Vod
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 3682
Merit: 3015
Licking my boob since 1970
|
 |
June 20, 2017, 06:07:47 AM |
|
Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings ?
Your parents must be paying your way in life. No way you could survive on your own intelligence. Remember when chocolate ice cream was invented, and all the vanilla ice cream just ceased to exist?  |
https://nastyscam.com - landing page up https://vod.fan - advanced image hosting - coming soon! OGNasty has early onset dementia; keep this in mind when discussing his past actions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"You Asked For Change, We Gave You Coins" -- casascius
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
SingAlong
|
|
June 20, 2017, 06:26:47 AM |
|
Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings ?
Your parents must be paying your way in life. No way you could survive on your own intelligence. Remember when chocolate ice cream was invented, and all the vanilla ice cream just ceased to exist? I'm not saying that the theory of human evolution is true but we can say that if a certain thing evolves to another one it doesn't mean that all of those thing would follow and evolve or have a same form to evolve since they can take in any form with regarda of their environment and other factors. So it doesn't mean that if somehow humans evolve from monkey like you said that all monkeys would become humans but rather some would not evolve and some take in another form rather than evolve to become a human. Simple logic. |
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1365
|
|
June 20, 2017, 06:29:39 AM |
|
Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings ?
Your parents must be paying your way in life. No way you could survive on your own intelligence. Remember when chocolate ice cream was invented, and all the vanilla ice cream just ceased to exist? I'm not saying that the theory of human evolution is true but we can say that if a certain thing evolves to another one it doesn't mean that all of those thing would follow and evolve or have a same form to evolve since they can take in any form with regarda of their environment and other factors. So it doesn't mean that if somehow humans evolve from monkey like you said that all monkeys would become humans but rather some would not evolve and some take in another form rather than evolve to become a human. Simple logic. Complex science fiction.  |
|
|
|
|
Astargath
|
|
June 20, 2017, 08:16:31 AM |
|
All these things that you list are prone to, misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. The Bible record is a record set down in the power of God, and in eye witness record. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that it hasn't changed in over 2000 years. The Bible is prone to misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. Those things are science and they work, medicine works and it's useful, physics work and are useful, most technology we have today is thanks to those sciences. If you want to deny all of them come up with a better argument than ''prone to, misinterpretation, potential change'' because that doesn't do it. Eye witness are better than science? Give me a break hahaha you are hilarious sometimes, one of the main causes of wrongful convictions is eyewitness miss-identifications. The bible also has like 30 different versions through out time. Well, just because you ignore proper use of the language... The Bible says what it says. Understand what you can understand. Believe it all. People are prone to misinterpreting everything. Only 30 versions? I think that if you check out BibleGateway you will find a lot more than 30 versions. And these aren't all of them. There is only 1 version of the original. After all, the guys who wrote the Bible didn't make two different copies of what they wrote; not even Jeremiah when he rewrote what King Zedekiah burned. Eye witnesses are way better than than the fiction that often passes for science these days.
The bible is not responsible for having medicine today or cars or planes or any other thing that you can think of. All of those things exist thanks to science and smart people who use science. The bible is a worthless book and even religious people know it. You go to a hospital if you are sick because that's how you get cured, there are no praying hospitals where you go there and expect to get healed thanks to prayer because it doesn't work. You can be ignorant and deny science as much as you want to fit your stupid beliefs but don't spread your bullshit to other people.
God is responsible for the Bible. God is also "responsible for having medicine today" and "cars" and "planes" and every "other thing that you can think of." Of course, where there is evil involved, God is the Great Giver... Who is giving us the things that we ask for. But even though it is evil, He is giving it in the perfect, righteous way. Watch out! You are going to get the evil you are asking for from God, even if your asking is inadvertent, or your wanting of evil is. You are just rambling about other things. I presented clear evidence of how almost all sciences show that the earth/universe is older than 6000 years old and some of them depend on those measurements. You can't just comment, nah they are all wrong. You have to prove they are wrong and you won't because they are not, they work, as I said previously and they are applied to everything. It's not their fault you are too delusional to accept it and that you would deny 99% of science just to make satisfy your crazy beliefs. Evidence is great stuff. All the evidence for billions of years is: 1. Theory... not know to be factual; 2. Not attested to as fact by the scientists who propose it; 3. Circular referencing; 4. Only attested to as fact by those in the media or those who have an "old earth" agenda; 5. Can be applied in ways that show the opposite of old earth. Look it up to see that what I am saying is true. The Bible, on the other hand, is definite eye witness references. Who are you going to believe? The scientists who admit by their limiting words (such as: if, maybe, chances are, probably, etc.), or the Bible witnesses who don't have any limiting words? Believe both! The scientists show by their limiting words that they don't know. The Bible witnesses show by their definite report that they do know. Believe them both. The earth is less than 6,200 years old. 1. A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can, in accordance with the scientific method, be repeatedly tested, using a predefined protocol of observations and experiments.[1][2] Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and are a comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. 2. ? 3. Like what 4. Same thing can be applied to religious people 5. Like what ''is definite eye witness references. '' And you know that, how? I don't have to believe anything because all these methods can be tested. I could test them by myself actually, I could study each method individually and test things by myself. Science is not belief. ^^^ 1. Notice that there is nothing that says that science theory is fact. ^^^ 2. Scientists, themselves, use qualifying language (if, maybe, possible, probable) showing things are not fact. ^^^ 3. & 5. Things like BB theory and evolution theory and relativity theory, etc. ^^^ 4. Thank you for your agreement. Hebrew tradition along with the fact that there were only superficial changes to the Bible over at least 2000 years, along with the miracles of Moses, etc., being attested to as fact, along with the strength in the numbers of hand-written copies from ancient times, along with nothing having been proven false, along with the scientific proof that God exists, along with the history of the way the Bible came together... all shows that the Bible is truth. Things don't come together the way the Bible did without some miraculous hand of God making it happen. Those eye witness reports stand solid. 1. There is nothing factual, nothing can be 100% factual, you are discarding all science because it doesn't say it's a fact? Sometimes you amaze me. I guess computers aren't a fact either and all the other technologies by your definition. 2.  they can't use words now? 3. Like what exactly 4. ok? Who cares if there are only superficial changes, that would only mean that the bible hasn't changed since it was written, that doesn't mean it's truth lol. How are the miracles of moses attested as fact? hahaha plenty of things have been proven wrong in the bible : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors''along with the history of the way the Bible came together.'' Don't know what that means but nothing of what you said proves the bible is factual. |
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1365
|
|
June 20, 2017, 08:35:51 AM |
|
All these things that you list are prone to, misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. The Bible record is a record set down in the power of God, and in eye witness record. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that it hasn't changed in over 2000 years. The Bible is prone to misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. Those things are science and they work, medicine works and it's useful, physics work and are useful, most technology we have today is thanks to those sciences. If you want to deny all of them come up with a better argument than ''prone to, misinterpretation, potential change'' because that doesn't do it. Eye witness are better than science? Give me a break hahaha you are hilarious sometimes, one of the main causes of wrongful convictions is eyewitness miss-identifications. The bible also has like 30 different versions through out time. Well, just because you ignore proper use of the language... The Bible says what it says. Understand what you can understand. Believe it all. People are prone to misinterpreting everything. Only 30 versions? I think that if you check out BibleGateway you will find a lot more than 30 versions. And these aren't all of them. There is only 1 version of the original. After all, the guys who wrote the Bible didn't make two different copies of what they wrote; not even Jeremiah when he rewrote what King Zedekiah burned. Eye witnesses are way better than than the fiction that often passes for science these days.
