RebelKev Wrote:

subflea Wrote:You believe in a magical sky fairy and in creationism.

Conservative ignorance exemplified.

...and yet you believe that your belief, which has also failed to be proven, is any truer.

With the existence of god, the burden of proof is in the hands of those who believe there is one. The burden of proof is always in the hands of the person who believes some thing or some process exists. Without being able to prove a god exists, there is no possible way of proving creationism.

I'm with Zero on this one, guys. Newton did some great stuff to study early physics and laid much of the groundwork for modern science today. But he also spent a lot of time working with alchemy, which if he was following the scientific method he would have seen a lot of inconsistencies that would have led him away from that pursuit.

Like I said a few days ago the human mind can be fooled very easily. That is why science requires that the experimenter separates him/herself from the experiment as much as possible. See double blind experiments.

Gregor Mendel laid the ground work for modern genetics, but his work was not noted for what it was for quite some time after his death. However as Zero says, Mendel's theological work was not what led him to his ideas about inheritance, it was his observation and documentation.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:I'm with Zero on this one, guys. Newton did some great stuff to study early physics and laid much of the groundwork for modern science today. But he also spent a lot of time working with alchemy, which if he was following the scientific method he would have seen a lot of inconsistencies that would have led him away from that pursuit.

Like I said a few days ago the human mind can be fooled very easily. That is why science requires that the experimenter separates him/herself from the experiment as much as possible. See double blind experiments.

Gregor Mendel laid the ground work for modern genetics, but his work was not noted for what it was for quite some time after his death. However as Zero says, Mendel's theological work was not what led him to his ideas about inheritance, it was his observation and documentation.

You are making many people's point, Rage. That point is that people that are religious can and do great things in the subject of science. Zero's contention was that people who believe in creationism and God can't.

RebelKev Wrote:You are making many people's point, Rage. That point is that people that are religious can and do great things in the subject of science. Zero's contention was that people who believe in creationism and God can't.

Why is there an argument? Sounds like everyone is correct.

Seriously though, anyone of any religious mindset can use scientific principles to better understand the workings of the natural world. Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindi, Shinto, etc. will all find the exact same data. It makes sense, though, that someone who works in paleontology puts him or herself at a distinct disadvantage if they disregard observation and believe in a 6,000 year old earth.

Fanatical Wrote:if they disregard observation and believe in a 6,000 year old earth.

I've often heard this used as a bash against Christians, but I have yet to find a Christian who believes in it. Another thing is that the Earth is the center of the universe. Well, Andromeda is hauling some major ass to circle the Earth every 24 hours. This context, from what I know, came from a battle that happened in the Middle East where the the sun stood still due to divine intervention. Is it true? I have no clue nor do I really care. It was completely taken out of context. I am also not oblivious to the fact that many scientific breakthroughs have been hindered by major religious factions throughout history. Eratosthenes knew the shape and circumference of the Earth more than 200 years before the birth of Christ, yet in 1491 people thought the Earth was flat. How? Overly religious zealots utilizing tactics to destroy anything that didn't follow the Bible. Do I discount harm when it is caused by people of faith? No. Never have. However, no free-thinking Christian is going to stand idly by while ALL Christians are bashed by the likes of the Zero's of the world.

I have met many Christians who believe the earth is only about 6,000 years old. Glad to see that at least you aren't one of them Kev.

subflea Wrote:I have met many Christians who believe the earth is only about 6,000 years old. Glad to see that at least you aren't one of them Kev.

It is in the Bible that there is no concept of time in Heaven. 6000 years could easily be 6 billion.

6000 years is 6000 years. Everyone knew then what a year is, everyone knows now what a year is. It hasn't changed much. It is simply the time scale of one of hundreds of creation myths put to a scale that humans could more easily comprehend. Not many outside of the Hindus were able to concieve of a billion years. It is too bad most ancient texts have been destroyed, the loss of history is immense.

Fanatical Wrote:6000 years is 6000 years. Everyone knew then what a year is, everyone knows now what a year is. It hasn't changed much. It is simply the time scale of one of hundreds of creation myths put to a scale that humans could more easily comprehend. Not many outside of the Hindus were able to concieve of a billion years. It is too bad most ancient texts have been destroyed, the loss of history is immense.

I didn't say anyone back then was able to discern between a year and a billion year. I said it in context of God. As for people living 6000 years ago, I'll also disagree with your contention that everyone knew what a year actually was. One of the first offerings to the Spanish Conquistadors 500+ years ago was a gold calender. Of course, it was of no value to the Spanish other than the gold that it was on. They didn't understand what they had. Don't try to understand things past with today's thinking.

Because the Spanish did not appreciate other cultures' artistic and astronomical capabilities does not mean they did not understand what a year was. If anything it shows the concept of measuring time accurately was important in completely seperate cultures. Plants and animals understand the concept of a year, four seasons. Plants will lose their leaves, animals will hibernate or migrate; they just can't comunicate the concept as elequently as we can. Understanding when the seasons returned was essential to agricultural societies. As long as we've had plant cultivation, people have understood what a year was.

But coming from a critical standpoint, if the stated time scales are can be easily brushed away, what else can be easily brused away?

RebelKev Wrote:You are making many people's point, Rage. That point is that people that are religious can and do great things in the subject of science. Zero's contention was that people who believe in creationism and God can't.

Actually, I think Zero didn't accurately explain his position, but I don't think it was as hard line as you seem to be portraying. The process of science can be done by anyone. It is just a matter of setting aside any preconceived notions and following the evidence to where it leads.

If you do not set aside any preconceived notions you will find the evidence that confirms those notions. Thus confirmation bias. That's why homeopathy, for example, is not good science. The "experimenters" claim that it cannot be tested with a double blind experiment. Not using double blind adds the tester's ideals into the experiment and taints the results.

And that's why creation scientists working towards confirming their position is bad science. On the other hand, there have been plenty of scientists (religious and non-religious) who have ignored preconceived ideas to find good answers.

RebelKev Wrote:That point is that people that are religious can and do great things in the subject of science. Zero's contention was that people who believe in creationism and God can't.

Here's an idea - why doesn't RebelKev speak for RebelKev, and let Zero speak for Zero, m'kay?

My point was this - and exactly this: Theological practices are not used to solve scientific problems

That's it. Other people have figured this out. Any other interpretation of my words is wrong. Continuing to press on in this argument only makes you look even more ignorant, dishonest, and immature.

Zero Wrote:Here's an idea - why doesn't RebelKev speak for RebelKev, and let Zero speak for Zero, m'kay?

My point was this - and exactly this: Theological practices are not used to solve scientific problems

That's it. Other people have figured this out. Any other interpretation of my words is wrong. Continuing to press on in this argument only makes you look even more ignorant, dishonest, and immature.

No need to put words in your mouth. You do that all by yourself:

Quote:Theologians are good at arguing theological problems, and they may be geniuses at doing it. But they aren't going to come up with a cure for cancer, they aren't going to invent the next great technological wonder that improves everyone's quality of life, and they aren't going to solve the global energy crisis. Especially those of the archaic "be fruitful and multiply" theologies.

You don't think anyone with any religious teaching or affiliation is capable of invention or scientific advances. You're wrong.

Quote:My point was this - and exactly this: Theological practices are not used to solve scientific problems

That's it. Other people have figured this out. Any other interpretation of my words is wrong.

Give it up, dude. You lost.

RebelKev Wrote:You don't think anyone with any religious teaching or affiliation is capable of invention or scientific advances.

That's odd, considering I made this post 9 months ago.

Quote:Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D., director of the National Human Genome Research Institute Wrote:
Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.


http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/03/collins...index.html

Doesn't sound like this is a guy who is too embarassed that he has been duped for so long. And, FWIW, he's a strong Christian too (which is the point of the article). More people need to take his approach and realize that the two systems are not incompatible.

You should know the drill from your time in the military. Salute, say yes sir, and move on (and go stew about it in your own feces later).

Zero Wrote:Give it up, dude. You lost.

Lost what? It's pretty clear if there is any loser in this debate it is you.

I said some of the greatest minds throughout the history of the world were theologians. You said they weren't good for anything but debating theology. You were proven wrong as many people that were religious and/or theologians have contributed greatly to invention and scientific advances. YOU give it up. You might want to do a recap on this thread or at least work a little harder at keeping up.

RebelKev Wrote:You might want to do a recap on this thread or at least work a little harder at keeping up.

You've made the same argument at least 3 times in this thread. I explained it several times to you. You go back to the same erroneous argument. I summarized in bold-face type. You ignored it. Who is having a hard time keeping up?

I'm sorry that the Mississippi educational system has failed you. Really I am. I'm sorry that your time in the Army did not teach you to be a man and admit your failings. I'm sorry your parent(s) didn't raise you to develop more than an eight year old level of maturity. All of these are not my problem , but I suggest you go work on it in the future.

As for me, I don't have the time or energy to spend arguing with idiots.

Zero Wrote:You've made the same argument at least 3 times in this thread. I explained it several times to you. You go back to the same erroneous argument. I summarized in bold-face type. You ignored it. Who is having a hard time keeping up?

I'm sorry that the Mississippi educational system has failed you. Really I am. I'm sorry that your time in the Army did not teach you to be a man and admit your failings. I'm sorry your parent(s) didn't raise you to develop more than an eight year old level of maturity. All of these are not my problem , but I suggest you go work on it in the future.

As for me, I don't have the time or energy to spend arguing with idiots.

You're really starting to piss me the **** off. I have yet to insult you, yet you continue to insult everyone on this site who disagrees with you. You keep is up you won't be here for long. If the mods won't do something about it, GDamnit, I will. Keep it up, hero.

Don't get too frustrated Zero.

I'm closing this thread because it has run its course well over a few times.