[Mydunda]

by trying so hard to prove your intellect, you have infact exposed your shortcomings!

[wajibu]

1. Wajibu can you with certainty prove and confirm that the world was NOT created in 6 days as the Bible says? or you just believe because scientists taking a leap of faith say so? You can't prove or even show that the earth is billions of years old can you?

I wont even try to debate your level of intelligence; that I will leave it to the forum. First we use science to prove how old the bible and Christian religion is. I’m assuming as a “scientist”, you have heard of radiocarbon dating and half-life. The scientist who discovered it is revered and has passed the scrutiny of other scientists since he received a Nobel Prize in chemistry. You know the realization that the 6 day and 6,000-year theory offers no logical explanation for an overabundance of fossil records . Common men stop blowing smoke in our asses. When error s like that is allowed to masquerade as truth, the validity of even the Bible itself is brought into question. Now as a “scientist”, if you choose to dismiss that as a paradigm, then maybe it is time to choose another career path. You strike me as one of those Christians that believe in the state "In God we trust; everyone else requires verification."

2. Why do people die and where do they go after they die? Science will tell you death is the stop of the heartbeat and all physical metabolic processes that maintain life. afterwards? nothing. Can they stop death? of course no. can you give this forum a rational explanation of what death is?
There are so many instances science has stopped death; maybe you meant can you stop old age? Terri Schiavo is a perfect example how science was able to stop death and prolong life. No amount of prayers would have saved a person in such debilitated state. Again as a scientist you should know, doctors or paramedics will still attempt to resuscitate even without a pulse. Surprisingly when the debate was going on about pulling the plug, most Christians were counting and hoping science would keep her alive. They knew prayers had no chance.

Who and what is responsbile for the order wonderful order of seasons, weather, gravity, temperatures, etc that we enjoy in our world today? Science and rational thought will invaraiably explain that our world is very suitable for inhabitation, but will they tell us just how it is that under the influence of a random process as they call it such order can be derived? Scientists will tell you that the tilting of this earth by just 1 more degree would lead to its destruction, that the distance of our earth from teh sun is just right for our earth, closer would have meant death from heat and further would have meant freezing. I could go on and on...any rational explanation without chance (chance is not rational it is an excuse)...funny how people would rather say chance than God...your answer?

I’m assuming you are following the current debates about global warming. Then why display such ignorance. Then you would know what we do affect the weather. Otherwise why don’t we put our faith in God and hope for the best. So obviously religion has nothing to do with season’s weather and gravity. There is more to what causes weather and seasons and how gravity works. This is not the forum for such debates. I don’t think NASA counts on prayers to do there experiments. Look if you don’t believe “tilting of this earth by just 1 more degree would lead to its destruction “, offer your reasons why. There is scientific evidence Earth-Sun distance is changing as we speak ; now do you want to know why or just want to believe God is having second thoughts about his earlier design. We are where we are because of science and you “Christians” continue defecating on it. If you have no trust in science I challenge you get rid of anything to do with science then entrust God to provide like manna from heaven. You talk about this God, heaven and hell with passion but when asked where they are, you hit a mental block.

While you keep repeating Gods non-existence over and over, you still have some very strong opinions about what he should be like, or what he should be doing. Do you think your human mind (or science) can fully grasp the concept of God?
The answer to that is an astounding YES. God is just like Santa Clause or comic super hero for adults.

Why isn't every strand of grass exactly 3cm tall? Why doesn't the sun go down at exactly 6.30 every day? Why did the lion eat the zebra? Why are some people short and others tall? Why are there amputees? Just because there is a God, that doesn't mean life on earth has to be heaven, the time for that will come, and his main priority is getting you a place there (with your permission, of course). Stop looking at death and suffering through human eyes, imagine if from the beginning of time, you saw every living thing born and die, every single day.... would death mean the same to you?

It is even retarded to start debating with a person with such mindset. You are in the same caliber with a person who ask me “who woke you up this morning?” or “who gave you life this morning?”. Then they are quick to answer “GOD”. Depending with my mood I might go into these long debates about how I ended here or just dismiss them for another “bible thumper”.

[ATLian]

Simply put, science has developed all the methods they suggest date the earth millions of years on the basis of the paradigm that it is older than 6,000 years. Notice that if science held that the earth is 6,000 years old, all the tools for dating would date within the range of 6000 years.

