|
Post by andy on Mar 7, 2018 3:00:53 GMT -5
Is there evidence that “nothing” ever existed? You can’t see “nothing” , there is no evidence that “Nothing” exists. So how is a theory about the existence of Everything, based on the notion , that it arose from “nothing” ( yet we know that “nothing” has ever/never been proven to exist) ? Do scientists accept that the methods of science are based on evidence, and yet there is absolutely Zero evidence that this “nothing” has ever existed. (Theoretically, we cannot even replicate a pure vacuum, Nevertheless it’s theoretical existence would be Predicated by human eyes inability to observe it, as It could not even contain photons....) Of course we know that’s if it doesn’t have material components, it needs to be taken as a “faith based belief “ ? everyone has a faith based belief system, no matter what you put your faith in.
|
|
|
Post by andy on Mar 7, 2018 3:08:47 GMT -5
it doesn’t seem that Dr Goldacre puts very much faith in the pharmaceutical advertisements?
he shows “why he doesn’t” in that video
|
|
|
Post by snow on Mar 7, 2018 17:52:58 GMT -5
The medical field is aware of the problems in medicene and science reported here.
But if you think for one minute that you could tell the doctor in this video that "creationism" was the answer, -he would have difficult time trying to not laugh in your face!
most good doctors are Godly, imo It's not 'Godly' to believe in creationism. It's blinding yourself to evidence and I think if there is a creator, he gave people brains to use them, not to stay stuck in what people believed thousands of years ago.
|
|
|
Post by andy on Mar 8, 2018 2:07:49 GMT -5
The medical field is aware of the problems in medicene and science reported here.
But if you think for one minute that you could tell the doctor in this video that "creationism" was the answer, -he would have difficult time trying to not laugh in your face!
you are a typical “non creationist,”, you think most Creationists are not critical thinkers, and it’s a “laugh in the face” to believe in a Creator? Sad, real sad, just don’t laugh at your Creator, it certainly Isn’t funny to me, if creationists were doing the laughing?
|
|
|
Post by andy on Mar 8, 2018 2:23:58 GMT -5
youtu.be/HZBO6Z0f84Q. presentation by the best critical thinker of life. (Imo) Worth listening to, (laugh if you think it helps in your ability to thinking irrationally)
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 8, 2018 4:12:52 GMT -5
The medical field is aware of the problems in medicene and science reported here.
But if you think for one minute that you could tell the doctor in this video that "creationism" was the answer, -he would have difficult time trying to not laugh in your face!
you are a typical “non creationist,”, you think most Creationists are not critical thinkers, and it’s a “laugh in the face” to believe in a Creator? Sad, real sad, just don’t laugh at your Creator, it certainly Isn’t funny to me, if creationists were doing the laughing? How about you listing the steps that go into "critical thinking?"
Just google the topic "critical thinking."
Of course you don't think it is "funny."
After all it is the "fear" of god that keeps you going.
|
|
|
Post by andy on Mar 8, 2018 4:27:00 GMT -5
“ the futile bankruptcy of the scientific analysis community as it exists today!” —-andy
Bad Science- by Ben Goldacre
“Expelled, no intelligence allowed” — Ben Stein
Where is so called science leading? Most Likely they are destroying human ability to think rationally and logically and critically
Go to the 1:10 :00. Mark of the - AE Wilder-Smith talk, he understands the problem better than i have managed to so far ,
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 8, 2018 4:30:48 GMT -5
youtu.be/HZBO6Z0f84Q . presentation by the best critical thinker of life. (Imo) Worth listening to, (laugh if you think it helps in your ability to thinking irrationally) Arthur, Ernest Wilder-Smith, FRSC, more commonly known as A. E. Wilder-Smith, was a British organic chemist, and young Earth creationist.
All anyone needs do is look at the Grand Canyon to know that it isn't possible that the earth is only less than 10,000 old. Let along that the whole universe was created in that time length.
Earth creationism (YEC) is a form of creationism, a religious belief.
Its primary adherents are Christians who subscribe to a literal interpretation of the creation narrative in the Bible's Book of Genesis and believe that God created the Earth in six 24-hour days.[ wiki
|
|
|
Post by andy on Mar 8, 2018 9:59:26 GMT -5
there is a national epidemic of over medication use of opioid meds and opiates /opium/ etc/ etc The answer to this problem is given in this Lecture on drugs (illegal) , but could be applied to Prescriptions as well: The inborn desire of our brain to find “purpose” in living, which evolution denies , sad to say. Great read( or just listen!): youtu.be/0EOVt_uhMCUThank you .
|
|
|
Post by friend on Mar 27, 2018 8:48:54 GMT -5
a wonderful worldview that unites the discussion of “good vs evil”
why is there a seeming irreconcilable divergence?
Simple, because they both glorify Our Creator.
God used the most attritous evil imaginable, to
reconcile the greatest good possible.
I’m just thankful God didn’t ask me to stick my head in the sand (third option?) , but to stick up for the ultimate Good. Amen
|
|
|
Post by hmmmmm on Apr 8, 2018 12:18:12 GMT -5
So, ID the concept of a “history of the Genesis of man” was Strictly a man made concept.
IF, IF, And what purpose ? What grandeur could be
Inherited for such an endeavor?
Was it inspired by other humans that believed God Created the Universe, or was it inspired by “unbelievers?” What a strange hypothesis that would be, eh??
Hmmmmmm..... aw but that seems to be the logic of the skeptics/unbeliever.
It makes no sense , but that doesn’t stop people from being illogical now , does it?
