Comments
81 - 100 of 102 Comments Last updated Jan 28, 2013

“I don't believe in mathematics”

Since: Aug 08

De Leon, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#82
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Me I Know Notheeng wrote:
<quoted text>
Unless you read all the methodology, etc. Of every theory that you state as fact you are putting your faith in the people who did the research. People of most faiths also believe in the verifiable, sometimes first-hand, personally verifiable experiences of other people of faith. Why is placing your faith in researchers and publishers any more valuable? Ten thousand scientists can reach the same conclusion and all be wrong. Five people can arrive at a different conclusion and all be right. Religion and science are just faith in two different things. Neither can be proven with absolute certainty.
In other words, it's turtles all the way down, and I can't trick you into believing otherwise.

“Candor for the few”

Since: Nov 08

Deer Park

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83
Jan 23, 2013
 
Me I Know Notheeng wrote:
<quoted text>
I have nothing to prove. You are the one throwing around theories you accepted as fact despite a logical explanation of why that doesn't make you any different than those that accept the testimony of that have gone before them in their faith. It is a simple statement that I made up by myself. My own original thought. Maybe you will have one some day. You can dream, anyway.
First you claim that I am wrong. Then you say you have nothing to prove. That is as wrong as wrong can be. Proclaiming I'm wrong does not make you right. If you are unable to back up your assertions, then they have no validity and only shows your own ignorance, since you can't substantiate your claim.

Religious faith is based on ancient stories handed down from those that tried to explain what they did not understand. There lies the biggest problem with theology.

On the other hand, science has proven many of the theories and through their research, have developed new theories yet to be proven. However, those theories are provided with a basis of know facts and leads them to discover new information and facts to formulate further theories in their quest for real answers.

If you can't understand that, you apparently have not done your homework.

“Candor for the few”

Since: Nov 08

Deer Park

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#84
Jan 23, 2013
 
sjbible wrote:
The point I am trying to make is that all are theories that are accepted in thier own circles. None can be proven as true. Evolution doesn't have irrefutable proof anymore than Theistic evolution or the Biblical account. It comes down to what one believes to be true, the thing is if it takes faith in a theory or faith in a teaching then it is a religious belief of that person.
The continental drifts could have easily formed from a world wide flood as seen in the bible, it cannot be proven as true or false anymore than the evolutionary teaching of it taking millions of years and basing the age of the earth on that theory.
Let me see if I understand you correctly...

You think the "flood" lifted the continents up and caused them to drift into their current locations?

I would highly recommend some courses in geology, etc., so that you might understand how the earth is made up and the reason for continental drift.

Hint: It's not from flooding and it's STILL occurring... and that is a known fact, not theory.

“Ok, maybe I know a little bit.”

Since: Sep 12

But I don't know that.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#85
Jan 23, 2013
 
DPTX wrote:
<quoted text>First you claim that I am wrong. Then you say you have nothing to prove. That is as wrong as wrong can be. Proclaiming I'm wrong does not make you right. If you are unable to back up your assertions, then they have no validity and only shows your own ignorance, since you can't substantiate your claim.
Religious faith is based on ancient stories handed down from those that tried to explain what they did not understand. There lies the biggest problem with theology.
On the other hand, science has proven many of the theories and through their research, have developed new theories yet to be proven. However, those theories are provided with a basis of know facts and leads them to discover new information and facts to formulate further theories in their quest for real answers.
If you can't understand that, you apparently have not done your homework.
I just said neither theory can be proven right or wrong, and I do fi d ot humorous that those who accuse the religious set of being ignorant and closed-minded, are themselves, incapable of considering anything other than their way of thinking.
As far as you are concerned you are just a rude, self-inflated windbag. You can say this was proved or whatever you like, but you take it as fact because you trust you the source. That doesn't mean it won't be disproven at another time.
Science today. Quackery tomorrow.

