Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Didn't you get the memo? We are the new Chosen People. (Frankly I am a bit worried. A fat lot of good that did for the Jews)
-
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
- Thread starter dad
- Start date
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Wait. I have a computer. What was I thinking.
Yes, you are correct. The TOE does not teach that women come from the bones of men.
Last week is not being discussed indeed. This is:
Last Thursdayism - RationalWiki
You're a young earth creationist who explains the seeming disparity with reality by deception from your god.
Your only argument is that you're a last thursdayist.
You're discussing it exactly. No difference whatsoever. You're pretty obtuse not to see it. You can't see the obvious.
This black and white thinking is exactly what prevents you from seeing yourself as a last thursdayist. As in, i might be denying a piece of paper, you're denying reality.
I know this is your thread and all, but i have decided that it's now about your beliefs, since it really IS all about your beliefs, not ours.
No one is doing any tampering whatsoever. I'm saying in order for your beliefs to be correct, god has to tamper with evidence. Which means there are two choices:
A. God tampers with evidence.
B. You're wrong.
I'm voting B.
Yes, in the other forum you openly insult your opposition. Here that's forbidden. Oh wait, a recent rule in that other forum also forbids it, which resulted in your last thread being locked. You're just paranoid & delusional.
This record is getting a bit tiring. By your definitions, everyone who disagrees with you is a devil worshiper. You're not here to discuss but to preach.
Exactly. But thankfully, i'm not a last thursdayist. I don't need to tell myself that the only way to bend my scripture to reality is by inventing a lie. Here:
"if the world was created 6000 years ago with the appearance of being made billions of years ago, what is there to stop us from claiming it was made Last Thursday?" - From the link earlier.
The answer is, there is nothing to stop us from claiming that. Your claim is as valid as a random idiot coming here and proclaiming the universe came into existence last thursday. It's also called omphalism:
Omphalos hypothesis - Wikipedia
"It is based on the religious belief that the universe was created by a divine being, within the past ten thousand years (in keeping with flood geology), and that the presence of objective, verifiable evidence that the universe is older than approximately ten millennia is entirely due to the creator introducing false evidence that makes the universe appear much, much older."
You have been doing exactly this.
Yawn. You seem to have trouble convincing even yourself of that because you keep preaching it like a mantra.
I'm pretty certain you've failed to note much. For example, i noted this: Whenever you claim that you're not making the claim that your god deceives, you are in fact lying to yourself. That's why all the trouble decrying every single person to ever observe any of these evidences. It's easier to decry _all_ interpretations of your opponents, than to admit that your god is a dodgy bastid.
Last edited:
You have a good point there. And from the looks of it, plenty of folks lining up to play that other role in the story. You know. The bad guy.
I find that most creationists do not understand their own fallacies and flawed arguments. The reasons for their flaws are not always apparent, but I cannot rule out delusion as a source.
siti
Well-Known Member
Well that I can certainly agree with! I must admit I have never seen such a far-fetched attempt to twist scientific facts to fit around a fairy tale. Very creative but utterly bizarre. How do you suppose light from stars billions of light years away has reached the earth then? Ah! Its suddenly dawning on me - they are not really that far away are they? They only appear to be impossibly distant...and I agree that must be true - otherwise you would not have had time to get here from whichever planet you came from. Anyway, welcome to planet earth, I hope you enjoy your stay - you're surely going to find things a little different around here. For example - an earth year is currently about 365 days - you might want to take that into account in your calculations.
It is much more common than I realized. Especially it seems prone to expression as very maniacal views on religion.
That's brilliant. Why has this not occurred to physicists and cosmologists? I hypothesize a barrier that light, other radiation and objects must pass through on their way to earth. This barrier brings them back to our scale in size. Not only are they much closer to us than they appear. They appear far away because they are so much smaller in relation to us. It is Dan's Theory of Relativity. Hey. This is as good as some of the claims I have seen plopped out on here.
I've noticed this in real life. Some of them are a bit scary. A guy on the subway literally came to me a few months ago and claimed he was Jesus. And that he could blow up the subway with his mind.
Since i couldn't prove him wrong, nor did i want to aggravate him in case he was a schizophreniac or something, i just politely asked him not to.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Oh noes!! Another sinner!
Wait, I just noticed that I am on a computer myself. When will it ever end?
I met a person a month or so ago at a local Home Depot that appeared to be experiencing paranoid delusions and wanted to know if a capacitor in her smoke detector was a camera. She also had not seen LED bulbs before and was completely freaked out by the one she found in her bathroom. Apparently, she was separating from her husband and was absolutely certain he had left these devices to spy on her. It was very strange.
If you use computers you are going to Hell. I know it. I just know it. It will never end. Never.
Well...Sorry I misunderstood that.
dad
Undefeated
As you were told no way, nothing like that. I am not suggested embedded ages. Get over it.
No, the deception of yours. That doesn't affect reality or me.
The faith of God and creation by Him is not my idea actually. Nor are you probably capable of discussing that and that is not the topic. Your belief system is. Science so called.
You are wrong. The tampering is a conspiracy theory inside your head.
Aside from your insults try and focus on ideas rather than persons in a debate. I would be a fool NOT to insult evo fables falsely called science. That is nothing like your personal (attempted) insults.
So is this your claim? Try and relate posts to the thread and posters at hand.
