Warning: Gravity is "Only a Theory"

[Hollie]

This thread is about gravity which is tied to the universe. We have the theory of Universal Gravitation from Sir Isaac Newton. What we theorize is based on Einstein's Theory of Relativity.

Anyway, I can explain the science behind it to get our calculations as well as the origins. Unfortunately, the OP couldn't help but complain about creationists and their explanation of the origins. Usually, science doesn't get into the origins, but the OP could not help himself. He should've just stuck to the Einstein and Newton's theories.

Now, you come in to complain about the origins. Why not just present what you have with YOUR complaint? If we stay away from origins, then no one should have any problems with the topic. I have problems with the OP and why he has a need to complain about the creationists when he is the one who brings in origins.

OTOH, you sneakily bring in origins by bringing in God when neither are the topic. For whatever reason, you had to made a bunch of threads on your complaints.

Why can't one just say "Gravity: It's only a theory?"

As for origins, I, as a scientist, can say this is how gravity works and how we can use it by getting calculations. As to how gravity and everything else got here, I don't know. As a creationist, I can say I know how gravity and everything else originated.

As a creationer, you can’t tell anyone anything without invoking fear and superstition.

 

[Hollie]

I'm not sidestepping anything. First, evolution from Darwin says nothing about God nor atheism. Very few atheists here have pointed it out. You and the majority of atheists just criticize creation. Natural selection points out how living organisms, animals and humans are related because they all change via

"
1) Fitness is terms of greater reproduction.
2) Genes that increase lifetime reproduction will be selected for, even if they reduce the individual’s longevity.
3) When we find something that seems like an error in natural selection, more likely we are missing some important function that compensates for the deficit.
4) Change the environment, and the gene may no longer increase fitness.
5) Natural selection arises by chance."

What creation and creationists do is how the universe, Earth, and living creatures including humans got here in the first place. They explain why we are here, too."

Thus, it's evolution that doesn't have all the answers. However, I think the majority of creationists do not call natural selection -- evolution.

There is no reason why Darwin’s work should have anything to do with your extremist religious beliefs.

 

[abu afak]

You want to see the 12 Christian sects who have signed on to your atheist evolution ? They don’t believe in creationism .

Roman Catholic Church	61.2	49.0	•		•
Southern Baptist Convention	15.7	12.6		†
United Methodist Church	8.5	6.8	•	†	•
National Baptist Convention USA	8.2	6.6		†
Church of God in Christ	5.5	4.4
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America	5.2	4.2		‡
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons)	4.8	3.8
Presbyterian Church (USA)	3.5	2.8	•	‡	•
National Baptist Convention of America	3.5	2.8		†
African Methodist Episcopal Church	3.5	2.8		†	•
Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod	2.6	2.1
The Episcopal Church	2

But Bond (and that other freak) say anyone supporting Evo is an atheist.
One can be a rational secularist, just not a completely science-denying literalist.
Also, when they say god they only mean their god, and as you point out, their SECT/CULT of literalism.
`

`

 

[Grumblenuts]

I didn't say it was "your thread." I called it 'this whole "gravity is just a theory thread?'"

Yes, in fact you did. Earlier:

Did you have a point with this whole "gravity is just a theory thread?"

Again, not my thread, Flops. Deal with it. Moving on..

I'll happily debate Tesla when he comes on this forum, and says something with which I disagree.

If you think something he said disputes my facts, quote it and say you will defend it.

I did and, sorry, you best get used to defending your own stuff. Regardless, thanks for revealing your true, tedious wanker self. Life is short. Bubbye!

 

[Seymour Flops]

Yes, in fact you did. Earlier:

Again, not my thread, Flops. Deal with it. Moving on..

I did and, sorry, you best get used to defending your own stuff. Regardless, thanks for revealing your true, tedious wanker self. Life is short. Bubbye!

Never takes long for the personal attacks accompanied by a goodbye to come out.

Run, Gumplenuts, run!

 

[james bond]

As a creationer, you can’t tell anyone anything without invoking fear and superstition.

Are you afraid that the creationists are right with their creation science? After all, they have evidence that backs up creation while macroevolution doesn't have any evidence to back it up.

I think superstition comes in with belief in atheism. Supernatural isn't the same as superstition, so you are wrong again lol -- Supernatural vs Superstition - What's the difference?.

 

[james bond]

But Bond (and that other freak) say anyone supporting Evo is an atheist.

