|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267
Dawg Talker
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267 |
Quote:
whose graduates include Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger,
I agree with the church. I wouldn't want my kid there either. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431 |
Quote:
if you wanna believe theories based on nonsense with no facts to back them, fine...
Flood that covers the whole world for 40 days then disappears ...check.
Powerful being that moves continents around like chess pieces ...check.
Immaculate conception ...check.
Parting the sea....check .
Reanimation ...check .
Humans living for hundreds of years ...check .
Looks kind of silly when condensed like that. Believe what you want but you look silly when you try and infuse facts into arguments like the ones mentioned above .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Interesting read... but I got a question. Quote:
Type I supernovae are a kind of exploding star that we think (well, we’re actually pretty sure) all explode in such a way that their absolute brightness can be determined, so, like Cepheids, their true distance can be found. And we can see them out for hundreds of millions of light years, which is really really far away.
If it's 100's of millions of light years away, how did they measure that? If light is the fastest thing we know, then sending any sort of measuring beam/pulse would not have returned yet, or will for a long long time.
Also, if that star blew up 1 million years ago, there's nothing there to measure anymore, just the light that is still streaming to earth.
if they have never seen or been to the edge of the universe, how can they determine it's expanding.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,537
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,537 |
Great questions. Quote:
If it's 100's of millions of light years away, how did they measure that? If light is the fastest thing we know, then sending any sort of measuring beam/pulse would not have returned yet, or will for a long long time.
Also, if that star blew up 1 million years ago, there's nothing there to measure anymore, just the light that is still streaming to earth.
Exactly.... when you look out at the sky, you're not only seeing how things look far away. You're seeing how they looked a long time ago. Let's say we're looking at a supernova that is 1,000 light years away. What we're seeing is light that left from the supernova explosion 1,000 years ago, and is just now reaching us. We don't send any signals out to anything in the sky, we just observe the light from all these events as they come to us.
Now, according to General Relativity, nothing (including light) can travel at faster than the speed of light in a vacuum. The famous thought experiment for this is as follows: Assume that for some random reason, the sun were to instantly disappear right now. For the next 8 minutes (the time it takes light to leave the sun and reach us), everybody on the earth would be completely unaware. LIght that had left the sun before it disappeared would continue to reach us, but moreover, gravitons that left the sun would continue to pull the earth in a circle. It is only 8 minutes later, that we would see the sun instantly disappear.
Quote:
if they have never seen or been to the edge of the universe, how can they determine it's expanding.
They use redshift. It's comparable to when you hear an ambulance approaching you. When the ambulance is coming towards you, the wail of the siren sounds higher than when the ambulance is racing away from you. This is because when the ambulance is moving towards the sound waves emitted by the ambulance are being compressed, becuase when the ambulance emits each wave, it is doing so from a little bit closer than before. When the ambulance is racing away from you, the opposite occurs. We hear this difference as a change in pitch.
The same is true for photons. Though they always travel at the speed of light (unlike sound), their frequency changes for sources that are moving towards or away from us. For sources that are moving towards us, the frequency becomes a little bit higher (on the visible spectrum this is a shift towards bluer light, and is thus called blueshifted). For sourcs that are moving away from us, visible photons are shifted towards the red side of the spectrum, and are thus called redshifted.
So how do we know what the photons are supposed to look like, so we can tell whether they are redshifted or blueshifted? Most atomic phenomena have very specific frequencies that they output photons at. An example of this is the yellow sodium lamps that are used on streets. They only emit photons with a wavelength 589.3 nm (and a corresponding frequency given by wavelength*frequency = speed of light). We know that certain atomic phenomena exist in all stars, and we look for the frequency of those emissions when they reach us.
The results are pretty cool. In the galaxy, some stars are moving towards us while others are moving away from us. The same is true for some of the closest galaxies. However, when we look out far enough, it turns out that everything is moving away from us. And even more spectacularly, things that are farthest away from us, are moving the away the fastest. When you plot the speed that something is moving away from us, as a function of how far it already is away from us, you get this extremely well tested plot:
http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/NatSci102/NatSci102/images/hubnew.gif
So this leads us to believe that the universe is actually stretching out everwhere. All objects are moving away from each other with a characteristic speed, which is given by the slope of the above line. The value ends up being ~80 km/s/Mpc.
~Lyuokdea
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,059
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,059 |
Quote:
I'm gonna respond to this thread before reading any other post.
This situation is essentially no different from the the one I just read about a West Point Grad who wants to be gay, out, and in the military.... with no culpability for his choices.
Lissen up, folks... IF YOU SIGN A CONTRACT, HONOR THE CONTRACT.
If you don't like the terms of the contract, walk away.
It is now, and always has been that simple.
whine, whine, whine.... I need 3 lbs. of cheese and a crate of crackers for a balanced tasting here...
Take the girl to Prom, get your diploma in the mail, and maybe get lucky on prom night.... chances are, the whole experience will be better for you than it will be for all the adults who are now sticking their dix inda mix.
"Can't we all just get along?"
You obviously haven't been reading the replies. If you had you wouldn't have bothered because this has become a typical argument on how stupid believers and non-believers are.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,059
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,059 |
Sorry Knight but I just can't buy into such a literal interpretation. I do believe in God but I don't buy into the 'Earth was made in 7 days' or the Earth is only 10,000 years old. Things like people being well over 100 years old sounds like true fiction.
I think the Old Testament is not to be taken literal at all. I do believe in Jesus and that he died for us. I won't debate my beliefs with those who think belittling faith is how you have a discussion.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Beyond that, I think religion is stupid,
That's fine, I think that believing all of this is a cosmic accident is stupid.
Quote:
I think our government is corrupt
Amen brother.
Quote:
and I think our population continually gets lazier and dumber.
Wouldn't have anything to do with its continually growing infatuation with self-indulgent needs like video games, drugs, rock and roll, sex, rap, designer clothes, government dependence, etc would it?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,667
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,667 |
Quote:
Wouldn't have anything to do with its continually growing infatuation with self-indulgent needs like video games, drugs, rock and roll, sex, rap, designer clothes, government dependence, etc would it?
You forgot football message boards. 
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg) gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
Quote:
You obviously haven't been reading the replies. If you had you wouldn't have bothered because this has become a typical argument on how stupid believers and non-believers are.
I'm looking at it as more of an educational experience 
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
Quote:
If it's 100's of millions of light years away, how did they measure that? If light is the fastest thing we know, then sending any sort of measuring beam/pulse would not have returned yet, or will for a long long time.
Why Ly said. But also, that's only for near earth objects.
For things like supernovae, you can use parallax but instead of using the earth as two reference points, you use other objects of known distance to help nail it down. For example, a supernova explodes, and three days later we see it light up a gas cloud that was near it. We knew the distance for the cloud, and since we have the light constant we can figure out the distance from the cloud to the supernova. The rest is geometry.
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
If it's 100's of millions of light years away, how did they measure that? If light is the fastest thing we know, then sending any sort of measuring beam/pulse would not have returned yet, or will for a long long time.
Why Ly said. But also, that's only for near earth objects.
For things like supernovae, you can use parallax but instead of using the earth as two reference points, you use other objects of known distance to help nail it down. For example, a supernova explodes, and three days later we see it light up a gas cloud that was near it. We knew the distance for the cloud, and since we have the light constant we can figure out the distance from the cloud to the supernova. The rest is geometry.
How did we know the distance of the cloud that's 50 million light years away?
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
Just a hypothetical
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,663
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,663 |
Pst....There is no cloud....It's all a hoax by the US government staged in Los Angeles somewhere in a super secret bunker....... 
Last edited by keys_bow_wow; 05/11/09 02:42 PM.
KeysDawg
The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. - Carl Sagan
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
I don't think religious people are stupid...I think they're taking part in a form of temporary insanity.
Over the years, I've found that people who are generally insecure about their beliefs will, rather than try to espouse their point of view and let others be as they may as someone secure would, instead go and bash everything that they don't agree with because they unconsciously attempt to bolster their own beliefs by tearing down the beliefs of others. They can't really help themselves and this is a prime example. It's sad, really.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960 |
Quote:
Frost, a senior at Heritage Christian School in northwest Ohio, agreed to the school's rules when he signed a statement of cooperation at the beginning of the year, principal Tim England said.
done and done.
