Has science proved there is no God?

[DriftingSand]

Fantastic debate between an Old Earth Christian and a Young Earth Christian. Both are educated men (very long but worth watching): [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNV6XYpX_XQ]Hugh Ross vs. Kent Hovind - How old is the Earth? - YouTube[/ame]

 

[amrchaos]

I just thought about it

You are not a Young Earth creationists, are you Drifting Sands?

 

[hortysir]

'There are no unknowns'????

 

[amrchaos]

Fantastic debate between an Old Earth Christian and a Young Earth Christian. Both are educated men (very long but worth watching): Hugh Ross vs. Kent Hovind - How old is the Earth? - YouTube

Kent Hovind--hmmm.


You have a bad habit of picking some questionable sources to present us.

 

[DriftingSand]

Big Bang Cosmology is not a friend to Young earth Creationism.

Maybe Old Earth Creationism(since it actually accept an Earth that is billions of years old), but definitely not Young Earthers!!

I think that 4 minute video is highly questionable in its content.

I'm a young earth, Bible believing Christian but I do find other ideas fascinating to listen to. There's an old saying: keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer. I like to know what the false teachings are so I'm better prepared to argue against them.

But science helps the Bible account in at least two ways:

1) It points to the earth's beginning. There was a starting point. The Bible calls it "creation" which, if it occurred in a six day period is -- spontaneous creation.
2) Since it is clear that organic life as well as the physical universe reflect detailed design then it should make sense to anyone with an average IQ that it was designed. Therefore, there must be a Designer. Nobody inspects a Corvette without knowing instinctively that it was Designed and Created.

 

[Hollie]

Fantastic debate between an Old Earth Christian and a Young Earth Christian. Both are educated men (very long but worth watching): Hugh Ross vs. Kent Hovind - How old is the Earth? - YouTube

Kent Hovind--hmmm.


You have a bad habit of picking some questionable sources to present us.

I'll raise your Kent Hovind with a Ken Ham.

 

[DriftingSand]

Fantastic debate between an Old Earth Christian and a Young Earth Christian. Both are educated men (very long but worth watching): Hugh Ross vs. Kent Hovind - How old is the Earth? - YouTube

Kent Hovind--hmmm.


You have a bad habit of picking some questionable sources to present us.

I'll raise your Kent Hovind with a Ken Ham.

And they would find you questionable so I guess we're all even steven.

 

[Hollie]

Kent Hovind--hmmm.


You have a bad habit of picking some questionable sources to present us.

I'll raise your Kent Hovind with a Ken Ham.

And they would find you questionable so I guess we're all even steven.

Not likely. Both Hovind and Ham are among the worst of the bunch in connection with creationist charlatans.

 

[DriftingSand]

I'll raise your Kent Hovind with a Ken Ham.

And they would find you questionable so I guess we're all even steven.

Not likely. Both Hovind and Ham are among the worst of the bunch in connection with creationist charlatans.

Coming from one of the most rabid, anti-Christian, Christ-haters this board has. We all know that you're consumed with an obsessive/compulsive, bi-polar hatred for the Bible and all things associated with it. So you really don't have a thimble full of credibility; thus, your opinion means squat.

 

[amrchaos]

And they would find you questionable so I guess we're all even steven.

Not likely. Both Hovind and Ham are among the worst of the bunch in connection with creationist charlatans.

Coming from one of the most rabid, anti-Christian, Christ-haters this board has. We all know that you're consumed with an obsessive/compulsive, bi-polar hatred for the Bible and all things associated with it. So you really don't have a thimble full of credibility; thus, your opinion means squat.

I don't know about Ken Ham, but I am familiar with the Hovind-that is Kent and son Eric.

The only way I can see someone using their works is if they are a strict literalists of the Scripture.

Are you a Strict Biblical Literalist, Drifting Sands?

 

[Hollie]

.

 

[Hollie]

And they would find you questionable so I guess we're all even steven.

Not likely. Both Hovind and Ham are among the worst of the bunch in connection with creationist charlatans.

Coming from one of the most rabid, anti-Christian, Christ-haters this board has. We all know that you're consumed with an obsessive/compulsive, bi-polar hatred for the Bible and all things associated with it. So you really don't have a thimble full of credibility; thus, your opinion means squat.

Does that come with a jingle?

 

[Hollie]

Long but very interesting (and truthful):

Truthful? You mean except for the fraudulent credentials of Don Patton.



Suspicious Creationist Credentials

Don Patton is a young-earth creationist who, along with Carl Baugh, is known as a proponent of the claim that human footprints appear alongside dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy Riverbed of Glen Rose, Texas.

Patton has claimed Ph.D. candidacy in geology from Queensland Christian University in Australia. According to Glen Kuban:

When I asked Patton for clarification on this during the [1989 Bible-Science] conference, he stated that he had no degrees, but was about to receive a Ph.D. degree in geology, pending accreditation of QCU, which he assured me was "three days away." Many days have since passed, and Patton still has no valid degree in geology. Nor is the accreditation of QCU imminent. [4]


Glen Kuban has written more extensively on Patton's claimed degrees in his articles on the Paluxy "man-tracks".

A Matter of Degree: Carl Baugh's Claimed Credentials

 

[BreezeWood]

without identifying by the "Standard Model of Particle Physics" what constitutes the Spirit while living or simply what is life it only stands to reason it would not be noticed after "death" .... captivating but hokkie video.

 

[CJW]

The God particle is a misnomer, so no.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

The discovery of the Higgs Boson particle has led physicists to claim there can be no undiscovered particles, and there are no unknowns. So there can be no after life.
Watch the video and tell me why they are wrong.

Higgs Boson and the Fundamental Nature of Reality - Sean Carroll - Skepticon 5 - YouTube

is it the assumption that God is a particle?.....

 

[Hollie]

The God particle is a misnomer, so no.....

True. The term was coined only to describe the importance of Higgs-boson to the standard model of physics. The term, just like the gods, will be re-modeled as science gains knowledge.

 

[Hollie]

The discovery of the Higgs Boson particle has led physicists to claim there can be no undiscovered particles, and there are no unknowns. So there can be no after life.
Watch the video and tell me why they are wrong.

Higgs Boson and the Fundamental Nature of Reality - Sean Carroll - Skepticon 5 - YouTube

is it the assumption that God is a particle?.....

The gods are just place holders. Consider them to be a big bucket of spackle used to fill gaps in our knowledge.

 

[PostmodernProph]

The discovery of the Higgs Boson particle has led physicists to claim there can be no undiscovered particles, and there are no unknowns. So there can be no after life.
Watch the video and tell me why they are wrong.

Higgs Boson and the Fundamental Nature of Reality - Sean Carroll - Skepticon 5 - YouTube

is it the assumption that God is a particle?.....

The gods are just place holders. Consider them to be a big bucket of spackle used to fill gaps in our knowledge.

I cannot consider them to be a big bucket of spackle.....you already fill that role.....

 

[Hollie]

is it the assumption that God is a particle?.....

The gods are just place holders. Consider them to be a big bucket of spackle used to fill gaps in our knowledge.

I cannot consider them to be a big bucket of spackle.....you already fill that role.....

Spam from the forever befuddled......