Heh, you don't know about your own religion lmao. As the norm, I kick your worthless atheist ass all over the place here.

'Since World War II a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been atheists. The prominent new atheist, agnostic and evolutionist Richard Dawkins claims that "Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist."

The majority of Western World atheists are evolutionists. As far as nontheist Buddhism, as no major beliefs/principles of Buddhism are contrary to it, many Buddhists are also evolutionists.[4][5]

The Discovery Institute reported:

“

Compare just these two findings, reported in a survey we commissioned in 2016. On one hand: Nearly 7 in 10 atheists and more than 4 in 10 agnostics say that for them personally, unguided chemical evolution and Darwin's mutation/natural selection mechanism have made the existence of God "less likely." On the other: By contrast, 6 in 10 theists and more than 2 in 10 agnostics say the existence in nature of "many things that are exquisitely designed and highly complex" has made the existence of God "more likely" for them personally.[6]

”

The atheist philosopher and evolutionist Michael Ruse admitted:

“

[E]volution, akin to religion, involves making certain a priori or metaphysical assumptions, which at some level cannot be proven empirically.[7]

”

Michael Ruse also indicated: "Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today."[8]

In the their Question evolution! campaign, Creation Ministries International asserts that evolution is a religion.[9] The focus of the Question evolution! campaign is on 15 questions that evolutionists cannot adequately answer.[10] The 15 Questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer can be found at their webpage entitled 15 questions for evolutionists.'

Atheism and evolution - Conservapedia

www.conservapedia.com

 

[james bond]

There is no reason why Darwin’s work should have anything to do with your extremist religious beliefs.

The Bible came BEFORE Darwin, but he didn't take its creation science into consideration. Thus, evolution doesn't fit as creation already explained natural selection.

Instead, what Darwin proposed has natural selection by abiogenesis, but there is no evidence for abiogenesis. Darwin had his own ideas about origins and today atheists have their own ideas, too.

 

[Hollie]

The Bible came BEFORE Darwin, but he didn't take its creation science into consideration. Thus, evolution doesn't fit as creation already explained natural selection.

Instead, what Darwin proposed has natural selection by abiogenesis, but there is no evidence for abiogenesis. Darwin had his own ideas about origins and today atheists have their own ideas, too.

Your madrassah has been a source of falsehoods and misinformation. Darwin’s work never addressed abiogenesis.

Jimmy Swaggert is not a qualified science teacher.

 

[Wuwei]

ETA: My purpose in S&I isn't to discuss proof of God, but to show creation science. Now, I can show proof of it with secular ways and not have to say, "God did it."

Here's an example. Noah's or global flood was created as "on this day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up . . ." (Genesis 7:11). We find "ocean springs off Ecuador's coast that proved that such large bodies of water do indeed contains fountains spewing liquids." The big evidence is we learned about plate tectonics from creationist Alfred Wegener.

"Fountains spewing liquids"??? Give us evidence of how much spewing is needed.

The average depth of water in the ocean is 1.6 miles

To raise the ocean another 1.6 miles would require another entire ocean of water. The tallest mountain is over 4 miles high. The amount of water needed to cover the tallest mountain is formidable -- a multiple number of oceans, which is not known to exist.

Deep waters

Santa Cruz, California DEEP inside the Earth, the pressure is excruciating. Squeezed into strange shapes and forms, the rocks are so hot that they crawl like super-thick treacle. It is an inferno worthy of Dante, but it also contains something surprising. What's the last thing you would expect...

www.newscientist.com

But this water is not a series of immense seas. Rather, it is scattered in droplets, some as small as a single molecule, with most trapped inside crystal lattices of rare minerals that only form under intense pressures. How much there is down there is still fiercely debated.​

Another source says the trapped water is 400 Km below the surface. Creationists have not covered the fact that the water that is trapped in the earth is not available to rise as fountains. What strains the physical reality even more is the process of getting the several oceans worth of receding flood water 400 Km back down into the mantel where it is today -- dispersed and locked inside crystal lattices.

That is evidence that Noah's flood is impossible.

.

 

[Hollie]

The Bible came BEFORE Darwin, but he didn't take its creation science into consideration. Thus, evolution doesn't fit as creation already explained natural selection.

Instead, what Darwin proposed has natural selection by abiogenesis, but there is no evidence for abiogenesis. Darwin had his own ideas about origins and today atheists have their own ideas, too.

Many gods came before your gods. Why do you worship a day late and a Bible short gods?

 

[Hollie]

Heh, you don't know about your own religion lmao. As the norm, I kick your worthless atheist ass all over the place here.

'Since World War II a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been atheists. The prominent new atheist, agnostic and evolutionist Richard Dawkins claims that "Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist."

The majority of Western World atheists are evolutionists. As far as nontheist Buddhism, as no major beliefs/principles of Buddhism are contrary to it, many Buddhists are also evolutionists.[4][5]

The Discovery Institute reported:

“

Compare just these two findings, reported in a survey we commissioned in 2016. On one hand: Nearly 7 in 10 atheists and more than 4 in 10 agnostics say that for them personally, unguided chemical evolution and Darwin's mutation/natural selection mechanism have made the existence of God "less likely." On the other: By contrast, 6 in 10 theists and more than 2 in 10 agnostics say the existence in nature of "many things that are exquisitely designed and highly complex" has made the existence of God "more likely" for them personally.[6]

”

The atheist philosopher and evolutionist Michael Ruse admitted:

“

[E]volution, akin to religion, involves making certain a priori or metaphysical assumptions, which at some level cannot be proven empirically.[7]

”

Michael Ruse also indicated: "Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today."[8]

In the their Question evolution! campaign, Creation Ministries International asserts that evolution is a religion.[9] The focus of the Question evolution! campaign is on 15 questions that evolutionists cannot adequately answer.[10] The 15 Questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer can be found at their webpage entitled 15 questions for evolutionists.'

Atheism and evolution - Conservapedia

www.conservapedia.com

Why should anyone but a religious extremist accept anything from charlatans at the Disco'tute?

 

[Hollie]

Are you afraid that the creationists are right with their creation science? After all, they have evidence that backs up creation while macroevolution doesn't have any evidence to back it up.

I think superstition comes in with belief in atheism. Supernatural isn't the same as superstition, so you are wrong again lol -- Supernatural vs Superstition - What's the difference?.

The ID'iot creationers are not right, so. no reason to be afraid.

Why are ID'iot creationers afraid of facts and evidence?

 

[james bond]

The ID'iot creationers are not right, so. no reason to be afraid.

Why are ID'iot creationers afraid of facts and evidence?

As per your norm, you do not discuss the topic. At least, I try to discuss the topic, but this is not an easy one to understand. God gave us gravity and it gives us attraction between physical bodies and time dilation.

Yours is but to complain about me. The main reason to be afraid of God's wrath is the Lake of Fire forever. However, you'll suffer immediate pain after death as you will be transported to a temporary hell while I'll go to a temporary heaven. Those are the facts whether you believe it or not.

I think gravity or Jesus helps to pull you in if one tries to escape. That's just my personal opinion or imagination lol. This way there's no need for a flaming arrow to the heart and you being dragged back in agony. Also, there are stories of the devil dragging you to hell but that's not what the Bible states.

The facts and evidence are in the Bible and science backs up the evidence. Also, I'm able to explain them here. I can't help it if it repudiates your evolutionary beliefs, but the Bible said it first and the greatest scientists of the world have been creation scientists. Your scientists die and are quickly forgotten. What did you learn from what's his name?

 

[james bond]

"Fountains spewing liquids"??? Give us evidence of how much spewing is needed.

The average depth of water in the ocean is 1.6 miles

To raise the ocean another 1.6 miles would require another entire ocean of water. The tallest mountain is over 4 miles high. The amount of water needed to cover the tallest mountain is formidable -- a multiple number of oceans, which is not known to exist.

Deep waters

Santa Cruz, California DEEP inside the Earth, the pressure is excruciating. Squeezed into strange shapes and forms, the rocks are so hot that they crawl like super-thick treacle. It is an inferno worthy of Dante, but it also contains something surprising. What's the last thing you would expect...

www.newscientist.com

But this water is not a series of immense seas. Rather, it is scattered in droplets, some as small as a single molecule, with most trapped inside crystal lattices of rare minerals that only form under intense pressures. How much there is down there is still fiercely debated.​

Another source says the trapped water is 400 Km below the surface. Creationists have not covered the fact that the water that is trapped in the earth is not available to rise as fountains. What strains the physical reality even more is the process of getting the several oceans worth of receding flood water 400 Km back down into the mantel where it is today -- dispersed and locked inside crystal lattices.

