- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 10 2009,20:23) Of course Scientific facts can be disproved. In fact, most will be over time with the evolution of Science and Technology. Wasn't there facts about a global Ice Age that was imminent, and the facts are global warming?
Science isn't always disproved though, often it's a question of refinement rather than radical rethinking. For example, Newtonian mechanics is still quite acceptable for every day life. You just need more sophisticated models for more extreme situations – the very small (quantum) for instance, or the very fast (relativistic).As for the facts about your Ice Age, certainly, here's a good link to a news story about it:
http://www.colorado.edu/news/r/bff9b4f453f2f9e1aa1e5d1b699d8525.htmlHowever, do note that the cooling trend ultimately leading to another Ice Age wasn't disproven so much as altered by human activity.
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 10 2009,23:11) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 10 2009,03:44) By the way, what do you mean by Hawking disproved.
Einstein disproved.
Sounds like the usual christian smear of science to me.
Stuart
I am not trying to disprove anything, nor am I trying to prove anything. In fact I am only a novice in the realm of science since it is not my forte. I just make comments now and again. That is why you do not see me usually in these areas. This is for you folks of the scientific world. So that is why I do not debate, I made a small insignificant statement, you asked a question, I gave a simple answer, you wish to debate? You win!Now that was simple.
So you are intending to make smears against science then run.Very noble.
Stuart
Knowledge begins with reverence for God. (Pr 1:7)
Modern science does not want to believe the Bible. (2Ti 4:3,4)
True science is correct from the beginning. (Ge 1:1, Jer 32:17, Col 1:16,17)
True science is a valuable tool provided by God. (Pr 8:10, Jas 1:17)
True science is the knowledge of God through His creation. (Ps 19:1-4, Ps 97:6, Ro 1:18-20)
Modern science has substituted the worship of the creature (evolution) for the Creator. (Ro 1:21-25)
Modern science is limited by its rejection of the supernatural. (Ex 7:10-12)
Modern science is limited by its rejection of the knowledge of God. (Job 38:19-21, Isa 40:28, Isa 55:8,9, Ro 11:33)
Material knowledge, in itself, lacks meaning. (1Ki 4:30-34, Ecc 1:16-18)
The highest knowledge is to know Jesus. (Jn 17:3, 2Co 10:4,5, Col 2:2,3)
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 10 2009,16:07) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 10 2009,23:11) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 10 2009,03:44) By the way, what do you mean by Hawking disproved.
Einstein disproved.
Sounds like the usual christian smear of science to me.
Stuart
I am not trying to disprove anything, nor am I trying to prove anything. In fact I am only a novice in the realm of science since it is not my forte. I just make comments now and again. That is why you do not see me usually in these areas. This is for you folks of the scientific world. So that is why I do not debate, I made a small insignificant statement, you asked a question, I gave a simple answer, you wish to debate? You win!Now that was simple.
So you are intending to make smears against science then run.Very noble.
Stuart
No just being honest.You seem to intend on just argument.
I am sure you can find one more worthy for your argument.
Jesus wants His people to be one. (Jn 10:16, Jn 15:12, Jn 17:21,22).
Science is good if used right.
Science gives us weapons of destruction.
Science also kills.
God produces good fruit.
Love is the essence of God's law. (Ex 20:1-17, Dt 6:4,5, Lev 19:18, Mt 7:12, Mt 22:36-40, see also Mk 12:28-31, Mt 23:23,24, Ro 13:8-10, Gal 5:14, Jas 2:8, 1Jn 5:2, 2Jn 1:5,6 (compare Jn 13:34).
Science does not produce love.
We are to love others. (Mt 19:16-19, Mt 22:36-40, Eph 4:1,2, 1Th 3:12, 1Th 4:9, Heb 13:1, 1Pe 1:22, 1Jn 3:10,11, 1Jn 4:7,11,12).
Science does not promote peace.
Love promotes peace. (Pr 10:12).
Love is a characteristic of God's people. (Jn 13:35).
