Scientists dismiss Newton's theory of gravity

[Wyatt earp]

Like we have been saying evolution and gravity is just a theory...

Evolution and gravity are facts. A theory of evolution or a theory of gravity are plausible explanations for such facts. And the sentence "Newton was wrong" is wrong. The theory of Newton is only wrong in case of some conditions, what he never thought about. The theory of Newton was replaced - better to say "enlarged" - from the theory of relativity of Albert Einstein. Since more then a hundred years every single test (experiment and observation) of the theory of Albert Einstein was definetelly correct. A short time ago some scientists from the University of California in Los Angeles found even out it is also exact in the very near of the supermassive black hole in in the middle of our milky way. They watched since 24 years S0-2 who circles around Sagittarius A* - as far as I know with the help of the W.M. Keck-Oberservatorium Hawaii. The observation showed the gravitational redshift in the near of this black hole.

To say they are facts shows me what a fool you are.


.

 

[zaangalewa]

james bond : What means funny?

Funny as in fishy. It's a warning for false teacher of evolution based on the lies of Satan.

Chick.com: Big Daddy?

Just wondering, are you Catholic?

Yes. And you? Are you an idiot? Take a look at your hand - take a look at the hand of a gorilla. Viola: What you see is evolution.

 

[zaangalewa]

Like we have been saying evolution and gravity is just a theory...

Evolution and gravity are facts. A theory of evolution or a theory of gravity are plausible explanations for such facts. And the sentence "Newton was wrong" is wrong. The theory of Newton is only wrong in case of some conditions, what he never thought about. The theory of Newton was replaced - better to say "enlarged" - from the theory of relativity of Albert Einstein. Since more then a hundred years every single test (experiment and observation) of the theory of Albert Einstein was definetelly correct. A short time ago some scientists from the University of California in Los Angeles found even out it is also exact in the very near of the supermassive black hole in in the middle of our milky way. They watched since 24 years S0-2 who circles around Sagittarius A* - as far as I know with the help of the W.M. Keck-Oberservatorium Hawaii. The observation showed the gravitational redshift in the near of this black hole.

To say they are facts shows me what a fool you are.


.

Okay - you say you are not a Christian. ShouId I be shocked now?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Like we have been saying evolution and gravity is just a theory...

Evolution and gravity are facts. A theory of evolution or a theory of gravity are plausible explanations for such facts. And the sentence "Newton was wrong" is wrong. The theory of Newton is only wrong in case of some conditions, what he never thought about. The theory of Newton was replaced - better to say "enlarged" - from the theory of relativity of Albert Einstein. Since more then a hundred years every single test (experiment and observation) of the theory of Albert Einstein was definetelly correct. A short time ago some scientists from the University of California in Los Angeles found even out it is also exact in the very near of the supermassive black hole in in the middle of our milky way. They watched since 24 years S0-2 who circles around Sagittarius A* - as far as I know with the help of the W.M. Keck-Oberservatorium Hawaii. The observation showed the gravitational redshift in the near of this black hole.

To say they are facts shows me what a fool you are.


.

Denying that evolution and gravity are facts shows what a fool you are.

 

[james bond]

james bond : What means funny?

Funny as in fishy. It's a warning for false teacher of evolution based on the lies of Satan.

Chick.com: Big Daddy?

Just wondering, are you Catholic?

Yes. And you? Are you an idiot? Take a look at your hand - take a look at the hand of a gorilla. Viola: What you see is evolution.

I'm Christian. I went to a private Catholic elementary school though.

I have a human hand. The problem with gorillas is there is no way a chimp or gorilla could have developed from a common ancestor. You need both for your evolution into human. While we have hands similar to a gorilla, our hands are not like those of a chimp.

What do you think of JW? Do you think they are a cult?

What about Christian Scientists? I recently went to a Christian Scientist reading room. It was very nice and the people were nice. I remembered the Christian Science Monitor in Catholic school.

 

[zaangalewa]

james bond : What means funny?

Funny as in fishy. It's a warning for false teacher of evolution based on the lies of Satan.

Chick.com: Big Daddy?

Just wondering, are you Catholic?

Yes. And you? Are you an idiot? Take a look at your hand - take a look at the hand of a gorilla. Viola: What you see is evolution.

I'm Christian.

That's why you called me a [godless] fool?

I went to a private Catholic elementary school though.

Good grief. How often did you play truant?

I have a human hand.

You have a hand. Your hand is not "human" or "christian light" in sense of ethics. Your hand is a kind of biological tool. To this hand belong a lot of things. It starts in the finger nails and it ends in sensoric and motoric areas within your brain.

