| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| lets play " whack a moehle " | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 12 2009, 09:34 PM (1,916 Views) | |
| Deleted User | Apr 21 2009, 07:46 AM Post #71 |
|
Deleted User
|
I'm still waiting for breeze to say something, anything about creationism. Go back to his actual words: "i will post a few scientific reasons for Creation". When will you do that, breeze? Do you even know anything about creation "science"? Eric, that was fascinating about Kepler's Third Law. A few simple facts illustrate the simple science--at least your explanation makes it accessible. I can't imagine for the life of me why someone like breeze and his pasted authors are so fearful of science. |
|
|
| ngc1514 | Apr 21 2009, 08:14 AM Post #72 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"Scientific reasons" and "creationism" form an incongruity. Most science and even a lot of the math behind it is relatively understandable by those with a high school education in math. It's not - as the saying goes - brain surgery. I just don't understand how moderately intelligent people can come up with crap like rotations being "broken" other than knowing the choir to whom they preach are complete illiterates in the sciences. Planetary orbital dynamics has been fully understood for centuries, but these twits just invent (apparently) "facts" that are just not true. How strong can their religious faith be if they KNOW it is based on lies? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 21 2009, 08:26 AM Post #73 |
|
Deleted User
|
It's not knowing, it's believing. The purpose of science seems to make statements about relationships. "the relationship is T^2/R^3". E = mc^2. Those statements make predictions for which you can then find validating or falsifying data. Creationism if it were science would need to formulate the personal relationship with God. Then it could be validated or falsified. |
|
|
| the breeze | Apr 21 2009, 11:38 PM Post #74 |
the breeze
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Peculiarities in the Fossil Record All we have is evidence that a certain species exists for a certain period of time without significant change, which then goes extinct to be replaced at a different time with a radically different species, with no connection from the previous species to the next one. What the textbooks don't mention is that there's been a reversal of this fossil tree; it's only true up until the creation of man. Since the creation of man, the whole thing reverses. As time proceeds, we have fewer and fewer species with less and less diversity and complexity, and it's the land mammals that are being impacted in the worst way. There were 30,000 land mammals on planet Earth when God created Adam and Eve. There are only 15,000 remaining today. In just a few thousand years, 15,000 species of mammals have disappeared. Admittedly, man has a lot to do with that. As Paul and Ann Erlich pointed out in their book on extinctions, though, even if we were to get rid of every vestige of humanity and civilization on planet Earth, a minimum of one species would still become extinct every year. How many species do we see appearing? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 22 2009, 12:48 AM Post #75 |
|
Deleted User
|
Breeze, this is what you said you would do: "i will post a few scientific reasons for Creation, and the " moehle " can try to disprove them. then i will whack him down with more proof." When can we start playing? |
|
|
| ngc1514 | Apr 22 2009, 12:52 AM Post #76 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
More absolutely unsupportable and silly nonsense from breezy:
I see you're still quoting your Hugh (Hughly (sic) Wrong) Ross. How do you know how many species of land mammals at the time of the creation and today? And I notice that while Ross seems to think this is some great observation, he does admit that man has a lot to do with it. But even more striking is that Ross is confirming an observation by that Great Satan of evolutionists, Stephen Jay Gould, when he wrote in Wonderful Life that evolution is not an expansion of the number of species, but a winnowing down of species from a profligate beginning. The beginning in the book being that time known as the Cambrian explosion about 530 million years ago. Evolution seems to go wild when something like the Cambrian Explosion hits with the formation of hundreds and thousands of new species, genera, families and orders. Over time this evolutionary wealth is slowly whittled down to the more successful life forms. From that observation by Gould, one would expect the number of land mammals to decrease. Your boy, Hugely Wrong, is doing a great job supporting exactly what evolutionary theory proposes. |
![]() |
|
| ngc1514 | Apr 22 2009, 12:54 AM Post #77 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
In the terms of the Nixonian administration... "That sentence is no longer operational." I haven't seen him post anything scientific yet and definitely nothing supporting creationism! |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 22 2009, 01:14 AM Post #78 |
|
Deleted User
|
As a Christian you'd think he would be a man of his word. How about Hooey Ross? Sounds like he never pruned a tree. It happens naturally, by selection. Or man can do it, by selecting. |
|
|
| Deleted User | Apr 22 2009, 01:49 AM Post #79 |
|
Deleted User
|
Christianity should never have made claims it could be proven by science. It's my belief those claims will be what speeds up it's demise. They should have stuck with what they were good at. Namely giving hopeless people, hope of a better day, and a peaceful death. In a way I feel sorry for Breeze, he soo wants to prove it's scientific. He should just give it up, decide it doesn't matter. He has faith, that should be enough to just live his life in peace. |
|
|
| ngc1514 | Apr 22 2009, 02:07 AM Post #80 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It's not ALL of Christianity that makes those claims, CEK, but a very narrow fundamentalist branch that believes every word of the bible is absolutely true. The vast majority of Christendom is quite comfortable with the idea of an old universe and the evolution of man - guided by the hand of god. This differs from the Deist position because Deists do not accept the idea of a personal god in the form of Jesus. But you point out what I wonder all the time. If these people have the faith they claim, why worry about what science learns about the universe in which we live? If the Adam and Eve story is allegory and man really did evolve from a common ancestor to the apes... so what? Just put it down as the tool by which god created man and the story of Genesis is one of god's breathing a soul into the first man and woman. But no. The fundamentalist, biblical inerrancy crowd is fighting a losing war with science because science just does not confirm those 3,000 year old myths and fables. And the harder they push for the acceptance of those fables in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the more they drive rational people away from religion. Their image changes from fervent believer to wingnut. I suspect a special place exists in hell (assuming there is one...which the evidence does not support) for those who have been so prideful in this world as to INSIST they know how it all came to be. And have driven away believers because of their obstinacy. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · RV AND CAMPING DISCUSSION · Next Topic » |








![]](http://z3.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)

12:41 AM Jul 14