President - Fort Collins Browns Backers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,925
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,925 |
Quote:
Quote:
I don't think religious people are stupid...I think they're taking part in a form of temporary insanity.
Over the years, I've found that people who are generally insecure about their beliefs will, rather than try to espouse their point of view and let others be as they may as someone secure would, instead go and bash everything that they don't agree with because they unconsciously attempt to bolster their own beliefs by tearing down the beliefs of others. They can't really help themselves and this is a prime example. It's sad, really.
Pretty much what I said earlier. It appears it is holding true.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,648
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,648 |
Quote:
Quote:
England acknowledged signing the form but warned Frost there would be consequences if he attended the dance. England then took the issue to a school committee made up of church members, who decided to threaten Frost with suspension.
So basically he signed the form, but the kid would be suspended if he actually went.
Perhaps the principal should have taken it to the committee BEFORE signing off on it.
The kid also could have been dishonest and just went to the dance without informing the school.
The kid did his due diligence, the principal did not. The principal should have given the kid the same courtesy he was given.
Would the outcome have been different? Probably not much, but at least the kid would have known absolutely the consequences of his actions ahead of time. It wouldn't have been a guessing game, thinking that he'd get a lecture or whatever. The principal could also have declined to sign off on the form as well.
Then again, what business is it of the school's what this kid does on his own time and not the school's dime?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Then again, what business is it of the school's what this kid does on his own time and not the school's dime?
Kids get suspended from sports teams all the time for stuff they do when not actually "in school"... this is no different.
I'm really curious as to the language of the school rules that the boy signed.. has that been posted? If so, I missed it. What exactly does it forbid?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,675
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,675 |
Anything that resembles fun 
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Flood that covers the whole world for 40 days then disappears ...check.
Powerful being that moves continents around like chess pieces ...check.
Immaculate conception ...check.
Parting the sea....check .
Reanimation ...check .
Humans living for hundreds of years ...check .
Looks kind of silly when condensed like that. Believe what you want but you look silly when you try and infuse facts into arguments like the ones mentioned above .
Sorry Ire, but it's no more silly than believing that there was some giant cloud of dust full of inorganic matter that exploded, reformed into solar systems and planets with pools of cosmic goo and under a gazillion to one shot, the exact right chemical make-up of proteins were close enough together to get somehow electrically charged to create "life".... but even if I can stretch my imagination to believe that happened, then I have to believe that that one cosmic accident that created this simplistic "life", over hundreds of millions of years, evolved into thousands of different species of plants and animals, which all live in this symbiotic environment and now we sit here as living breathing intelligent (well some of us) beings with all of the technology and advancement that we have... sorry, that sounds just as far fetched.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,537
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,537 |
Quote:
Flood that covers the whole world for 40 days then disappears ...check.
Powerful being that moves continents around like chess pieces ...check.
Immaculate conception ...check.
Parting the sea....check .
Reanimation ...check .
Humans living for hundreds of years ...check .
Looks kind of silly when condensed like that. Believe what you want but you look silly when you try and infuse facts into arguments like the ones mentioned above .
Quote:
Sorry Ire, but it's no more silly than believing that there was some giant cloud of dust full of inorganic matter that exploded, reformed into solar systems and planets with pools of cosmic goo and under a gazillion to one shot, the exact right chemical make-up of proteins were close enough together to get somehow electrically charged to create "life".... but even if I can stretch my imagination to believe that happened, then I have to believe that that one cosmic accident that created this simplistic "life", over hundreds of millions of years, evolved into thousands of different species of plants and animals, which all live in this symbiotic environment and now we sit here as living breathing intelligent (well some of us) beings with all of the technology and advancement that we have... sorry, that sounds just as far fetched.
I think both of these posts are missing the point somewhat. The question isn't "What sounds more probable?". The question is, "What do our observations tell us?". The best part about science is that we don't have to worry about belief, or what sounds silly. We only worry about what our observations of the world tell us. And over and over, they positively, definitely, and irrefutably tell us that the earth is ~4.5 billion years old, and that humans evolved from simpler forms of life, and that the universe is about ~13 billion years old, and continues to expand today.
The amount of evidence on the scientific side of this debate is so obscenely large, and so convincing, that the only way to believe the other side, is to define the Bible as absolute truth, and then determine that all other ideas are false by comparison.
