quote:
I have been on both sides of the fence, but when I dug deeper it became clear to me that an old world just doesn't fit with the evidence out there. That is just one example.
So, considering that all of the numerous radiometroic dating methods used by Geologists are consistent with one another; IOW, they show the same age ranges when the same rock is tested by each method, why do you doubt their accuracy?
quote:
My point is (whether it's clear or not, I don't know) that there's a conflict of interest with perhaps all parties involved. Evolutionary science depends on old ages,
Please explain how all of the various dating methods can be flawed in such a precise way as to be consistent with one another.
quote:
uniformitarionism,
What is the evidence that any of the forces of the universe have been significantly different at any time in the past?
quote:
and arguably, a God-less universe.
Wow, all of those religious scientists out there will be surprised to know that they are actually Athiests.
quote:
Therefore, any evidence "science" gathers that isn't in line with this paradigm, must get discarded or overlooked.
Any scientist will tell you that it is a career-making move to find evidence that overturns paradigms and long-held ideas! Einstein did that with Newton, after all.
The thing is, you want non-science to be considered scientific.
quote:
So you can't tell me to "open my eyes to the fruits of science" (sorry I can't find your exact quote) because in a lot of areas in science, the bias towards to current paradigm does not allow for veracious investigation.
That is quite a claim. Care to support it?
I think the problem is that you wish the supernatural to be included in scientific explanations. They used to be, and that's how Galileo was imprisioned.
Can you explain to me how letting the supernatural into science would benefit inquiry?
quote:
It therefore comes down to one thing, in ALL our lives, and that is faith. We must all decide on which side of the fence we want to be. Because, no one can say for 100% certainty that they have all the facts, or that they know everything.
Except that you do exactly that! You believe what you believe, and you do not doubt in the least, and you stop questioning.
quote:
The evidence that two scientists examine, can usually fit two different paradigms, depending on what assumptions you begin with.
Examples?
quote:
I have often said that evolutionists possess much greater faith than the creationist. Because you believe in spite of the unfathomable odds, and the evidence you see.
The evidence leads me, overwhelmingly, to evolution occurring.
However, if reliable scientific evidence from nature came forward that contradicted evolution, I would have to change. So far I haven't seen any.
Is that the same kind of faith you have, sonnikke?
I really think that the reason you have all of these objections is because you don't know very much about Biology or Evolution, or Geology, etc.
What would you say your education level on these subjects are?
™ Version 4.2