God Recreated the Earth 6,000 Years Ago!

[Parsimony]

placing an adjective in front of the noun .....doesn't really change the noun.

Compare panda with red panda. Or ice with Vanilla Ice. Or egg with nest egg.

 

[gnostic]

don't read much of what I post.....do you?

placing an adjective in front of the noun .....doesn't really change the noun.

Do you know how pathetic and weak that argument is?

In every branches of knowledge and skills, there are languages for each one.

Take the word, "strategy", although they may seem to have similar meanings, their usages are different in war, politics, business, management, sport.

Take the word "depression".

1. One is definition is the psychology, a emotional or mental illness, but other possible definitions,
   
2. could be used in regarding to economic depression,
   
3. or in topology and geography it may relates to terrain, of sunken place,
   
4. and there is atmospheric depression, relating to pressure that cause severe storms, like cyclones or hurricanes.

Whether it be medicine, economy, topology, meteorology or some others that I haven't thought of, depression, can have meaning, depending on how you use it.

How or where you use the word, will determine the definition.

Like or not science, have different definitions to certain words, like theory that different to everyday usage outside of science.

The word "weight" is used to measure food in kilogram, but in most science, kilogram is a measurement of mass. Weight in science mean the force, measured in as newtons, and is related to calculation of mass (kilogram) multiply by acceleration (m / s^2), where is acceleration is gravity.

If you don't understand the scientific terminology, then why are you even here debating against us when you don't know what you are talking about?

If you argue with some about the bible, wouldn't it better that both people have read the same scriptures, to argue effectively over which interpretation is more in align with the original context?

Christians for instance, have different interpretation to the Hebrew scriptures (or Old Testament), because Christians don't always follow everything that in the OT, because this part of the bible only applied to or intended for the Jews or the Israelites. But Jews don't followed the New Testament or Christian scriptures at all. Christians don't follow the same customs as Jews do, like the Sabbath and Passover, and let's not forget the circumcision., because by the time of 2nd century, most Christians were of non-Israelite blood.

 

[Thief]

yeah...yeah...yeah...
and I don't read the text as if a clock....

no attempt of scripture debunking can separate the Creator from the creation.
the story may have huge fault lines.....
but cause and effect cannot be separated.

God and his creation....
Cause and effect.

 

[Thief]

but for you....I will call it .....

God Theory

and I believe in God because of science....therefore....

it's a scientific theory

and carries sufficient weight to be true until proven false.

 

[metis]

but for you....I will call it .....

God Theory

and I believe in God because of science....therefore....

it's a scientific theory

and carries sufficient weight to be true until proven false.

That's not how it works when it comes to real science, though. You may accept that, but we can't because there's simply no objective evidence for us to go on.

 

[outhouse]

and I believe in God because of science....

You mean pseudoscience.

You already admit to refusing the FACTS in REAL science

 

[outhouse]

it's a scientific theory

and carries sufficient weight to be true until proven false.

Factually it is not.

Its why you have no credible sources.

 

[outhouse]

but cause and effect cannot be separated.

It has never been put together because it is not credible.

 

[McBell]

but for you....I will call it .....

God Theory

and I believe in God because of science....therefore....

it's a scientific theory

and carries sufficient weight to be true until proven false.

funny how not even you believe what you post....

"placing an adjective in front of the noun .....doesn't really change the noun."​

 

[McBell]

and carries sufficient weight to be true until proven false.

Thus why you have little credibility...

 

[outhouse]

Thus why you have little credibility...

I doubt he has even has a little

 

[Ouroboros]

placing an adjective in front of the noun .....doesn't really change the noun.

Adjective in front of a noun is to qualify and give more descriptive information about the noun, so in a sense, an adjective actually do change the noun, or more accurately, the adjective and the noun together form a unity that is understood together as a one.

For instance, "popular music" isn't the same kind of music as "classical music". They're all music, but they're different kinds. The same way "theory" vs "scientific theory" do have different meanings. The "scientific" in front of the noun "theory" is to qualify the noun to a specific use of the noun.

