|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,554
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,554 |
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
Which explains a lot.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,800
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,800 |
Yay. That's the first 100 done
Whatever you said...everyone knows you are a lying jerk. That's a bold assertion. Point out where you think I lied. Well?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2019
Posts: 179
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Mar 2019
Posts: 179 |
At least by now everyone should have some facts of believe of their own choice.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,864
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,864 |
With the universe being about 6,000 years old there;s not much time to play with. God added in stars that appear to be of different ages just to fool you infidels. A couple years ago there was a non-creationist astronomer on TV who developed a program to plot novas and super novas. His program could track the debris up to about a million years. He enlisted the aid of astronomers from around the world to use his program. After a few years the oldest they could find was about 7,000 years since its destruction. Maybe one of you evolutionists could fill them in on the missing years. Or is it you guys are not accepting facts. Like I asked, If there was an Infinite Intelligent Energy Being could He create what we now see in its present state? This is not a trick question. And its more philosophical than science or religion. Rich, considering that some star systems and galaxies are millions and millions of light years away from Earth. And considering that we are looking at them, definitively demonstrates that such star or galaxy is at least millions of years old. We can not say if that star is still there today. But we know it was there millions of years ago, because that is how long it took the light to reach Earth. You are looking at this from a uniform uiformitarianistic view. Consider gravitational time dilation. A proven concept of science used daily. An astrophysicist wrote a book called 'Starlight and time. He has made predictions on what the space missions will discover. He has been correct in the scientific observations.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,864
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,864 |
Just because the New Testament uses the format of identifying that a story is a parable doesn't mean all stories in the Bible are meant to be taken literally. Okay. You use the Bible the way you want and I will use It correctly.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,864
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,864 |
''A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.'' And yet may be wrong. The factual foundation, geology, fossils, genetic diversity, gene expression, epigenetics, etc, can't be wrong. It is what it is, it is objective independent evidence. What can be wrong being the details of how organisms evolve....environmental pressure forcing adaption, gene expression, the role of mutations, etc....not that animals and plants can and do evolve. Geology has billions of dead things buried in water born sediment all over the world. That is exactly what one would look for for evidence of a world wide flood. Fossils are the preserved bones of the dead things. Genetic diversity, gene expression, epigenetic are a few things used to support Special Creation. Adaptation was predicted by William Blythe, a creationists, as God's mechanism for preserving animals, ten years prior to Darwin's' book
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1 |
''A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.'' And yet may be wrong. The factual foundation, geology, fossils, genetic diversity, gene expression, epigenetics, etc, can't be wrong. It is what it is, it is objective independent evidence. What can be wrong being the details of how organisms evolve....environmental pressure forcing adaption, gene expression, the role of mutations, etc....not that animals and plants can and do evolve. Geology has billions of dead things buried in water born sediment all over the world. That is exactly what one would look for for evidence of a world wide flood. Fossils are the preserved bones of the dead things. Genetic diversity, gene expression, epigenetic are a few things used to support Special Creation. Adaptation was predicted by William Blythe, a creationists, as God's mechanism for preserving animals, ten years prior to Darwin's' book The strata runs deep, there are no large or small animals fossils to be found in precambrian layers.....3 billion years of microbes before conditions enabled an explosion of complexity and diversity. That is not evidence for special creation, it is evidence for natural evolution. Nor is it anything like genesis describes. Creationists sift the evidence and their explanations of that evidence through the filter of their faith and what comes out of that filtering does not explain the evidence.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,651 Likes: 1 |
