The Laws of the Universe

[dad]

How do you know they are good men to trust their writings? How do you know they are good records? How do you know they were all "under the auspices of a good God?"

Our record came down with careful assurances that it was true. It works, and the prophesies seal it with the unquestionable Hand of God.

 

[Tiberius]

Science...religion..banking...show biz...you name it. Men are men.

What are you trying to say? That religion is just show biz? Couldn't agree more.

Science is just showbiz? Fraid not. It's actually TESTED.

Yes I do. The main kingdoms were all foretold. Jesus' life is well recorded, and we know He fulfilled the hundreds of prophesies.

What testable things were predicted, and how can we test them?

Obviously you do not understand it.

Obviously you do not understand it.

Different ways of looking at the ratios with a same state belief means nothing.

Ah. Once again you just dismiss what you don't like.

Nope. You merely need a state change that leaves the existing materials in a decay relationship.

Ah, but not just ANY decay relationship. If it was a decay relationship that was diufferent to the one we see today, then it would give nonsense results if we assumed that it was always the same as it is today. The only way to make sense of a different past state is to know how to correct for it. Science does not do this, and yet sense is still made. This can only be true if the past state was exactly the same as the present state!

That is not falsifying anything but one sample. I am talking about the same state past. That can't be falsified. Using the same state past belief to color how you view a rock is not falsifying anything.

Just one sample? But this happens with EVERY sample!

That assumes a same state far away universe, nothing more.

And it gets results with such an assumption. If the far away universe was different as you say, why does it get such results?

" "The carbon in the graphite is not as old as the rock. That can only ring a bell and require us to ask if we need to reconsider earlier studies."

Nearly 4,000-million years old samples from Greenland have been used to develop the dominant time line regarding the emergence of the earliest biosphere. The recent findings suggest the biosphere may have emerged millions of years later, a hypothesis that now demands a rigorous study, said Papineau.

"It could be that researchers in the field need to go back to Greenland to restudy these rocks and determine if the the carbonaceous materials are in fact as old as the metamorphosed rock itself," Papineau said.

As the planet evolved, rock and other matter was subjected to a range of temperatures that leave telltale signatures scientists can now study. The team's examination found that the rock samples were subjected to high-grade metamorphism. Yet the crystalline structure of the graphite present in the samples was not, leading scientists to conclude the matter infiltrated the rock at a later stage in time, though the exact timing is not clear at this point. "

The Archaeology News Network: Young graphite in old rocks challenges the earliest signs of life

That is not falsifying anything but one sample. I am talking about the different state past. That can't be falsified. Using the different state past belief to color how you view a rock is not falsifying anything.

 

[sandwiches]

Our record came down with careful assurances that it was true. It works, and the prophesies seal it with the unquestionable Hand of God.

Anyone can hand out assurances. But the prophecies you mention sound promising. Which prophecies are you referring to and how were they verified?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Anyone can hand out assurances. But the prophecies you mention sound promising. Which prophecies are you referring to and how were they verified?

I seem to recall discussing a specific set of prophecies with dad -- we never finished the discussion; he scurried off.

 

[dad]

Anyone can hand out assurances. But the prophecies you mention sound promising. Which prophecies are you referring to and how were they verified?

Bible prophesies. They cover kingdoms, kings, life and death and resurrection of Jesus, the captivities of Israel, etc etc.

But that is getting off topic. What you need to focus on is the laws of the universe. Prove they were the same or we will see that it is actually not known.

Nathan....if you are referring to your time wasting baseless doubts rambling thread, it wasn't that interesting. Hiding in shadows, speculating in a dark way about times that are not known, and grasping at silly conflicting interpretations of the bible for support is worthless. Straining at Nats might be your thing.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Bible prophesies. They cover kingdoms, kings, life and death and resurrection of Jesus, the captivities of Israel, etc etc.

Oh, you mean the same sort of things we were discussing in that other thread before you scurried off without an answer?

Nathan....if you are referring to your time wasting baseless doubts rambling thread, it wasn't that interesting. Hiding in shadows, speculating in a dark way about times that are not known, and grasping at silly conflicting interpretations of the bible for support is worthless. Straining at Nats might be your thing.

I understand dad -- you have no answers, but still need to believe in the greatness of yourself and your ideas. You're just bitter because I debunked the prophecies and you couldn't say a single thing to counter it.

 

[sandwiches]

Bible prophesies. They cover kingdoms, kings, life and death and resurrection of Jesus, the captivities of Israel, etc etc.

But that is getting off topic. What you need to focus on is the laws of the universe. Prove they were the same or we will see that it is actually not known.

No no. Focus. We're going with the line of thinking that the natural laws were different in the distant past BECAUSE of the Bible. So, you need to show us why the Bible needs to be trusted.

You mentioned kingdoms, Jesus, and Israel. Now, what about them? What were the prophecies and how were they verified?

 

[dad]

No no. Focus. We're going with the line of thinking that the natural laws were different in the distant past BECAUSE of the Bible.

No. We are going with the line of the obvious. Science claims it knows stuff. It bases that claim on certain stuff. That stuff just had the stuffing knocked out of it. Get the cat back in the bag or admit defeat.

So, you need to show us why the Bible needs to be trusted.

No. That you need to look into yourself. The way many seem to approach that is by getting to know God, then they start realizing His word is cool.

You mentioned kingdoms, Jesus, and Israel. Now, what about them? What were the prophecies and how were they verified?

Wow. Maybe google fulfilled bible prophesy. Something like 1/3 of the book is a done deal.

 

[dad]

Oh, you mean the same sort of things we were discussing in that other thread before you scurried off without an answer?



I understand dad -- you have no answers, but still need to believe in the greatness of yourself and your ideas. You're just bitter because I debunked the prophecies and you couldn't say a single thing to counter it.

Nope. You doubted for doubting sake based on nothing. Is that fun?

 

[sandwiches]

No. We are going with the line of the obvious. Science claims it knows stuff. It bases that claim on certain stuff. That stuff just had the stuffing knocked out of it. Get the cat back in the bag or admit defeat.
No. That you need to look into yourself. The way many seem to approach that is by getting to know God, then they start realizing His word is cool. Wow. Maybe google fulfilled bible prophesy. Something like 1/3 of the book is a done deal.

Concentrate, tiger. Don't lose focus now. You said the universe had different set of laws as the present because the Bible says so. Back it up, chief.

Now, I'll understand if you can't, though.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Nope. You doubted for doubting sake based on nothing. Is that fun?

Good for you, dad -- even when nobody else believes in you, you can still believe in yourself!

That's the power of...

 

[mzungu]

What creationists fail to understand is that the laws governing the universe cannot be different and the universe remain in its form.

Any change (even the most minute) would render the universe unable to exist.

This is the problem when people without the slightest idea of anything scientific come up with explanations that even cartoon physics cannot keep up with!

 

[Nathan Poe]

What creationists fail to understand is that the laws governing the universe cannot be different and the universe remain in its form.

And what creationists refuse to understand is that those laws cannot be changed for their own personal convenience.

 

[dad]

What creationists fail to understand is that the laws governing the universe cannot be different and the universe remain in its form.

Any change (even the most minute) would render the universe unable to exist.

First of all, if you mean deep space you have no idea it seems what laws apply there, so you can't say what a change would do.

If you mean on the earth surface and area nearby, such as our solar system, I would not expect that present laws underwent a change to any great degree. What was changed was something else, that left us here like this, I would think.


Neither will they when the present

 

[dad]

Concentrate, tiger. Don't lose focus now. You said the universe had different set of laws as the present because the Bible says so. Back it up, chief.

The bible does outline differences in nature in the future and past. The way God backed up the bible was by many works to many men. When science came along, to join the observations, it had a back seat. Very limited view. It also picked a seat facing away from God's stage, so if it wants something backed up, it needs to turn it's back around to where things can be seen. The action is not in the dark area where science chooses to operate. Better to look at evidences as adults, and with honesty.

It is not what science can see that determines the show. It is not rational to expect everyone to turn from the show, and lights, and look in the dark corner of so called science only. Their call is something akin to

'come see the dark matter show...followed by the dark energy show..followed by the universe in my soup show...all debased cockroach kin welcome..'

If we can't accept the record, then even one raised from the dead would not be evidence in our eyes. Evidence cannot be contained in the dark corner of so called science, or even seen in proper light.

 

[mzungu]

First of all, if you mean deep space you have no idea it seems what laws apply there, so you can't say what a change would do.

If you mean on the earth surface and area nearby, such as our solar system, I would not expect that present laws underwent a change to any great degree. What was changed was something else, that left us here like this, I would think.


Neither will they when the present

With all due respects and meaning no insult; That is a question that only one who has absolutely no knowledge of what is science would ask. No matter how you try to spin it, the laws governing the constants are the same everywhere in the universe!

 

[dad]

With all due respects and meaning no insult; That is a question that only one who has absolutely no knowledge of what is science would ask. No matter how you try to spin it, the laws governing the constants are the same everywhere in the universe!

With all due beliefs you mean. That's all I have seen them offer. Name one constant...

 

[Nabobalis]

With all due beliefs you mean. That's all I have seen them offer. Name one constant...

mass of particles, charge of particles, speed of light in a vacuum.

 

[dad]

mass of particles, charge of particles, speed of light in a vacuum.

Earth concepts all...so?? What's next, angels on my shoulder?

 

[Nabobalis]

Earth concepts all...so?? What's next, angels on my shoulder?

Well with no reason to assume otherwise, I don't see a problem.