Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Discovery or Ignorance: The Choice Is yours?
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 31 of 402 (473855)
07-03-2008 9:59 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by John 10:10
07-03-2008 9:31 AM


Facts are what make scientists understand the world we live in, not theories.
This is a statement so utterly wrong that it would make any scientist laugh like a hyena.
Scientific theories such as the theory of gravity, quantum theory, the germ theory of disease, the atomic theory of matter, the theory of relativity are how scientists understand the world. That's what "theory" means in science.
The facts are the things to be understood. The theories are the understanding of the facts.
Before you decided to shoot your mouth off about science, a subject of which you evidently know nothing, why didn't you bother to find out the meaning of the words you so witlessly recite?
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 9:31 AM John 10:10 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Brian, posted 07-03-2008 10:23 AM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 37 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 11:19 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 32 of 402 (473858)
07-03-2008 10:19 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by John 10:10
07-03-2008 9:54 AM


True science deals with how things "really" work from cause to effect, not theories about how you think they may work.
If you had ever paid any attention to science you'd know that you're talking rubbish.
The wonders of science that are useful take cause and effects that can be known to a high degree of accuracy and apply them to the good of mankind.
And the the name scientists give to their knowledge of the relationship between cause and effect is "theory".
Show me one good thing teaching the theory of evolution of man has done for the good of mankind?
It's made us a whole lot less ignorant. Well, those of us who were paying attention.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 9:54 AM John 10:10 has not replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 4958 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 33 of 402 (473860)
07-03-2008 10:22 AM


Here's a question..
Why is it that when a person goes through some religious conversion experience they suddenly know more about science, history, theology, archaeology, and every other academic discipline than people who have studied a particular area for decades at a very high level?
Why bother going to uni for x amount of years when you can just welcome Jesus into your life and suddenly possess a ph.d level of knowlegde in every subject known to man?
Some creationists here seem to think they are an expert on absolutely everything, despite the fact (and this is a fact)that their posts betray an ignorance of the subjects they claim to be experts in.
The thing is, if they really wanted to know about the world around them then there are a lot of highly qualified people here who are very willing to help.

Brian
Member (Idle past 4958 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 34 of 402 (473861)
07-03-2008 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Dr Adequate
07-03-2008 9:59 AM


I'm suspecting that the '10.10' in John's name is his age, we'll know for sure if he changes it next month to 'John 10:11'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-03-2008 9:59 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 11:24 AM Brian has replied

John 10:10
Member (Idle past 2995 days)
Posts: 766
From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA
Joined: 02-01-2006


Message 35 of 402 (473867)
07-03-2008 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Brian
07-03-2008 9:56 AM


Why would a scientist prefer to start with a god and then look for evidence?
Try looking in Hebrews 11:6 for your answer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Brian, posted 07-03-2008 9:56 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Brian, posted 07-03-2008 11:27 AM John 10:10 has replied

John 10:10
Member (Idle past 2995 days)
Posts: 766
From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA
Joined: 02-01-2006


Message 36 of 402 (473869)
07-03-2008 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Coyote
07-03-2008 9:58 AM


Coyote writes: Sounds like you should leave science to the scientists; they're the ones who are qualified to determine what science is and how it should work.
John 10:10 writes: I have spent 44 years in the nuclear business, have worked on or at 1/3 of the 104 commercial nuclear plants now operating in the USA, and am now retired. I believe I understand the scientific principles of nuclear energy and how to go from the splitting of an atom to producing MWs of power as good as most here at this forum.
This is what true science is supposed to be about, understanding known phenomena from cause to effect, and harnessing these known facts for the good of mankind.
I believe those who do know their Creator can do this as well or better than those who do not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Coyote, posted 07-03-2008 9:58 AM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-03-2008 12:55 PM John 10:10 has not replied

John 10:10
Member (Idle past 2995 days)
Posts: 766
From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA
Joined: 02-01-2006


Message 37 of 402 (473870)
07-03-2008 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Dr Adequate
07-03-2008 9:59 AM


Dr Adequate writes: The facts are the things to be understood. The theories are the understanding of the facts.
John 10:10 writes: I sorry, but I'm not laughing, and neither are most scientists. When theories can be proven to a high degree of accuracy, then they may be moved from the realm of theory and speculation to a scientific principle that can be relied upon in all manner of engineering and medical processes. Until then theories in no way, shape or form truly understand the facts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-03-2008 9:59 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Granny Magda, posted 07-03-2008 12:59 PM John 10:10 has replied

John 10:10
Member (Idle past 2995 days)
Posts: 766
From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA
Joined: 02-01-2006


Message 38 of 402 (473871)
07-03-2008 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Brian
07-03-2008 10:23 AM


Brian writes: I'm suspecting that the '10.10' in John's name is his age, we'll know for sure if he changes it next month to 'John 10:11'.
John 10:10 writes: Try looking in John 10:27-28 to see how old I am.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Brian, posted 07-03-2008 10:23 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Brian, posted 07-03-2008 11:34 AM John 10:10 has replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 4958 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 39 of 402 (473872)
07-03-2008 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by John 10:10
07-03-2008 10:53 AM


