
No. I'm not leaving just because you are completely incapable of backing up your outrageous claims.
I am completely capable to answer. YOU are not capable to ask.
So, lemme get this straight. You claim rocks are alive, yet you provide no supporting evidence to back up this claim, and you can't even tell us how you define life.
Is this a joke?
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?