|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4144 days) Posts: 67 From: Traverse City, MI usa Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Have some scientists been too fanatical? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sinamatic Member (Idle past 4144 days) Posts: 67 From: Traverse City, MI usa Joined: |
My disagreement there is with those words "too fanatical." I don't know what exactly you mean by that. My way of looking at it is to compare the amount of hype in what Christians say about atheists with the amount of hype in what atheists say about Christians. And by that statement, atheists look relatively mild in their criticisms. I grant that some of them say quite harsh things, but that still looks mild in comparison with what some Christians say about atheists. Yeah I'm not going to argue with that because I can see how that might very well be true.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Capt Stormfield Member (Idle past 456 days) Posts: 428 From: Vancouver Island Joined:
|
...aethiest... Is there a particular reason you have chosen to consistently misspell atheist this way? I'm curious if you are trying to make a point of some kind. Capt.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Thanks for the answer. Also Dr. A.\
I'm not going to argue with you since you are sure the WHY factor is important and explained in the old earth model, and all I can do at the moment is doubt it, which isn't very helpful, and it's no doubt offensive and insulting as well, which just goes with the territory of this debate unfortunately, sorry about that. But I did want to say that this idea that anything FORMED in the Flood misrepresents YEC thinking. Nobody claims corals, reefs, limestone, or ANYTHING "formed" in the Flood. All the Flood did was TRANSPORT stuff that was already formed, or in the case of rock transported the sediments that then solidified where they were deposited. A tangent of course, just had to mention it. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 164 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined:
|
how can science explain what or why someone thinks a thought or makes a choice? That would be the science of Psychology. The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 989 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined:
|
You are mistaken, Faith. Some YEC do in fact suggests those things. The YEC, including you, can't even come on this board and lay out a comprehensive and consistent YEC model that you all can mostly agree on. That is by far not the case for us OE geos. We quibble about whether skarn is a rock type or an alteration and each other's interpretations, and other details, but the big picture is consistent and laid out for all to see.
If YEC was true, then it would be those geologists who are finding the natural resources. Financial success is blind to ideology. We produce results and therefore, we get the funding.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3643 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined:
|
That is by far not the case for us OE geos. And just to stress, Rox, that of course you OE geos encompass geologists in every university, mining and oil company around the world, across every religion, across every nationality - all of you in practically 100% (to 3 sig fig) agreement. That vs the minority fundementalist element of just one religion, and even amongst whom you can find virtually no level of agreement. Faith certainly has her work cut out for her
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 802 days) Posts: 3193 Joined:
|
nwr didn't even type the words "big bang".
"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Boof Member (Idle past 246 days) Posts: 99 From: Australia Joined:
|
roxtool writes: If YEC was true, then it would be those geologists who are finding the natural resources. Financial success is blind to ideology. We produce results and therefore, we get the funding. Exactly. Further to your example upthread (which Faith handwaved away saying the fossils occur in the same places in both OE and YE 'models'), I have been personally involved with numerous exploration companies which commonly use various forms of radiometric dating to help identify new or unrecognised terrains for mineral exploration. In one instance radiometric dating of a granitoid played a major part in a significant copper discovery. According to the creationists radiometric dating doesn't work - either it's all a conspiracy or it's all incompetance. Yet somehow multinational miners around the world keep using this (and all of the other fundamental tools to modern geology) and they keep making money out of it. You said it so well: financial success is blind to ideology.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 989 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined:
|
Excellent example!
We have various intrusions in our mining district and surrounding districts, but the ones associated with Cu mineralization are the 110 Ma quartz monzonitic intrusions rather than the Tertiary aged ones. Finding and identifying those are part of our exploration program. Not to mention the correct stratigraphic units: Mississippian shale and Pennsylvanian limestone. In addition, we age date our rhyolite flows/intrusions to help us recognize significant faults associated with mineralization, in fault genesis/reconstruction, or even identify rhyolites that may be associated with gold. It works because we keep finding more metal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
This sort of thing is said all the time but it makes no sense to me. I assume that particular fossils could orient a person looking for minerals or oil by their position in the strata just as well from a creationist point of view as an evolutionist point of view. Not so. "But eventually, by 1994 I was through with young-earth creationism. Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true. I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question. "From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true? ," One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said 'No!' A very close friend that I had hired at Arco, after hearing the question, exclaimed, "Wait a minute. There has to be one!" But he could not name one. I can not name one. No one else could either. One man I could not reach, to ask that question, had a crisis of faith about two years after coming into the oil industry. I do not know what his spiritual state is now but he was in bad shape the last time I talked to him."--Glenn Morton Creationism just doesn't work.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5930 Joined: Member Rating: 5.8 |
Creationism just doesn't work.
In fact, creationism blows up in their face.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024