This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Shtal on 23 November 2012 - 06:11
by GSDtravels on 23 November 2012 - 13:11
"Does this also mean you don't have the physical strength to not play sports? Or the lung capacity to not smoke?"
That makes no sense........
Precisely!! And neither does your statement, on the same merit!
"GSDtravels......if God did not create the world......and Science is always fact.... Why can't Scientists and non-believers agree on how it all came to be? They have multiple theories on how it all happened do they not? Christians who believe the Bible IS God's Word.....can at least agree on how it all came to be. Hmm..."
Scientists and non-believers are not agreeing because they're not proposing that they know how it came it be. Science is neutral in anything until evidence is presented in order for it to make a judgement. No, they do not have multiple theories, they have no theories about how it all started. The Big Bang was not the beginning, but it was the beginning of our universe. Before that, they don't know. I think the biggest question is, why do you feel the need to know when there is no way to know? If there is a way to know, science will find it and, if and until that happens, rational people will suspend judgement, not logic. When we don't have the answer to any specific question, we look to find the answer. If we can't find the answer, then we'll never know. You can ponder and imagine and hope and pray and stand on your head and spin if you like--------> but you cannot assert, as fact, something that you don't know, period.
What terrifies me more than anything is that I have to explain this to a "teacher" of "science".
That makes no sense........
Precisely!! And neither does your statement, on the same merit!
"GSDtravels......if God did not create the world......and Science is always fact.... Why can't Scientists and non-believers agree on how it all came to be? They have multiple theories on how it all happened do they not? Christians who believe the Bible IS God's Word.....can at least agree on how it all came to be. Hmm..."
Scientists and non-believers are not agreeing because they're not proposing that they know how it came it be. Science is neutral in anything until evidence is presented in order for it to make a judgement. No, they do not have multiple theories, they have no theories about how it all started. The Big Bang was not the beginning, but it was the beginning of our universe. Before that, they don't know. I think the biggest question is, why do you feel the need to know when there is no way to know? If there is a way to know, science will find it and, if and until that happens, rational people will suspend judgement, not logic. When we don't have the answer to any specific question, we look to find the answer. If we can't find the answer, then we'll never know. You can ponder and imagine and hope and pray and stand on your head and spin if you like--------> but you cannot assert, as fact, something that you don't know, period.
What terrifies me more than anything is that I have to explain this to a "teacher" of "science".
by Blitzen on 23 November 2012 - 13:11
Who's a "teacher of science"?
by beetree on 23 November 2012 - 13:11
Again, Travels ignores "limitations" in favor of her definitions. Science does not "know" any more than what a man or woman can know. Science does not know what is "evidence" until it is determined to be called that by a human observation. Humans are notorious for being imperfect. Why is that simple idea always overlooked in all GSDTravels arguments?
At least Travels admits to not knowing, and being unable to "know". That is a step in the right direction.
At least Travels admits to not knowing, and being unable to "know". That is a step in the right direction.
by GSDguy08 on 23 November 2012 - 13:11
Travels, my statement made perfect sense. And do you not claim to believe in God? But yet you deny He created everything?
by BabyEagle4U on 23 November 2012 - 14:11
Ahhh Science does know the Laws of Cause and Effect, sooo the Big Bang cannot be an effect with no cause. That we DO know. That means the Big Bang wasn't the beginning - it was the end of something. There was a pre-existing condition (nothing or absolute nothing) - that condition we DON'T know vis science because there is no physical evidence. What we DO know is Genesis at face value saying "the earth was without form and void" and "darkness was apon the face of the deep" and "the spirit of God moved apon the face of the water" (para) That means there was nothing NOT absolutely nothing - and supported by the Laws of Cause and Effects and the Second Law of Thermodynamics !!!
But, all things considered in Science, you cannot say the Big Bang was a starting point because that would also say the Laws of Cause and Effects are NOT true as we know them. And saying no infinity before the Big Band is NOT supported by the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Unless the Second Law of Thermodynamics is NOT as we know it..
Soooooo all of a sudden there's that shiny penny, yet again, validating the very opening lines of Genesis !!! Amazing isn't ?
But, all things considered in Science, you cannot say the Big Bang was a starting point because that would also say the Laws of Cause and Effects are NOT true as we know them. And saying no infinity before the Big Band is NOT supported by the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Unless the Second Law of Thermodynamics is NOT as we know it..
Soooooo all of a sudden there's that shiny penny, yet again, validating the very opening lines of Genesis !!! Amazing isn't ?
by Shtal on 23 November 2012 - 17:11
What is facts
Can someone explain what caused Big Bang?
If there was initial creation moment that made everything, then it cries out for a beginner - right? Or cause outside the universe to bring into existence.
btw, how do they know about Big Bang anyway?
But the answer is simple, I believe in the beginning of God, but evolutionist believe in the beginning of dirt.
lol, I believe in God and they believe in dirt.
This is not science but faith.
Can someone explain what caused Big Bang?
If there was initial creation moment that made everything, then it cries out for a beginner - right? Or cause outside the universe to bring into existence.
btw, how do they know about Big Bang anyway?
But the answer is simple, I believe in the beginning of God, but evolutionist believe in the beginning of dirt.
lol, I believe in God and they believe in dirt.
This is not science but faith.
by Two Moons on 23 November 2012 - 17:11
Genesis at face value?
It must be so.
This big bang theory though based on some fact has a very big hole, or more holes in it and you people lacking any facts of your own want to use those holes to fill your own needs.
I know all of you hold Phd.'s by the immense knowledge you exhibit here.
Who created your creator?
Dazzle me.
It must be so.
This big bang theory though based on some fact has a very big hole, or more holes in it and you people lacking any facts of your own want to use those holes to fill your own needs.
I know all of you hold Phd.'s by the immense knowledge you exhibit here.
Who created your creator?
Dazzle me.
by Two Moons on 23 November 2012 - 17:11
Shital,
you are in a sense correct, I do in a way worship the Earth, dirt as you called it.
And the beauty and wonder of Nature.
Not a book selected from many other books that exist to contradict one another.
you are in a sense correct, I do in a way worship the Earth, dirt as you called it.
And the beauty and wonder of Nature.
Not a book selected from many other books that exist to contradict one another.
by BabyEagle4U on 23 November 2012 - 18:11
Moons, did you watch that video yet ?
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top