Science does not eradicate sin.
How about we slow down with all the mythological fantasy stories, lies and strawmen, and you go back to your statement about Hawking and Einstein. HOW were they disproved? Remember the credibility of what you typed above rests on you being able to back up your libel with facts.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 10 2009,22:38) How about we slow down with all the mythological fantasy stories, lies and strawmen, and you go back to your statement about Hawking and Einstein. HOW were they disproved? Remember the credibility of what you typed above rests on you being able to back up your libel with facts. Stuart
1. Has anyone ever observed symmetric time dilation – a moving clock going both slower and faster than their own clock(s) ?2. Has anyone ever seen a black hole explode ?
The answer to both the above questions is NO.
So we must conclude that the theories of Hawking and Einstein are false, because they do not match experiment or observation.
Correct?
And what about Hawking and Einstien ?
Where is their proof ?
Where is their credibility and facts?
No different than a flat earth until it found form and became round.
Maybe religion is finding its form. For you flat earth folks.
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 12 2009,05:37) Quote (Stu @ Oct. 10 2009,22:38) How about we slow down with all the mythological fantasy stories, lies and strawmen, and you go back to your statement about Hawking and Einstein. HOW were they disproved? Remember the credibility of what you typed above rests on you being able to back up your libel with facts. Stuart
1. Has anyone ever observed symmetric time dilation – a moving clock going both slower and faster than their own clock(s) ?2. Has anyone ever seen a black hole explode ?
The answer to both the above questions is NO.
So we must conclude that the theories of Hawking and Einstein are false, because they do not match experiment or observation.
Correct?
And what about Hawking and Einstien ?
Where is their proof ?
Where is their credibility and facts?
No different than a flat earth until it found form and became round.
Maybe religion is finding its form. For you flat earth folks.
Let's start on Einstein, here's an article listing several pretty decent ways to prove the theory:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilationGranted you need atomic clocks and aeroplanes, or satellites but I'd suggest you can construct a solid repeatable scentifically valid experiment out of it to prove the theory – as many times as you like.
So if you want 1 just sit half way in between two atomic clocks at different altitude/acceleration and wait.
If you want 2, start waiting. I mean, have you ever seen a flood wipe out most of the earth? Or an ice sheet cover the whole planet? Or all the ice melt? Have you even ever won the top prize on the lottery?
Don't get me wrong, I can parrot out a few interesting things but I don't really understand the universe we live in, nowhere near. If I didn't have far more pressing concerns I might take a stronger interest in it.
It's folly to write things off simply because you don't – and can't – understand them. But write me off too, by all means.
Quote (TimothyVI @ Oct. 10 2009,22:01) Sounds like the bible is describing a flat circle, not a globe or sphere. You could still fall off the edge of a flat circle I suppose. Surely God knew the difference. Tim
Couple of things to add here.1. The Hebrew word rendered circle in this verse (chawg) is also used for sphere.
2. When I look at the full moon the shape I see I see a circle. From my perspective here on Earth, that is what is presented visually to me.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 12 2009,20:10) Quote (TimothyVI @ Oct. 10 2009,22:01) Sounds like the bible is describing a flat circle, not a globe or sphere. You could still fall off the edge of a flat circle I suppose. Surely God knew the difference. Tim
Couple of things to add here.1. The Hebrew word rendered circle in this verse (chawg) is also used for sphere.
2. When I look at the full moon the shape I see I see a circle. From my perspective here on Earth, that is what is presented visually to me.
That's not true. It only looks like a circle for a few days each month. The reason that it doesn't look like a circle for some of the month is that it is a sphere.Stuart
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 12 2009,20:10) 2. When I look at the full moon the shape I see I see a circle. From my perspective here on Earth, that is what is presented visually to me.
Pay attention.Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 13 2009,07:08) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 12 2009,20:10) 2. When I look at the full moon the shape I see I see a circle. From my perspective here on Earth, that is what is presented visually to me.