The bible is not responsible for having medicine today or cars or planes or any other thing that you can think of. All of those things exist thanks to science and smart people who use science. The bible is a worthless book and even religious people know it. You go to a hospital if you are sick because that's how you get cured, there are no praying hospitals where you go there and expect to get healed thanks to prayer because it doesn't work. You can be ignorant and deny science as much as you want to fit your stupid beliefs but don't spread your bullshit to other people.
God is responsible for the Bible. God is also "responsible for having medicine today" and "cars" and "planes" and every "other thing that you can think of." Of course, where there is evil involved, God is the Great Giver... Who is giving us the things that we ask for. But even though it is evil, He is giving it in the perfect, righteous way. Watch out! You are going to get the evil you are asking for from God, even if your asking is inadvertent, or your wanting of evil is. You are just rambling about other things. I presented clear evidence of how almost all sciences show that the earth/universe is older than 6000 years old and some of them depend on those measurements. You can't just comment, nah they are all wrong. You have to prove they are wrong and you won't because they are not, they work, as I said previously and they are applied to everything. It's not their fault you are too delusional to accept it and that you would deny 99% of science just to make satisfy your crazy beliefs. Evidence is great stuff. All the evidence for billions of years is: 1. Theory... not know to be factual; 2. Not attested to as fact by the scientists who propose it; 3. Circular referencing; 4. Only attested to as fact by those in the media or those who have an "old earth" agenda; 5. Can be applied in ways that show the opposite of old earth. Look it up to see that what I am saying is true. The Bible, on the other hand, is definite eye witness references. Who are you going to believe? The scientists who admit by their limiting words (such as: if, maybe, chances are, probably, etc.), or the Bible witnesses who don't have any limiting words? Believe both! The scientists show by their limiting words that they don't know. The Bible witnesses show by their definite report that they do know. Believe them both. The earth is less than 6,200 years old. 1. A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can, in accordance with the scientific method, be repeatedly tested, using a predefined protocol of observations and experiments.[1][2] Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and are a comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. 2. ? 3. Like what 4. Same thing can be applied to religious people 5. Like what ''is definite eye witness references. '' And you know that, how? I don't have to believe anything because all these methods can be tested. I could test them by myself actually, I could study each method individually and test things by myself. Science is not belief. ^^^ 1. Notice that there is nothing that says that science theory is fact. ^^^ 2. Scientists, themselves, use qualifying language (if, maybe, possible, probable) showing things are not fact. ^^^ 3. & 5. Things like BB theory and evolution theory and relativity theory, etc. ^^^ 4. Thank you for your agreement. Hebrew tradition along with the fact that there were only superficial changes to the Bible over at least 2000 years, along with the miracles of Moses, etc., being attested to as fact, along with the strength in the numbers of hand-written copies from ancient times, along with nothing having been proven false, along with the scientific proof that God exists, along with the history of the way the Bible came together... all shows that the Bible is truth. Things don't come together the way the Bible did without some miraculous hand of God making it happen. Those eye witness reports stand solid. 1. There is nothing factual, nothing can be 100% factual, you are discarding all science because it doesn't say it's a fact? Sometimes you amaze me. I guess computers aren't a fact either and all the other technologies by your definition. 2. they can't use words now? 3. Like what exactly 4. ok? Who cares if there are only superficial changes, that would only mean that the bible hasn't changed since it was written, that doesn't mean it's truth lol. How are the miracles of moses attested as fact? hahaha plenty of things have been proven wrong in the bible : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors''along with the history of the way the Bible came together.'' Don't know what that means but nothing of what you said proves the bible is factual. You are wrong. Factual things are factual. Evolution has been proven to not be fact, over and over. That is one of the things that is factual. Nice sci-fi theory. But proven not factual, over and over. |
|
|
|
|
Astargath
|
|
June 20, 2017, 10:14:07 AM |
|
All these things that you list are prone to, misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. The Bible record is a record set down in the power of God, and in eye witness record. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that it hasn't changed in over 2000 years. The Bible is prone to misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. Those things are science and they work, medicine works and it's useful, physics work and are useful, most technology we have today is thanks to those sciences. If you want to deny all of them come up with a better argument than ''prone to, misinterpretation, potential change'' because that doesn't do it. Eye witness are better than science? Give me a break hahaha you are hilarious sometimes, one of the main causes of wrongful convictions is eyewitness miss-identifications. The bible also has like 30 different versions through out time. Well, just because you ignore proper use of the language... The Bible says what it says. Understand what you can understand. Believe it all. People are prone to misinterpreting everything. Only 30 versions? I think that if you check out BibleGateway you will find a lot more than 30 versions. And these aren't all of them. There is only 1 version of the original. After all, the guys who wrote the Bible didn't make two different copies of what they wrote; not even Jeremiah when he rewrote what King Zedekiah burned. Eye witnesses are way better than than the fiction that often passes for science these days.
The bible is not responsible for having medicine today or cars or planes or any other thing that you can think of. All of those things exist thanks to science and smart people who use science. The bible is a worthless book and even religious people know it. You go to a hospital if you are sick because that's how you get cured, there are no praying hospitals where you go there and expect to get healed thanks to prayer because it doesn't work. You can be ignorant and deny science as much as you want to fit your stupid beliefs but don't spread your bullshit to other people.
