@crockshit, You can't prove anything in science? Who told you that shit you moron? They failed to tell you that they were talking about atheistic science, not real science. And that's true, atheism CANNOT prove ANYTHING. The Falsifiability Program is controversial at best. Popper argued that science can never prove things to be true, but it can prove them to be false. He's full of shit just like you. Did Columbus prove the world to be round or not? What is crime investigation all about?
@coolgreyoneabby "Only on the subject of evolution do the scientifically illiterate think they know more than the scientists who study the subject for a living" I certainly know more than you about it. REPEAT: the common ancestor HAD to have looked like a monkey. So there you have it. Monkeys turning into humans. hahahahaha You belief some outrageously ridiculous shit. Calling it scientific doesn't make it scientific even if scientists agree. LMAOROFL@YOU. hahahahahaaa
@coolgreyoneabby Hey asshole, do a google image search for "human evolution" and see what you get!!! HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
@coolgreyoneabby "A common ancestor to Human and monkeys was not a monkey and it does not matter what it looked like, It was not a monkey" HAR HAR HAR It DOES matter what it looked like? And here you are claiming it was not a monkey with no proof whatsoever and YOU have the audacity to yell "Advertizing your ignorance again" so it could have looked like a zebra? hahahaha This is proof of what bullshitters you evotarded liars really are. I AM ROFL HAR HAR HAR
@coolgreyoneabby Oh, this has got to be one of the most irrational comments yet. In science, when you want to test which theory is working, the scientists don't constantly intervene, disrupting causes and effect relationships. It's similar with God and Satan who seldom intervene to interrupt cause and effect in this war about whose government is best. God HAS done miracles including ones like that in a few cases..but generally allows cause and effect to go naturally.
@coolgreyoneabby Third on the below..to ALL human suffering in the past, all atheism can say is, "Tough cookies. Wrong place, wrong time and all that jazz. See ya and I wouldn't wanna be ya."
Christianity was the main entity that massively improved human rights for the entire world...atheism did precisely NOTHING for 1000s of years. Most importantly, it is ONLY GOD that has power to right the injustices of the past and He promises He will do that when He comes.
@coolgreyoneabby It's even more irrational though. We have numerous well documented benefits from following Bible principles (decades of extra life, much greater happiness, better marriages, the founding of modern science (which would not exist without Christianity), the pioneering of human rights (which also would mostly not exist without Christianity) and so much more. And you have the audacity to say, show me an arm growing back or I'm going to ignore all this.That's just stupid. I'm sorry.
@TruthIsLife7 What I have seen in the data is exactly the opposite. Non theists live exactly as long as theists, double blind clinical studies show prayer does exactly zero for any health benefits, and non theists and theists have the same divorce rates. Looks like wishful thinking on your part. Modern science came about despite religion not because of it, Just ask Galileo who was imprisoned by Christians for the rest of his life for saying the earth revolved around the sun.
@TruthIsLife7As far as morality, there is one metric you could look up, Non theists are UNDER represented as a % of the overall population in prison. Seems that Christianity and prison sentences go together. And also incorrect on the suffering of people, It is theists, non theists and science that works together to provide clean water, vaccines, safe foods, etc. Theists will "pray for you" which is a way to do next to nothing and pretend you are helping.
@coolgreyoneabby What you see is irrelevant. It's the research that matters. But, you don't really care about that do you. National Geographic and the National Institute of Health, Blue Zones, etc. are just idiots in your eyes. Btw, NIH just awarded $5 million dollars to study why Christians who follow Bible principles (I did NOT say all Christians...most don't follow Bible health laws..only those who follow Bible principles, such as the Adventists). Learn to read.
@TruthIsLife7 Oh My God that was the most inane statement I have read. ( Yes, I can read and I'm not a member of your 7th day superstition) "NIH just awarded $5 million dollars to study why Christians who follow Bible principles learn to read" Here is the answer: People learn to read regardless of what superstition you teach them. Therefore SDA will learn to read along with everyone else. I'll send the bill directly to you.
@Razomir "The bible claims God's favorite creation must be in the center of all things aka geocentrism."
I'll send you $50 if you can find a verse in the Bible claiming this.
" An expanding universe is NOT a biblical concept."
Baloney. ~15 verses in the Bible speak of a stretching of the heavens (Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 45:12; Isaiah 51:13, etc.) which for ancient minds and vocabulary in a different language is about as close as you can get to referring to an expanding universe.
@TruthIsLife7 What it shows is that you are out of your league in this debate. You continually point towards that site and I have looked through it. You have no real evidence of any value. Merely assumptions, half-truths and skewed facts. Creation science is a joke. You have no basic understanding of scientific methodology, experimentation, fallibility, repeatibility and you are saying I dont have a clue? You have GOT to be joking.
@Razomir Let me make it clear.There are admirable people in all philosophies, including atheism&I have atheist friends.But,officially atheist states caused over 100,000,000 deaths in just 1 century, far more deaths than all religions with state power have caused in ALL ALL history including the most despicable religions. Religious states had creeds that restricted them some (and most of their violence violated the creeds). Atheists have none,so power was used to destroy what atheism despised.
@TruthIsLife7 Look if you are going to fabricate facts this conversation is over. Atheist states?Do not confuse say Stalin being atheist for him killing for atheistic reasons.So let me make it clear to you, religion is the leading cause of deaths through the course of history and THAT is the fact.You have an incredibly wrong and incompetent understanding of what atheism is. It is NOT an ideology.I suggest you look it up before you argue with atheists lest you be considered ignorant
@Razomir No, they didn't at all persecute people for their science & they were rare events..and I already quoted an atheist scholar who ridiculed the idea that we could compare those things where ~2-10,000 people died (tragic) to states where atheism was the official view and murdered 1-200 million. Really incomparable...and the persecution of science that supports the Bible by atheistic establishments is far greater now than anything even the Catholic church ever did.
@Razomir I didn't confuse science and natural philosophy or Christianity. Christianity does not deal with all science or all philosophy, but it most certainly does contain some.
I have almost as much disagreement with the Catholic church on some points as with atheism to which it is a sister in setting aside instructions God for man made traditions. And it's largely because it accepted Aristotle as nearly infallible(&Galileo's belligerent nature) that it put Galileo on trial.
@Razomir By cherry picking,I mean you pick out the ONE scientist who was put on trial for his scientific views in centuries&ignore the billions/trillions of dollars the church directly invested in science in many areas during those centuries funding literally 1000s of people trying to advance science,many of them priests&scientists at the same time,doing work directly based on the Bible's philosophy&specific scientific concepts&atheists cherry pick a couple house arrest "persecutions"? Come ON.
@TruthIsLife7 Arguing with you seems pointless. Could you provide any proof of those billions and trillions of "dollars" (Especially considering the currency at the time) because this claim is quite contrary to the facts I have.And once again I repeat, living in a time when religion was dominant, being a scientist does not make you a biblical scientist.What do you think the inquisition was?Seeking out heretics and herecy was usually what scientists practiced as it opposed canon law
@TruthIsLife7 I actually find it quite amusing (although pointless) that you keep claiming atheism supresses information in a day and age where the internet is available to all. And after, you go on to cherry pick information which might support your claims, completely ignoring context and objectivity then accuse others of cherry picking? I suppose that would be the only way you could keep going with your claims but if you want to be taken seriously you need to do better than tat.
@Razomir Find me one public school that teaches the truth that Christianity pioneered far more human rights movements than anything else and the reason why as Stanford's Rene Girard explains.
Find me ONE public school that teaches the Big Bang confirms the Bible's predictions of an expanding universe. Find me one public school that teaches that following the Bible's health principles adds 10+ years to life. All these are indisputably fact. Censorship is VERY real, and not just of Christianity.
@TruthIsLife7 The bible claims god's favorite creation must be in the center of all things aka geocentrism. An explanding universe is NOT a biblical concept. Hell it was said god resided in heaven because it was written in a time that people couldnt fly. Now god is supposedly beyond the big bang. That is called a god of the gaps argument and it is just as pitiful. Public schools dont teach these things because they are gross misinformation. That is not lack of objectivity.
@TruthIsLife7 The reason they don't teach that bunk is that it is all bullshit spread by a dogmatic religion that makes shit up. How much more clear can we be?
@coolgreyoneabby "The reason they don't teach that bunk is that it is all bullshit spread by a dogmatic religion that makes shit up" I believe we just discovered WHO has the dogmatic religion, and WHO makes shit up. YOU! hahahaa ROFL Your claims that creationists are relying on religion is just a strawman that you hide behind because as I have just shown, what you believe in is hoax. A funny hoax, but a hoax just the same.
@Razomir There is censorship in history, biology, economics, linguistics &other fields. My mentor has his Ph.d. from the University of Illinois and has done pioneering research in using L1 glosses to increase language acquisition. The renowned David Nunan listened to his lecture and couldn't find any fault in his methods or evidence, but just said, "I know you're wrong."He's had had incredible difficulty publishing in USA(but not so much Korea) because of prejudice against using L1.
@TruthIsLife7 And all that proves what exactly? What has this field of linguistics have to do with the debate at hand? The example proves nothing especially without providing further details. Even the greatest minds err at times but again I ask what is the relevance here?
@Razomir "What do you think the inquisition was?" You know nothing about the Inquisition. FACT: the heresy suppressed by the Inquistion killed more people than the Inquistion. Do you even know the name of the heresy? No you don't. You have been brainwashed. Nobody in the Inquisition was executed for what they believed, but for what they did. The trial records still exist. Google Jenny Gibbons. She is a witch who completely clears the Catholic Church of witch hunts and murder of innocent people.
@Razomir, "TruthIsLife7, Arguing with you seems pointless" Of course, he's right and you're wrong. Simple as that. I've been reading your comments and you don't have a single fact straight, not one. You have been taught what the govt wants you to be taught. You follow the company line exactly. You know jack about science or history. It's been censored from everything. Again, it's called brainwashing.
@TruthIsLife7 No cherry picking really. The witch hunts and the inquisition are largely known for persecuting people who engaged in scientific research and naming them heretics.
@Razomir No, they didn't at all persecute people for their scientists and they were rare events..and I already quoted an atheist scholar who ridiculed the idea that we could compare those things were ~2-10,000 people died (tragic) to states where atheism was the official view and murdered 1-200 million. Really incomparable...and the persecution of science that supports the Bible by atheistic establishments is far greater now than anything even the Catholic church ever did.
@TruthIsLife7 I am sorry to say you have gone into the realm of fantasies now. Atheists persecuting science? Are you purposefully playing the role of a fool or do you actually believe that? Deaths casued by religios disagreements and conflicts outnumber ANY other cause in the course of human history, where there are none (or hardly any) deaths in the name of atheism. Are you misunderstandong what those terms mean?
@Razomir There are some atheists who have grown up in churches whose pastors didn't have any training or knowledge in science that thought it was rational to leave Christianity because they never had any information about the massive facts that support Christianity. I can respect those. But, many left because as Aldous Huxley said, they hated the restrictions. But, biblical restrictions are no less valuable than the scientific in promoting progress&millions have died because of ignoring them.
@TruthIsLife7 I am begining to think I am wasting my time with you. I dont mean to come off as rude but when someone takes up this much of my time and doesnt have a basic understanding of the concepts and terminology he/she uses in the debate I find it utterly pointless to continue. You are one of those people that do not argue in order to reach truth but instead to prove a point at all costs. Those costs include cherry picking and blatant lies.
@TruthIsLife7 I am begining to think I am wasting my time with you. I dont mean to come off as rude but when someone takes up this much of my time and doesnt have a basic understanding of the concepts and terminology he/she uses in the debate I find it utterly pointless to continue. You are one of those people that do not argue in order to reach truth but instead to prove a point at all costs. Those costs include cherry picking and blatant lies.
@TruthIsLife7 And because I dont mean to outright call you a liar I will say you are simply delusional because your data is trully incorrect and when it is correct as far as the numbers it is grossly taken out of context. You may not believe it but not only do you take things out of context, you actually build your entire argument on such fallicies. Arguing with you feels like I am arguing with a fan of the sword and magic ganre who claims there have been thousands...
@TruthIsLife7 ... of unicorn sightings but the mass conspiracy of "the man" is lying about it to keep pro-unicornists down. And that orcs are naturally a proof for alien life on jupiter and DNA means "dont need atheism" which naturally proves religion is right. I have humored you so far but you have failed to provide any argumentation that isnt out of place or out of context. Conspiracy theories while interesting and captivating can hardly be called truth just because you like them
@TruthIsLife7 Ignorance is not a crime, certainly, but it also doesnt grant you respect in a debate. Your notions of atheism, science and scientific method are incompetent. Please refine your understandings for the sake of future debates. Now I suggest we both spare any further waste of time here. I am done with you and will no longer aknowledge your responses as I believe I have given you enough time which I feel you have wasted trying to show fallicies are fact. Goodbye.
@Razomir You clearly don't have a clue about the scientific method or what counts as evidence. When a hypothesis makes predictions and they are confirmed, that IS ALWAYS COUNTED AS EVIDENCE and Bible science has done that countless times. There is observational science, inferential/forensic science, explanatory science, etc. and I can give you specific examples of all of these both from secular research and from Bible scientists. You are against the basic methods of science at present.
@TruthIsLife7 RE: Deut 20: 16-17, 1 Sam 15: 3 This isn't war, this is what you do when taking over real estate! This is how the USA came to be; by eliminating the barbaric, native population and then eventually practicing slavery (which is why the USA became rich so quickly). And now (your) reaping the benefits of that. We did the same thing in Canada, as was done in Australia by the British. Who do you think populated New Mexico before-hand? You have to weed a garden for the plants to flourish.
@Razomir "The witch hunts and the inquisition are largely known for persecuting people who engaged in scientific research and naming them heretics." Yes, cherry picking. That was an outright lie. And you think you're NOT brainwashed?
@TruthIsLife7 Even supposing you are right (which I dont) religion declines yet science exponentially progresses. Kinda shows there is no correlation, in fact quite the opposite.
@Razomir Religion is exploding in some countries (Russia and China for example). But, when you suppress facts from people's knowledge...more and more will leave that view even if it has evidence. If I banned all knowledge of universal common descent, which has less evidence than creation science does, from schools and science journals..in a decade or two, very few people would believe it. Suppression of facts and evidence is the main environment in which atheism thrives.
@TruthIsLife7 Let us get one thing straight. Creation science has NO evidence. Only speculation and hypothesies. In fact it has been solidly refuted on many occasons. Atheism is ALL about spreading logic and reason. Atheists dont go door to door trying to convert people, the religious groups do. As for Russia, you are taking things out of context YET AGAIN. That ëxplosion"is just due to people admitting what they were banned from saying before, not an actual growth of religion.
@Razomir I don't do cherry picking and I don't do taking out of context. I teach students to avoid logical fallacies like the plague. YT posts are very limited though, and to realize you've been taught propaganda usually takes a while before your eyes are opened.
Creation science predicted that functions would be found for vestigial organs and JunkDNA as well LONG before science found them. It has almost totally triumphed with vestigial organs and is doing the same with junkDNA.
@TruthIsLife7 And we go back to what I said at the begining...WOW you are ignorant! noncoding DNA and vestigiality are some of the strongest points FOR evolution. That would be AGAINST creationism. If you can look at those example and claim they prove the exact opposite of what they really do, I have to say you either have your concepts mixed up or you are lacking in reason and/or intelligence in general...this trully is ridiculous.
@Razomir Of ~200 organs originally labeled vestigial ~100+ years ago, we know now that pretty much ALL have important function (and please don't put out the garbage of 2nd function for which you have ZERO evidence of 1st function). Papers are being published almost daily showing that junkDNA has important function and even evolutionists are admitting that this may be one of their biggest mistakes ever. Creationists predicted we would find function for nearly all junkDNA &are being vindicated.
@Razomir Of ~200 organs originally labeled vestigial ~100+ years ago, we know now that pretty much ALL have important function (and please don't put out the garbage of 2nd function for which you have ZERO evidence of 1st function). Papers are being published almost daily showing that junkDNA has important function and even evolutionists are admitting that this may be one of their biggest mistakes ever. Creationists predicted we would find function for nearly all junkDNA &are being vindicated.
@Razomir "religion declines yet science exponentially progresses" Apples and oranges. The Church is the guardian of true science. Atheists don't like true science and that's why we have nonsense like evolution being taught as fact. Modern science came directly out of the Church. It's now been hijacked by atheists so it is without morality OR truth. The purpose of real science is to find the truth. If the scientific method was actually applied to evolution, evolution fails immediately.
@TruthIsLife7 "that it put Galileo on trial" The atheists are big on consensus science. Funny how that the consensus of science was against Galileo, an overlooked fact. The main issue with Galileo was that he was claiming a fact without proof. The reason he was on trial was not for his science but for his theology. He suddenly thought he was a theologian. His house arrest can't really be called persecution especially if you define persecution the way atheists do persecution.
@TruthIsLife7 "that it put Galileo on trial" The atheists are big on consensus science. Funny how that the consensus of science was against Galileo, an overlooked fact. The main issue with Galileo was that he was claiming a fact without proof. The reason he was on trial was not for his science but for his theology. He suddenly thought he was a theologian. His house arrest can't really be called persecution especially if you define persecution the way atheists do persecution.
@Razomir Where did I deny the geocentrism mistake??? Dr. Hannam deals with it. That's cherry picking to the extreme though. Like 100s of scientists, Kepler thought:
“Since we astronomers are priests of the most high God with respect to the book of nature, it behooves us not to think of the praise of our abilities, but above all of the glory of God. . . . Enough for me is the honor of guarding, with my discovery, the door of God's temple, in which Copernicus serves before the high altar.”
@Razomir I just quoted Dr. Hannam below on a fact of history..how can you not know that most of the pioneers of science did their science DIRECTLY because they thought God created the world and so it was an honor and privilege to study His creation. There are MAJOR philosophical foundations from the Bible and many specific ones as well. I've put some on my site and more are coming soon. I work with documented facts & I have listed many references, you haven't.
@TruthIsLife7 No no, you work with assertions. A narrative book and a personal site doesnt equal evidence. Who lied to you that science pioneers worked in the name of god?
@TruthIsLife7 A fact of history is the persecution of proponents of heliocentrism by the church. Yet you conveniently omit such examples and claim fantasies to be fact. They arent.
@Razomir "A fact of history is the persecution of proponents of heliocentrism by the church" SEE? That's not a fact and you don't know what you're talking about. Who told you that and have you researched it to find out exactly what happened. NO you haven't, you just accepted it because it fit with your world view. Which so far, from what I am reading is complete fantasy. Yet you accuse others of fantasy. I suggest you do some REAL research.
@Razomir "A fact of history is the persecution of proponents of heliocentrism by the church" FACT? Have you read the Church's side of this? No you haven't. Try that. Maybe you'll find a fact for a change. You, my friend, are a perfect example of brainwashed with no facts. CLASSIC
@Razomir Do you disagree that biogenesis and and an expanding universe are 100% true? If so, I'd like to hear why. (in saying 100%, I am fully aware that this depends on certain assumptions such as our perceptions being real/accurate, etc. but I'm using this in the sense that as much as anything else is true, understanding these assumptions, it's as true as gravity being real. Last I heard, neither Dawkins nor Hawkings have shown any evidence contradicting biogenesis or an expanding universe.
@Razomir I know the genetic fallacy allegation well. But, it is no more valid than saying Darwin had nothing to do with the development of evolution in modern times. Many of the greatest scientists explicitly use biblical philosophy or specific biblical scientific concepts in their scientific work. Many historians of science agree. You've done nothing to disprove them at all except post opinions that don't match historical fact&you obviously haven’t read much of my site or you say these things.
@Razomir If your position were correct, then modern science should have popped up in many other of the 1000s of cultures around the world that have existed. It did not, which falsifies your position. There are specific philosophical requirements for modern science to be established and flourish and these are not found in hardly any other culture besides Christianity.
@TruthIsLife7 Again, please do not put philosophy and christianity in the same category. Philosophical requirements - certainly. Christian requirements, not by a longshot. As I explained to you already, the development of philosophy and theology occurred simultaneously but eventually deviated. And it is from the philosophical basis that modern sciences came to be, not the theology. In fact the bible directly contradicst certain scientific discoveries. So what is biblical science?
@TruthIsLife7 Modern science works based on funding on which religion has no bearing. 90% of scientists are atheist and science advances as religion declines. What does that tell you?
@Razomir "science advances as religion declines" What does that tell me? Well it tells me why science has become so corrupt. Atheism is actually the most vehement organism of murder in the history of the world. Russia promoted atheism by murder for 70 killing at least 160 million. It has now failed and the Russian govt is building churches as we speak. So after the war you're going to see the demise of atheism. It's a complete failure in the practical sense as well as the intellectual.
@JackSShit I suggest you look up some actual data before making such misinformed claims. You are just another example of a person who hasnt got the first clue what atheism is.
@Razomir No, Dr. Hannam's book is NOT just a proposed theory (you should use the term hypothesis since theories have confirmations and you are arguing against that).
Dr. Hannam who is himself an evolutionist, not a creationist, explains:
“…Christians believe that God created the world and ordained the laws of nature. He is the guarantor of constant and rational laws, such that investigating the world can consequently be a religious duty. It's easy to forget that, until the 19th century,
@TruthIsLife7 I said theory because it seems to be accepted as such by some (including you) but you are correct, hypothesis is more fitting. Please point me towards what biblical philosophy has been used in sciences. I cannot seem to think of any. It is I that work with facts and you with assertions. Published assertions as they are, you are being dishonest in saying they are 100% true and agreed upon when they clearly are not.
@Razomir "It is I that work with facts and you with assertions." WOW what an arrogant statement and from someone who is more ignorant than any religious fundie I've ever talked to. "Please point me towards what biblical philosophy has been used in sciences" There's your problem. You NEED someone else to point you. Why can't you point yourself? So NO you don't work with any facts.
@Razomir "It is I that work with facts and you with assertions." WOW what an arrogant statement and from someone who is more ignorant than any religious fundie I've ever talked to. "Please point me towards what biblical philosophy has been used in sciences" There's your problem. You NEED someone else to point you. Why can't you point yourself? So NO you don't work with any facts.
@Razomir …science had almost no practical applications. A religious imperative to study nature provided almost the only reason to bother doing it. It's no surprise that so many scientific pioneers were devout men: Johannes Kepler, Sir Isaac Newton, Joseph Priestley, Michael Faraday, Georg Mendel, and James Clerk Maxwell, to name just a few.” wwwDOTpatheosDOTcom/Resources/Additional-Resources/Science-and-Christianity-Can-Get-On-Better-Than-You-Think-James-Hannam-04-14-2011
@coolgreyoneabby It's precisely because I KNOW better that I can't be an atheist :).Carl Sagan put it simply, "An atheist has to know a lot more than I know."
Real science follows the weight of evidence even though there might be some hard/unanswered questions, anomalies, etc.&I can point to many examples of this. The weight of evidence is MASSIVELY in favor of God, Christianity and creation science. Atheism doesn't have a prayer, pardon the pun, in terms of evidence(I know what's coming ;).
@coolgreyoneabby Creation science’s hypotheses have been confirmed time after time&ALL scientists agree that concepts it pioneered are indisputably scientific&100% true. If an expanding universe&biogenesis alone are true (just 2 testable claims of 100s that Bible science made 1000s of years ago), creation has strong scientific evidence, by the normal rules of science. Why don't scientists know about the billions of confirmations of 100s of Bible science claims (some you can see on my site)?
@TruthIsLife7 See, it is claims like these that make me think you are not being sincere about being a professor. You couldnt possibly believe what you justy said in good faith if you are aiming for objectivity. Not only is it not 100%, it is actually a laughable matter in the scientific community as it directly opposes evolution. Steven Hawking and Richard Dawkins are just two of the most dominant in their fields that would disagree 100% with you.
@Razomir "Not only is it not 100%, it is actually a laughable matter in the scientific community as it directly opposes evolution" Ad populum logical fallacy. The scientific community is an ass. As proven by the nonsense of claiming evolution to be scientific.
@JackSShit Be careful about condemning the scientific community. There are some jerks..but many VERY smart and sincere people. Some agree there is serious bias in some areas. Some are naive.
@TruthIsLife7 I understand. But if you look at the whole of it science is killing us and has killed more than it has saved. The more science and technology grow the more enslaved we become. Eventually we'll have no freedom. The problem of science separated from religion is that now science has no ethics and no morality.
@JackSShit It's far far more important to separate atheism from government than it is to separate religion from government. I agree. But, science is just a tool like a knife. How it's used depends on the morality of people using it and it's been used to save literally billions of lives, esp. in combination with Christianity. Norman Borlaug alone, a strong Christian, won the Nobel peace prize for using science and creationist levels of evolution to save 1 billion lives.
@JackSShit WRONG WRONG AND WRONG. It is science that gave us modern medicine, vaccines, organ transplants, clean water, refrigeration to keep food from spoiling, fertilizers to increase food production, identification of natural poisons, decreased infant mortality, increased life expectancy, increased food safety, increased food transport capabilities, reduced methods of spreading infectious disease. Religion would still have you praying for your health like the 14th century.
@JackSShit If you think your God is so loving, powerful, helpful, forgiving, and omnipotent please pray for one of our wounded servicemen to regrow a leg, arm or eye. As soon as that happens, call me, Then I'll buy your religious superstition myths.
@Razomir "Steven Hawking and Richard Dawkins are just two of the most dominant in their fields that would disagree 100% with you" I just have to laugh at that. Another logical fallacy. Those are two mixed up individuals. Don't use them as a resource if you want credibility.
@JackSShit Of course, because they dont fit what your limited intellect allows you to believe I will omit two of the world's most intelligent scientist? Laughable...
@Razomir "Of course, because they dont fit what your limited intellect" HAR HAR HAR
SOOooo, when Dawkins said aliens must have done it that fits your open-minded intellect? HAR HAR HAR HAR That's just super. You're really a smart guy. I just couldn't tell until now. HAR HAR HAR HAR ROFL ROFL
@Razomir Historically the consensus view is ALWAYS WRONG. Consensus is an ad populum argument. Science is about ONE investigator proving the consensus wrong. It's always been that way. AND WHEN a scientist finds some new discovery the consensus is always there to destroy him if they can. They are a lying, jealous bunch.
@JackSShit Razomir REALLY doesn't know much about scientific evidence.U know more. I have a part time job of editing articles for journals. But, sometimes the consensus is wrong, but not always.
@TruthIsLife7 What you are trying to do has become blatantly obvious. You are one of those theists that can no longer believe religion alone and thus are trying to bridge it with the indesputable advances of science. You are willing to lie, skew data and take things out of context in the process. That behavior has been well documented though I had never before met with one exhibiting it. If you are indeed a professor, you are an absolute disgrace to the title.
@Razomir "If you are indeed a professor, you are an absolute disgrace to the title" I've been reading your bullshit. You're the jackass in this rodeo. OH NOW you'll get all upset because a Christian just insulted you. Some of your own medicine for a change.
1) Governments ban religion in public schools (due to church-state concerns)
2) Many scientists have an a priori bias&ban evidence for creation.
‘Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic.’ Kansas State University immunologist Scott Todd, correspondence to Nature 401(6752):423, 30 Sept. 1999.
3) Most pastors aren't scientists and so don't teach the evidence in churches.
@Razomir Btw, I didn't anywhere say Christianity was the only factor in improving life, health, science, etc. There are others. But, in some very important areas, it was Christianity almost exclusively that laid the foundations and made all future progress possible.
@TruthIsLife7 Incorrect. Christianity had nothing to do with laying the foundations other than being the dominant religion at the time that those foundations were made. Second, there has indeed been good evidence of a flood, but saying this was the biblical flood has also been refuted on numerous occasions. About the book you mention, it is a narrative not a defininng scientific study. Just a proposed theory and I will explain to you where your error lies (tbc)
@Razomir "Christianity had nothing to do with laying the foundations other than being the dominant religion at the time that those foundations were made" Your ignorance abounds.
@TruthIsLife7 relieiogn was in fact the first form of science in that it sought to provide explanation for our world. But as our understanding advanced it became obsolete in that role and instead turned into a method of control in the face of the church. You make a grave error in thinking that a scientific breakthrough was made by a religious person that ties the two together. In fact many such scientists were supposedly religious only to avoid persecution. And the others...
@Razomir "In fact many such scientists were supposedly religious only to avoid persecution. And the others..." Sorry to have to say this, but OH BULLSHIT
@Razomir "But as our understanding advanced it became obsolete in that role and instead turned into a method of control in the face of the church" No, it came into conflict with lying, fraud, and hoaxes all perpetrated by atheist science. If you don't think so google evolution fraud. Google evolution fraud and what do you get? 13,200,000 hits of evolution fraud, hoaxes, and fakes. Google creation fraud and what do you get? You get 415,000 EVOLUTION frauds, hoaxes, and fakes.
@TruthIsLife7 ...usually separated their scientific theories from their personal belief. That doesnt mean religion paved the way for science anymore than if say Einstein was a fan of say lord of the rings, that meant Tolkien's work paved the wave for general relativity. Another error is you speaking of natural philosophy and comparing it to modern science.Philosophy is the critical thinking and reflecting upon ideas that sets the standards for modern sciences but in itself isnt one
@TruthIsLife7 There is a reason philosophy usually goes along with "of ####" as dsiciplines differ. There is no religion of science or religion of philosophy for example. The book makes an interesting though false claim. I will read through it but it's premise is incorrect. Much like saying capitalism paved the way for quantum theory, and even that would be more correct because of the funding possibilities, Having two processes be contemporary does not tie them together.
@Razomir Dr. Silvestru, Ph.D in geology from ‘Babes-Bolyai’ University in Cluj, Romania is a world authority on the geology of caves, published 41 scientific papers & 3 books&was for years the head scientist at the world’s first Speleological Institute. His seminar is probably the best summary of the vast evidence for a global flood (but there are many other scientists who agree)
watch?v=L-BaMAt4dnE (Start at 36:00. ~54:00 deals with how catastrophic plate tectonics supports the global flood).
@coolgreyoneabby If you want to talk about totally irrational claims, look no further than abiogenesis. All forms of it ranging from the spontaneous generation form which the hardcore creationist Pasteur debunked as pseudoscience to the present have been falsified or failed.
@TruthIsLife7 Then what is your conspiracy theory as to why evolution is accepted by mainstream science like Dro Prothero while Creationism is rejected?
@Razomir Just one of the many sources I used was Dr. Hannam who has a Ph.d. in the history of science and recently published, “The Genesis of Science: How the Christian Middle Ages Launched the Scientific Revolution” which is based on his research +highly regarded academic work by the world’s leading historians of medieval science such as David Lindberg, Edward Grant, William A Wallace, Alan Debus, John North, Lynn Thorndike, Anneliese Maier and Lynn White.
@coolgreyoneabby It has been very positively reviewed: “Well-researched and hugely enjoyable”. New Scientist “It is engaging, informative and I heartily recommend it.” says Ruth Francis, Head of Press for Nature
@Razomir You obviously have not read the site, because if you had, you would realize that the claim is not about all Christians, only those who follow Biblical health principles (although the head of the non-religious Blue Zones states that research shows that just going to church adds 4-14 years to life). I also gave links to peer reviewed studies at the NIH. No, I did not at ANY point use presuppositions. I treated the Bible as a hypothesis and then found confirmations from science.
@Razomir Do you really have any scientific background? You don't seem to understand that citing a peer reviewed study/experiment DOES constitute evidence. In order to test the Bible, you must look at what the Bible claims&then test them to see if they are validated.If you want to test punctuated equilibrium, you have to look at what it claims&then test that. You don't force claims on a theory that it doesn't make. I didn't use the Bible as evidence, but it can be in some situations.
Hey Renee, essentialism is a concept which derives from spiritual schools. For instance, Buddhism writes that we don't have an unchangeable self. We can't think of any particular atoms of our body as "ourself" since they all are different to the ones we had in our childhood. (This is part, briefly, of the ancient Buddhist teaching called dependent-origination).
@Razomir Neither I nor Dr. Hannam (of Cambridge) nor anyone I am citing are ignorant. Dr. Hannam's book is highly recommended by both Nature&New Scientist&you can see a bit on his site wwwDOTjameshannamDOTcom. The indisputable facts of history are that it was because Christians reasoned on Biblical principles that they out of 1000s of cultures built modern science. I'm working on a page explaining this. It's got some good material already:
@TruthIsLife7 You are not ignorant. You are STAGGERINGLY ignorant. You cherrypick a few facts (the minority, I might add) and state them as indisputable truth. Well it doesnt work that way. Also your information is very much false. Christians building modern science? Like how they DIDNT oppose the switch from geocentrism to heliocentrism and didnt persecute it's supporters? Wishful thinking doesnt change the facts. You really need to do better than that. Better yet, read a book.
@coolgreyoneabby Still with your delusions. Bible science has never ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, EVER been just "God did it". That's a lie on the level of saying the holocaust never happened. Many scholars in the history of science agree that a Christian philosophy was VERY helpful to doing science. And FYI, the diseases in the middle ages were only stopped when the scientists and doctors gave up& they started following the laws of quarantine given in the Bible. This is an indisputable fact.
@coolgreyoneabby This is the main way "God did it' science worked in history, by realizing nature was intelligently designed & because it is, it's worthy of study. Dr. Henry F. "Fritz" Schaefer, five-time Nobel Prize nominee, world-renowned chemist writes, "The significance and joy in my science comes in...discovering something new and saying to myself, 'So that's how God did it!' My goal is to understand a little corner of God's plan." --U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 23, 1991.
@TruthIsLife7 Wow you are ignorant...You keep writing and writing and every next post is just more misinformation or delusional assertions. For some reason you compare ancient and undeveloped "science" with god, but how about comparing it to today's situation? Also please explain to me what it is that you understand by "bible science"? I am very curious. Considering how the religious establishment condemned scientific research it is hard to believe you just said what you did...
@Razomir Biblical scientific concepts were written simply so all could understand the essentials for a good life&follow them easily. Yet, no contemporary culture of that time even remotely matched what these ancients laid out for health, not for 1000s of years. Even today, people who follow Bible principles live ~10 years longer,&this is confirmed by 100s of peer reviewed studies AND reported by NatGeo, NIH, Blue Zones, etc.See also my Bible health science playlist videos 2-7¬es.
@TruthIsLife7 I am sorry to say but that is not a view that the NIH in particular does (or would ever) get behind. I cannot really believe someone dabbling in such amazingly abstract terms believes he is presenting an argument! People who follow the bible live 10 years longer? Based on what?? Divine support through prayer? Come on, you need to do a lot better than that if you are going to argue with me or any other sane person for that matter.
@Razomir You have obviously not gone to the link at all. I DO have NUMEROUS references there from the sources I claim. Stop claiming that you are willing to read unless you actually go&do it. I am a professor&have taught at both secular&Christian schools. I also read the equivalent of ~100+ books a year.
The site is NOT done yet..There are 40+ specific health principles that contribute to many health benefits (not just longer life) and 100s of peer reviewed studies back that up.
@TruthIsLife7 Then you are a disgrace as a professor. I am in the academic circles as well and I find your claims to be quite false. I did read through your site and I find it laughable. You keep claiming one must not have presuppositions, yet you derive all your evidence from the bible and claim objectivity. Also, saying there is evidence and not presenting any is highschool level reasoning. IF there was evidence this debate would be unneeded. Sadly for you, there isnt.Just claims
@TruthIsLife7 One more thing, I tried to look up some of your claims about the prolonged life spans of christians. Do you really not realize how biased those numbers are? You split christians (I.E. most of america) vs everyone else and that includes poverty stricken muslim/3rd world countries and you attribute it all to christianity. So I have a question. Since christianity has been on the decline, why has there been no drop of life longevity as should be if you are correct?
@TruthIsLife7 You teach? It is as obvious as it can be that you have exactly zero science background. Peer review means peer review by scientists, not your peers of Creationists who believe in a 900 year old man who built a giant wooden boat for 2 of every "kind" of animal.
@coolgreyoneabby Wrong again. While I am not a professional scientist, I have taken courses in philosophical biology which required reading works in the history of science such as Dr. Kuhn's seminal work, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions", "The Mismeasure of Man" by Dr. Stephen Gould of Harvard+many other science classes. Recently I read "Your Inner Fish" by Neil Shubin. I cite many scientists with Ph.ds. in science fields, Christian, creationists and non-religious.
@Razomir Dr. Hannam has a Ph.d in the history of science from Cambridge and summarizes what most in the field agree on. It is ignorant to say people like him are ignorant.
Not only does NIH agree with what I say, Adventist Health Study-2 was recently awarded $5.5 million from National Institutes of Health to continue the studies on why the Adventist diet, which is based on the Bible, makes them the longest living people in America.
@TruthIsLife7 Many scientists including Einstein casually referred to nature as "God". as in Einstein's famous quote, "God does not play dice with the universe" but he was also known to openly reject your idea of a personal God. In any case, your religion has you trapped in your own bubble of delusional beliefs. Thank all that is good that others have rejected your lazy useless and dangerous belief system in search of a proper understanding of reality. Me, Feb 15, 2012.
@coolgreyoneabby Yes, I know Einstein wasn't a Christian (largely due to propaganda that kept people ignorant of what most historians of science agree on today). But he was angry at people thinking he was atheists. He was quite friendly to ID.
Take a bit of time to get cured of propaganda here. And if you read and follow facts there, I guarantee it will give you MANY benefits, in THIS life.
@TruthIsLife7 WRONG Einstein wasn't a Christian because we was Jewish you moron! Creationism: Advertising our stupidity for all the world to see. Razomir is correct, You really aren't very bright. Let me guess: No college science degree, you believe in the talking snake and a 900 year old man who built an ark with animals loaded 2x2. You vote Republican, watch Fox News and think Sean Hannity is a patriot. Pretty much nailed that one right?
@coolgreyoneabby "You vote Republican, watch Fox News &think Sean Hannity..."
--
ROFLLLLL!! I literally fell out of my chair laughing at your prejudice. I campaigned for Obama, despise Fox political news as largely a propaganda source, and can't stand Hannity, Beck although once in a while they do have a few things right. John Stewart is usually more accurate than they are.
Um, I always scored in the top 1-5% in the nation on national tests in school ;). Einstein wasn't a religious Jew.
@coolgreyoneabby "in search of a proper understanding of reality. Me, Feb 15, 2012" Reality? Aren't you one of those who believe that wolf-like creatures turned into whales, dinos turned into birds, and monkeys turned into humans? AND YOU talk about someone else's reality? HAR HAR HAR
@JackSShit Sorry! Contrary to Creationists often repeated misconceptions about evolution, evolution does NOT claim that any animal "turns into" any other animal. Successive generations eventually evolve into new species. Big difference. No evolutionists claims that humans evolved from monkeys. That is misconception #2. Species A "turning into" species B is very different from having a common ancestor. Creationist: "Evolution claims your cousin turns into you". You are wrong.
@coolgreyoneabby I don't have any misconceptions about evolution. I know more about it than you do from your stupid answer. "evolution does NOT claim that any animal "turns into" any other animal" OH YES IT DOES. You don't understand evolution. Do you know what gradualism is? Apparently not. It's about One species turning into another species. i.e., dinos turning into birds. cont.
Dr. Weisenberg, evolution 'scientist' said, "Given enough time you can turn anything into anything. Yeah, it's true. It's true. Alright, I have proof, it's proven. You have the fossil record, shows all of the steps." Evolve == turn into idiot boy.
BIG FAIL and thanks for proving you know nothing about evolution.
@JackSShit The major problem Creationists have is the inability to explain the fossil record from a creationists viewpoint. Creationists are used to being able to make shit up and have their sheeple just believe them, no questions asked. Science is a different world, There needs to be evidence and peer review, not dogmatic religious opinion. How is the fossil record explained from the creationists viewpoint? Did God have several creation points along millions of years or what?
@coolgreyoneabby "The major problem Creationists have is the inability to explain the fossil record from a creationists viewpoint" OK, well let's have an evotard explain it from an evotarded view. OK? From Gould, “I want to argue that the ‘sudden’ appearance of species in the fossil record and our failure to note subsequent evolutionary change within them is the proper prediction of evolutionary theory as we understand it."
@JackSShit Typical Creationists quote mine used many times only again advertizes your complete lack of the most basic science education. Gould was referring to "Punctuated Equilibrium". Look that one up and READ it, creatard.
@coolgreyoneabby AND don't be yelling quote mine if you can't prove it is. But don't bother anyway because I'll just have to embarrass you. I have him saying that in more than one way. Plus other scientists say the same thing. NOW I am going to continue rubbing it in your face.
@JackSShit Only in Biology do the uneducated unwashed masses who have been taught that a magic sky daddy created everything by incantation think they are more well informed on our origins that scientists who study origins for a living. Doesn't matter how loud you yell, how often you repeat your myths, evolution is a fact. You just don't know it. The funny part is how proud you are of your willful ignorance. Very sad. you should have stayed awake in science class or gone to college.
@coolgreyoneabby Actually in college I learned to believe in evolution since my religion doesn't forbid believing in it. Your religion won't let you believe anything else. btw your "quote mine" plea is bogus. He wasn't referring to PE. He was telling why he had to make up PE to cover up the fossil record's proving OF creation.
@JackSShit You are 0 for 4. Evolution has nothing to do with Atheism, Evolution has to do with science and evidence. Religious myths stem from lack of evidence and so they made shit up. Watch Ken Miller: Evolution explain to you why evolution is true. He is a Christian, unlike you, an educated one. You can remain willfully ignorant or you can watch one of your fellow Christians try to educate you. I don't really care. You can stay dumb for the rest of your life for all I care.
@coolgreyoneabby "You are 0 for 4" So you just make up your own scores? HAR HAR HAR "Evolution has to do with science and evidence" What science and what evidence. It's nothing more than false assumptions, circular logic, and bogus science. To be scientific a theory must be repeatable. Go look at the vid 7 postulates of evolution. Not one of them is repeatable and therefore evolution is not scientific. All the evidence points to CREATION.
@JackSShit There is more to Google than pictures. Try using it to research "Human Evolution" and READ it. The first entry WIKI will do just fine, so does TalkOrigins. Your superstitious religiously based dogmatic Creationists websites is where you went wrong. Read what science says and learn instead of being the loud ignorant fool.
@crockshit, You can't prove anything in science? Who told you that shit you moron? They failed to tell you that they were talking about atheistic science, not real science. And that's true, atheism CANNOT prove ANYTHING. The Falsifiability Program is controversial at best. Popper argued that science can never prove things to be true, but it can prove them to be false. He's full of shit just like you. Did Columbus prove the world to be round or not? What is crime investigation all about?
JackSShit 5 days ago
You remind me of Jodie Arias. Thats creepier then shit.
