Science has much better answers than "God did it" (Christianity, exist)

[AREQUIPA]

Originally Posted by Sweater Fish

It's unfortunate that so many religious people fall into the modern snare of trying to prove that religion is as good as science using scientific reasonign to do it.

Science is good, science is great, but it's only one form of reason man has at his disposal. Science has certainly existed as long as people have been thinking. It was there in our caves and campfires, it was there in our rafts and pottery, it was there in our religion. But in our best and fullest moments as a species, science has worked alongside and together with our other forms of reason like emotion, morality, pure logic, aesthetics and prophecy. And then the answers we come to are so much more complexly textured. They last longer.

It seems like we have a tendency to get unbalanced in society, though. For centuries favoring religion and prophecy as forms of reason and trying to shoehorn science and artistic reason into them. Or then swinging too far the other way so that science and materialism rule us and we lose the ability to even understand the prophecies and words of God that were once so clear to us.

Try to look into your mind and see how much more it can do than just figure out why that rock fell from the sky.

If I follow your argument, I'd say to you that science is not the be -all and end of everything. On the other hand, coming to beliefs without their having been verified by sound logic and scientifically valid evidence is not to be encouraged. It leads to believing in nonsense.

Prophecy is not valid. The claim of the 'word of God' is not valid. It does not stand up under scrutiny and has no business to be believed. Science has the tried and tested track record of veracity and religion doesn't.

Speculation and theorizing is fine but to believe in any of those speculations and theories without the decent supporting evidence which validates the geocentric solar system, a billion year old earth and the process of natural selection is foolishness, illogic and nonsense.

Prophecies have been discussed here at length and I can tell you that it frequently ended up with the believers in prophecy simply rejecting the evidence against them. (Though I have to say that it is hard to disprove that something is going to happen). Blind Faith is not a good way of reasoning.

[TKramar]

Originally Posted by Arjay51

You really need to seek help. Or at least educate yourself to facts instead of your fantasies.

I know the facts that can be known, and I know that some things cannot be known--and, unlike scientists, am perfectly willing to admit that some things are unknowable.

I also don't believe in banging my head against a brick wall, hoping it will fall down eventually.

[TKramar]

"In a hole in the ground, there lived a hobbit."

[Campbell34]

Originally Posted by AREQUIPA

I will give it you that the fiery mountain could be seen as a description of an asteroid plunging into the sea. It could also be read as a threat of the biggest thing John of Patmos could think of plunging burning into the sea. Given the fanciful context (which is why I pointed it out) and bearing in mind that much of that sounds more like a volcano than a bolide, the suggestion that it is a prophetic vision - or memory - you don't seem too clear about it - of some event which it vaguely resembles (that asteroids are planetoid - shaped rather than mountain - shaped is a 'detail' which would of course be dismissed by you as not helpful to your case), is open to doubt.

Even if one takes it as a bolide, and bearing in mind the point agreed that the ancient greeks (according to Acts) knew about such things, one can only see it in very fanciful terms as yet another bit of punishment dished out by God and in no way does it show any advanced astronomical knowledge which is, I remind you, the point you were trying to claim.

Your sideswipe at 'science' is cheap and irrelevant and is quite obviously an attempt to pretend that scientific scepticism about events which turn out to be true should oblige us to believe without anything better than John's hellfire ravings the claims of the Bible, which are, despite your strenuous efforts, turning out, seriatem to be false.

You didn't seriously think I'd be fooled did you?

One of your mistakes here is to suggest that asteroids are planetoid shaped rather than mountain shaped. That is simply wrong. If you consider the link below you will see on page six, asteroid 243 Ida. It is about 35 miles long and 15 miles wide. Asteroids may appear planetoid shaped from far distances. Yet up close, they are not. Asteroids come in all shapes and sizes, and usually appear as a large rock and not a planet.

Pictures of Asteroids


Also the effects described by John are not effects that have been experienced by any volcanoes of the past. One of the greatest Volcanic explosions of all time was that of Krakatoa. And as powerful as that was, we do not see one third of the marine life dying in that sea, or the destruction of that many ships.

Most of your present assumptions have little to do with the facts. And the Biblical description given, and it's effects will find much more agreement with a falling asteroid, that an exploding volcano.

I find your lack of knowledge on the shape of astroids, and your overall lack of historical knowledge of past volcanic effects surprising.

[Campbell34]

Originally Posted by rifleman

{Gawd; this is soooo easy....Thx, Tommo!}



You just have to be open to suggestion, Tommo. Which we know you certainly are, if the suggestion points in the right direction.