~Lyuokdea
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
That's fine, I think that believing all of this is a cosmic accident is stupid.
And I would agree with you.
We have tapes of Kennedy getting killed and we can't figure that out...do we really think we're going to have a concrete answer as to where we came from?
The problem is, everyone finds a concrete answer they agree with, and then argue any point that doesn't mesh with their own personal idea.
Quote:
Wouldn't have anything to do with its continually growing infatuation with self-indulgent needs like video games, drugs, rock and roll, sex, rap, designer clothes, government dependence, etc would it?
It has a lot to do with these things...but not these things specifically. Sex isn't destroying our society, nor is video games, drugs, dependence on gov't, or rock and roll...what's flawing us is the excess and the manner in which we use them.
I could start a whole thread on what is ailing us...but one other point is the idea that buying things or having things make us better and happier people. Hell, we could pin this whole economic crisis onto things of that nature, Veblen-esque stuff. 'Well, they have a new car/pool/house/jet ski/woman, so I need one that's equal or better'.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
Quote:
I don't think religious people are stupid...I think they're taking part in a form of temporary insanity.
Over the years, I've found that people who are generally insecure about their beliefs will, rather than try to espouse their point of view and let others be as they may as someone secure would, instead go and bash everything that they don't agree with because they unconsciously attempt to bolster their own beliefs by tearing down the beliefs of others. They can't really help themselves and this is a prime example. It's sad, really.
It's not about tearing down the beliefs of others. Can you address any of Lyuokdea's points? He isn't bashing anybody, but I'd be very impressed if you could refute any of his posts. I think it would be a good learning experience for all participating.
FWIW I think it might come off as 'tearing down the beliefs of others' because when you go beyond faith and try to use science to back creationism and what not, you run into such staunch and strong contradictory evidence. Not to open up another debate, but look at creationism and noah's ark vs the theory of evolution.
If one were to merely recite some facts pertaining to the theory of evolution, it might appear that someone is bashing creationism. But in reality the two theories are so directly at odds with each other, and when one has a mountain of evidence in its favor and the other a mountain of people with faith backing them, it comes off exactly how you might expect it to come off.
Just using but one example here. Perhaps we could debate whether the earth is flat or a sphere instead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Perhaps we could debate whether the earth is flat or a sphere instead.
Obviously flat.
Now who's going to come along and 'bash' my beliefs? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,925
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,925 |
Quote:
Quote:
Perhaps we could debate whether the earth is flat or a sphere instead.
Obviously flat.
Now who's going to come along and 'bash' my beliefs?
That the earth is round is indisputable. It is provable, and has been proven.
Believe what you want. I won't call you stupid. Which is more than I can say for how you respond to people.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Believe what you want. I won't call you stupid. Which is more than I can say for how you respond to people.
If I honestly claimed that the world was flat, I would expect to be called stupid.
When someone claims that they believe in talking snakes and two of every animal loaded onto the Arc...they should expect their claim to be called stupid.
Literal belief in the Bible is irrational and illogical. I don't know of a nicer way to word that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,925
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,925 |
So, I'm stupid for believing as I do (in christianity, that is), I'm irrational, and illogical. Got it. (there's more to the Bible, AND to christianity specifically, than "a talking snake", by the way). But, at least I know what you think of me. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,744
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,744 |
Quote:
I guess you could reduce this to a philosophical question of "what was time before the big bang", but there is quite a bit of evidence that the universe began about 13 billion years ago.
That's basically what I was implying..even before the Big Bang there was time. Even though the universe began 13 billion years time existed before that as time is nothing more than moments passing. Even if there was nothing time still passed until the big bang. So even though the universe maybe 13 billion years old time has existed before that.
Quote:
No. Depending on the relative strengths of the currently unknown baryonic (matter), dark matter, and dark energy components in the total energy density of the universe, a universe with a beginning could either recollapse (big crunch), expand at a constant speed, or continue to expand at an increasing rate. Currently the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, and it is believed that it will continue to do so.
I wasn't talking about matter was I? And did you forget to mention the big rip theory? Obviously if you accept the Big Bang, surely you must accept the Big Rip theory also? Even so, neither matter as they have no effect on time as you can have time with no matter. Everything that has a beginning will have an end therefore if you saying that the universe will continue forever then it never had a beginning even if you believe in the Big Bang all of the matter that was required for the universe was pre-existing in some form.
Quote:
Kind of true, but your it's quite a bit more nuanced than that. I think the two effects that you are pointing at are:
1.) Violations of simultaneity - If two observers A and B are in different spatial locations and both observe two events, they may not agree on which order the events occurred in. (For realistic observer velocities, you have to be talking about events which occurred at more or less the same time. There are stringent mathematical laws about how close the events must be.
2.) Time dilation - Observers which are in motion relative to each other, will both see the other's clock running slower than their own.
~Lyuokdea
Actually it wasn't partially true, it is completely true. You said exactly what I said but I said it in more simple form. Just because it was simple doesn't mean it was only partially true. Please define the Theory of Relatively in one sentence.....I bet you come up with a definition eerily similar to mine. Besides I didn't want to write a dissertation on this board so I provided a layman's version. Completely off subject but one of my favorite quotes:
When the Solution is simple, God is Answering.
Go Browns!!![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/BrowniePoints/AndersonSnowPic.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,537
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,537 |
Quote:
That's basically what I was implying..even before the Big Bang there was time. Even though the universe began 13 billion years time existed before that as time is nothing more than moments passing. Even if there was nothing time still passed until the big bang. So even though the universe maybe 13 billion years old time has existed before that.
Remember that, according to the laws of general relativity, space and time are inseparable. Also, due to observations of Hubble's law, it is space itself which is thought to be expanding. It is not simply an explosion of matter through a static space-time. Thus you can't really say definitively that time existed before the big bang. We are far away from understanding what existed before the big bang, and serious questions remain as to how answerable the question is.
Quote:
I wasn't talking about matter was I? And did you forget to mention the big rip theory? Obviously if you accept the Big Bang, surely you must accept the Big Rip theory also?
The two theories are not connected. The Big Rip theory is one of the many hypotheses which could explain the final state of the universe. The Big Rip theory requires a very specific formulation for dark energy, which we have thus far been unable to test. There is no prediction of the Big Rip Theory which has yet been experimentally tested (unlike the big bang), and thus at this point it is simply theoretical conjecture.
Quote:
Even so, neither matter as they have no effect on time as you can have time with no matter.
Yes, but remember that the existence of matter affects the propagation of time through its gravitational effect on space time.
Quote:
Everything that has a beginning will have an end
I see no reason for that to be necessarily true. A ray is one (mathematical) example of a structure which has a beginning, but no end.
Quote:
therefore if you saying that the universe will continue forever then it never had a beginning even if you believe in the Big Bang all of the matter that was required for the universe was pre-existing in some form.
It doesn't have to be. For instance, a positron-electron pair can be created from pure energy even though neither existed in the first place. This phenomena is critical to quantum field theory. I have absolutely no evidence either way, on whether the energy/matter in the universe existed before the big bang. As of yet, we do not have an experimental method to test that.
Quote:
Actually it wasn't partially true, it is completely true. You said exactly what I said but I said it in more simple form. Just because it was simple doesn't mean it was only partially true. Please define the Theory of Relatively in one sentence.....I bet you come up with a definition eerily similar to mine. Besides I didn't want to write a dissertation on this board so I provided a layman's version.
My apologies....i was just trying to clarify what you said, which I thought was a little vague, and could be misinterpreted. I wasn't trying to pick at your knowledge of the subject.
~Lyuokdea
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 05/12/09 12:59 AM.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,537
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,537 |
I've spent quite a bit of time the last few days trying to reason things through. I think my overriding point is this:
While scientific investigation cannot logically prove the existence of god, the entirety of scientific observation is incompatible with the literal interpretation of the Bible. The Young Earth Creation viewpoint cannot be observationally proven, because it is observationally wrong. There are, as far as I can tell, only two self consistent viewpoints that remain. I'll try to describe each in as unbiased a manner as possible:
1.) Accept the reality of scientific observation - Using these observations, you would come to many conclusions (e.g. the earth is ~13 billion years old, men evolved from apes etc.). The result of these findings would force you to reject a literal interpretation of the Bible. However, this is still compatible with the existence of god (defined here as an omnipotent intelligence), because logical processes cannot evaluate the existence of something that is beyond our logical comprehension.
2.) Accept a literal interpretation of the Bible - Using this as your standard of truth, you would come to many conclusions (e.g. The earth is ~6000 years old, all living humans came from a common pair of ancestors etc), which are incompatible with scientific observation. Thus you would have to reject the reality of scientific observation.
There is only one way (at least that I can currently surmise) to reject the reality of scientific observation. That is to decide that God (note, he is now a necessity in this theory), has designed the universe such that scientific observation would repeitively find the same in correct answers. This could be done in two ways:
a.) God simply begins the universe 6000 years ago, but sets the initial conditions such that the universe appears (to every possible observation) to be about 13 billion years old at the time of creation (e.g. the universe was created with things that "appear" to be 100,000 year old fossils, and things that "appear" to be billion year old stars). Then all scientific observations would self-consistently determine these wrong answers are indeed correct.
b.) God continuously and interactively tricks all scientific observations by sending incorrect data to "trick" the worlds scientists that their theories are correct, when in fact the world is quite different from what scientists think they observe.
Both of these viewpoints are, as far as I can tell, logically self-consistent. A person who believes in scientific observation as well as the existence of God could simply believe that the Bible is written in metaphorical language. And a person who believes in the literal interpretation of the Bible could believe that God creates the illusion of scientific objectivity as a way to test the faith of his true believers.
Thus my main point, I believe, is that a literal interpretation of the Bible is inherently inconsistent with the reality of scientific observation, and thus it is impossible to believe both. Which you choose, is purely a matter of belief, because neither can be logically proven, from within their own framework.
~Lyuokdea
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,675
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,675 |
Quote:
Quote:
Perhaps we could debate whether the earth is flat or a sphere instead.
Obviously flat.
Now who's going to come along and 'bash' my beliefs?
Fess up Phil you really do think the world is flat 
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,675
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,675 |
All that typing yet you still can't answer this simple question. Which came first the chicken or the egg?
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
lyuokdea....that was a very well though out post... science is certainly cool...and i certainly believe that amazing as science is there had to be some thought that went into it all... i certainly believe in a higher power...there has to be imo.... the big variable is all this is right before our eyes...us...humans... in reference to your earlier posts about time..well what is it? imo its something that we create as a way of establishing order for something...humans want to understand..we want to figure it out...it just can't be.... animals eat when they are hungry....we eat a lunch time...age is a form of senority...or rank....how long it takes to get somewhere reflects on our patience....what is time to a rock or tree? and in your last post about the bible....you left out one thing again....us... humans wrote it down...now iirc it says in the bible somewhere that it was correct because God inspired those to write only the truth down (i know i butchered that bad...i'm sure someone who knows better will clarify ) in other words...its Gods word.... getting back to humans...we were given free will..we can do what we want...well if you look at the 7 deadly sins..or simply humanities quest for money and power...i find it highly unlikely that the bible hasen't been changed or modified to suit ones needs or goals at the time... also how does a human understand something we can't comprehend, or don't have all the facts about...we are sure to fail..or miss the mark entirely for lack of a good understanding...
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
jc. Ok, I'm going to solve it all for everyone. What we call the universe is nothing more than a spec of dust on someones lampshade, and their universe is a spec of dust on another lampshade. And those tiny atoms we see under microscopes are other universes. In other words, we are insignificant allergens, in a giant omniverse.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,675
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,675 |
Your still smoking pot 
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
If I honestly claimed that the world was flat, I would expect to be called stupid.
When someone claims that they believe in talking snakes and two of every animal loaded onto the Arc...they should expect their claim to be called stupid.
Why? One can be proven true, the other cannot be proven false... but it speaks to the very essence of a "miracle"... miracles are, by definition, irrational. As the famous quote goes:
There are two ways to live your life - one is as though nothing is a miracle, the other is as though everything is a miracle.
Albert Einstein
I happen to believe that things happen we can't explain and that actual miracles DO occur, like people being suddenly free of terminal diseases... people like yourself assume there is a scientific explanation, we just haven't found it yet. And that's cool
Similar to those who try to hoax the "evolution community" with pig bones and whatnot, they give the evolution community a bad name... just as those who see bleeding statues or Jesus' image in toast tend to give the faith community a bad name. But I still believe that things happen that we can't explain... and I attribute those things to God.
Quote:
Literal belief in the Bible is irrational and illogical. I don't know of a nicer way to word that.
You are correct... to a point. Did Satan pose as a snake and talk "Eve" into eating an apple? Did the Red Sea part on cue? Did Noah load 2 of every animal on an Arc? ... I don't know which of those are actual and which are metaphorical and that debate exists within the faith community....
What I do believe is that there is an absolute good and an absolute evil in this world and both of them are vying for your attention.....
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
It has a lot to do with these things...but not these things specifically. Sex isn't destroying our society, nor is video games, drugs, dependence on gov't, or rock and roll...what's flawing us is the excess and the manner in which we use them.
I could start a whole thread on what is ailing us...but one other point is the idea that buying things or having things make us better and happier people. Hell, we could pin this whole economic crisis onto things of that nature, Veblen-esque stuff. 'Well, they have a new car/pool/house/jet ski/woman, so I need one that's equal or better'.
So what you are saying is that a more Biblical approach to these things would make us all happier and make this country and the world a better place?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
also how does a human understand something we can't comprehend, or don't have all the facts about...we are sure to fail..or miss the mark entirely for lack of a good understanding...
It's an interesting thing isn't it?... The human mind is limited in its capacity so how can it possibly comprehend something that is not limited, that is omnipotent and omnipresent? We cannot... so we choose not to. If we can't explain it, see it, touch it, formulate it, then it cannot possibly exist and it is therefore... "irrational"... because we, in our limited capacity, said so.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
I believe very strongly in God, and if Phil didn't think I was stupid I would find that very upsetting. All is right with the world. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
It's not about tearing down the beliefs of others. Can you address any of Lyuokdea's points? He isn't bashing anybody, but I'd be very impressed if you could refute any of his posts. I think it would be a good learning experience for all participating.
FWIW I think it might come off as 'tearing down the beliefs of others' because when you go beyond faith and try to use science to back creationism and what not, you run into such staunch and strong contradictory evidence. Not to open up another debate, but look at creationism and noah's ark vs the theory of evolution.
If one were to merely recite some facts pertaining to the theory of evolution, it might appear that someone is bashing creationism. But in reality the two theories are so directly at odds with each other, and when one has a mountain of evidence in its favor and the other a mountain of people with faith backing them, it comes off exactly how you might expect it to come off.
Just using but one example here. Perhaps we could debate whether the earth is flat or a sphere instead.
This entire post is a perfect example of what is wrong with this debate - you seem to feel that because I'm religious, I therefore must try to disprove Lyuokdea's science, as though the two cannot co-exist. That is completely ludicrous. The belief that science and religion are in constant opposition is one of the reasons why there is rarely a civil debate on the topic.
I don't take the entire Old Testament as literal truth. I suppose if you did, then there would be more to what you're saying. Rather, I think many of the stories in there are used more as literary devices to speak to general truths or to make points. Some religious are literalists and many are not as well, so you are making a generalization right off the bat there.
What Phil does is not what Lyuokdea is doing. Lyuokdea is simply bringing up evidence that he believes in to prove his point whereas Phil is just all out bashing the religious and their beliefs... he's completely demeaning. Not to pick on you necessarily, but you did the exact same thing by implying I would even debate a flat earth. This is the arrogance of some who believe in purely science; that they're so educated and learned that they can talk down to everyone who differs in belief.
I think we can both agree that the universe was created billions of years ago by the Big Bang or some similar initial event. I think we can both agree that earth formed after that and that man has only been on earth for a limited time with a fairly strong likelihood that he evolved from a lesser species. Now, looking purely through a scientific scope, you'll try to trace back everything to the Big Bang and beyond and figure out what caused that, and what caused what happened before that ad infinitum. You'll look forward from the Big Bang and attempt to explain how everything we have now came to be and works in perfect harmony with such intricate and masterful detail.
I'm not sure what your answer is for what guided things to be the way they are, as even science can only guess. Mine is God.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Ohio Christian school tells
student to skip prom
|
|
