User Tag List

Page 7 of 18 FirstFirst ... 4567891017 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 269

Thread: Why don't creationists publish?

  1. #91
    Over 5000 post club 6days's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    5,938
    Thanks
    1,067
    Thanked 3,994 Times in 2,378 Posts

    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1805157
    Quote Originally Posted by Redfern
    Science, as a methodology for studying and learning about the universe, makes no mention of religion, so by definition that means it is secular.
    Depends what you mean by secular. If you mean an unwillingness to follow evidence that seems to lead to a supernatural creation, then that is a religious secularism and not science. Science is the study of the world around us through observation and experiment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Redfern
    Subverting science for religious reasons is absolutely making it subject to religion.
    We agree... Sort of. For example ...
    1) when evolutionists argue that bad vertebrate Eye Design is evidence against a creator. (if bad design is evidence against an intelligent Creator, then good design must be evidence for a intelligent creator).
    2) Assuming 95% of our DNA is useless biological remnants.
    3) Assuming organs such as the appendix is a useless biological leftover.
    4) Assuming so-called pseudogenes have no function.
    There are many many examples where Shoddy conclusions of evidence were made based on a false belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by Redfern
    I agree. But since those scientific concepts originated, the Christian scientists who have refined and expanded on some of those concepts have largely bifurcated into two groups – those who see science unencumbered by religious precepts as the best way to understand God’s creation (OECs), and those who oppose science when it does not conform to their doctrines (YECs).
    it seems you are more interested in pushing a false narrative than you are in reality.

    Geneticists, chemists, biologists, etc all use the exact same scientific method no matter if they are hardcore atheist or hardcore creationist. They can have different beliefs about the past which seldom interfere with empirical science. (A few examples noted about where evolutionary beliefs have hindered science).

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to 6days For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (September 4th, 2018),Right Divider (September 5th, 2018)

  3. #92
    Over 2500 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,801
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 1,034 Times in 670 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    370913
    All those scientific errors, corrected by??? Creationists, dont know, perhaps 6 days has a list of the intrepid creationists who convinced the atheists of their mistakes.

  4. #93
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    354
    Thanks
    43
    Thanked 92 Times in 77 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    13863
    Quote Originally Posted by 6days View Post
    … what you mean by secular. If you mean an unwillingness to follow evidence that seems to lead to a supernatural creation, then that is a religious secularism and not science.
    When do you declare something as supernatural? When I was young, I was in charge of an early computer that was being used in support of some rocket research. The computer had about 20,000 bytes of memory that was housed in a cabinet the size of a kitchen table. Today I often carry a dozen memory chips in my pocket, each one containing more than ten million “kitchen tables” equivalent memory. If I had been told long ago that physical computer memory size would be reduced by over a factor of ten billion to one, I would likely have dismissed it as a supernatural fantasy. A vast amount of today’s technology would have been viewed as supernatural to people just a few centuries ago.

    There is no supernatural, there are only things that are still far beyond our understanding. The minute you declare something as supernatural, you surround it with a shield of ignorance.

    Quote Originally Posted by 6days View Post
    if bad design is evidence against an intelligent Creator, then good design must be evidence for an intelligent creator
    Come on 6days, you are above this level of inanity. Look at wings seen in the animal world. Sometimes we see species where the wings barely give any help at all, and other times we see wings that carry birds on flights of thousands of miles without landing. Using your logic, the crappy wings don’t show much intelligence (from mother nature) in their design, but then the creator that came up with the good wing design (also mother nature) must be intelligent. That OK with you?

    Quote Originally Posted by 6days View Post
    Assuming organs such as the appendix is a useless biological leftover.
    Multiple times in past conversations it has been specifically pointed out to you that concluding something is vestigial is not, and never has been, conditional on it being useless. I am left with two options. Either you are mentally deficient and incapable of remembering that, or you have no moral qualms about repeatedly posting something you know is false.

    Quote Originally Posted by 6days View Post
    There are many many examples where Shoddy conclusions of evidence were made based on a false belief system.
    Yup, like the shoddy conclusions arising from the false belief that ancient oral nomadic creation myths are reliable scientific accounts.

    Quote Originally Posted by 6days View Post
    it seems you are more interested in pushing a false narrative than you are in reality.
    Discussing modern views about creation, I mentioned the current segregation into YECs, OECs, and others who simply ignore religious ideas about creation. What do you see as a false narrative in that?