God is responsible for the Bible. God is also "responsible for having medicine today" and "cars" and "planes" and every "other thing that you can think of." Of course, where there is evil involved, God is the Great Giver... Who is giving us the things that we ask for. But even though it is evil, He is giving it in the perfect, righteous way. Watch out! You are going to get the evil you are asking for from God, even if your asking is inadvertent, or your wanting of evil is. You are just rambling about other things. I presented clear evidence of how almost all sciences show that the earth/universe is older than 6000 years old and some of them depend on those measurements. You can't just comment, nah they are all wrong. You have to prove they are wrong and you won't because they are not, they work, as I said previously and they are applied to everything. It's not their fault you are too delusional to accept it and that you would deny 99% of science just to make satisfy your crazy beliefs. Evidence is great stuff. All the evidence for billions of years is: 1. Theory... not know to be factual; 2. Not attested to as fact by the scientists who propose it; 3. Circular referencing; 4. Only attested to as fact by those in the media or those who have an "old earth" agenda; 5. Can be applied in ways that show the opposite of old earth. Look it up to see that what I am saying is true. The Bible, on the other hand, is definite eye witness references. Who are you going to believe? The scientists who admit by their limiting words (such as: if, maybe, chances are, probably, etc.), or the Bible witnesses who don't have any limiting words? Believe both! The scientists show by their limiting words that they don't know. The Bible witnesses show by their definite report that they do know. Believe them both. The earth is less than 6,200 years old. 1. A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can, in accordance with the scientific method, be repeatedly tested, using a predefined protocol of observations and experiments.[1][2] Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and are a comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. 2. ? 3. Like what 4. Same thing can be applied to religious people 5. Like what ''is definite eye witness references. '' And you know that, how? I don't have to believe anything because all these methods can be tested. I could test them by myself actually, I could study each method individually and test things by myself. Science is not belief. ^^^ 1. Notice that there is nothing that says that science theory is fact. ^^^ 2. Scientists, themselves, use qualifying language (if, maybe, possible, probable) showing things are not fact. ^^^ 3. & 5. Things like BB theory and evolution theory and relativity theory, etc. ^^^ 4. Thank you for your agreement. Hebrew tradition along with the fact that there were only superficial changes to the Bible over at least 2000 years, along with the miracles of Moses, etc., being attested to as fact, along with the strength in the numbers of hand-written copies from ancient times, along with nothing having been proven false, along with the scientific proof that God exists, along with the history of the way the Bible came together... all shows that the Bible is truth. Things don't come together the way the Bible did without some miraculous hand of God making it happen. Those eye witness reports stand solid. 1. There is nothing factual, nothing can be 100% factual, you are discarding all science because it doesn't say it's a fact? Sometimes you amaze me. I guess computers aren't a fact either and all the other technologies by your definition. 2. they can't use words now? 3. Like what exactly 4. ok? Who cares if there are only superficial changes, that would only mean that the bible hasn't changed since it was written, that doesn't mean it's truth lol. How are the miracles of moses attested as fact? hahaha plenty of things have been proven wrong in the bible : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors''along with the history of the way the Bible came together.'' Don't know what that means but nothing of what you said proves the bible is factual. You are wrong. Factual things are factual. Evolution has been proven to not be fact, over and over. That is one of the things that is factual. Nice sci-fi theory. But proven not factual, over and over. You didn't answer any of the other questions, you giving up finally on your stupid crusade? Factual things are factual - badecker 2017 http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errorshttp://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors |
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1365
|
|
June 20, 2017, 05:26:33 PM |
|
All these things that you list are prone to, misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. The Bible record is a record set down in the power of God, and in eye witness record. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that it hasn't changed in over 2000 years. The Bible is prone to misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. Those things are science and they work, medicine works and it's useful, physics work and are useful, most technology we have today is thanks to those sciences. If you want to deny all of them come up with a better argument than ''prone to, misinterpretation, potential change'' because that doesn't do it. Eye witness are better than science? Give me a break hahaha you are hilarious sometimes, one of the main causes of wrongful convictions is eyewitness miss-identifications. The bible also has like 30 different versions through out time. Well, just because you ignore proper use of the language... The Bible says what it says. Understand what you can understand. Believe it all. People are prone to misinterpreting everything. Only 30 versions? I think that if you check out BibleGateway you will find a lot more than 30 versions. And these aren't all of them. There is only 1 version of the original. After all, the guys who wrote the Bible didn't make two different copies of what they wrote; not even Jeremiah when he rewrote what King Zedekiah burned. Eye witnesses are way better than than the fiction that often passes for science these days.
The bible is not responsible for having medicine today or cars or planes or any other thing that you can think of. All of those things exist thanks to science and smart people who use science. The bible is a worthless book and even religious people know it. You go to a hospital if you are sick because that's how you get cured, there are no praying hospitals where you go there and expect to get healed thanks to prayer because it doesn't work. You can be ignorant and deny science as much as you want to fit your stupid beliefs but don't spread your bullshit to other people.
God is responsible for the Bible. God is also "responsible for having medicine today" and "cars" and "planes" and every "other thing that you can think of." Of course, where there is evil involved, God is the Great Giver... Who is giving us the things that we ask for. But even though it is evil, He is giving it in the perfect, righteous way. Watch out! You are going to get the evil you are asking for from God, even if your asking is inadvertent, or your wanting of evil is. You are just rambling about other things. I presented clear evidence of how almost all sciences show that the earth/universe is older than 6000 years old and some of them depend on those measurements. You can't just comment, nah they are all wrong. You have to prove they are wrong and you won't because they are not, they work, as I said previously and they are applied to everything. It's not their fault you are too delusional to accept it and that you would deny 99% of science just to make satisfy your crazy beliefs. Evidence is great stuff. All the evidence for billions of years is: 1. Theory... not know to be factual; 2. Not attested to as fact by the scientists who propose it; 3. Circular referencing; 4. Only attested to as fact by those in the media or those who have an "old earth" agenda; 5. Can be applied in ways that show the opposite of old earth. Look it up to see that what I am saying is true. The Bible, on the other hand, is definite eye witness references. Who are you going to believe? The scientists who admit by their limiting words (such as: if, maybe, chances are, probably, etc.), or the Bible witnesses who don't have any limiting words? Believe both! The scientists show by their limiting words that they don't know. The Bible witnesses show by their definite report that they do know. Believe them both. The earth is less than 6,200 years old. 1. A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can, in accordance with the scientific method, be repeatedly tested, using a predefined protocol of observations and experiments.[1][2] Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and are a comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. 2. ? 3. Like what 4. Same thing can be applied to religious people 5. Like what ''is definite eye witness references. '' And you know that, how? I don't have to believe anything because all these methods can be tested. I could test them by myself actually, I could study each method individually and test things by myself. Science is not belief. ^^^ 1. Notice that there is nothing that says that science theory is fact. ^^^ 2. Scientists, themselves, use qualifying language (if, maybe, possible, probable) showing things are not fact. ^^^ 3. & 5. Things like BB theory and evolution theory and relativity theory, etc. ^^^ 4. Thank you for your agreement. Hebrew tradition along with the fact that there were only superficial changes to the Bible over at least 2000 years, along with the miracles of Moses, etc., being attested to as fact, along with the strength in the numbers of hand-written copies from ancient times, along with nothing having been proven false, along with the scientific proof that God exists, along with the history of the way the Bible came together... all shows that the Bible is truth. Things don't come together the way the Bible did without some miraculous hand of God making it happen. Those eye witness reports stand solid. 1. There is nothing factual, nothing can be 100% factual, you are discarding all science because it doesn't say it's a fact? Sometimes you amaze me. I guess computers aren't a fact either and all the other technologies by your definition. 2. they can't use words now? 3. Like what exactly 4. ok? Who cares if there are only superficial changes, that would only mean that the bible hasn't changed since it was written, that doesn't mean it's truth lol. How are the miracles of moses attested as fact? hahaha plenty of things have been proven wrong in the bible : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors''along with the history of the way the Bible came together.'' Don't know what that means but nothing of what you said proves the bible is factual. You are wrong. Factual things are factual. Evolution has been proven to not be fact, over and over. That is one of the things that is factual. Nice sci-fi theory. But proven not factual, over and over. You didn't answer any of the other questions, you giving up finally on your stupid crusade? Factual things are factual - badecker 2017 http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errorshttp://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errorsWhat crusade. Anybody who examines evolution from the standpoint of a clear mind, can see that there is nothing factual about it. All the factual things that some people apply to evolution, can be applied to creation as well, in a different way. Evolution just plain doesn't work. |
|
|
|
|
Astargath
|
|
June 20, 2017, 05:38:45 PM |
|
All these things that you list are prone to, misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. The Bible record is a record set down in the power of God, and in eye witness record. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that it hasn't changed in over 2000 years. The Bible is prone to misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. Those things are science and they work, medicine works and it's useful, physics work and are useful, most technology we have today is thanks to those sciences. If you want to deny all of them come up with a better argument than ''prone to, misinterpretation, potential change'' because that doesn't do it. Eye witness are better than science? Give me a break hahaha you are hilarious sometimes, one of the main causes of wrongful convictions is eyewitness miss-identifications. The bible also has like 30 different versions through out time. Well, just because you ignore proper use of the language... The Bible says what it says. Understand what you can understand. Believe it all. People are prone to misinterpreting everything. Only 30 versions? I think that if you check out BibleGateway you will find a lot more than 30 versions. And these aren't all of them. There is only 1 version of the original. After all, the guys who wrote the Bible didn't make two different copies of what they wrote; not even Jeremiah when he rewrote what King Zedekiah burned. Eye witnesses are way better than than the fiction that often passes for science these days.
The bible is not responsible for having medicine today or cars or planes or any other thing that you can think of. All of those things exist thanks to science and smart people who use science. The bible is a worthless book and even religious people know it. You go to a hospital if you are sick because that's how you get cured, there are no praying hospitals where you go there and expect to get healed thanks to prayer because it doesn't work. You can be ignorant and deny science as much as you want to fit your stupid beliefs but don't spread your bullshit to other people.
God is responsible for the Bible. God is also "responsible for having medicine today" and "cars" and "planes" and every "other thing that you can think of." Of course, where there is evil involved, God is the Great Giver... Who is giving us the things that we ask for. But even though it is evil, He is giving it in the perfect, righteous way. Watch out! You are going to get the evil you are asking for from God, even if your asking is inadvertent, or your wanting of evil is. You are just rambling about other things. I presented clear evidence of how almost all sciences show that the earth/universe is older than 6000 years old and some of them depend on those measurements. You can't just comment, nah they are all wrong. You have to prove they are wrong and you won't because they are not, they work, as I said previously and they are applied to everything. It's not their fault you are too delusional to accept it and that you would deny 99% of science just to make satisfy your crazy beliefs. Evidence is great stuff. All the evidence for billions of years is: 1. Theory... not know to be factual; 2. Not attested to as fact by the scientists who propose it; 3. Circular referencing; 4. Only attested to as fact by those in the media or those who have an "old earth" agenda; 5. Can be applied in ways that show the opposite of old earth. Look it up to see that what I am saying is true. The Bible, on the other hand, is definite eye witness references. Who are you going to believe? The scientists who admit by their limiting words (such as: if, maybe, chances are, probably, etc.), or the Bible witnesses who don't have any limiting words? Believe both! The scientists show by their limiting words that they don't know. The Bible witnesses show by their definite report that they do know. Believe them both. The earth is less than 6,200 years old. 1. A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can, in accordance with the scientific method, be repeatedly tested, using a predefined protocol of observations and experiments.[1][2] Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and are a comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. 2. ? 3. Like what 4. Same thing can be applied to religious people 5. Like what ''is definite eye witness references. '' And you know that, how? I don't have to believe anything because all these methods can be tested. I could test them by myself actually, I could study each method individually and test things by myself. Science is not belief. ^^^ 1. Notice that there is nothing that says that science theory is fact. ^^^ 2. Scientists, themselves, use qualifying language (if, maybe, possible, probable) showing things are not fact. ^^^ 3. & 5. Things like BB theory and evolution theory and relativity theory, etc. ^^^ 4. Thank you for your agreement. Hebrew tradition along with the fact that there were only superficial changes to the Bible over at least 2000 years, along with the miracles of Moses, etc., being attested to as fact, along with the strength in the numbers of hand-written copies from ancient times, along with nothing having been proven false, along with the scientific proof that God exists, along with the history of the way the Bible came together... all shows that the Bible is truth. Things don't come together the way the Bible did without some miraculous hand of God making it happen. Those eye witness reports stand solid. 1. There is nothing factual, nothing can be 100% factual, you are discarding all science because it doesn't say it's a fact? Sometimes you amaze me. I guess computers aren't a fact either and all the other technologies by your definition. 2. they can't use words now? 3. Like what exactly 4. ok? Who cares if there are only superficial changes, that would only mean that the bible hasn't changed since it was written, that doesn't mean it's truth lol. How are the miracles of moses attested as fact? hahaha plenty of things have been proven wrong in the bible : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors''along with the history of the way the Bible came together.'' Don't know what that means but nothing of what you said proves the bible is factual. You are wrong. Factual things are factual. Evolution has been proven to not be fact, over and over. That is one of the things that is factual. Nice sci-fi theory. But proven not factual, over and over. You didn't answer any of the other questions, you giving up finally on your stupid crusade? Factual things are factual - badecker 2017 http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errorshttp://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errorsWhat crusade. Anybody who examines evolution from the standpoint of a clear mind, can see that there is nothing factual about it. All the factual things that some people apply to evolution, can be applied to creation as well, in a different way. Evolution just plain doesn't work. Anybody who studies evolution can see that is backed by more than 20 different sciences. Creation hasn't been applied to anything, evolution has. Creation has been around for 6000 years and yet no one has been able to use it for anything, the bible which is supposedly the word of god contains nothing useful for scientists throughout time. Evolution has been around for a few years only and it has already been successfully applied to many different things. You don't pray and wait for god to heal you when you are sick, you go to a hospital. There is nothing useful about the bible, god or any other religion, they are all useless. We are here thanks to a few smart people and thanks to science and the scientific method. You can keep believing in whatever you want to believe but at the end of the day, people that study medicine, physics, math and other useful things are the ones who are making the whole world advance and progress, not priests, not bishops, not the pope. God could have made the bible useful if he really existed, instead : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors the only thing you find in the bible are errors. |
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1365
|
|
June 20, 2017, 05:59:44 PM |
|
All these things that you list are prone to, misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. The Bible record is a record set down in the power of God, and in eye witness record. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that it hasn't changed in over 2000 years. The Bible is prone to misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. Those things are science and they work, medicine works and it's useful, physics work and are useful, most technology we have today is thanks to those sciences. If you want to deny all of them come up with a better argument than ''prone to, misinterpretation, potential change'' because that doesn't do it. Eye witness are better than science? Give me a break hahaha you are hilarious sometimes, one of the main causes of wrongful convictions is eyewitness miss-identifications. The bible also has like 30 different versions through out time. Well, just because you ignore proper use of the language... The Bible says what it says. Understand what you can understand. Believe it all. People are prone to misinterpreting everything. Only 30 versions? I think that if you check out BibleGateway you will find a lot more than 30 versions. And these aren't all of them. There is only 1 version of the original. After all, the guys who wrote the Bible didn't make two different copies of what they wrote; not even Jeremiah when he rewrote what King Zedekiah burned. Eye witnesses are way better than than the fiction that often passes for science these days.
