Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Which came first: the young earth, or the inerrant scripture?
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 76 of 161 (237391)
08-26-2005 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Tal
08-26-2005 2:26 PM


Re: Tal strikes out again. (the Sequel)
Not according to Wikipedia
Try using a more reliable source. Wikipedia is not the source of all knowledge Tal, and there ARE more accurate places to find it.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Tal, posted 08-26-2005 2:26 PM Tal has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 77 of 161 (237392)
08-26-2005 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Tal
08-26-2005 2:26 PM


Re: Tal strikes out again. (the Sequel)
Did you read the Wikipedia article at all?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Tal, posted 08-26-2005 2:26 PM Tal has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 78 of 161 (237393)
08-26-2005 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Tal
08-26-2005 2:28 PM


Re: Tal strikes out again. (the Sequel) Part Deux
So you never even read the article. Read it then come back.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Tal, posted 08-26-2005 2:28 PM Tal has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 79 of 161 (237401)
08-26-2005 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Tal
08-26-2005 2:28 PM


Re: Tal strikes out again. (the Sequel) Part Deux
Tal
Abiogensis is the study of how life began. As a theist, I would describe it as the study of How GOD did it. The Bible says GOD formed life from dust. That's a shorthand description. Abiogensis is looking at that in somewhat more detail, looking to see which dust particles She used and how IT put them together.
It's mostly chemistry and physics, not biology, since there wasn't life until after the event.
BUT ...
the TOE still has nothing to do with how life started. That is the study called Abiogensis.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Tal, posted 08-26-2005 2:28 PM Tal has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 80 of 161 (237412)
08-26-2005 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by hoaryhead
08-26-2005 11:48 AM


Re: Hoaryhead Answers Detractors
1) Evolution is not about the age of the earth - one detractor.
That's entirely correct. Evolution is not about the age of the earth.
3) The planet started out as a molten mass - another detractor.
What happened to the Big Bang Theory?
How the planet started out and how the cosmos started out, are two quite different matters. Don't confuse them.
4) One man denied that the "3 Rs" are science.
The university professors would not like people talking about their fields of experise in such a disrespectful manner.
As a university professor (and mathematician), I can assure you that I found nothing disrepectful in that comment. Indeed, mathematics is not a science.
Without the science of mathematics we would have no computers or Internet.
Nobody is denying the value and importance of mathematics. However, it just so happens that it is not a science.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by hoaryhead, posted 08-26-2005 11:48 AM hoaryhead has not replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 81 of 161 (237424)
08-26-2005 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Tal
08-26-2005 2:24 PM


Re: Tal strikes out again. (the Sequel)
I'm sorry, I've been misunderstanding Tal all this time.
When he said he was a Creationist, I assumed he meant Biblical creation. But, since he considers things like lightning to me magical, I see that he's a Zeus Creationist. (Titan-ist?)
Tal, lightning isn't "magic". And the bunny was in the hat to begin with.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Tal, posted 08-26-2005 2:24 PM Tal has not replied

  
hoaryhead 
Inactive Member


Message 82 of 161 (237464)
08-26-2005 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by coffee_addict
08-26-2005 11:51 AM


Re: Hoaryhead Answers Detractors
"Do you think that acting like you know anything about science will work in a place like this?"
I have never in my life said anything as ignorant as, "Mathematics is not a science."
If you accept this man, you should accept anyone.
What is it about science that yiou do not understand?
hoaryhead

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by coffee_addict, posted 08-26-2005 11:51 AM coffee_addict has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Chiroptera, posted 08-26-2005 5:17 PM hoaryhead has not replied
 Message 90 by coffee_addict, posted 08-26-2005 5:53 PM hoaryhead has not replied

  
hoaryhead 
Inactive Member


Message 83 of 161 (237479)
08-26-2005 5:10 PM


Why cannot men add to 160?
1) While admiting that Isaac Asimov died in 1992; a detractor said things have changed in the last 160 years. WOW!
2) Who is Isaac Isimov?
Ph.D in chemistry from Columbia University ... author of over 70 books. Mr. Asimov is generally recognized as one of this country's leading writers in science" - from dust jacket of his book, The Universe.
Can you match these qualifications?
What is all the harping about men not believing in diseases?
Never met a man in my life who did not believe in diseases.
You should get a new theme song.
hoaryhead