    Quote Originally Posted by 6days View Post
    Geneticists, chemists, biologists, etc. all use the exact same scientific method no matter if they are hardcore atheist or hardcore creationist.
    Then where are the published scientific studies from the hardcore creationists dealing with places they differ with secular science? Remember, thus thread deals with the paucity of published scientific studies supporting YEC beliefs.

  5. #94
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,519
    Thanks
    24,311
    Thanked 6,870 Times in 4,323 Posts

    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147604
    Quote Originally Posted by redfern View Post
    When do you declare something as supernatural? When I was young, I was in charge of an early computer that was being used in support of some rocket research. The computer had about 20,000 bytes of memory that was housed in a cabinet the size of a kitchen table. Today I often carry a dozen memory chips in my pocket, each one containing more than ten million “kitchen tables” equivalent memory. If I had been told long ago that physical computer memory size would be reduced by over a factor of ten billion to one, I would likely have dismissed it as a supernatural fantasy. A vast amount of today’s technology would have been viewed as supernatural to people just a few centuries ago.

    There is no supernatural, there are only things that are still far beyond our understanding. The minute you declare something as supernatural, you surround it with a shield of ignorance.
    Just want to address this.

    "Supernatural" simply means "outside or beyond nature/the universe."

    Super - outside of, beyond
    Natural - nature

    God is supernatural, he is outside of the universe, not subject to it's laws, because He created it.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    Grosnick Marowbe (September 5th, 2018),Right Divider (September 5th, 2018)

  7. #95
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    354
    Thanks
    43
    Thanked 92 Times in 77 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    13863
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    "Supernatural" simply means "outside or beyond nature/the universe."

    Super - outside of, beyond
    Natural - nature

    God is supernatural, he is outside of the universe, not subject to it's laws, because He created it.
    Thanks, JR. Other religions, not just Christians, make similar claims about their God(s). But science is conducted without regard to any religion’s beliefs. There are many things science does not yet understand, but I know of nothing that deals with nature that science is proscribed from trying to learn about and understand.

    Do you know of any?

  8. #96
    Over 2500 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,801
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 1,034 Times in 670 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    370913
    Quote Originally Posted by redfern View Post
    Then where are the published scientific studies from the hardcore creationists dealing with places they differ with secular science? Remember, thus thread deals with the paucity of published scientific studies supporting YEC beliefs.
    One would think that especially with the guidance of an omniscient deity, the scholarship coming out of Liberty University would be turning "secular" science on its head.

  9. #97
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,519
    Thanks
    24,311
    Thanked 6,870 Times in 4,323 Posts

    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147604
    Quote Originally Posted by redfern View Post
    Thanks, JR. Other religions, not just Christians, make similar claims about their God(s). But science is conducted without regard to any religion’s beliefs.
    Not necessarily.

    Even secular archaeologists will have a Bible nearby when excavating near where places that are mentioned in the Bible should be.

    There are many things science does not yet understand,
    I think that everyone agrees on that. But there's a difference between not knowing something yet and not knowing it because it's not able to be known, because it isn't factual.

    but I know of nothing that deals with nature that science is proscribed from trying to learn about and understand.

    Do you know of any?
    Could you rephrase your statement, please? Either my brain is malfunctioning and not reading your statement right, or you missed a word or something. I can't seem to make heads or tails of it.

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    genuineoriginal (September 5th, 2018),Grosnick Marowbe (September 5th, 2018),Right Divider (September 5th, 2018)

  11. #98
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,519
    Thanks
    24,311
    Thanked 6,870 Times in 4,323 Posts

    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147604
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonahdog View Post
    One would think that especially with the guidance
    Considering that God has been quiet for nearly the past 2000 years, there hasn't been any active guidance...

    of an omniscient deity,
    Which applies only to pagan deities... God can know everything that can be known. He can't know something that can't be known.

    the scholarship coming out of Liberty University would be turning "secular" science on its head.

  12. #99
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    17,389
    Thanks
    324
    Thanked 10,657 Times in 7,765 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147826
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Not necessarily.
    Even secular archaeologists will have a Bible nearby when excavating near where places that are mentioned in the Bible should be.
    I think the point Redfern would make is that it doesn't matter what "book is in your hand"; it doesn't matter what you believe; it doesn't matter what your idea is: The scientific method is available to everyone.

    As long as you're willing to outline an idea you believe — without equivocation — leave it open to testing and falsification, and — most importantly — reject the idea if the evidence shows it is impossible, you're a potential scientist.

    That the Bible is helpful to archaeologists doesn't add much to the discussion over what science is.

    Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Stripe; September 5th, 2018 at 11:00 AM.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  13. #100
    Body part Right Divider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    13,776
    Thanks
    11,363
    Thanked 19,268 Times in 10,845 Posts

    Blog Entries
    5
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147683

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by redfern View Post
    Thanks, JR. Other religions, not just Christians, make similar claims about their God(s). But science is conducted without regard to any religion’s beliefs. There are many things science does not yet understand, but I know of nothing that deals with nature that science is proscribed from trying to learn about and understand.

    Do you know of any?
    According to your "science": God.
    Quote Originally Posted by Squeaky View Post
    That explains why your an idiot.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    You preach against me for preaching obedience to Christ for salvation.
    Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
    (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

    1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
    (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

    Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Right Divider For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (September 5th, 2018)

  15. #101
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,519
    Thanks
    24,311
    Thanked 6,870 Times in 4,323 Posts

    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147604
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    I think the point Redfern would make is that it doesn't matter what "book is in your hand"; it doesn't matter what you believe; it doesn't matter what your idea is: The scientific method is available to everyone.

    As long as you're willing to outline an idea you believe — without equivocation — leave it open to testing and falsification, and — most importantly — reject the idea of the evidence shows it is impossible, you're a potential scientist.

    That the Bible is helpful to archaeologists doesn't add much to the discussion over what science is.

    Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
    And I would agree with that. @redfern

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    Stripe (September 5th, 2018)

  17. #102
    Over 1500 post club Silent Hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Somewhere out there beneath the pale moonlight.
    Posts
    1,887
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked 152 Times in 124 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    27279
    Quote Originally Posted by redfern View Post
    There is no supernatural, there are only things that are still far beyond our understanding. The minute you declare something as supernatural, you surround it with a shield of ignorance.
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    "Supernatural" simply means "outside or beyond nature/the universe."

    Super - outside of, beyond
    Natural - nature

    God is supernatural, he is outside of the universe, not subject to it's laws, because He created it.
    Quote Originally Posted by redfern View Post
    Other religions, not just Christians, make similar claims about their God(s). But science is conducted without regard to any religion’s beliefs. There are many things science does not yet understand, but I know of nothing that deals with nature that science is proscribed from trying to learn about and understand.

    Do you know of any?
    Quote Originally Posted by Right Divider View Post
    According to your "science": God.
    Please describe, in detail, how "science" should proceed in exploring and "learn(ing) about and understand(ing)" something "outside of the universe, not subject to it's (the universes') laws".

    I'm certain a reward in Sweden awaits your insight.

  18. #103
    Over 2500 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,801
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 1,034 Times in 670 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    370913
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Which applies only to pagan deities... God can know everything that can be known. He can't know something that can't be known.


    Well then your deity knows the universe is older than 10,000+/- years.More like 13.8 billion plus. Glad that is settled.

  19. #104
    Body part Right Divider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    13,776
    Thanks
    11,363
    Thanked 19,268 Times in 10,845 Posts

    Blog Entries
    5
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147683

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by Silent Hunter View Post
    Please describe, in detail, how "science" should proceed in exploring and "learn(ing) about and understand(ing)" something "outside of the universe, not subject to it's (the universes') laws".

    I'm certain a reward in Sweden awaits your insight.
    Listen to what He says. It's just that easy.

    Just because you cannot put God under your microscope .... too bad for your religion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Squeaky View Post
    That explains why your an idiot.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    You preach against me for preaching obedience to Christ for salvation.
    Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
    (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

    1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
    (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

    Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Right Divider For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (September 5th, 2018)

  21. #105
    Over 1500 post club Silent Hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Somewhere out there beneath the pale moonlight.
    Posts
    1,887
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked 152 Times in 124 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    27279
    Quote Originally Posted by Silent Hunter View Post
    Please describe, in detail, how "science" should proceed in exploring and "learn(ing) about and understand(ing)" something "outside of the universe, not subject to it's (the universes') laws".

    I'm certain a reward in Sweden awaits your insight.
    Quote Originally Posted by Right Divider View Post
    Listen to what He says. It's just that easy.
    As you said, "Considering that God has been quiet for nearly the past 2000 years, there hasn't been any active guidance...", there hasn't been much to listen to and an obviously man-made book does you no favors.

    Quote Originally Posted by Right Divider View Post
    Just because you cannot put God under your microscope .... too bad for your religion.
    ... well, YOU said it was possible, I'm just looking for your deep insight on how "science" should proceed.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us