|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1413 days) Posts: 1495 From: Framingham, MA, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: These Fellows Is Crazy! | |||||||||||||||||||||||
MrHambre Member (Idle past 1413 days) Posts: 1495 From: Framingham, MA, USA Joined: |
"I think the scientific evidence that God created the universe 13-15 billion years ago is good."
Discovery Institute Fellow Henry Schaefer, Ph.D. in Chemical Physics Standard Evolutionary Theory Has Shortcomings Atlanta Journal-Constitution September 28, 2002 "Scientific critics, as we have seen, are routinely stigmatized as religiously motivated."Discovery Institute Fellow Stephen C. Meyer Director of the Center for Science and Culture WorldNetDaily.com September 28, 2001 ------------------I would not let the chickens cross the antidote road because I was already hospitlized for trying to say this!-Brad McFall
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5840 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
mrH writes: "I think the scientific evidence that God created the universe 13-15 billion years ago is good." What's wrong with this quote? He's quite right. It's very good for a laugh now and then. ------------------holmes
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1499 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
He's crazy if he cannot site and support the evidence
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Cresswell Inactive Member |
Well, evidence that the universe is 13-15 billion years old can be found in any of a vast number of scientific texts.
That God created is a whole lot harder to prove. Though I suppose the Bible would be a citable source (though one open to debate as to how good that evidence is and what it means). Though, as a Christian theist, I'm happier to say that God is creating the universe rather than he did create it. Alan
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
kjsimons Member Posts: 822 From: Orlando,FL Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
That God created is a whole lot harder to prove. Though I suppose the Bible would be a citable source You've got to be joking!! The bible as a citable source that god (the christian variety or jewish or is this just any god) exists is absolutely ridiculous!! Of course religion in general is nonsensical.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Cresswell Inactive Member |
Of course it's a citable source. Anything is. Though, naturally, any source cited for any reason is automatically up for debate. Perhaps you ought to consider what is meant by citation. Certainly as a Christian I would cite Scripture to support my position. You, or anyone else, are at liberty to discuss the value of that supporting evidence (indeed dismiss it entirely if you can) or my interpretation of it. But that doesn't stop that being part of the basis of my beliefs.
And, in my reasoned opinion, atheism is as nonsensical as you find my religion. I can't prove God exists, but have faith he does. You can't prove he doesn't exist, but have faith that he doesn't. Alan
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
kjsimons Member Posts: 822 From: Orlando,FL Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
And, in my reasoned opinion, atheism is as nonsensical as you find my religion. I can't prove God exists, but have faith he does. You can't prove he doesn't exist, but have faith that he doesn't. Wrongo Dr.!!! I don't have faith in god(s) nonexistence, I simply have never seen any scientific/materialistic proof of any dieties existence. Your opinion means nothing if you use science to interpret the world around you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
kjsimons Member Posts: 822 From: Orlando,FL Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Of course it's a citable source. Anything is. Though, naturally, any source cited for any reason is automatically up for debate If the bible can be considered a valid citable source then so can all relgion/mythologies, fairytales, and all works of fiction can be citable sources. You have no proof that the bible contains more than an occasional correct historical reference.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Cresswell Inactive Member |
Sorry for assuming you're an atheist rather than agnostic.
Of course, you won't find any scientific evidence for the existance or non-existance of the non-material. Science works within the framework of materialism; it can't address anything outside that - be that the (non-)existance of a diety or how much I love my girlfriend. I use science to interpret the material world around me. My faith enables me to extrapolate beyond the material to understand the whole of my world - just as an atheist, Buddhist or anyone else does. Alan
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Cresswell Inactive Member |
quote:Quite right, and why not? If something illustrates a point (as, say, a lot of fiction or poetry does) then use it. If I want to discuss an idea I have to cite the relevant sources. Citing a source doesn't even imply agreement ... just recognition that you're aware of and willing to consider (even if long enough to reject it) all relevent data. quote:And, I haven't claimed it does. All I've claimed here so far is that Biblical teaching forms a substantial part of how I understand the world. Alan
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
kjsimons Member Posts: 822 From: Orlando,FL Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Sorry for assuming you're an atheist rather than agnostic.
Actually I am an atheist until there is some proof of god(s). I don't not believe in god(s) no matter the evidence, I don't currently believe in god(s) because there is not evidence that it(they) exist.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
Dr Cresswell writes:
quote: Yes, but nobody accepts that number simply because it's written down in a book. Instead, the evidence that the universe is about 14 billion years old can be found by going outside and looking up. Anybody can do it. ------------------Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Cresswell Inactive Member |
quote:Oh, I'm sure you can find someone who accepts it cos it's written in a book. There's no avoiding the sheep at times. But, I accept the date because anyone with a smattering of physics and maths can examine the evidence given and follow the arguments (to a greater or lesser degree). Other people will probably just have to trust that others who can follow what's said; just as I have to trust a doctor who prescribes a particular drug if I fall ill since my knowledge of biochemistry and human physiology isn't sufficient for me to fully assess the diagnosis and effects of the drug. I take it you were drawing a parallel with people who believe something about God "simply because it's written down in a book". Again, I'm sure there are sheep out there in this area to. Personally, I believe in God. That belief is, in part, based on Scripture - it's also based on reason and experience (including that of others).
quote:I could also say "The evidence that God exists can be found by going outside at night and looking up. Anybody can do it", which, of course, doesn't make your statement wrong (I happen to accept it more or less - the less being that with the naked eye you can't see much more than a few hundred thousand years into the past ... actually reaching the number 14billion years takes a bit of maths on more data than given by the human eye). Alan
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9003 From: Canada Joined: |
"the less being that with the naked eye you can't see much more than a few hundred thousand years into the past"
Actually you can see about 2 million years into the past as I have done a number of times -- Andromeda. However, that doesn't invalidate your argument. In fact, you can't just "look up" and see the universe for what it is. It takes a lot more than that. That's why our present understanding of it's majesty is not a lot more than a century old.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
Dr Cresswell responds to me:
quote:quote: Then why is it when everybody does the age-of-the-universe thing, they all come to essentially the same answer but when everybody does the does-god-exist thing, they all come to essentially different answers? You'd think that if the evidence for god were so apparent, people would agree on the characteristics of that god, but we have yet to come up with a consistent description...even between people who claim to believe in the same god. Please, everyone, let's not be disingenuous about the need for equipment and training to understand the physics involved. The point is that there is a physical process that anybody can do, even those who are skeptical, and through it, everybody pretty muh comes to the same answer. But with god, even people who go through the identical process, we find that people end up on completely different ends of the scale. ------------------Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024