It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Creationist Quackery, Part 150, 001 : Creationists Say Aliens Don't Exist, So Let's Stop Looking!

page: 32
10
<< 29  30  31   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Trying to argue the none physical with physical means as a method for prof is likewise impossible the other way around .Unless if the supernatural exist . The Bible is the key imo to understanding the supernatural world and if it could fall within the realm of science it would be metaphysics .Seeing something (physical) cant come from nothing it must have come from a supernatural means with a cause . a reply to: Krazysh0t




posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

The supernatural, if it exists, is just misunderstood science. I have every belief that if it exists, then we should be able to detect it, and if not, invent technology that detects it for us. Relying on a several thousand year old book to tell you about the supernatural is unreliable. If it exists as the bible says, then science will get around to studying it eventually. And at that point it will be called just natural instead of supernatural.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:02 AM
link   
This is the first paragraph in the pdf I linked to . "In recent years, study after study has found that a college education no longer does what it should do
and once did.1 Whether these studies look directly at the capabilities of graduates, or instead at what
employers find their capabilities to be, the result is the same: far too many college graduates have not
learned to write effectively, they can not read and comprehend any reasonably complex book, they
have not learned to reason, and their basic knowledge of the history and institutions of the society
in which they live is lamentably poor. “An astounding proportion of students are progressing through
higher education today without measurable gains in general skills” is the anguished conclusion of a
respected national study, entitled appropriately Academically Adrift.
2 Further, students now spend on
average little time studying outside the classroom, and the demands made of them by their faculty
teachers have been correspondingly reduced." a reply to: Krazysh0t

I am sure there was a turning point in this situation and my guess it was near or around the year 1970 .I will read the paper in full now because inquiring minds need to know .



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

Just because our education system is going downhill doesn't mean you cannot come out of it with a good education. Many of the problems with our education system rely on students relying solely on their professors to just teach them the material. Education is a two-way street. You have to exercise your brain while you are learning in order to process the information correctly. You cannot just sit back and let the professor teach you. You won't get anything out of it.

Also, even if you disagree with the subject matter, it behooves you to learn it anyways. That way you can adequately debate against it or work to prove a different set of beliefs. It you don't even know the basics because you've disregarded anything coming out of our education system, you are at a disadvantage. Your knowledge is lacking, so you cannot prove what you disagree with wrong since you don't know what it says.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
Man is fallible but God told them what to write down .

You know this how?


Should He have used a monkey ? I am thinking that there must have been the first man to create a fire .I don't think his name was Eddy. So we see scientific men moving from caves to labs .A carpenter can build you a house but he is not a scientist .A mechanic can build you a car but he is not a scientist .A scientist can write a paper that some other none scientist can actually make something out of .The paper is a concept ,a abstract that a engineer will have to convert to a real empirical thing . That first man that made fire didn't need a scientific paper telling him that rubbing two sticks together would get hot enough to make fire . You don't need a calculator to make calculations .You do need to be able to calculate to make something real . Scientist make wrong calculations . They are fallible in what they do and think . They are not the only ones to get thing correct . A cave man can do that as well .


You aren't saying anything at all. You don't know science, therefor have no right to even talk about it. If you are going to claim scientists are fallible and make mistakes and use it as an argument against fields of science you hate, then you have to also agree that the people that wrote the bible are fallible and make mistakes, and use that argument against the bible as well. If not, you are a hypocrite using double standards. There's no way around that.



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Science can and does change it's mind from time to time . But science can be stuck in a dead end path for different reasons .One reason might just be because it will not allow other opinions and theory's into the MS conversation . I enjoy the Electrical Universe conversation because it does have legitimate basis from some of the great minds of the past . In this vid the speaker near the end goes into what he thinks gravity is . Caution . If Big Bang cosmology is a must for your evolution theory then this vid may not be for you . www.youtube.com... a reply to: Krazysh0t Not all teachers or schools of learning are created equal so one must or should exercise discernment when choosing both .



edit on 17-1-2015 by the2ofusr1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 07:56 PM
link   
If you studied the subject of the Bible and how it came to be you might come to a different conclusion then you do .Tell me science person how you can get something (matter) out of nothing . a reply to: Barcs



posted on Jan, 18 2015 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

Electric universe theory has been debunked. Just because minds of the past thought about it, doesn't me it is still valid today. It's not being suppressed by the mainstream science people. It's been flat out debunked.

The Electric Universe Theory Debunked

This demonstrates a HUGE double standard for you. You put theories like Evolutionary Synthesis and the Big Bang under extra scrutiny, and so they are invalid because of small inconsistencies (that you made up). Yet a theory that has been COMPLETELY discarded due because evidence literally says it cannot happen, is somehow valid for you.



posted on Jan, 18 2015 @ 01:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
If you studied the subject of the Bible and how it came to be you might come to a different conclusion then you do .Tell me science person how you can get something (matter) out of nothing . a reply to: Barcs



Once again, you prove you know nothing about science. Something from nothing is a RELIGIOUS viewpoint, not a scientific one. Big Bang theory does not state that something ever came from nothing. It states that matter was close together and expanded. Only religious folks that haven't done an ounce of research on the topic say that. You're like 0-20 in your claims about science thus far, do you really need to dig yourself deeper?

And I HAVE studied the bible. The first 20 years of my life I studied it intensely. I was raised on it. I've read it cover to cover on more than one occasion. Sorry, but even the bible doesn't support your false claims about science rooted in ignorance. I don't care if you choose to have faith in it, but you can't claim it's absolute truth just because you believe it and then denounce science because it follows evidence.

Plus, science and the bible can easily coexist, but that depends on how much faith you place in the men that wrote the bible. If you think they are all infallible and got every thing absolutely literally correct (even via translation to modern day English), then the conflict lies with your strict interpretations of ancient texts, rather than any plausible holes in the scientific method.

What do you have against learning about science? I'm just curious. It's one thing to not take science as 100% truth, but it's completely different to not even understand what you are arguing about, yet posit lies in order to justify your argument, rather than attempt to learn how it really works. You can't argue against something you haven't taken the bare minimum time to research. Bottom line.
edit on 18-1-2015 by Barcs because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
10
<< 29  30  31   >>

log in

join