Try looking in Hebrews 11:6 for your answer.
And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.
I said scientist not theologian.
So, what you are essentially saying is that to please God you have to lie, ignore the evidence, and act like a simpleton? If you accomplish this then God will reward you?
Why does God want His creation to act like idiots? Is it because people have to be idiots to believe in God?
What scientist would start any research wothout looking at the evidence?
As I said, the creos have a far more difficult job than the scientists do. They have something beginning from nothing all instigated by an entity they have no proof exists! Yes indeed, creationism is way ahead of science.
BTW, you do know that Hebrews authorship has now been taken off Paul. What a reliable book the Bible is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 10:53 AM John 10:10 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 12:25 PM Brian has replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 4958 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 40 of 402 (473876)
07-03-2008 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by John 10:10
07-03-2008 11:24 AM


That passage doesn't say anything about your age, it is just a promise of eternal life, the life to come.
I suspect you are probably the same age as Jesus in Luke 2:42.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 11:24 AM John 10:10 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 12:28 PM Brian has not replied

John 10:10
Member (Idle past 2995 days)
Posts: 766
From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA
Joined: 02-01-2006


Message 41 of 402 (473882)
07-03-2008 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Brian
07-03-2008 11:27 AM


Brian writes: So, what you are essentially saying is that to please God you have to lie, ignore the evidence, and act like a simpleton? If you accomplish this then God will reward you?
John 10:10 writes: You quoted Heb 11:6 correctly, but did not understand it correctly. It says God "rewards those who earnestly seek Him." That means God proves Himself to those who follow the path of Heb 11:6.
You say, "Give me proof in God, then I will believe."
God says, "Believe first, then I will prove Myself to you."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Brian, posted 07-03-2008 11:27 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Brian, posted 07-03-2008 12:41 PM John 10:10 has replied

John 10:10
Member (Idle past 2995 days)
Posts: 766
From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA
Joined: 02-01-2006


Message 42 of 402 (473884)
07-03-2008 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Brian
07-03-2008 11:34 AM


Yes, I'm an eternal lifer. Look also in Post 36 and you will get a hint of how many earthly years I've been here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Brian, posted 07-03-2008 11:34 AM Brian has not replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 4958 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 43 of 402 (473888)
07-03-2008 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by John 10:10
07-03-2008 12:25 PM


God says, "Believe first, then I will prove Myself to you."
It's called self delusion, this principle can apply to anything.
This is hardly a scientific approach though is it, believe something first THEN the evidence will be provided?
Plus, when a book as horrendously flawed as the Bible is, then that's a good reason NOT to consider Heb. 11:6!
But this still doesn't account for the vast amount of evidence that supports evolution, ignoring this evidence doesn't make it go away.
And misrepresenting what evolution is only makes it look as if you haven't bothered to find out what it is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 12:25 PM John 10:10 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 1:10 PM Brian has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 44 of 402 (473891)
07-03-2008 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by John 10:10
07-03-2008 11:10 AM


John 10:10 writes: I have spent 44 years in the nuclear business, have worked on or at 1/3 of the 104 commercial nuclear plants now operating in the USA, and am now retired.
And I hope you got the floors all nice and clean. What a shame you didn't speak to any scientists while you had the opportunity; many of them would have been happy to fill in the appalling gaps in your schooling, like what scientists do, what science is, and what the word "theory" means.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 11:10 AM John 10:10 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by dwise1, posted 07-03-2008 2:50 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 45 of 402 (473892)
07-03-2008 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by John 10:10
07-03-2008 11:19 AM


What We Mean by Theory
I sorry, but I'm not laughing, and neither are most scientists. When theories can be proven to a high degree of accuracy, then they may be moved from the realm of theory and speculation to a scientific principle that can be relied upon in all manner of engineering and medical processes. Until then theories in no way, shape or form truly understand the facts.
I'm sorry John, but the good Dr is quite right and you are completely wrong. The term "theory", when used in science, does not mean what you seem to think it does. The confusion usually stems from the use of "theory" for some principles and the use of "law" for others. Whilst "law" might seem more solid, in science the two terms are interchangeable. In fact, scientists no longer use the term "law", since it gives a misleading impression of total certainty, whereas in science, all knowledge is held tentatively.
"Theory" is the highest accolade that a modern scientist can give to an idea. It will only be used when there is a wealth of evidence to support the idea (although "theory" is used in a looser sense within physics). An idea with no supporting evidence is, at best, a hypothesis. Scientist do not use the term theory in the way that you or I might in everyday conversation. If you still doubt this, take a look at this link; Theory - Wikipedia
Or here's this, from creationist site AnswersinGenesis, specifically from a page called Arguments we think creationists should not use ;
quote:
“Evolution is just a theory.”
What people usually mean when they say this is “Evolution is not proven fact, so it should not be promoted dogmatically.” Therefore people should say that! The problem with using the word “theory” in this case is that scientists use it to mean a well-substantiated explanation of data. This includes well-known theories such as Einstein’s Theory of Relativity and Newton’s Theory of Gravity, as well as lesser-known ones such as the Debye-Hckel Theory of electrolyte solutions. It would be better to say that particles-to-people evolution is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture.
Whilst I'm here, I notice that you aren't using the quote boxes, such as can be seen at the top of this post. Using these boxes makes your post much easier to read and helps prevent confusion about who is saying what.
Granny writes:
Hit the "peek" button in the bottom right hand corner of this (and every) post to see how I do this.
quote:
Or you can use this style if you prefer.
Also, if you want to quote Bible passages, I recommend that you put short passages right here on the page, instead of forcing others to look them up, because I guarantee that most people won't bother to look them up.

Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 11:19 AM John 10:10 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by John 10:10, posted 07-03-2008 1:34 PM Granny Magda has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024