U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-10-2010, 09:12 AM
 
1,883 posts, read 2,551,237 times
Reputation: 598

Advertisements

Please explain what other areas of science you disagree with in terms of the legitimacy of it's findings, other than what addresses evolution.In other words,is the physics that created cell phones and nuclear energy wrong?Is astronomy wrong?What about the medical sciences?Are the neurologists we let operate on us wrong?The chemists who make our medicines and big screen TV's?The scientists who conceived and built the space station?The ones who conceived of a computer that we are now using to debate?

The point is,why just this one area?Why do we accept that science knows what it is doing in computers,cell phones we use to talk overseas,planes we willingly get in and go tens of thousands of feet into the air in,doctors we let operate on us and give us pills that other scientists have created,etc,etc.Every facet of a modern human's world is filled with scientifically devised items,but in this ONE area,we decide that science is wrong.And why?Because of any logical proof?No,because of an interpretation of the Bible that was conceived when some religious men were still arguing about whether black men and Indians had souls or were soulless.The same kind of interpretation that once argued that the Earth was still and the entire universe revolved around the Earth.

So on what basis,other than being told by a preacher "the Bible says so",do creationists reject this one scientific area?

BTW,I ask this as a fellow Christian,just not a literalist evangelical one.More of a Meister Eckhart one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-10-2010, 09:44 AM
 
Location: East Coast U.S.
1,513 posts, read 1,429,116 times
Reputation: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifertexan View Post
So on what basis,other than being told by a preacher "the Bible says so",do creationists reject this one scientific area?
What does evolution have to do with origins?

The term 'evolution' is loaded. Do you speak of time + chance + matter? Molecules to man?

If so, where did time, matter and chance come from?

You speak of science. Great. The science we have confirms that everything that begins to exist has a cause. If I say that science holds the only truth, then, I've made a philosophical statement - not a scientific one.

Do you (naturalists) just blindly follow a bunch of highly educated Moderator cut: deleted who claim to be smarter and better informed due to their learning credentials of one sort or another?

Last edited by june 7th; 04-10-2010 at 11:34 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2010, 09:52 AM
 
Location: Sinking in the Great Salt Lake
13,143 posts, read 19,134,646 times
Reputation: 14006
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post

Do you (naturalists) just blindly follow a bunch of highly educated Moderator cut: Orphaned who claim to be smarter and better informed due to their learning credentials of one sort or another?
No, we go to school for years and are taught how and why thoseModerator cut: Orphaned came to the conclusions they did. We are encouraged to challenge their conclusions and see if they really hold up. All things declared as scientific fact have been through a long process of challenges and probing.

Science is a documented flowchart of knowledge, not a grab bag of random assumptions.

Last edited by june 7th; 04-10-2010 at 11:35 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2010, 09:59 AM
 
1,883 posts, read 2,551,237 times
Reputation: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
What does evolution have to do with origins?

The term 'evolution' is loaded. Do you speak of time + chance + matter? Molecules to man?

If so, where did time, matter and chance come from?

You speak of science. Great. The science we have confirms that everything that begins to exist has a cause. If I say that science holds the only truth, then, I've made a philosophical statement - not a scientific one.

Do you (naturalists) just blindly follow a bunch of highly educated "know-it-all's" who claim to be smarter and better informed due to their learning credentials of one sort or another?
No,nobody blindly follows the Moderator cut: orphaned.Scientific theory can be tested.Most new theories are not met with approval by the holders of the old theories,and are attacked scientifically until their correctness is acknowledged or flaws found and exposed.Research the Big Bang vs the Steady State theories,or plate tectonics,just to name a couple.Nothing in the sciences is hidden from those willing to educate themselves on any particular issue.

Other than this,you basically you dodge the question.OK.

Next?

Last edited by june 7th; 04-10-2010 at 11:36 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2010, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Space Coast
1,989 posts, read 4,618,541 times
Reputation: 2748
To answer the OP, some of the other science that I commonly see creationists object to are big bang and geologic time. Also, I have seem some right here on c-d object to the earth being spherical (they insist it's flat) and to the heliocentric model of the solar system. On occasion I will see some more extreme folks object to any form of medical treatment, but I don't know how they feel about the science itself, other than claims that it is "evil" (as in talking snake evil).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2010, 02:27 PM
 
Location: East Coast U.S.
1,513 posts, read 1,429,116 times
Reputation: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifertexan View Post
No,nobody blindly follows the "know-it-all's." Scientific theory can be tested.Most new theories are not met with approval by the holders of the old theories,and are attacked scientifically until their correctness is acknowledged or flaws found and exposed.Research the Big Bang vs the Steady State theories,or plate tectonics,just to name a couple.Nothing in the sciences is hidden from those willing to educate themselves on any particular issue.

Other than this,you basically you dodge the question.OK.


Next?
Dodge the question? How so?

Do you intend to keep on 'topic' here and respond to my questions or, in keeping with your OP (term applied loosely) just attack and impugn creationists?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2010, 02:57 PM
 
1,838 posts, read 1,976,930 times
Reputation: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifertexan View Post
Please explain what other areas of science you disagree with in terms of the legitimacy of it's findings, other than what addresses evolution.In other words,is the physics that created cell phones and nuclear energy wrong?Is astronomy wrong?What about the medical sciences?Are the neurologists we let operate on us wrong?The chemists who make our medicines and big screen TV's?The scientists who conceived and built the space station?The ones who conceived of a computer that we are now using to debate?

The point is,why just this one area?Why do we accept that science knows what it is doing in computers,cell phones we use to talk overseas,planes we willingly get in and go tens of thousands of feet into the air in,doctors we let operate on us and give us pills that other scientists have created,etc,etc.Every facet of a modern human's world is filled with scientifically devised items,but in this ONE area,we decide that science is wrong.And why?Because of any logical proof?No,because of an interpretation of the Bible that was conceived when some religious men were still arguing about whether black men and Indians had souls or were soulless.The same kind of interpretation that once argued that the Earth was still and the entire universe revolved around the Earth.

So on what basis,other than being told by a preacher "the Bible says so",do creationists reject this one scientific area?

BTW,I ask this as a fellow Christian,just not a literalist evangelical one.More of a Meister Eckhart one.
dont forget that modern scienc e is also responsible for global warming-what use will we have of any good science if theres no planet to exist on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2010, 03:08 PM
 
1,883 posts, read 2,551,237 times
Reputation: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
Dodge the question? How so?

Do you intend to keep on 'topic' here and respond to my questions or, in keeping with your OP (term applied loosely) just attack and impugn creationists?
Dodge in the sense you have not answered the original questions.Again,if you missed it,the question is why do creationists have an issue with this one part?You have not answered.Since I am asking you to answer the OP,I think it safe to say I am staying on topic.

But so as to move this along,I am talking about evolution in the commonly accepted scientific sense.If you do not understand this definition,then please do some research on your own.I feel no need to educate those who choose to come in and engage in a discussion on a particular subject.And evolution has a lot to do with origins of life.It is how we got from inorganic materials to what we are now.As to where all this comes from,who knows?Where does God come from?Why question where the original energy from whence all life originates comes from when you cannot answer where God comes from?If the answer is that Gos has always existed,then the same answer is satisfactory for where the original energy of the universe comes from.Personally I believe both to be the same.The energy of the Big Bang is the energy of God.Both are eternally existing.

Now that I have answered yours,even though you failed to address mine,and I did ask first and start this thread,do you care to try and actually address the OP now?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2010, 03:32 PM
 
Location: East Coast U.S.
1,513 posts, read 1,429,116 times
Reputation: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifertexan View Post
Dodge in the sense you have not answered the original questions.Again,if you missed it,the question is why do creationists have an issue with this one part?You have not answered.Since I am asking you to answer the OP,I think it safe to say I am staying on topic.
Again, it's near impossible to address your questions unless you are willing to show a little integrity here and explain more precisely what you mean when you state the term 'evolution.'

There are many creationists that hold to "Theistic" or "Biblical" evolution. You seem to want to lump all "creationists" together.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lifertexan View Post
But so as to move this along,I am talking about evolution in the commonly accepted scientific sense.If you do not understand this definition,then please do some research on your own.I feel no need to educate those who choose to come in and engage in a discussion on a particular subject.
There's really no need for you to get wrapped around the axle just because I asked for clarification of your position. The fact is that the term 'evolution' tends to be somewhat subjective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lifertexan View Post
And evolution has a lot to do with origins of life.It is how we got from inorganic materials to what we are now.
Oh really? I think you'll find many pro-evolution types here on this forum that disagree.

In order for something to evolve, it first has to exist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lifertexan View Post
As to where all this comes from,who knows?Where does God come from?Why question where the original energy from whence all life originates comes from when you cannot answer where God comes from?If the answer is that Gos has always existed,then the same answer is satisfactory for where the original energy of the universe comes from.Personally I believe both to be the same.The energy of the Big Bang is the energy of God.Both are eternally existing.
Does God exist? If so, did God ever have a beginning?

Was there ever a time when there was nothing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lifertexan View Post
Now that I have answered yours,even though you failed to address mine,and I did ask first and start this thread,do you care to try and actually address the OP now?
Did I miss something?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2010, 04:20 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 32,007,059 times
Reputation: 14896
Quote:
Originally Posted by dobeable View Post
dont forget that modern scienc e is also responsible for global warming-what use will we have of any good science if theres no planet to exist on.
Let's not confuse technology with science.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:53 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top