RayHolly69 6 days ago in playlist Uploaded videos
This has been flagged as spam show
@coolgreyoneabby To cure yourself of 1 of many delusions,take 10 minutes and watch these, BOTH from non-Christian science research sites:
wwwDOTtedDOTcom/talks/dan_buettner_how_to_live_to_be_100DOThtml (11:30-end)
google: nationalgeographic longevity, 1st link, click sights&sounds
They reason they are not taught in school is because of a priori fallacious bias.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
Comment removed
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
Only on the subject of evolution do the scientifically illiterate think they know more than the scientists who study the subject for a living.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@coolgreyoneabby "Only on the subject of evolution do the scientifically illiterate think they know more than the scientists who study the subject for a living" I certainly know more than you about it. REPEAT: the common ancestor HAD to have looked like a monkey. So there you have it. Monkeys turning into humans. hahahahaha You belief some outrageously ridiculous shit. Calling it scientific doesn't make it scientific even if scientists agree. LMAOROFL@YOU. hahahahahaaa
JackSShit 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby Hey asshole, do a google image search for "human evolution" and see what you get!!! HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
JackSShit 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby "A common ancestor to Human and monkeys was not a monkey and it does not matter what it looked like, It was not a monkey" HAR HAR HAR It DOES matter what it looked like? And here you are claiming it was not a monkey with no proof whatsoever and YOU have the audacity to yell "Advertizing your ignorance again" so it could have looked like a zebra? hahahaha This is proof of what bullshitters you evotarded liars really are. I AM ROFL HAR HAR HAR
JackSShit 1 week ago
You would be the best teacher ever in schools
demonatwork1979 1 week ago
Comment removed
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby Oh, this has got to be one of the most irrational comments yet. In science, when you want to test which theory is working, the scientists don't constantly intervene, disrupting causes and effect relationships. It's similar with God and Satan who seldom intervene to interrupt cause and effect in this war about whose government is best. God HAS done miracles including ones like that in a few cases..but generally allows cause and effect to go naturally.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby Third on the below..to ALL human suffering in the past, all atheism can say is, "Tough cookies. Wrong place, wrong time and all that jazz. See ya and I wouldn't wanna be ya."
Christianity was the main entity that massively improved human rights for the entire world...atheism did precisely NOTHING for 1000s of years. Most importantly, it is ONLY GOD that has power to right the injustices of the past and He promises He will do that when He comes.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby It's even more irrational though. We have numerous well documented benefits from following Bible principles (decades of extra life, much greater happiness, better marriages, the founding of modern science (which would not exist without Christianity), the pioneering of human rights (which also would mostly not exist without Christianity) and so much more. And you have the audacity to say, show me an arm growing back or I'm going to ignore all this.That's just stupid. I'm sorry.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 What I have seen in the data is exactly the opposite. Non theists live exactly as long as theists, double blind clinical studies show prayer does exactly zero for any health benefits, and non theists and theists have the same divorce rates. Looks like wishful thinking on your part. Modern science came about despite religion not because of it, Just ask Galileo who was imprisoned by Christians for the rest of his life for saying the earth revolved around the sun.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7As far as morality, there is one metric you could look up, Non theists are UNDER represented as a % of the overall population in prison. Seems that Christianity and prison sentences go together. And also incorrect on the suffering of people, It is theists, non theists and science that works together to provide clean water, vaccines, safe foods, etc. Theists will "pray for you" which is a way to do next to nothing and pretend you are helping.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby What you see is irrelevant. It's the research that matters. But, you don't really care about that do you. National Geographic and the National Institute of Health, Blue Zones, etc. are just idiots in your eyes. Btw, NIH just awarded $5 million dollars to study why Christians who follow Bible principles (I did NOT say all Christians...most don't follow Bible health laws..only those who follow Bible principles, such as the Adventists). Learn to read.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TruthIsLife7 Oh My God that was the most inane statement I have read. ( Yes, I can read and I'm not a member of your 7th day superstition) "NIH just awarded $5 million dollars to study why Christians who follow Bible principles learn to read" Here is the answer: People learn to read regardless of what superstition you teach them. Therefore SDA will learn to read along with everyone else. I'll send the bill directly to you.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@Razomir "The bible claims God's favorite creation must be in the center of all things aka geocentrism."
I'll send you $50 if you can find a verse in the Bible claiming this.
" An expanding universe is NOT a biblical concept."
Baloney. ~15 verses in the Bible speak of a stretching of the heavens (Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 45:12; Isaiah 51:13, etc.) which for ancient minds and vocabulary in a different language is about as close as you can get to referring to an expanding universe.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir "Creation science has NO evidence."
This comment shows that either:
A) You don't have the slightest comprehension of what scientific evidence is or
B) You don't have a clue what creation theory teaches (yes it is a theory by any definition of the word).
Here's a 13 point definition of the concept with a few links:
wwwDOTtruth-is-lifeDOTorg/CreationScienceDOThtml
Creation science predicted many things LONG before science confirmed them. This always counts as evidence.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 What it shows is that you are out of your league in this debate. You continually point towards that site and I have looked through it. You have no real evidence of any value. Merely assumptions, half-truths and skewed facts. Creation science is a joke. You have no basic understanding of scientific methodology, experimentation, fallibility, repeatibility and you are saying I dont have a clue? You have GOT to be joking.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir Let me make it clear.There are admirable people in all philosophies, including atheism&I have atheist friends.But,officially atheist states caused over 100,000,000 deaths in just 1 century, far more deaths than all religions with state power have caused in ALL ALL history including the most despicable religions. Religious states had creeds that restricted them some (and most of their violence violated the creeds). Atheists have none,so power was used to destroy what atheism despised.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Look if you are going to fabricate facts this conversation is over. Atheist states?Do not confuse say Stalin being atheist for him killing for atheistic reasons.So let me make it clear to you, religion is the leading cause of deaths through the course of history and THAT is the fact.You have an incredibly wrong and incompetent understanding of what atheism is. It is NOT an ideology.I suggest you look it up before you argue with atheists lest you be considered ignorant
Razomir 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir No, they didn't at all persecute people for their science & they were rare events..and I already quoted an atheist scholar who ridiculed the idea that we could compare those things where ~2-10,000 people died (tragic) to states where atheism was the official view and murdered 1-200 million. Really incomparable...and the persecution of science that supports the Bible by atheistic establishments is far greater now than anything even the Catholic church ever did.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
Comment removed
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir I didn't confuse science and natural philosophy or Christianity. Christianity does not deal with all science or all philosophy, but it most certainly does contain some.
I have almost as much disagreement with the Catholic church on some points as with atheism to which it is a sister in setting aside instructions God for man made traditions. And it's largely because it accepted Aristotle as nearly infallible(&Galileo's belligerent nature) that it put Galileo on trial.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir By cherry picking,I mean you pick out the ONE scientist who was put on trial for his scientific views in centuries&ignore the billions/trillions of dollars the church directly invested in science in many areas during those centuries funding literally 1000s of people trying to advance science,many of them priests&scientists at the same time,doing work directly based on the Bible's philosophy&specific scientific concepts&atheists cherry pick a couple house arrest "persecutions"? Come ON.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Arguing with you seems pointless. Could you provide any proof of those billions and trillions of "dollars" (Especially considering the currency at the time) because this claim is quite contrary to the facts I have.And once again I repeat, living in a time when religion was dominant, being a scientist does not make you a biblical scientist.What do you think the inquisition was?Seeking out heretics and herecy was usually what scientists practiced as it opposed canon law
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir gotta go teach a class..but will be back later.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 I actually find it quite amusing (although pointless) that you keep claiming atheism supresses information in a day and age where the internet is available to all. And after, you go on to cherry pick information which might support your claims, completely ignoring context and objectivity then accuse others of cherry picking? I suppose that would be the only way you could keep going with your claims but if you want to be taken seriously you need to do better than tat.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir Find me one public school that teaches the truth that Christianity pioneered far more human rights movements than anything else and the reason why as Stanford's Rene Girard explains.
Find me ONE public school that teaches the Big Bang confirms the Bible's predictions of an expanding universe. Find me one public school that teaches that following the Bible's health principles adds 10+ years to life. All these are indisputably fact. Censorship is VERY real, and not just of Christianity.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 The bible claims god's favorite creation must be in the center of all things aka geocentrism. An explanding universe is NOT a biblical concept. Hell it was said god resided in heaven because it was written in a time that people couldnt fly. Now god is supposedly beyond the big bang. That is called a god of the gaps argument and it is just as pitiful. Public schools dont teach these things because they are gross misinformation. That is not lack of objectivity.
Razomir 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 The reason they don't teach that bunk is that it is all bullshit spread by a dogmatic religion that makes shit up. How much more clear can we be?
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@coolgreyoneabby "The reason they don't teach that bunk is that it is all bullshit spread by a dogmatic religion that makes shit up" I believe we just discovered WHO has the dogmatic religion, and WHO makes shit up. YOU! hahahaa ROFL Your claims that creationists are relying on religion is just a strawman that you hide behind because as I have just shown, what you believe in is hoax. A funny hoax, but a hoax just the same.
PWNED
JackSShit 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby Now tell me some more funny shit that you evotards believe. Dinos into birds and wolf-like creatures into whales? HAR HAR HAR
"Given enough time you can turn anything into anything. Yeah, it's true. It's true. Alright, I have proof, it's proven." HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
It's embarrassing isn't it, when your phony bullshit is EXPOSED for what it really is--PHONY BULLSHIT
OWNED
JackSShit 1 week ago
@Razomir There is censorship in history, biology, economics, linguistics &other fields. My mentor has his Ph.d. from the University of Illinois and has done pioneering research in using L1 glosses to increase language acquisition. The renowned David Nunan listened to his lecture and couldn't find any fault in his methods or evidence, but just said, "I know you're wrong."He's had had incredible difficulty publishing in USA(but not so much Korea) because of prejudice against using L1.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 And all that proves what exactly? What has this field of linguistics have to do with the debate at hand? The example proves nothing especially without providing further details. Even the greatest minds err at times but again I ask what is the relevance here?
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir "What do you think the inquisition was?" You know nothing about the Inquisition. FACT: the heresy suppressed by the Inquistion killed more people than the Inquistion. Do you even know the name of the heresy? No you don't. You have been brainwashed. Nobody in the Inquisition was executed for what they believed, but for what they did. The trial records still exist. Google Jenny Gibbons. She is a witch who completely clears the Catholic Church of witch hunts and murder of innocent people.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@Razomir, "TruthIsLife7, Arguing with you seems pointless" Of course, he's right and you're wrong. Simple as that. I've been reading your comments and you don't have a single fact straight, not one. You have been taught what the govt wants you to be taught. You follow the company line exactly. You know jack about science or history. It's been censored from everything. Again, it's called brainwashing.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 No cherry picking really. The witch hunts and the inquisition are largely known for persecuting people who engaged in scientific research and naming them heretics.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir No, they didn't at all persecute people for their scientists and they were rare events..and I already quoted an atheist scholar who ridiculed the idea that we could compare those things were ~2-10,000 people died (tragic) to states where atheism was the official view and murdered 1-200 million. Really incomparable...and the persecution of science that supports the Bible by atheistic establishments is far greater now than anything even the Catholic church ever did.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 I am sorry to say you have gone into the realm of fantasies now. Atheists persecuting science? Are you purposefully playing the role of a fool or do you actually believe that? Deaths casued by religios disagreements and conflicts outnumber ANY other cause in the course of human history, where there are none (or hardly any) deaths in the name of atheism. Are you misunderstandong what those terms mean?
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir There are some atheists who have grown up in churches whose pastors didn't have any training or knowledge in science that thought it was rational to leave Christianity because they never had any information about the massive facts that support Christianity. I can respect those. But, many left because as Aldous Huxley said, they hated the restrictions. But, biblical restrictions are no less valuable than the scientific in promoting progress&millions have died because of ignoring them.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 I am begining to think I am wasting my time with you. I dont mean to come off as rude but when someone takes up this much of my time and doesnt have a basic understanding of the concepts and terminology he/she uses in the debate I find it utterly pointless to continue. You are one of those people that do not argue in order to reach truth but instead to prove a point at all costs. Those costs include cherry picking and blatant lies.
