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.
OK. Let me state my position once and for all. I never said anywhere that the earth was 6000 years old. I said it wasn't 4 1/2 billion years old.
I submit that 4 1/2 billion is the figure most often used as being the age of the earth. Now, I say to all of you that were that figure to be 6 billion, you would all latch onto that figure and swear by it too. Were some Harvard professor to then come along and claim the earth to be 3 1/2 billion years old, then you would believe that as well. I say, don't make a statement unless you can prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. There is no standard available by which to make a scientific comparison.
When a calibration lab calibrates a voltmeter, a meter calibrator is required that is five times as accurate as is the voltmeter under calibration. This is the acceptable standard for any instrument's bona fide calibration. By what standard does one calibrate the age of something 4 1/2 billion years old?
I once saw a pipefitters' helper fired. The pipefitter was on one side of a ship's bulkhead and told the helper to run his rule through a hole in the bulkhead to measure the length of pipe necessary to join a pipe run. The helper did as he was told. The pipefitter held the end of the rule to the pipe and asked the helper what the measurement was. The helper responded, "Thirty one and three quarters and a little bit." The pipefitter immediately turned red in his face and fired the helper on the spot. In the real world we cannot operate on "a little bit". That only works at the professors' and the scientists' levels. Why can't the age of the earth be 4 billion three hundred thousand and forty-nine years old?
Now, concerning the electron theory. Exide Corporation once made an uninterruptible power supply on contract for the US Government. I attended a class at Exide's plant in Raleigh, North Carolina. Exide taught the Conventional Flow Theory of Electricity. This theory teaches the flow from positive to negative which is the reverse taught in the electron theory. Many of us who had learned the electron theory had to turn our thinking completely around in order to accommodate this approach. Guess what? We got through and their uninterruptible power supply got installed and it worked like a charm. The end result was the exact same.
As an engineer, my work is usually pretty precise. If you claim you have a fish walking around upright in a pair of Air Jordan's that proves a species in transition, I expect, no I demand, you provide photos illustrating the fish as a fingerling through his present condition and throughout his transitional progression right up to the moment your fish turns into Taylor Swift. Prove your claim, otherwise your claim is no more than opinion, speculation, and conjecture.
Now, as far as the Theory of Evolution and Creationism. We can discuss it until we are blue in our faces. No one will win. This argument has been going on since before many of us were born. I have never seen anyone change his/her stance on this argument and I have no reason to believe I ever will.
There is one thing I do believe though because to be a Christian I simply am required to believe it. That is the very first verse in the Bible: In the beginning God created . . .
Last edited by the_human_being; 11-04-2014 at 12:15 PM..
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_human_being
Since you are interested and hung up on theories, why don't you explain it and the Theory of Gravity, the Theory of Chaos, the Theory of Electricity - both the Electron Theory and Conventional Theory since they both result in the same things. You might even explain the Atomic Theory since in my own opinion, it probably answers both the electrical questions. Elaborate on the Positron Theory as well.
What do you have against science? Why are you hung up on theories? I have given you the definitions for both scientific theory and for science. Those two should suffice.
You just don't or won't get it.
I am asking you WHAT the scientific method is.
You have danced and pranced around that question, but never once answered it. Theories get developed by using the scientific method. Now, go do some learning and tell us how. It will help you understand a lot.
Here eyes seem wide enough apart! I have to agree. LOL!
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.
