Don't dictate beliefs

Sep 5, 2012 Full story: The Star Press 11,175

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Full Story

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7258 Nov 29, 2012
“Louis Pasteur (1822 - 1895), the father of antibiotics was a godly Catholic; Gregor Mendel (1822-!884), the discoverer of genes was a Catholic creationist; Joseph Lister (1827 - 1912), the father of antiseptics was a devout Quaker; Michael Faraday (1791 - 1857), discoverer of electromagnetic induction was a Sandemanian Presbyterian; George Washington Carver (1864 - 1963), a famous black scientist, and one of the greatest botanists and inventors to ever live was a god-worshipping Christian; Wernher von Braun (1912 - 1977), the father of rocket science was a Christian and a Creationist; Max Planck (1858 - 1947), a great physicist, was a Christian who firmly believed that God permeated everything; Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) was a God- believing Jew who also loved the New Testament; Antoine Henri Becquerel (1852 – 1908), the discoverer of radioactivity was a Catholic; and tens of thousands of other contributors to science and technology believed in God. Where would technology be today if it were not for Louis Pasteur, Gregor Mendel, Joseph Lister, George Washington Carver, Werner von Braun, Max Planck, Albert Einstein and thousands of other famous Intelligent Design - believing scientists and their religious beliefs? If these scientists had been taught evolution and atheism in our public schools, what would have happened to their intense belief in an Intelligent Designer that caused them to inquire how things work?”
http://www.intelligentdesigntheory.info/famou...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7259 Nov 29, 2012
Arthur Holly Compton quote:

“It is not difficult for me to have this faith, for it is incontrovertible that where there is a plan there is intelligence - an orderly, unfolding universe testifies to the truth of the most majestic statement ever uttered -'In the beginning, God.'”

http://www.famousquotes.com/author/arthur-hol...

[Wikipedia: Compton (September 10, 1892 – March 15, 1962) was an American physicist and Nobel laureate in physics for his discovery of the Compton effect.]

[Arthur Holly Compton was born at Wooster, Ohio, on September 10th, 1892, the son of Elias Compton, Professor of Philosophy and Dean of the College of Wooster. He was educated at the College, graduating Bachelor of Science in 1913, and he spent three years in postgraduate study at Princeton University receiving his M.A. degree in 1914 and his Ph.D. in 1916. After spending a year as instructor of physics at the University of Minnesota, he took a position as a research engineer with the Westinghouse Lamp Company at Pittsburgh until 1919 when he studied at Cambridge University as a National Research Council Fellow. In 1920, he was appointed Wayman Crow Professor of Physics, and Head of the Department of Physics at the Washington University, St. Louis; and in 1923 he moved to the University of Chicago as Professor of Physics. Compton returned to St. Louis as Chancellor in 1945 and from 1954 until his retirement in 1961 he was Distinguished Service Professor of Natural Philosophy at the Washington University.]

[Poor, uneducated, ignorant believer in myths? Nope, not hardly!!!]

[“... the most majestic statement ever uttered -'In the beginning, God.'”]

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7260 Nov 29, 2012
Great scientists from the past

C.S. Lewis showed the very strong connection between the development of modern scientific thought and the belief the scientists held in a Creator (Lawgiver).“Men become scientific because they expected law in nature and they expected law in nature because they believed in a lawgiver.”1

"Overwhelming strong proofs of intelligent and benevolent design lie around us ... the atheistic idea is so non-sensical that I cannot put it into words." (Lord Kelvin)

"I am a Christian ... I believe only and alone ... in the service of Jesus Christ ... In Him is all refuge, all solace." (Johannes Kepler)

"The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator. Science brings men nearer to God." (Louis Pasteur). Pasteur strongly opposed Darwin's theory of evolution because he felt it did not conform to the scientific evidence.

Robert Boyle believed in Jesus Christ's "Passion, His death, His resurrection and ascension, and all of those wonderful works which He did during His stay upon earth, in order to confirm the belief of His being God as well as man."

"Order is manifestly maintained in the universe … the whole being governed by the sovereign will of God." (James Prescott Joule)

"There are those who argue that the universe evolved out a random process, but what random process could produce the brain of man or the system of the human eye?" (Werhner Von Braun)

"Almighty Creator and Preserver of all things, praised be all Thou has created." (Carl Linnaeus)

"I am a believer in the fundamental doctrines of Christianity." (Sir Joseph Lister)

"Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance." "The true God is a living, intelligent and powerful being." (Sir Isaac Newton)

Michael Faraday was careful to "Thank God, first, for all His gifts."

... continued -- includes present day scientists here:
http://www.changinglivesonline.org/component/...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7261 Nov 29, 2012
Biblical Theory Of Evolution

Isaac Newton, Johann Kepler, Blasie Pascal, Galileo, Michael Faraday, Samuel Morse, George Washington Carver, Gregor Mendel and Louis Pasteur were all scientists who believed in the Biblical Theory of Evolution. I am writing about the Biblical Theory of Evolution because I grew up hearing this theory and I have always wondered exactly what it was and what it all meant. This paper is meant to explain the Biblical Theory of Evolution. The Biblical Theory of Evolution begins with the first book of the bible. The following is what the bible says about creation according to Genesis 1.

"(1) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”

continued, and gets very interesting here:
http://promptpapers.com/research-paper-topics...

[“Isaac Newton, Johann Kepler, Blasie Pascal, Galileo, Michael Faraday, Samuel Morse, George Washington Carver, Gregor Mendel and Louis Pasteur were all scientists who believed in the Biblical Theory of Evolution.” And there are many other scientists, as well, who do not accept the godless theory of Darwin.]

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7262 Nov 29, 2012
Science's Rejection of Evolution

To say that evolution is the easiest thing to prove is a statement beyond reason and a product of blind faith.

Many will say that “all major scientists support evolution.” The fact is there are many scientists who believe in the biblical account. Here is just a small sample: Joseph Lister, antiseptic surgery; Louis Pasteur, bacteriology; Sir Isaac Newton, dynamics (discovered the laws of gravity, mathematics, co-discovered calculus); Johann Kepler, celestial mechanics, physical astronomy; Robert Boyle, chemistry; Georges Cuvier, comparative anatomy, vertebrate paleontology; Charles Babbage, computer science; James Clerk Maxwell, electrodynamics, statistical thermodynamics; Michael Faraday, electromagnetics, field theory; Ambrose Fleming, electronics; Lord William Kelvin, energetics, thermodynamics; Henri Fabre, entomology; George Stokes, fluid mechanics; William Herschel, galactic astronomy; Robert Boyle, gas dynamics; Gregor Mendel, genetics; Louis Agassiz, glacial geology, ichthyology; James Simpson, gynecology; Leonardo da Vinci, hydraulics; Blaise Pascal, hydrostatics; William Ramsay, isotopic chemistry; Matthew Maury, oceanography; David Brewster, optical mineralogy; John Woodward, paleontology; Rudolph Virchow, pathology; James Joule, reversible thermodynamics; Sir Francis Bacon, scientific method; Nicholas Steno, stratigraphy; Carolus Linnaeus, systematic biology; and Humphrey Davy, thermokinetics.”

continued:

“P. Lemoine, president of the Geological Society of France, editor of the Encyclopedie Francaise and director of the Natural History Museum in Paris, concluded:

“The theories of evolution, with which our studious youth have been deceived, constitute actually a dogma that all the world continues to teach: but each, in his specialty, the zoologist or the botanist, ascertains that none of the explanations furnished is adequate.... It results from the summary, that the theory of evolution, is impossible.”

Dr. Wernher von Braun, father of America's space program, in a Sept. 14, 1972, letter to the California Board of Education, said,“For me, the idea of a creation is not conceivable without invoking the necessity of design. One cannot be exposed to the law and order of the universe without concluding that there must be design and purpose behind it all. In the world around us, we can behold the obvious manifestations of an ordered, structured plan or design. We can see the will of the species to live and propagate. And we are humbled by the powerful forces at work on a galactic scale, and the purposeful orderliness of nature that endows a tiny and ungainly seed with the ability to develop into a beautiful flower. The better we understand the intricacies of the universe and all it harbors, the more reason we have found to marvel at the inherent design upon which it is based.”

continued:

“Newsweek magazine, in a 1998 cover story entitled “Science Finds God,” noted:“According to a study released last year, 40 percent of American scientists believe in a personal God - not merely an ineffable power and presence in the world, but a deity to whom they can pray.”

In 1959, Dr. T.N. Tahmisian, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, was even more blunt:“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact.”

... Darwinian evolution is not science; it is the only tax-supported religion in the USA.”
http://lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVarticles/S...

[“... the theory of evolution, is impossible.”]

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#7263 Nov 29, 2012
Khatru wrote:
I was also being polite with him but respect is so alien to him he couldn't handle it and he snapped.
They just can't keep a civil tongue for long. 45,000 posts into Topix, and I am aware of only three Christians that have. I haven't seen one of them for most of six months (Fossil Bob), or the other for two years (Nettie). Al Garcia would be the third.
Khatru wrote:
I guess the Christian in him found civility just too hard a concept to grasp.
He said that he couldn't resist. I accepted that judgment.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7264 Nov 29, 2012
Re-posting:

There are several cases of scientific misconduct that has hit the media since the 1980’s that has shed some light on the reality of the situation, but to say that scientific misconduct has only really been around since the 1980’s would be false. It is estimated that some of the greatest minds in science have either fabricated results, or skewed data to support their theories.
Take a look at these examples:
"Isaac Newton may have adjusted calculations to fit observations."
"Gregor Mendel's results with pea plants were cleaner than what is observed experimentally, indicating that he might have changed the data."
"Robert Millikan, in a research paper describing the charge of an electron, failed to mention that he eliminated some data points."
[Citations: Columbia University]
If these folks would have published today their research may have been pulled and they would have lost all credibility.
http://www.experiment-resources.com/scientifi...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7265 Nov 29, 2012
Challenging Darwin's Myths

“It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that).”

–Richard Dawkins, prominent Oxford scientist and author

Ever since Darwin first published his theory of evolution, his defenders' favorite tactic against critics has been to attack their character and intelligence. Darwin himself used it against some of the greatest scientists of his day, accusing them of superstition and religious bias.

Now that Darwinism rules the scientific roost, such charges against dissenters are widespread. Not even schoolchildren are immune. Indeed, California's science education guidelines instructs teachers to tell dissenting students, "I understand that you may have personal reservations about accepting this scientific evidence, but it is scientific knowledge about which there is no reasonable doubt among scientists in this field..."

By today's rules, criticism of Darwinism is simply unscientific. The student who wishes to pursue such matters is told to "discuss the question further with his or her family and clergy."

But is Darwinism so obviously true that no honest person could doubt it? Are alternatives like "intelligent design" so unscientific that no reasonable person could embrace them?

The answer to both questions is a resounding no.

[WHY?- CONTINUED:]
http://www.arn.org/docs/dardoc1.htm
KJV

United States

#7266 Nov 29, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>No, just very disappointed. I had hoped for a better relationship with you.
Dude it was just a joke.
KJV

United States

#7267 Nov 29, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>No, I haven't. I don't launch gratuitous character attacks. Twice now you've alluded to fraud and hiding from the law. Mission accomplished.

KJV wrote, "The door was left wide open on the post before I couldn't help myself. "

Twice?

Don't worry about it. It sounds like it was inevitable.
No the second post was pointing out that Mexico would not be the place to go to if someone had commit fraud.
In other words I know you did go down there to hide. And again that joke was nothing compared with some of the very nasty joke you've partaken in about the God that I believe in.
KJV

United States

#7268 Nov 29, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>You're out of date on this one. You might try a little fact checking some time.
This was in response to dark matter vs dark energy. And if something was able to travel faster then light how could it be matter and not pure energy.

As far as fact checking for get it. I'm not submitting papers to be published I'm chatting on a chat board. I'll quote articles in reference to support what I'm talking about.
KJV

United States

#7269 Nov 29, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>You're whining again because you got caught, lol. And your mistake upset you so much that you even posted more later on about it, to try to cover yourself. I'll just reply to this one.

You're so predictable – there's nothing original about you. And I could have almost guessed the exact words you would use, and I knew for sure you would respond to that post. You fool no one, but you are indeed a fool, with egg all over your horrid face.

“You should know that being in the minority doesn't mean you're wrong. What percentage of the population did Noah and his family make up?”

LMAO
LMAO

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#7270 Nov 29, 2012
derek4 wrote:
But is Darwinism so obviously true that no honest person could doubt it? Are alternatives like "intelligent design" so unscientific that no reasonable person could embrace them?
The answer to both questions is a resounding yes.

Fixed it for you, spam bot.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#7271 Nov 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
This was in response to dark matter vs dark energy. And if something was able to travel faster then light how could it be matter and not pure energy.
As far as fact checking for get it. I'm not submitting papers to be published I'm chatting on a chat board. I'll quote articles in reference to support what I'm talking about.
Seriously? You just indiscriminately scour the internet for anything,*anything* that supports your argument, and then you post it, regardless of whether or not it's true? No fact checking necessary?