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Rahvin, posted 08-26-2005 5:43 PM hoaryhead has not replied
 Message 87 by Theodoric, posted 08-26-2005 5:47 PM hoaryhead has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 84 of 161 (237483)
08-26-2005 5:17 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by hoaryhead
08-26-2005 4:50 PM


Re: Hoaryhead Answers Detractors
quote:
I have never in my life said anything as ignorant as, "Mathematics is not a science."
Nor have I ever in my life said anything as ignorant as, "Mathematics is a science."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by hoaryhead, posted 08-26-2005 4:50 PM hoaryhead has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by arachnophilia, posted 08-26-2005 5:46 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 85 of 161 (237496)
08-26-2005 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by hoaryhead
08-26-2005 5:10 PM


Re: Why cannot men add to 160?
2) Who is Isaac Isimov?
Ph.D in chemistry from Columbia University ... author of over 70 books. Mr. Asimov is generally recognized as one of this country's leading writers in science" - from dust jacket of his book, The Universe.
Did I miss something?
What in God's name does Isaac Asimov have to do with anything in this thread?
You realize he was primarily a science fiction writer, right? I don't see how he is at all relevant.
Can you match these qualifications?
Qualifications are irrelevant. All that matters is the argument. A 10-year-old child can make an argument and be correct - the argument is not affected by its source.
As to your other comments:
Math is not a science, hoaryhead. Neither is writing or reading.
Science includes biochemistry, physics, astronomy, etc. Not math.
Science deals in the observation of the natural world, positing an educated guess as to an explanation of the data, and the testing of that hypothesis through the peer review process.
Mathematics does not concern experimental observations, theories, or falsifications. Math can be used to conclusively PROVE things - science only deals in finding the most highly accurate representation of the real world possible. Math is used in the persuit of science, but it is an entirely seperate entity.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by hoaryhead, posted 08-26-2005 5:10 PM hoaryhead has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by arachnophilia, posted 08-26-2005 5:50 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 86 of 161 (237498)
08-26-2005 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Chiroptera
08-26-2005 5:17 PM


Re: Hoaryhead Answers Detractors
far beit from me to agree with this guy, but i'm fairly certain most people classify mathematics with sciences. for instance, at the university, the math department is in a building called "science and engineering" which is next to "physical sciences" which used to occupy the same building.
in the library of congress system, sciences are all Q's, QA is math, QB is cosmology, QC is physics.
however, the people around the math department tend to say things like "mathematics is the only true religion."

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Chiroptera, posted 08-26-2005 5:17 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Nuggin, posted 08-27-2005 7:33 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 87 of 161 (237499)
08-26-2005 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by hoaryhead
08-26-2005 5:10 PM


Re: Why cannot men add to 160?
So are you saying Asimov is correct?
There have been lots of scientific changes in last 160 years. How does this make evolution false?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by hoaryhead, posted 08-26-2005 5:10 PM hoaryhead has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Theodoric, posted 08-26-2005 5:50 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 88 of 161 (237501)
08-26-2005 5:50 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Rahvin
08-26-2005 5:43 PM


Re: Why cannot men add to 160?
Science includes biochemistry, physics, astronomy, etc. Not math.
again, i hate to point this out, but physics is math. calculus, generally creditted to newton, was devised entirely to deal with real world problems, regarding things like falling bodies.
Mathematics does not concern experimental observations, theories, or falsifications.
math does indeed deal with theories and falsifications. proof by reduction to absurdity is a good method of falsifaction, for instance.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Rahvin, posted 08-26-2005 5:43 PM Rahvin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Nuggin, posted 08-27-2005 7:37 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 89 of 161 (237502)
08-26-2005 5:50 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Theodoric
08-26-2005 5:47 PM


Re: Why cannot men add to 160?
I would agree that Mathematics is a science. But then again science is a pretty broad term. Here is a place where we truly are arguing semantics.
Hoary - Do not think for a moment this means that your arguments have any merit.
This message has been edited by Theodoric, 08-26-2005 06:01 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Theodoric, posted 08-26-2005 5:47 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 476 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 90 of 161 (237504)
08-26-2005 5:53 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by hoaryhead
08-26-2005 4:50 PM


Re: Hoaryhead Answers Detractors
hoaryhead writes:
What is it about science that yiou do not understand?
Well, for one thing, it's my field of study.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by hoaryhead, posted 08-26-2005 4:50 PM hoaryhead has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024