Gray Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 2 hours ago, JLHPROF said: Fixed it. If it happened, the flood would be detectable for the same reasons that Venus crashing into Mars would be detectable, even if it had happened a few thousand years ago.
JLHPROF Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 5 minutes ago, Gray said: If it happened, the flood would be detectable for the same reasons that Venus crashing into Mars would be detectable, even if it had happened a few thousand years ago. If you remove any supernatural elements sure.
Gray Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 17 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: If you remove any supernatural elements sure. Right, including a supernatural removing of massive amounts of evidence. A celestial cover-up.
thesometimesaint Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 20 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: If you remove any supernatural elements sure. Science can not posit any Supernatural elements and remain science. That is religions forte. SEE
JLHPROF Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 7 minutes ago, Gray said: Right, including a supernatural removing of massive amounts of evidence. A celestial cover-up. Sounds familiar: D&C 110: 1 The veil was taken from our minds, and the eyes of our understanding were opened. God is good at keeping us from seeing things, especially when he wants us to operate on faith. 4 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Science can not posit any Supernatural elements and remain science. That is religions forte. Which is why science can never have complete understanding or know anything with absolute certainty. 1
mnn727 Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 48 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: If you remove any supernatural elements sure. So you're saying you believe God is a Trickster?
Gray Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 16 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Sounds familiar: D&C 110: 1 The veil was taken from our minds, and the eyes of our understanding were opened. God is good at keeping us from seeing things, especially when he wants us to operate on faith. Why would it be important to take the literal flood on faith? Is there some salvific substance there?
thesometimesaint Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 11 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Which is why science can never have complete understanding or know anything with absolute certainty. That is a Strawman Argument. Science doesn't claim that we do have a complete understanding of everything of know anything with absolute certainty. We do know certain things, about certain subjects. Despite Bill O'Reily we really do know how the tides work, even if he doesn't. SEE O’Reilly: I’ll tell you why [religion’s] not a scam. In my opinion, all right? Tide goes in, tide goes out. Never a miscommunication. You can’t explain that. You can explain why the tide goes in… We do know physics works though we are constantly learning more about how it works. We sent a spaceship past Pluto with split second accuracy.
JLHPROF Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 3 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: That is a Strawman Argument. Science doesn't claim that we do have a complete understanding of everything of know anything with absolute certainty. We do know certain things, about certain subjects. Oh really? Quote There was no global flood some 4000 BCE. Sounds like a claim of absolute certainty to me.
waveslider Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 16 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: We do know physics works...... Please explain exactly how physics works in a black hole then? Black holes sure seem to defy a lot of the laws of physics as we know them.
Calm Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 3 hours ago, JLHPROF said: Fixed it. You might want to fix your own post. Against board rules to do that in a quote box, I believe as it may confuse posters not closely following the conversation. You should always claim changes as your own under your own name to avoid confusion. 1
JLHPROF Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 48 minutes ago, Calm said: You might want to fix your own post. Against board rules to do that in a quote box, I believe as it may confuse posters not closely following the conversation. You should always claim changes as your own under your own name to avoid confusion. Done.
bcuzbcuz Posted September 17, 2016 Posted September 17, 2016 2 hours ago, waveslider said: Please explain exactly how physics works in a black hole then? Black holes sure seem to defy a lot of the laws of physics as we know them. Science doesn´t need to explain everything. It is accepted in science that somethings are currently beyond explanation. That you merely mention black holes denotes an acceptance of one part of science that presently mystifies current complete knowledge. Science does not need to explain everything. Religon, on the other hand, as soon as it encounters an unexplained phenomen, must, absolutely must, try to find an explanation. When such an explanation is wanting, then religion plays its "god card". "God did it". The "God did it" card trumps any other answer. It automatically wins. Science, however, requires: demands, that any answer given can be reproduced with the same result. When science gives an explanation, it demands that others can reproduce the same results. For example: if you think that some event or details justify a creationist conception of the world we live in, all you need to do is show how the details fit only to your explanation. I won´t hold my breath.
JLHPROF Posted September 17, 2016 Posted September 17, 2016 9 minutes ago, bcuzbcuz said: Science, however, requires: demands, that any answer given can be reproduced with the same result. When science gives an explanation, it demands that others can reproduce the same results. Half of what science explains is based on formula and extrapolation, not direct observation. Personally, I think a lot of these scientists just forget to carry the one.