The bible is not responsible for having medicine today or cars or planes or any other thing that you can think of. All of those things exist thanks to science and smart people who use science. The bible is a worthless book and even religious people know it. You go to a hospital if you are sick because that's how you get cured, there are no praying hospitals where you go there and expect to get healed thanks to prayer because it doesn't work. You can be ignorant and deny science as much as you want to fit your stupid beliefs but don't spread your bullshit to other people.
God is responsible for the Bible. God is also "responsible for having medicine today" and "cars" and "planes" and every "other thing that you can think of." Of course, where there is evil involved, God is the Great Giver... Who is giving us the things that we ask for. But even though it is evil, He is giving it in the perfect, righteous way. Watch out! You are going to get the evil you are asking for from God, even if your asking is inadvertent, or your wanting of evil is. You are just rambling about other things. I presented clear evidence of how almost all sciences show that the earth/universe is older than 6000 years old and some of them depend on those measurements. You can't just comment, nah they are all wrong. You have to prove they are wrong and you won't because they are not, they work, as I said previously and they are applied to everything. It's not their fault you are too delusional to accept it and that you would deny 99% of science just to make satisfy your crazy beliefs. Evidence is great stuff. All the evidence for billions of years is: 1. Theory... not know to be factual; 2. Not attested to as fact by the scientists who propose it; 3. Circular referencing; 4. Only attested to as fact by those in the media or those who have an "old earth" agenda; 5. Can be applied in ways that show the opposite of old earth. Look it up to see that what I am saying is true. The Bible, on the other hand, is definite eye witness references. Who are you going to believe? The scientists who admit by their limiting words (such as: if, maybe, chances are, probably, etc.), or the Bible witnesses who don't have any limiting words? Believe both! The scientists show by their limiting words that they don't know. The Bible witnesses show by their definite report that they do know. Believe them both. The earth is less than 6,200 years old. 1. A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can, in accordance with the scientific method, be repeatedly tested, using a predefined protocol of observations and experiments.[1][2] Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and are a comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. 2. ? 3. Like what 4. Same thing can be applied to religious people 5. Like what ''is definite eye witness references. '' And you know that, how? I don't have to believe anything because all these methods can be tested. I could test them by myself actually, I could study each method individually and test things by myself. Science is not belief. ^^^ 1. Notice that there is nothing that says that science theory is fact. ^^^ 2. Scientists, themselves, use qualifying language (if, maybe, possible, probable) showing things are not fact. ^^^ 3. & 5. Things like BB theory and evolution theory and relativity theory, etc. ^^^ 4. Thank you for your agreement. Hebrew tradition along with the fact that there were only superficial changes to the Bible over at least 2000 years, along with the miracles of Moses, etc., being attested to as fact, along with the strength in the numbers of hand-written copies from ancient times, along with nothing having been proven false, along with the scientific proof that God exists, along with the history of the way the Bible came together... all shows that the Bible is truth. Things don't come together the way the Bible did without some miraculous hand of God making it happen. Those eye witness reports stand solid. 1. There is nothing factual, nothing can be 100% factual, you are discarding all science because it doesn't say it's a fact? Sometimes you amaze me. I guess computers aren't a fact either and all the other technologies by your definition. 2. they can't use words now? 3. Like what exactly 4. ok? Who cares if there are only superficial changes, that would only mean that the bible hasn't changed since it was written, that doesn't mean it's truth lol. How are the miracles of moses attested as fact? hahaha plenty of things have been proven wrong in the bible : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors''along with the history of the way the Bible came together.'' Don't know what that means but nothing of what you said proves the bible is factual. You are wrong. Factual things are factual. Evolution has been proven to not be fact, over and over. That is one of the things that is factual. Nice sci-fi theory. But proven not factual, over and over. You didn't answer any of the other questions, you giving up finally on your stupid crusade? Factual things are factual - badecker 2017 http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errorshttp://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errorsWhat crusade. Anybody who examines evolution from the standpoint of a clear mind, can see that there is nothing factual about it. All the factual things that some people apply to evolution, can be applied to creation as well, in a different way. Evolution just plain doesn't work. Anybody who studies evolution can see that is backed by more than 20 different sciences. Creation hasn't been applied to anything, evolution has. Creation has been around for 6000 years and yet no one has been able to use it for anything, the bible which is supposedly the word of god contains nothing useful for scientists throughout time. Evolution has been around for a few years only and it has already been successfully applied to many different things. You don't pray and wait for god to heal you when you are sick, you go to a hospital. There is nothing useful about the bible, god or any other religion, they are all useless. We are here thanks to a few smart people and thanks to science and the scientific method. You can keep believing in whatever you want to believe but at the end of the day, people that study medicine, physics, math and other useful things are the ones who are making the whole world advance and progress, not priests, not bishops, not the pope. God could have made the bible useful if he really existed, instead : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors the only thing you find in the bible are errors. Except that evolution isn't factual. That's why they call it the theory of evolution. None of the sciences show enough to prove evolution to be factual. On top of that, evolution would have to overcome the things that show that it is impossible, like probability math, and Irreducible complexity, for example. Seems like you are trying to keep the evolution hoax going. Why? Do you have a financial stake in it like so many university profs? |
|
|
|
|
bkbirge
|
|
June 20, 2017, 06:07:47 PM |
|
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and at this point after so many lifetimes of serious investigation the burden of proof is on the creationists not the evolutionists. But what we get from creationists is made up "facts", unverifiable sources, strawman arguments, reasoning based on preconceived conclusions using spurious anecdotal evidence combined with the worst kind of pseudo-science, and just plain old ignorance like not knowing the difference between "theory" as used in everyday language and "scientific theory". In short, using logic against anyone's religion is a lose-lose proposition, a total waste of time and just gets both sides upset.
