Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Do the religious want scientific enquiry to end?
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 100 of 111 (576754)
08-25-2010 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by archaeologist
08-25-2010 5:49 AM


in general answers coyote is wrong and his 'research' means nothing
So we should just stop doing scientific research, right? You claim that you already have the answers, so we should just stop doing science and close up all those labs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by archaeologist, posted 08-25-2010 5:49 AM archaeologist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by archaeologist, posted 08-30-2010 4:46 AM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(1)
Message 105 of 111 (577801)
08-30-2010 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by archaeologist
08-30-2010 4:46 AM


how about doing it right and realize that scientific research is hampered and hindered by so many mitigating factors.
So you are saying that we should not do scientific research because it is hampered and hindered, right?
1. do you know what the global flood evidence looks like? if not, how would you identify it?
We do know what flood deposits look like. They are large layers of large comglomerate material with large grain size. This is in contrast to layers that are produced by calm water over longer time periods where you see very fine grained sediments and annual varving. The picture below is a perfect example with flood layers that sandwich seasonal varves. Two separate floods of Lake Missoula produced the flood layers on the top and bottom of the photo while the middle represents 21 years of annual varves.
You can read more here about the Channeled Scablands and how catastrophic flooding is detected in the geologic record.
4. construction of cities, wars, local floods, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, tornados, earthquakes, erosion and so on, all have their hand in destroying evidence, thus we are back to #s 1 & 2.
It is the evidence that does exist which points to an ancient Earth and no global flood layer from a recent global flood. This evidence includes hundreds of thousands of years of ice layers and lake varves which are not produced by floods and would be interrupted by a flood.
5. secular science is so limited that it cannot tell someone what they had for breakfast last week let alone what took place 3-4,000 years ago. the tools are faulty.
They are not faulty at all. You just reject the evidence because it is inconvenient for your dogmatic religious beliefs.
secular science is NOT objective thus anything it does violates its own principles that suppoedly guide its work.
How is secular science not objective?
then since secular science is NOT about truth
Truth is for philosophers and theologians. Science tries to figure out how nature works and what happened in the past, two tasks that it has done really well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by archaeologist, posted 08-30-2010 4:46 AM archaeologist has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 106 of 111 (577802)
08-30-2010 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by archaeologist
08-30-2010 4:48 AM


keep in mind that GOD does NOT operate BY secular scientific rules, His work is SUPENATURAL
Evidence please.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by archaeologist, posted 08-30-2010 4:48 AM archaeologist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by archaeologist, posted 09-03-2010 6:59 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 111 of 111 (579175)
09-03-2010 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by archaeologist
09-03-2010 6:59 PM


after you provide evidence that He does follow secular science.
I'm not the one who claims God exists. You are.
If you can't back up your claims then don't make them. It's really, really simple.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by archaeologist, posted 09-03-2010 6:59 PM archaeologist has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024