Originally posted by PenguinThe researchers themselves still have very much to learn, now, don't they? 😏
Have you not been paying attention? The researchers themselves felt their results were unlikely to be right, they just couldn't find where the error was. By the middle of last year the conclusion was that it was down to a fault in the wiring.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/jun/08/neutrino-researchers-einstein-right
This is how science works in the real world. Watch and learn RJ, watch and learn.
--- Penguin.
Originally posted by KeplerYes, there are concrete things that demonstrate that God exists. 😏
Have you got anything concrete other than a poorly translated, badly edited and shockingly redacted collection of ancient writings to demonstrate that you are not making an assumption about the existence of a deity?
HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Glory be to God! Holy! Holy! Holy!
2 edits
Originally posted by PenguinHowever, evil-lution goes farther than that, because according to Darwin's hypothesis, all living things came from ONE common ancestor. The Holy BiBle says that God created different kinds and then they multiplied according to their kind. In many cases of creationism, God created male and female of each kind and the reproduction process involves the sexual intercourse between the TWO. That is the great difference between creation and evil-lution.
So from where do you get your definition of a 'kind'? You accept that the bible is imprecise. It does not define what a 'kind' is. It could simply mean "very similar to its parents", which is exactly in line with evolution by natural selection.
--- Penguin.
The following link is to a video that shows how Evil-lution works:
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsThanks for demonstrating that there are other ways to make an ass of yourself...
Your problem, other than not accepting the truth revealed from God, is that you are trying to explain the PAST by the NOW by using assumptions. To ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME. 🙄
Incidentally, do you add all this "hallelujah etc" nonsense at the end of some of your posts in order that god might be fooled into believing you are sincere? Or are you trying to convince us other posters? Or yourself, perhaps? It does come across as breathtakingly puerile.
1 edit
Originally posted by avalanchethecatI especially aimed it at the JWs, who deny the trinity of God as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Thanks for demonstrating that there are other ways to make an ass of yourself...
Incidentally, do you add all this "hallelujah etc" nonsense at the end of some of your posts in order that god might be fooled into believing you are sincere? Or are you trying to convince us other posters? Or yourself, perhaps? It does come across as breathtakingly puerile.
The HalleluYah instead of Hallelujah is to emphasize God's name "Yah", as given to Moses, as the one being praised. The !!! is to indicate that the NAME is shared by the three persons of the triunity of GOD.
I then give the accepted translation in English as Praise the Lord and the single ! to emphazie the oneness of God.
Then I give the spirit creature's cry from around the throne of God of Holy! Holy! Holy! as recorded in the book of Isaiah to emphasize the holiness of all three persons of the one God.
But then it became something that seemed also appropriate to end many other posts of mine.
1 edit
Originally posted by KeplerI see the heavens and the earth as concrete evidence of the existence of the God that created them. Also we have the microscopic world that we can not see with the naked eye. It is obvious to me that these could not have come into existence without the aid of a supernatural being with intelligence and knowledge much greater than our own.
Go on then, I'll bite. Show us some of this concrete evidence.
The law and order in both the universe in the heavens around the earth and microscopic universe within the earth and within biological systems is testimony of the existence of an supernatural intelligent designer.
I also believe there is concrete evidence that this supernatural being manifested Himself in the form of a man about 2000 years ago. He demonstrated His supernatural abilities by doing many miracles and predicting future events. One of these future events was the death of His own body and its resurrection in three days and nights. This is all recorded in the New Testament scriptures and some of it predicted in Old Testament scripture. There is an empty tomb in Jerusalem as testimony to His resurrection and a burial cloth and face cloth, with a supernaturally made image of that man on the burial cloth consistent with the description of the crucifixion death of Jesus, that are both relics kept over all these centuries by Christians and are now in control of the Roman Catholic Church.
http://www.wnd.com/2010/05/151025/
Originally posted by RJHindsHope this incredible footage fits within the conversation:
It is true that through selective breeding man has been able to domesticate animals and plants. But man has never been able to turn on kind of plant or animal into another kind nor has man been able to create life.
DNA contains all of the information needed to duplicate itself, and all the information that the cell needs to operate and perform its various ...[text shortened]... the following link for more:
http://www.scientificproofagainstevolution.org/Pages/default.aspx
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=SkY03n0_sD8&vq=medium
(Pro or Con, seems this 5 minute experience will be enjoyable)
.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyWhat wonderful, loving, and innocent creatures God has made. They are too marvelous for words.
