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.
The hole does not prove that there is no doughnut. Scientists are always "plugging in" theories. The last of the 92 natural elements was not proven to exist until WWII, but no scientist would insist that they did not exist, because there was an element for every atomic number. The fact that they had not yet proved that there was Prometheum did not cast any doubt on the existence of Iron and Oxygen.
Similarly, the absence of any proof of "missing links" does not prove that there is no chain.
OK. Did I deny the doughnut for the hole in it? My point is, that the theory used to plug the hole, is quite often, flawed, but,, since it's the only one it gets used. Or, perhaps, only a few scientists have actually examined said hole, and it gets plugged with an unsubstantiated theory because it's the best they can do. Thats why we have terms like 'breakthrough' in science. Prometheum being a good example of that. Sooner or later, someone comes up with something REALLY good ya know. There has not been a really good one in the fossil record for a while. Interesting ones, but nothing that would revolutionize how we see ourselves. So, they keep digging. One day, they will find something nice and juicy, if they have not already and just ain't tellin'.
Yeah, but I like the other explanation better, and was just trying to figure out how, as a woman, I should get to "choose", whose testicles to "testify" on. . . .
That might be a bit uncomfortable. Maybe even painful.
Now now, stop contradicting his facts with facts Omaha. While we are talking facts, evolution , by itself, leaves gaping holes in our developmental history. Thus, those holes are plugged with theory. Hmmm, and thats not dogmatic? Especially when we consider that this theory is being presented as fact, because more than one scientist agrees with it, therefore, it MUST be accepted as correct.ooooook then.
I honestly don't know why I'm attempting to talk to a stone, but you seem to only want to listen to false science that backs up your faith. However, I am willing to listen to good science, if there were good science about creationism. There isn't, so bring it on.
And yet, still no one who is a proponent of intelligent design, creationism, or whatever you want to call it, can tell me why a rabbit has to eat its own poop in order to actually sustain itself. Thats right, A rabbit can't digest its food the first time. So its got to eat it, poop it out, and then eat it again to get its nutrients.
I honestly don't know why I'm attempting to talk to a stone, but you seem to only want to listen to false science that backs up your faith. However, I am willing to listen to good science, if there were good science about creationism. There isn't, so bring it on.
And yet, still no one who is a proponent of intelligent design, creationism, or whatever you want to call it, can tell me why a rabbit has to eat its own poop in order to actually sustain itself. Thats right, A rabbit can't digest its food the first time. So its got to eat it, poop it out, and then eat it again to get its nutrients.
I guess the question is, do you believe that science is secular? How about mathmatics?
There is no good scientific evidence for creationism. (Please, if you have an argument for it, post it in the religious section, and link it here. Its been debated so many times there I can't count.)
There is substantial evidence for evolution, and it is taught as a theory in school, along with the theory of realtivity, and other scientific theory.
I don't see seculars teaching dogma in schools, I see them pushing for the advocation of teaching science in schools, not religion. If you have an example of them teaching "God doesn't exist" in schools please provide it. I have never once heard a teach say those words.
Believing that evolution is a good scientific theory doesn't make you any less Christian, and it doesn't disprove God. You can't disprove something that there is no proof for. However, it shouldn't be taught in schools, if there is no proof of it.
It is atheism/humanism that there is no proof for ; it masquerades as real science . Theres plenty for Creationism but how willing are you to have a totally unbiased mind ? Its not a case that there is no evidence, its a matter of the Will to look at it : Frank Turek vs. Christopher Hitchens: What Best Explains Reality: Theism or Atheism? on Vimeo . If there were any proof for atheism/humanism, this popular atheist Debater would have presented it on a gold plate.
I honestly don't know why I'm attempting to talk to a stone, but you seem to only want to listen to false science that backs up your faith. However, I am willing to listen to good science, if there were good science about creationism. There isn't, so bring it on.
And yet, still no one who is a proponent of intelligent design, creationism, or whatever you want to call it, can tell me why a rabbit has to eat its own poop in order to actually sustain itself. Thats right, A rabbit can't digest its food the first time. So its got to eat it, poop it out, and then eat it again to get its nutrients.
Oh Gawwwwwd! OK 'cludart' is it? Lets get something cleared up here. I am about as much a Christian , or whatever, looking to affirm a faith as Teddy Roosevelt is still POTUS>. LMAO, I'm NOT a religious person...at all. I am merely saying , that teaching evolution as pure fact, is as unsubstantiated as teaching creation. Evolution has just as many holes as creation does, so, how can it be taught as scientific FACT when it is only THEORY at the end of the day? So a bunch of scientists agree that a certain theory is plausible, and choose to accept it as teachable. Well, a group of theoligists can do the same thing. Are the theologins any less credible than the , oh, say paleontoligists? I suppose that depends on WHO one chooses to ask, doesn't it? I am , simply, stating that it matters about a fart in a high wind what scientists, clergy, et al choose to accept as fact, and offer as such. NONE of them have proof positive that any of what they say is absolute fact, in terms of the subject of our origins as a species. Oh sure, they can all point to pertinant discoveries in the fossil record, or to some old abstract text, the latter perhaps bolstered some by an acheological discovery. The two 'sciences of arheology and theology DO overlap at times. It's facinating stuff, but it's all conjecture as to what the real story is. Somewhere in here, my real position on things and my real character flew by you at mach speed. I did not think I was being all that ambiguous, but hey, just another theory shot full of holes..
Oh Gawwwwwd! OK 'cludart' is it? Lets get something cleared up here. I am about as much a Christian , or whatever, looking to affirm a faith as Teddy Roosevelt is still POTUS>. LMAO, I'm NOT a religious person...at all. I am merely saying , that teaching evolution as pure fact, is as unsubstantiated as teaching creation. Evolution has just as many holes as creation does, so, how can it be taught as scientific FACT when it is only THEORY at the end of the day? So a bunch of scientists agree that a certain theory is plausible, and choose to accept it as teachable. Well, a group of theoligists can do the same thing. Are the theologins any less credible than the , oh, say paleontoligists? I suppose that depends on WHO one chooses to ask, doesn't it? I am , simply, stating that it matters about a fart in a high wind what scientists, clergy, et al choose to accept as fact, and offer as such. NONE of them have proof positive that any of what they say is absolute fact, in terms of the subject of our origins as a species. Oh sure, they can all point to pertinant discoveries in the fossil record, or to some old abstract text, the latter perhaps bolstered some by an acheological discovery. The two 'sciences of arheology and theology DO overlap at times. It's facinating stuff, but it's all conjecture as to what the real story is. Somewhere in here, my real position on things and my real character flew by you at mach speed. I did not think I was being all that ambiguous, but hey, just another theory shot full of holes..
Your the one who said that evolution was dogmatic. I simply supplied you video showing that it wasn't a religion, it is a science, which is evolving.
Their argument is the same one they've had for years, and they have no proof. Evolution is supported by proof, proof in the fossil records, proof in countless other studies.
As in "flock of do-dos" so elequently puts it, "They won't submit any evidence before peer review, because they have no evidence." At least Evolution is open for debate on its holes.
I do thank you for sharing your story. The great majority of people who abandon Christianity are due to a bad experience and/or not getting thier heart-felt questions answered . Youve presented ALOT in this response , and far more than what i can address in this particular venue, but, id be willing to carry this chat further on PM or email if you wish...because you didnt get beyond the religiousity stage into a deep and meaningful personal relationship with God thru Christ . While im not discounting what you say as reality to yourself, there are some misconceptions you have from being drowned in a religion of legalism . I can assure you what you experienced growing up was NOT the real Christian Faith -- it was the same legalism that Christ himself condemned the Pharisees about when they established thier own manmade rules, regulations, and demands to keep one pinned to their system of legalism.
That said, God is still the same and has not moved ; he still hopes you recognize your ultimate reason for living is in him and invites you to seek him without the legalistic bondage. Did you know that Christ himself denounced religion because of the harm it has ? If you want to examine what a real walk with God entails, im available to discuss that with you apart from this Thread , or you choose to sit down with a Pastor of a large Church who would be willing to listen to you then explain what it was that was severely missing in your childhood/young adult life. Is this something you can see doing since there simply is no greater issue facing Man , than the Creator and how one is reconciled to him for eternity -- it never was based on ones good works outweighing the bad ; it was always based on what Christ DID , not what we can DO to earn our way.
Regards.
I appreciate your concern, but you need not worry, I am living a happy and fulfilling life. I have not "god" shaped void in my heart.
Also, digging deeper into Christianity and religion is what got me here in the first place so unless I want to be like Catholics and just do as I am told, I'll stick to what I know and what I am doing.
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.
.
