Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ykickamoocow

Creationists Go Round And Round

Recommended Posts


Sure is. Reliant Scimitar GTC. GRP body on a mixture of Ford, Triumph and Jaguar oily bits nailed to a hefty separate backbone chassis. Go here for info:

Sporting Reliants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Creationism is not an outdated concept. Is a belief. The problem arises when people starts mixing evolutionism (a scientific theory) with creationism (a belief).

Neutering people you don't agree with, that is an outdated concept. :P

Actually the problem is to look at anyone by itself, one can not be explain without the other therefore standing on one side alone is wrong and that is why we have a conflict here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cheers Ykick - that made me laugh. What's the J-word? Jackass! God, those people are dumb. They use long words to fool those less articulate than themselves.

More seriously, I never understand why Christians are so insecure in their beliefs as to have to convince themselves that the Bible is literally true in every detail, despite the fact that there are more internal inconsistencies in it than there are words in the New Testament; despite the fact that God changes his morality at the drop of a hat; despite every area of science showing it's not literally true. You can still be a Christian and believe in evolution - like the Pope, or the head of the Anglican church.

the problem here is that many people think that everything in the bible is the word of God but that is not the case, the bible contain words of God but also words of men and even words from the Satan itself, there is worng believe among Christians who think that the bible is perfect when is not, becasue God wanted the man to believe by faith and having a bullet proof bible would be a good way to demostrate that bible came from God and that is not what God wants, he didn't gave any proof of his existence becasue that would invalidate faith, and what is faith? faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. that's the reason why we don't have any proof or any perfect bible, the bible itself says this For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has? thoses christians trying to find a perfect bible are just fooling themselves and making things harder fro thoses under their teaching knowlegde is not our field, faith is because only by faith can we be saved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually the problem is to look at anyone by itself, one can not be explain without the other therefore standing on one side alone is wrong and that is why we have a conflict here.

Sounds like an intriguing concept. You should elaborate. I won't probably agree, because I am an atheist, but I am sure that religion and scientific knowledge are not at war, no more than literature and gymnastics.

BTW, I am trying to read Ash1's posts (20 pages on arial 10pt...) so far it must have been one of the most hilarious things I read. It is worth it. I recommend it. I can't belive that that Macarthur guy is really a succesful preacher. Saint Augustine, or Saint Thomas Aquinas would have kicked his arse for being so incoherent, blasphemous and ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's the thing, and I say this without much inclination to engage in any long argument or cut/paste debate. I also say it as someone who has worked in geosciences for more than 25 years and who has been a part time student of theology off and on for many of those years.

All knowledge is based on faith!

I don't mean religious faith necessarily, but faith in our senses, our observations, our recollections, our interpretations, etc. Faith in our teachers, parents, family and "experts". Religious faith may often be part of this (even for the non religious) but it is not the only faith and without faith there is no knowing. At some point things you have previously taken on faith you begin to see as thing you know. Thus comes knowledge.

I also understand that I do not know much at all. How can I say this.....well people whom I trust, people whom I have faith in, have told me so often enough that I have come to believe it is something that I know. In the grand sceme of things...... I don't know that much, kinda funny me thinks!

You all probably don't know that much either. <_<

cheers mates, I think I will go have a scotch now, single malt, 15 years old, I know I like that!

nuff said

I already said in past threads about this that Scientists need a lot more faith to believe in their theory than we need to believe in God, for example the bible have been the same for all this years but science is constatly change and denying what it was a FACT the day before, so how can we be sure that today's knowlegde is right? what is a law today can be a completely wrong tomorrow and that why they need faith to support thoses theories/laws even when they know that this is this way, that call this "Science in motion" but there were people swearing by thoses proven wrong laws/theories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am the god of hell fire, and I bring you fire,

I'll take you to burn

Fire,I'll take you to learn,

I'll see you burn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds like an intriguing concept. You should elaborate. I won't probably agree, because I am an atheist, but I am sure that religion and scientific knowledge are not at war, no more than literature and gymnastics.

BTW, I am trying to read Ash1's posts (20 pages on arial 10pt...) so far it must have been one of the most hilarious things I read. It is worth it. I recommend it. I can't belive that that Macarthur guy is really a succesful preacher. Saint Augustine, or Saint Thomas Aquinas would have kicked his arse for being so incoherent, blasphemous and ignorant.

I already elaborated on this in another thread but I don't remember the title of that thread, basically God was known (At least in spanish) as the Breeder and the word breeder was used instead of creator, by being a breeder he started everything and he directed evolution not that he made the whole world and everything on it like they are now, I have an ancient bible in spanish which can be found online too, that call God the breeder that word was replace by Creator in newest versions and probably that is why we now have this conflict now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're confusing axioms with faith. Axioms aren't a matter of choice. We don't have 'faith' in our observations, they are all we have. That's what encompasses all our ways of knowing about the world and being able to interact with it. Which is why I have a little time for people who suggest alternative ways of 'observing', but very little for people who tell you to disbelieve what you observe. Until that's all we have, that's all there is. Nothing else exists, what cannot be observed and cannot affect us doesn't exist. That's not faith. Faith is blind. Blind faith is an oxymoron. It's funny how people who criticize science entrust their lives every single day nay every moment to it, and yet depend very little on their faith. Why do you drive a car believing that the brakes will work? Fly in a metal cylinder imagining that the crazy laws of physics will keep it floating on thin air? When did you ever put that much 'faith' in faith? Your derisive fatalism doesn't sit well with how you live your life does it?

If everyone had faith that the sun moved, we'd be none the wiser now. So someone didn't have that faith.

Sure if you take science on faith, that's your problem. Part of the problem is that most people don't know how easy it is to understand basic science for yourself with simple experiments and no maths - finding that the earth is spherical for example.

If this is true discoveries are over, there's nothing left to be discovered, let's go back to the time when we didn't know there were microbes (viruses, bacteries...) they were causing diseased, killing people and animals and we didn't have any idea of this, there were no way for us to observe thoses creature but yet they were causing trouble to us, at that point THEY were not observable and yet they were there affecting us in a way we didn't know and were not able to study them but they were real, they are just like God his is not observable and yet he is affecting us because he support the whole creation even when you are not able to see it, since the beggining of humankind there were microbes in the world and we could see their effect on us, we didn't understand what was happening but science HAD an answer for thoses fenomenom and it was a wrong answer but everybody believe it because "science said so" but God knowing that there are microbes in the word commanded his people a lot of higene rules like washing their hand before eating, thousand of years ago.

What can not be observe could be affecting you in a way that you don't understand now but that doesn't means that this unobservable thing we are yet to discover is not affecting you nor exist, thinking the way you are expresing here could be the end of Science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am the god of hell fire, and I bring you fire,

I'll take you to burn

Fire,I'll take you to learn,

I'll see you burn

Thanks, Arthur.

Burn, burn, burn, burn, BURN!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure is. Reliant Scimitar GTC. GRP body on a mixture of Ford, Triumph and Jaguar oily bits nailed to a hefty separate backbone chassis. Go here for info:

Sporting Reliants

Brilliant. I really like the lines the colour is rich too! I also like the front lights - I can't stand the headlight designs that all our newer cars are using nowdays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks, Arthur.

Burn, burn, burn, burn, BURN!!!!!

:tiphat::worshippy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"If I conduct an experiment and the results yield a certain insight, you can then follow the experiment's methodology and confirm/dismiss the results. You can also challenge the methodology itself. From the speed of light to the size of the planet to whatever you want in the sciences, knowledge is not based on faith. Far from it."

Still.... any conclusions yo uare drawing rely on your faith in your observations, faith in your instruments faith in the scientific method of repeatability faith in your ability to reason etc. For instance for centuries the observable fact was that the sun rose and set. People had faith in their observation that the sun moved.

At the coer everything begins with faith, then we see things repeated and we test things and we draw conclusions we call facts etc..

I am afraid not. One thing is to consider Orwell's words "If I think I am flying and you think I am flying, then I must be flying". Interestingly, these words are at the center of religious faith.

OTOH, scientific observation gains its grounding in independent observation. The point is that, for example, water boils at 100 degrees, not because I say so or you say so, not because I have faith or you have faith, but because it is an experiment that can be repeated infinately many times with equal results regardless of who carries it out. IOW, one million years ago, a monky-man boiled water at 100 degrees and across the galaxy a slimy alien is boiling water at 100 degrees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IOU all a long reply.

Don't you dare, I'll ban your bald arse :nono1:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't you dare, I'll ban your bald arse :nono1:

Oh yeah? You try that you Creationist-loving, seal-clubber, fur-wearer, sig-hauer-collector, forum gestapo old man!

:boxing::blink::unsure::byebye::banned22:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol::lol::lol: You Argentine commie pinko, why I should just rip your sorry head off and shove it down your scrawny neck, you maggot...........YOU HEAR ME???????????????????????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's it. I will blow the dust off these soviet missiles and...wait a minute...what's this logo? "Powered by Lada"? :dam:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am afraid not. One thing is to consider Orwell's words "If I think I am flying and you think I am flying, then I must be flying". Interestingly, these words are at the center of religious faith.

OTOH, scientific observation gains its grounding in independent observation. The point is that, for example, water boils at 100 degrees, not because I say so or you say so, not because I have faith or you have faith, but because it is an experiment that can be repeated infinately many times with equal results regardless of who carries it out. IOW, one million years ago, a monky-man boiled water at 100 degrees and across the galaxy a slimy alien is boiling water at 100 degrees.

Are you sure about that?????????? That is the trouble with science. Thye only tell you the side that substantiates the theory they are trying to present.

:D Change the atmospheric pressure and that water will boil at a much different temperature. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. What did the Romans science ever do for us?

Good grief, I agree with Maure. Must lie down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah. What did the Romans science ever do for us?

Good grief, I agree with Maure. Must lie down.

Have a brandy or two, it helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you sure about that?????????? That is the trouble with science religion. Thye only tell you the side that substantiates the theory they are trying to present.

:D Change the atmospheric pressure and that water will boil at a much different temperature. :D

:lol: I think you'll find that your point works far better when applied to religion rather than to science! When was the last time your preacher told you what Muslims think about a particular topic? Scientists on the other hand routinely tell you about the problems with their theories - ever seen a medicine's list of side-effects, for example? The problem is that most people simply do not understand, through stupidity and/or willful ignorance encouraged by bad theology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I got a few minutes. Here are a few points to ponder. This is for people on both sides of the argument

With an open mind read the following litlle story

Suppose you have an ant farm and you want to leave instructions with your ants that will help keep them safe while you are out for the next 2 years. While you're at it explain the world as you know it to them, and touch on space travel as well. Communicate this to them in a form they understand. Try not to make any mistakes. Tell them you are going to send somebody back to check on them in about a year.

No lets say suppose( you really have to use your imagination here) you can turn your son into an ant for a week, and you send him back to the ants. You tell your son you better go down there and clue them in. I'm not so sure they understood what I was telling them. Just try and explain it to them because I'm too busy. Just call me on the communication device and let me know how things are going. Chances are you might have trouble with some, and they will probably want to kill you. However take this antitoxin, it will neutralize the ant bite and return you to your human status. During the week you son makes great progress living with the ants. He explains many things, and his knowledge of things they know nothing about amazes them. Now your son is making great progress giving them new instructions based on their new found knowlege. Now lets suppose while your son is being an ant, the queen ant has him taken out because she perceives you as a threat and that is how ants deal with threats. They don't know any different or don't understand anything else except being an ant. You kind of expected this might happen. So they bite your son and roll him in a hole. The antitoxin kicks in and your son begins the return to becoming a human. Its a four day process.

Now when readng the story above, and with a little imagination, doesn't that sound like a probable outcome

Image what a human would seem like to the ant. How accurately could you have communicated everything you know to these ants using their form of comminication . Your human knowledge of the world is impossible for them to comprehend. They just can't do it know matter how hard they try. They do they best they can, but they are frankly incapable of grasping some of the concepts.

Humans have a tendency to think that we are the highest order. We are after all the most intelligent species on the plant. We have been able to explain a lot of things, but I am a firm believer in you can only understand what you are capable of understanding. Human science frankly leaves too much unexplained. Like my little fairy tale above, I feel we are the ants, and I am not so foolish as to believe that all I know and undertand is all that there is to know and understand. Are you???? Our own history has shown us that. We keep turning pages, and the arrogance of our species is our worst enemy. Wasn't it in 1921 some science publication made the claim that there was nothing else left to discover!!!!! Good grief how wrong was that.

I look at the science community and how some of it(certianly not all of it) looks down at creationists. But really with an attitude like that, who are the closed minded ones???? Those who believe in only what they understand???? Be very careful who you call stupid and naive. Are you willing to bet the farm on only what you understand. What about the millions of things we don't understand. Are you just going to shrug you shoulders and say oh well, I don't understand it, so why do I care.

If you are still with me.

Try explain the color red to a blind man

Read the 1920 world book encyclopedia. Now tell me how accurate our scientific community is. This book is only 90 years old, and look at all the inaccuracies presented as truths. People who are ready to trust their lives to human science need to contemplate a little. Especially if you are going around calling people of faith stupid.

On the flip side creationist who think they know it all are making exactly the same mistake. The common ground in both camps is an unbelievable amount of unknowns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: I think you'll find that your point works far better when applied to religion rather than to science! When was the last time your preacher told you what Muslims think about a particular topic? Scientists on the other hand routinely tell you about the problems with their theories - ever seen a medicine's list of side-effects, for example? The problem is that most people simply do not understand, through stupidity and/or willful ignorance encouraged by bad theology.

Change that to "and theory" and we have agreement.

:D Our problem is our inherent superiority complex on both sides. :D

My theory is both sides are so far away from knowing much about anything the discussion is almost pointless. The universe is vast and our minds small. We do the best we can, but frankly it ain't much. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember the Earth is only 7.000 yrs old. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...