Mulosh,

I disagree. You're arguing that science first had the answer (6,000 years) then tried to make sure all calculations agree with this 6,000 years. That's not true. The 6,000 years is from the Bible, science just proved that there are many things that have been available for longer than 6,000 years.



Scientists will tell you that ... that the distance of our earth from teh sun is just right for our earth, closer would have meant death from heat and further would have meant freezing.

I don't know which scientists these are, coz this is totally wrong. Christians always claim that god made the world so perfect that if it moved an inch closer to the sun, we'd freeze to death, while if it moved even an inch further, we'd bake to death. Bila even getting very scientific, simple common sense should tell you that this is not true since the earth moves around the sun in an elliptical orbit, not a circular orbit. This means that there are times when the distance to the sun will be greater than other times. In fact the difference between the earth's perihelion (the point at which the earth is closest to the sun) and it's aphelion (the furthest point away from the sun) is 3 MILLION MILES, wacha this inch.

[ATLian]

miStar,

you posed an excellent question - the one about time. If a day is defined as a single rotation of the earth around it's axis, then how do they account for the time before the earth came into existence. How do they know that there were N number of days from when the universe came into being to when the earth and the solar system had "organized" itself to what we now know, where days and years are defined by the earth's rotations around it's own axis and the sun respectively.

Anyway, the definition of all time scientifically is based on the definition of a second. The official scientific definition of a second is this:

The second is the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom at a temperature of 0 Kelvin.

This means that this hold whether or not the earth exists, or even if the earth was to crush into a meteorite that would case it to now orbit around it's axis once every 71 hours.

Just a parting thought: even if the day was defined as a single rotation around the sun instead of using the caesium 13 atom's raditation, what would be wrong with using that definition to measure the past time? Can't I say, for example, that the Great Pyramid is as tall as 190,000 Coca Cola bottles placed on top of each other, even though coke bottles did not exist when the pyramids were created?



Your assumption that mt.everest was in existance during Noahs age is just that....an assumption.

Mt. Everest has been around for millions of years. The geological events that produced it happened millions of years before Noah's flood. If Noah's flood happened 5,000 years ago, then there is absolutely no doubt that Mt. Everest existed during that flood!



He did not?! Says who? You? Have you talked to Jonah about this then? Were you there? Did a scientist follow Jonah all his life with a video camera, which could prove that it did not happen?

He did not?! Says who? You?.....here we go again., and you know the drill...

You can't have an intelligent discussion like this. Neither were you there to see the whale eat Jonah, or to see god make Adam from clay. Most conclusions are as a result of logical deductions, not eye-witness evidence!

[Mulosh]

1. Wajibu can you with certainty prove and confirm that the world was NOT created in 6 days as the Bible says? or you just believe because scientists taking a leap of faith say so? You can't prove or even show that the earth is billions of years old can you?

I wont even try to debate your level of intelligence; that I will leave it to the forum. First we use science to prove how old the bible and Christian religion is. I’m assuming as a “scientist”, you have heard of radiocarbon dating and half-life. The scientist who discovered it is revered and has passed the scrutiny of other scientists since he received a Nobel Prize in chemistry. You know the realization that the 6 day and 6,000-year theory offers no logical explanation for an overabundance of fossil records . Common men stop blowing smoke in our asses. When error s like that is allowed to masquerade as truth, the validity of even the Bible itself is brought into question. Now as a “scientist”, if you choose to dismiss that as a paradigm, then maybe it is time to choose another career path. You strike me as one of those Christians that believe in the state "In God we trust; everyone else requires verification."

Your answer to this one is very interesting, beside questioning my intelligence, which I have never doubted, you will realize that your answer is clearly within a paradigm...that is the simple truth. And I will not choose another career path because I a doing science well enough and probably very close to if not the highest level. That aside, I am repeating here that if scientists preceding the the discovery of carbon never suggested that the earth is older than 6,000yrs, then carbon dating would not have yielded the results it has yielded, you can only contest this fact if your new to the scientific method, and you can take this to the bank. Because I am sure no one has told that radioactive dating makes several assumptions that cannot be proven by anyone e.g. that radioactive decay is constant, that no external factors have influenced decay, that they accurately determine the quantity of the parent structure before it started to decay...etc, and it gets better, some rocks have been dated to be 4 billion years old when they were actually 200 years old, I can give you references if you are interested. Point is, like religion, science too employs lots of assumption.

2. Why do people die and where do they go after they die? Science will tell you death is the stop of the heartbeat and all physical metabolic processes that maintain life. afterwards? nothing. Can they stop death? of course no. can you give this forum a rational explanation of what death is?
There are so many instances science has stopped death; maybe you meant can you stop old age? Terri Schiavo is a perfect example how science was able to stop death and prolong life. No amount of prayers would have saved a person in such debilitated state. Again as a scientist you should know, doctors or paramedics will still attempt to resuscitate even without a pulse. Surprisingly when the debate was going on about pulling the plug, most Christians were counting and hoping science would keep her alive. They knew prayers had no chance.

You have obviously dodged this one, havent you, you have sidestepped the issue, science stopped (postoponed?) Terri schaivo's death, but did not stop here from dying at a latter time, see the point?

Who and what is responsbile for the order wonderful order of seasons, weather, gravity, temperatures, etc that we enjoy in our world today? Science and rational thought will invaraiably explain that our world is very suitable for inhabitation, but will they tell us just how it is that under the influence of a random process as they call it such order can be derived? Scientists will tell you that the tilting of this earth by just 1 more degree would lead to its destruction, that the distance of our earth from teh sun is just right for our earth, closer would have meant death from heat and further would have meant freezing. I could go on and on...any rational explanation without chance (chance is not rational it is an excuse)...funny how people would rather say chance than God...your answer?

I’m assuming you are following the current debates about global warming. Then why display such ignorance. Then you would know what we do affect the weather. Otherwise why don’t we put our faith in God and hope for the best. So obviously religion has nothing to do with season’s weather and gravity. There is more to what causes weather and seasons and how gravity works. This is not the forum for such debates. I don’t think NASA counts on prayers to do there experiments. Look if you don’t believe “tilting of this earth by just 1 more degree would lead to its destruction “, offer your reasons why. There is scientific evidence Earth-Sun distance is changing as we speak ; now do you want to know why or just want to believe God is having second thoughts about his earlier design. We are where we are because of science and you “Christians” continue defecating on it. If you have no trust in science I challenge you get rid of anything to do with science then entrust God to provide like manna from heaven. You talk about this God, heaven and hell with passion but when asked where they are, you hit a mental block.

Here you have made a decent attempt, but I still asked who and what is responsible for the order of our universe, your answer has explained how man impacts on his environment, which is true, you have mentioned NASA and its experiments, but its not NASA that runs the universe, it rather seeks to explain how it works. For a better discussion, could stick to the issues and stick to rules of logic and reason which you hold so dear, get straight to the answers instead of sideshows like "xtains continue defecating on it, etc".
My point is science is wonderful, only to the extent it helps us to understand God and his works, but science CANNOT and will NEVER answer the fundamental, philosphic questions of our life and universe.

[Death]

Originally Posted by Mulosh

You have obviously dodged this one, havent you, you have sidestepped the issue, science stopped (postoponed?) Terri schaivo's death, but did not stop here from dying at a latter time, see the point?

Actually Mulosh, I don't see your point. Yes, as of yet, science has not stopped death, and neither has your god. So I don't see where you are going with that. I mean, what exactly is your argument here, that because we die there is a god??? BTW, science as pointed out has found cures for multiple diseases and as such has prolonged the lives of many, unlike religion.

Originally Posted by Mulosh

Who and what is responsbile for the order wonderful order of seasons, weather, gravity, temperatures, etc that we enjoy in our world today? Science and rational thought will invaraiably explain that our world is very suitable for inhabitation, but will they tell us just how it is that under the influence of a random process as they call it such order can be derived? Scientists will tell you that the tilting of this earth by just 1 more degree would lead to its destruction, that the distance of our earth from teh sun is just right for our earth, closer would have meant death from heat and further would have meant freezing. I could go on and on...any rational explanation without chance (chance is not rational it is an excuse)...funny how people would rather say chance than God...your answer?

Mulosh, you seem like a reasonable person who's actually interested in an honest discussion. As such, let me start by stating that science DOES NOT say that this world came about by chance or randomly. Do not confuse the chaos theory with chance. Here's a great but brief essay explaining this.

Lastly, I see your whole argument is basically a rehash of the 'Design Argument'. Rather than restate rebuttal's that have already been penned, I suggest you take a look here For reasons why that argument holds no water.

[wajibu]

I am repeating here that if scientists preceding the discovery of carbon never suggested that the earth is older than 6,000yrs, then carbon dating would not have yielded the results it has yielded, you can only contest this fact if your new to the scientific method, and you can take this to the bank. Because I am sure no one has told that radioactive dating makes several assumptions that cannot be proven by anyone e.g. that radioactive decay is constant, that no external factors have influenced decay, that they accurately determine the quantity of the parent structure before it started to decay...etc, and it gets better, some rocks have been dated to be 4 billion years old when they were actually 200 years old, I can give you references if you are interested. Point is, like religion, science too employs lots of assumption.

No one is questioning your intelligence but I can’t help and wonder why your keep insisting and throwing in people faces about it. Let the forum determine and decide that, you don’t need my stamp of approval. That said; your claim of being a scientist does not make your word any truthful. Actually your application of science comes into question. I think it is a little absurd to suggest the scientific community met and agreed on the age of earth regardless of the “overwhelming” evidence provided by the bible. The age of earth determination was not an overnight thing there is a timeline and supported by a lot of scientists from different disciplines. One scientist in the late 17th century sent the ball rolling during a period it was considered blasphemous to question the bible. As you will see there was no set way to establish the age of earth but through intuition and carefully observed painstakingly experiments carried through the years resulting in ground breaking theories. I will be nice and list them for you:
• 1654, Archbishop Usher (Ireland), based on genealogy in Bible, determined that Earth was created October 26, 4004 BC, 9:00am (PST). Therefore, the Earth was 6000 years old.
• A French scholar, Bernard Palissy who lived from 1510-1589 believed the Earth was much older based on his observations that rain, wind, and tides were the cause for much of the present-day appearance of the Earth. He wrote that, these forces could not work over such a short period of time to produce the changes. He was burned at the stake in 1589. A bad time for scientific inquiry. Poor guy
• 1770's, James Hutton, Father of Geology (Scotland, 1726-1797) published `Theory of the Earth' in 1785. Demonstrated that Hadrian's Wall was built by Romans and that after 1500 years there was no change. Thus, he suspected that Earth was much older than 6000 years.
• 1897, Lord Kelvin assumed that the Earth was originally molten and calculated a date based on cooling through conduction and radiation. The age of Earth was calculated to be about 24-40 million years based on the laws of thermodynamics.
• 1899, John Joly (Irish) calculated the rate of delivery of salt to the ocean. River water has only a small concentration of salts. Rivers flow to the sea, therefore, evaporative concentration of salts can be calculated. Age of Earth was calculated to be 90-100 million years.
• 1860, the thickness of total sedimentary record is divided by average sedimentation rates (in mm/yr) and calculated to be about 3 million years old. In 1910, the same measurement yields about 1.6 billion years old.
• Charles Lyell (1800's) compared amount of evolution shown by marine mollusks in the various series of the Tertiary System with the amount that had occurred since the beginning of the Pleistocene. He estimated about 80 million years for the Cenozoic Era alone.
• 1859 Charles Darwin provided scientific evidence to show that all species of life have evolved over time from one or a few common ancestors through the process of natural selection.
• Radioactivity is discovered by Henri Becquerel in 1896. In 1905, Rutherford and Boltwood used radioactive decay to measure the age of rocks and minerals. Uranium decay produces He, leading to a date of 500 million years for the oldest rocks.
• 1949 The technique of radiocarbon dating was discovered by Libby and his colleagues, determine the age of carbonaceous materials up to about 60,000 years

Fast forward, study done on samples returned from comets and the gives new insight about formation of the earth and correlates some of significant clues as to the history of the solar system and earth. I don’t think the age of earth is simple as your explanation of “paradigm” you are dismissing all that overwhelming evidence without giving reasons why you think the earth is 6000 years. And as I said you are using science to determine the age of the bible. How else would you determine the age of the bible or earth in this case? Unless you blindly accept Archbishop Usher statement who first suggested to Christians the age of earth. Now you know why this scientific approach remains as theories. Scientists use a process collectively and over time; endeavor to construct an accurate by that I mean reliable, consistent and non-arbitrary representation of the world. Now this scientific theories or law represents a hypothesis, or a group of related hypotheses, which has been confirmed through repeated experimental tests. That means they have been tested and approved by there peers qualifying it as a theory. Now if you have a better way of disapproving radio active dating, please be my guest. Otherwise stop making an ass out of science.


