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.
Thanks, but I don't need a different part of the world to tell me how I'm perceived:
Luke 21:17 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake.
I always discount the opinion of blamers and admire doers.
Blamers have no value to society at all.
These figure do tell us something, if people are raised among religious people they themselves are more likely to be religious if they are not then they won't.
So SkyWriting, had you been raised and gone to school in the UK the odds are that you would not be religious.
It makes you wonder as well why when quoting census results, there's nary a No-True-Christian fallacy in sight.
What all this has to do with the topic?
Who said anything about hate? Creationists are mainly viewed with amusement in my experience.
The analogy of people who claim to have been abducted by aliens fits quite well I think. It is rather as if a UFO obsessive accused you of hating people who have been abducted by aliens. Your immediate response would be amusement and "pardon...?"
These figure do tell us something, if people are raised among religious people they themselves are more likely to be religious if they are not then they won't. So SkyWriting, had you been raised and gone to school in the UK the odds are that you would not be religious.
My schools were 100% secular, as are my parents. I accepted Jesus at 32.
What does that have to do with "are more likely to be religious"? More likely, not guaranteed.
Most schools are secular.
My response: Baloney & Cheese.So SkyWriting, had you been raised and gone to school in the UK the odds are that you would not be religious.
"Why doesnt creationism need any data?"
snip
Let me give you a reason for the importance of YOU unshackling Science from your bias:
A man found a drunk rumaging around under a streetlight, "Lose something?"
"My wallet," slurred the drunk.
"Where abouts did you lose it?"
"Over in the bushes."
"Then why are you looking here?" reasoned the first man.
"Because the light's better."
I'm confused. Are you a scientist or a nuclear engineer? They're not the same thing.As a scientist I've been fired twice for speaking up for Creationism, so I have something to add to this discussion. I was paid for 26 years as a nuclear engineer (with a Masters degree at UC Berkeley, unlike President Jimmy Carter), so I understand the scientific principle as well.
Another interpretation is that alternative explanations for Gentry's results were found, and that he refused to accept them and became somthing of a crank.1. Too many scientists who are Creationists, when they do good science in this area, try to turn the paper into a witness for the Bible. These papers are automatically deleted, regardless of the strength of the Science. Witness the publishing history of Robert Gentry whose many papers on radioactive halos, challenging Earth's dating system, were widely referenced in scientific circles. Then he did the no-no and used that forbidden word, "Bible".
Could you give some examples of these papers that drew unusual insights?I published over 40 papers in the scientific journals and conferences, national and worldwide. I know how to be "wise as a fox, innocent as a dove" when addressing the biased scientists of our day. Approximately 10 of the papers drew unusual insights because of my 'Young Earth' perspective.
Sorry to disappoint you, but no one is gasping at you. Provide some more specifics about this young-earth oriented science you've been doing if you want anyone to pay attention to your claims.I can hear the collective gasps of all you scientists who say, "How dare you dirty our hallowed halls with 'Young Earth' science?" (you've just proved my point about scientific bias).
If he does solar engineering, he's a solar engineer. I'm well aware that formal training is not the only way to develop a career -- I've got graduate degrees in English literature and particle physics, but I'm a geneticist in practice -- but in your original post, you alluded to your engineering training as the basis of your knowledge of science.SFS: I'm confused. Are you a scientist or a nuclear engineer? They're not the same thing.
My response: When I went back to graduate school after my stint in the Navy, my friend with a PhD in Fusion Engineering was hired by a solar power company. Now, SFS, I'll turn your question around: Was my friend a fusion engineer or a solar engineer? Formal university training is not the only way to develop a career.
It's been a long time since I read Gentry's papers, but as I recall, he never dealt adequately with alternative explanations for his results, and didn't seem to be going anywhere new. If your research isn't leading to new insights and doesn't address alternative explanations, it's likely to be shunted aside.SFS: Another interpretation is that alternative explanations for Gentry's results were found, and that he refused to accept them and became somthing of a crank.
My response: Yes, he had opposition throughout his publishing career. But his publications dropped off drastically when he used 'forbidden language' in his last major publication.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant, can you provide citations to the literature so I can read some of these papers. Conference presentations aren't much help unless they've been published, which SEPM doesn't seem to do with their annual conferences.SFS (I combined his last two questions): Could you give some examples of these young-earth papers that drew unusual insights?
My response: I presented my paper, Oil exploration under the catastrophist paradigm, at the Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists Conference, in December (2002). [...]
"Why doesnt creationism need any data?"
As a scientist I've been fired twice for speaking up for Creationism, so I have something to add to this discussion. I was paid for 26 years as a nuclear engineer (with a Masters degree at UC Berkeley, unlike President Jimmy Carter), so I understand the scientific principle as well.
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?