-
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!
Is Science Necessary...
- Thread starter Nakosis
- Start date
syo
Well-Known Member
The science which has answers to questions.
PureX
Veteran Member
Well, many SAY they do, and even believe what they're saying, but then in discussion, it becomes apparent that some do not. Instead, what they believe is that non-material considerations have no import or meaningful consequence.
syo
Well-Known Member
Too bad for science. If it doesn't give answers, it's useless.
Audie
Veteran Member
I hope you will point this out in real time sometime.
Identify it as " scientism" if thats what you think it is.
Until then I will disagree with your assertion.
Could you for present purposes say what you
mean by " non material"?
If you mean something about spirits I will
say now that such are unworthy of consideration- though taking them seriously
has huge consequence.
syo
Well-Known Member
Results? What exactly? I don't understand.
"What do you think science is? There's nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. Which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?"
- Dr. Steven Novella
Audie
Veteran Member
He is talking about the grim chimera
of "scientism", a beast rumoured by
our friend to haunt this forum.
syo
Well-Known Member
Nah.
They work together.
Do you think a no-religious, non-spiritual person can have ethics?
If so, how do you think they go about supporting their ethics?
Does religion apply to ethics?
And by ethics, I don't mean lists of things that a deity has purportedly commanded people to do or not do, but actual ethics: examining the principles and factors that make actions right or wrong.
Major part of the Canyon was formed fast. All current layer of the canyon seems to have eroded in similar time, that is why I believe the most of it was eroded fast after flood/during the flood.
It is interesting how anyone can think something else than the sudden flood event could have caused those. But maybe the problem is that people don’t really understand how the flood happened.
By what the Bible tells, before the flood, there was only one continent. Below it, there was vast water cavity. And the flood came when the continent was broken, collapsed, and sunk. Modern continents were formed during that event. And in the first part of the event, water flooded the earth, lot of vapour was formed, which caused the rain. The flooding water carried stuff from the braking point towards the other edges. Evidence for this edge is the Mid Atlantic ridge.
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https://cdn.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Mid-Atlantic-Ridge.jpg&f=1&nofb=1
From there the flooding water carried stuff for example towards west coast or America, causing orogenic mountains and vast sediment layers. And obviously, the flood carried first the stuff that was on top of the future Atlantic Ocean floor and eventually most of the loose stuff was removed, leaving the future ocean floor to be relatively clean. This is why it looks new for us, all old stuff was cleaned and only new sediments have been slowly covering it. At this point, old sediments were gathered to mountain areas and also for the area where the Grand Canyon would form later.
The flooding and rain caused planet to cool down, causing the ice age. Great glaciers were formed, which eventually also lowered the water level also. Those glaciers stored the water required to cause the Grand Canyon. When it started to melt, the sedimentary rocks had not hardened enough, which is why the melt water eroded the canyon fast.
All this water going back and worth explains the best way what we can now observe. I don’t think there is any other credible theory for to explain those findings.
Time of the supposed flood? What makes you believe they have it correct?
It is entertaining and I would like to hear how you explain it.
Sorry, I have no good reason to believe that, especially if we understand all that happened during the flood event and what was the starting conditions of earth before the flood.
By what the Bible tells, there was only one continent before the flood. And apparently when the flood came, it happened when the original continent was broken and collapsed and the waters beneath it, flooded. Water level was different then, because land had not been compressed as much as nowadays. Today it looks like we would need more water, because the ocean floors have gone down making it look like mountains are rising, which doesn't really happen.
Sorry, I was not accurate enough. I meant, can they prove the ash is from the particular event and not by some other cause?