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.
Religion says god said it is this, and it is, case closed, send in your donations.
Originally posted by packro
Last I checked it only affects people who know they are being prayed for
lol so that means prayer works? which could mean there might be a God? what exactly are you trying to say?
anyways... if anything... everyone should be agnostic. to not be is illogical. if you "worship" science theories then you're just as religious as any Bible thumper...
Scientists do not "worship" theories my friend... they build ideas based on provable results. To believe scientific theory does not require any faith.... the answers are there for all to see. Nor does Science teach us that we are not worthy of answering these questions.... it challenges us to do so... just as the rest of the universe does also...
Originally posted by luciddream
Originally posted by UnlimitedSky
While I totally enjoyed your presentation and creativity, and without a shadow of a doubt agree with you on your viewpoint, it must be said that you are specifically referring to religion vs science, not spiritualy vs science. Correct?
I'm pretty sure OP is referring to Religion and the box as The Book or holy text. Spirtuality does not require a god, imo, i believe spirituality as in energy, chi, karma etc.
For all we know the flying spaghetti monster created us and causes rain on us when he has to use the bathroom. Science talk? What part of your statement is science? Sorry, there is no science out there that supports the biblical creation story.
For all we know using science talk, the sun could simply be the back side of a black hole and the fire ball in the sky is what a black hole does to all the light it takes in. We do not know what happens on the back side of a black hole.
To be honest we will never answer that, but some science followers (such as many who went nuts at this comic) are too ignorant to understand the full complexity of life.
Originally posted by Barcs
reply to post by BelieveInEnoch
People didn't watch the videos because this topic is about how religion refuses to acknowledge proven science, while that video has nothing to do with the topic. In fact, I'd go as far as saying that it proves the OP perfectly, because your video is nothing more than a bunch of faulty assumptions that are demonstrably false, for example "carbon dating is bogus". If that's really how you feel, then please post the scientific data that shows it is false. There are tons of methods of dating and they all concur with each other. You shouldn't believe anything Hovind says. He's a liar and a con man. All you have to do is read some very basic science books to debunk him and his nonsense about dinosaurs living at the same time as humans. There's no evidence to suggest anything close to that.
For all we know the flying spaghetti monster created us and causes rain on us when he has to use the bathroom. Science talk? What part of your statement is science? Sorry, there is no science out there that supports the biblical creation story.
For all we know using science talk, the sun could simply be the back side of a black hole and the fire ball in the sky is what a black hole does to all the light it takes in. We do not know what happens on the back side of a black hole.
As far as the proven science that religions refuse to acknowledge:
Will you please give me some examples?
How can you say/know that at least Kent does not cover those proven science topics that religions do not accept?
The text books are full of lies.
Why have you become the expert of what is true science reports?
Kent covers hundred of supposed proven science results that are later retracted and said to be wrong but they continue to print them.
As far as proof for carbon dating uselessness: www.youtube.com... He also cover other methods used to date things, like the geologic column, and their circle reasoning of dating bones to the age of the rocks they are near, but they respond to the age of the rocks by the age of the bones that the rocks were near, its called circle reasoning, and that my friend is NOT good science.
Raw, i.e. uncalibrated, radiocarbon ages are usually reported in radiocarbon years "Before Present" (BP), "Present" being defined as 1950. Such raw ages can be calibrated to give calendar dates. One of the most frequent uses of radiocarbon dating is to estimate the age of organic remains from archaeological sites. When plants fix atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) into organic material during photosynthesis they incorporate a quantity of 14C that approximately matches the level of this isotope in the atmosphere (a small difference occurs because of isotope fractionation, but this is corrected after laboratory analysis[citation needed]). After plants die or they are consumed by other organisms (for example, by humans or other animals) the 14C fraction of this organic material declines at a fixed exponential rate due to the radioactive decay of 14C. Comparing the remaining 14C fraction of a sample to that expected from atmospheric 14C allows the age of the sample to be estimated.
What has Kent Hovind lied about? Who has he conned?
What evolution science religion books am I to read that debunks Kent? The ones Kent has debunked.
Dinosaurs living with man: So all the evidence that Kent gives that dinos did live with humans is what then?
BUT there are lots of scientists, science books and science tests done that do prove the creation story.
I thought science was o look at all evidence but so far from you all I have heard is that you have only looked at one side. Are you as evolution scientist, not looking for truth but looking only to prove your theory because other wise I do not understand how you can make the statements you just made.
What evidence is there for the "Evolution" theory and the "big bang theory"? None. Tthey are theories not good science.
He will give how science has disproved various evolution claims, with the science used to disprove the claim, with either, what the Bible says, before, after and sometimes throughout his proof of the false claim. That's were the evolutionist refuse to listen. They never explain why, what Kent gave as scientific evidence to disprove the false claim they just move on to something else.
All text books that contain the evolution religion theory. What lies? Millions of years old, bones show evolution, carbon dating, geological column, all the various examples of proof of evolution like Lucy, which most of them are made up of 2 bones or less and some of those 2 bones were found miles apart from each other.
Good science is great, I agree. I do not need to provide scientific data for his findings when he gives them. So, if he is wrong prove him wrong. Prove the scientific data that he gives wrong. Like I said above you quit listen because he can debunk evolution very quickly and then you have to listen to what you do not want to hear.
I listed them above.
I thought you study science?????? You claim that Kent does not utilize proper scientific methods because he starts with a conclusion. Yeah, it called a hypothesis! But you are right GOOD science makes claims based on whether the hypothesis was right or wrong, not theories.
I'm not sure what your claim is that Kent got wrong about the process of carbon dating. The info given does not answer how in any way they could understand how much carbon was in the air to be absorbed 1,000,000 years ago, yet alone 3,000. What about the fact that they have taken samples from living creatures and dated them to be thousands of years old? What about the fact that 2 samples taken from different parts of the SAME (dead) woolly mammoth vary by tens of thousands of years.
You have said what you think he lied about but gave no evidence. Is there any one video that debunks him that is better than the others? What factual/proven science has he ignored? He is in jail for tax fraud and this is ATS, home of the conspiracy theories. Did you know that by the IRS's own tax code, US citizens are not to pay taxes?
Please give me a link to one you want me to watch and then we can talk about that link, movies, or series of movies
Ok, maybe your right here, they don’t “Prove the creation story” but they sure do point to it. I did on page 2. However, Kent does prove on many topics how the evolution theory is bogus.
If there is no evidence, then please single at least one thing, you personally believe that Kent has wrong, otherwise you are just denying the evidence he gives and please tell me what is wrong about the evidence provided by Kent. It’s hard to know about something that didn’t happen. If it happened and YHVH made it appear that way, it was the fastest week of evolution the world has seen.
Oh yeah, exactly what form or definition of evolution are you talking about anyways?