What's Next?

[AV1611VET]

What will scientists lose next?

1. They lost Amelia Earhart.
2. They lost Roanoke.
3. They lost ten tribes.
4. They lost a whole race of people, despite they leaving a city-by-city itinerary behind.
5. They lost a continent.
6. They lost gave up a planet.

Person, city, tribe, race, continent, planet ... what's next I wonder?

 

[Radrook]

Lose their minds perchance? Selective blindness does seem to indicate an inexorable drifting in that direction.

 

[miknik5]

Lose their minds perchance? Selective blindness does seem to indicate an inexorable drifting in that direction.

And 2 Thessalonians 2 suggests the very thing

Not limited to scientists, though

 

[Goonie]

What will scientists lose next?

1. They lost Amelia Earhart.
2. They lost Roanoke.
3. They lost ten tribes.
4. They lost a whole race of people, despite they leaving a city-by-city itinerary behind.
5. They lost a continent.
6. They lost gave up a planet.

Person, city, tribe, race, continent, planet ... what's next I wonder?

They didn't lose any off those things.

 

[miknik5]

You're right
It isn't fair to blame scientists alone

I am sure AV is referring to all those who are self absorbed in their self-wisdom

Who look to make a name for themselves but do not acknowledge the sovereignty of GOD in all things

 

[Radrook]

You're right
It isn't fair to blame scientists alone

I am sure AV is referring to all those who are self absorbed in their self-wisdom

The reason that they tend to perceive any mention of a scientist as being of the non religious kind is because they find the combination of being religious as well as a scientist incompatible. In fact, they consider such a scientist, no matter how brilliant he might be, as being intellectually flawed.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You're right
It isn't fair to blame scientists alone

I am sure AV is referring to all those who are self absorbed in their self-wisdom

Who look to make a name for themselves but do not acknowledge the sovereignty of GOD in all things

And yet, what has their opposition accomplished?

 

[Radrook]

And 2 Thessalonians 2 suggests the very thing

Not limited to scientists, though

No! Not at all. Especially since a significant percentage of the public follow the scientist's lead in selective blindness.

 

[miknik5]

The reason that they tend to perceive any mention of a scientist as being of the non religious kind is because they find the combination of being religious as well as a scientist incompatible. In fact, they consider such a scientist, no matter how brilliant he might be, as being intellectually flawed.

Im beginning to see that
And so when these "brilliant types" lose something (make a mistake) who and what do they attribute it to?

Or do they just try to cover it up hoping no one will notice

 

[Jimmy D]

The reason that they tend to perceive any mention of a scientist as being of the non religious kind is because they find the combination of being religious as well as a scientist incompatible. In fact, they consider such a scientist, no matter how brilliant he might be, as being intellectually flawed.

Who are "they"? Why are you trying to perpetuate this ridiculous notion that science and religion are in opposition? You know perfectly well a huge number of scientists also claim a religious affiliation.

 

[AV1611VET]

And yet, what has their opposition accomplished?

 

[Ygrene Imref]

What will scientists lose next?

1. They lost Amelia Earhart.
2. They lost Roanoke.
3. They lost ten tribes.
4. They lost a whole race of people, despite they leaving a city-by-city itinerary behind.
5. They lost a continent.
6. They lost gave up a planet.

Person, city, tribe, race, continent, planet ... what's next I wonder?

City: Vatican, or Geneva
Tribe: not touching
Race: not touching
Continent: FOUND ONE mostly submerged under Mauritius. 'Lost continent' found under Mauritius - CNN.com
Planet: We lose this earth and exchange it for somewhere else - by exploration or by force (most probable - pollution, climate change, GTNW, a brown dwarf companion star, asteroid impact, Thanos, etc.)

 

[ViaCrucis]

What will scientists lose next?

1. They lost Amelia Earhart.
2. They lost Roanoke.
3. They lost ten tribes.
4. They lost a whole race of people, despite they leaving a city-by-city itinerary behind.
5. They lost a continent.
6. They lost gave up a planet.

Person, city, tribe, race, continent, planet ... what's next I wonder?

Are you doing okay AV? This post is gibberish even by your own usual standards.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[TLK Valentine]

Catchy songs. Got it.

 

[Ygrene Imref]

Who are "they"? Why are you trying to perpetuate this ridiculous notion that science and religion are in opposition? You know perfectly well a huge number of scientists also claim a religious affiliation.

Claiming a religious affiliation means nothing in Academia.

It may mean something to the person - it may mean more than a label holder for the purposes of adding theistic credibility to their academic answers (for example.)

But, mere affiliation means absolutely nothing. And, we know this because scientists are humans, and many humans who claim that they cast out demons, and worshipped God will be REJECTED because they were worshipping images and beasts.

 

[miknik5]

Who are "they"? Why are you trying to perpetuate this ridiculous notion that science and religion are in opposition? You know perfectly well a huge number of scientists also claim a religious affiliation.

Oh that's good

Because when 2 Thessalonians 2 does indeed happen they won't be that confused

 

[AV1611VET]

Who are "they"?

Scientists ... nuff said.

Why are you trying to perpetuate this ridiculous notion that science and religion are in opposition?

We learn quickly.

You know perfectly well a huge number of scientists also claim a religious affiliation.

Yup ... religious nuts ... all of them.

We call them "mission fields."

 

[miknik5]

Are you doing okay AV? This post is gibberish even by your own usual standards.

-CryptoLutheran

Is it?
It's actually in service to those who are wise in their own eyes

It's a tribute to the Nebuchadnezzers of this world

And a possible help for them

 

[Jimmy D]

Claiming a religious affiliation means nothing in Academia.

It may mean something to the person - it may mean more than a label holder for the purposes of adding theistic credibility to their academic answers (for example.)

But, mere affiliation means absolutely nothing. And, we know this because scientists are humans, and many humans who claim that they cast out demons, and worshipped God will be REJECTED because they were worshipping images and beasts.

I'm not really following you there. Maybe my wording was ambiguous, I should have said a huge number of scientists are Christians, Muslims, Hindus etc.

 

[miknik5]

And yet, what has their opposition accomplished?

Are we supposed to do something?