The problem with gorillas is there is no way a chimp or gorilla could have developed from a common ancestor.

Everything has always a common ancestor. For me this is a very nice "picture" our creator made for us to sense him. I love it very much when I start in the morning to see an old tree and to think "you and I have a common ancestor" or shorter "brother tree". Thinking so I feel familiar with gods creation. But it is more complex: My hand is a picture of the tree too. Indeed is my - and everyones - perception of space and time the play of all our senses and muscels while "flying" through treetops. It's not a joke to say "the ape who did fail a branch (or used a little branch to long) belongs not to our ancestors". Lots of US-comics show this very nice by the way. But more serios: It needs an unbelievable perfection to hunt in treetops. You have to know what's going on all around you.

You need both for your evolution into human.

You have a totally other view to the word "human" than I have. When ETs with three legs are landing in the Himmalaya and ask the Dalai Lama for the way to Rome, because they are Catholics who made a mistake, then (1) I would not be astonished at all and (2) I would be very happy to see my new sisters and brothers. If they dance Irish with three legs or they dance the Schuhplattler could bring me to the idea that some of our ancestors had lovers, they never spoke about.

While we have hands similar to a gorilla, our hands are not like those of a chimp.

Your front paw looks more chimp than dog or cat, isn't it? But our blood is red. It's really totally crazy to make since thousands of years selective breeding and to think natural selection is not existing.

What do you think of JW? Do you think they are a cult?

Pope Benedict XVI made clear that it is for Catholics a sign of respect on Jews not to use some expressions for g'd, because this hurts in their eyes one of the 10 commandents. And the use of the word "cult" is crazy too. You seem to think about sects in this context. Let me say it in this way: I believe in one god, one truth, one church. This means not I misrespect only a little any human being, who is [still] not a Catholic, who is [still] not a member of the universal church. The church is still not perfect, that's all.

What about Christian Scientists?

Nothing special. Every Christian is able to be a philosopher and/or scientist. Truth is always true. To try to find out what's true is good. To try to deny what's true is bad.

I recently went to a Christian Scientist reading room. It was very nice and the people were nice. I remembered the Christian Science Monitor in Catholic school.

I guess you speak here about a special club or a special sect. Whatever. The Catholic Church has lots of schools and lots of universities in the world. And lots of teachers. A main motor for education and science in Europe was since ever the Catholic Church.



PS: By the way: Sorry! You did not call me a fool. Another one did.

 

[james bond]

That's why you called me a [godless] fool?

You're confusing me for bear513. I'll take leave now.

Not everything has a common ancestor. God didn't create us like that. Instead of a tree of life that Darwin proposed, we have more bushes of life. This is from basic creation and natural selection.

JW is Jehovah's Witnesses. They are considered a cult and what I would call false teachings.

I think Christian Scientists have a connection to the Catholic Church. I think they still have the Christian Scientist Monitor magazine. Christian Scientist is not creation scienctists nor creation science. No relation.

 

[zaangalewa]

That's why you called me a [godless] fool?

You're confusing me for bear513. I'll take leave now.

Sorry - was my mistake. I said it in the last line. I don't hide such mistakes. My fault.

Not everything has a common ancestor.

Not everything is evolution - circles for example exist since the universe exists - but everything what lives here on planet earth has with everything else what lives here on our planet a common ancestor.

God didn't create us like that. Instead of a tree of life that Darwin proposed, we have more bushes of life. This is from basic creation and natural selection.

JW is Jehovah's Witnesses. They are considered a cult and what I would call false teachings.

... okay ... a second misunderstanding from me. From time to time I meet someone from the organisation "Jehovah's Witnesses". We agree in lots of things. The only real problem we had once had to do with medicine. I hope I was able to convince him that blood is only a special fluid without any consequence for the spirituality of the people.

By the way: My wife once said to me the funny (and frustrated) sentence "Blood is not thicker than water", when she thought about how strangers had helped her in a difficult situation of her life. And although this sentence is physically wrong, she was spiritually totally right to say so.

I think Christian Scientists have a connection to the Catholic Church.

If you speak about a kind of "alternative science" then I would say you are wrong. We are mainstream - what doesn't mean that sometimes a single person or a little group is right, while all others are wrong. Everyone, who bis interested in truth, has always also to listen what others say. The Holy Spirit flows wherever He likes to flow and not where someone likes to see him flow.

I think they still have the Christian Scientist Monitor magazine. Christian Scientist is not creation scienctists nor creation science. No relation.

