Creationists take heed - Page 3

Lincoln · May 10, 2003, 08:49

Well I am happy to learn that the second law of thermodynamics does not exist anymore. I learn something new here everyday. It is amazing that atheists will go to such extremes to deny deterioriation. I guess we are all just getting younger and younger!

Sava · May 10, 2003, 08:52

Silly Lincoln... don't blame atheists for pointing out the truth... blame your God for lying to you.

Lincoln · May 10, 2003, 08:57

Thanks for confirming that the second law does not exist anymore. I really am starting to be convinced now... Let me know what happens the next time you turn the heat off from under a frying pan. I guess evolution is doing something here that I don't understand...

Sava · May 10, 2003, 09:00

Actually, my God crack was unfair. It wasn't God who lied to you. It was the men who wrote the bible and the generations of Christians before you. God could very well be waiting for us in death, shaking his/her head because of how he/she has been misrepresented.

Lincoln · May 10, 2003, 09:01

Well I agree that he has been misrepresented.

Sava · May 10, 2003, 09:06

I don't have a problem with people believing in a diety or higher power. I'm a soft-atheist/agnostic. I can't say whether or not there isn't a God. But I do have a problem with the whole ear-plugging "LA LA LA" attitude of some religious people. The Orthodox church, for instance, has accepted what science has shown, but yet the faith of it's partioners has not wavered. There's nothing wrong with admitting that maybe the authors of the Bible weren't 100% accurate in their description of things. The Bible's accuracy does not affect the status of what lies beyond death. One can believe in God and still accept the truth of the world in which he/she created.

Lincoln · May 10, 2003, 09:22

Well I hope that you don't throw the baby out with the dirty bath water. Jesus didn't care much for hypocrites either. I certainly do not know all about God. I think you are right and there will be many surprises in the end.

Cruddy · May 10, 2003, 09:26

Quote:

Originally posted by BustaMike

Not quite accurate as it pertains to this topic. As I said before, when systems start to get to very small levels, they fail to be smooth and start to get quantifiable...

I always wondered why a straight line could be thought of as part of a circle of infinite radius. It seemed to me the 2 definitions contradicted each other. Needless to see, I have a lot of arguments with maths teachers. They don't improve my knowledge of numbers, but they do help my debating skills.

Next!

Rogan Josh · May 10, 2003, 09:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
But I do have a problem with the whole ear-plugging "LA LA LA" attitude of some religious people.

Why do you have a problem with it? It is simply how they want to express themselves and their beliefs. Most Christians draw a great deal of strength and well-being from going to church to worship. Do you also have a problem with people who go to a nightclub to release their tensions?

You people are so unbelievably narrow minded!

Sava · May 10, 2003, 09:28

yay we agree on something!

Cruddy · May 10, 2003, 09:30

I'm amazed that so many people's ideas of an all powerful, omniscient God are so small minded. Such a being is surely beyond the limits of human definition anyway, so all these petty arguments of Creationists are about selling the idea, rather than the content.

Next!

Sava · May 10, 2003, 09:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Rogan Josh

Why do you have a problem with it? It is simply how they want to express themselves and their beliefs. Most Christians draw a great deal of strength and well-being from going to church to worship. Do you also have a problem with people who go to a nightclub to release their tensions?

You people are so unbelievably narrow minded!

Sorry, but when people's beliefs fly in the face of truth, well it bothers me. It's no different than the alcoholic who claims he can drive better while drunk. Perhaps you should re-read my posts. You can still go to church, believe in God, and be a good person WHILE admitting that maybe the world is older than 6,000 years and that we all aren't descended from two naked white people.

Ever thought the Adam and Eve was a MYTH?

Rogan Josh · May 10, 2003, 09:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
Sorry, but when people's beliefs fly in the face of truth, well it bothers me.

Well, if it bothers you, then it is your problem - not theirs. Their beliefs only 'fly in the face' of your truth, just as your beliefs may 'fly in the face' of theirs.

Quote:

It's no different than the alcoholic who claims he can drive better while drunk.

It is waaay different. Someone who believes he can drive better while drunk is putting other people at risk (if he acts on his beliefs). Creationists are not.

Quote:

Perhaps you should re-read my posts. You can still go to church, believe in God, and be a good person WHILE admitting that maybe the world is older than 6,000 years and that we all aren't descended from two naked white people.

Ever thought the Adam and Eve was a MYTH?

Of course you can - I do! But people should be allowed to believe in what they want without being held to ridicule by people like you.

Dr Strangelove · May 10, 2003, 09:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Boris Godunov

No it isn't. Observation of fact. A complete literal adherence to the Bible inherently involves being a moral bigot, since the Bible commands one to be as such.

What a bigoted statement! No it doesn't, because the Bible is so complex that there is no one literal translation. Most people who use the Bible to support their bigoted views make the grave error of ripping a few phrases out of their context.

The best known tele-evangelists don't necessarily have the support of the majority of evangelists. Yesterday a major evangelical council issued a sharp condemnation of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and even Franklin Graham for their anti-Islamic statements.

Rogan Josh · May 10, 2003, 09:42

Dr. S:

Sava · May 10, 2003, 09:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Rogan Josh
Well, if it bothers you, then it is your problem - not theirs. Their beliefs only 'fly in the face' of your truth, just as your beliefs may 'fly in the face' of theirs.

If you could call a disdain for truthicide a problem, well then I agree. I've got a problem. Sure I have many silly beliefs. People poke fun at them sometimes. But I don't prostelesize my outlandish beliefs, nor do I try to force the public education system to teach them.

Quote:

It is waaay different. Someone who believes he can drive better while drunk is putting other people at risk (if he acts on his beliefs). Creationists are not.

Again, I have another problem. I think the slaughter of the truth and the perpetuation of myth as fact IS a bad thing.

Quote:

Of course you can - I do! But people should be allowed to believe in what they want without being held to ridicule by people like you.

Sorry. The first amendment says people can hold whatever beliefs they want and express them freely. And they can. But it also protects my belief that they are stupid. And believing in something mythical or outlandish doesn't make them stupid, it's ignoring fact and imperical evidence that makes them stupid.

Boris Godunov · May 10, 2003, 09:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove

What a bigoted statement! No it doesn't, because the Bible is so complex that there is no one literal translation. Most people who use the Bible to support their bigoted views make the grave error of ripping a few phrases out of their context.

The best known tele-evangelists don't necessarily have the support of the majority of evangelists. Yesterday a major evangelical council issued a sharp condemnation of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and even Franklin Graham for their anti-Islamic statements.

(Exodus 34:12 to 34:26, King James version):

"Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for a snare in the midst of thee: But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves: For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice; And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods."

Tell me how I interpret that a different way that doesn't make it amount to horrendous religious bigotry?

I don't see how you can interpret God's commands to the Israelites to slaughter thousands in the name of their moral bigotry ("They are different, kill them")

Look, I'm not saying all religious people would believe this by any means, but if one is (as I stipulated) a fundamentalist who believes the Bible is the Word of God and inerrant, then I don't see how one cannot be a religious and moral bigot, as it explicitly commands people to be such. If you're not, then you're not following the Bible to the letter (which suits me just fine).

Boris Godunov · May 10, 2003, 09:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln
Well I am happy to learn that the second law of thermodynamics does not exist anymore. I learn something new here everyday. It is amazing that atheists will go to such extremes to deny deterioriation. I guess we are all just getting younger and younger!

Oh please. Yes, I'm sure these scientists must be atheists, even though the article says no such thing. They just must ve evil-lutionists out to perpetuate the anti-creation conspiracy! I'm sure that, rather than just reporting what they onserved through science, they really just set out to disprove the second law in order to stick it in the eye of creationists!

You sound more ridiculous all the time.

Kuciwalker · May 10, 2003, 09:54

The Universe isn't "expanding into something". When they say the Universe is expanding, it can mean two things - in an infinite universe, that the distance between any two points has increased, and in a curved (spherical, torus, etc.) universe, that the circumference has increased. You are trying to picture yourself looking down on the Universe, which is again impossible because there is nothing outside the Universe. Picture it from inside the Universe, especially from inside a curved Universe, and it makes sense.

As to my definition of the Universe, can you come up with a better, complete one? Mine clearly and exclusively defines the Universe, while any other makes the Universe an irrelevant term.

Rogan Josh · May 10, 2003, 09:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
And believing in something mythical or outlandish doesn't make them stupid, it's ignoring fact and imperical evidence that makes them stupid.

So how much impirical evidence for the universe being 14 billion years old have you, personally, seen?

I suspect none - does that make you stupid for believing it?

Sava · May 10, 2003, 10:01

I don't believe that. In fact I think the universe, or cosmos, the nature of our existence, to be infinitely old. Evidence suggests that the matter in our corner of the universe is around 25-40 billion years (IIRC). But I don't believe in it. I won't force others to believe in it. I just form a general theory on such information. It forms the basis of my understanding of the universe. And it is a very dynamic theory. I'll simply suggest that others take a look at the evidence and make their own conclusion. And, in the future, new evidence might come to light that proves otherwise. I will learn, and adjust my theories accordingly. Being deadset in a belief is dangerous. Science isn't exact either. If this "law" can be broken, I must equally question other laws. Personally, I think Einstein is wrong in his claim that the speed of light is an impassible barrier. Some of my physics friends call me stupid sometimes, but hey, that goes with the territory.

I don't like to use the word "belief" per se. It implies a certainty. And the only thing I can say for certain is that "I exist". Everything else is a theory based upon my sensory experience and impirical evidence.

Lincoln · May 10, 2003, 10:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Boris Godunov

Oh please. Yes, I'm sure these scientists must be atheists, even though the article says no such thing. They just must ve evil-lutionists out to perpetuate the anti-creation conspiracy! I'm sure that, rather than just reporting what they onserved through science, they really just set out to disprove the second law in order to stick it in the eye of creationists!

You sound more ridiculous all the time.

Why don't you ask urban Ranger what he is? Clue: He is an atheist and he is the one who posted the article. And I won't laugh in your face for making a mistake.

Sava · May 10, 2003, 10:17

There's a large group of Christian scientists that think evolution is a valid explanation.

Giancarlo · May 10, 2003, 10:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln

Why don't you ask urban Ranger what he is? Clue: He is an atheist and he is the one who posted the article. And I won't laugh in your face for making a mistake.

You are a creationist let me guess? The ways you go to deny what is presented.

Boris Godunov · May 10, 2003, 10:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln

Why don't you ask urban Ranger what he is? Clue: He is an atheist and he is the one who posted the article. And I won't laugh in your face for making a mistake.

Your post said:

Quote:

Well I am happy to learn that the second law of thermodynamics does not exist anymore. I learn something new here everyday. It is amazing that atheists will go to such extremes to deny deterioriation.

Considering that it was the work of the scientists mentioned in the article that indicated that the second law is not always true, saying it was UR's work is rather silly, isn't it? He was only posting an article. Did you even read it? Probably not...

Lincoln · May 10, 2003, 10:35

Yes, I read the article and I suppose I could have worded my post better to make it clear I was referring to the constant anti-Chrisitan rants of Urban Ranger. Is that a reason to laugh in someone's face?

Giancarlo · May 10, 2003, 10:39

Lincoln, I think UR has a very big point to make and let him make it. If you want to make an issue about his personal beliefs than do it somewhere else. This is the place to discuss the facts.

Sava · May 10, 2003, 10:43

Quote:

This is the place to discuss the facts.

Lincoln · May 10, 2003, 10:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Boris Godunov

(Exodus 34:12 to 34:26, King James version):

"Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for a snare in the midst of thee: But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves: For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice; And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods."

Tell me how I interpret that a different way that doesn't make it amount to horrendous religious bigotry?

I don't see how you can interpret God's commands to the Israelites to slaughter thousands in the name of their moral bigotry ("They are different, kill them")

Look, I'm not saying all religious people would believe this by any means, but if one is (as I stipulated) a fundamentalist who believes the Bible is the Word of God and inerrant, then I don't see how one cannot be a religious and moral bigot, as it explicitly commands people to be such. If you're not, then you're not following the Bible to the letter (which suits me just fine).

I guess you have never read where Jesus said to forgive the woman rather than stone her to death. And you apparently do not understand that Jesus said to turn the other cheek when offended. And I suppose that you do not undesrtand that the New Testament teaches that "mercy rejoices over judgment" or that we are under "the law of grace" now because of the death and resurection of Jesus. No, Chrisitans are not bigots if they believe what Jesus said.

Lincoln · May 10, 2003, 10:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Fez
Lincoln, I think UR has a very big point to make and let him make it. If you want to make an issue about his personal beliefs than do it somewhere else. This is the place to discuss the facts.

Since when have facts had anything to do with a discussion at Apolyton?