Since: Dec 12

Deer Park, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#86
Jan 25, 2013
 
DPTX wrote:
<quoted text>Let me see if I understand you correctly...
You think the "flood" lifted the continents up and caused them to drift into their current locations?
I would highly recommend some courses in geology, etc., so that you might understand how the earth is made up and the reason for continental drift.
Hint: It's not from flooding and it's STILL occurring... and that is a known fact, not theory.
It seems odd that proven science in Columbus day was the earth was flat but 1000's of years before Isaiah the prophet of Israel had said it was "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:"
Then we have probsbly the oldest writings known to man in Job 26 and it states:"7 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.
8 He bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds; and the cloud is not rent under them." all of this known scientfic facts, the earth in hanging on nothing and the moisture hangs in the clouds to bring occasional rain but they don't burst.
Then in Genesis 7:11 "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened."
Look right here "the fountains of the great deep broken up" sounds exactly like a great movement of the earth a drift caused the waters (fountains) of the deep to break up, that would be a great shifting of the continental drifts and the plate tectonics shifting and great waters coming from under the earth while the theory of the water canopy around the earth is seen as bursting before Job wrote that now it doesn't all very well explain our earth.
Isaiah says God sits on the circle of the earth and Job says God hung it on nothing. All scientic facts proven today and recorded in the bible.
Then of course we have Genesis 1:30 "And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so." All Animal and human life ate of the herbs of the earth, all were vegetarians until one great event after the flood of Noah God gave this in Genesis 9:2 & 3, "2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered. 3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things." animals and man became carniverous and the animals began to fear man. Up until then the animals lived in peace with man and weren't afraid of him. That is why Noah was able to gather the Animals so easily they didn't fear man until after the flood. All things scientifically seen in the bible.

“I don't believe in mathematics”

Since: Aug 08

De Leon, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#87
Jan 25, 2013
 
Columbus didn't believe the earth was flat. And it certainly wasn't "proven science" of the time.

Your use of the word "proof" is problematic. A theory supported by a massive amount of evidence that provides a way to make realistic conjectures and predictions is different from a religious belief. Enough evidence and predictive power means you can consider a theory proven. Evolution is a good example.

However, it's not the kind of proof used in deductive logic. You can certainly argue that scientific theories can't be proved because the laws of physics might change tomorrow or Jesus will fly down on a white horse. But until that happens, scientists will carry on as if their theories have meaning and are useful enough to construct the modern world.

“Ok, maybe I know a little bit.”

Since: Sep 12

But I don't know that.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#88
Jan 25, 2013
 
Saw an article yesterday on a new type of DNA discovered, I believe, within human cells. There is so much that is unknown that even the most advanced information we possessed until now is now incomplete. All that is is infinite in nature, and what we think we know as fact may be disproved at any moment. I just find it so hypocritical when people who believe they are the scientific, open minds, but they rigidly adhere to their beliefs. Reminds me of a verse in Psalms that says God laughs on high and holds them in derision. I know who I have believed and am always ready to give an answer for the hope that is within. Therein is the operative word. Hope. I have an endless hope of a future because of a loving creator. Without a loving creator anyone is at the mercy of evolution or whatever force they believe to be driving all that we know. If the big bang or evolution did anything then another occurrence can re-do or undo spontaneously without regard to anything. It turned man from pond life. It can turn it back. Your great great great grandkids could be frogs or monkeys or whatever is suited to life at that time. Even if you, or they, remain human there is no hope of anyone with any power who cares about you, or them, one way or the other,and there is no hope for any future beyond what you live on earth. Without a belief in a loving creator who prepares an afterlife, when you and your children and grandchildren pass you will simply stop existing. May be ok for you,but is it what one really wants for their children or grandchildren?

“I don't believe in mathematics”

Since: Aug 08

De Leon, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#89
Jan 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Identifying a new form of DNA doesn't disprove anything we know about DNA. Of course, scientific knowledge is incomplete. It builds upon itself.

It's ludicrous to accuse scientists of rigidly clinging to their beliefs. The scientific process is to persistently question and try to disprove its conclusions.

You can take comfort in whatever religious beliefs you choose, but you have no evidence to cause me to consider them as anything resembling truth. In fact, in order to accept these beliefs, I would have to reject reason and evidence.

No thanks.
Defiant1

Deer Park, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#90
Jan 25, 2013
 
Hezekiah wrote:
Identifying a new form of DNA doesn't disprove anything we know about DNA. Of course, scientific knowledge is incomplete. It builds upon itself.
It's ludicrous to accuse scientists of rigidly clinging to their beliefs. The scientific process is to persistently question and try to disprove its conclusions.
You can take comfort in whatever religious beliefs you choose, but you have no evidence to cause me to consider them as anything resembling truth. In fact, in order to accept these beliefs, I would have to reject reason and evidence.
No thanks.
"I would have to reject reason and evidence."

What is so special about this topic?. You reject reason and evidence as a liberal every damn day of the week against people who see the freak in
the White House as he really is.

“Ok, maybe I know a little bit.”

