- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote Science says put up or shut up. It is rude like that, but honest! To be fair dear Stuart, Science may support this idea, however they do not practice it.
Quote (princess of the king @ April 28 2010,14:08) Quote Science says put up or shut up. It is rude like that, but honest! To be fair dear Stuart, Science may support this idea, however they do not practice it.
What example(s) do you have in mind?Stuart
Quote (Stu @ April 28 2010,20:47) Quote (princess of the king @ April 28 2010,14:08) Quote Science says put up or shut up. It is rude like that, but honest! To be fair dear Stuart, Science may support this idea, however they do not practice it.
What example(s) do you have in mind?Stuart
Hi Stuart,The keep 'flapping their chops' about a lie! You know which one.
Quote (Stu @ April 28 2010,20:47) Quote (princess of the king @ April 28 2010,14:08) Quote Science says put up or shut up. It is rude like that, but honest! To be fair dear Stuart, Science may support this idea, however they do not practice it.
What example(s) do you have in mind?Stuart
Due to the fact that nothing ever ends for science, no firm standings. Any subject or matter can change with 'new' evidence/findings.I do not dispute the cause. Sciene can never 'shut up' due to the nature of science. Very micro managed.
Will you recant your statement, or will we continue on.
Quote (Stu @ April 28 2010,20:47) Quote (princess of the king @ April 28 2010,14:08) Quote Science says put up or shut up. It is rude like that, but honest! To be fair dear Stuart, Science may support this idea, however they do not practice it.
What example(s) do you have in mind?Stuart
((((((((((((((((((((((((((Edit)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Hi Stuart,
They keep 'flapping their chops' about a lie! You know which one.
Quote (princess of the king @ April 29 2010,13:49) Quote (Stu @ April 28 2010,20:47) Quote (princess of the king @ April 28 2010,14:08) Quote Science says put up or shut up. It is rude like that, but honest! To be fair dear Stuart, Science may support this idea, however they do not practice it.
What example(s) do you have in mind?Stuart
Due to the fact that nothing ever ends for science, no firm standings. Any subject or matter can change with 'new' evidence/findings.I do not dispute the cause. Sciene can never 'shut up' due to the nature of science. Very micro managed.
Will you recant your statement, or will we continue on.
It is not true that there are no firm standings. Most change is refinement, very little of it is radical changes of direction.Newton is still practically right, even if Einstein changed the details.
Darwin has always been right, all we have done is fit the newly discovered pieces into his framework: they fit almost perfectly, even though he didn't know what they would turn out to be.
Put up or shut up means you have no credibility unless your claim to the contrary is supported by evidence. No one has ever disproved Darwin, and despite whatever considerable powers you may have, I don't think you are going to be the first.
Science says if you have evidence, speak up!
Stuart
Quote (Ed J @ April 29 2010,13:52) Quote (Stu @ April 28 2010,20:47) Quote (princess of the king @ April 28 2010,14:08) Quote Science says put up or shut up. It is rude like that, but honest! To be fair dear Stuart, Science may support this idea, however they do not practice it.
What example(s) do you have in mind?Stuart
((((((((((((((((((((((((((Edit)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Hi Stuart,
They keep 'flapping their chops' about a lie! You know which one.
No idea what you mean.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ May 02 2010,01:43) Quote (Ed J @ April 29 2010,13:52) Quote (Stu @ April 28 2010,20:47) Quote (princess of the king @ April 28 2010,14:08) Quote Science says put up or shut up. It is rude like that, but honest! To be fair dear Stuart, Science may support this idea, however they do not practice it.
What example(s) do you have in mind?Stuart
((((((((((((((((((((((((((Edit)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Hi Stuart,
They keep 'flapping their chops' about a lie! You know which one.
No idea what you mean.Stuart
Hi Stuart,The Lie about evolving from apes. More proof of God's existence!
You always want T8 to watch 'your' videos, will you watch these?Witnessing to the world in behalf of YHVH (Psalm 45:17)
יהוה האלהים(JEHOVAH GOD) YÄ-hä-vā hä ĔL-ō-Hêêm!
Ed J (AKJV Joshua 22:34 / Isaiah 60:13-15)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Stu @ May 02 2010,01:42) Quote (princess of the king @ April 29 2010,13:49) Quote (Stu @ April 28 2010,20:47) Quote (princess of the king @ April 28 2010,14:08) Quote Science says put up or shut up. It is rude like that, but honest! To be fair dear Stuart, Science may support this idea, however they do not practice it.
What example(s) do you have in mind?Stuart
Due to the fact that nothing ever ends for science, no firm standings. Any subject or matter can change with 'new' evidence/findings.I do not dispute the cause. Sciene can never 'shut up' due to the nature of science. Very micro managed.
Will you recant your statement, or will we continue on.
It is not true that there are no firm standings. Most change is refinement, very little of it is radical changes of direction.Newton is still practically right, even if Einstein changed the details.
Darwin has always been right, all we have done is fit the newly discovered pieces into his framework: they fit almost perfectly, even though he didn't know what they would turn out to be.
Put up or shut up means you have no credibility unless your claim to the contrary is supported by evidence. No one has ever disproved Darwin, and despite whatever considerable powers you may have, I don't think you are going to be the first.
Science says if you have evidence, speak up!
Stuart
Alas Stuart, there still is change even though it be slight.Stuart, I dearly love you, you are however begining to sound like the ones that teach the trinity.
Even though it is not stated profoundly, it is still there, just as we progress we add the pieces to what belief is held. Different name, same subject.
Contrary to the belief, a square can fit into a round. Evidence can support this, once different applications are applied, then it becomes impossible.
Stuart, when will you reason, that science is not always correct, and limits one.
Take care Stuart.