That is evidence that Noah's flood is impossible.

.

This has been explained already as the Bible was here before New Scientist magazine lol.

Evidence of Fountains of the Great Deep?

Two recent articles in Nature Geoscience may provide important validations of the global Flood. Did researchers find evidence of the “fountains of the great deep” that started the deluge? Timothy Paulsen, from the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, and co-authors from Michigan Technological...

www.icr.org

These new scientists and you just can't accept the truth because it goes against faith in evolutionary thinking.

 

[Hollie]

As per your norm, you do not discuss the topic. At least, I try to discuss the topic, but this is not an easy one to understand. God gave us gravity and it gives us attraction between physical bodies and time dilation.

Yours is but to complain about me. The main reason to be afraid of God's wrath is the Lake of Fire forever. However, you'll suffer immediate pain after death as you will be transported to a temporary hell while I'll go to a temporary heaven. Those are the facts whether you believe it or not.

I think gravity or Jesus helps to pull you in if one tries to escape. That's just my personal opinion or imagination lol. This way there's no need for a flaming arrow to the heart and you being dragged back in agony. Also, there are stories of the devil dragging you to hell but that's not what the Bible states.

The facts and evidence are in the Bible and science backs up the evidence. Also, I'm able to explain them here. I can't help it if it repudiates your evolutionary beliefs, but the Bible said it first and the greatest scientists of the world have been creation scientists. Your scientists die and are quickly forgotten. What did you learn from what's his name?

You don't discuss anything. You proselytize. You don't understand what forum you're in.

Live in trembling fear of your gods in the religion forum.

 

[Hollie]

This has been explained already as the Bible was here before New Scientist magazine lol.

Evidence of Fountains of the Great Deep?

Two recent articles in Nature Geoscience may provide important validations of the global Flood. Did researchers find evidence of the “fountains of the great deep” that started the deluge? Timothy Paulsen, from the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, and co-authors from Michigan Technological...

www.icr.org

These new scientists and you just can't accept the truth because it goes against faith in evolutionary thinking.

YouTube videos accompanied by music and lots of pretty colors.

Science for the religious extremist.

 

[Wuwei]

This has been explained already as the Bible was here before New Scientist magazine lol.

Evidence of Fountains of the Great Deep?

Two recent articles in Nature Geoscience may provide important validations of the global Flood. Did researchers find evidence of the “fountains of the great deep” that started the deluge? Timothy Paulsen, from the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, and co-authors from Michigan Technological...

www.icr.org

These new scientists and you just can't accept the truth because it goes against faith in evolutionary thinking.

Can you point out the spot in your video where they say where the several oceans worth of water was and how all that managed to come through the fountains of the deep? And where several oceans worth of water disappeared to when the flood receded?

If this has been explained in the bible, as you say, then you are relying on a religious miracle, not science. This should be in the religious forum, not here.
.

 

[Dagosa]

But Bond (and that other freak) say anyone supporting Evo is an atheist.
One can be a rational secularist, just not a completely science-denying literalist.
Also, when they say god they only mean their god, and as you point out, their SECT/CULT of literalism.
`

`

Ha ha…
Every Christian who claims to follow their bible as fact is a hypocrite. They don’t even represent other Christians who admit to support evolution.

 

[Dagosa]

This thread is about gravity which is tied to the universe. We have the theory of Universal Gravitation from Sir Isaac Newton. What we theorize is based on Einstein's Theory of Relativity.

Anyway, I can explain the science behind it to get our calculations as well as the origins. Unfortunately, the OP couldn't help but complain about creationists and their explanation of the origins. Usually, science doesn't get into the origins, but the OP could not help himself. He should've just stuck to the Einstein and Newton's theories.

Now, you come in to complain about the origins. Why not just present what you have with YOUR complaint? If we stay away from origins, then no one should have any problems with the topic. I have problems with the OP and why he has a need to complain about the creationists when he is the one who brings in origins.

OTOH, you sneakily bring in origins by bringing in God when neither are the topic. For whatever reason, you had to made a bunch of threads on your complaints.

Why can't one just say "Gravity: It's only a theory?"

As for origins, I, as a scientist, can say this is how gravity works and how we can use it by getting calculations. As to how gravity and everything else got here, I don't know. As a creationist, I can say I know how gravity and everything else originated.

Way too much to read…..no comment about the 12 sects of Christians who have all signed on to evolution ?