My claim is that science of origins is belief based. Nothing to do with your strawman diversion. Really. Science really does assume and therefore claim that nature.laws were the same in the past. That is a basis for models of the past. Why can you not prove or support this basis for science claims? Instead we see lies about what my position is, repeated even after I clarified how you were not even in the ball park. This shows us you are DESPERATE to avoid dealing with having to support the basis and beliefs used for actual origin science claims. It also shows a deep dishonesty in lying about my position.
False. I do not keep with flood geology at all! That is a lie. Nor is the delusion of the deceived due to God tampering with evidence. As you were told it is due to the beliefs you impose on things when looking at them, so that they then start to look old to you. The reasons it looks old are faith based. Namely that our laws and nature existed back then, so that we had the radioactive decay and etc. All your premises rest on that belief of a same state past. Nothing looks old without it!
Never. That would be your religion that deceives. Like the OP says. Focus. be honest.
That is why you blather on about 'these evidences' without providing any!
So you engage in personal insults, lie about my position repeatedly, fail to defend your beliefs falsely called science and then finish the symphony of insanity with an insult to the Almighty!
Not bad for someone accusing others of insulting people.
dad
Undefeated
I would think it took some time to get here.
How much time is the issue! Since Adam saw the stars I know it wasn't much time! No problem if no time as we know it and think of it exists in deep space! If there is no time as we know it then it can not take a lot of time as we know it to move in deep space! All that time you thought it took (billions of years) doesn't exist in reality. Possibly because it does not take much time out there to move. Remember speed is a concept based on fishbowl time. 'How much time it takes to move through so much space'. If time was different than we experience and are familiar with here in the fishbowl, then we would not have the same time involved in movements!
Doesn't matter at all. God is able to make them far. Or not. The issue is whether science knows how far they are! They do not. Not unless you can prove time exists the same in all the universe.
Yes, we know that. It is also known from records of Scripture that a year used to be 360 days!
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Theory of relativy
Germ theory of desease
Plate tectonic theory
Atomic theory
Evolution theory
..
Are we perhaps seeing a pattern here?
Could it be that the problem here is that you don't comprehend what the word "theory" means in a scientific context?
Just so you know: "theory" in science basically means "graduated hypothesis".
It's not some wild guess or unsupported idea.
No..... In science, a theory is a body of knowledge, a well tested and confirmed hypothesis.
The fact of the matter is that there is nothing "above" theory in science. Science is the graduation stage of an explanation of a set of data. It is the accepted and best explanation at our disposal for any given phenomenon.
There is nothing higher. It's the end-stage of any scientific idea.
As explained above.... scientific ideas don't start out as theories. They start out as hypothesis.
They are promoted to "theory" when the hypothesis is well tested and confirmed.
1. science doesn't deal in proving things
2. really good theories, do not become "facts". Theories explain facts. Facts support theories. You really need to brush up a bit on how science works and what these words mean in scientific jargon.
Here's a small summary:
- Fact: a fact is just an observation, a data point. ie: apples fall to earth
- Law: a law is an abstraction of a logical set of facts. ie: objects with mass attract other objects with mass
- Hypothesis: a proposed explanation of a set of facts AND laws. WHY do apples fall? WHY do objects with mass attract other objects with mass? How does it work?
- Theory: a well tested and accepted hypothesis. The graduation stage of any scientific hypothesis.
Theories stay theories. They are never considered "proven" (no matter how much evidence and confirmation test you can sum up), because you can never be certain that future discoveries won't force you to revise or even replace a currently accepted theory. Theories never become laws or facts. Laws and facts are descriptive of what happens. Theories EXPLAIN why the laws and facts are what they are.
Explanations never become the thing they are trying to explain..........
Such as?
Your opinion is noted.
I however KNOW that evolution theory, like any other scientific theory, requires no "faith" at all.
Evolution makes testable predictions and is supported by an insane amount of solid evidence, while contradicted by none. No need for faith when there are mountains of evidence.
That would be abiogenesis, not evolution. Evolution explains the origins of diversity of living things. It does not explain the origins of life itself. Completely different subject and scope of inquiry
Well, it would certainly help if you would start by informing yourself on how science works, what the words mean in scientific jargon and what the actual scope is of the theory you wish to argue against.
Because up until now, every single objection you have raised is based on misunderstanding of all of it.
Good, because theories and facts aren't the same thing.
At present, it seems as if you wouldn't recognise science if it came up to you wearing a T-shirt saying "I AM SCIENCE" while smacking you upside the head with a 50-foot flag pole with a flag that says "THEORIES EXPLAIN FACTS".
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Science IS religion. It is neither true nor false. It is to simple and the statement itself is not science. The statement is religious itself.
If you want to do this as science: Describe how the everyday world works for us all, then please learn to stop and identify when you yourself are doing science or religion.
Science as everyday process is in effect neutral. But some people on both sides of religious and not overlook that.
Science is a limited human behavior in making sense of the world, but so is religion for how the world works.
Both objectivity in science and subjectivity in religion have limits.
I am a skeptic in the global sense and I can spot the limitations in both. They both have limited usefulness in practice for the everyday world. Neither works in an unlimited sense.
So if you are trying to state the facts about how the world works even now, neither science nor religion works unlimited for all of the world even now.