06 Feb 12
Originally posted by kevcvs57The creator has inspired men to write the Holy Scriptures that are
No the point is you cannot enter into scientific research when you already "know" the answer without casting doubt on the veracity of your findings so their either creationists which by definition is an act of faith or your still searching for the empirical truth i.e you dont subscribe to any given creation story. To claim both titles is a lie.
compiled in the Holy Bible and it reveals the truth.
Christ is the Truth, the Way, and the Life. 😏
06 Feb 12
Originally posted by RJHindsSo why didn't you simply accept that from the beginning instead of trying to use a claim by numbers when you said that there were 'many' scientists that agree with you.
So it is natural that at this time in history that there would be more
scientist going along with the evolutionary view, just like in an
earlier time most believed every thing revolved around the Earth.
06 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadI have always accepted that fact. I did not say there were more scientist
So why didn't you simply accept that from the beginning instead of trying to use a claim by numbers when you said that there were 'many' scientists that agree with you.
that agree with me, just many. The fact that I only mentioned two does
not negate that, because I have listed many scientist in a previous post
that do not believe in the theory of evolution. The fact that I do not know
every scientist that may still be in the closet does not matter. 😏
06 Feb 12
Originally posted by RJHindsExcept those in your previous list probably have no knowledge or opinions on ice core data. So they don't count. And no, ice core data has nothing whatsoever to do with evolution.
The fact that I only mentioned two does not negate that, because I have listed many scientist in a previous post that do not believe in the theory of evolution.
06 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadIt shouldn't have anything to do with evolution. But the interpretation
Except those in your previous list probably have no knowledge or opinions on ice core data. So they don't count. And no, ice core data has nothing whatsoever to do with evolution.
of the data is done to promote an old Earth because of the belief in
evolution and the need for long periods of time necessary for that
theory. The educational propaganda is so great that they are looking
for evidence of long ages to make it fit. So when they see something
that can be interpreted two ways the automatically ignore one in
favor of the other or choose to err on the side of evolution. And we
young Earth creationist do the same on our side.
06 Feb 12
Originally posted by RJHindsSo you can't produce 'many' scientists as you claimed. Are you confused or are you just lying? Or is it a mixture of both?!
The education system has been propagandized by the evolutionist for
so long it should be understandable to most intelligent humans that
the tendency of most humans is to go along with the accepted view.
So it is natural that at this time in history that there would be more
scientist going along with the evolutionary view, just like in an
earlier time most believed every thing revolved around the Earth.
06 Feb 12
Originally posted by RJHindsThat's not the issue. The issue is you claiming that there are 'many', your words not mine, scientists who think that the ice caps have only existed for a few thousand years. When asked to produce these 'many' scientists you simply can't. So you are either lying, seeing as how you are a known engine user this is natural to you, or simply confused about what it is you're talking about.
You just can't seem to understand that everyone that disagrees with you
is not either confused or lying.
06 Feb 12
Originally posted by RJHindsActually our knowledge of the age of the earth predates the theory of evolution.
It shouldn't have anything to do with evolution. But the interpretation
of the data is done to promote an old Earth because of the belief in
evolution and the need for long periods of time necessary for that
theory.
And no, the interpretation of ice core data is done because that is what we do in science, not to try and back up evolution. The age of the earth is a well known fact in science and ice core data is not generally used to to verify this, but is used to study things like climate and atmospheric content etc.
The educational propaganda is so great that they are looking
for evidence of long ages to make it fit.
There is no need to look, its everywhere. And our understanding of the age of the earth is based on the data, not on some desire to reach a given conclusion. That is how religion works, not science.
So when they see something that can be interpreted two ways the automatically ignore one in
favor of the other or choose to err on the side of evolution.
No, we think about it, do experiments on it, and compare it to other evidence until we can rule out other explanations. Currently there are no other reasonable explanations for the data. Even kelly could not put forward any despite suggesting that there might be some out there.
And we young Earth creationist do the same on our side.
No, you creationists just make stuff up. It has always amazed me how dishonest some theists can be when trying to justify their beliefs. Who are you trying to fool? Yourself? Everyone else? Why?
06 Feb 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadNot at all, I'm quite fine saying it could be accurate, but the truth of the matter
You may think what you like. The fact remains that you have failed to provide any alternative explanation for the data despite claiming that alternative explanations exist.
And you have failed to back up your claim that anything not written by humans is subject to error. All you are really doing is denying the facts that are there in front of your eyes because your religion tells you to.
remains all of our alternate methods of dating the past share the same issues
that ice core testing does with respect to not really knowing if they are true or
not.
If you cannot acknowledge that as true, I'd say your belief system has built
in blinders.
Kelly
06 Feb 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadNot at all, I'm quite fine saying it could be accurate, but the truth of the matter
You may think what you like. The fact remains that you have failed to provide any alternative explanation for the data despite claiming that alternative explanations exist.
And you have failed to back up your claim that anything not written by humans is subject to error. All you are really doing is denying the facts that are there in front of your eyes because your religion tells you to.
remains all of our alternate methods of dating the past share the same issues
that ice core testing does with respect to not really knowing if they are true or
not.
If you cannot acknowledge that as true, I'd say your belief system has built
in blinders.
Kelly
06 Feb 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadNot at all, I'm quite fine saying it could be accurate, but the truth of the matter
You may think what you like. The fact remains that you have failed to provide any alternative explanation for the data despite claiming that alternative explanations exist.
And you have failed to back up your claim that anything not written by humans is subject to error. All you are really doing is denying the facts that are there in front of your eyes because your religion tells you to.
remains all of our alternate methods of dating the past share the same issues
that ice core testing does.
If you cannot acknowledge that as true, I'd say your belief system has built
in blinders.
Kelly