Questions for Evolution-Deniers

[AlbertBall]

And apparently you haven’t heard of climategate. There are several threads here on CAF about that. Also, you could google it.

Or are you claiming that the actions of the CRU involving peer review, falsification of data, deleting of data which didn’t fit their motives, etc. were justified? OK, read about it first.

So you don’t understand the process??

Just so i can be clear are you equating the peers of 1 department to 150 years of peer review???

I found extermely ironic “A lifetime in engineering gives you a very good antenna. It also cures people of any self belief they cannot be wrong”.

They are going to publish the full data…

said yesterday: “CRU’s full data will be published in the interests of research transparency when we have the necessary agreements. It is worth reiterating that our conclusions correlate well to those of other scientists based on the separate data sets held by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.”

*He added: “Our global temperature series tallies with those of other, completely independent, groups of scientists working for NASA and the National Climate Data Centre in the United States, among others. Even if you were to ignore our findings, theirs show the same results. The facts speak for themselves; there is no need for anyone to manipulate them.” *

Where is your issue?

 

[buffalo]

So you don’t understand the process??

Just so i can be clear are you equating the peers of 1 department to 150 years of peer review???

I found extermely ironic “A lifetime in engineering gives you a very good antenna. It also cures people of any self belief they cannot be wrong”.

They are going to publish the full data…

said yesterday: “CRU’s full data will be published in the interests of research transparency when we have the necessary agreements. It is worth reiterating that our conclusions correlate well to those of other scientists based on the separate data sets held by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.”

*He added: “Our global temperature series tallies with those of other, completely independent, groups of scientists working for NASA and the National Climate Data Centre in the United States, among others. Even if you were to ignore our findings, theirs show the same results. The facts speak for themselves; there is no need for anyone to manipulate them.” *

Where is your issue?

There are continuous peer review failures.

 

[AlbertBall]

There are continuous peer review failures.

And who highlights these? Oh yeah… other PEERS!

 

[wanstronian]

But if you want to discuss science based ID…

There is no science-based ID. ID has no scientific basis whatsoever, in any of its guises.

 

[buffalo]

There is no science-based ID. ID has no scientific basis whatsoever, in any of its guises.

Let us test this:

Design exists - yes or no?

 

[buffalo]

And who highlights these? Oh yeah… other PEERS!

We are all peers…

 

[Timothy_Piper]

Well, I guess that proves it then.

You cannot prove the Word of God to the foolish; for “the natural man cannot understand the things of God for they are foolishness to him.” “The wisdom of men is foolishness to God.” Think of it this way; do you believe you are wiser than the intelligence it took to make all you see on earth and in the heavens and all the laws that hold it together? You see you play the fool in your own wisdom; just as God has said.

Since you rolled your eyes and can only assume you have read, studied, analyzed the Bible and found it deficient; is this correct that you did all of this or are you just running your mouth? If you say it is deficient, then please show us so we my become like you.

The Bible is not a scientific book, but what it does say about the natural world science has taken centuries to discover that which was already written. Read the first verse in the Bible and you will see all 5 things that are known about that make up our natural world, which Herbert Spencer was given credit for some 6000 years later. See if you can figure out what I am speaking; keep in mind, the Bible does not use scientific terms.

Recently man has discovered that the sun drags our solar system across the universe; God said that is the Book of Job, which is one of the oldest books. The hydrological cycle was spoken in the Bile in at least two places.

If you just looked at the prophecy of the city of Tyre and what God said about it in great detail with the end that men would cast fishing nets on it, which if you look at pictures today, that is exactly what you will see. A mathematics scientist studied this prophecy and put the odds of it actually coming to pass as it was written in the detail in which it was written and this mathematician said it would be equivalent to taking the entire state of Texas and spreading silver dollars 2 feet deep, marking one with black ink, putting a blind fold on someone and tell them to pick up the one that was marked. This is just one prophecy. The events and life of Jesus there were over 300 that have been fulfilled alone. The faith based on Scripture is not a blind faith; it is a faith that is the substance of God. It is your faith that is blind based on human reason or lack thereof.

The bad news is that God will condemn you for eternity unless you repent of your offense to him, cry out for mercy and come to Him on His terms. This is why it is called the gospel, which means good news. But the good news is predicated upon the bad news, which is you fall short of God moral standards and will live in everlasting torment.

 

[Timothy_Piper]

Dear me do you not even have the Patience to scroll down??? SAME SOURCE…

“A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena. Most theories that are accepted by scientists have been repeatedly tested by experiments and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.”

One HAS TO ASK if you cant even be bothered to read a few lines, can you blame me for not taking these people seriously where 10,000+ lines are involved?

This is why theory is not fact; it can’t be observed or tested or recreated. Here is a common sense explanation why one species does not evolve into a new and different one. If evolution were true and it happens over periods of time and not all species would evolve at the same rate, then based on the amount of time since Darwin was around, we should be able to have observed at least a half dozen or so new species which have been created, but it has not because it does not happen that way, just as God said.

Do you believe in survival of the fittest?

The main problem with all the models these so-called scientist use is they base it on the uniformity, which the Bible says catastrophe, like the creation and the universal flood.

Einstein has it right when he said that space and time relative concepts and not absolute. For the Bible tells us this is true in eternal past and eternity future. Think about this and really ponder what would happen to our known universe if “time” ceased to exist, which is the future of the universe. Ask yourself this; would anything in our universe, as we know it, exist at all if it were not for time? What happens if time is removed? It won’t be like “Ground Hog Day”. What is know would be “uncreated”, but you have to really think it through to realize that removing time, will remove all that exists as we know it and this is precisely what happened before time and what will after in eternity furture, for in eternity, there is no time.

 

[wanstronian]

You cannot prove the Word of God to the foolish; for “the natural man cannot understand the things of God for they are foolishness to him.” “The wisdom of men is foolishness to God.” Think of it this way; do you believe you are wiser than the intelligence it took to make all you see on earth and in the heavens and all the laws that hold it together? You see you play the fool in your own wisdom; just as God has said.

Since you rolled your eyes and can only assume you have read, studied, analyzed the Bible and found it deficient; is this correct that you did all of this or are you just running your mouth? If you say it is deficient, then please show us so we my become like you.

The Bible is not a scientific book, but what it does say about the natural world science has taken centuries to discover that which was already written. Read the first verse in the Bible and you will see all 5 things that are known about that make up our natural world, which Herbert Spencer was given credit for some 6000 years later. See if you can figure out what I am speaking; keep in mind, the Bible does not use scientific terms.

Recently man has discovered that the sun drags our solar system across the universe; God said that is the Book of Job, which is one of the oldest books. The hydrological cycle was spoken in the Bile in at least two places.

If you just looked at the prophecy of the city of Tyre and what God said about it in great detail with the end that men would cast fishing nets on it, which if you look at pictures today, that is exactly what you will see. A mathematics scientist studied this prophecy and put the odds of it actually coming to pass as it was written in the detail in which it was written and this mathematician said it would be equivalent to taking the entire state of Texas and spreading silver dollars 2 feet deep, marking one with black ink, putting a blind fold on someone and tell them to pick up the one that was marked. This is just one prophecy. The events and life of Jesus there were over 300 that have been fulfilled alone. The faith based on Scripture is not a blind faith; it is a faith that is the substance of God. It is your faith that is blind based on human reason or lack thereof.

The bad news is that God will condemn you for eternity unless you repent of your offense to him, cry out for mercy and come to Him on His terms. This is why it is called the gospel, which means good news. But the good news is predicated upon the bad news, which is you fall short of God moral standards and will live in everlasting torment.

I’ll take my chances; if he’s the sort of god who punishes people for having questioning minds and rational thought processes, then he’s not up to much in my opinion.

 

[ricmat]

I’ll take my chances; if he’s the sort of god who punishes people for having questioning minds and rational thought processes, then he’s not up to much in my opinion.

Wastronian, I haven’t been following the above conversation, but thought it worth mentioning what God wants us to do with our minds. I know you’ll no doubt be turned off because I’m quoting some bible stuff here, but here it is anyway. Note that God is not punishing us for having questioning minds and rational thought processes. He is chastising us for not going far enough. Written about 200BC - the book of Wisdom:

Wis 13:1-9 For all men were by nature foolish who were in ignorance of God, and who from the good things seen did not succeed in knowing him who is, and from studying the works did not discern the artisan; (2) But either fire, or wind, or the swift air, or the circuit of the stars, or the mighty water, or the luminaries of heaven, the governors of the world, they considered gods. (3) Now if out of joy in their beauty they thought them gods, let them know how far more excellent is the Lord than these; for the original source of beauty fashioned them. (4) Or if they were struck by their might and energy, let them from these things realize how much more powerful is he who made them. (5) For from the greatness and the beauty of created things their original author, by analogy, is seen. (6) But yet, for these the blame is less; For they indeed have gone astray perhaps, though they seek God and wish to find him. (7) For they search busily among his works, but are distracted by what they see, because the things seen are fair. (8) But again, not even these are pardonable. (9) For if they so far succeeded in knowledge that they could speculate about the world, how did they not more quickly find its LORD?

 

[AlbertBall]

This is why theory is not fact; it can’t be observed or tested or recreated. Here is a common sense explanation why one species does not evolve into a new and different one. If evolution were true and it happens over periods of time and not all species would evolve at the same rate, then based on the amount of time since Darwin was around, we should be able to have observed at least a half dozen or so new species which have been created, but it has not because it does not happen that way, just as God said.

Do you believe in survival of the fittest?

The main problem with all the models these so-called scientist use is they base it on the uniformity, which the Bible says catastrophe, like the creation and the universal flood.

Einstein has it right when he said that space and time relative concepts and not absolute. For the Bible tells us this is true in eternal past and eternity future. Think about this and really ponder what would happen to our known universe if “time” ceased to exist, which is the future of the universe. Ask yourself this; would anything in our universe, as we know it, exist at all if it were not for time? What happens if time is removed? It won’t be like “Ground Hog Day”. What is know would be “uncreated”, but you have to really think it through to realize that removing time, will remove all that exists as we know it and this is precisely what happened before time and what will after in eternity furture, for in eternity, there is no time.

:banghead: We HAVE observed many instances of speciation. Ok before we continue please define theory in regard to science.

 

[wanstronian]

Wastronian, I haven’t been following the above conversation, but thought it worth mentioning what God wants us to do with our minds. I know you’ll no doubt be turned off because I’m quoting some bible stuff here, but here it is anyway. Note that God is not punishing us for having questioning minds and rational thought processes. He is chastising us for not going far enough. Written about 200BC - the book of Wisdom:

Wis 13:1-9 For all men were by nature foolish who were in ignorance of God, and who from the good things seen did not succeed in knowing him who is, and from studying the works did not discern the artisan; (2) But either fire, or wind, or the swift air, or the circuit of the stars, or the mighty water, or the luminaries of heaven, the governors of the world, they considered gods. (3) Now if out of joy in their beauty they thought them gods, let them know how far more excellent is the Lord than these; for the original source of beauty fashioned them. (4) Or if they were struck by their might and energy, let them from these things realize how much more powerful is he who made them. (5) For from the greatness and the beauty of created things their original author, by analogy, is seen. (6) But yet, for these the blame is less; For they indeed have gone astray perhaps, though they seek God and wish to find him. (7) For they search busily among his works, but are distracted by what they see, because the things seen are fair. (8) But again, not even these are pardonable. (9) For if they so far succeeded in knowledge that they could speculate about the world, how did they not more quickly find its LORD?

You’re right, it turns me off. I’m not interested in what the Bible says, because there’s no evidence that the bible is anything other than a story book. If you want to convince me that God exists and wants me to do X, Y or Z, then produce evidence.

Incidentally, you’re in no better position to tell me ‘what God wants’ than anybody else in this world. You’re basing your opinion on doctrine and dogma, not on any kind of proof! It has no objective value.

 

[ricmat]

You’re right, it turns me off. I’m not interested in what the Bible says, because there’s no evidence that the bible is anything other than a story book. If you want to convince me that God exists and wants me to do X, Y or Z, then produce evidence.

I’m not trying to convince you that God exists (at least not with the previous post).

You seemed to be concerned that if God exists, that he did not want people to have questioning minds, or use rational thought processes. I just wanted to give you the Christian perspective on how God wants us to use our minds, which contradicts your assertion. Whether you believe he exists or not is up to you. In any case, I thought the passage I quoted was interesting in that it was written 2200 years before you asked your question. (Yes, I know that doesn’t prove anything. But I find it interesting).

Incidentally, you’re in no better position to tell me ‘what God wants’ than anybody else in this world. You’re basing your opinion on doctrine and dogma, not on any kind of proof! It has no objective value.

“What God wants” (of us) is pretty much written in our hearts (or consciences). It pops up universally in most cultures. First and foremost, he wants us to search for him. That too has emerged in many cultures in different forms. And when we search for God but refuse to see the answer, then our search goes off in other directions and we make other things our god - money, power, fame and glory.

You are looking only for the kind of proof that disqualifies God. So…I don’t think you are going to find God that way. But in general if you dislike people trying to convince you that God exists, this probably isn’t the best place for you to hang out. If in the back of your mind you actually want people to convince you that God exists, it might be better to take a less adversarial approach.

 

[StAnastasia]

I’ll take my chances; if he’s the sort of god who punishes people for having questioning minds and rational thought processes, then he’s not up to much in my opinion.

That’s a caricature of the God of Catholic faith.

 

[wanstronian]

That’s a caricature of the God of Catholic faith.

Maybe; however I was responding directly to the comment:
“The bad news is that God will condemn you for eternity unless you repent of your offense to him, cry out for mercy and come to Him on His terms.”

 

[buffalo]

I’ll take my chances; if he’s the sort of god who punishes people for having questioning minds and rational thought processes, then he’s not up to much in my opinion.

an addendum to your signature:

but there will always be at least one gap or we would be God.

 

[buffalo]

Maybe; however I was responding directly to the comment:
“The bad news is that God will condemn you for eternity unless you repent of your offense to him, cry out for mercy and come to Him on His terms.”

Yup - God is all loving, all merciful and perfectly just. He could not be otherwise.

 

[wanstronian]

I’m not trying to convince you that God exists (at least not with the previous post).

You seemed to be concerned that if God exists, that he did not want people to have questioning minds, or use rational thought processes.

Not at all, I was responding to “The bad news is that God will condemn you for eternity unless you repent of your offense to him, cry out for mercy and come to Him on His terms.” I do not concern myself with what God would want if he existed, any more than I concern myself with Santa’s taste in music if he existed!

I just wanted to give you the Christian perspective on how God wants us to use our minds, which contradicts your assertion. Whether you believe he exists or not is up to you.

Well actually, it isn’t. I can’t choose whether to believe or not. I’m bound by my rationality.

In any case, I thought the passage I quoted was interesting in that it was written 2200 years before you asked your question. (Yes, I know that doesn’t prove anything. But I find it interesting).

Fair enough.

“What God wants” (of us) is pretty much written in our hearts (or consciences). It pops up universally in most cultures. First and foremost, he wants us to search for him. That too has emerged in many cultures in different forms. And when we search for God but refuse to see the answer, then our search goes off in other directions and we make other things our god - money, power, fame and glory.

It sounds like you’re abstracting God away from being an omnimax entity, and towards being something internal to our consciousness - the urge to ‘do the right thing.’

You are looking only for the kind of proof that disqualifies God. So…I don’t think you are going to find God that way. But in general if you dislike people trying to convince you that God exists, this probably isn’t the best place for you to hang out. If in the back of your mind you actually want people to convince you that God exists, it might be better to take a less adversarial approach.

If I see proof that God exists, I’ll accept it. If I see proof that he doesn’t, I’ll accept that too. In the meantime, in the absence of any evidence either way, I reserve the right not to believe in him. For the same reason, I don’t believe in fairies or the kraken.
I don’t mind people trying to convince me that God exists, but I want them to use strong logic and/or empirical evidence, not the wishy-washy excuses for proof I have so far seen on this forum. I have to admit that I am fascinated and frustrated in roughly equal measures by the obstinacy of some on this forum that they have proof for God’s existence, when they clearly have nothing of the sort.

 

[ricmat]

I’m bound by my rationality.

Have you considered moving to Vulcan?

(I just watched the latest Star Trek DVD, so I had to get that in )

 

[StAnastasia]

Maybe; however I was responding directly to the comment:
“The bad news is that God will condemn you for eternity unless you repent of your offense to him, cry out for mercy and come to Him on His terms.”

Right – I understand why you find that objectionable.