InquisitiveSkeptic
Member
When adam and eve ate from the tree of knowlege we gained our intellect. We realised we where naked. Maybe, When my eyes where opened to other answers, I looked at them. do you know what I found. I found a whole new pespective on life. it made sense. My belief in the physical universe is not wrong by any means as far as what scientists call officially irrefutable fact. but those who present their information have done a poor job of disseminating that knowledge to most people. Average people take the modern world for granted, and don't really understand anything around them, and how it works or how it was made. How many of you can calculate simple fluid dynamics? or even orbital mechanics?
Im posting here because im unsure about how to post in the science and christianity section. i cant find the means to do so. no reply button, no make new thread link either.
anyway, since the writing of the bible mankind has done something so much more than discover his own nudity. Buildings, computers, quantum physics ect. all of them by discovery through asking questions and studyin reality. The scientific method, PEARL. Physical Evidence and Reasoned Logic.
such logic an be mathematical or theoretical reasoning based off evidence.
Well, this means that denying such things is denying people who have looked at something, and accquired the theory through nothing but studying and explaining what they see. Theories evolve to suit evidence. thats not to say they are wrong. Theories on light changed after someone tested diffraction patterns in single photon environments and got suprised. look it up, its where the scientific theory of multiple universes came from. Quantum wierdness. Its all derived from observation. No one seems to comprehend what that means. So I shall analogise it.
I burp, and spew fire out of my mouth. This supports a resulting theory of flammable burps. I study this and realsie not all burps spontaniously ignite. so i wonder why. I experiment on chemical compunds in air and discover that oxygen and carbon have a tendancy to react a little violently. theres my theory. "We can burp out pure carbon and that reacts violently with the oxygen in the air"
Someone else less gullible comes along and discovers That the cause is the fact i drank a gallon of gassoline. He also discovers that the The human body doesnt expell pure carbon via burping. The theory has changed to soemthing more probable. And this is always how theories are treated.
They could be wrong, but theyre based on what we see.
So I ask, Evolution and the big bang. both derived from observation, much like my burp spewing flame derived a theory of flammable burping from expelling carbon, somehow became such highly regarded theories through lying? do you know what happens to scientists who lie? *Edited for content* You get one chance and then you're fired. The intelectual arrena is a zero tollerance zone for lies. We arent idiots, We are highly skeptical and very intelligent people who are serious only baout one thing. Intellectual honesty and varifying things. No theory is left unscrutinised. My carbon burps theory would have been debunked in 30 seconds flat and overwhelmingly so.
But if i made the scientific community unsure, its called a theory. If they are positive its true, its fact.
So, what is the justification for accusing milions of scientists of being liars? What disproves the big bang, what disproves evolution? I see theoretical weaknesses that need to be looked at, not a dead theory. Agree with me? They arent wrong, theyre just not.... fully discovered yet. If not, justify your reasoning without confusing evolution with abiogenesis.
also, its come to my attention that 500 scientists oppose evolution. now christians say it makes evolution alot less viable based on the fact some scientists disagree on it. By that logic, what about the theory of creationism that countless millions of scientists oppose? By that logic, if milions disagree with it its alot less viable. Being correct is not being the majority, its simply bring right.
Im posting here because im unsure about how to post in the science and christianity section. i cant find the means to do so. no reply button, no make new thread link either.
anyway, since the writing of the bible mankind has done something so much more than discover his own nudity. Buildings, computers, quantum physics ect. all of them by discovery through asking questions and studyin reality. The scientific method, PEARL. Physical Evidence and Reasoned Logic.
such logic an be mathematical or theoretical reasoning based off evidence.
Well, this means that denying such things is denying people who have looked at something, and accquired the theory through nothing but studying and explaining what they see. Theories evolve to suit evidence. thats not to say they are wrong. Theories on light changed after someone tested diffraction patterns in single photon environments and got suprised. look it up, its where the scientific theory of multiple universes came from. Quantum wierdness. Its all derived from observation. No one seems to comprehend what that means. So I shall analogise it.
I burp, and spew fire out of my mouth. This supports a resulting theory of flammable burps. I study this and realsie not all burps spontaniously ignite. so i wonder why. I experiment on chemical compunds in air and discover that oxygen and carbon have a tendancy to react a little violently. theres my theory. "We can burp out pure carbon and that reacts violently with the oxygen in the air"
Someone else less gullible comes along and discovers That the cause is the fact i drank a gallon of gassoline. He also discovers that the The human body doesnt expell pure carbon via burping. The theory has changed to soemthing more probable. And this is always how theories are treated.
They could be wrong, but theyre based on what we see.
So I ask, Evolution and the big bang. both derived from observation, much like my burp spewing flame derived a theory of flammable burping from expelling carbon, somehow became such highly regarded theories through lying? do you know what happens to scientists who lie? *Edited for content* You get one chance and then you're fired. The intelectual arrena is a zero tollerance zone for lies. We arent idiots, We are highly skeptical and very intelligent people who are serious only baout one thing. Intellectual honesty and varifying things. No theory is left unscrutinised. My carbon burps theory would have been debunked in 30 seconds flat and overwhelmingly so.
But if i made the scientific community unsure, its called a theory. If they are positive its true, its fact.
So, what is the justification for accusing milions of scientists of being liars? What disproves the big bang, what disproves evolution? I see theoretical weaknesses that need to be looked at, not a dead theory. Agree with me? They arent wrong, theyre just not.... fully discovered yet. If not, justify your reasoning without confusing evolution with abiogenesis.
also, its come to my attention that 500 scientists oppose evolution. now christians say it makes evolution alot less viable based on the fact some scientists disagree on it. By that logic, what about the theory of creationism that countless millions of scientists oppose? By that logic, if milions disagree with it its alot less viable. Being correct is not being the majority, its simply bring right.
