The Laws of the Universe

[Mikecpking]

I have repeatedly told our Creationist friends that the Bible is a spiritual Book and not a Science textbook. Millions worldwide are Christians and yet have no conflict with science.
This fringe group of people who are mainly Americans and or live in America; Have confused Faith with science and faith with politics.

They are so set in their beliefs that it is truly a waste of time trying to convince them of otherwise. Unless they are young and impressionable then we may as well just ignore them or play along in jest!

That's right. The bible is collection of books encompassing history, poetry, letters and oral tradition from numerous sources. For me, it is not about 'how', but 'why'. The more I discover though science, cosmology, geology and muy hobby growing carnivorous plants, the more I can appreciate it.
But to add 'literalism' all the way through is not how the bible should be understood. If one does, then you get debates like these and makes a mockery of this brand of Christianity.

 

[Fahrrad]

and muy hobby growing carnivorous plants

Oh god, this is my phobia.
That said, I have immense respect for you and other Christians like you. I think living in south Texas has made me more religiously tolerant than the super-present media representation of the average Atheist (who, from my experiences, are terrible atheists and are usually more attached to dogma than the people they denounce)

Or I'm just soft

 

[Mikecpking]

Oh god, this is my phobia.
That said, I have immense respect for you and other Christians like you. I think living in south Texas has made me more religiously tolerant than the super-present media representation of the average Atheist (who, from my experiences, are terrible atheists and are usually more attached to dogma than the people they denounce)

Or I'm just soft

I would hate to live in the 'bible belt'. Even in my own church in the UK, I have friends who are creationists, but I avoid these kind of discussions unless they bring it up. We are still friends, but at least over here, they listen and in some cases, do change their mind.

 

[VehementiDominus]

Or to believe that the past was the same! That is why you, here, now will not be able to prove it. Got it VD?

It has every reason to believe the past was the same. There's no evidence to support it ever changing.

If nothing changes, then it stays the same.

Your premise is wrong.

You can't bend reality to fit your delusions and myths. You can't make up laws and assert that they're factual when you, yourself, have no evidence supporting it.

What you're saying is like me saying "You can't prove that the Earth has always been the same. The fact is, it used to be different, it used to have Elves and Hobbits and Dwarves and Trolls and Wizards, and magic rings. Of course, this is true because you can't prove otherwise and it's in LotR! Reality would've had to've been differnt back then, though, to allow for magical races, such as wizards.". It's stupid. And it's all you ever talk about.

Stupid premise + Only thing you're capable of discussing = ?

You do the math.

 

[VehementiDominus]

I would hate to live in the 'bible belt'. Even in my own church in the UK, I have friends who are creationists, but I avoid these kind of discussions unless they bring it up. We are still friends, but at least over here, they listen and in some cases, do change their mind.

Haha, I think it'd be hilarious to live in the Bible Belt.

Though, as an atheist I'd have to take a sidearm everywhere to protect myself against crazy redneck fundies with a chip on their shoulder against anyone that doesn't believe exactly as they do.

 

[Delphiki]

The only proof required is that science doesn't know.

Apparently not, since no one here except you is convinced by such "proof".

 

[Mikecpking]

Haha, I think it'd be hilarious to live in the Bible Belt.

Though, as an atheist I'd have to take a sidearm everywhere to protect myself against crazy redneck fundies with a chip on their shoulder against anyone that doesn't believe exactly as they do.

No disrespect to like-minded Americans here, but thank God we live in England!

 

[dad]

No disrespect to like-minded Americans here, but thank God we live in England!

On on that note, ...amen

 

[Mikecpking]

On on that note, ...amen

Where do you live, dad?

 

[dad]

Sorry, could you explain it then?

As for the tests, spectroscopy, for one.

Great. So since you never cited an example I guess I will.

"Therefore, astronomers study another molecule which is always found in the neighbourhood of H2, namely carbon monoxide, CO. The intense spectral line of CO at the wavelength of 2.6 mm can be observed with radio telescopes that are placed on atmospherically favourable sites: high and dry mountains, in the desert or at the South Pole. In cosmic space carbon monoxide is an indicator of conditions favourable for the formation of new stars and planets."


Star Forming Regions in Andromeda

Here they are talking about Andromeda. So what we seem to have is spectral lines that are not normally able to be seen from earth. But if they go way up in a mountain, or some such places, they can see some. So how many other things can they NOT see?! What sort of incomplete picture did we used to get decades ago? What sort of incomplete picture do we now get, but maybe do not yet know??

Nothing about hydrogen, or carbon, etc in space presents a problem that I can see. It is merely a material. How far away is it, and what else is there, and what forces are working there, and what time is woven in to the mix if any?