Razomir 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TruthIsLife7 I am begining to think I am wasting my time with you. I dont mean to come off as rude but when someone takes up this much of my time and doesnt have a basic understanding of the concepts and terminology he/she uses in the debate I find it utterly pointless to continue. You are one of those people that do not argue in order to reach truth but instead to prove a point at all costs. Those costs include cherry picking and blatant lies.
Razomir 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 And because I dont mean to outright call you a liar I will say you are simply delusional because your data is trully incorrect and when it is correct as far as the numbers it is grossly taken out of context. You may not believe it but not only do you take things out of context, you actually build your entire argument on such fallicies. Arguing with you feels like I am arguing with a fan of the sword and magic ganre who claims there have been thousands...
Razomir 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 ... of unicorn sightings but the mass conspiracy of "the man" is lying about it to keep pro-unicornists down. And that orcs are naturally a proof for alien life on jupiter and DNA means "dont need atheism" which naturally proves religion is right. I have humored you so far but you have failed to provide any argumentation that isnt out of place or out of context. Conspiracy theories while interesting and captivating can hardly be called truth just because you like them
Razomir 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Ignorance is not a crime, certainly, but it also doesnt grant you respect in a debate. Your notions of atheism, science and scientific method are incompetent. Please refine your understandings for the sake of future debates. Now I suggest we both spare any further waste of time here. I am done with you and will no longer aknowledge your responses as I believe I have given you enough time which I feel you have wasted trying to show fallicies are fact. Goodbye.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir You clearly don't have a clue about the scientific method or what counts as evidence. When a hypothesis makes predictions and they are confirmed, that IS ALWAYS COUNTED AS EVIDENCE and Bible science has done that countless times. There is observational science, inferential/forensic science, explanatory science, etc. and I can give you specific examples of all of these both from secular research and from Bible scientists. You are against the basic methods of science at present.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 RE: Deut 20: 16-17, 1 Sam 15: 3 This isn't war, this is what you do when taking over real estate! This is how the USA came to be; by eliminating the barbaric, native population and then eventually practicing slavery (which is why the USA became rich so quickly). And now (your) reaping the benefits of that. We did the same thing in Canada, as was done in Australia by the British. Who do you think populated New Mexico before-hand? You have to weed a garden for the plants to flourish.
puffrooster 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir "The witch hunts and the inquisition are largely known for persecuting people who engaged in scientific research and naming them heretics." Yes, cherry picking. That was an outright lie. And you think you're NOT brainwashed?
JackSShit 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Even supposing you are right (which I dont) religion declines yet science exponentially progresses. Kinda shows there is no correlation, in fact quite the opposite.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir Religion is exploding in some countries (Russia and China for example). But, when you suppress facts from people's knowledge...more and more will leave that view even if it has evidence. If I banned all knowledge of universal common descent, which has less evidence than creation science does, from schools and science journals..in a decade or two, very few people would believe it. Suppression of facts and evidence is the main environment in which atheism thrives.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Let us get one thing straight. Creation science has NO evidence. Only speculation and hypothesies. In fact it has been solidly refuted on many occasons. Atheism is ALL about spreading logic and reason. Atheists dont go door to door trying to convert people, the religious groups do. As for Russia, you are taking things out of context YET AGAIN. That ëxplosion"is just due to people admitting what they were banned from saying before, not an actual growth of religion.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir I don't do cherry picking and I don't do taking out of context. I teach students to avoid logical fallacies like the plague. YT posts are very limited though, and to realize you've been taught propaganda usually takes a while before your eyes are opened.
Creation science predicted that functions would be found for vestigial organs and JunkDNA as well LONG before science found them. It has almost totally triumphed with vestigial organs and is doing the same with junkDNA.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 And we go back to what I said at the begining...WOW you are ignorant! noncoding DNA and vestigiality are some of the strongest points FOR evolution. That would be AGAINST creationism. If you can look at those example and claim they prove the exact opposite of what they really do, I have to say you either have your concepts mixed up or you are lacking in reason and/or intelligence in general...this trully is ridiculous.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir Of ~200 organs originally labeled vestigial ~100+ years ago, we know now that pretty much ALL have important function (and please don't put out the garbage of 2nd function for which you have ZERO evidence of 1st function). Papers are being published almost daily showing that junkDNA has important function and even evolutionists are admitting that this may be one of their biggest mistakes ever. Creationists predicted we would find function for nearly all junkDNA &are being vindicated.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir Of ~200 organs originally labeled vestigial ~100+ years ago, we know now that pretty much ALL have important function (and please don't put out the garbage of 2nd function for which you have ZERO evidence of 1st function). Papers are being published almost daily showing that junkDNA has important function and even evolutionists are admitting that this may be one of their biggest mistakes ever. Creationists predicted we would find function for nearly all junkDNA &are being vindicated.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir "religion declines yet science exponentially progresses" Apples and oranges. The Church is the guardian of true science. Atheists don't like true science and that's why we have nonsense like evolution being taught as fact. Modern science came directly out of the Church. It's now been hijacked by atheists so it is without morality OR truth. The purpose of real science is to find the truth. If the scientific method was actually applied to evolution, evolution fails immediately.
JackSShit 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TruthIsLife7 "that it put Galileo on trial" The atheists are big on consensus science. Funny how that the consensus of science was against Galileo, an overlooked fact. The main issue with Galileo was that he was claiming a fact without proof. The reason he was on trial was not for his science but for his theology. He suddenly thought he was a theologian. His house arrest can't really be called persecution especially if you define persecution the way atheists do persecution.
JackSShit 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TruthIsLife7 "that it put Galileo on trial" The atheists are big on consensus science. Funny how that the consensus of science was against Galileo, an overlooked fact. The main issue with Galileo was that he was claiming a fact without proof. The reason he was on trial was not for his science but for his theology. He suddenly thought he was a theologian. His house arrest can't really be called persecution especially if you define persecution the way atheists do persecution.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@Razomir Where did I deny the geocentrism mistake??? Dr. Hannam deals with it. That's cherry picking to the extreme though. Like 100s of scientists, Kepler thought:
“Since we astronomers are priests of the most high God with respect to the book of nature, it behooves us not to think of the praise of our abilities, but above all of the glory of God. . . . Enough for me is the honor of guarding, with my discovery, the door of God's temple, in which Copernicus serves before the high altar.”
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir A narrative book only?Stop lying.
“Well-researched&hugely enjoyable”. New Scientist
“It is engaging, informative and I heartily recommend it.” says Ruth Francis, Head of Press for Nature
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
Comment removed
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir I just quoted Dr. Hannam below on a fact of history..how can you not know that most of the pioneers of science did their science DIRECTLY because they thought God created the world and so it was an honor and privilege to study His creation. There are MAJOR philosophical foundations from the Bible and many specific ones as well. I've put some on my site and more are coming soon. I work with documented facts & I have listed many references, you haven't.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 No no, you work with assertions. A narrative book and a personal site doesnt equal evidence. Who lied to you that science pioneers worked in the name of god?
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir "Who lied to you that science pioneers worked in the name of god?" Who lied to YOU that it didn't?
JackSShit 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 A fact of history is the persecution of proponents of heliocentrism by the church. Yet you conveniently omit such examples and claim fantasies to be fact. They arent.
Razomir 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir "A fact of history is the persecution of proponents of heliocentrism by the church" SEE? That's not a fact and you don't know what you're talking about. Who told you that and have you researched it to find out exactly what happened. NO you haven't, you just accepted it because it fit with your world view. Which so far, from what I am reading is complete fantasy. Yet you accuse others of fantasy. I suggest you do some REAL research.
JackSShit 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir "A fact of history is the persecution of proponents of heliocentrism by the church" FACT? Have you read the Church's side of this? No you haven't. Try that. Maybe you'll find a fact for a change. You, my friend, are a perfect example of brainwashed with no facts. CLASSIC
JackSShit 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir Do you disagree that biogenesis and and an expanding universe are 100% true? If so, I'd like to hear why. (in saying 100%, I am fully aware that this depends on certain assumptions such as our perceptions being real/accurate, etc. but I'm using this in the sense that as much as anything else is true, understanding these assumptions, it's as true as gravity being real. Last I heard, neither Dawkins nor Hawkings have shown any evidence contradicting biogenesis or an expanding universe.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
Comment removed
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir I know the genetic fallacy allegation well. But, it is no more valid than saying Darwin had nothing to do with the development of evolution in modern times. Many of the greatest scientists explicitly use biblical philosophy or specific biblical scientific concepts in their scientific work. Many historians of science agree. You've done nothing to disprove them at all except post opinions that don't match historical fact&you obviously haven’t read much of my site or you say these things.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir If your position were correct, then modern science should have popped up in many other of the 1000s of cultures around the world that have existed. It did not, which falsifies your position. There are specific philosophical requirements for modern science to be established and flourish and these are not found in hardly any other culture besides Christianity.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Again, please do not put philosophy and christianity in the same category. Philosophical requirements - certainly. Christian requirements, not by a longshot. As I explained to you already, the development of philosophy and theology occurred simultaneously but eventually deviated. And it is from the philosophical basis that modern sciences came to be, not the theology. In fact the bible directly contradicst certain scientific discoveries. So what is biblical science?
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir "In fact the bible directly contradicst certain scientific discoveries" Proof that all you have are assertions and no facts.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Modern science works based on funding on which religion has no bearing. 90% of scientists are atheist and science advances as religion declines. What does that tell you?
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir "science advances as religion declines" What does that tell me? Well it tells me why science has become so corrupt. Atheism is actually the most vehement organism of murder in the history of the world. Russia promoted atheism by murder for 70 killing at least 160 million. It has now failed and the Russian govt is building churches as we speak. So after the war you're going to see the demise of atheism. It's a complete failure in the practical sense as well as the intellectual.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@JackSShit I suggest you look up some actual data before making such misinformed claims. You are just another example of a person who hasnt got the first clue what atheism is.
Razomir 1 week ago
Comment removed
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir No, Dr. Hannam's book is NOT just a proposed theory (you should use the term hypothesis since theories have confirmations and you are arguing against that).
Dr. Hannam who is himself an evolutionist, not a creationist, explains:
“…Christians believe that God created the world and ordained the laws of nature. He is the guarantor of constant and rational laws, such that investigating the world can consequently be a religious duty. It's easy to forget that, until the 19th century,
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 I said theory because it seems to be accepted as such by some (including you) but you are correct, hypothesis is more fitting. Please point me towards what biblical philosophy has been used in sciences. I cannot seem to think of any. It is I that work with facts and you with assertions. Published assertions as they are, you are being dishonest in saying they are 100% true and agreed upon when they clearly are not.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir "It is I that work with facts and you with assertions." WOW what an arrogant statement and from someone who is more ignorant than any religious fundie I've ever talked to. "Please point me towards what biblical philosophy has been used in sciences" There's your problem. You NEED someone else to point you. Why can't you point yourself? So NO you don't work with any facts.
JackSShit 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir "It is I that work with facts and you with assertions." WOW what an arrogant statement and from someone who is more ignorant than any religious fundie I've ever talked to. "Please point me towards what biblical philosophy has been used in sciences" There's your problem. You NEED someone else to point you. Why can't you point yourself? So NO you don't work with any facts.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@Razomir …science had almost no practical applications. A religious imperative to study nature provided almost the only reason to bother doing it. It's no surprise that so many scientific pioneers were devout men: Johannes Kepler, Sir Isaac Newton, Joseph Priestley, Michael Faraday, Georg Mendel, and James Clerk Maxwell, to name just a few.” wwwDOTpatheosDOTcom/Resources/Additional-Resources/Science-and-Christianity-Can-Get-On-Better-Than-You-Think-James-Hannam-04-14-2011
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@coolgreyoneabby It's precisely because I KNOW better that I can't be an atheist :).Carl Sagan put it simply, "An atheist has to know a lot more than I know."
Real science follows the weight of evidence even though there might be some hard/unanswered questions, anomalies, etc.&I can point to many examples of this. The weight of evidence is MASSIVELY in favor of God, Christianity and creation science. Atheism doesn't have a prayer, pardon the pun, in terms of evidence(I know what's coming ;).
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
Comment removed
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby Creation science’s hypotheses have been confirmed time after time&ALL scientists agree that concepts it pioneered are indisputably scientific&100% true. If an expanding universe&biogenesis alone are true (just 2 testable claims of 100s that Bible science made 1000s of years ago), creation has strong scientific evidence, by the normal rules of science. Why don't scientists know about the billions of confirmations of 100s of Bible science claims (some you can see on my site)?
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 See, it is claims like these that make me think you are not being sincere about being a professor. You couldnt possibly believe what you justy said in good faith if you are aiming for objectivity. Not only is it not 100%, it is actually a laughable matter in the scientific community as it directly opposes evolution. Steven Hawking and Richard Dawkins are just two of the most dominant in their fields that would disagree 100% with you.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir "Not only is it not 100%, it is actually a laughable matter in the scientific community as it directly opposes evolution" Ad populum logical fallacy. The scientific community is an ass. As proven by the nonsense of claiming evolution to be scientific.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@JackSShit Be careful about condemning the scientific community. There are some jerks..but many VERY smart and sincere people. Some agree there is serious bias in some areas. Some are naive.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 I understand. But if you look at the whole of it science is killing us and has killed more than it has saved. The more science and technology grow the more enslaved we become. Eventually we'll have no freedom. The problem of science separated from religion is that now science has no ethics and no morality.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@JackSShit It's far far more important to separate atheism from government than it is to separate religion from government. I agree. But, science is just a tool like a knife. How it's used depends on the morality of people using it and it's been used to save literally billions of lives, esp. in combination with Christianity. Norman Borlaug alone, a strong Christian, won the Nobel peace prize for using science and creationist levels of evolution to save 1 billion lives.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@JackSShit WRONG WRONG AND WRONG. It is science that gave us modern medicine, vaccines, organ transplants, clean water, refrigeration to keep food from spoiling, fertilizers to increase food production, identification of natural poisons, decreased infant mortality, increased life expectancy, increased food safety, increased food transport capabilities, reduced methods of spreading infectious disease. Religion would still have you praying for your health like the 14th century.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@JackSShit If you think your God is so loving, powerful, helpful, forgiving, and omnipotent please pray for one of our wounded servicemen to regrow a leg, arm or eye. As soon as that happens, call me, Then I'll buy your religious superstition myths.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@Razomir "Steven Hawking and Richard Dawkins are just two of the most dominant in their fields that would disagree 100% with you" I just have to laugh at that. Another logical fallacy. Those are two mixed up individuals. Don't use them as a resource if you want credibility.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@JackSShit Of course, because they dont fit what your limited intellect allows you to believe I will omit two of the world's most intelligent scientist? Laughable...
Razomir 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir "Of course, because they dont fit what your limited intellect" HAR HAR HAR
SOOooo, when Dawkins said aliens must have done it that fits your open-minded intellect? HAR HAR HAR HAR That's just super. You're really a smart guy. I just couldn't tell until now. HAR HAR HAR HAR ROFL ROFL
JackSShit 1 week ago
@Razomir Historically the consensus view is ALWAYS WRONG. Consensus is an ad populum argument. Science is about ONE investigator proving the consensus wrong. It's always been that way. AND WHEN a scientist finds some new discovery the consensus is always there to destroy him if they can. They are a lying, jealous bunch.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@JackSShit Razomir REALLY doesn't know much about scientific evidence.U know more. I have a part time job of editing articles for journals. But, sometimes the consensus is wrong, but not always.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 What you are trying to do has become blatantly obvious. You are one of those theists that can no longer believe religion alone and thus are trying to bridge it with the indesputable advances of science. You are willing to lie, skew data and take things out of context in the process. That behavior has been well documented though I had never before met with one exhibiting it. If you are indeed a professor, you are an absolute disgrace to the title.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir "If you are indeed a professor, you are an absolute disgrace to the title" I've been reading your bullshit. You're the jackass in this rodeo. OH NOW you'll get all upset because a Christian just insulted you. Some of your own medicine for a change.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby 3 reasons:
1) Governments ban religion in public schools (due to church-state concerns)
2) Many scientists have an a priori bias&ban evidence for creation.
‘Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic.’ Kansas State University immunologist Scott Todd, correspondence to Nature 401(6752):423, 30 Sept. 1999.
3) Most pastors aren't scientists and so don't teach the evidence in churches.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir Btw, I didn't anywhere say Christianity was the only factor in improving life, health, science, etc. There are others. But, in some very important areas, it was Christianity almost exclusively that laid the foundations and made all future progress possible.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Incorrect. Christianity had nothing to do with laying the foundations other than being the dominant religion at the time that those foundations were made. Second, there has indeed been good evidence of a flood, but saying this was the biblical flood has also been refuted on numerous occasions. About the book you mention, it is a narrative not a defininng scientific study. Just a proposed theory and I will explain to you where your error lies (tbc)
Razomir 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir "Christianity had nothing to do with laying the foundations other than being the dominant religion at the time that those foundations were made" Your ignorance abounds.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 relieiogn was in fact the first form of science in that it sought to provide explanation for our world. But as our understanding advanced it became obsolete in that role and instead turned into a method of control in the face of the church. You make a grave error in thinking that a scientific breakthrough was made by a religious person that ties the two together. In fact many such scientists were supposedly religious only to avoid persecution. And the others...
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir "In fact many such scientists were supposedly religious only to avoid persecution. And the others..." Sorry to have to say this, but OH BULLSHIT
JackSShit 1 week ago
@JackSShit You are welcome to say it but you will be wrong saying it. MANY such cases have been documented. Wishing it away doesnt change the fact.
Razomir 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir "But as our understanding advanced it became obsolete in that role and instead turned into a method of control in the face of the church" No, it came into conflict with lying, fraud, and hoaxes all perpetrated by atheist science. If you don't think so google evolution fraud. Google evolution fraud and what do you get? 13,200,000 hits of evolution fraud, hoaxes, and fakes. Google creation fraud and what do you get? You get 415,000 EVOLUTION frauds, hoaxes, and fakes.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 ...usually separated their scientific theories from their personal belief. That doesnt mean religion paved the way for science anymore than if say Einstein was a fan of say lord of the rings, that meant Tolkien's work paved the wave for general relativity. Another error is you speaking of natural philosophy and comparing it to modern science.Philosophy is the critical thinking and reflecting upon ideas that sets the standards for modern sciences but in itself isnt one
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir I hope you're not a professor. If so I can see why students today are so dumbed down.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 There is a reason philosophy usually goes along with "of ####" as dsiciplines differ. There is no religion of science or religion of philosophy for example. The book makes an interesting though false claim. I will read through it but it's premise is incorrect. Much like saying capitalism paved the way for quantum theory, and even that would be more correct because of the funding possibilities, Having two processes be contemporary does not tie them together.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir Dr. Silvestru, Ph.D in geology from ‘Babes-Bolyai’ University in Cluj, Romania is a world authority on the geology of caves, published 41 scientific papers & 3 books&was for years the head scientist at the world’s first Speleological Institute. His seminar is probably the best summary of the vast evidence for a global flood (but there are many other scientists who agree)
watch?v=L-BaMAt4dnE (Start at 36:00. ~54:00 deals with how catastrophic plate tectonics supports the global flood).
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby If you want to talk about totally irrational claims, look no further than abiogenesis. All forms of it ranging from the spontaneous generation form which the hardcore creationist Pasteur debunked as pseudoscience to the present have been falsified or failed.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Then what is your conspiracy theory as to why evolution is accepted by mainstream science like Dro Prothero while Creationism is rejected?
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@Razomir Just one of the many sources I used was Dr. Hannam who has a Ph.d. in the history of science and recently published, “The Genesis of Science: How the Christian Middle Ages Launched the Scientific Revolution” which is based on his research +highly regarded academic work by the world’s leading historians of medieval science such as David Lindberg, Edward Grant, William A Wallace, Alan Debus, John North, Lynn Thorndike, Anneliese Maier and Lynn White.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby It has been very positively reviewed: “Well-researched and hugely enjoyable”. New Scientist “It is engaging, informative and I heartily recommend it.” says Ruth Francis, Head of Press for Nature
You can read about it here:
blogsDOTnatureDOTcom/soapboxscience/2011/05/18/science-owes-much-to-both-christianity-and-the-middle-ages
And btw, I have cite 100s scientists on all sides&peer reviewed research.I also edit peer reviewed papers for doctors I work with.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir You obviously have not read the site, because if you had, you would realize that the claim is not about all Christians, only those who follow Biblical health principles (although the head of the non-religious Blue Zones states that research shows that just going to church adds 4-14 years to life). I also gave links to peer reviewed studies at the NIH. No, I did not at ANY point use presuppositions. I treated the Bible as a hypothesis and then found confirmations from science.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir Do you really have any scientific background? You don't seem to understand that citing a peer reviewed study/experiment DOES constitute evidence. In order to test the Bible, you must look at what the Bible claims&then test them to see if they are validated.If you want to test punctuated equilibrium, you have to look at what it claims&then test that. You don't force claims on a theory that it doesn't make. I didn't use the Bible as evidence, but it can be in some situations.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
Hey Renee, essentialism is a concept which derives from spiritual schools. For instance, Buddhism writes that we don't have an unchangeable self. We can't think of any particular atoms of our body as "ourself" since they all are different to the ones we had in our childhood. (This is part, briefly, of the ancient Buddhist teaching called dependent-origination).
smartgenes 1 week ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Comment removed
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@Razomir Neither I nor Dr. Hannam (of Cambridge) nor anyone I am citing are ignorant. Dr. Hannam's book is highly recommended by both Nature&New Scientist&you can see a bit on his site wwwDOTjameshannamDOTcom. The indisputable facts of history are that it was because Christians reasoned on Biblical principles that they out of 1000s of cultures built modern science. I'm working on a page explaining this. It's got some good material already:
wwwDOTtruth-is-lifeDOTorg/ScientificEvidenceDOThtml
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 You are not ignorant. You are STAGGERINGLY ignorant. You cherrypick a few facts (the minority, I might add) and state them as indisputable truth. Well it doesnt work that way. Also your information is very much false. Christians building modern science? Like how they DIDNT oppose the switch from geocentrism to heliocentrism and didnt persecute it's supporters? Wishful thinking doesnt change the facts. You really need to do better than that. Better yet, read a book.
Razomir 1 week ago
renee i love u
RGOC2012 1 week ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@coolgreyoneabby Still with your delusions. Bible science has never ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, EVER been just "God did it". That's a lie on the level of saying the holocaust never happened. Many scholars in the history of science agree that a Christian philosophy was VERY helpful to doing science. And FYI, the diseases in the middle ages were only stopped when the scientists and doctors gave up& they started following the laws of quarantine given in the Bible. This is an indisputable fact.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby This is the main way "God did it' science worked in history, by realizing nature was intelligently designed & because it is, it's worthy of study. Dr. Henry F. "Fritz" Schaefer, five-time Nobel Prize nominee, world-renowned chemist writes, "The significance and joy in my science comes in...discovering something new and saying to myself, 'So that's how God did it!' My goal is to understand a little corner of God's plan." --U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 23, 1991.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Wow you are ignorant...You keep writing and writing and every next post is just more misinformation or delusional assertions. For some reason you compare ancient and undeveloped "science" with god, but how about comparing it to today's situation? Also please explain to me what it is that you understand by "bible science"? I am very curious. Considering how the religious establishment condemned scientific research it is hard to believe you just said what you did...
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir Biblical scientific concepts were written simply so all could understand the essentials for a good life&follow them easily. Yet, no contemporary culture of that time even remotely matched what these ancients laid out for health, not for 1000s of years. Even today, people who follow Bible principles live ~10 years longer,&this is confirmed by 100s of peer reviewed studies AND reported by NatGeo, NIH, Blue Zones, etc.See also my Bible health science playlist videos 2-7¬es.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 I am sorry to say but that is not a view that the NIH in particular does (or would ever) get behind. I cannot really believe someone dabbling in such amazingly abstract terms believes he is presenting an argument! People who follow the bible live 10 years longer? Based on what?? Divine support through prayer? Come on, you need to do a lot better than that if you are going to argue with me or any other sane person for that matter.
Razomir 1 week ago
@Razomir You have obviously not gone to the link at all. I DO have NUMEROUS references there from the sources I claim. Stop claiming that you are willing to read unless you actually go&do it. I am a professor&have taught at both secular&Christian schools. I also read the equivalent of ~100+ books a year.
The site is NOT done yet..There are 40+ specific health principles that contribute to many health benefits (not just longer life) and 100s of peer reviewed studies back that up.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Then you are a disgrace as a professor. I am in the academic circles as well and I find your claims to be quite false. I did read through your site and I find it laughable. You keep claiming one must not have presuppositions, yet you derive all your evidence from the bible and claim objectivity. Also, saying there is evidence and not presenting any is highschool level reasoning. IF there was evidence this debate would be unneeded. Sadly for you, there isnt.Just claims
Razomir 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 One more thing, I tried to look up some of your claims about the prolonged life spans of christians. Do you really not realize how biased those numbers are? You split christians (I.E. most of america) vs everyone else and that includes poverty stricken muslim/3rd world countries and you attribute it all to christianity. So I have a question. Since christianity has been on the decline, why has there been no drop of life longevity as should be if you are correct?
Razomir 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 You teach? It is as obvious as it can be that you have exactly zero science background. Peer review means peer review by scientists, not your peers of Creationists who believe in a 900 year old man who built a giant wooden boat for 2 of every "kind" of animal.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby Wrong again. While I am not a professional scientist, I have taken courses in philosophical biology which required reading works in the history of science such as Dr. Kuhn's seminal work, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions", "The Mismeasure of Man" by Dr. Stephen Gould of Harvard+many other science classes. Recently I read "Your Inner Fish" by Neil Shubin. I cite many scientists with Ph.ds. in science fields, Christian, creationists and non-religious.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
Comment removed
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Razomir Dr. Hannam has a Ph.d in the history of science from Cambridge and summarizes what most in the field agree on. It is ignorant to say people like him are ignorant.
Not only does NIH agree with what I say, Adventist Health Study-2 was recently awarded $5.5 million from National Institutes of Health to continue the studies on why the Adventist diet, which is based on the Bible, makes them the longest living people in America.
wwwDOTlluDOTedu/public-health/health/nihawardDOTpage
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Many scientists including Einstein casually referred to nature as "God". as in Einstein's famous quote, "God does not play dice with the universe" but he was also known to openly reject your idea of a personal God. In any case, your religion has you trapped in your own bubble of delusional beliefs. Thank all that is good that others have rejected your lazy useless and dangerous belief system in search of a proper understanding of reality. Me, Feb 15, 2012.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby Yes, I know Einstein wasn't a Christian (largely due to propaganda that kept people ignorant of what most historians of science agree on today). But he was angry at people thinking he was atheists. He was quite friendly to ID.
Take a bit of time to get cured of propaganda here. And if you read and follow facts there, I guarantee it will give you MANY benefits, in THIS life.
wwwDOTtruth-is-lifeDOTorg/ScientificEvidenceDOThtml
Lies about laziness and danger are propaganda.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 WRONG Einstein wasn't a Christian because we was Jewish you moron! Creationism: Advertising our stupidity for all the world to see. Razomir is correct, You really aren't very bright. Let me guess: No college science degree, you believe in the talking snake and a 900 year old man who built an ark with animals loaded 2x2. You vote Republican, watch Fox News and think Sean Hannity is a patriot. Pretty much nailed that one right?
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby "You vote Republican, watch Fox News &think Sean Hannity..."
--
ROFLLLLL!! I literally fell out of my chair laughing at your prejudice. I campaigned for Obama, despise Fox political news as largely a propaganda source, and can't stand Hannity, Beck although once in a while they do have a few things right. John Stewart is usually more accurate than they are.
Um, I always scored in the top 1-5% in the nation on national tests in school ;). Einstein wasn't a religious Jew.
TruthIsLife7 1 week ago
@TruthIsLife7 Then you have no excuse and should know better.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby "in search of a proper understanding of reality. Me, Feb 15, 2012" Reality? Aren't you one of those who believe that wolf-like creatures turned into whales, dinos turned into birds, and monkeys turned into humans? AND YOU talk about someone else's reality? HAR HAR HAR
JackSShit 1 week ago
@JackSShit Sorry! Contrary to Creationists often repeated misconceptions about evolution, evolution does NOT claim that any animal "turns into" any other animal. Successive generations eventually evolve into new species. Big difference. No evolutionists claims that humans evolved from monkeys. That is misconception #2. Species A "turning into" species B is very different from having a common ancestor. Creationist: "Evolution claims your cousin turns into you". You are wrong.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby I don't have any misconceptions about evolution. I know more about it than you do from your stupid answer. "evolution does NOT claim that any animal "turns into" any other animal" OH YES IT DOES. You don't understand evolution. Do you know what gradualism is? Apparently not. It's about One species turning into another species. i.e., dinos turning into birds. cont.
JackSShit 1 week ago
Dr. Weisenberg, evolution 'scientist' said, "Given enough time you can turn anything into anything. Yeah, it's true. It's true. Alright, I have proof, it's proven. You have the fossil record, shows all of the steps." Evolve == turn into idiot boy.
BIG FAIL and thanks for proving you know nothing about evolution.
HAR HAR HAR
JackSShit 1 week ago
@JackSShit The major problem Creationists have is the inability to explain the fossil record from a creationists viewpoint. Creationists are used to being able to make shit up and have their sheeple just believe them, no questions asked. Science is a different world, There needs to be evidence and peer review, not dogmatic religious opinion. How is the fossil record explained from the creationists viewpoint? Did God have several creation points along millions of years or what?
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby "The major problem Creationists have is the inability to explain the fossil record from a creationists viewpoint" OK, well let's have an evotard explain it from an evotarded view. OK? From Gould, “I want to argue that the ‘sudden’ appearance of species in the fossil record and our failure to note subsequent evolutionary change within them is the proper prediction of evolutionary theory as we understand it."
DID YOU GRASP WHAT HE SAID?
JackSShit 1 week ago
@JackSShit Typical Creationists quote mine used many times only again advertizes your complete lack of the most basic science education. Gould was referring to "Punctuated Equilibrium". Look that one up and READ it, creatard.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby AND don't be yelling quote mine if you can't prove it is. But don't bother anyway because I'll just have to embarrass you. I have him saying that in more than one way. Plus other scientists say the same thing. NOW I am going to continue rubbing it in your face.
JackSShit 1 week ago
@JackSShit Only in Biology do the uneducated unwashed masses who have been taught that a magic sky daddy created everything by incantation think they are more well informed on our origins that scientists who study origins for a living. Doesn't matter how loud you yell, how often you repeat your myths, evolution is a fact. You just don't know it. The funny part is how proud you are of your willful ignorance. Very sad. you should have stayed awake in science class or gone to college.
coolgreyoneabby 1 week ago
@coolgreyoneabby Actually in college I learned to believe in evolution since my religion doesn't forbid believing in it. Your religion won't let you believe anything else. btw your "quote mine" plea is bogus. He wasn't referring to PE. He was telling why he had to make up PE to cover up the fossil record's proving OF creation.
YOU LOSE
JackSShit 6 days ago
@coolgreyoneabby NOPE, evolution is the creation myth of atheists.
YOU LOSE AGAIN
JackSShit 6 days ago
@JackSShit You are 0 for 4. Evolution has nothing to do with Atheism, Evolution has to do with science and evidence. Religious myths stem from lack of evidence and so they made shit up. Watch Ken Miller: Evolution explain to you why evolution is true. He is a Christian, unlike you, an educated one. You can remain willfully ignorant or you can watch one of your fellow Christians try to educate you. I don't really care. You can stay dumb for the rest of your life for all I care.
coolgreyoneabby 6 days ago
@coolgreyoneabby "You are 0 for 4" So you just make up your own scores? HAR HAR HAR "Evolution has to do with science and evidence" What science and what evidence. It's nothing more than false assumptions, circular logic, and bogus science. To be scientific a theory must be repeatable. Go look at the vid 7 postulates of evolution. Not one of them is repeatable and therefore evolution is not scientific. All the evidence points to CREATION.
YOU LOSE
JackSShit 5 days ago
@coolgreyoneabby HEY DUMMASS did you do that google image search for "human evolution?" So dont' be telling anyone "willfully ignorant"
JackSShit 6 days ago
@JackSShit There is more to Google than pictures. Try using it to research "Human Evolution" and READ it. The first entry WIKI will do just fine, so does TalkOrigins. Your superstitious religiously based dogmatic Creationists websites is where you went wrong. Read what science says and learn instead of being the loud ignorant fool.
coolgreyoneabby 6 days ago