• 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!

Science IS religion

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
Origin sciences are belief based so they are religion. Real science has to do with actual knowledge and observations and how the world works now.
ROFL... you can completely dismiss what dad has to say here. He apparently doesn't believe that the Earth orbits the sun because no one has ever actually observed it happening. This is his apparent comprehension of how the scientific method works.
 

dad

Undefeated
Yes the force that created nature is nature itself and that creative force created humans. Humans then created god in their image to explain everything they did not understand.

Show the evidence for this.
Fortunately nature created a nervous system that was finally able to understand the world without magical beings.
Did all early peoples of history lack this?
Unfortunately some humans remain stuck in the past with their biblically written description of their god unable to understand what has been learned so create excuses instead of opening their eyes to the amazing world that they live in. Again sorry Dad.
Don't apologize for inept rants. Just try to have the good manners not to waste our time with them again.
 

dad

Undefeated
What you actually did was say that your claims are obvious, and if i don't see it, i'll never see it. So great leading, man. You led me to doubt your ability to lead yourself out of a room without walls.
Eve is not my claim nor did I invent it. The story is well known, she came from the bone of a man. That means she could not have been born. The TOE teaches otherwise. ..Regardless of what you either see or think you see.

Yes, science does make the assumption that last thursdayism is probably stupid. I actually give you the benefit of the doubt: Last thursdayism could be true. As could the Matrix. But they sound pretty stupid to me too.

Last week is not being discussed here. Strawman.


Or, we could use science until YOU come up with a way to prove last thursdayism. That sounds a lot better... :D
You cannot use origin sciences any more than you can use Mother Goose stories. Using actual science of the present world is something we all do. That doesn't get your religion brownie points!

Yes, if you take the bible literally, then embedded age and last thursdayism are just wonderful defence mechanisms to prevent your worldview from crumbling totally.
Strawman. No one is discussing this but you. There are no old old ages, forget embedded ones.

Here's an alternative: Maybe it's not supposed to be taken literally, and maybe your interpretation itself is flawed.
More useless baseless doubts and denial of what is in black and white.

It's because the alternative, last thursdayism(and Christian apologetics in general) sounds really, really far-fetched.
Other beliefs are not the topic. Your religion falsely called science is.

So they go with evidence and assume its age hasn't been tampered by a deceiver god.
The only tampering being done is by your evo beliefs imposed onto evidences.

I don't feel like it, i'm reading your other thread, the recently locked one, in christianforums. In that one you're decrying evidence using the same reasoning you're doing in this post: That the laws of physics were different in the past due to your belief in last thursdayism.
The mods there have enforced ever increasing rules on telling the truth. So I will let them enjoy some catholic rigor mortis for now.

Yes, and unless the rocks contain tampering from a deceiver god, then it's accurate.
Once so called science gets hold of the rocks, then they do encounter tampering by having beliefs sprayed all over them.

If rocks do contain said tampering, then yeah i suppose it's not very accurate. First you have to show that this deceiver god exists.
The patterns of isotopes would only represent long ages IF this present nature had existed the whole time. Science canot prove it did, it has merely assumed and believed so and modeled accordingly. Religion!
Ps. Dad, it has a more appropriate name than last thursdayism. It's a common form of apologetics. But i'm using the more derisive yet equally accurate term to voice the ridiculousness of the entire concept.
Your misconceptions and starkly limited comprehension of my position and even that of your own religion is duly noted.
 

dad

Undefeated
ROFL... you can completely dismiss what dad has to say here. He apparently doesn't believe that the Earth orbits the sun because no one has ever actually observed it happening. This is his apparent comprehension of how the scientific method works.
No one hinted at any such foolishness. Try to debate honestly, even though you come from a disadvantaged intellectual position with your evo belief system. Otherwise lurkers will catch on that you make stuff up.
 

Dan From Smithville

He who controls the spice controls the universe.
Staff member
Premium Member
I know that information is tracked on the number of viewers of a thread, but what these visits amount to is not reported. It could be that people pop in see that there is nothing to the OP or see no point in responding to the OP and leave. It is pure speculation to make claims about what a lurker may catch and has no meaning except as a questionable device to give a false sense about a position. I do not find that to be a very moral position for a religious person to take.
 

dad

Undefeated
Oh I see! So let me get this right, you are suggesting that the flood happened at around the KT boundary time - about 66 million years ago -
That would be my current educated guess, yes. In real time that is about 4500 actual years ago. In so called science faith based imaginary time it is about 70 million years.

and Edenic metallurgy began 1600 years before that so homo sapiens has been mining and smelting metal ores since the dinosaurs were still around -
Of course. The thing is that in that different former nature, most animals and man likely could not leave fossil remains, so they are not in the fossil record! From dust we came and to dust we returned pretty fast back then apparently.
and Adam was born (oops, I mean created) about 66,001,600 years ago?
That depends on what imaginary date you accept for when the KT layer was laid down. If we used 70 million imaginary years ago, then we would add the 1600 extra on top. But remember that the error curve grows exponentially soon as we approach the time when the nature changed. It goes wildly wrong and gets worse very fast. To give you an idea, they say the earth is what 4.5 BILLION years old!? Well, that is how far and fast it goes wrong!
 

dad

Undefeated
I know that information is tracked on the number of viewers of a thread, but what these visits amount to is not reported. It could be that people pop in see that there is nothing to the OP or see no point in responding to the OP and leave. It is pure speculation to make claims about what a lurker may catch and has no meaning except as a questionable device to give a false sense about a position. I do not find that to be a very moral position for a religious person to take.

Well you can assume there is no such thing as lurkers if you like. Just ignore that part and consider it is not for you:)
 

dad

Undefeated
Science has no God, no miracles, no holy sanctified days or rituals, no practice for higher morality as sin or evil or good, etc,.... last 100 years of science has made the world a better place verses 3000 years of religion.
Science does not make the world better, it just equips sinners better to do more damage faster.
 

dad

Undefeated
The theory of evolution is testable,
Show us a test then.

it is falsifiable.
Unlike the truth which cannot be found false! But make it fit their religion!

every time science claims are found wrong (often) they simply change the story to accommodate the new facts and

Second does the observation agree with the predictions of the theory.

Well, I have not observed a common relative with a flatworm, have you? The fable is unsupportable fantasy.

You on the other hand do not appear to be able to post any scientific evidence that supports your beliefs.
My religion is not yours, so there is no science that covers mine! Yet all evidence agrees! Fossil evidence, continental drift, etc etc etc etc etc etc. A.L.L.
 

dad

Undefeated
Let's watch the personal attacks. I can demonstrate that all you have is belief. You could demonstrate that you know. And I have demonstrated many times that I know. I can support my claims. But until you support some of yours that I requested you support first you are in no position to ask for any such demonstration.

All you need to do is to admit that you cannot support your beliefs and I will explain how we know that life is the product of evolution. I will go over evidence and why it is evidence until it is coming out of your ears. All that is required is that you either support your earlier claims or admit that you can't.
If posts are frequent ad do not address the topic or contain substance they are spam. Watch that.
 

Dan From Smithville

He who controls the spice controls the universe.
Staff member
Premium Member
I ignore all parts that start with dad under the consideration that they are not fit for human consumption.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Show us a test then.

Easy, no Precambrian bunny rabbits.

Unlike the truth which cannot be found false! But make it fit their religion!

That is your sin. Try again.

every time science claims are found wrong (often) they simply change the story to accommodate the new facts and

Again, your sin.

Well, I have not observed a common relative with a flatworm, have you? The fable is unsupportable fantasy.

Sure, every time I read one of your posts. I observe a relative of a flatworm. Of course you know it is not unsupportable. If you truly believed that you would not run away when people tried to help you to learn.

My religion is not yours, so there is no science that covers mine! Yet all evidence agrees!Fossil evidence, continental drift, etc etc etc etc etc etc. A.L.L.


Religion is your weakness. Not everyone has your weakness. And you really should learn what is and what is not evidence, But again, since evidence shows you to be wrong you have to invoke the Ostrich defense to protect your beliefs.

Tell me, why do you run away from learning what is and what is not evidence?
 

dad

Undefeated
Easy, no Precambrian bunny rabbits.

How would you know what lived in that time? Science looks at what died in the various times. More specifically what died and was able to fossilize! There is no reason to assume our current nature existed then, so we cannot apply current reasons for fossilization to that time. Most creatures probably could not then leave remains!

Sure, every time I read one of your posts. I observe a relative of a flatworm.
Sure you do. Great scientific observations you have there. Pink unicorns too?

Of course you know it is not unsupportable.
You are part of the proof in your failure to be able to support it!

Religion is your weakness. Not everyone has your weakness.
You have your own beliefs. In your case weakness is an applicable word for them.

So, you have made a claim based on there having existed a same nature.state in the past here on earth. Unless you prove it or support it with actual evidence rather than blather, your claim is shown to be religion.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
How would you know what lived in that time? Science looks at what died in the various times. More specifically what died and was able to fossilize! There is no reason to assume our current nature existed then, so we cannot apply current reasons for fossilization to that time. Most creatures probably could not then leave remains!

Sure you do. Great scientific observations you have there. Pink unicorns too?

You are part of the proof in your failure to be able to support it!

You have your own beliefs. In your case weakness is an applicable word for them.

So, you have made a claim based on there having existed a same nature.state in the past here on earth. Unless you prove it or support it with actual evidence rather than blather, your claim is shown to be religion.
If you would like to learn I and others here will help you. But first you must show that your interest is genuine.

When you are ready to learn the basics I am ready to help. So will others.

Once again all you have are beliefs. Beliefs that are refuted by the simple fact that we need new versions of the flu shot every year. I do not have your flaws. I do have my own, but the flaws you attribute to others tend to be yours and yours alone.
 

dad

Undefeated
If you would like to learn I and others here will help you. But first you must show that your interest is genuine.

When you are ready to learn the basics I am ready to help. So will others.

Once again all you have are beliefs. Beliefs that are refuted by the simple fact that we need new versions of the flu shot every year. I do not have your flaws. I do have my own, but the flaws you attribute to others tend to be yours and yours alone.
Try to do more than spam repetitive nonsense.
 
Top