Reply With Quote
what does "making them feel good" have to do with the factuality though. i fail to make that connection
I totally agree.
But.....we have to take into account most people want something else besides this, so they have it, it makes them feel good, yep a drug. Old people knowing their days are numbers feel better about things if there is hope of an afterlife. Some kid with a disease feels better if they know others are praying for them. We aren't cold callused creatures only interested in the hard cold facts, we are all about emotions.
I have no clue how all this came about and if you read anything scientific it doesn't take long after reading,...maybe...may..could have...might have...before you figure out you won't find the answer there either.
Something out of our relm of comprehension is responsible for all this but like I mentioned I have no clue how it was done. If evolution was a method, ok ...cool. To think this all came about because of a ...BANG!...is beyond ridiculous. Way too many things have to work together to pull this off, no way in that happens without a Designer.
But this Designer has nothing at all to do with the Bible, that is just us humans screwing things up as usual.
What if the Earth were a 1000 miles closer to the sun? What if the Earth rotated at a different speed? Why do we have all the nutrients humans need to exist? The sperm and the egg. That doesn't just...BANG~!!!!!!!!!!...happen.
Last edited by Avante; 12-12-2014 at 01:01 AM.
what does "making them feel good" have to do with the factuality though. i fail to make that connection
I was talking about why so many people believe in the Biblical God.
You wanna talk science? Ok here you go.
that didn't answer my question, but ok. never put it past you to post youtubes you didnt watch
Why would anyone post a video they didn't watch? Do we not see the guy as a an old man? Do we not see some fish swimming at the very end with his statement in lettering? Stop with this ridiculous....you didn't watch?
So tell me what did you think about that? The worlds leading atheist the author of over 30 books finally coming to his senses. What is your take on that?
Check this one out...
Ever notice intelligent people treat atheists like little children as we saw there?
Last edited by Avante; 12-12-2014 at 01:54 AM.
so a christian evangelist speaks out against atheism. should i be shocked?
and why would i care about david berlinski? this guy claims he is one of the world's leading physicists, and yet berlinski doesn't have a single degree in physics
So no matter what anyone says regardless of their education, you have the real answer, right? What about the claim that science is now beginning the prove the existance of an intelligent design?
Interesting...
http://magazine.biola.edu/article/10...elligent-desi/
no, i mean, this guy tried to make a big deal about David Berlinski and called him one of the worlds leading physicists
Why not talk about all those examples of science being wrong, how very intelligent people believe in a creator and how there are many in the scientific world beginning to question the old ways, those you were taught.no, i mean, this guy tried to make a big deal about David Berlinski and called him one of the worlds leading physicists
You try too hard to discredit everyone, all those far more educated than you are.
There are so many articles, videos talking down atheism and evolution it's ridiculous.
we've discussed it plenty. newton was largely wrong about gravity. but you know who discovers this mistakes in science? other scientists. science always advances by disproving old science. that's why its silly when people say "scientists dont allow people to question them." the only thing science does is question science.
we've discussed this as well. i've also been clear in separating theism/atheism from creation/evolution. again, i'm fine with people believing in a god, as long as that belief doesn't conflict with scientific knowledge... an example of this is young earth creationists who believe the earth is 6,000 years old. thats when i get a little irkedhow very intelligent people believe in a creator
yeah, as i said above, this is completely normal. scientists are always questioning old science. science is not afraid to correct and improve itself. there is no set in stone "holy book" of science. scientists are always free to challenge other theories, but you better have some really hefty proof to do so. einstein basically rewrote the book on gravity, and proved that much of newton's theories on gravity were wrongand how there are many in the scientific world beginning to question the old ways, those you were taught.
So you are well aware that at any time science could......we were wrong about our stance on evolution and the existance of intelligent design....yet still feel this need to battle to the end over, well I had chemistry andf biology, hahahaha!!!!!!!!!! Come on man.
How about just a tad bit of...."hey we do the best we can but we don't really have all the answers"...ok?
The more time we spend defending ourselves, the less time we have to present factual data about the unscientific notions upon which the theory of evolution is based. That’s why we tend to ignore the personal attacks and focus on science.
Because we do this, our critics naturally claim that we don’t defend the credentials of scientists who reject the theory of evolution because we can’t. Since the charge is repeatedly made that all “real scientists” accept the theory of evolution, we will address that charge this month.
Past Scientists
There is no question that some of the most famous scientists of all times believed in creation. Ann Lamont has written a book en led 21 Great Scientists Who Believed The Bible. She devotes chapters to Kepler, Boyle, Newton, Linnaeus, Euler, Faraday, Babbage, Joule, Pasteur, Kelvin, Maxwell, and Werner von Braun. These men weren’t dummies, and they believed in creation.