You have obviously dodged this one, havent you, you have sidestepped the issue, science stopped (postoponed?) Terri schaivo's death, but did not stop here from dying at a latter time, see the point?

Unfortunately science has not been able to stop death but it has prolonged life in so many instances that prayers and God has failed. Personally I don’t see the need to live past 60 years. That’s my personal take.

[ATLian]

@miStar,

this time thing gets even more interesting. Check out this info I came across:

The moon revolves around the Earth in about one month (27 days 8 hours). It rotates around its own axis in the same amount of time. The same side of the moon always faces the Earth; it is in a synchronous rotation with the Earth.

The Moon's orbit is expanding over time as it slows down (the Earth is also slowing down as it loses energy). For example, a billion years ago, the Moon was much closer to the Earth (roughly 200,000 kilometers) and took only 20 days to orbit the Earth. Also, one Earth 'day' was about 18 hours long (instead of our 24 hour day). The tides on Earth were also much stronger since the moon was closer to the Earth.

I wonder how they calculated this one.

[Death]

@Mulosh.

I really liked this doze. It's a rather sarcastic retort to the argument from design.
But if you look past the sarcasm, you'll see a serious point:

Cretinism or Evilution?: Why We Believe in a Designer!

[miStar]

Originally Posted by wajibu

1.

While you keep repeating Gods non-existence over and over, you still have some very strong opinions about what he should be like, or what he should be doing. Do you think your human mind (or science) can fully grasp the concept of God?
The answer to that is an astounding YES. God is just like Santa Clause or comic super hero for adults.

Why isn't every strand of grass exactly 3cm tall? Why doesn't the sun go down at exactly 6.30 every day? Why did the lion eat the zebra? Why are some people short and others tall? Why are there amputees? Just because there is a God, that doesn't mean life on earth has to be heaven, the time for that will come, and his main priority is getting you a place there (with your permission, of course). Stop looking at death and suffering through human eyes, imagine if from the beginning of time, you saw every living thing born and die, every single day.... would death mean the same to you?

It is even retarded to start debating with a person with such mindset. You are in the same caliber with a person who ask me “who woke you up this morning?” or “who gave you life this morning?”. Then they are quick to answer “GOD”. Depending with my mood I might go into these long debates about how I ended here or just dismiss them for another “bible thumper”.

You know what, you are simply a complete idiot, and dont talk like you know me, cause you know absolutely nothing about what i'm about, or what calibre i belong to. And if I sound angry, its because you, of all people, (considering your childish rebuffs & general level of debate here), is actually implying that I'm stupid? That has got to be one of the biggest insults to me ever, not because of the content, but because its coming from you.

You speak of intelligence and yet you cant even understand the bible, the most read book in human history? So when Jesus says 'eat my body and drink my blood' you start picturing pagans eating human flesh & drinking blood? Jesus also said 'ii'm the light and the way', i guess to you that means he also worked for the city council fixing roads and streetlights or something.

Seriuosly, havent you ever heard of metaphor? symbolism? figurative speach? If you cant understand the bible (forget believing whats written in it, simply UNDERSTANDING it), then I suggest you keep away from it, or read it but under close supervision from a mature sensible person. Alternatively, read books more to your level (with simple,straightforward, LITERAL stories), a good place to start would be here: Children's Bedtime Stories by Gordon Dioxide

I like to debate about this, but with you've turned out to be a dissapointment. I actually thought you could do better. Take a leaf from ATLian, i dont agree with him,but he responds thoughtfully, & does not resort to cheap personal attacks, which seems to be the only trick you've got in your (very small) hat. Now thats someone i can debate with, as for you... ..have a nice year.