The Miracle of Water.

[nPeace]

Riiight! You keep telling yourself that! (That’s like the third time you’ve brought up the Ark’s ratios without any urging from me! I think it affects you more than you want it to.) And forget about what Jesus said at Matthew 24:37-39.

Noe??? Where did RF get that translation?

 

[cladking]

Minneapolis/ St Paul is bifurcated. The wernickes area would be more like LA/ DC with a whole country in between them.

An egg becomes bifurcated to make twins and no matter what parts of the country they live they'll always be bifurcated.

Even if one moves down under they'll never get back together.

God, I hate semantics and word games. But it's the only argument that some people can muster.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You didn’t answer my questions.

I don't need to. This isn't about my religion. I am not trying to tell you science based on anything that is found there. I am not claiming I reject science for no good reason, but really it is because of my church.

You are trying to turn a debate that you are losing into an argument over ideology. I am not going to play your game.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Again, you didn’t answer my questions!

Again, I am not playing your game.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Riiight! You keep telling yourself that! (That’s like the third time you’ve brought up the Ark’s ratios without any urging from me! I think it affects you more than you want it to.) And forget about what Jesus said at Matthew 24:37-39.

Because it is a great example of how you use evidence. You take figures that have nothing to do with a global flood and use them as evidence for a global flood. This is the extent of your "science".

You believe whatever you need to in order to feel comfortable in the burned out shell of your argument, but it has no effect on me other than what I stated previously.

Since it was a widely known story, it would be difficult to imagine a Jewish person of the time that would not have been aware of it. It is hardly evidence the flood happened. It is evidence of why you believe, but your belief and reasons for it have nothing to do in supporting the facts of nature.

 

[ecco]

That POV stifled Newton, Boyle, Kepler, Bacon, etc.?

I didn't know Newton, Boyle, Kepler, Bacon were Jehovahs Witnesses.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That POV stifled Newton, Boyle, Kepler, Bacon, etc.?
Don’t think so.



Lol! You should hear the conversations I have w/ my fellow Witnesses, sometimes! You’d think differently!

More faulty assumptions. You’ve been deluded, I’m afraid.
Interesting: you belittle my beliefs...which I’m quite sure you don’t fully know / understand...but if I even mention yours, you feel I’m attacking you. Maybe not attacking, but you didn’t like it.

Imagine Newton, Boyle, Kepler or Bacon as JW's. No one would have ever heard of them, except to tell them, "Thank you, Not interested in your version of religion" after them knocking on their doors.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I didn't know Newton, Boyle, Kepler, Bacon were Jehovahs Witnesses.

You beat me to it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You didn’t answer my questions.

Being a Methodist doesn't incite me to grasp at fabricated stories about flash-frozen mammoths with mouths full of fresh bouquets either.

 

[Jose Fly]

There is evidence that they did not let a "godditit POV" interfere with their own intellect, while maintaining their religious views. That is my entire point. Those that let it, do not become a Newton, Boyle, Kepler, or Bacon.

The difference @Hockeycowboy fails to appreciate is that with those folks "God did it" was not their answer to the problems they sought to solve. No doubt their curiosity and perhaps their motivation to investigate the universe stemmed from their beliefs about God, but that's very different than looking at a problem, declaring "God did it" to be the answer, and stopping there.

 

[Jose Fly]

Imagine Newton, Boyle, Kepler or Bacon as JW's. No one would have ever heard of them, except to tell them, "Thank you, Not interested in your version of religion" after them knocking on their doors.

Well they certainly wouldn't have been working at any universities!

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The difference @Hockeycowboy fails to appreciate is that with those folks "God did it" was not their answer to the problems they sought to solve. No doubt their curiosity and perhaps their motivation to investigate the universe stemmed from their beliefs about God, but that's very different than looking at a problem, declaring "God did it" to be the answer, and stopping there.

He either does not understand that or refuses to accept it and all due to some fairly obvious reasons that are also denied.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Well they certainly wouldn't have been working at any universities!

With a church-sponsored ideology of "Goddidit", there is no need for a job in research to understand what we observe.

 

[Jose Fly]

He either does not understand that or refuses to accept it and all due to some fairly obvious reasons that are also denied.

Yup. It's fascinating to watch.

With a church-sponsored ideology of "Goddidit", there is no need for a job in research to understand what we observe.

I can just see the JW leaders with Newton, Kepler, et al., chastising them for being in universities where "moral and spiritual dangers" lurk, and every time one of them published a ground-breaking paper, the JW leaders would question them on why they were seeking prestige and status, and why their papers didn't mention God at all.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yup. It's fascinating to watch.


I can just see the JW leaders with Newton, Kepler, et al., chastising them for being in universities where "moral and spiritual dangers" lurk, and every time one of them published a ground-breaking paper, the JW leaders would question them on why they were seeking prestige and status, and why their papers didn't mention God at all.

I imagine the conversation would be how they risk disfellowship for giving voice to their radical ideas that have nothing to do with end times. God would rather they spend their time going door to door bothering other people.

 

[SkepticThinker]

The difference @Hockeycowboy fails to appreciate is that with those folks "God did it" was not their answer to the problems they sought to solve. No doubt their curiosity and perhaps their motivation to investigate the universe stemmed from their beliefs about God, but that's very different than looking at a problem, declaring "God did it" to be the answer, and stopping there.

I've pointed out the very same thing to him myself, on more than one occasion.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yup. It's fascinating to watch.


I can just see the JW leaders with Newton, Kepler, et al., chastising them for being in universities where "moral and spiritual dangers" lurk, and every time one of them published a ground-breaking paper, the JW leaders would question them on why they were seeking prestige and status, and why their papers didn't mention God at all.

A church, personal belief, and even proselytizing door to door are all fine. I may not appreciate every example and I am not a fan of having people come to my door for a lot of reasons. But I can live with the fact that people have the right to believe as they choose and communicate it within the law, but I cannot abide by the claim that they reject part or all of science based on the evidence, when it is clear they have little understanding of the evidence or the science and it is really just church doctrine. Even that could be dismissed if it were not for the effort to take it to action and remove valid knowledge, reasoning and science and replace it with one groups doctrine and denial. Any groups.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I've pointed out the very same thing to him myself, on more than one occasion.

A lot of people have. But when one is constrained by doctrine and church authority rather than following the evidence, denial is all that person can engage in.

 

[Jose Fly]

A church, personal belief, and even proselytizing door to door are all fine. I may not appreciate every example and I am not a fan of having people come to my door for a lot of reasons. But I can live with the fact that people have the right to believe as they choose and communicate it within the law

I agree.

but I cannot abide by the claim that they reject part or all of science based on the evidence, when it is clear they have little understanding of the evidence or the science and it is really just church doctrine.

Clearly if their positions on science were based on the data they would actually be familiar with it. The fact that pretty much all of them are remarkably ignorant of the science is a good indication that something else is going on. You nailed exactly what that "something else" is.

Even that could be dismissed if it were not for the effort to take it to action and remove valid knowledge, reasoning and science and replace it with one groups doctrine and denial. Any groups.

Yup. History is rife with cases of religious conservatives trying to squash and repress new knowledge.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

The difference @Hockeycowboy fails to appreciate is that with those folks "God did it" was not their answer to the problems they sought to solve. No doubt their curiosity and perhaps their motivation to investigate the universe stemmed from their beliefs about God, but that's very different than looking at a problem, declaring "God did it" to be the answer, and stopping there.

Oh, grief!

First, “goddidit stifles curiosity “; now, “No doubt their curiosity and...motivation...stemmed from their beliefs about God”!!

Goodness, make up your minds!