Message 6 of 307 (655288) 03-09-2012 7:13 AM

Reply to: Message 1 by foreveryoung 03-08-2012 7:52 PM

Not by me. In fact I wouldn't mind your participation on a couple threads

Dogs will be Dogs will be ???
Speciation + Evolution = More Diversity
Transitional Fossils Show Evolution in Process
and
How "novel" features evolve when that gets promoted

What rubs people the wrong way is when you say things they know are false, and particularly if you don't appear willing to learn where you are wrong.

I've learned a lot on this forum, and as a result have changed my opinions on a number of issues, but facts remain facts, and denial of facts can be a problem. Such as denial of the age of the earth:

see Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1

Well now your presence is requested in a couple of places.

Enjoy.

Message 41 of 307 (655434) 03-10-2012 9:55 AM

Reply to: Message 25 by foreveryoung 03-10-2012 1:42 AM

your answer is here on the Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 thread.

Enjoy.

Message 66 of 307 (655489) 03-10-2012 7:33 PM

Reply to: Message 64 by shadow71 03-10-2012 7:06 PM

Science is based on the assumption (a) that objective evidence is a part of reality rather than illusion, and (b) that we can understand reality by testing concepts against objective evidence.

Assumptions aren't faith, they are tentative positions that can be demonstrated to be false, while faith is not based on an assumption that god/s exist.

Science is only able to test natural means (unless you have a source for employing supernatural means), so (until there is evidence otherwise) it is rational to proceed with explaining objective evidence with natural means up until those means fail.

Science is a feed-back system that seeks to eliminate false concepts through falsification by testing against objective evidence, thus reaching closer approximations to what we assume to be reality as time passes and more knowledge is derived of what seems to work and what we know doesn't work.

Enjoy.

Message 86 of 307 (655543) 03-11-2012 1:29 PM

Reply to: Message 77 by shadow71 03-11-2012 12:45 PM

You can't thread a nut on a nail. You may think you can jam one on, but that still does not make the nail a bolt. Science is currently unable to employ supernatural, so it uses the tools available to study what it can.

Yet, curiously, many scientists are people of faith, so obviously they have allowed faith in their worldview.

Using nature and natural processes to study nature and natural processes, what an amazing concept.

Amazingly, the evidence is that many people of faith do not rule out supernatural means while they use nature and natural processes to study nature and natural processes, but instead are focused on what nature and natural processes can tell us about nature and natural processes.

Would you not agree that the more we know about nature and natural processes, then the more we know about the created world?

Should scientists have to allow for a flat earth or a geocentric earth in order to make room for specific faiths when the evidence clearly shows that these concepts are falsified?

Should scientists have to allow for a world wide flood and a young earth in order to make room for specific faiths when the evidence clearly shows that these concepts are falsified?

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : make room?

Message 105 of 307 (655562) 03-11-2012 1:58 PM

Reply to: Message 91 by foreveryoung 03-11-2012 1:34 PM

Two points:

(1) cognitive dissonance predicts this reaction, and
(2) remember this if you ever try to argue that there is a majority of Christians that support any particular cause or concept.

And if you mean they aren't young-earth-fundamentalist-flood-literalist Christians then,

(a) that was the point and,
(b) they are not the majority,

Enjoy.

Message 125 of 307 (655595) 03-11-2012 5:09 PM

Reply to: Message 110 by foreveryoung 03-11-2012 2:14 PM

Understandable.

Read about Cognitive Dissonance, then, when your eyes unglaze, go back to Message 105.

Enjoy.