waveslider Posted September 17, 2016 Posted September 17, 2016 24 minutes ago, bcuzbcuz said: Science doesn´t need to explain everything. It is accepted in science that somethings are currently beyond explanation. That you merely mention black holes denotes an acceptance of one part of science that presently mystifies current complete knowledge. Science does not need to explain everything. Religon, on the other hand, as soon as it encounters an unexplained phenomen, must, absolutely must, try to find an explanation. When such an explanation is wanting, then religion plays its "god card". "God did it". The "God did it" card trumps any other answer. It automatically wins. I mentioned black holes because thesometimesaint said: 3 hours ago, waveslider said: We do know physics works...... so my comment was indeed denoting my acceptance of one part of science that presently mystifies complete knowledge. My point was to state that we don't know physics works all the time... That there are circumstances when we just don't know, and science doesn't explain everything. Religion also doesn't need to explain everything. It doesn't need to explain unexplained phenomena either. If it did then there would be no need for faith. It is only when secularists come in without any faith and demand answers to things that require the faith that seems so completely misunderstood by themselves, that the skeptics say we are playing a trump card of, God did it," because we don't have an immediate answer to the skeptics' questions.
thesometimesaint Posted September 17, 2016 Posted September 17, 2016 19 hours ago, JLHPROF said: Oh really? Sounds like a claim of absolute certainty to me. Physics works.
thesometimesaint Posted September 17, 2016 Posted September 17, 2016 19 hours ago, waveslider said: Please explain exactly how physics works in a black hole then? Black holes sure seem to defy a lot of the laws of physics as we know them. We're still trying to figure that out. But the Theory of Gravity proposed by Einstein allows for them.
Larry Cotrell Posted September 17, 2016 Posted September 17, 2016 Evidence that God created the Earth: 1)Everything that begins to exist has a cause 2)The universe began to exist 3) Therefore, The universe has a cause *It cannot cause itself because it would have had to already exist to cause itself. Because of this, it had to have been an eternal supernatural being.
thesometimesaint Posted September 17, 2016 Posted September 17, 2016 7 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said: Evidence that God created the Earth: 1)Everything that begins to exist has a cause 2)The universe began to exist 3) Therefore, The universe has a cause *It cannot cause itself because it would have had to already exist to cause itself. Because of this, it had to have been an eternal supernatural being. Non sequitur 2
Calm Posted September 18, 2016 Posted September 18, 2016 10 hours ago, Larry Cotrell said: Evidence that God created the Earth: 1)Everything that begins to exist has a cause 2)The universe began to exist 3) Therefore, The universe has a cause *It cannot cause itself because it would have had to already exist to cause itself. Because of this, it had to have been an eternal supernatural being. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_first_cause#Everything_that_comes_into_being_must_have_a_cause 2
The Nehor Posted September 18, 2016 Posted September 18, 2016 On 9/16/2016 at 3:19 PM, mnn727 said: So you're saying you believe God is a Trickster? Finally we can admit that God our Father is actually Loki as we all secretly thought. 2
maklelan Posted September 18, 2016 Posted September 18, 2016 On 9/13/2016 at 11:14 AM, snowflake said: I have been reading a book by Walt Brown titled In the Beginning, Compelling Evidence for the Creation and the Flood. In his book he poses the question, Is evolution compatible with the Bible? pg194. "Many people, although they may not know the term, are theistic evolutionists; that is, they believe God used evolution to create the universe and everything in it. For some, this appears to be an acceptable compromise--belief in evolution and belief in God. The first provides scientific respectability, while the second provides eternal hope and satisfies an inward conviction that there must be a Creator. For these people, evolution is compatible with the Bible." But is it? For me the short answer is No, evolution is not compatible with the bible. "if evolution happened, then death was widespread before man evolved. But if death preceded man and was not a result of Adam's sin, then sin is a fiction. If sin is a fiction, then we have no need for a Savior". pg200. So, is evolution compatible with the Bible? If so, please explain how you come to that conclusion. The Bible isn't compatible with the Bible. Evolution is a fact. That it is considered questionable at all in this day and age is one of the most damning indictments of religious ideology I could ever imagine. It would be utterly laughable if it weren't so absolutely horrifying that it is actually taken seriously by people in positions of power in our country and even in our church community. 3
waveslider Posted September 18, 2016 Posted September 18, 2016 3 minutes ago, maklelan said: Evolution is a fact Actually Evolution is a theory.
maklelan Posted September 18, 2016 Posted September 18, 2016 On 9/16/2016 at 2:19 PM, mnn727 said: So you're saying you believe God is a Trickster? If someone believes the Bible is unilaterally the word of God, then they believe God is a trickster. See, for instance, 1 Kgs 22:19–37, where MIcaiah explains that God asked one of his spirits to go deceive the king of Israel to his death, which he did. 1
thesometimesaint Posted September 18, 2016 Posted September 18, 2016 (edited) 15 minutes ago, waveslider said: Actually Evolution is a theory. Please explain what a Scientific Theory is. For help SEE A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world. SEE http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/just-a-theory-7-misused-science-words/ Edited September 18, 2016 by thesometimesaint 1
Recommended Posts