With the universe being about 6,000 years old there;s not much time to play with. God added in stars that appear to be of different ages just to fool you infidels. A couple years ago there was a non-creationist astronomer on TV who developed a program to plot novas and super novas. His program could track the debris up to about a million years. He enlisted the aid of astronomers from around the world to use his program. After a few years the oldest they could find was about 7,000 years since its destruction. Maybe one of you evolutionists could fill them in on the missing years. Or is it you guys are not accepting facts. Like I asked, If there was an Infinite Intelligent Energy Being could He create what we now see in its present state? This is not a trick question. And its more philosophical than science or religion. Rich, considering that some star systems and galaxies are millions and millions of light years away from Earth. And considering that we are looking at them, definitively demonstrates that such star or galaxy is at least millions of years old. We can not say if that star is still there today. But we know it was there millions of years ago, because that is how long it took the light to reach Earth. You are looking at this from a uniform uiformitarianistic view. Consider gravitational time dilation. A proven concept of science used daily. An astrophysicist wrote a book called 'Starlight and time. He has made predictions on what the space missions will discover. He has been correct in the scientific observations. Don't you think that physicists take relativity into account?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,749 Likes: 20
Campfire Sage
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,749 Likes: 20 |
''A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.'' And yet may be wrong. Only in the sense that, if it were indeed wrong, it would be extremely easy to prove it wrong. Ways to prove evolution wrong would be manifold, were it in fact wrong. You'd hardly be able to research it without proving it wrong constantly. Just for one example, find a single equine fossil prior to (beneath, in undisturbed strata) the Paleocene Epoch. In terms of life on earth, that's like ten minutes till midnight on a clock where midnight represents the present. Were evolution false, those fossils would be abundant. Heck, you'd find modern day horses at every level you dug (all the way back to the Cambrian) if evolution were false. Find one, and you've disproved evolution. That's what we mean when we say evolution is disprovable. It doesn't actually mean that there's a chance it will eventually be disproved. With so many ways to disprove it, were it untrue, it would have already been disproved long ago. Now we're beyond that, and arguing only over precise aspects of the mechanisms by which it occurred.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
Theory means (pick one): a: hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b: an unproved assumption : CONJECTURE c: abstract thought : SPECULATION https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theoryNot hard to believe evolutians are confused by a simple word, when they have faith in someone that discovers a fossilized toe bone that proves a larger cranium. Maybe not confusion, though. Might be a part of the long con that is the theory of evolution, removin the accurate description of it to make it seem more legitimate. The theory of evolution has not and cannot be proved at the present time. All I can do is speculate which word scares the shat outa evolutians the worst, macroevolution or theory. Call it the theory of evolutians. Good job continuing to display your ignorance. He's some help for you from Wikipedia: A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.[3] The meaning of the term scientific theory (often contracted to theory for brevity) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from the common vernacular usage of theory.[4][Note 1] In everyday speech, theory can imply an explanation that represents an unsubstantiated and speculative guess,[4] whereas in science it describes an explanation that has been tested and widely accepted as valid. These different usages are comparable to the opposing usages of prediction in science versus common speech, where it denotes a mere hope.This is precisely why evolution is a "theory" in the dictionary definition because it never has and never will demonstrate repeatedly the purely materialistic spontaneous generation of life or the simultaneous development of all 30+ fine tuned mechanisms required for life. If the hypothesis has no scientific way to get started (it isn't taking us anywhere scientific), it certainly cannot be demonstrated, and therefore it is relegated to the simple dictionary definition of (non-scientific) theory i.e. an unproven assumption. This is why we insist and will continue to insist on the typical dictionary definition because not only is it unproven ... it is also both unscientific and illogical.
Last edited by Thunderstick; 08/26/19.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
These things go sideways pretty quickly. From my perspective Religion is not faith, faith is not something you can force on another , if you are feeling pressured from it , you either are not open at the time or the messanger is false Nothing explains human consciousness , our ability to examine ourselves . So how did thought begin? It is a fair question Faith as defined as a belief held without the support of evidence is faith regardless of anyone's perspective. Thought, as the evidence tells us, is an electrochemical activity of a brain, which can be altered chemically and with the application of current to brain regions....producing fear, love, anxiety, involuntary movements, etc, (Delgado, et al). I already addressed the definition of faith as defined by the original Webster definition and the meaning of it in Greek--citing a lexicon. The faith you describe is an evolutionist's faith and not a biblical faith.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
And there is the practical side that we want to reiterate again ...