__________________________________________

BTW, for our more open-minded readers, I hasten to point out that "science" is but a relatively modern toolset established to validate and standardize the questioning and answering process that man has always enjoyed. and to replace random prophecy and uniformed decisions, the staple of religious sects and dogma. An early "spiritual" observation of some amazing but inexplicable celestial event by a prophet in biblical times was fine and dandy, but if it wasn't corroborated by someone else, it can now be considered an "irreproducible result", for which science, with it's long-established sense of humor, even has a journal:

The Journal of Irreproducible Results

Nowadays, evil "science" (at least Tommo sees it) actually requires a full description of the process, equipment, methodologies and references, as well as the names of co-authors and prior research whihc the current study may be based on, for any research results to be considered potentially valid and credible and publishable. By the time it's in print in Science, or Nature, The Journal of Geological Science, or any other credible publication, it's passed muster with an academically distinguished and published panel.

By the way, as a glaring example, the Creationist Institute is in no way even vaguely credible since it panders to the suggestive, is highly biased solely towards a Christian God entity, provides absolutely no supporting documentation, and routinely ridicules honest work by real individuals who simply follow the rules of credibility. In many cases now well documented, it has also attempted to validate known prevarications (lies) by highly creative but fully debunked and in fact criminally oriented individuals and groups (the Delk footprint carver, and NAMI™ are good examples).

Thus scientist's careful and conservative declarations, per se, are entirely unlike Tom's lone-gunman simplistic, hand-waving denials and dismissals. The Lone DeRanger rides Again!

There is no such entity as "Science" as Tom tries to portray for us. No global conspiracy. There's only individual human beings, far better read and studious than Tom or the majority of the fundamentalist Christian tribe. Just reliable people who have chosen to expand our universal knowledge base, openly, vigorously and honestly through advanced education and years of defensible research.

Unfortunately, such an inevitable and truth-uncovering scientific process flies !*SMACK*! in the face of ancient-myth hell-for-leather, knee-jerk, mumbo-jumbo folk lore and fairy tales, which is exactly what the scientifically illiterate fundamentalists choose to flee from, demonize, and name-call.

As if the "Neener Neener Neener" approach to honest debate by information shunning Christian acolyte denialists carries any weight with any mature, intellectual folk, much less scientists who operate on the cutting edge of new information.

So, with that in mind, press on Tommo. You continue to amuse us all.
____________________________

Oh BTW, this morning on NPR, a university in Utah made an announcement of the discovery of the oldest flying carnivorous flying dinosaur yet found in a geological formation in Utah that dates to 125 million years ago, all counted and validated n'stuff! Holy Factual Truth, Batman! Danged Varves, huh?

Neener Neener Neener indeed!

Yes rifleman, you can make an arguement that the top of a volcano could be blown into the sea. And if we could leave it there that would end the debate. However, the description given by John does not match the top of a mountain being blown into the sea. What John describes is something far move violent, far more destructive. Even when you consider the most powerful volcanic explosions from the past. Not one of them even come close to what John is describing. And I would of thought that a thinking man of science such as yourself rifleman would of picked up on that. Can you tell us the last time a volcano blew that it destroyed one third of the ships in the sea, and one third of that seas marine life?

[Arjay51]

Originally Posted by TKramar

I know the facts that can be known, and I know that some things cannot be known--and, unlike scientists, am perfectly willing to admit that some things are unknowable.

I also don't believe in banging my head against a brick wall, hoping it will fall down eventually.

No? You appear to only state what is convenient to encourage your blathering at any given moment, arguing in semantics when you actually know that a) you are wrong and b) just can't seem to admit that you have been caught out in your nonsense.

Of course, it is worthless discussing anything with you since you will change your stance just to argue.

[Arjay51]

Originally Posted by TKramar

"In a hole in the ground, there lived a hobbit."

Another typical, off topic attempt to control the conversation.

As usual, epic fail.

[TKramar]

Originally Posted by Arjay51

Another typical, off topic attempt to control the conversation.

As usual, epic fail.

You only say it's off topic because you don't know the context.

Apparently, you don't know as much as you suppose that you do.

[PGC301]

I'll ask again, since discovering something and creating something are apparently essentially the same thing, does that mean that Urbain Le Verrier created Neptune or that Newton created gravity?

[Arjay51]

Originally Posted by PGC301

I'll ask again, since discovering something and creating something are apparently essentially the same thing, does that mean that Urbain Le Verrier created Neptune or that Newton created gravity?

He knows that he has been caught in his bull and is refusing to answer.

In his case, that passes for wisdom.