Quote (Ed J @ May 02 2010,02:07) Hi Stuart, The Lie about evolving from apes.
Can't see how it is a lie, when you yourself ARE an ape, as am I.The Hominidae (anglicized hominids, also known as great apes) form a taxonomic family, including four extant genera: chimpanzees, gorillas, humans, and orangutans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape
Stuart
Quote (princess of the king @ May 02 2010,02:55) Quote (Stu @ May 02 2010,01:42) Quote (princess of the king @ April 29 2010,13:49) Quote (Stu @ April 28 2010,20:47) Quote (princess of the king @ April 28 2010,14:08) Quote Science says put up or shut up. It is rude like that, but honest! To be fair dear Stuart, Science may support this idea, however they do not practice it.
What example(s) do you have in mind?Stuart
Due to the fact that nothing ever ends for science, no firm standings. Any subject or matter can change with 'new' evidence/findings.I do not dispute the cause. Sciene can never 'shut up' due to the nature of science. Very micro managed.
Will you recant your statement, or will we continue on.
It is not true that there are no firm standings. Most change is refinement, very little of it is radical changes of direction.Newton is still practically right, even if Einstein changed the details.
Darwin has always been right, all we have done is fit the newly discovered pieces into his framework: they fit almost perfectly, even though he didn't know what they would turn out to be.
Put up or shut up means you have no credibility unless your claim to the contrary is supported by evidence. No one has ever disproved Darwin, and despite whatever considerable powers you may have, I don't think you are going to be the first.
Science says if you have evidence, speak up!
Stuart
Alas Stuart, there still is change even though it be slight.Stuart, I dearly love you, you are however begining to sound like the ones that teach the trinity.
Even though it is not stated profoundly, it is still there, just as we progress we add the pieces to what belief is held. Different name, same subject.
Contrary to the belief, a square can fit into a round. Evidence can support this, once different applications are applied, then it becomes impossible.
Stuart, when will you reason, that science is not always correct, and limits one.
Take care Stuart.
Absolutely no idea what you are banging on about princess, but fair play to you whatever it is.Stuart
When Stu tries to understand God with his natural senses, he will not see him. This alone explains why he is the way he is.
Here is a quote from James Freeman Clarke, “Imperfect and Perfect Theism,” from the book, Steps of Belief (1870).
“The Bible says, and says correctly, that ‘spiritual things are spiritually discerned.’ Man has various organs by which he discerns various realities. Each class of realities is discerned through its own organ. In externals, we know this well enough. We never expect to see with our hands, or to smell with our ears. We know that we cannot do a sum in the rule of three by our nose, or taste with our tongue the proper translation of a Greek sentence. Visible things, we know, are optically discerned, by the eyes; audible things are discerned audibly, by the ears; tangible things are discerned by the touch; logical things
are detected by the reason; emotions of the soul are perceived by the consciousness; historical facts are reported by the memory. We do not deny the existence of Julius Cesar, because we cannot touch him; nor the fragrance of a rose, because we cannot hear it. Nor do we deny the existence of hope and fear, love and hatred, because these cannot be perceived by the sense. Why, then, doubt the reality of spiritual things, because they must be spiritually discerned?”Quote (t8 @ June 10 2010,11:26) When Stu tries to understand God with his natural senses, he will not see him. This alone explains why he is the way he is.
Absolutely it does. Thank you for the compliment.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ June 11 2010,22:44) Quote (t8 @ June 10 2010,11:26) When Stu tries to understand God with his natural senses, he will not see him. This alone explains why he is the way he is.
Absolutely it does. Thank you for the compliment.Stuart
He also refuses to consider Scientific data that I have provided.Quote (Stu @ June 11 2010,22:44) Quote (t8 @ June 10 2010,11:26) When Stu tries to understand God with his natural senses, he will not see him. This alone explains why he is the way he is.
Absolutely it does. Thank you for the compliment.Stuart
Where have you been Stu.
I was worried about you.Tim
Quote (Stu @ June 11 2010,22:44) Quote (t8 @ June 10 2010,11:26) When Stu tries to understand God with his natural senses, he will not see him. This alone explains why he is the way he is.
Absolutely it does. Thank you for the compliment.Stuart
No probs. Keep denying roses because you can't hear them. It is entertaining.Quote (Ed J @ June 12 2010,04:25) Quote (Stu @ June 11 2010,22:44) Quote (t8 @ June 10 2010,11:26) When Stu tries to understand God with his natural senses, he will not see him. This alone explains why he is the way he is.
Absolutely it does. Thank you for the compliment.Stuart
He also refuses to consider Scientific data that I have provided.
Remove the word scientific from your post, and you are right!Stuart
Quote (TimothyVI @ June 12 2010,05:26) Quote (Stu @ June 11 2010,22:44) Quote (t8 @ June 10 2010,11:26) When Stu tries to understand God with his natural senses, he will not see him. This alone explains why he is the way he is.
Absolutely it does. Thank you for the compliment.Stuart
Where have you been Stu.
I was worried about you.Tim
Hi TimI've been around and about, and a more frequent visitor here than it might appear. How about your good self?
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ June 12 2010,09:26) Quote (Stu @ June 11 2010,22:44) Quote (t8 @ June 10 2010,11:26) When Stu tries to understand God with his natural senses, he will not see him. This alone explains why he is the way he is.
Absolutely it does. Thank you for the compliment.Stuart
No probs. Keep denying roses because you can't hear them. It is entertaining.
Your analogy fits the claims of the religious regarding the “meaning of life”. What does a rose sound like is just as valid a question as for what purpose am I here?And by the way, the religious only claim to have the answer: they can never tell you what it actually is. All you get religious descriptions and platitudes that assume all sorts of things that no one else can hear. Or smell, see, touch or taste.
Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