Theistic views birthed our country and the other beneficent countries of the world and gave them the liberties that we enjoy based on all men being created and therefore deemed of equal value. Theistic premises do not guarantee that man will not be selfish or remain uncorrupted; but they provide moral restraint against selfishness, hold all humanity to an equal standard of justice, and provide the societal framework for the potential development of beneficence. Theistic based governments have provided a framework for the liberty to express atheism and all other forms of religion, providing they do not cross the foundational moral boundaries of that society. At the point in time in which theism is completely rejected or overwhelmed by the due process of a free society, that society will, experience the loss of liberties, and begin a moral decline from which there will be no recovery. This will proceed under the guise of science until it reaches the inevitable Big Bang that will ultimately destroy itself.
There is no moral basis for human equality in either evolution or atheism. Human equality in an atheistic or evolutionary context lies solely with the arbitrary whims of the power structure, because the power structure answers to no transcendent moral authority and only answers to itself. This is why governments based on the premises of evolution and atheism have consistently demonstrated their tyrannical despotism, their eventual corruption, the loss of the practice of liberty of conscience, and often even basic human rights for some dissident segments of the population. When evolution and atheism are the fundamental premises, they will suppress and try to forcibly eradicate theism because it becomes enemy number 1 to the agenda for is opposed to its very foundational premises.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,554
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,554 |
The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh
Which explains a lot.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,735
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,735 |
There is no moral basis for human equality in either evolution or atheism. Human equality in an atheistic or evolutionary context lies solely with the arbitrary whims of the power structure, because the power structure answers to no transcendent moral authority and only answers to itself. This is why governments based on the premises of evolution and atheism have consistently demonstrated their tyrannical despotism, their eventual corruption, the loss of the practice of liberty of conscience, and often even basic human rights for some dissident segments of the population. When evolution and atheism are the fundamental premises, they will suppress and try to forcibly eradicate theism because it becomes enemy number 1 to the agenda for is opposed to its very foundational premises.
I have a question. The premise of the above paragraph is that only withing theism resides human equality and moral propriety. How do you explain that every major religion has not only condoned inequality, but they have at various times promoted it and in the case of christian religion the despotic and tyrannical opposition to fact in the form of the inquisition and the killing and imprisoning of the victims thereof? That seems to me to be no less tyrannical and despotic than any government. It also seems to me that to be arguing in favor of a theocracy that has practiced such despotism is more than just ingenuous, it is A bold faced lie intended to deceive or it is pure plain and simple ignorance. Either of which makes such debate a fools errand.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,994
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,994 |
''A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.'' And yet may be wrong. The factual foundation, geology, fossils, genetic diversity, gene expression, epigenetics, etc, can't be wrong. It is what it is, it is objective independent evidence. What can be wrong being the details of how organisms evolve....environmental pressure forcing adaption, gene expression, the role of mutations, etc....not that animals and plants can and do evolve. Geology has billions of dead things buried in water born sediment all over the world. That is exactly what one would look for for evidence of a world wide flood. Fossils are the preserved bones of the dead things. Genetic diversity, gene expression, epigenetic are a few things used to support Special Creation. Adaptation was predicted by William Blythe, a creationists, as God's mechanism for preserving animals, ten years prior to Darwin's' book Do you really believe that all those billions of fossils were all deposited at the same time in one flood? It took millions of years to bury all those billions of dead things.
Last edited by BOWSINGER; 08/26/19.
Leo of the Land of Dyr
NRA FOR LIFE
I MISS SARAH
“In Trump We Trust.” Right????
SOMEBODY please tell TRH that Netanyahu NEVER said "Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States, it can dry up and blow away."