That's in addition to using Relativity to predict the orbits of planets

Irrelevant. Our system is not deep space.

and light Doppler to predict the movement of stars.

Example of a star we predict the movement of, and how we confirm it moved?

We use complex formulas for calculating gravitational pull around planets so that we can launch space probes like Cassini, which was launched from Earth, flew across the Solar system, and then was guided into an orbit around Saturn, where it has remained, thanks to much work from scientists studying the workings of gravitational orbit.

Irrelevant. As above.

I dare say you might want to push your unlike zones out to around the edge of the gas giants (in a donut shape, of course. We don't want to allow the Sun to be observed with accuracy)

Nonsense. We know little about the sun anyhow, have you ever been inside it?

 

[dad]

Where do you live, dad?

A little town called NOYB.

 

[dad]

And in its place there's what? What? What?
...

The place of physical knowledge of earth and vicinity is all well and good where it applies. Of course when a spiritual event happens the usual laws are overridden. And in the center of the earth, we don't know that they apply either. No need to imagine and get uptight about where they apply. Where are you absolutely certain they do apply, and can prove it??!!! That is the clear limits of your fishbowl.

 

[dad]

And what other basis would that be?

That depends on what is being looked at. If we look at radioactive decay, the results of ratios existing for parent/daughter materials, etc, result from something having been responsible for the materials. What that is we don't know. They have noticed that things are in this state which now includes decay, so have attributed all the materials to this! That is not based on knowledge, but ignorance. Anything that we get that results from the ratio pattern has nothing nothing nothing to do with a present decay state that science can prove.

You intentionally forgot it so that you wouldn't have to deal with it.

Not true actually. You intentionally won't tell us, and I doubt anyone cares. What, want to pretend that whatever it was was real important?

or have you forgot the example of radio dating techniques agreeing with each other?

So do many fairy tales. But the reasons there is agreement are all circular.

 

[Mikecpking]

Great. So since you never cited an example I guess I will.

"Therefore, astronomers study another molecule which is always found in the neighbourhood of H2, namely carbon monoxide, CO. The intense spectral line of CO at the wavelength of 2.6 mm can be observed with radio telescopes that are placed on atmospherically favourable sites: high and dry mountains, in the desert or at the South Pole. In cosmic space carbon monoxide is an indicator of conditions favourable for the formation of new stars and planets."


Star Forming Regions in Andromeda

Here they are talking about Andromeda. So what we seem to have is spectral lines that are not normally able to be seen from earth. But if they go way up in a mountain, or some such places, they can see some. So how many other things can they NOT see?! What sort of incomplete picture did we used to get decades ago? What sort of incomplete picture do we now get, but maybe do not yet know??

Nothing about hydrogen, or carbon, etc in space presents a problem that I can see. It is merely a material. How far away is it, and what else is there, and what forces are working there, and what time is woven in to the mix if any?


Irrelevant. Our system is not deep space.


Example of a star we predict the movement of, and how we confirm it moved? Irrelevant. As above.


Nonsense. We know little about the sun anyhow, have you ever been inside it?

Have you heard of Cepheid variable stars? These are 'standard candles' used to measure the distances of galaxies.

 

[Davian]

That's right. The bible is collection of books encompassing history, poetry, letters and oral tradition from numerous sources. For me, it is not about 'how', but 'why'. The more I discover though science, cosmology, geology and muy hobby growing carnivorous plants, the more I can appreciate it.
But to add 'literalism' all the way through is not how the bible should be understood. If one does, then you get debates like these and makes a mockery of this brand of Christianity.

Well said.

 

[dad]

Have you heard of Cepheid variable stars? These are 'standard candles' used to measure the distances of galaxies.

Yes. I have. They can't work. Better rethink. Try to support them if you dare.

 

[Davian]

Yes. I have. They can't work. Better rethink. Try to support them if you dare.

Still struggling with that 'berden of evidence' concept?

 

[sandwiches]

Where do you live, dad?

Australia.

 

[Mikecpking]

Yes. I have. They can't work. Better rethink. Try to support them if you dare.

Care to back up your claims?

 

[sandwiches]

Still struggling with that 'berden of evidence' concept?

Well, you have to understand dad's line of thinking: No matter what the opposition uses as evidence, they have to prove that things in deep space and things in the deep past were exactly as they are now without using logic, inferences, and tests that work here. He's one of the extremely incredulous and skeptical theists... when it comes to things they disagree with. He is essentially asking for time travel or to travel to deep space. But knowing dad, even if we did those things, he'd claim that we changed along with the laws of the universe as we traveled into deep space or into the past.

He also believes that the Bible is true and that it's science's job to provide evidence that the Bible is wrong and that science is correct. In other words, he thinks his assertions require no justification and the opposing view doesn't require to be falsified.