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.
Because no one can come up with anything any better. Right wrong or indifferent it is the best they have to offer. For people with Cancer the best that science has to offer may leave a lot to be desired. In fact most everyone dies, no matter how science tries to keep them alive. So in the end their best efforts can not seem to keep the grim reaper away. Although in some cases they can add years to people lives, so that is enough for most people. My wife has two very close friends of her that science says are dieing from Cancer right now. There is nothing that man can do for them. Their only hope is God and His divine healing. My grandmother lived to be 100 and she said she outlived all of her friends. They had all gone before her. So in the end, what can science do for you and what does science have to offer?
Any such one is advised to take note of Glen Morton's idea of YEC geology: ''All rock formations are the result of the flood''. For an individual who claims to have spent years studying a subject, he doesn't appear to have been learning. One can pick up such absurd misconceptions in far less time at talkdeceptions.
lol 'insoluble evaporites' lolIn fact evaporites which are widespread in the Geologic Column are insoluble problems for flood geology.
Great sample. Are those smaller, WNW-trending impressions at the base of the sample insect walking traces? They're amazingly well preserved for such a delicate feature.
This originally came from a great website that unfortunately is now down. It had pictures of tracks of a spider along with raindrop impressions and many other really great pictures of trace fossils from the Coconino formation.Great sample. Are those smaller, WNW-trending impressions at the base of the sample insect walking traces? They're amazingly well preserved for such a delicate feature.
Because life gets to be a habit that is hard to break. Or the evolutionist would say that people with a desire to live is a product of natural selection. If you want a long life then live right, listen to your doctor and do what science tells you to do. Even they say hypercondriac live longer. They go to the doctor often and for a lot of conditions it is important to get early treatment.If death is inevitable, why plead to God to prolong your life?
What have your demands to to do with the topic? And how many more can you dream up?
What are "religious methods?"Religious methods of thinking have been failing to solve anything for 7,000 years,
What happens when the scientific method upholds that all phenomena will one day have a purely naturalistic cause?while the scientific method has only been going for a few hundred. (although the roots were planted in ancient Greece) Come back in 20 years.
Okay, fair enough. Before science became the popular method of discerning things, everyone was religious. Most nations had a state religion and it was a crime to be an atheist, it simply wasn't done. That being said, non-scientific ways of advancing society would often involve religious or spiritual interpretations. i.e. Look how far that got us compared to what we have now.What are "religious methods?"
Science doesn't say that everything has a naturalistic cause in the absolute sense, it just doesn't see any evidence (and therefor a reason) that would lead it to incorporate the supernatural. Show science something legitimately supernatural and it will be forced to reevaluate it's position.What happens when the scientific method upholds that all phenomena will one day have a purely naturalistic cause?
Advancing society through metaphysics is only a single aspect. At one time science determined that the earth was stationary. Today, it is shown not to be. Through that we can determine that all stationary things will one day be shown to be in motion. Or not. The discovery of the direct cause of lightning excluded causes such as plate tectonics, bacterial infections, computer programming, God, falling trees, wifi signals. Yet the cause of certain phenomena being bacterial infections is held up today. Moving plates, software etc are held even if there are interpretations not involving them.That being said, non-scientific ways of advancing society would often involve religious or spiritual interpretations.
First of all, you're not science. I don't know where you materialists picked up that idea. I don't show things to science (you) and the property you call the "scientific establishment" isn't science either. Science is simply observability testability and repeatability of cause and effect. I show you science, I don't show, to science.Science doesn't say that everything has a naturalistic cause in the absolute sense, it just doesn't see any evidence (and therefor a reason) that would lead it to incorporate the supernatural. Show science something legitimately supernatural and it will be forced to reevaluate it's position.
If it has a naturalistic cause then the naturalistic cause is science. If it has a non visible cause the the non visible cause mapping with the effect is science. I cannot show science to itself.Of course this only works with actual, backed up, supernatural claims. Show it anecdotal claims and science will typically have a naturalistic cause.
Again, you're confusing the issue. It cannot be "proven by methods outside of science." It is evidenced or proven through science. You've simply created a little clique here where the sole interpretationof the data is to be moderated through materialism. If only earthists (all phenomena will one day be shown to have a purely earthly cause) were allowed to interpret data you realize that we would not be in outer space today correct? You may also realize that astronomy would not be "outside of science" nor do I have to show planetary bodies "to science."Now if you claim that many divine supernatural claims are proven by methods outside of science, you will be required to demonstrate those methods and why they work if you want anyone to believe you.
Evidence of things caused by bacteria is no longer filling gaps in our knowledge with conjecture, it's based on positive observation based evidence. The stationary earth model was overturned by new evidence. The old model wasn't based on observations, it was simply the default an most reasonable seeming answer at the time, before new data arose.Advancing society through metaphysics is only a single aspect. At one time science determined that the earth was stationary. Today, it is shown not to be. Through that we can determine that all stationary things will one day be shown to be in motion. Or not. The discovery of the direct cause of lightning excluded causes such as plate tectonics, bacterial infections, computer programming, God, falling trees, wifi signals. Yet the cause of certain phenomena being bacterial infections is held up today. Moving plates, software etc are held even if there are interpretations not involving them.
