Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Again, if it were 100% infallible then it would be considered a fact or a law. Instead it's a theory. Nothing else to really say.
This a common misunderstanding of what scientific theories and laws are.
This might help explain it?
"Some people think that in science, you have a theory, and once it's proven, it becomes a law. That's not how it works. In science, we collect facts, or observations, we use laws to describe them, and a theory to explain them. You don't promote a theory to a law by proving it. A theory never becomes a law.
This bears repeating. A theory never becomes a law. In fact, if there was a hierarchy of science, theories would be higher than laws. There is nothing higher, or better, than a theory. Laws describe things, theories explain them. An example will help you to understand this. There's a law of gravity, which is the description of gravity. It basically says that if you let go of something it'll fall. It doesn't say why. Then there's the theory of gravity, which is an attempt to explain why."
I taught my children when they were young all about gravity; I asked them to throw a hat into the air and make it stay up there. After a few tries (by me) they realized that it can't be done. The same is true with Lying & stealing, I taught them.
It is the same as if you throw a big rock into that lake that looks like glass. It will upset the calm; It takes a long time for all of those ripples (in life) to calm down again. Don't throw rocks into the water (of life) and upset the calm (in your life) by trying to defy God's Laws!
They understood me perfectly - that was 25 years ago. Now they are teaching their children in the same manner.
...The DNA of the Neanderthal only varies from modern humans by 0.3%, making it pretty conclusive that humans evolved from Neanderthals. There. That's where we evolved from...
Actually, modern humans and Neanderthals appear to have both evolved from a common, earlier ancestor. Modern humans and Neanderthals coexisted for some time and then Neanderthals died out (or were killed). They also appear to have interbred; we have a small amount of Neanderthal ancestry, according to genetic studies.
Christianity should be questioned and is questioned quite often by it's strongest believers and strongest naysayers. The difference is, in my opinion, the naysayers who have been involved with being in church, have not received accurate doctrine which makes them believe things that aren't necessarily true about Christianity.
And what makes you think you have 'received accurate doctrine' and other Christians who don't believe the same things you do, have not? What is your source of 'accurate doctrine'? If you say the Bible, then your own argument works against you. Did you observe the original writers being instructed in 'accurate doctrine' by YHWH?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgtvatitans
But my faith in God goes before all else, so anything that the word of God says goes before, science if it contradicts the word.
I think that says it all really. Young Earth Creationist Ken Ham pretty much said the same thing. No amount of evidence would convince him of anything if it contradicted what he believes the Bible says.
How do you reconcile that the 'word of God' describes the earth as being flat with a dome over it?
This was what the ancient Hebrews believed their universe looked like and how they described it.
There was forensic evidence to show that Zimmerman shot Martin, but not sufficient evidence to prove whether he shot Martin in self-defense or not. Which is why he was acquitted.
Not sure why you would use that to try to support your argument.
I taught my children when they were young all about gravity; I asked them to throw a hat into the air and make it stay up there. After a few tries (by me) they realized that it can't be done. The same is true with Lying & stealing, I taught them.
It is the same as if you throw a big rock into that lake that looks like glass. It will upset the calm; It takes a long time for all of those ripples (in life) to calm down again. Don't throw rocks into the water (of life) and upset the calm (in your life) by trying to defy God's Laws!
They understood me perfectly - that was 25 years ago. Now they are teaching their children in the same manner.
These are not god's laws, that is simple common sense; those are teachable w/o the need for an imaginary god.
This a common misunderstanding of what scientific theories and laws are.
This might help explain it?
"Some people think that in science, you have a theory, and once it's proven, it becomes a law. That's not how it works. In science, we collect facts, or observations, we use laws to describe them, and a theory to explain them. You don't promote a theory to a law by proving it. A theory never becomes a law.
This bears repeating. A theory never becomes a law. In fact, if there was a hierarchy of science, theories would be higher than laws. There is nothing higher, or better, than a theory. Laws describe things, theories explain them. An example will help you to understand this. There's a law of gravity, which is the description of gravity. It basically says that if you let go of something it'll fall. It doesn't say why. Then there's the theory of gravity, which is an attempt to explain why."
It's also important to note that a theory can be proven wrong, but a fact cannot. That was the point in the post that you quoted from me.
A way of presenting a law in this case would be saying that life was created when ............. A way of explaining theory is we grew to become humans because of x, y and z. The explanation of life creation will have to be a fact, not a theory.
Last edited by justtitans; 02-09-2014 at 08:00 AM..
There was forensic evidence to show that Zimmerman shot Martin, but not sufficient evidence to prove whether he shot Martin in self-defense or not. Which is why he was acquitted.
Not sure why you would use that to try to support your argument.
You asked about proving a crime without witnesses. The point was, the details of a crime could not be proven because there were no corroborating witnesses, which is why your question is flawed. It is easily debunked and doesn't show what actually happened. Anything that happened would be a guess, only Zimmerman knows the truth, but for everyone else, all we can do is speculate, just like we are doing with the beginning of life. Evidence alone does not explain if there was a crime committed or not. Shooting Martin may or may not be the crime, but that isn't really the debate, it was why he shot him that was in question, just like we want to know why things exist as they do.
And what makes you think you have 'received accurate doctrine' and other Christians who don't believe the same things you do, have not? What is your source of 'accurate doctrine'? If you say the Bible, then your own argument works against you. Did you observe the original writers being instructed in 'accurate doctrine' by YHWH?
Of course reading the Bible is my means of accurate doctrine.
DID YOU observe the original writers in accurate doctrine? How do you know that it's right or wrong?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist
I think that says it all really. Young Earth Creationist Ken Ham pretty much said the same thing. No amount of evidence would convince him of anything if it contradicted what he believes the Bible says.
How do you reconcile that the 'word of God' describes the earth as being flat with a dome over it?
This was what the ancient Hebrews believed their universe looked like and how they described it.
It's also important to note that a theory can be proven wrong, but a fact cannot. That was the point in the post that you quoted from me.
A way of presenting a law in this case would be saying that life was created when ............. A way of explaining theory is we grew to become humans because of x, y and z. The explanation of life creation will have to be a fact, not a theory.
You still seem confused. Try reading that link again.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