|
|
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1365
|
|
June 20, 2017, 06:19:32 PM |
|
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and at this point after so many lifetimes of serious investigation the burden of proof is on the creationists not the evolutionists. But what we get from creationists is made up "facts", unverifiable sources, strawman arguments, reasoning based on preconceived conclusions using spurious anecdotal evidence combined with the worst kind of pseudo-science, and just plain old ignorance like not knowing the difference between "theory" as used in everyday language and "scientific theory". In short, using logic against anyone's religion is a lose-lose proposition, a total waste of time and just gets both sides upset.
The evolution idea has only been popular for a couple hundred years. Before that, everyone understood creation. The burden of proof is on the evolutionist. Science shows that evolution is false. The scientific laws and principles of cause and effect, entropy, and complexity combine to show that God made the world. The creation story is set in place through the power that made the Bible. The science of evolution shows that evolution is inconclusive. Other science, like probability math, Irreducible Complexity, no factual missing links, standard corrosion, etc., show that evolution did not happen. |
|
|
|
|
Astargath
|
|
June 20, 2017, 06:59:15 PM
Last edit: June 20, 2017, 07:09:23 PM by Astargath |
|
All these things that you list are prone to, misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. The Bible record is a record set down in the power of God, and in eye witness record. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that it hasn't changed in over 2000 years. The Bible is prone to misinterpretation, potential change regarding how things worked in the past, and circular referencing. Those things are science and they work, medicine works and it's useful, physics work and are useful, most technology we have today is thanks to those sciences. If you want to deny all of them come up with a better argument than ''prone to, misinterpretation, potential change'' because that doesn't do it. Eye witness are better than science? Give me a break hahaha you are hilarious sometimes, one of the main causes of wrongful convictions is eyewitness miss-identifications. The bible also has like 30 different versions through out time. Well, just because you ignore proper use of the language... The Bible says what it says. Understand what you can understand. Believe it all. People are prone to misinterpreting everything. Only 30 versions? I think that if you check out BibleGateway you will find a lot more than 30 versions. And these aren't all of them. There is only 1 version of the original. After all, the guys who wrote the Bible didn't make two different copies of what they wrote; not even Jeremiah when he rewrote what King Zedekiah burned. Eye witnesses are way better than than the fiction that often passes for science these days.
The bible is not responsible for having medicine today or cars or planes or any other thing that you can think of. All of those things exist thanks to science and smart people who use science. The bible is a worthless book and even religious people know it. You go to a hospital if you are sick because that's how you get cured, there are no praying hospitals where you go there and expect to get healed thanks to prayer because it doesn't work. You can be ignorant and deny science as much as you want to fit your stupid beliefs but don't spread your bullshit to other people.
God is responsible for the Bible. God is also "responsible for having medicine today" and "cars" and "planes" and every "other thing that you can think of." Of course, where there is evil involved, God is the Great Giver... Who is giving us the things that we ask for. But even though it is evil, He is giving it in the perfect, righteous way. Watch out! You are going to get the evil you are asking for from God, even if your asking is inadvertent, or your wanting of evil is. You are just rambling about other things. I presented clear evidence of how almost all sciences show that the earth/universe is older than 6000 years old and some of them depend on those measurements. You can't just comment, nah they are all wrong. You have to prove they are wrong and you won't because they are not, they work, as I said previously and they are applied to everything. It's not their fault you are too delusional to accept it and that you would deny 99% of science just to make satisfy your crazy beliefs. Evidence is great stuff. All the evidence for billions of years is: 1. Theory... not know to be factual; 2. Not attested to as fact by the scientists who propose it; 3. Circular referencing; 4. Only attested to as fact by those in the media or those who have an "old earth" agenda; 5. Can be applied in ways that show the opposite of old earth. Look it up to see that what I am saying is true. The Bible, on the other hand, is definite eye witness references. Who are you going to believe? The scientists who admit by their limiting words (such as: if, maybe, chances are, probably, etc.), or the Bible witnesses who don't have any limiting words? Believe both! The scientists show by their limiting words that they don't know. The Bible witnesses show by their definite report that they do know. Believe them both. The earth is less than 6,200 years old. 1. A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can, in accordance with the scientific method, be repeatedly tested, using a predefined protocol of observations and experiments.[1][2] Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and are a comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. 2. ? 3. Like what 4. Same thing can be applied to religious people 5. Like what ''is definite eye witness references. '' And you know that, how? I don't have to believe anything because all these methods can be tested. I could test them by myself actually, I could study each method individually and test things by myself. Science is not belief. ^^^ 1. Notice that there is nothing that says that science theory is fact. ^^^ 2. Scientists, themselves, use qualifying language (if, maybe, possible, probable) showing things are not fact. ^^^ 3. & 5. Things like BB theory and evolution theory and relativity theory, etc. ^^^ 4. Thank you for your agreement. Hebrew tradition along with the fact that there were only superficial changes to the Bible over at least 2000 years, along with the miracles of Moses, etc., being attested to as fact, along with the strength in the numbers of hand-written copies from ancient times, along with nothing having been proven false, along with the scientific proof that God exists, along with the history of the way the Bible came together... all shows that the Bible is truth. Things don't come together the way the Bible did without some miraculous hand of God making it happen. Those eye witness reports stand solid. 1. There is nothing factual, nothing can be 100% factual, you are discarding all science because it doesn't say it's a fact? Sometimes you amaze me. I guess computers aren't a fact either and all the other technologies by your definition. 