Whoever fights for gods creation is always welcome in our Church. I don't understand why so many people have problems with the funny discussion "evolution vs creation". This are 2 different things. What to compare? The problem in philosophy is "chance vs plan". Both concepts are not very helpful in case of science. We don't know the plan of god, so we don't know what will be his next step - and if we take a look around, then we see on the other side not only noise - we see structures. So only a pure random priniciple seems not to be true. Our own logic seems to exist somehow in the world all around. Looks like it's the same logic. But sometimes we don't know, how to interpret this all. What is mathematics in physics for example and what is real hard physics (without mathematics)? That's not easy to say - specially not when we are not able to see very little particles or titanic structures.

 

[james bond]

Sorry - was my mistake. I said it in the last line. I don't hide such mistakes. My fault.

Don't worry about it.

Not everything is evolution - circles for example exist since the universe exists - but everything what lives here on planet earth has with everything else what lives here on our planet a common ancestor.

This is the hard part. See, I believed in evolution, at first too. I even went to a famous west coast school where they made up the teaching program -- Understanding Evolution. It has professors famous in the evolution world. I have friends who wen to a famous Catholic university in San Francisco.

However, around 2008-2011, a series of articles came out that challenged it. Thus, I compared it to creation science, i.e. young earth creation. I became a reborn Christian in 2012. I think you know one has to become a reborn Christian in order to be predestined. It's not like one didn't lead to another, but I started to read the Bible. That's what led me to creation science. I struggled with the people parts like everyone else, so I ignored that part. It was like God guiding me. I read the science parts first, i.e. Genesis and the supernatural. The first difficult part was seeing the list of people who lived so long. Then it went into the begots. I just put the Bible down until I could make sense of it. Finally, it dawned on me that what was in the past was different than what was in the present. That's one of the first huge lies of atheism -- uniformitarianism. The past was different than in the present. We cannot use the present to understand the past. It should be the other way around. This was what was taught before the 1850s with all the great creation scientists such as Sir Isaac Newton and Sir Francis Bacon -- Creation scientists - creation.com.

Prior to this, we had the eternal universe. Secular science always had challenged the Bible. Science always had disagreed with the word of God. However, the word of God can never change. Thus, Satan through evolution had put into place the greatest lie to fool most of humankind. The science of past, the science of the present, were wrong and based on lies. People like Carl Sagan. People like Stephen Hawking. They were all wrong and not predestined.

What God's word teaches is that of the science from before the 1850s. Since then, secular scientists have systematically eliminated creation scientists whom I listed above from their peer reviews. These were their greatest enemies whose theories and science challenge theirs. Thus, today we have two sciences. One is Satan's. The other is God's. I don't think this can last too much longer. Even famous theologian William Lane Craig is not predestined. He believes in the lies of evolution, too.

What does it mean? It means Satan will be able to pull off the greatest trick to all humankind with the coming of his antiChrist. Many people will be convinced this is the way to go and put him into power. Isn't this what the Bible prophecised?

If the present is the key to the past, then we should see monkeys and apes be able to walk bipedal. However, they can't. it means they never walked bipedal in the past. Jack Chick's comic laid out the six keys to evolution. None are observable except the last one. Only real science can be tested using the scientific method. You know it.

So what about Catholicism? Do you believe in the Shroud of Turin? Well, that has been debunked. Real, observable science debunked it. Thus, one has to look at what Catholicism entails. One poster BreezeWood, a nut jobber, rails against it all the time.

Chick.com: Awful Truth, The

The Bible has always stated that Satan placed a false teacher within the church. It explains all the different versions of the Abrahamic God.

So, the question has always been the same. Are you predestined? That has always been what the Bible has stated.

 

[Hollie]

Sorry - was my mistake. I said it in the last line. I don't hide such mistakes. My fault.

Don't worry about it.

Not everything is evolution - circles for example exist since the universe exists - but everything what lives here on planet earth has with everything else what lives here on our planet a common ancestor.

This is the hard part. See, I believed in evolution, at first too. I even went to a famous west coast school where they made up the teaching program -- Understanding Evolution. It has professors famous in the evolution world. I have friends who wen to a famous Catholic university in San Francisco.

