drich0150
Regular Member
- Mar 16, 2008
- 6,407
- 437
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
The bi-ble, tells me sooo.How do you know that?
A statement of faith, much like this one: "Perhaps He does!"Perhaps it's because he doesn't?
Does that make it the only one?Indeed, but it's the only one we know of.
Quoting Carl Sagan(who was quoting someone else, but I forgot who... nothing like google to remember things:Thomas Carlyle): If we are alone in the Universe, it sure seems like an awful waste of space.

And I will use a quote to answer this. "fa-da, tea-chi" (Mr. Me-au-gi)Again, how do you know that?
Because: "the bi-ble, tells me sooo!"How wave you come across that piece of knowledge?
Yes.yes ok.... but they, supposedly, knew about him. They didn't have to believe. They had direct contact, right?
Really! Really! (Shrek)You know him?? REALY??!?!
I followed the outline in Luke 11AMAZING!!!
You're the person I was looking for!
How did you get to know him?
He is described very accurately in the bible.What is he like?
I really don't know for sure what all of these other people think , nor do I know for sure what you think, they think. so i can not give you an accurate answer.Like what all other christians think? or is he more like what the Hindus think? or like what the Vikings thought?
If a treasure is buried in a remote Caribbean Island and you have a map/Complete instructions, where exactly to find this treasure, is it stupid to start digging where the map tells you to dig? Or is it better to "seek" where you feel comfortable seeking, and disregard the map?I seek this knowledge. But I refuse to believe in order to know.... that's stupid!
Where I am from it is stupid to seek something in a place where one is assured not to find it. (But I guess yall do it differently in the "South.")
It's called the bible.Again, "the plan". How do you know about this plan?
The same. why wouldn't work for them? (The answer to you next statement: "So?")How does that work with people who are born in other cultures?
(I seem to be stuck asking the same questions...)
Yes!So you think that just because someone found an old copy of a story, it means the story is true?
Again if "we were telling tales" then why should they stop when they were first recorded?I'm talking about what happened before... long before the story was written. The first people, those who didn't even have a writing system.
You seem to confuse the belief in that one is measuring the correct distance, or the belief that one is observing all possible data from a singular perspective, or that one's conclusion from an experiment is indeed interpreted correctly. I am not doubting the "science." I am merely point out your Faith in the "facts."You seem to confuse observation and measurement, or experimentation, with faith.
Oooo a sore spot. Look, smarty, Even if what you say is true, their is no way you have performed ALL of the experiments, or made all of the discoveries, or made all of the observations that have been made to come to the conclusions you have. At some point you have deferred to "someone smarter than you." More than likely way, way smarter. It is in this deferral that you take on the role of a "Faith wielding believer." (like it or not.)I'm not taking the word of any person who I think is smarter than me. I've performed some of those experiments and I can see that where they point.
In the "DoPpLeR EfFeCt" this distortion you "hear" is effect by the distance the one is from the Event. Now how pray tell can "we" from one single point in space a trillion billion miles from our second nearest light source( let alone the ones we are looking at to make these leaps in "science) can we be sure that light waves and frequency are not effected in a way as to throw our equations off, (even just a little) over such a great distance?Surely, you've heard a car passing by you. As it comes towards you, you hear a higher frequency sound from the engine. As it goes away from you, you hear a lower frequency sound from the same engine. But the engine is always sending out the same sound. What happens is an effect which was coined by first described by a guy named Doppler... so it was called the "Doppler Effect". This effect can be found in any kind of wave phenomena.
And one such phenomena is light.
Gravity effects light does it not? Even if one can be sure (Some how) that in a 100 trillion billion mile line of sight can be established, and by some miracle one can say with absolute certainty that light "DoPpLeR eFfEcT" will not degrade (Even the tiniest amount) over the sheer distance that we are making our observations from. There is no way to know if in that 100 trillion billion mile line of sight there is not some gravitational event (maybe even unknown) effecting your "observation or measurement" in some slight way, thus throwing your numbers far from the truth.
People like you remind me of those who claimed the world was flat. They take one single human perspective (In that case the assumption that the ground is flat= the world being flat) and role with it, because it is the "popular" way to think. Here you all have over looked common sense to "believe" in such a way to make a bible believing Christian blush.
Here in your example, It just so happens that your thought is all based on one tiny point in space. From which you claim knowledge of how the entire universe was built and maintained.. And! some how you do not see the "Faith" in it all.
So tell me again how the world is flat..After determining the light spectrum from a special kind of star, another scientist, pointed his telescope and spectrometer to other galaxies. What he found was what has been called the "redshift", or light from these stars reaches us but it's frequency components are all shifted towards the red part of the spectrum, or to lower frequencies. This means that these galaxies are actually moving away from our. Just so you know, this scientist was Edwin Hubble. He charted a few tens of such galaxies and all were moving away. And what's more: the farther away they were, the faster they were moving, the more pronounced the redshift was.
This is completely compatible with galaxies moving isotropically (spherically) away from a central point.
So, if galaxies are moving away from a central point... moving way back in time, they must have been all clumped together.
From this, the big bang theory was born. It wasn't a perfect theory, but it's explained by evidence.
The curious thing is that more astronomers have been looking at the sky and they have confirmed what Hubble did and then some.
See? some observation, some experimentation, some reasoning.... and things make sense. No faith required. No super intelligent men required. If Hubble did these experiments in the early 20th Century, then even you could do them with a toy telescope, a prism and a webcam. You'd just need to know what to look for.
Indeed.So you claim the evolution of the species is just a theory?
It is a theory like any other before it. It's "probability" is only as certain as the available evidence and interpretation of said evidence.Would you agree that it can merit a high probability of being correct?
Does it matter? No matter the alternative the same type of faith is used to believe in it.What's the alternative?
You have confused the type of argument we are engaged in. I am not here to say one is correct and another is wrong. I am here pointing at the faith in all of them.How do you explain bacteria that become immune to antibiotics?
You might want to rethink your argument alittle to fit what is actually being addressed.How do you explain that all animals with interior skeleton are similar? Same bone placement, same back structure, same ribcage... only a few differences to account for different habitats, different strategies to stay alive.
So, all pre-human skulls ever found were tiny bone fragments that had to pieced together?
How on earth did paleontologists ever managed to piece together a T-rex?
It takes no faith at all to look at a complete skull and see that it belonged to some ape-like animal, but had more cranial volume than any present-day non-human primate. It must have logically belonged to a pre-human primate, or hominid. Of course, things don't work out quite so simply, that's why there were Neanderthal's and other hominids that, (notice this) probably, didn't evolve and went extinct.
The Dead Sea ScrollsI just did a google search and the only place such scrolls ever come up is in a game. Would you mind pointing me in the right direction, so I can know what you're talking about?
Whether it makes sense or not is not the issue. It is only one of many possible interpretations of the data. Because of this your "belief" in a specific interpretation of those facts comes down to a matter of faith.. Just like when the world was flat. (It is easy to believe now because all of your peers also believe as you do.)It makes sense if you accept evolution as the driving force towards present-day living species. It's a theory that makes sense and is compatible with evidence - evidence from the fossil record and circumstantial evidence from the observation of how the same species of animal is differently adapted to different environments... even in humans!
Upvote
0