[/QUOTE]Again, you're confusing the issue. It cannot be "proven by methods outside of science." It is evidenced or proven through science. You've simply created a little clique here where the sole interpretationof the data is to be moderated through materialism. If only earthists (all phenomena will one day be shown to have a purely earthly cause) were allowed to interpret data you realize that we would not be in outer space today correct? You may also realize that astronomy would not be "outside of science" nor do I have to show planetary bodies "to science."
The observations proving the earth and the rest of the physical universe to exists are testable and verifiable by everyone. If you ever want anyone to believe your claims then you must create a method of collecting information that is reliable, repeatable, and accessible to everyone. You reject science based on it's purely materialistic worth, but that doesn't mean that claims about the spiritual don't require proof. (and a system of proving things) Otherwise I could make up whatever I want about the spiritual and you would be forced to believe me.
BLASPHEMY! I distinctly remember God having four eyes.I saw the ghost of Ronald Reagan at the water park drinking ghost tequila and riding a ghost Kangaroo which was wearing a ghost Justin Bieber wig. It had great spiritual value and convinced me that God is a panda with three eyes and bat wings who loves Monty Python. If you, Greg, reject "materialistic" interpretations of the world, then surely i need no evidence of this to convince you of this supernatural, spiritual occurence.
BLASPHEMY! I distinctly remember God having four eyes.
I'm sorry. All the truth and the light is contained within the work inspired by God himself.Well, MY vision says otherwise. In fact, the tequila in Mr. Reagan's glass in my vision, it was revealed to me, came from a three-leaved agave plant, representing God's three eyes (He really prefers being referred to as Zargon) which in turn stand for him and his two methods of communication with the world: through ambiguous, nonsensical, easily misinterpretable visions, and through riddles and stories, such as the bible, which SpiritReagan told me was translated all wrong. In fact, the bible is Zargon's epic fantasy novel, but the preface of "not intended to be taken as fact" was quickly lost and mistranslated into the genesis story because of a weird quirk of the Babylonian language. You see, InsaneDuck, you must come to the light and see the truth, and the truth has three eyes.
I'm sorry. All the truth and the light is contained within the work inspired by God himself.
Main Page - LOLCat Bible Translation Project
I have a friend who awoke one morning to find a blue demon sitting at the end of his bed. He swore off mescaline forever. I suggest you consider the same.I saw the ghost of Ronald Reagan at the water park drinking ghost tequila and riding a ghost Kangaroo which was wearing a ghost Justin Bieber wig. It had great spiritual value and convinced me that God is a panda with three eyes and bat wings who loves Monty Python.
There was no "new evidence." There were only future [software, bacterial, falling tree] causes. Since windows software excluded both bacterial infections and God as a cause, I see no reason why the casual nature of bacterial infections should be held up in certain domains. The discovery that software was the cause (and not bacterial infections) clearly showed that phenomena being attributed to bacterial infections today are only gaps in our "scientific" knowledge. However, there seems to be no antagonism towards bacteria.Evidence of things caused by bacteria is no longer filling gaps in our knowledge with conjecture, it's based on positive observation based evidence. The stationary earth model was overturned by new evidence. The old model wasn't based on observations, it was simply the default an most reasonable seeming answer at the time, before new data arose.
The "scientific community" is a community that does science. I'll tell you what. We have a "scientific community" here which employs methodological earthism. We say that all things will one day be shown to have a purely earthly cause. Send us your data so we can "fit it into a 'scientific model.'"And btw, I know there is not a "personified" science being. But the scientific community will assess your theory and if it works, they will put it into the accepted scientific model. I'm sorry I used terminology not to your liking.
I didn't say the earth didn't exist. Earthism is the philosophy where only the earth exists.You are the one confusing the issue here.
We know earth to exist, and we can use the observational techniques that work to determine the earth to exist to observe space. (plus physically going there didn't hurt)
The earth yes. The rest of the physical universe with an aversion to the rest of the physical universe, no. Since so much has been explained by causes on earth, you could say that "methodological earthism was working fine." Until a point is reached however, its insufficiency is realized, and it becomes a burden.The observations proving the earth and the rest of the physical universe to exists are testable and verifiable by everyone.
A method of collecting [future naturalistic] information. The information is automatically nullified.If you ever want anyone to believe your claims then you must create a method of collecting information that is reliable, repeatable, and accessible to everyone.
I reject your interpretation of science.You reject science based on it's purely materialistic worth,
You seem again to be equating your position (that the evidence has a future naturalistic cause) with a lack of evidence. All you have to show is how chance can assemble a man. Darwinism is right up there with the "migrating fireflies" theory of starlight.but that doesn't mean that claims about the spiritual don't require proof. (and a system of proving things) Otherwise I could make up whatever I want about the spiritual and you would be forced to believe me.
I'm not interested in claims to know all there is to know about evidence; I'm interested in finding out about the experiment. If knowledge can only be obtained via experiment, surely someone had to have done one. Why not wait and see what your comrades come up with?
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?