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.
Then take your own advise and stop judging god to be good or anything else. Welcome to the skeptics club jeff.
Well and truly spoken.
Quote:
As to Ken Sham he's like all modern creatools - making tons of money off the backs of gullible people.
I've said this before, and I sincerely do believe it, though I state for the record here that I acknowledge I may well be completely wrong--but I don't think Ham believes a word of the tripe he spews. I really don't. I don't believe he's getting richy-rich off AIG (though his net worth is a mystery, his recorded annual salary doesn't seem crazy) but I think he's found his niche, and a way of making a living while also getting some press.
And blindly accepting the popular beliefs of "scientists" like Bill Nye is not actually doing "science", either.
But hey...you believe the popular ideas...so how can you be wrong? I mean...the majority has NEVER been wrong, has it?
Let's see, one non sequitur about Bill Nye that has nothing to do with my post and one sentence putting words in my mouth that I never said or came remotely close to saying. That is about the quality of response I expected. Kudos.
What I am not seeing, is any reason that I or anyone else should take your opinion on science any more seriously than I would that of a 12 year old child.
All the layers that can be seen in the Grand Canyon come from the world-wide flood of Noah's day. I believe the creation exhibit near Ken Ham's Ark shows how this is so.
Wow!
Washington, DC — Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees. Despite promising a prompt review of its approval for a book claiming the Grand Canyon was created by Noah's flood rather than by geologic forces, more than three years later no review has ever been done and the book remains on sale at the park, according to documents released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
"In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology," stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. "It is disconcerting that the official position of a 'national park as to the geologic age of the Grand Canyon is ‘no comment.’"
Please show me a post where I've said ANYTHING like that. I never have said that science is always wrong.
Again...I've never said anything like that.
But I do find it interesting that you take offense at what we are perceived to be saying, while you then claim to be able to speak definitively on areas of theology while my advanced degree in it is dismissed.
No..I mean the things that people just assume to be true based on preconceived notions. You really have no way to date the earth without using some assumptions. Evolution is based off of assumptions. So many things that science holds to be true are based off of assumptions.
I referred to geology, physics and chemistry, and you answered with pop science.
Not sure what you mean by my speaking definity on areas of theology unless you mean no more than any other layperson might say. If I inferred any knowledge let alone advanced knowledge of theology then I would be mistaken and I would apologize. I do work hard at leaving out the actual religion in my posts and post about science, laws, society and equality. I would like you to post an example where I spoke definitively on areas of theology cause I think I know as little of that as you show knowledge of sciences.
Without certain assumptions like water flows down hill we cannot know a single thing. We have zero evidence that radioactive decay for all the isotopes has changed since the early time nor that trees grew differently in the last 400o years or that large rocks did not float way out into an ocean on top or the water in the past but do we really have to question the basis of sciences just because they do not agree with the your view of what the Bible says? As far as assumptions a much bigger one is one you as you assume that the very first person who wrote the Bible wrote what your God told him to. If that is an assumption then perhaps everything about your religion may be false.
Lord Kevin dated the earth to no more than 2 million years ago in an attempt to undermine evolution. But he had no knowledge of radioactive decay and the heat it generated so even a stout
Christian who wanted a young earth has a much older date than Hamm.
I referred to geology, physics and chemistry, and you answered with pop science.
Because much of what passes for geology, physics and chemistry is essentially, pop science.
Quote:
Not sure what you mean by my speaking definity on areas of theology unless you mean no more than any other layperson might say. If I inferred any knowledge let alone advanced knowledge of theology then I would be mistaken and I would apologize. I do work hard at leaving out the actual religion in my posts and post about science, laws, society and equality. I would like you to post an example where I spoke definitively on areas of theology cause I think I know as little of that as you show knowledge of sciences.
You seem quite outspoken about religious matters. You've made it clear what you think of God and other "superstitions".
Quote:
Without certain assumptions like water flows down hill we cannot know a single thing. We have zero evidence that radioactive decay for all the isotopes has changed since the early time
You don't know that it HAS NOT, either. You've merely assumed it.
All the layers that can be seen in the Grand Canyon come from the world-wide flood of Noah's day. I believe the creation exhibit near Ken Ham's Ark shows how this is so.
You are still trapped in your paradox where you are perfectly fine with conventional dating techniques used by "evolutionists" (your word) indicating an old Earth yet you continue saying that all the strata was formed during a recent flood event.
Because much of what passes for geology, physics and chemistry is essentially, pop science.
Pop-science is a scientifically meaningless term. If you can specifically describe the theories in geology, physics, and chemistry that you believe are false, and then support your assertions using the scientific method, I will eat my shoes.
Right all the angles of repose for sediments were different back then and wet muds had a much higher loading capacity then they do today. Guess you must agree with Jeff that gravity was different during those times.
Not only that but the cinder cones of former volcanoes had to have had all the debris around them washed away by the flood of Noah's day. Neither wind nor normal rain fall even for billions of years could have washed that away leaving just the cinder cones.
Of course I can. The Bible is as much a book on history as any other history book is and truthful at that.
There wasn't a China right after the flood. Present day China came from the offspring of one of Noah's sons and from the multiplication of languages at dispersal from the tower of Babel.
See this statement of yours here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
The fact we do have so many different languages should be a tip-off that the historic account in Genesis has plausibility. Otherwise we'd all still have just one language since humans would rather have one language to amalgamate their power.
This is what I asked you about. "Because the Bible says so" does not in any way support your claim of "the fact we do have so many different languages should be a tip-off that the historic account in Genesis has plausibility".
Rather, it makes perfect sense that we have so many different languages, given the fact that many different cultures grew in many different parts of the world, long before people had even sporadic interaction with other cultures. It is not in any way something which makes no sense and thus should be a tip-off that the historic account in Genesis has plausibility.
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.