The article you cited was in reference to a flawed experiment that was later retracted. That means nothing to you? So long as, at one time, it supported whatever point you are trying to make? It doesn't matter to you that it was questionable from the get go?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#7272 Nov 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
This was in response to dark matter vs dark energy. And if something was able to travel faster then light how could it be matter and not pure energy.
As far as fact checking for get it. I'm not submitting papers to be published I'm chatting on a chat board. I'll quote articles in reference to support what I'm talking about.
This really illuminates how you think.

"The truth doesn't matter, only my truth matters." That's what I get from your comment.
KJV

United States

#7273 Nov 29, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Seriously? You just indiscriminately scour the internet for anything,*anything* that supports your argument, and then you post it, regardless of whether or not it's true? No fact checking necessary?

The article you cited was in reference to a flawed experiment that was later retracted. That means nothing to you? So long as, at one time, it supported whatever point you are trying to make? It doesn't matter to you that it was questionable from the get go?
Yes that was retracted however the same experiment was successful between Chicago and Sudan Minnesota. But no I don't spend hours checking the back ground of an article.
If I'm talking about something and need some backing up I google it and read it to find what I was looking for to backing up my memory of what I was taught in my years of education. I don't have all my classes recoded and I know long have my school books so I find what I'm look for on the web.

So you're going to sit there and claim you research each and every article you read. You really going to claim that?
KJV

United States

#7274 Nov 29, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>This really illuminates how you think.

"The truth doesn't matter, only my truth matters." That's what I get from your comment.
Your nuts. I was quoting Einstein who claimed anything traveling faster then light would be pure energy.

Wikipedia

Faster-than-light
"Faster than the speed of light" redirects here. For other uses, see Faster than the speed of light (disambiguation).
Faster-than-light (also superluminal or FTL) communications and travel refer to the propagation of information or matter faster than the speed of light. Under the special theory of relativity, a particle (that has rest mass) with subluminal velocity needs infinite energy to accelerate to the speed of light, although special relativity does not forbid the existence of particles that travel faster than light at all times (tachyons).

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#7275 Nov 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
You don't know how but you do know how not? Is that correct? You don't know how the universe started but you have done enough investigation to know how it could not have happened?
Yes. Some hypotheses can be ruled out.

With all of its scientific and historical errors of fat, its failed prophecies, unkept promises and self-contradictions, your bible cannot possibly be the word of a perfect and loving god that it claims to be. That means that it was written by exactly who it appears to have been written by - ancient men playing god - and that makes it mythology.

The universe evolved from a speck. Life evolved on earth from a common ancestral cell. The correct bible is the one that predicted these things, which is none of them.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#7276 Nov 29, 2012
Hedonist wrote:
City living is definitely a major mind shift from working a small horse ranch out in the middle of nowhere, but I've lived in big cities before. Spent the last 12 years breeding and training Paso Finos, it was time for a change.

And city life is fun once you get your head in the right frame of reference!

Like I said, out dance options are excellent. Wednesday night salsa & bachata ... Friday & Saturday local live jazz at any number of venues with cha-cha, rumba, jitterbug, etc. All within our "stagger zone" (the zone where it's easy to stagger home without needing to drive).

We even walk to the grocery store and have a subway line less than a block away. Sold all my cars & trucks but 1 and hardly ever even need that.
That sounds much better. Congratulations.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#7277 Nov 29, 2012
derek4 wrote:
And there is nothing carved in stone proving evolution – it's just a theory, surrounded by much objection and questionable science.
That is incorrect, Dim. The theory of evolution is now carved in stone.

There is no legitimate challenge to it, and no controversy - just an agenda driven disinformation campaign. Have you read the Wedge Document? It's a mission statement for the Discovery Institute announcing its intention to broadside science. It's literally a written statement of that antiscientific agenda that was leaked to the public.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 18 min Morse 231,990
Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 20 min Friend of all 14,455
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 59 min Gillette 1,040
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 4 hr thetruth 29
Young atheists: The political leaders of tomorrow 4 hr thetruth 6
Why Christians should stick up for atheists 4 hr thetruth 8
Can Atheists Know God Does Not Exist When They ... 15 hr QUITTNER Nov 27 2014 31

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE