8236
VIP Member
I won't even call it a debate. For it is not one.
In simple terms. If I ask you: How many apples make a pear? You would be stuck for an answer. (If not, then please do explain, in the context that was meant by the question).
Ok here goes:
ON BEHALF OF ALL 'SCIENTISTS' (essentially meaning: everyone): SCIENCE AND RELIGION ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE:
Science is about nothing more interesting than making OBSERVATIONS, taking MEASUREMENTS, and then (hopefully) trying to make those observations fit a THEORY (usually based upon another theory) in order to 'explain' the origional observation and make (future) predictions about the PHENOMENON previously observed. (The different processes can take place in varying orders)
'Science' is a kind of framework that floats in an 'ether' like a floating scaffolding arrangement. New ideas come along, are tested and (when found to be in agreement with the nuts and bolts of the 'scaffolding') are added to it. The whole 'arrangement' is dependent upon itself - it's like a house of cards - and could easily collapse, as would be the case, for instance, if a single phenomenon like a measurable 'vision' or the 'hand of God' appeared out of 'thin air'. This however, has never been observed, and as time goes by, it allows us to become more and more certain that we understand the world around us to an extent that allows us to do 'usefull' things with its matter/'energy', like I am now, spouting over the internet.
Science is a way of looking at the world. It is not perfect and is forever changing/moving on/developing. So next time you read an article in the paper saying 'Einstein was wrong' or whatever, ignore it for the rag that it is, because the idiots that wrote it missed the point.
These are the most relevent contributions I will ever make on this board - so plz take note - particularly those who see Science as some kind of 'religious' threat to their own faith, coz that is exactly what religion is: FAITH.
ONE CAN NOT MEASURE 'GOD'. Therefore SCIENCE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION. AT ALL.
In simple terms. If I ask you: How many apples make a pear? You would be stuck for an answer. (If not, then please do explain, in the context that was meant by the question).
Ok here goes:
ON BEHALF OF ALL 'SCIENTISTS' (essentially meaning: everyone): SCIENCE AND RELIGION ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE:
Science is about nothing more interesting than making OBSERVATIONS, taking MEASUREMENTS, and then (hopefully) trying to make those observations fit a THEORY (usually based upon another theory) in order to 'explain' the origional observation and make (future) predictions about the PHENOMENON previously observed. (The different processes can take place in varying orders)
'Science' is a kind of framework that floats in an 'ether' like a floating scaffolding arrangement. New ideas come along, are tested and (when found to be in agreement with the nuts and bolts of the 'scaffolding') are added to it. The whole 'arrangement' is dependent upon itself - it's like a house of cards - and could easily collapse, as would be the case, for instance, if a single phenomenon like a measurable 'vision' or the 'hand of God' appeared out of 'thin air'. This however, has never been observed, and as time goes by, it allows us to become more and more certain that we understand the world around us to an extent that allows us to do 'usefull' things with its matter/'energy', like I am now, spouting over the internet.
Science is a way of looking at the world. It is not perfect and is forever changing/moving on/developing. So next time you read an article in the paper saying 'Einstein was wrong' or whatever, ignore it for the rag that it is, because the idiots that wrote it missed the point.
These are the most relevent contributions I will ever make on this board - so plz take note - particularly those who see Science as some kind of 'religious' threat to their own faith, coz that is exactly what religion is: FAITH.
ONE CAN NOT MEASURE 'GOD'. Therefore SCIENCE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION. AT ALL.
First of all, in order to have any conversation or discussion on any subject there must first be some rules that are involved. Just like a game, if both parties are not playing by the same rules then there is no sense in playing that game. This would start with a definition of the word "Fact". "Fact" as defined in science must meet three citeria: (1) It must be testable-you have to be able to test that theory in a laboratory setting. (2) Observable-It must be observable in nature, you must be able to observe it and see it occur on a daily basis somewhere on the earth in nature. Finally, (3) Repeatable-EVERY time you do a test in a lab setting you must come up with the same result, i.e. 1+1=2. I could exhaust many, many pages on how the evolutionay theory meets NONE of these criteria, but you are looking for proof of creationism so i will leave this alone at this time. With this in mind I will start on several facts that prove creation is the only possibility. (1) The first law of Thermodynamics-States that something cannot come out of nothing-This law is self-explanitory, that without the right ingredience, put together at the right time, and in the right order, life CANNOT be formed. Proteins, (which are the basic building blocks of life) could not be formed out of thin air, they have to be created from somewhere, and where as the evolutionary theory canot provide and answer to this law: the creation mandate can.