Evolutionists, of course, will argue that these great scientists lived before Darwin, and weren’t acquainted with the theory of evolution or modern scientific discoveries. While that may be true of some, it certainly isn’t true of Werner von Braun (1912 - 1977). Furthermore, their argument is based on the false premise that the evidence for the theory of evolution is stronger today than it was in the sixteenth through twentieth centuries. In reality, it was easier to believe in the theory of evolution when the fossil record was much less complete, before spontaneous generation of life was disproved, before genetics and molecular biology were understood as well as they are today.
Present Scientists
There are thousands of modern scientists who reject evolution. There is a partial list of them at http://www.christiananswers.net/crea...ople/home.html. But evolutionists apparently believe that any modern scientist who rejects evolution has merely been brainwashed by Christian doctrine. For example, consider this email we received from “P”.
Subject: "Science is against the theory of evolution."
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 10:25:52 -0400
From: P
To: [email protected]
Last edited by Avante; 12-12-2014 at 02:43 AM.
sure, but we go on the information available to us. thats the rational thing to do
you keep finding examples of random scientists who oppose evolution as if it's making a point. no matter how many you post, its a tiny minority at this point
Birds Roost On New Evolutionary Tree
In a massive data crunching analysis, researchers have created a new evolutionary tree for birds. The effort required enormous computing power and new algorithms because it involved the whole genomes, rather than just a few genes, of 48 species of birds to establish their relatedness. The study is the first of its kind for vertebrates.
“It contradicts morphology-based trees. It contradicts mitochondrial trees. It supports more trees based upon nuclear genes, although those trees weren’t highly resolved and this one is.”
Bird genomes, in terms of genome size, compared to other vertebrate groups like reptiles, amphibians, mammals, they’re on average smaller than other vertebrates. And this allows one to sequence their genomes easier, and also assemble them easier.
The reason why: it’s thought that they have less repe ive genome in their genome, but yet a similar complement of genes encoding for proteins…so you can learn a lot about vertebrate biology more easily studying birds than you can in other groups where there’s a lot of this repe ive so-called junk DNA. “
with the whole genome scale dating we are arguing that avian diversity of 95 percent of the species did not occur 80 to 100 million years ago in the Cretaceous Period, but occurred right around the time of the extinction of the dinosaurs [what we call the meteor impact in the Yucatan peninsula], which was an alternative theory…
right after that extinction event, we get all orders of birds diverge within 50 million years. And then from there on everybody else speciates.”
http://www.scientificamerican.com/po...utionary-tree/
did someone say "speciates"? speciation? say it ain't so!
Don't you know according to SpurRaider21 it's what the "majority" says that is true.
did someone say "speciates"? speciation? say it ain't so!
Spurraider, you realize your arguing one of the most important subjects in the history of mankind with an old, chubby, former child rapist who spends a vast majority of his golden years on a site dedicated to a team that he doesn't even follow right? In other words, you should stop and just accept that you're much smarter than him.
Your hung up on the majority rules it must be right theory.
You just don't get it. That is why you have weak debate skills you debate like its a NBA smack off "count the rings".
"There are more Spur fans than mavs fans so we rule"
Just because the books in your school teach something doesn't make it 100% fact.
When Edison talked about light bulbs he was in the minority so was Bill Gates when he said people will want personal computers.
I suppose if the majority posters said you was a flaming does that make it true?
Get off your majority high horse and post some evidence man Evolved from a ape already .
i never said they are right because they are a majority
but its foolish to use examples of a handful of scientists as if they are a dominant voice over the consensus.
and when edison came up with his light bulb, its not like other scientists said "no you're wrong. that isn't a light bulb"
Tell me where the Master Designer kept his magic wand and I'll tell you how man evolved from apes. Show me the wand, son.
Emotions are great mechanisms to help humans cope and survive, although they're not unique in the animal kingdom. Elephants do show some sort of 'emotion' by collecting and burying the remains of a dead relative. Humans share a lot of these so-called 'human' characteristics with other animals.
Yet you're using the Internet to log in to Spurstalk while typing on your computer that's powered by electricity. Internet, computer, and electricity=all possible because of years of scientific research/trial and error.
What relevance is this to the topic?Yet you're using the Internet to log in to Spurstalk while typing on your computer that's powered by electricity. Internet, computer, and electricity=all possible because of years of scientific research/trial and error.
You do realize Scientists cannot accept metaphysics? It doesn't mean they don't hold faith, it's because pointing towards God has no use for them.
scientists label this as a theory. A very controversial theory at that. It's the people that fail to open their mind that give Evolutionists a bad name.
Easter Island statues were built by Polynesian settlers almost a thousand years ago. According to studies, these statues or moai were representatives of deceased ancestors/chiefs. Most of them were built between 1250-500 by a distinguished class of craftsmen.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions