Not logged in. Login - Register


All new registrations need to be approved manually. After registration, mail me at tyblossom at aol dot com.
ChaseChat is available for Smartphones via Tapatalk, Download the app at http://tapatalk.com/m?id=4&referer=1048173. After installing CLICK HERE to add the forum to Tapatalk.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Science for God's sake
10-02-2017, 02:21 AM,
#11
RE: Science for God's sake
(10-01-2017, 08:39 AM)OjoDude Wrote: Nothing wrong with creationism. Science once believed the earth was flat too, among other scientific "facts" until they weren't. And when science can't explain something, it's a theory sold as fact like manmade global warming. And like most science, at some point it is debunked or never proven but taken as truth by the feeble minded. So far, nobody in all of human history has been abke to debunk God or creationism.

The onus is not on me to debunk your God. That would be like me asking you to prove that pink dragons don't exist. You can't do it.
Reply
10-02-2017, 03:28 AM,
#12
RE: Science for God's sake
(10-01-2017, 09:05 AM)crazyfamily Wrote: I don't hear scientists denouncing religion,

lol Crazy. you live in a cave or bubble somewhere. how do you access the internet?

some of the harshest critics of religion are well known scientists who get plenty of attention in the media

(10-01-2017, 09:05 AM)crazyfamily Wrote: but I do hear creationists denouncing science

wow, crazy. wrong-o again. do you have an example?

you must put literally zero effort into ever listening to anyone who might have a different opinion than you

what you will find is that there are many God believing and/or creationist believing people (some are scientists), and they believe very strongly in the scientific method

many of the important foundations of science came from Christians, doncha know??

and a lot of scientists have differing opinions on the scientific "theories" that are out there (you know why they call them theories right?)

and if someone differs in their conclusion on the evidence of a theory, that doesn't make one person any more a science denier than another person. this is a tactic of the progressive left. you know, the ones who are so open minded and tolerant all the time. hee hee.

they love diversity of opinion doncha know. lol. just kidding. more like, if you disagree with "them", you're denouncing science!

it's a lot easier to label your opponent rather than trying to make a case on the merits


Reply
10-02-2017, 03:28 AM,
#13
Science for God's sake
CF,
Thanks for the article, very good. People, regardless of their religious or non-religious affiliation are driven by money and power. Corruption is at its highest level in anything... Family, friends, community, government, religious community, or scientific community.
Everyone has an agenda.

I consider myself a scientist, a microbiologist. DNA can't be created randomly and life breathed into it. That can't be created in a test tube. But what I can prove is the observation of nature through my scientific eyes. God's wonder at the mi-nute level can't be explained.
Here's an example:
An insect... The cicada

The seven periodical cicada species are so named because, in any one location, all of the members of the population are developmentally synchronized—they emerge as adults all at once in the same year. This periodicity is especially remarkable because their lifecycles are so long—13 or 17 years.

No one can show me the diagram of the first breath of life in an organism of primodial soup to each and every strange and wonderful organism that lives today.
The diagram needs "why's, how's".

God's universe is proof for me, from macro to micro.


Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Reply
10-02-2017, 06:44 AM,
#14
RE: Science for God's sake
I've wondered how the ancient Israelites came up with a creation story (Genesis) that approximates scientific thinking on the Big Bang, etc.
Reply
10-02-2017, 08:25 AM, (This post was last modified: 10-02-2017, 09:46 AM by crazyfamily.)
#15
Science for God's sake
Here, Chris Yates, here's some science denial for fun and profit.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-kim...04606.html

BTW, we know the cause of hurricanes and it isn't gay people.



Interesting to me, I wind up on the outside on other issues. Though I take a more libertarian approach to vaccinations, I think it's foolish and shortsighted to ignore the multitude of incidences of Autism that appear to be directly linked to bulk immunizations. I've read the studies and it all sounds inconclusive to me. So, aside from the ones that benefit from the protection that vaccinations are purported to guarantee, who benefits? Oh, pharmaceutical companies, we can trust them right?

The same science that deems vaccinations successful, medicine, will also prove that vaccinations can be harmful and that is why they should not be promoted by the medical community and mandated by the government. The government, of course, has no legal authority to force vaccinations but they're gonna try. So, which group is the science denier? Once again it's the group profiting from the sale of vaccines.
Reply
10-02-2017, 10:51 PM, (This post was last modified: 10-02-2017, 11:34 PM by OjoDude.)
#16
RE: Science for God's sake
(10-01-2017, 11:27 PM)crazyfamily Wrote: Sorry, busy day. Context is very important, and while I don't read much, I love videos and can google with the best of the B grade class.

https://youtu.be/HooeZrC76s0

I stand by my assertion that I don't hear scientists denouncing God, but there is an overwhelming number of clergy, and followers, and presidents, and politicians, and oil CEO's, and school administrators, and presidents denouncing science.

This sums up my perception of the issue:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/23/us/sci...ience.html

I'd like to add that there is no good reason for people guided by religious faith to be anti-science. The indication, to me, is there is an alternative agenda at play. For people like, businessmen....the president and others like him, the agenda is money. Climate change, environmental impact etc. is a drag on profits. Simple. There's no good reason for people guided by religious faith to be anti-science.
Context is important, and I love videos too. I find most people guided by religious faith to be pro-science.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gbiXTH0484M

For people like, politicians...Al Gore and others like him, the agenda is control. What better way to control others than to control the environment which is everywhere and everyone is a part of it. I agree on this point, the indication to me with "climate change" is that there is an alternative agenda at play.

(10-02-2017, 02:21 AM)FollowMeDown Wrote:
(10-01-2017, 08:39 AM)OjoDude Wrote: Nothing wrong with creationism. Science once believed the earth was flat too, among other scientific "facts" until they weren't. And when science can't explain something, it's a theory sold as fact like manmade global warming. And like most science, at some point it is debunked or never proven but taken as truth by the feeble minded. So far, nobody in all of human history has been abke to debunk God or creationism.

The onus is not on me to debunk your God. That would be like me asking you to prove that pink dragons don't exist. You can't do it.
Actually, it is. If you assert there is no God, you must demonstrate that if you declare it so. Your belief requires the onus. Christians state there is a God, but also admit it is a belief of faith, openly. And Christians provide evidence, with historical documentation. Where is your evidence to the contrary? Do you have any?

I won't make the assertion that dragons do not exist, and therefore would not need to debunk it. I will be agnostic on that subject, but state only that it is unlikely they do. If you have evidence that dragons exist, I would be happy to consider it.

See how that works?
Reply
10-02-2017, 11:54 PM,
#17
Science for God's sake
There you have it, 'nuff said. We can't explain everything to everyone's satisfaction, so let's call it magic.

However, we understand hurricanes, earthquakes, tectonic plates, water, oxygen, hydrogen, carbon, etc, etc, etc. We know well and good which chemicals we put into the air and the impact they have on the atmosphere. We understand ground level ozone and the impact to our health. We can measure temperature and track surface temperature trends. We can measure the loss of polar caps, we can track the extinction of animals and insects. There is so much data that leads back to mans impact on the planet that we don't need magic to understand what the outcome will be.

So, back to what I said above. The insistence that God is somehow running this show is just a tool of denial that allows the meek to excuse themselves from the conversation. You can believe in God and believe man made climate change too, it's a choice people make to not believe. It's a choice to choose money over humanity. God doesn't tell people to do this, in fact, I'm certain that christianity teaches the opposite. Well, it used to.
Reply
10-03-2017, 12:25 AM, (This post was last modified: 10-03-2017, 12:46 AM by OjoDude.)
#18
RE: Science for God's sake
(10-02-2017, 11:54 PM)crazyfamily Wrote: There you have it, 'nuff said. We can't explain everything to everyone's satisfaction, so let's call it magic.

However, we understand hurricanes, earthquakes, tectonic plates, water, oxygen, hydrogen, carbon, etc, etc, etc. We know well and good which chemicals we put into the air and the impact they have on the atmosphere. We understand ground level ozone and the impact to our health. We can measure temperature and track surface temperature trends. We can measure the loss of polar caps, we can track the extinction of animals and insects. There is so much data that leads back to mans impact on the planet that we don't need magic to understand what the outcome will be.

So, back to what I said above. The insistence that God is somehow running this show is just a tool of denial that allows the meek to excuse themselves from the conversation. You can believe in God and believe man made climate change too, it's a choice people make to not believe. It's a choice to choose money over humanity. God doesn't tell people to do this, in fact, I'm certain that christianity teaches the opposite. Well, it used to.
I'm always in awe at the hubris of what we as humans think we understand. At one point, we thought Pluto was a planet. Then it wasn't. Then it was again. At one point, we thought the Earth was the center of the universe. At one point, we thought the sun revolved around the earth. At one point, we thought the earth was flat. All of these beliefs were declared under the guise of scientific fact. Until, of course, they weren't. Which the same can be said of global cooling, then global warming, and now climate change. A never-ending moving of a goalpost with an apparent alternative agenda than "saving the planet".

You can believe in God and not believe in manmade climate change too, it's a choice people make based on evidence and proof. I'm certain that God and Christianity teaches us to seek truth.

(10-02-2017, 11:54 PM)crazyfamily Wrote: There you have it, 'nuff said. We can't explain everything to everyone's satisfaction, so let's call it magic.
Meeting everyone's satisfaction is not my goal, and it isn't the goal of science either. If we intend to be scientific, the only thing we can call magic is the theory of evolution. It isn't based on science at all.
Reply
10-03-2017, 07:35 AM, (This post was last modified: 10-03-2017, 08:26 AM by crazyfamily.)
#19
Science for God's sake
(10-03-2017, 12:25 AM)OjoDude Wrote: A never-ending moving of a goalpost with an apparent alternative agenda than "saving the planet".

And we see that your agenda is showing. What is it that climate change science is endangering in "your world"?

All of the "goal post moving," as you like to characterize it, is important. Were those who believed that the earth is flat ever able to prove it? Does changing Pluto's designation nullify any of the science behind the original discovery in 1930? So, while the science community builds on the data, refining definitions with new discoveries, a certain population wants them to stop with their discoveries. I'm certain that new information will arise in time with new perspectives that weren't previously considered or attainable, and they will not reverse the previously held convictions. As with your "goal post moving," these new perspectives will build on these old theories. At some point it will be undeniable, just as it is that the world is round.

Proving or disproving the existence of God, disputing the stories of the Bible is not the charge of scientists and doesn't need to be. If it happens through the course of discovery, then it's just a product of our expanding knowledge base, but one needs to be open to it. Religion does one thing very well, it closes minds to other possibilities...birth control...who said that. How many people can the planet support?

At least in this country, and for the time being, we have the freedom to believe what we like.

Oh look, how timely.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-41476648
Reply
10-03-2017, 08:36 AM,
#20
RE: Science for God's sake
(10-03-2017, 07:35 AM)crazyfamily Wrote:
(10-03-2017, 12:25 AM)OjoDude Wrote: A never-ending moving of a goalpost with an apparent alternative agenda than "saving the planet".

And we see that your agenda is showing. What is it that climate change science is endangering in "your world"?

All of the "goal post moving," as you like to characterize it, is important. Were those who believed that the earth is flat ever able to prove it? Does changing Pluto's designation nullify any of the science behind the original discovery in 1930? So, while the science community builds on the data, refining definitions with new discoveries, a certain population wants them to stop with their discoveries. I'm certain that new information will arise in time with new perspectives that weren't previously considered or attainable, and they will not reverse the previously held convictions. As with your "goal post moving," these new perspectives will build on these old theories. At some point it will be undeniable, just as it is that the world is round.

Proving or disproving the existence of God, disputing the stories of the Bible is not the charge of scientists and doesn't need to be. If it happens through the course of discovery, then it's just a product of our expanding knowledge base, but one needs to be open to it. Religion does one thing very well, it closes minds to other possibilities...birth control...who said that. How many people can the planet support?

At least in this country, and for the time being, we have the freedom to believe what we like.

Oh look, how timely.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-41476648

My agenda should be showing, I've not tried to hide it. Truth should be everyone's agenda.

The dinosaurs died, but the earth survived an extinction level event. The earth will survive humans. "Climate change" has nothing to do with saving the planet. It has to do with control.

The religion of leftism does close minds to other possibilities. This is true.

Quote:At least in this country, and for the time being, we have the freedom to believe what we like.
Oh look, you're showing your true agenda. Like I said, control is the agenda.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Contact Us | ChaseChat - Forrest Fenn's Forum | Return to Top | | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication