12 Apr 15
1 edit
Originally posted by 667joeGod is eternal; He has no beginning nor end. There never was a 'time' when God didn't exist. "Before the mountains were born, or Thou didst give birth to the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, Thou art God." (Psalm 90:2)
Hines is saying that everything must have a cause. Then he says that god did not have a cause. The two statements are contradictory.
12 Apr 15
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyIf god could always exist without being created, why is is not possible that is true for other entities?
God is eternal; He has no beginning nor end. There never was a 'time' when God didn't exist. "Before the mountains were born, or Thou didst give birth to the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, Thou art God." (Psalm 90:2)
12 Apr 15
3 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsSo, yet another creationist site with just words, what papers has Malone or should we call him Balogne, what papers has he submitted to peer reviewed journals on the subject of evolution? What you have here is a video of like minded idiots totally duped into believing the creationist brainwashing. Like any REAL scientist would get a fair hearing there.
Bruce Malone-Scientific proof that evolution is NOT scientific!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jBOwlmTcmQ
You have to do better than that if want to add maybe even ONE person to your list of the duped. So far you have zero. Well maybe Kelly is in your camp but he was pre-duped before seeing you.
The people in the audience look drugged, drugged on religion.
BTW, old Brucie only has a BS in chemistry. Not even a masters degree. Some scientist. I have two kids with higher degrees than that.
And my daughter's husband actually IS a genuine Phd, statistical physics, a subject you probably can't even imagine what it is about much less know anything about.
My daughter is going for her Phd in music this summer, at least a two year project. Her first degree in music was from Berklee in Boston and masters at Wesleyan.
Another son has a masters in social work and is in the top of his field here in Allentown Pa.
So show me the actual science papers old Brucie has written about evolution, other than BS video's which are, after all is said and done, a political move to gain votes for the push to Iranize the US but in Christianity and a young Earth Christianity at that.
The announcer calls Bruce Bologna a scientist. At best he is an inventor who helped with some 18 patents. To be called a scientist, you need AT LEAST a masters degree. In the world of real science, a BS is not a whole lot better than a GED.
One slight notch about Hovind, who THINKS he has a Phd. One that cost him 25 bucks a month for about 4 months. WOW. You know, you should apply there too, 5 months maybe at 25 bucks a month, you too could have a Phd in creationism.
BTW, Hovind's actual 'dissertation' was analysed for content and level and it came out at about 7th grade level. If he had worked a bit harder, he could have brought it all the way of to High School level but no such luck.
12 Apr 15
Originally posted by 667joeOriginally posted by 667joe
If god could always exist without being created, why is is not possible that is true for other entities?
"If god could always exist without being created, why is is not possible that is true for other entities?"
Thanks for your reply. Executive summary: Because one of God's Divine Attributes is Sovereignty. Should we continue?
12 Apr 15
Originally posted by 667joeOriginally posted by 667joe
I believe in facts and the search for truth though science. I don't give credence to fairy tails and make believe.
"I believe in facts and the search for truth though science. I don't give credence to fairy tails and make believe."
Many share your views. Do scientific laws exist because science legislated and enforces them or does science observe them?
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYou've been called out for this sophistry before. The definition of "law" that triggers your disingenuous use of the words "legislated" and "enforces" is along the lines of 'a rule or body of rules of conduct essential to or binding upon human society and imposed by authority'.
Do scientific laws exist because science legislated and enforces them or does science observe them?
Meanwhile the definition of "law" in science, as you well know because you've been caught trying to pass the sophistry off as 'argument' before, is 'a generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature' which of course has no relation to the terms "legislated" and "enforces". The two uses of the word "law" are not synonyms. Do you really need to resort to these word games to propagate your beliefs? .🙂
12 Apr 15
Originally posted by 667joeHowever, even in the scientific method, imagination IS critical to the formation of hypotheses.
I believe in facts and the search for truth though science. I don't give credence to fairy tails and make believe.
I've said before that faith is just another form of knowledge, one that most scientists just do not have access to because they are fitted with blinders called "the scientific method".