Pay attention.
Oh yeah! Sorry.So anyway, you would have to only ever look at the full moon to conclude that it was literally a disc.
Are you saying that the bible says it is a sphere or a disc? Nature would reject it, if submitted, for its lack of clarity.
Stuart
The point I was making that it's quite plausible to me that CHAWG (if it was meant to be rendered “circle” at all) was used to denote a visual perspective – the image that the Earth presented to YHWH where He was viewing it (from above), rather than a scientific/geometric one. To us the full moon presents a circular shape from our viewing perspective on Earth. It's legitimate to say “circle of the moon”. Type that into google an you'll get 16.2 million hits.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 14 2009,07:03) The point I was making that it's quite plausible to me that CHAWG (if it was meant to be rendered “circle” at all) was used to denote a visual perspective – the image that the Earth presented to YHWH where He was viewing it (from above), rather than a scientific/geometric one. To us the full moon presents a circular shape from our viewing perspective on Earth. It's legitimate to say “circle of the moon”. Type that into google an you'll get 16.2 million hits.
“circle of the moon” is terribly ambiguous.The perception that the moon is round when looking at it?
The shape of the orbit the moon approximately describes around the earth?
The rotation of the surface of the moon as it turns around an axis, presenting the same face to Earth as it orbits?
A reference to the cyclical nature of phases of the moon?
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 15 2009,22:48) Let me try that again. So, Is 1:18, your god lives above the earth?
Stuart
Hey, don't you know heaven is up (hence the clouds) and hell is down (hence the fire and brimstone)?It's almost a metaphor for social mobility, and the human tendency to equate evelation with stature.
I'm pretty sure you're astute enough to work out when I'm being completely serious and when that might not be the case.
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 10 2009,19:30) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 10 2009,11:35) Quote (Douglas @ Oct. 09 2009,14:21) Quote (TimothyVI @ Oct. 10 2009,05:11) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 09 2009,23:43) Where was science when the world believed it was flat?
I think that the ones who stated otherwise were being repressed or killed by the Christians in charge.Tim
Hmmm, and yet, some people knew the earth wasn't flat before then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EratosthenesSure you're not thinking of Galileo Galilei?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_GalileiActually, if you glance through the latter article it's interesting in that it points out issues with taking all of the Bible entirely literally – to do with the sun rising and the earth not being moveable, etc.
Of course now, we're stuck with not even being able to see the sun as the centre of the universe. On the flipside, it means there's a whole universe out there waiting to be figured out.
Exactly Science is proven and disproven on a daily basis. Funny thing as well as we inch along through life many parts of the bible are being proven accurate.
Like what?Stuart
There is water on the moon, whereas 1 year ago, there wasn't.Piltdown Man was a human ancestor (believed for 40 years).
The Wollemi pine has been extinct for about 150 million years.
Spontaneous generation
Evolution
To name a few.
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 15 2009,22:47) So your god lives above the earth? Stuart
Your God doesn't even live. He is dead/non-existent.Life came from death.
Everything came from nothing.
Somehow the universe and all its logic just happened like magic and there it is.
Rabbits spontaneously come into being when pulled out of a hat.
Money can come from nothing. Just need to figure out how the first thing came from nothing and go from there.Wow Stu it is rooly rooly amazing.
But forgive me if I don't see eye to eye with you.Quote (Stu @ Oct. 15 2009,22:48) Let me try that again. So, Is 1:18, your god lives above the earth?
Stuart
Proverbs 15:3 NKJV
“The eyes of the Lord are in every place, keeping watch on the evil and the good.”Speaking of Hawking and Einstein, if we step into their world, common sense goes out the window.
If 100 years ago, you presented any of their ideas, you would be thought insane.
Hawking and Einstein both demonstrated that we know extremely little about the universe. We are stupid. 100 years from now, we'll have a better idea of just how stupid.
“The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed.”–Albert
I wonder how often stu is “rapt in awe.” hmmm.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