However, around 2008-2011, a series of articles came out that challenged it. Thus, I compared it to creation science, i.e. young earth creation. I became a reborn Christian in 2012. I think you know one has to become a reborn Christian in order to be predestined. It's not like one didn't lead to another, but I started to read the Bible. That's what led me to creation science. I struggled with the people parts like everyone else, so I ignored that part. It was like God guiding me. I read the science parts first, i.e. Genesis and the supernatural. The first difficult part was seeing the list of people who lived so long. Then it went into the begots. I just put the Bible down until I could make sense of it. Finally, it dawned on me that what was in the past was different than what was in the present. That's one of the first huge lies of atheism -- uniformitarianism. The past was different than in the present. We cannot use the present to understand the past. It should be the other way around. This was what was taught before the 1850s with all the great creation scientists such as Sir Isaac Newton and Sir Francis Bacon -- Creation scientists - creation.com.

Prior to this, we had the eternal universe. Secular science always had challenged the Bible. Science always had disagreed with the word of God. However, the word of God can never change. Thus, Satan through evolution had put into place the greatest lie to fool most of humankind. The science of past, the science of the present, were wrong and based on lies. People like Carl Sagan. People like Stephen Hawking. They were all wrong and not predestined.

What God's word teaches is that of the science from before the 1850s. Since then, secular scientists have systematically eliminated creation scientists whom I listed above from their peer reviews. These were their greatest enemies whose theories and science challenge theirs. Thus, today we have two sciences. One is Satan's. The other is God's. I don't think this can last too much longer. Even famous theologian William Lane Craig is not predestined. He believes in the lies of evolution, too.

What does it mean? It means Satan will be able to pull off the greatest trick to all humankind with the coming of his antiChrist. Many people will be convinced this is the way to go and put him into power. Isn't this what the Bible prophecised?

If the present is the key to the past, then we should see monkeys and apes be able to walk bipedal. However, they can't. it means they never walked bipedal in the past. Jack Chick's comic laid out the six keys to evolution. None are observable except the last one. Only real science can be tested using the scientific method. You know it.

So what about Catholicism? Do you believe in the Shroud of Turin? Well, that has been debunked. Real, observable science debunked it. Thus, one has to look at what Catholicism entails. One poster BreezeWood, a nut jobber, rails against it all the time.

Chick.com: Awful Truth, The

The Bible has always stated that Satan placed a false teacher within the church. It explains all the different versions of the Abrahamic God.

So, the question has always been the same. Are you predestined? That has always been what the Bible has stated.

Sorry - was my mistake. I said it in the last line. I don't hide such mistakes. My fault.

Don't worry about it.

Not everything is evolution - circles for example exist since the universe exists - but everything what lives here on planet earth has with everything else what lives here on our planet a common ancestor.

This is the hard part. See, I believed in evolution, at first too. I even went to a famous west coast school where they made up the teaching program -- Understanding Evolution. It has professors famous in the evolution world. I have friends who wen to a famous Catholic university in San Francisco.

However, around 2008-2011, a series of articles came out that challenged it. Thus, I compared it to creation science, i.e. young earth creation. I became a reborn Christian in 2012. I think you know one has to become a reborn Christian in order to be predestined. It's not like one didn't lead to another, but I started to read the Bible. That's what led me to creation science. I struggled with the people parts like everyone else, so I ignored that part. It was like God guiding me. I read the science parts first, i.e. Genesis and the supernatural. The first difficult part was seeing the list of people who lived so long. Then it went into the begots. I just put the Bible down until I could make sense of it. Finally, it dawned on me that what was in the past was different than what was in the present. That's one of the first huge lies of atheism -- uniformitarianism. The past was different than in the present. We cannot use the present to understand the past. It should be the other way around. This was what was taught before the 1850s with all the great creation scientists such as Sir Isaac Newton and Sir Francis Bacon -- Creation scientists - creation.com.

Prior to this, we had the eternal universe. Secular science always had challenged the Bible. Science always had disagreed with the word of God. However, the word of God can never change. Thus, Satan through evolution had put into place the greatest lie to fool most of humankind. The science of past, the science of the present, were wrong and based on lies. People like Carl Sagan. People like Stephen Hawking. They were all wrong and not predestined.

What God's word teaches is that of the science from before the 1850s. Since then, secular scientists have systematically eliminated creation scientists whom I listed above from their peer reviews. These were their greatest enemies whose theories and science challenge theirs. Thus, today we have two sciences. One is Satan's. The other is God's. I don't think this can last too much longer. Even famous theologian William Lane Craig is not predestined. He believes in the lies of evolution, too.

What does it mean? It means Satan will be able to pull off the greatest trick to all humankind with the coming of his antiChrist. Many people will be convinced this is the way to go and put him into power. Isn't this what the Bible prophecised?