Since: Sep 12

But I don't know that.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#91
Jan 25, 2013
 
Hezekiah wrote:
Identifying a new form of DNA doesn't disprove anything we know about DNA. Of course, scientific knowledge is incomplete. It builds upon itself.
It's ludicrous to accuse scientists of rigidly clinging to their beliefs. The scientific process is to persistently question and try to disprove its conclusions.
You can take comfort in whatever religious beliefs you choose, but you have no evidence to cause me to consider them as anything resembling truth. In fact, in order to accept these beliefs, I would have to reject reason and evidence.
No thanks.
I didn't ask anyone to do anything or believe anything. I only pointed out that as vast as we consider our knowledge it is puny and may be disproved at any time. I pointed out that I think it is funny when people think they are open minded, when, in fact they do not appear to be so, and I pointed out what I think I have, and that is hope of something better than my future generations being nothing more that victims of the whims of unstable and uncertain forces of whatever. You were not even personally mentioned or referred to in any way, and if you took my thoughts as a personal offense that would be a problem you created on your own. You are following what you think is proven by other people, and I am following what has proved true not just by generations who have gone before me but also in my own life. I have seen miracles no one...not even the most brilliant doctors at the best hospitals can explain except to say there was no other explanation but God. More than one. I believed before the miracles. They only confirm. Like the trees moving is just another confirmation of the wind we can't see. Faith is the substance of things hoped for and evidence of things not seen. It isn't any more logical than believing the order of this world was somehow begotten from chaos. I think I will blow up a big pile of junk and see if it lands in the form of a new Ford Expedition since I really want one. White. Not the extra long one but the regular one. Maybe with a platinum trim on the bottom. I love platinum. My wedding rings are platinum. Maybe if they stop cleaning up after plant explosions and leave the debris there another something useful will develop from the debris in a million years.

“Candor for the few”

Since: Nov 08

Deer Park

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#92
Jan 25, 2013
 
The only point I see is that you don't have a point. All of this is nothing but jibberish and double-speak, in an attempt to sound edumacated or thought provoking, although no real thought has been put forth.

I guess you missed the explanation that the current findings regarding DNA do no obsolete previous findings... they build upon the previous and bring forth new discoveries. That's what science does. It is not a belief, it's a continual building of knowledge... something that is difficult for many to understand, so they use religion to simplify their reason in life.

Religion is just like Santa Claus, except your parents didn't tell you that it was something made up to explain what we don't understand or just to get you to behave.

“Ok, maybe I know a little bit.”

Since: Sep 12

But I don't know that.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#93
Jan 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

DPTX wrote:
The only point I see is that you don't have a point. All of this is nothing but jibberish and double-speak, in an attempt to sound edumacated or thought provoking, although no real thought has been put forth.
I guess you missed the explanation that the current findings regarding DNA do no obsolete previous findings... they build upon the previous and bring forth new discoveries. That's what science does. It is not a belief, it's a continual building of knowledge... something that is difficult for many to understand, so they use religion to simplify their reason in life.
Religion is just like Santa Claus, except your parents didn't tell you that it was something made up to explain what we don't understand or just to get you to behave.
I never implied any discovery negated any previous discovery. It only points out how much we do not know. As I said before, it is my belief that you choose to believe the works others have done without any personal knowledge of your own. I choose to believe what has proven true in my own personal experience. Just because you believe yours is somehow superior or more logical doesn't make it true. If you believe that then you should be able to believe the sky fluorescent green tomorrow at 6pm. I can hardly wait to see your belief in action. I do love bright colors. I am getting my camera ready early so I dont miss it.

Since: Dec 12

Deer Park, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#94
Jan 26, 2013
 
Hezekiah wrote:
Columbus didn't believe the earth was flat. And it certainly wasn't "proven science" of the time.
Your use of the word "proof" is problematic. A theory supported by a massive amount of evidence that provides a way to make realistic conjectures and predictions is different from a religious belief. Enough evidence and predictive power means you can consider a theory proven. Evolution is a good example.
However, it's not the kind of proof used in deductive logic. You can certainly argue that scientific theories can't be proved because the laws of physics might change tomorrow or Jesus will fly down on a white horse. But until that happens, scientists will carry on as if their theories have meaning and are useful enough to construct the modern world.
That brings us to this one:

Claudio Ptolomei an Ancient-Greek- Egyptian scientist in the 11th century, created the so called geocentric system according to which the Earth stays motionless in the center of the world and all celestial bodies move around it.

Ptolemei's geocentric system can be seen in Joshua 10:12 and 13,
12 Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.

13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

we can see in 2 Kings 20:10 and 11, 10 And Hezekiah answered, It is a light thing for the shadow to go down ten degrees: nay, but let the shadow return backward ten degrees.
11 And Isaiah the prophet cried unto the Lord: and he brought the shadow ten degrees backward, by which it had gone down in the dial of Ahaz.

We can see more support for the Ptolemei theory. If the earth revolves around the Sun then God would have stopped the earth, but if the Sun revolves around the earth then God just stopped it's rotation as well as that of the moon.