Hope this incredible footage fits within the conversation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=SkY03n0_sD8&vq=medium
(Pro or Con, seems this 5 minute experience will be enjoyable)
.
Originally posted by RJHindsYes, I have seen that one before. It seems to boil down to "LA LA LA I DON'T BELIEVE YOU!"
However, evil-lution goes farther than that, because according to Darwin's hypothesis, all living things came from ONE common ancestor. The Holy BiBle says that God created different kinds and then they multiplied according to their kind. In many cases of creationism, God created male and female of each kind and the reproduction process involves the sexual ...[text shortened]... k is to a video that shows how Evil-lution works:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5W763lQR0tU
No solid reason is offered why any of the stuff it comments on is wrong.
The only reason you have ever offered is that evolution disagrees with some parts of a collection of tales written a few thousand years ago by nomadic tribesmen without the knowledge gained in the thousands of years since.
--- Penguin.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by RJHindscould you go into a bit more detail as to why the microscopic world is 'obviously' created by god. you often use the word obvious before making huge generalizations. lets talk detail. if its all 'obvious' can you tell us if the higgs particle 'obviously' exists? can you tell us which of the current theories regarding the unification of the major forces is 'obviously' the correct one. if you can just look at the sky and figure out how that got there then the rest should be no problem for you.
I see the heavens and the earth as concrete evidence of the existence of the God that created them. Also we have the microscopic world that we can not see with the naked eye. It is obvious to me that these could not have come into existence without the aid of a supernatural being with intelligence and knowledge much greater than our own.
The law and ord ...[text shortened]... ians and are now in control of the Roman Catholic Church.
http://www.wnd.com/2010/05/151025/
Originally posted by RJHindsObvious to you maybe. It is not so obvious to me. I think the problem lies in the differences in our world views. I look for evidence, you have no need of evidence because you believe, you have faith. This is fine as far as it goes, however it leaves us little common ground.
I see the heavens and the earth as concrete evidence of the existence of the God that created them. Also we have the microscopic world that we can not see with the naked eye. It is obvious to me that these could not have come into existence without the aid of a supernatural being with intelligence and knowledge much greater than our own.
The law and ord ...[text shortened]... ians and are now in control of the Roman Catholic Church.
http://www.wnd.com/2010/05/151025/
Myself, I do not think that science and religion should talk to each other at all. Religion requires that leap of faith based on nothing more than belief. Science uses belief (if you don't believe the Higgs boson exists why go looking for it?) as the basis for investigation but that belief must be confirmed by observation and experiment, it must be able to be converted to a theory with predictive power.
You believe, fervently, in the existence of a particular god, God with a capital G. Atheists, not necessarily scientists, believe equally fervently in the non-existence of any and all gods. Both beliefs are held on the basis of faith, neither is based on any evidence that would satisfy a proper scientist.
I see the heavens and the earth as concrete evidence for themselves. I have no need to invoke the god of the gaps to explain the existence of either because the universe exists, demonstrably so, and there is a sufficiency of evidence to convince me that the earth formed, as other planets did, from dust left over from the formation of a star, our sun approximately 4.5 billion years ago. I have no need of a supernatural being to hand craft the universe because I know enough about emergent systems to realise that the universe could just exist because it does. To invoke a creator just results in the Russian doll nonsense of "OK, who created the creator?" and so on. Unfortunately trotting out "God is eternal, he's always been here and always will be" just gets us back to the "prove it" nonsense.
There is no possibility of reconciling this view with yours. You must demonstrate that almost the entirety of physics is wrong and I feel no need to convince you that you are wrong as it does you no harm to hold your beliefs. However, unlike many atheists I am quite happy to accept that a god or gods may well exist. The universe is very big thing with plenty of space for even the the most supernatural of supernatural beings to go unnoticed by us.
I see no evidence for a creator god, or any other kind of god. I see no evidence partly because I haven't looked for any but also because I have so far not needed the god hypothesis to cover any gaps in my knowledge. Science works by striving to fill the gaps, not just accepting them and filling them with handy god-goo. I am aware that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. This is the reason for my thread asking what a god is. How would I know what evidence of a god looked like if I don't have the faintest idea what a god is?
Originally posted by RJHindsYet you were quite willing to use the erroneous conclusions about the speed of light, that something can go faster than the speed of light when it suited your needs. Again, science as weapon. You could care less for truth in science only the furthering of your own dogma at any cost.
The researchers themselves still have very much to learn, now, don't they? 😏