If the present is the key to the past, then we should see monkeys and apes be able to walk bipedal. However, they can't. it means they never walked bipedal in the past. Jack Chick's comic laid out the six keys to evolution. None are observable except the last one. Only real science can be tested using the scientific method. You know it.

So what about Catholicism? Do you believe in the Shroud of Turin? Well, that has been debunked. Real, observable science debunked it. Thus, one has to look at what Catholicism entails. One poster BreezeWood, a nut jobber, rails against it all the time.

Chick.com: Awful Truth, The

The Bible has always stated that Satan placed a false teacher within the church. It explains all the different versions of the Abrahamic God.

So, the question has always been the same. Are you predestined? That has always been what the Bible has stated.

That's some pretty heavy-handed proselytizing. Wouldn't you get a bigger audience if you stood on a crowded street corner thumping your bibles?

 

[Hollie]

Sorry - was my mistake. I said it in the last line. I don't hide such mistakes. My fault.

Don't worry about it.

Not everything is evolution - circles for example exist since the universe exists - but everything what lives here on planet earth has with everything else what lives here on our planet a common ancestor.

This is the hard part. See, I believed in evolution, at first too. I even went to a famous west coast school where they made up the teaching program -- Understanding Evolution. It has professors famous in the evolution world. I have friends who wen to a famous Catholic university in San Francisco.

However, around 2008-2011, a series of articles came out that challenged it. Thus, I compared it to creation science, i.e. young earth creation. I became a reborn Christian in 2012. I think you know one has to become a reborn Christian in order to be predestined. It's not like one didn't lead to another, but I started to read the Bible. That's what led me to creation science. I struggled with the people parts like everyone else, so I ignored that part. It was like God guiding me. I read the science parts first, i.e. Genesis and the supernatural. The first difficult part was seeing the list of people who lived so long. Then it went into the begots. I just put the Bible down until I could make sense of it. Finally, it dawned on me that what was in the past was different than what was in the present. That's one of the first huge lies of atheism -- uniformitarianism. The past was different than in the present. We cannot use the present to understand the past. It should be the other way around. This was what was taught before the 1850s with all the great creation scientists such as Sir Isaac Newton and Sir Francis Bacon -- Creation scientists - creation.com.

Prior to this, we had the eternal universe. Secular science always had challenged the Bible. Science always had disagreed with the word of God. However, the word of God can never change. Thus, Satan through evolution had put into place the greatest lie to fool most of humankind. The science of past, the science of the present, were wrong and based on lies. People like Carl Sagan. People like Stephen Hawking. They were all wrong and not predestined.

What God's word teaches is that of the science from before the 1850s. Since then, secular scientists have systematically eliminated creation scientists whom I listed above from their peer reviews. These were their greatest enemies whose theories and science challenge theirs. Thus, today we have two sciences. One is Satan's. The other is God's. I don't think this can last too much longer. Even famous theologian William Lane Craig is not predestined. He believes in the lies of evolution, too.

What does it mean? It means Satan will be able to pull off the greatest trick to all humankind with the coming of his antiChrist. Many people will be convinced this is the way to go and put him into power. Isn't this what the Bible prophecised?

If the present is the key to the past, then we should see monkeys and apes be able to walk bipedal. However, they can't. it means they never walked bipedal in the past. Jack Chick's comic laid out the six keys to evolution. None are observable except the last one. Only real science can be tested using the scientific method. You know it.

So what about Catholicism? Do you believe in the Shroud of Turin? Well, that has been debunked. Real, observable science debunked it. Thus, one has to look at what Catholicism entails. One poster BreezeWood, a nut jobber, rails against it all the time.

Chick.com: Awful Truth, The

The Bible has always stated that Satan placed a false teacher within the church. It explains all the different versions of the Abrahamic God.

So, the question has always been the same. Are you predestined? That has always been what the Bible has stated.

Isaac Newton and Sir Francis Bacon were not "creation scientists".

Why do you feel a need to force your religion on others?

 

[zaangalewa]

abu afak

Sorry - was my mistake. I said it in the last line. I don't hide such mistakes. My fault.

Don't worry about it.

Not everything is evolution - circles for example exist since the universe exists - but everything what lives here on planet earth has with everything else what lives here on our planet a common ancestor.

This is the hard part. See, I believed in evolution, at first too.

Biological evolution isnot a belief. It is a fact. The qwo9rd "evolution" is only used inmost cases totally wrong. For is an expression like "evolution of cars" toa6taly doeffetn formthei what bioogicla evolution is. Machines follow s laws of fashion, constructive plans and a grwoing of knowledge in different fields.