--edit

To help you understand a little what an adjective is, I just simply Googled it and here's a definition for what an adjective is:
ad·jec·tive
ˈajəktiv/
noun
GRAMMAR

1. a word or phrase naming an attribute, added to or grammatically related to a noun to modify or describe it.

And perhaps the term "modify" is confusing, it means to change something, so... do adjective change the meaning of a noun? Yup. They sure do.

 

[Thief]

Adjective in front of a noun is to qualify and give more descriptive information about the noun, so in a sense, an adjective actually do change the noun, or more accurately, the adjective and the noun together form a unity that is understood together as a one.

For instance, "popular music" isn't the same kind of music as "classical music". They're all music, but they're different kinds. The same way "theory" vs "scientific theory" do have different meanings. The "scientific" in front of the noun "theory" is to qualify the noun to a specific use of the noun.

--edit

To help you understand a little what an adjective is, I just simply Googled it and here's a definition for what an adjective is:
ad·jec·tive
ˈajəktiv/
noun
GRAMMAR

1. a word or phrase naming an attribute, added to or grammatically related to a noun to modify or describe it.

And perhaps the term "modify" is confusing, it means to change something, so... do adjective change the meaning of a noun? Yup. They sure do.

all theories are theories.
just ideas of explanation.

 

[Thief]

I've been watching a documentary about math and mathematicians....

seems it was necessary to accept ideas that cannot proven along with ideas that can be......

 

[Ouroboros]

all theories are theories.
just ideas of explanation.

Sure, but Scientific theory is something with a substantial backing and support in the form of evidence. That's the difference. And the adjective "scientific" indicates that.

Regardless of what you think of scientific theory, adjectives do change the noun.

 

[Thief]

Sure, but Scientific theory is something with a substantial backing and support in the form of evidence. That's the difference. And the adjective "scientific" indicates that.

it was science that led to the singularity....
at that point a choice is made.
science will assist in making that choice

it cannot do so for you

 

[Ouroboros]

it was science that led to the singularity....
at that point a choice is made.
science will assist in making that choice

it cannot do so for you

??? You lost me.

So the scientific theory is the same as theory in colloquial use because I have to make a choice at the big bang of the singularity since the singularity can't do it for me... ? What about the choice of my chocolate covered strawberries and the excitement of the puppy who loves bacon? Which undecided singularity under scientific theory assisted in that choice? And what about the rubber duckies? Where do they come in into big bang? Whose choice is the rubber ducky of scientific theory in dark matter of relativity? Perhaps there's an epoch of uncertainty in the cerebral multiplex of the cohesive story of plastic construction? I don't know. Do you?

Perhaps if you had less mystical ramblings and a little bit more coherent material to support what you're trying to convey, we could have a better chance of parlay. But that's your choice............... ...................... .. . .... .......... . . ... .................... . . . . . . ... ..... ..... . .. .........

 

[Thief]

??? You lost me.

So the scientific theory is the same as theory in colloquial use because I have to make a choice at the big bang of the singularity since the singularity can't do it for me... ? What about the choice of my chocolate covered strawberries and the excitement of the puppy who loves bacon? Which undecided singularity under scientific theory assisted in that choice? And what about the rubber duckies? Where do they come in into big bang? Whose choice is the rubber ducky of scientific theory in dark matter of relativity? Perhaps there's an epoch of uncertainty in the cerebral multiplex of the cohesive story of plastic construction? I don't know. Do you?

apparently.....you really are lost

 

[Ouroboros]

apparently.....you really are lost

Apparently it's your choice. The scientific theory of singularity can't do it for you.

If you tried a little harder to explain what you're saying, maybe there could be some more interesting discussion.

 

[Thief]

Apparently it's your choice. The scientific theory of singularity can't do it for you.

If you tried a little harder to explain what you're saying, maybe there could be some more interesting discussion.

at the point of observation (which you only do by thinking)....

the singularity is self starting?
science would say ...no....

for every effect there is a cause.

at the point of singularity, science cannot proceed.

you can.