Verses:

Nicolaus Copernicus seminal a figure in the history of scientific thought challenged the geocentric cosmology that had been dogmatically accepted since the time of Aristotle. Copernicus proposed that a rotating Earth revolving with the other planets about a stationary central Sun could account in a simpler way for the same observed phenomena of the daily rotation of the heavens, the annual movement of the Sun through the ecliptic, and the periodic retrograde motion of the planets

“I don't believe in mathematics”

Since: Aug 08

De Leon, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95
Jan 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I must be missing your point.

Are you saying that scientific theories are not reliable, and that religious texts are?

Copernicus could have never figured out that the earth revolves around the sun without the tremendously detailed observations that astronomers made while trying to prove the Ptolemaic system.

On the other hand, you're saying that God made the sun and the moon stand still.
Defiant1

Deer Park, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#97
Jan 27, 2013
 
Hezekiah wrote:
I must be missing your point.
Are you saying that scientific theories are not reliable, and that religious texts are?
Copernicus could have never figured out that the earth revolves around the sun without the tremendously detailed observations that astronomers made while trying to prove the Ptolemaic system.
On the other hand, you're saying that God made the sun and the moon stand still.
All this time I thought Al Gore invented the sun and moon, along with the internet.

Since: Dec 12

Deer Park, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#98
Jan 27, 2013
 
Hezekiah wrote:
I must be missing your point.
Are you saying that scientific theories are not reliable, and that religious texts are?
Copernicus could have never figured out that the earth revolves around the sun without the tremendously detailed observations that astronomers made while trying to prove the Ptolemaic system.
On the other hand, you're saying that God made the sun and the moon stand still.
The bible along with many cultures talk about a time when the sun failed to go down or rise, and one when the sun moved backwards. Stories in American indian culture talk about this and a great father going through a flood.

If Ptolemei's geocentric model is the correct one these stories fit perfectly. If Capernicus's Heliocentric model is correct these would still be miraculous events. God we told in Joshua and 2 Kings did just that He held the sun and moon stationary and moved the sun back 10 degrees, while man was still held by gravity meaning the earth continued it's rotation.

“Perplexed”

Since: Nov 08

Deer Park

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#99
Jan 27, 2013
 
Defiant1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"I would have to reject reason and evidence."
What is so special about this topic?. You reject reason and evidence as a liberal every damn day of the week against people who see the freak in
the White House as he really is.
Too funny. Lol

“I don't believe in mathematics”

Since: Aug 08

De Leon, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#100
Jan 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

sjbible wrote:
<quoted text>
The bible along with many cultures talk about a time when the sun failed to go down or rise, and one when the sun moved backwards. Stories in American indian culture talk about this and a great father going through a flood.
If Ptolemei's geocentric model is the correct one these stories fit perfectly. If Capernicus's Heliocentric model is correct these would still be miraculous events. God we told in Joshua and 2 Kings did just that He held the sun and moon stationary and moved the sun back 10 degrees, while man was still held by gravity meaning the earth continued it's rotation.
In Ptolemy's model of the solar system, retrograde motion referred to the periodic apparent backing up movement of the planets in the sky, not the sun and moon.

The Copernican solution to the anomaly of retrograde motion led him to the sun-centered model of the solar system. That's how science works.

Stories from the Bible or any other primitive narratives that describe a violation of the physical laws of the universe are not credible. If your premise is that the laws of physics can change, then it's not possible to know anything.

Even religionists who believe in miracles and the power of prayer don't really believe this kind of nonsense. Notice that people pray to be healed of their backache, but they don't pray to grow back an amputated limb.

“I don't believe in mathematics”

Since: Aug 08

De Leon, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#101
Jan 27, 2013
 
sdjs wrote:
<quoted text>Too funny. Lol
Teabaggers are a little weak on evidence.

“Perplexed”

Since: Nov 08

Deer Park

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#102
Jan 27, 2013
 
Hezekiah wrote:
<quoted text>
Teabaggers are a little weak on evidence.
Oh hezzie, still love ya! On that note, how are we going to get a Starbucks on US-84? Brownwood needs it!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Baytown Discussions

Search the Baytown Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
TX Who do you support for Comptroller of Public Ac... (Oct '10) 12 min Larry Grover 591
TX Who do you support for Railroad Commissioner in... (Oct '10) 12 min nina roth 750
TX Longtime GOP Texas Gov. Perry wins another term (Nov '10) 16 min Defiant1 21,373
TX Who do you support for Governor in Texas in 2010? (Oct '10) 27 min nina roth 16,975
Why Can't We Have A Good Coach? 2 hr LP Texans Fan 3
What happened 6 hr Lomaxx 15
Obama arresting doctors if they talk.. Mon fubar 52
•••
•••

Baytown News Video

•••
•••

Baytown Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Baytown People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Baytown News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Baytown
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••