I even went to a famous west coast school where they made up the teaching program -- Understanding Evolution. It has professors famous in the evolution world. I have friends who wen to a famous Catholic university in San Francisco.

However, around 2008-2011, a series of articles came out that challenged it.

To challenge what? The theory of evolution?

Thus, I compared it to creation science, i.e. young earth creation. I became a reborn Christian in 2012. I think you know one has to become a reborn Christian in order to be predestined.

No. I'm a Catholic. One under more then a billion. I my own language I would say then "So ist es mir aufgesetzet" and I would laugh and everyone of my people would laugh with me. It means nothing else than "predestined" but sounds much more funny.

It's not like one didn't lead to another, but I started to read the Bible. That's what led me to creation science. I struggled with the people parts like everyone else, so I ignored that part. It was like God guiding me. I read the science parts first, i.e. Genesis and the supernatural. The first difficult part was seeing the list of people who lived so long.

The bible is very clear in this position. 120 yaers is the maximum life spans and 80 years is a good age. The high numbers of years of the different names can have other reasons. Perhaps it are the ages of the houses and not the ages of the persons for example. Or it is a notation or a code where we forgot what it means. Or ...

Then it went into the begots.

Begots? Hervorbringer?

I just put the Bible down until I could make sense of it. Finally, it dawned on me that what was in the past was different than what was in the present. That's one of the first huge lies of atheism -- uniformitarianism.

Schrödinger spoke about that life means the entropy sinks. Practically this is against the stream of a growing entropy in the universe. A local pardox which is possible because of the enegry of the sun. This little entropy reversal is nearly nohting and totally unimportant compared with the universe - but it means we live.

The past was different than in the present. We cannot use the present to understand the past.

That's very imporant in historical research. Not so important in natural science. Biological evolution is somewhere between this two poles.

It should be the other way around. This was what was taught before the 1850s with all the great creation scientists such as Sir Isaac Newton and Sir Francis Bacon -- Creation scientists - creation.com.

Prior to this, we had the eternal universe. Secular science always had challenged the Bible. Science always had disagreed with the word of God.

Not at all. Augustinus for example made clear wonders don't hurt natural laws - wonders hurt only our knowlegde about natural laws.

However, the word of God can never change.

Really?

Thus, Satan through evolution had put into place the greatest lie to fool most of humankind. The science of past, the science of the present, were wrong and based on lies.

I'm always astinhed about the shoroastric elements of teh chrtasin oif the USA. Satan isnot a kiidnoif Antigod. He's only an angel.

People like Carl Sagan. People like Stephen Hawking. They were all wrong and not predestined.

Carl Sagan and Stephen Hawking are children of god. And sSteohen hakwing neer cvalled god an assolle - what would had been his right to do so. Life was not fair to him - or do you think it was fair in his case? When you say "i am predteinged btu he was not" then you should be ashamed about you yourselve. I don't say this to attack you. I don't say you are not predestined. I lament your imbalance.

What God's word teaches is that of the science from before the 1850s. Since then, secular scientists have systematically eliminated creation scientists whom I listed above from their peer reviews. These were their greatest enemies whose theories and science challenge theirs. Thus, today we have two sciences. One is Satan's. The other is God's.

Think about this:

I don't think this can last too much longer. Even famous theologian William Lane Craig is not predestined.

Aha. Who is William Lane Craig?

He believes in the lies of evolution, too.

What does it mean? It means Satan will be able to pull off the greatest trick to all humankind with the coming of his antiChrist.

I'm convinced no Antichrist is able to undo what Christ had done. Again: The devil is only an angel.

Many people will be convinced this is the way to go and put him into power. Isn't this what the Bible prophecised?

Prophecised?

If the present is the key to the past, then we should see monkeys and apes be able to walk bipedal.

Why should they do so?

However, they can't. it means they never walked bipedal in the past. Jack Chick's comic laid out the six keys to evolution. None are observable except the last one. Only real science can be tested using the scientific method. You know it.

I have the feeling you try to solve to many problems with the wrong methods and you lost your overview. Love god - love all people - and start to live.

So what about Catholicism? Do you believe in the Shroud of Turin?

Shroud of Turin? ... I don't think it shows Jesus - but it is a mystery in this shroud. After huindreeds of years a photographer fund this pciture when tehy decided to bring it in a reservoir in a museum and wanted to archivate it.

