[_ Old Earth _] Some Old Age Issues

[Strangelove]

For example, let's look at a NON-evolution theory, . . . the Big Bang.

Can you clarify this please Deav. I dont understand. How is Big Bang theory NON-evolutionary? It's a LYNCHPIN of evolutionary theory!

It is also true when it comes to knowing that the world is FAR older than 6,000 - 10,000 years old. It is true when viewing sellestial bodies who's light took WELL beyond 6,000 - 10,000 years to arrive here, allong with events that took place in that distant past.

If your talking about measuring redshift then that is entirely theoretical science my friend and doesn't equal KNOWING our Earth is over 10,000 years old.

Science is not a religion. . . and it amazes me that people can say/believe that [while typing on a computer invented by scientific discovery].

No one said that.

I stated that THEORETICAL science is a religion.

In the same way Christians believe in God yet have no solid physical proof that He exists (from an aethiests point of view anyway) so too scientists who take theoretical science as fact are religious because they believe in things that they have no firm physical proof for either.

 

[jasoncran]

Okay, I'm not a medical doctor. . . . the leeches thing was just something I thought they no longer did. It isn't the point I was making. My point is that medical science has come a long way. They still faulter and still have much to learn, but science and experimentation is what is used to make advancements in medicine, not belief/faith.

Steven Hawking is a theoretical physicist. . . . so of course he will come up with some pretty "out there" theories, . . . but they are not on the same level as that which can be tested, re-tested, and verified by various people. But even so, Hawking's theories are not his "by belief". If testing shows them to be in error, I'm sure he would drop those notions in favor of the results.

I hope I'm able to convey the error in the "atheism is a religion of belief" ideology.

As for the OP, those questions ARE old, . . . and have been adressed before. I'm sure the answers to those "problems" can be found if a person throws away the fear of "going to those heretical sites that are secular science based".

i know that but i did state the those are used and have been tested, the maggots are used for wound care ie in war and also when a large are of tissue has necrotised and needs immediate attention and amputation isnt prefered.

No, Hawkins arrogantly states heres why theres no God, the multiverse! that isnt what science should be.

 

[lordkalvan]

Can you clarify this please Deav. I dont understand. How is Big Bang theory NON-evolutionary? It's a LYNCHPIN of evolutionary theory!

Big Bang cosmology is entirely peripheral to evolutionary theory, as has been pointed out to you before. If Hoyle's Steady State/Infinite Universe rather than the standard cosmological model was the generally accepted theory explaining the origins and existence of the Universe, you would be claiming that that was the 'LYNCHPIN [mmmm, love those scary capitals] of evolutionary theory'.

If your talking about measuring redshift then that is entirely theoretical science my friend and doesn't equal KNOWING our Earth is over 10,000 years old.

How is measuring redshift 'entirely theoretical science'? If you imagine that electromagnetic radiation is unaffected by the relative motion of objects from which it emanates or is reflected, then you probably need to let the inventors of Doppler radar and radar speed guns know.

No one said that.

I stated that THEORETICAL science is a religion.

Theoretical science being defined as?

In the same way Christians believe in God yet have no solid physical proof that He exists (from an aethiests point of view anyway) so too scientists who take theoretical science as fact are religious because they believe in things that they have no firm physical proof for either.

Theoretical science is taken as fact only insofar as evidence can be adduced that supports it or otherwise, for example the germ theory of disease was once entirely theoretical, but now it isn't.

 

[Deavonreye]

Can you clarify this please Deav. I dont understand. How is Big Bang theory NON-evolutionary? It's a LYNCHPIN of evolutionary theory!

If your talking about measuring redshift then that is entirely theoretical science my friend and doesn't equal KNOWING our Earth is over 10,000 years old.

The Big Bang theory has to do with cosmology and how the universe was thought to be started. I see that as theoretical, based upon how it works out mathmatically, and yes, based upon redshift. What can you tell me about redshifts?

As for it being a lynchpin of the evolutionary theory, it ties in, but only loosely. Evolution deals with change [biological] over a long period of time. Abiogensis deals with how said life initially came into being. That [how so] isn't known.

I stated that THEORETICAL science is a religion.

In the same way Christians believe in God yet have no solid physical proof that He exists (from an aethiests point of view anyway) so too scientists who take theoretical science as fact are religious because they believe in things that they have no firm physical proof for either.

Even though some things are theoretical, it still doesn't make them religious. I can't speak for them [theoretical scientists], but I can tell you that what they postulate isn't the same as a religious belief. As I said, what a theoretical scientist may postulate AS THE BEST GUESS isn't the same as worshipping a belief structure based on no evidence . . . . .. because IF their postulation is discovered to be untrue, they will abandon it for what actually is. THIS fact can never be labeled as a "belief/religion". I hope this can be clearly seen here!

In turn, would YOU stop believing in god if someone provided proof to the contrary? Probably not, because you have it as a religion.

 

[Strangelove]

Deavonrye.

I will continue this discussion when you tell me if you are a believer or not.

I have the right to know.

I've looked on profiles before and cant find where it says this.

Mods? Shouldn't it say in someones profile?

 

[Deavonreye]

Strangelove, I'm not sure why it matters, in this discussion, what my religious stance is. My posts are sound.

For what it's worth, I don't really have a religious affiliation at the moment. I was Assemblies of God for years, involved in the music ministry for more than a decade, . . . but now, after my own studies, I'm currently not embracing any religious system but am looking for what is real for me, . . . or better said, what will reveal itself as real to me [and by that I mean, in the spiritual sence].

I hope that helps.

 

[Strangelove]

Strangelove, I'm not sure why it matters, in this discussion, what my religious stance is. My posts are sound.

It matters because theres no point me bringing forward masses of Biblical quotes if they mean nothing to you. It would be a waste of time. Do you understand now? This forum is called Christianity & Science. That means we are here to discuss both aspects. Thats what I'm here for anyway. We know Kalvan isn't here for that so....how 'bout you?

For what it's worth, I don't really have a religious affiliation at the moment. I was Assemblies of God for years, involved in the music ministry for more than a decade, . . . but now, after my own studies, I'm currently not embracing any religious system but am looking for what is real for me, . . . or better said, what will reveal itself as real to me [and by that I mean, in the spiritual sence].

I hope that helps.

I didn't ask about your religious stance. Religion is the work of Satan set up to destroy faith in God.

I asked if you are a believer. That means have you read the Gospels and confessed Jesus the Son of God and part of the triune Godhead.

Have you read the Gospels?

 

[Deavonreye]

It matters because theres no point me bringing forward masses of Biblical quotes if they mean nothing to you. It would be a waste of time. Do you understand now? This forum is called Christianity & Science. That means we are here to discuss both aspects. Thats what I'm here for anyway. We know Kalvan isn't here for that so....how 'bout you?

I understand the point of this section of christianforums.net . . . but this topic didn't start with biblical quotes, but with misunderstandings of the physical world that cause such errors such as the OP. As for your "biblical quotes" thing, I'm not sure what scripture would support the OP.

I didn't ask about your religious stance. Religion is the work of Satan set up to destroy faith in God.

I asked if you are a believer. That means have you read the Gospels and confessed Jesus the Son of God and part of the triune Godhead.

Have you read the Gospels?

Semantics aside, I believed for about 30 years. . . . . and yes, I have read the bible.

 

[jasoncran]

Strangelove, I'm not sure why it matters, in this discussion, what my religious stance is. My posts are sound.

For what it's worth, I don't really have a religious affiliation at the moment. I was Assemblies of God for years, involved in the music ministry for more than a decade, . . . but now, after my own studies, I'm currently not embracing any religious system but am looking for what is real for me, . . . or better said, what will reveal itself as real to me [and by that I mean, in the spiritual sence].

I hope that helps.

its revelant to this forum in certian areas. and not on this forum through

please pm me or we can talk here.

 

[Deavonreye]

If I am hearing you correctly, jason, then discussions on the christianity & science section are okay if not bible centered. Other forums, on the other hand ARE bible centered. Is that correct?

 

[jasoncran]

If I am hearing you correctly, jason, then discussions on the christianity & science section are okay if not bible centered. Other forums, on the other hand ARE bible centered. Is that correct?

generally but the bible and its revalance to the creation theory are allowed. but the forums i suggest you avoid since you are unsure of your faith are the prayer forum and also the ct@a.

 

[Deavonreye]

Sounds reasonable. Those don't seem like sections that I would feel comfortable in, so I'll stick to just a few sections, such as the science part. Thanks!