09 Feb 08
Originally posted by josephwYeah, they should just ask god and hope he doesn't cause a tsunami.
I thought it was the consensus that the earth was warming. Now I hear that things might just be cooling off.
When will these scientists actually figure it out?
Maybe god will answer them if they are schizophrenic.
09 Feb 08
Originally posted by josephwYou obviously fail to realize that science's adaptability and perfectibility is a strength and not a weakness.
I thought it was the consensus that the earth was warming. Now I hear that things might just be cooling off.
When will these scientists actually figure it out?
09 Feb 08
Originally posted by PsychoPawnActually, this is a serious thread. I only titled it that way to generate a meaningful discussion.
Yeah, they should just ask god and hope he doesn't cause a tsunami.
Maybe god will answer them if they are schizophrenic.
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that with all that scientists come up with all the time, that there wouldn't be so many contradictions. I hear this theory and that theory. And then come to find out they decide they were wrong and come up with a new prevailing theory. It drives me nuts.
As far as I'm concerned science has run amuck.
09 Feb 08
1 edit
Originally posted by josephwWell, what would you prefer? That humanity's collective knowledge be set in stone, never to change again regardless of any new information that becomes available?
Actually, this is a serious thread. I only titled it that way to generate a meaningful discussion.
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that with all that scientists come up with all the time, that there wouldn't be so many contradictions. I hear this theory and that theory. And then come to find out they decide they were wrong and come up with a new prevailing theory. It drives me nuts.
As far as I'm concerned science has run amuck.
09 Feb 08
Originally posted by josephwYeah, science adapts and changes according to the evidence at hand and that is bad? Please explain.
Actually, this is a serious thread. I only titled it that way to generate a meaningful discussion.
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that with all that scientists come up with all the time, that there wouldn't be so many contradictions. I hear this theory and that theory. And then come to find out they decide they were wrong and come up with a new prevailing theory. It drives me nuts.
As far as I'm concerned science has run amuck.
09 Feb 08
Originally posted by PsychoPawnDon't you think that science should establish the facts based on objective truth and not devise all these clever theories based on their preconceived ideas about how they would like things to be?
Yeah, science adapts and changes according to the evidence at hand and that is bad? Please explain.
I remember a time when science was about the business of establishing fact. But it appears science has evolved.
[b]"Yeah, science adapts and changes according to the evidence at hand".[b/]
It's the same evidence, but a whole new theory every day. You know as well as I do the whole scientific community is driven by money. And now politics has joined in. Death by a thousand cuts!
09 Feb 08
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesI prefer facts. Any new information will only support the truth.
Well, what would you prefer? That humanity's collective knowledge be set in stone, never to change again regardless of any new information that becomes available?
You see, therein lies the deception. It is supposed that new information means that what is true now may not be true later. Truth is truth. New information that contradicts truth is a lie.
09 Feb 08
Originally posted by josephwYou are just very confused.
I prefer facts. Any new information will only support the truth.
You see, therein lies the deception. It is supposed that new information means that what is true now may not be true later. Truth is truth. New information that contradicts truth is a lie.
09 Feb 08
Originally posted by josephwEveryone prefers facts, if available. But it may be the case that absolute facts are beyond our grasp. We may simply not be able to ever grasp the Truth about anything. But we can always form closer and closer approximations of that truth. I know it's a shock to discover your parents are imperfect beings, but god is incapable of restoring that certainty to you, except in a superficial sense.
I prefer facts. Any new information will only support the truth.
You see, therein lies the deception. It is supposed that new information means that what is true now may not be true later. Truth is truth. New information that contradicts truth is a lie.
09 Feb 08
Originally posted by josephwIt was once thought that masturbation caused baldness and blindness and that chronic masturbators had lower intelligence. This was considered "truth." Is new information about this a "lie"?
I prefer facts. Any new information will only support the truth.
You see, therein lies the deception. It is supposed that new information means that what is true now may not be true later. Truth is truth. New information that contradicts truth is a lie.
09 Feb 08
Originally posted by josephwYou crave a perfect authority to tell you what's what.
Actually, this is a serious thread. I only titled it that way to generate a meaningful discussion.
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that with all that scientists come up with all the time, that there wouldn't be so many contradictions. I hear this theory and that theory. And then come to find out they decide they were wrong and come up with a new prevailing theory. It drives me nuts.
As far as I'm concerned science has run amuck.
Grow up, accept that reality is complicated, and that understand that empirical investigations of a complex subject matter by people with imperfect intelligence and limited tools are bound to involve theoretical disputes that are only gradually resolved.
09 Feb 08
Originally posted by josephwDo you acknowledge that "Christianity" as a whole is probably just as, if not more, contradictory as to the interpretation of the teachings of Jesus?
Actually, this is a serious thread. I only titled it that way to generate a meaningful discussion.
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that with all that scientists come up with all the time, that there wouldn't be so many contradictions. I hear this theory and that theory. And then come to find out they decide they were wrong and come up with a new prevailing theory. It drives me nuts.
As far as I'm concerned science has run amuck.
09 Feb 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneNo he probably won't. It's you that has the "interpretation" not Christianity. Jesus said his church would stand and nothing would prevail against it. Do you really think the God of Jesus would allow the truth to be lost and for St Paul to come in and deceive us all?
Do you acknowledge that "Christianity" as a whole is probably just as, if not more, contradictory as to the interpretation of the teachings of Jesus?
You have an interpretation based on only half of the sayings of Jesus (the other half remain ignored and brushed over by you) . St Paul had the complete picture. If you would like to explore the complete picture and have your lies exposed feel free. We went there once and you ran off. Until then stop trying to find a "way in" to other Christians , I'm still around to warn them about you.