Well, that has been debunked. Real, observable science debunked it. Thus, one has to look at what Catholicism entails. One poster BreezeWood, a nut jobber, rails against it all the time.

Chick.com: Awful Truth, The

The Bible has always stated that Satan placed a false teacher within the church. It explains all the different versions of the Abrahamic God.

So, the question has always been the same. Are you predestined? That has always been what the Bible has stated.

God knows who or what I am. I'm not worried whether I am predestined or not.
Heres's by the way teh favroite song of Stephen Hakwing. I hope he rests now in the arms of the Lord.



PS I have now not time ot correct my wrong spelling. I'm noit a good keyboarder. I hope you understand what I said.

 

[james bond]

Biological evolution isnot a belief. It is a fact. The qwo9rd "evolution" is only used inmost cases totally wrong. For is an expression like "evolution of cars" toa6taly doeffetn formthei what bioogicla evolution is. Machines follow s laws of fashion, constructive plans and a grwoing of knowledge in different fields.

No, evolution is a theory. Now, you're separating ToE and evolution in order to avoid origins. Evolution is not modern, but has been with us since ancient times. It was argued by the Stoics vs the Epicureans. Back then, it was part of evolutionary thinking and history.

To challenge what? The theory of evolution?

Haha. You just admitted that you are wrong and that it is ToE.

Besides, this isn't what you SAID. You said evolution was FACT. Not only is it NOT fact, you are ignoring the six basic concepts of evolution. ToE involves the last two of half of which has been creation science. #6 is fact, but it is still variation within a kind (family).

As for the rest, you go back into the other basic concepts of evolution. What kind of bait and switch argument are you using?

Anyway, I am glad you admitted ToE because that's what it is and NOT facts. We are not descendants of monkeys. Hopefully, you'll understand today's chimps and apes do not evolve because ToE is bogus. They do not become bipedal and never became bipedal and humans.

As for the rest, you may or may not get it one day. Predestination only refers to whether one is saved or not. God, in his infinite wisdom, has already chosen his people. None of us knows who he has chosen because we still await final judgment and Jesus will be the judge. We still have the will to choose which religion to worship including atheism.

However, it's not evolution. Evolution was formed by atheistic thinking, i.e. uniformitarianism and ToE, and has led many astray. It has systematically eliminated creation science from peer reviews which you conveniently ignore. Thus, creation scientists and I have no floor on which to speak upon. It's a violation of free speech in the scientific world. And this is one of the strongest reasons evolution is a lie and fake science.

ETA: Stephen Hawking? Eh... maybe YOU'LL get the chance to meet him in person in the next life. There you go.

 

[zaangalewa]

Biological evolution isnot a belief. It is a fact. The qwo9rd "evolution" is only used inmost cases totally wrong. For is an expression like "evolution of cars" toa6taly doeffetn formthei what bioogicla evolution is. Machines follow s laws of fashion, constructive plans and a grwoing of knowledge in different fields.

No, evolution is a theory.

Evolution is a fact. The or a theory of evolution is a plausible explanation for this fact. And I do not discuss anything in context "creation vs evoution". A totally superflous discussion, which has specially absolutelly nothing to do with Christians. Catholics never had a problem with the real scientific theory of biological evolution.

Now, you're separating ToE and evolution in order to avoid origins. Evolution is not modern, but has been with us since ancient times. It was argued by the Stoics vs the Epicureans. Back then, it was part of evolutionary thinking and history.

To challenge what? The theory of evolution?

Haha. You just admitted that you are wrong and that it is ToE.

View attachment 271791

Besides, this isn't what you SAID. You said evolution was FACT. Not only is it NOT fact, you are ignoring the six basic concepts of evolution. ToE involves the last two of half of which has been creation science. #6 is fact, but it is still variation within a kind (family).

As for the rest, you go back into the other basic concepts of evolution. What kind of bait and switch argument are you using?

Anyway, I am glad you admitted ToE because that's what it is and NOT facts. We are not descendants of monkeys.

A monkey with the name Hugo and you have a common ancestor. The theory of evolution is very concrete. Unfortunatelly I don't know, whether a monkey with the name Hugo exists - and this is the problem what the most people have, who speak about evolution: They are lost in abstracta. You are lost in abstracta too.

Hopefully, you'll understand today's chimps and apes do not evolve because ToE is bogus. They do not become bipedal and never became bipedal and humans.

As for the rest, you may or may not get it one day. Predestination only refers to whether one is saved or not. God, in his infinite wisdom, has already chosen his people. None of us knows who he has chosen because we still await final judgment and Jesus will be the judge. We still have the will to choose which religion to worship including atheism.

