science vs religion?

[james bond]

So not a scientist then. To actually be a scientist one must follow the scientific method. Almost every creation scientist that I know of has openly stated that they no longer do so.



Why do creationists make such obviously ignorant and incorrect claims? It amounts to a breaking of the Ninth Commandment. If there was evidence for a god scientists would accept it. Sadly for you there is no scientific evidence for your "creator". Would you care to learn what is and what is not scientific evidence? It is a very easy concept to understand.




Once again, what evidence? I am very sure that you have none since I have yet to meet a creationist that understands the concept.

>>SZ: So not a scientist then. To actually be a scientist one must follow the scientific method. Almost every creation scientist that I know of has openly stated that they no longer do so.<<

Ha ha. Stop it. My sides hurt.

The creation scientist Sir Francis Bacon came up with the scientific method to honor God.

It's the atheist scientists who make the ignorant and incorrect claims of evolution, billions of years old earth and universe (based on wrong assumptions) and the like. You believe in the myths of aliens, the universe is primed to create life, we have a common ancestor, the earth was created via uniformitarianism, the universe is boundless, i.e. has no boundaries, and other ridiculous fossils such as Lucy without any evidence and use of scientific method.

 

[Subduction Zone]

>>SZ: So not a scientist then. To actually be a scientist one must follow the scientific method. Almost every creation scientist that I know of has openly stated that they no longer do so.<<

Ha ha. Stop it. My sides hurt.

The creation scientist Sir Francis Bacon came up with the scientific method to honor God.

Francis Bacon was not a "creation scientist". You do not appear to know what one is. Creationism is a reaction the theory of evolution. If you knew your history you would know that Bacon worked over 200 years before Darwin. If he believed a creation myth that was only because he did not know any better. I can site scientist after scientist that did not know something that was not discovered until long after their deaths.

You appear to know that you are wrong too. You did not mention any modern "creation scientists" because you know that I am right.

It's the atheist scientists who make the ignorant and incorrect claims of evolution, billions of years old earth and universe (based on wrong assumptions) and the like. You believe in the myths of aliens, the universe is primed to create life, we have a common ancestor, the earth was created via uniformitarianism, the universe is boundless, i.e. has no boundaries, and other ridiculous fossils such as Lucy without any evidence and use of scientific method.

Please, this is so obviously wrong that it is either a blatant lie or an indication that you know nothing of the sciences at all.


Once again, I and others here will gladly help you to learn. You have shown that you do not understand the concept of evidence at all either. Perhaps we should start there.

 

[james bond]

Francis Bacon was not a "creation scientist". You do not appear to know what one is. Creationism is a reaction the theory of evolution. If you knew your history you would know that Bacon worked over 200 years before Darwin. If he believed a creation myth that was only because he did not know any better. I can site scientist after scientist that did not know something that was not discovered until long after their deaths.

You appear to know that you are wrong too. You did not mention any modern "creation scientists" because you know that I am right.




Please, this is so obviously wrong that it is either a blatant lie or an indication that you know nothing of the sciences at all.


Once again, I and others here will gladly help you to learn. You have shown that you do not understand the concept of evidence at all either. Perhaps we should start there.

I know more about science in my little pinkie than you. It's a joke to claim your stuffy atheist science superiority ha ha.

Last time, you were embarrassed and had no reply for Lucy. Lucy is another mistaken "theory" of common ancestor. It's the creation scientists who have the evidence and experiments to back it up. What science has shown is that it backs up the Bible while atheist science is wrong. The atheist scientists tried to raise money by touring Lucy across the US, but it lost so much money that Lucy is in mothballs in Ethiopia and won't tour again ever. Even the professor who put Lucy together thinks apes evolved from man. Next, a man and an ape hybrid cannot live for more than one generation. Forbidden Russian experiments proved it.

Try this one on. Darwin's theory of closely related creatures competing for food was wrong. It's been show in experiments that creatures cooperate in order to survive. Much of what Darwin hypothesized was wrong. Your survival of the fittest is falling apart.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I know more about science in my little pinkie than you. It's a joke to claim your stuffy atheist science superiority ha ha.

Please. You know that is not true. It is also a personal attack. You do not even understand the concept of evidence. Otherwise why are you so afraid to even discuss the subject?

Last time, you were embarrassed and had no reply for Lucy. Lucy is another mistaken "theory" of common ancestor. It's the creation scientists who have the evidence and experiments to back it up. What science has shown is that it backs up the Bible while atheist science is wrong. The atheist scientists tried to raise money by touring Lucy across the US, but it lost so much money that Lucy is in mothballs in Ethiopia and won't tour again ever. Even the professor who put Lucy together thinks apes evolved from man. Next, a man and an ape hybrid cannot live for more than one generation. Forbidden Russian experiments proved it.

What on Earth are you talking about? You never embarrassed me, you never had a bogus claim that I could not reply to. And no, the originals rarely travel. To what purpose? And no. you do not understand what the person that put Lucy together thinks.

Try this one on. Darwin's theory of closely related creatures competing for food was wrong. It's been show in experiments that creatures cooperate in order to survive. Much of what Darwin hypothesized was wrong. Your survival of the fittest is falling apart.

Please, you need to substantiate this claim of yours. And no one expects Darwin to have all of the answers. The term "Darwinsim" is a creationist term. Natural selection is still running strong.

If you ask proper questions I will answer them. If you screw up in your questions I will point out your errors for you so that you can try again.

 

[Darkstorn]

A creation scientist is a scientist who believes that God created everything in the beginning and the Bible.

I would think you're referring to atheist scientists who do not believe in God and refuse to accept (believe) the supernatural. They are the ones with the mythology.

Since atheists will not accept evidence that God is true, I would think they will have to learn it the hard way. It will be two Chuck buck the hard way and they lose.

Ha ha. Stop it. My sides hurt.

The creation scientist Sir Francis Bacon came up with the scientific method to honor God.

It's the atheist scientists who make the ignorant and incorrect claims of evolution, billions of years old earth and universe (based on wrong assumptions) and the like.

I know more about science in my little pinkie than you. It's a joke to claim your stuffy atheist science superiority ha ha.

Next, a man and an ape hybrid cannot live for more than one generation. Forbidden Russian experiments proved it.

And the icing on the cake:

Your survival of the fittest is falling apart.

This would make for a really good Monty Python type skit. I don't think your point is strong enough for people to actually waste their time. They should instead just point out how damn funny you are.

You have a very strong ability at making people laugh at you. You should try comedy instead of logical arguments.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Belief without evidence is ot science. Nor is trying to disprove evidence with bronze age faith.

No, i am referring to creation scientists, as i stated.

Nor do creationist have any evidence for god magic, your point being what? At last science has evidence of known conditions ant materials available and a valid hypothesis for abiogenesis.

Provide evidence of the supernatural that can be scientifically investigated otherwise you are simply asking good, honourable, honest people to believe in santa clause, unicorns and the hog father.

As yet, after several thousand years and several billion people attempting to prove the existence of god or gods, you still have only faith. As for your claimed evidence that god s true, present it for review. As far as i can see, those several thousand years and several billion people are proof by exhaustion that there is no such proof, only faith.

Sacrilege!

 

[ChristineM]

Sacrilege!

It is a family tradition to all sit by a roaring log fire on the afternoon of Dec 25 and watch the whole thing.

Terry Pratchett was my favourite and sorely missed author. As you may know I'm dyslexic, The Colour Of Magic was my introduction to reading once my problem was diagnosed and prismatic glasses prescribed and i have been hooked ever since.

Now he's on the reading list of our two eldest who have introduced the Diskworld series as good literature in the english lessons in their french school.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is a family tradition to all sit by a roaring log fire on the afternoon of Dec 25 and watch the whole thing.

Terry Pratchett was my favourite and sorely missed author. As you may know I'm dyslexic, The Colour Of Magic was my introduction to reading once my problem was diagnosed and prismatic glasses prescribed and i have been hooked ever since.

Now he's on the reading list of our two eldest who have introduced the Diskworld series as good literature in the english lessons in their french school.

I forgot that you were dyslexic, but I agree about Pratchett. I don't know why, but I have as yet to buy the final book featuring the Diskworld. I suppose it would make a good Christmas present for myself. I don't think that I will go Kindle, though I did buy one of his books that I already had in that format.

 

[ChristineM]

I forgot that you were dyslexic, but I agree about Pratchett. I don't know why, but I have as yet to buy the final book featuring the Diskworld. I suppose it would make a good Christmas present for myself. I don't think that I will go Kindle, though I did buy one of his books that I already had in that format.

The Shepard's crown? Very good, i recommend it.

Have the whole Diskworld series, most of his earlier works. Could never get on with the long Earth, definitely not Pratchett style so never bothered with the rest of the series. Terry was quite ill so I guess they were mostly written by Stephen Baxter perhaps even just using Terry's name for sales.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Shepard's crown? Very good, i recommend it.

Have the whole Diskworld series, most of his earlier works. Could never get on with the long Earth, definitely not Pratchett style so never bothered with the rest of the series. Terry was quite ill so I guess they were mostly written by Stephen Baxter perhaps even just using Terry's name for sales.

I am sure that it is. I know that Granny Weatherwax passes away, perhaps that is why I am a bit reluctant. And I agree about the Long Earth too. I even bought a couple of collections of his very early short stories. Very very raw and not the talented story writer that he became, but one could see flashes here and there.

 

[ChristineM]

I am sure that it is. I know that Granny Weatherwax passes away, perhaps that is why I am a bit reluctant. And I agree about the Long Earth too. I even bought a couple of collections of his very early short stories. Very very raw and not the talented story writer that he became, but one could see flashes here and there.

Me too, try the lspace website, there are some free short stories on there plus lots of info.

The L-Space Web - A Terry Pratchett / Discworld Web® Site

 

[Altfish]

I do have a mirror. I think it shows an image of Altfish with an iPhone taking a selfie.

It is definitely not me, I wouldn't touch Apple products with a bargepole. Any company that calls its complaint/repair section the Genius Bar is too far up its own ar$e

 

[gnostic]

I am one of those guys who appreciates a good joke thread, so if you want to make another unsubstatiated claim, I'm all ears.

Was that a “pun”, Kuzcotopia?

 

[Kuzcotopia]

Was that a “pun”, Kuzcotopia?

Just by a hair.

 

[james bond]

It is definitely not me, I wouldn't touch Apple products with a bargepole. Any company that calls its complaint/repair section the Genius Bar is too far up its own ar$e

Apple is the #1 company in California. It's not that Apple products are bad, but that they are overpriced. The Genius Bar is to talk with those who have detailed knowledge of the product, so one can ask them questions and find out what they didn't know about the product. If you're not an Apple fan or consumer, then it doesn't really matter. If libbies want to buy Apple products, then I don't begrudge them their personal preferences.

 

[Altfish]

Apple is the #1 company in California. It's not that Apple products are bad, but that they are overpriced. The Genius Bar is to talk with those who have detailed knowledge of the product, so one can ask them questions and find out what they didn't know about the product. If you're not an Apple fan or consumer, then it doesn't really matter. If libbies want to buy Apple products, then I don't begrudge them their personal preferences.

Taylor Swift was last years highest grossing singer - position in charts doesn't impress me.
All I said was, if the person had an iPhone it wasn't me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Instead of being quick to judge those opposing your worldview, why don't you try to understand what they are saying. It may lead you to a different direction.

What makes you think that I don't understand your world view? And where have any of my criticisms been wrong about you?

Why don't you try to learn some of the basics of science so that you don't keep repeating the same old tired ignorant creationist errors? It would do you no harm to learn the basics, such as what is and what is not evidence and what the scientific method is. You would quickly realize that those at Answers in Genesis and other creationist sites have removed themselves from the ranks of scientists. At least in regards of the myths that they believe in.

 

[Polymath257]

Instead of being quick to judge those opposing your worldview, why don't you try to understand what they are saying. It may lead you to a different direction.

Understanding isn't the same as agreeing. I understand the creationist mindset quite well, having been brought up in it and seeing it around me throughout my youth. But I find it insular, superstitious, and scientifically untenable. I have read creationist books and considered their arguments. I have followed up on their references and found not just that they lied, but just how pervasive their lies are. I have seen just how much they refuse to even understand what the positions are of those they fight against, typically reducing them to sound bites based on quote mining. I see how they twist the historical record, attempting to co-opt the early scientists into their camp when those early scientists had no better understanding than anyone else at the time.

So, I will return your post: Instead of being quick to judge those opposing your worldview, why don't you try to understand what they are saying. It may lead you to a different direction.

 

[`mud]

ohhhhhhh.......I have a suspicion that someone's kinda toonie tones !
~
maybe it's me.....yech !

 

[Subduction Zone]

>>SZ: By the way, orthodontists do not specialize in making teeth white. They straighten teeth, and most people do not need their teeth straightened. There is no way to judge how white those teeth were.<<

Hahahahahahahahahahaha. Oh brother, where art thou? Pearly whites, contrary to pearly gates, means teeth. As for pearly gates, don't even bother to look it up on the site below. You're not getting neither ha ha.

Yes, I now that, but by context you screwed up. I doubt if you can be honest enough to admit that.

The point was their teeth were perfect. They were straight and didn't need any orthodontic work. This was due to having good genes from Adam and Eve up to that point. Humanity got worse after Noah's Flood and kept getting worse. Yet, the atheists continue to look for reasons why the ancient people were in such good health. Atheist scientists are searching for ways for us to live longer via mutation products, but instead keep cutting our lives shorter. Christians know how to take care of themselves and will outlive the atheists.

Ancient Romans in Pompeii Had 'Perfect Teeth' | Smart News | Smithsonian

You fail when you only read the title but do not read the article. Here is a bit more:

"That wasn’t the only surprise for the researchers: their analysis also revealed that the people of Pompeii had nearly “perfect teeth,” ANSA reports. A low-sugar diet, rich in fruit and vegetables — along with fluorine that was present in a local water source— gave them their pearly whites. (The Mediterranean diet scores again!) The only dental damage was apparently due to the people’s habits of “cutting or snapping objects with their jaws,” ANSA adds. "

So very good, but not perfect. And an explanation. You may not like it, but relying on a myth will not save you. Adam and eve were a myth. You may not understand how we know that. You seem to be afraid to enter into a serious discussion of the sciences. And you have no clue at all what scientists are doing.

By the way there are no "atheist scientists" as you use the term, though all science is atheistic to date. There are only scientists regardless of religious beliefs. That is why the number of Christian scientists that accept the theory of evolution far outnumbers the number of Christian scientists that do not. There are mountains of scientific evidence for the theory of evolution and none for creationism. Only the delusional have a problem with the theory.