2. they can't use words now? 3. Like what exactly 4. ok? Who cares if there are only superficial changes, that would only mean that the bible hasn't changed since it was written, that doesn't mean it's truth lol. How are the miracles of moses attested as fact? hahaha plenty of things have been proven wrong in the bible : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors''along with the history of the way the Bible came together.'' Don't know what that means but nothing of what you said proves the bible is factual. You are wrong. Factual things are factual. Evolution has been proven to not be fact, over and over. That is one of the things that is factual. Nice sci-fi theory. But proven not factual, over and over. You didn't answer any of the other questions, you giving up finally on your stupid crusade? Factual things are factual - badecker 2017 http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errorshttp://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errorsWhat crusade. Anybody who examines evolution from the standpoint of a clear mind, can see that there is nothing factual about it. All the factual things that some people apply to evolution, can be applied to creation as well, in a different way. Evolution just plain doesn't work. Anybody who studies evolution can see that is backed by more than 20 different sciences. Creation hasn't been applied to anything, evolution has. Creation has been around for 6000 years and yet no one has been able to use it for anything, the bible which is supposedly the word of god contains nothing useful for scientists throughout time. Evolution has been around for a few years only and it has already been successfully applied to many different things. You don't pray and wait for god to heal you when you are sick, you go to a hospital. There is nothing useful about the bible, god or any other religion, they are all useless. We are here thanks to a few smart people and thanks to science and the scientific method. You can keep believing in whatever you want to believe but at the end of the day, people that study medicine, physics, math and other useful things are the ones who are making the whole world advance and progress, not priests, not bishops, not the pope. God could have made the bible useful if he really existed, instead : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors the only thing you find in the bible are errors. Except that evolution isn't factual. That's why they call it the theory of evolution. None of the sciences show enough to prove evolution to be factual. On top of that, evolution would have to overcome the things that show that it is impossible, like probability math, and Irreducible complexity, for example. Seems like you are trying to keep the evolution hoax going. Why? Do you have a financial stake in it like so many university profs? It's called theory because that's how scientists call things, no one calls anything the fact of evolution or the fact of gravity or the fact of physics. Irreducible complexity already debunked and I showed you: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB200.htmlhttp://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CI/CI102.htmlhttp://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexityhttps://www.quora.com/What-is-the-simplest-way-to-debunk-irreducible-complexity-to-an-evolution-denierYou can find more by googling it. Math: http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/can_probability_theory_be_used_to_refute_evolution_part_onehttp://experimentalmath.info/blog/2012/01/does-probability-refute-evolution/http://www.sciencemeetsreligion.org/evolution/probability.phpAs I said, your inability to accept that evolution is true doesn't make it false. Evolution is a fact and the theory of evolution explains it. As I said evolution works and it's applied to numerous things, creationism doesnt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_fact_and_theoryhttp://www.nas.edu/evolution/TheoryOrFact.htmlhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wp3Awd3MIkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLeztJkhi4Uhttp://www.patheos.com/blogs/daylightatheism/essays/evolution-is-just-a-theory/Not to mention all the errors the bible contains: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errorshttp://www.news24.com/MyNews24/The-Problem-of-the-Bible-Inaccuracies-contradictions-fallacies-scientific-issues-and-more-20120517http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/science/long.html |
|
|
|
RiverLavoomy
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 3
Merit: 0
|
|
June 20, 2017, 07:19:20 PM |
|
Why? We just don't live long enough to appreciate these changes. No hoax at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
bkbirge
|
|
June 20, 2017, 07:41:11 PM |
|
Science:
1. Hypothesis - a reasonable guess about something that you have observed or that you know. Must be testable.
2. Theory - one or more hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A scientific theory by this definition is considered by scientists to be true and factual. A single failed test immediately removes the theory from being called a "theory".
3. Law - description of a repeatedly observed phenomenon, NOT why and NOT what causes it. Usually expressed in the simplest mathematical terms possible. Laws do not turn into theories, and vice versa.
Note theories in the scientific sense, not the everyday-language sense, are the highest form of certainty in science.
Also note there is the Law of Gravity (thanks Newton) and the Theory of Gravity (thanks Einstein).
|
|
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1365
|
|
June 20, 2017, 10:06:38 PM |
|
Except that evolution isn't factual. That's why they call it the theory of evolution. None of the sciences show enough to prove evolution to be factual. On top of that, evolution would have to overcome the things that show that it is impossible, like probability math, and Irreducible complexity, for example. Seems like you are trying to keep the evolution hoax going. Why? Do you have a financial stake in it like so many university profs? It's called theory because that's how scientists call things, no one calls anything the fact of evolution or the fact of gravity or the fact of physics. Scientists call things as they call them for a reason. They call the law of gravity a law because it is a fact. They call the theory of evolution a theory because it is not known to be a fact. And you can find rebuttals to the things in the links, by simply reading the things that are said there, and finding the circular references. Again, rebuttals of the links you provide are found within the links, mostly by circular reference.
As I said, your inability to accept that evolution is true doesn't make it false. Evolution is a fact and the theory of evolution explains it. As I said evolution works and it's applied to numerous things, creationism doesnt.
Evolution is a sci-fi story. When you look the whole thing over, and compare the writings, it is all based on non-facts. The links you provide show it right within themselves. Perhaps you would like to start a thread showing the flaws in creationism. But you will have to debunk and rebut the proof that God exists to do so... which nobody has done. The scientific proof that evolution is not real lies basically in the fact that thinking scientists call it a theory rather than a law. The clear rebuttals for evolution show that it should not even be called a theory because it has been proven false. |
|
|
|
popcorn1
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1027
|
|
June 20, 2017, 10:07:13 PM |
|
Science:
1. Hypothesis - a reasonable guess about something that you have observed or that you know. Must be testable.
2. Theory - one or more hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A scientific theory by this definition is considered by scientists to be true and factual. A single failed test immediately removes the theory from being called a "theory".
3. Law - description of a repeatedly observed phenomenon, NOT why and NOT what causes it. Usually expressed in the simplest mathematical terms possible. Laws do not turn into theories, and vice versa.
Note theories in the scientific sense, not the everyday-language sense, are the highest form of certainty in science.
Also note there is the Law of Gravity (thanks Newton) and the Theory of Gravity (thanks Einstein).
. A scientific theory by this definition is considered by scientists to be true and factual.. Who ever is a scientist if you say a theory is true and fact your not a SCIENTIST.. And no your not one..  |
|
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1365
|
|
June 20, 2017, 10:21:33 PM |
|
Science:
1. Hypothesis - a reasonable guess about something that you have observed or that you know. Must be testable.
2. Theory - one or more hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A scientific theory by this definition is considered by scientists to be true and factual. A single failed test immediately removes the theory from being called a "theory".
3. Law - description of a repeatedly observed phenomenon, NOT why and NOT what causes it. Usually expressed in the simplest mathematical terms possible. Laws do not turn into theories, and vice versa.
Note theories in the scientific sense, not the everyday-language sense, are the highest form of certainty in science.
Also note there is the Law of Gravity (thanks Newton) and the Theory of Gravity (thanks Einstein).
