• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Evolution and Creationism both have equal value and scientific evidence to support them.

Autodidact

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
O.K. people, can we separate the discussion of American history? Thanks.

Now, about this evidence for creationism, it might help if Danmac tells us what he means by the term. Danmac, do you mean Young Earth Creationism, literal genesis, magic poofing, etc?

Before you drag the thread of on another tangent, would you mind answering the questions you have outstanding.

How does this sound--these threads are so trashed their hopeless. How about I start a thread called "The Theory of Evolution is supported by the evidence," and we start over there?
 
Danmac

Danmac

Well-Known Member
Autodidact said:
Not science, Danmac, and not interpretation. The SCIENTIFIC METHOD. It's a method. Do you have the slightest idea what it is? Do you, or do you not, believe that the scientific method is a good way to learn about the natural world?
Click to expand...

I know I'm gonna regret this, but here goes. I accept the scientific method............................ I don't care for the way some data is interpreted that's all.
 
Danmac

Danmac

Well-Known Member
Autodidact said:
O.K. people, can we separate the discussion of American history? Thanks.

Now, about this evidence for creationism, it might help if Danmac tells us what he means by the term. Danmac, do you mean Young Earth Creationism, literal genesis, magic poofing, etc?

Before you drag the thread of on another tangent, would you mind answering the questions you have outstanding.

How does this sound--these threads are so trashed their hopeless. How about I start a thread called "The Theory of Evolution is supported by the evidence," and we start over there?
Click to expand...

After you counselor
 
Valjean

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The ACLU defends principles. Individual cases are chosen as vehicles to establish these principles as legal precedent.

Principles are what people of higher moral development use to determine questions of right and wrong, &c.
 
tumbleweed41

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
Danmac said:
I know I'm gonna regret this, but here goes. I accept the scientific method............................ I don't care for the way some data is interpreted that's all.
Click to expand...

We have tried this before, I will give you another chance...

Please provide a specific example of a currently accepted biological scientific conclusion that has not been tested, and repeatedly challenged before acceptance. But instead relies on unscientific presuppositions or interpretations.
 
Danmac

Danmac

Well-Known Member
tumbleweed41 said:
We have tried this before, I will give you another chance...

Please provide a specific example of a currently accepted biological scientific conclusion that has not been tested, and repeatedly challenged before acceptance. But instead relies on unscientific presuppositions or interpretations.
Click to expand...

The existence of God.
 
Autodidact

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
Danmac said:
The existence of God.
Click to expand...

Are you deliberately trying to demonstrate your utter and total lack of understanding of what science is? How many times do you think I've told you this, do you suppose?

SCIENCE IS NOT ABOUT GOD. SCIENCE IS NEUTRAL, SILENT, HAS NOTHING TO SAY ABOUT WHETHER GOD EXISTS OR NOT.

The existence of God is NOT a scientific conclusion.

Typing the same thing over and over again is very annoying.
 
Danmac

Danmac

Well-Known Member
Autodidact said:
Are you deliberately trying to demonstrate your utter and total lack of understanding of what science is? How many times do you think I've told you this, do you suppose?

SCIENCE IS NOT ABOUT GOD. SCIENCE IS NEUTRAL, SILENT, HAS NOTHING TO SAY ABOUT WHETHER GOD EXISTS OR NOT.

The existence of God is NOT a scientific conclusion.

Typing the same thing over and over again is very annoying.
Click to expand...

CTNS--Science and the Spiritual Quest
 
Autodidact

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
Danmac said:
Yes.... science is interested in things outside of our space time universe.
Click to expand...

Well, one science is. But that's not what you're trying to argue. You're trying to argue that modern science disproves, or tries to disprove, God. This is simply false. btw, I don't think you want to argue that God is outside of our space/time/universe do you? Cuz y'know from our perspective, that's the exact same as not existing. It would also mean that Jesus never happened. So that seems like a bad line of argument for you.
 
Last edited:
tumbleweed41

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
Danmac said:
Yes.... science is interested in things outside of our space time universe.
Click to expand...
You do understand that the physical laws of our universe do not apply beyond our universe?
And that all energy and matter within our universe is subject to the laws contained within our universe?
 
Danmac

Danmac

Well-Known Member
Autodidact said:
Well, one science is. But that's not what you're trying to argue. You're trying to argue that modern science disproves, or tries to disprove, God. This is simply false. btw, I don't think you want to argue that God is outside of our space/time/universe do you? Cuz y'know from our perspective, that's the exact same as not existing. It would also mean that Jesus never happened. So that seems like a bad line of argument for you.
Click to expand...

That does not mean that God doesn't have access to our reality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top