However, it's not evolution. Evolution was formed by atheistic thinking, i.e. uniformitarianism and ToE, and has led many astray. It has systematically eliminated creation science from peer reviews which you conveniently ignore. Thus, creation scientists and I have no floor on which to speak upon. It's a violation of free speech in the scientific world. And this is one of the strongest reasons evolution is a lie and fake science.

ETA: Stephen Hawking? Eh... maybe YOU'LL get the chance to meet him in person in the next life. There you go.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Of course, nobody is dismissing Newton's theory. Thats just another piece of shit headline from probably the biggest piece of shit tabloid on the planet. Dont read the Express. There are way more fun ways to kill brain cells.

 

[james bond]

Evolution is a fact. The or a theory of evolution is a plausible explanation for this fact. And I do not discuss anything in context "creation vs evoution". A totally superflous discussion, which has specially absolutelly nothing to do with Christians. Catholics never had a problem with the real scientific theory of biological evolution.

Haha. No use continuing this discussion as you are not being scientific at all.

A monkey with the name Hugo and you have a common ancestor. The theory of evolution is very concrete. Unfortunatelly I don't know, whether a monkey with the name Hugo exists - and this is the problem what the most people have, who speak about evolution: They are lost in abstracta. You are lost in abstracta too.

Now, you have pulled the old bait-n-swith back to ToE. I think you're the one lost in "abstracta." I do not need evolution in my life because I have God, the Bible, and creation science, i.e. observable science that shows science backs up the Bible. Why is "evolution is fact" so important for you? Does Catholicism lack that which you seek? We have ding, another follower of Catholicism, who completely ignores Genesis. Genesis is the supernatural part in the Bible which we find science backs up. It is the most important part which secular/atheist scientists have eliminated from science. These people have been eliminated from peer reviews. They could lose their jobs if they bring up the Bible theory. Is it any wonder that we are not long for this Earth and will meet Jesus sooner than the next century?

Maybe after President Donald Trump completes his second term, the Earth will go to hell in a handbasket.

 

[Hollie]

Evolution is a fact. The or a theory of evolution is a plausible explanation for this fact. And I do not discuss anything in context "creation vs evoution". A totally superflous discussion, which has specially absolutelly nothing to do with Christians. Catholics never had a problem with the real scientific theory of biological evolution.

Haha. No use continuing this discussion as you are not being scientific at all.

A monkey with the name Hugo and you have a common ancestor. The theory of evolution is very concrete. Unfortunatelly I don't know, whether a monkey with the name Hugo exists - and this is the problem what the most people have, who speak about evolution: They are lost in abstracta. You are lost in abstracta too.

Now, you have pulled the old bait-n-swith back to ToE. I think you're the one lost in "abstracta." I do not need evolution in my life because I have God, the Bible, and creation science, i.e. observable science that shows science backs up the Bible. Why is "evolution is fact" so important for you? Does Catholicism lack that which you seek? We have ding, another follower of Catholicism, who completely ignores Genesis. Genesis is the supernatural part in the Bible which we find science backs up.

Science doesn't back up supernaturalism.

 

[james bond]

Of course, nobody is dismissing Newton's theory. Thats just another piece of shit headline from probably the biggest piece of shit tabloid on the planet. Dont read the Express. There are way more fun ways to kill brain cells.

Haha. Newton's theory has been dismissed since the 1900s. It was replaced by Einstein's theory of general relativity. However, we still use Newton's calculations today as it still works very nicely in the most of the universe (see very large or very small masses). Sir Isaac Newton's work on motion and gravity is still very relevant.

Now, before you go off on me, why don't toss our idja friend bear513 some choice ad hominems. He didn't know either.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

I see everyone is ignorant as to the real meaning "theory" and "law" in the scientific sense. Here's a hint, Newton never had a theory of gravity.

 

[WinterBorn]

Like we have been saying evolution and gravity is just a theory...


Newton was wrong: Scientists dismiss Newton's theory of gravity and warn Einstein is next


ISAAC NEWTON is rightly regarded as the greatest scientist of all time. However, groundbreaking black hole research has now disproved Newton’s theory of gravity – and even Albert Einstein’s theories are “starting to fray around the edges”, a scientist has warned.
By TOM FISH
12:00, Sat, Jul 27, 2019 | UPDATED: 12:00, Sat, Jul 27, 2019

I had seen this in an online science journal.

This is why I prefer science to religion. When new evidence comes to light, science accepts it and changes the previous theories.