. A scientific theory by this definition is considered by scientists to be true and factual.. Who ever is a scientist if you say a theory is true and fact your not a SCIENTIST.. And no your not one.. But, gravity itself is observed and used both by scientists and non-scientists all over the world, continually, all the time. The theory of gravity only tries to explain how and why gravity exists. In other words, gravity is fact while gravity theory is not yet known to be fact. At the same time, nobody knows if he is living in evolution. All the things that are suggested to be evolution can be attributed to things other than evolution. Along with this, evolution theory is not known to be the way that all this unknown evolution might work. What you get is: Gravity = fact; Gravity theory = unknown to be factual; Evolution = unknown to be factual; Evolution theory = unknown to be factual. There is no comparison. Evolution is completely unknown. When you Google things like "evolution fallacies," you can plainly see that there is easily enough question about evolution to show that it is at best, unknown. However, some of the hits show why evolution is impossible. |
|
|
|
popcorn1
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1027
|
|
June 20, 2017, 10:33:33 PM |
|
Science:
1. Hypothesis - a reasonable guess about something that you have observed or that you know. Must be testable.
2. Theory - one or more hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A scientific theory by this definition is considered by scientists to be true and factual. A single failed test immediately removes the theory from being called a "theory".
3. Law - description of a repeatedly observed phenomenon, NOT why and NOT what causes it. Usually expressed in the simplest mathematical terms possible. Laws do not turn into theories, and vice versa.
Note theories in the scientific sense, not the everyday-language sense, are the highest form of certainty in science.
Also note there is the Law of Gravity (thanks Newton) and the Theory of Gravity (thanks Einstein).
. A scientific theory by this definition is considered by scientists to be true and factual.. Who ever is a scientist if you say a theory is true and fact your not a SCIENTIST.. And no your not one.. But, gravity itself is observed and used both by scientists and non-scientists all over the world, continually, all the time. The theory of gravity only tries to explain how and why gravity exists. In other words, gravity is fact while gravity theory is not yet known to be fact. At the same time, nobody knows if he is living in evolution. All the things that are suggested to be evolution can be attributed to things other than evolution. Along with this, evolution theory is not known to be the way that all this unknown evolution might work. What you get is: Gravity = fact; Gravity theory = unknown to be factual; Evolution = unknown to be factual; Evolution theory = unknown to be factual. There is no comparison. Evolution is completely unknown. When you Google things like "evolution fallacies," you can plainly see that there is easily enough question about evolution to show that it is at best, unknown. However, some of the hits show why evolution is impossible. A theory is not FACT   And gravity is not an absolute fact it still really is a THEORY .. When something becomes fact then you know it to be TRUE.. Gravity is still not real FACT.. |
|
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1365
|
|
June 20, 2017, 10:49:53 PM |
|
Science:
1. Hypothesis - a reasonable guess about something that you have observed or that you know. Must be testable.
2. Theory - one or more hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A scientific theory by this definition is considered by scientists to be true and factual. A single failed test immediately removes the theory from being called a "theory".
3. Law - description of a repeatedly observed phenomenon, NOT why and NOT what causes it. Usually expressed in the simplest mathematical terms possible. Laws do not turn into theories, and vice versa.
Note theories in the scientific sense, not the everyday-language sense, are the highest form of certainty in science.
Also note there is the Law of Gravity (thanks Newton) and the Theory of Gravity (thanks Einstein).
. A scientific theory by this definition is considered by scientists to be true and factual.. Who ever is a scientist if you say a theory is true and fact your not a SCIENTIST.. And no your not one.. But, gravity itself is observed and used both by scientists and non-scientists all over the world, continually, all the time. The theory of gravity only tries to explain how and why gravity exists. In other words, gravity is fact while gravity theory is not yet known to be fact. At the same time, nobody knows if he is living in evolution. All the things that are suggested to be evolution can be attributed to things other than evolution. Along with this, evolution theory is not known to be the way that all this unknown evolution might work. What you get is: Gravity = fact; Gravity theory = unknown to be factual; Evolution = unknown to be factual; Evolution theory = unknown to be factual. There is no comparison. Evolution is completely unknown. When you Google things like "evolution fallacies," you can plainly see that there is easily enough question about evolution to show that it is at best, unknown. However, some of the hits show why evolution is impossible. A theory is not FACT And gravity is not an absolute fact it still really is a THEORY .. When something becomes fact then you know it to be TRUE.. Gravity is still not real FACT.. Gravity is fact. It is the name we give the force that causes things to fall. We don't know why it works, but it is fact so strongly that it is called a scientific law. When you go outside at night, and try to jump to the moon, you can't do it. Why? Gravity stops you. Gravity is all over the place. It is factual. |
|
|
|
|
Astargath
|
|
June 20, 2017, 10:56:56 PM |
|
Science:
1. Hypothesis - a reasonable guess about something that you have observed or that you know. Must be testable.
2. Theory - one or more hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A scientific theory by this definition is considered by scientists to be true and factual. A single failed test immediately removes the theory from being called a "theory".
3. Law - description of a repeatedly observed phenomenon, NOT why and NOT what causes it. Usually expressed in the simplest mathematical terms possible. Laws do not turn into theories, and vice versa.
Note theories in the scientific sense, not the everyday-language sense, are the highest form of certainty in science.
Also note there is the Law of Gravity (thanks Newton) and the Theory of Gravity (thanks Einstein).
. A scientific theory by this definition is considered by scientists to be true and factual.. Who ever is a scientist if you say a theory is true and fact your not a SCIENTIST.. And no your not one.. But, gravity itself is observed and used both by scientists and non-scientists all over the world, continually, all the time. The theory of gravity only tries to explain how and why gravity exists. In other words, gravity is fact while gravity theory is not yet known to be fact. At the same time, nobody knows if he is living in evolution. All the things that are suggested to be evolution can be attributed to things other than evolution. Along with this, evolution theory is not known to be the way that all this unknown evolution might work. What you get is: Gravity = fact; Gravity theory = unknown to be factual; Evolution = unknown to be factual; Evolution theory = unknown to be factual. There is no comparison. Evolution is completely unknown. When you Google things like "evolution fallacies," you can plainly see that there is easily enough question about evolution to show that it is at best, unknown. However, some of the hits show why evolution is impossible. A theory is not FACT And gravity is not an absolute fact it still really is a THEORY .. When something becomes fact then you know it to be TRUE.. Gravity is still not real FACT.. Gravity is fact. It is the name we give the force that causes things to fall. We don't know why it works, but it is fact so strongly that it is called a scientific law. When you go outside at night, and try to jump to the moon, you can't do it. Why? Gravity stops you. Gravity is all over the place. It is factual. this is also a fact http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errorshttp://www.news24.com/MyNews24/The-Problem-of-the-Bible-Inaccuracies-contradictions-fallacies-scientific-issues-and-more-20120517http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/science/long.html |
|
|
|
|