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
There is no moral basis for human equality in either evolution or atheism. Human equality in an atheistic or evolutionary context lies solely with the arbitrary whims of the power structure, because the power structure answers to no transcendent moral authority and only answers to itself. This is why governments based on the premises of evolution and atheism have consistently demonstrated their tyrannical despotism, their eventual corruption, the loss of the practice of liberty of conscience, and often even basic human rights for some dissident segments of the population. When evolution and atheism are the fundamental premises, they will suppress and try to forcibly eradicate theism because it becomes enemy number 1 to the agenda for is opposed to its very foundational premises.
I have a question. The premise of the above paragraph is that only withing theism resides human equality and moral propriety. How do you explain that every major religion has not only condoned inequality, but they have at various times promoted it and in the case of christian religion the despotic and tyrannical opposition to fact in the form of the inquisition and the killing and imprisoning of the victims thereof? That seems to me to be no less tyrannical and despotic than any government. It also seems to me that to be arguing in favor of a theocracy that has practiced such despotism is more than just ingenuous, it is A bold faced lie intended to deceive or it is pure plain and simple ignorance. Either of which makes such debate a fools errand. I carefully chose my wording and used these terms--theism--morality--equality--religious liberty. I did not say that any particular religion should be state established and would be opposed to that--because that inevitably leads to another form of suppression. What I promoted is exactly what our founders promoted. Do you agree with the founding principles of our country--All men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights? You cannot form a society on an amoral foundation or you will have an amoral and immoral society. As bad as all the religious persecution has been, and it has been horrible, societies founded on atheism or evolution or the two in combination have been exponentially worse in their suppression and persecution. In summary I'm promoting what our founders promoted--theism--morality--equality--religious liberty.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,369 |
''A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.'' And yet may be wrong. The factual foundation, geology, fossils, genetic diversity, gene expression, epigenetics, etc, can't be wrong. It is what it is, it is objective independent evidence. What can be wrong being the details of how organisms evolve....environmental pressure forcing adaption, gene expression, the role of mutations, etc....not that animals and plants can and do evolve. Geology has billions of dead things buried in water born sediment all over the world. That is exactly what one would look for for evidence of a world wide flood. Fossils are the preserved bones of the dead things. Genetic diversity, gene expression, epigenetic are a few things used to support Special Creation. Adaptation was predicted by William Blythe, a creationists, as God's mechanism for preserving animals, ten years prior to Darwin's' book Do you really believe that all those billions of fossils were all deposited at the same time in one flood? It took millions of years to bury all those billions of dead things. What kept them from decaying before they fossilized over those millions of years?
Last edited by Thunderstick; 08/26/19.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,749 Likes: 20
Campfire Sage
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,749 Likes: 20 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,749 Likes: 20
Campfire Sage
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,749 Likes: 20 |
What kept them from decaying before they fossilized over those millions of years?
1) Absence of bacteria due to absence of oxygen (usually due to being covered in silt), and 2) mineralization. The kind of bacteria that consumes organic matter requires oxygen.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,994
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,994 |
https://biologydictionary.net › fossil-record Fossil Record Definition A fossil record is a group of fossils which has been analyzed and arranged chronologically and in taxonomic order. Fossils are created when organisms die, are incased in dirt and rock, and are slowly replaced by minerals over time. What is left is a mineral impression of an animal which once existed. Many fields and specialties are utilized to categorize and arrange these fossils, including comparative anatomy, radiometric dating, and DNA analysis. Using the data from the fossil record, scientist try to recreate phylogenies, or trees describing the relationships between animals, both alive and extinct. The fossil record helps inform how different groups of animals are related through evolution.
Leo of the Land of Dyr
NRA FOR LIFE
I MISS SARAH
“In Trump We Trust.” Right????
SOMEBODY please tell TRH that Netanyahu NEVER said "Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States, it can dry up and blow away."
|
|
|
|
533 members (1234, 12344mag, 10gaugemag, 17CalFan, 16penny, 56 invisible),
2,269
guests, and
1,302
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,391
Posts18,488,753
Members73,970
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|