So the writers knew that what they wrote was true as true can be.....🤝
|
|
|
Post by friend—- bump up on Apr 18, 2018 18:27:48 GMT -5
So, IF ....if the concept of a “history of the Genesis of man” was Strictly a MAN made concept.
IF, IF, And what purpose ? What grandeur could be
Inherited for such an endeavor?
Was it inspired by other humans that believed God Created the Universe, or was it inspired by “unbelievers?” What a strange hypothesis that would be, eh??
Hmmmmmm..... aw but that seems to be the logic of the skeptics/unbeliever.
It makes no sense , but that doesn’t stop people from being illogical now , does it?
So the writers knew that what they wrote was true as true can be.....🤝
so , explain how Genisis was written and/or inspired by mankind? It cannot be explained
|
|
|
Post by friend. Bump on Apr 18, 2018 18:31:27 GMT -5
[quote author="And"
Is there evidence that “nothing” ever existed?
You can’t see “nothing” , there is no evidence that
“Nothing” exists. So how is a theory about the existence of Everything, based on the notion , that it arose from “nothing” ( yet we know that “nothing” has ever/never
been proven to exist) ?
Do scientists accept that the methods of science
are based on evidence, and yet there is absolutely
Zero evidence that this “nothing” has ever existed.
(Theoretically, we cannot even replicate a pure vacuum,
Nevertheless it’s theoretical existence would be
Predicated by human eyes inability to observe it, as
It could not even contain photons....)
[/quote] Of course we know that’s if it doesn’t have material components, it needs to be taken as a “faith based belief “ ?
Bump
|
|
|
Post by GMO issues: ? on May 23, 2018 13:36:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by friend / on Jun 3, 2018 14:57:33 GMT -5
a wonderful worldview that unites the discussion of “good vs evil” why is there a seeming irreconcilable divergence? Simple, because they both glorify Our Creator. God used the most attritous evil imaginable, to reconcile the greatest good possible. I’m just thankful God didn’t ask me to stick my head in the sand (third option?) , but to stick up for the ultimate Good. Amen And our long lost “prodigal brother”. ? 😊 Awesome intellectual.... youtu.be/QNGLZvtRoiUWait til you see/read about his evidence!! 🤝
|
|
|
Post by friend. on Jun 4, 2018 22:58:09 GMT -5
|
|
Serious searchforGod
Guest
|
Post by Serious searchforGod on Jul 18, 2018 21:52:04 GMT -5
|
|
Serious searchforGod
Guest
|
Post by Serious searchforGod on Jul 20, 2018 6:27:01 GMT -5
So, IF ....if the concept of a “history of the Genesis of man” was Strictly a MAN made concept. IF, IF, And what purpose ? What grandeur could be Inherited for such an endeavor? Was it inspired by other humans that believed God Created the Universe, or was it inspired by “unbelievers?” What a strange hypothesis that would be, eh?? Hmmmmmm..... aw but that seems to be the logic of the skeptics/unbeliever. It makes no sense , but that doesn’t stop people from being illogical now , does it? So the writers knew that what they wrote was true as true can be.....🤝 so , explain how Genisis was written and/or inspired by mankind? It cannot be explained [ Creation wasn’t a humanly inspired truth
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 20, 2018 19:08:41 GMT -5
So, IF ....if the concept of a “history of the Genesis of man” was Strictly a MAN made concept. IF, IF, And what purpose ? What grandeur could be Inherited for such an endeavor? Was it inspired by other humans that believed God Created the Universe, or was it inspired by “unbelievers?” What a strange hypothesis that would be, eh?? Hmmmmmm..... aw but that seems to be the logic of the skeptics/unbeliever. It makes no sense , but that doesn’t stop people from being illogical now , does it? So the writers knew that what they wrote was true as true can be.....🤝 so , explain how Genisis was written and/or inspired by mankind? It cannot be explained Creation wasn’t a humanly inspired truth The “history of the Genesis of man” is just like all the other "creation" stories of indigenous peoples the world over.
Humans are a species that has the ability to remember the past and wonder what caused things to happen. They wanted answers.
Therefore they created stories to explain what that they did not know. There is not a part of the world which is inhabited by mankind that DOES NOT have their own creation stories.
Why would anyone think the Genesis version is any more factual or logical than all the others?
|
|
|
Post by Serious searchfor on Jul 20, 2018 20:39:28 GMT -5
Creation wasn’t a humanly inspired truth The “history of the Genesis of man” is just like all the other "creation" stories of indigenous peoples the world over.
Humans are a species that has the ability to remember the past and wonder what caused things to happen. They wanted answers.
Therefore they created stories to explain what that they did not know. There is not a part of the world which is inhabited by mankind that DOES NOT have their own creation stories.
Why would anyone think the Genesis version is any more factual or logical than all the others? hmmm, this thread invites you to compare your search with other peoples searchings, i can only post post for that which i feel is the best(only) and logical explanation. math can yield one correct and logical analysis, our universe is defined as logically engineered/created and as long as your creation analysis meets the criteria required for logical creation , they are for practical purposes the same engineering concept, and equally true. In my opinion ?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 20, 2018 22:50:00 GMT -5
The “history of the Genesis of man” is just like all the other "creation" stories of indigenous peoples the world over.
Humans are a species that has the ability to remember the past and wonder what caused things to happen. They wanted answers.
Therefore they created stories to explain what that they did not know. There is not a part of the world which is inhabited by mankind that DOES NOT have their own creation stories.
Why would anyone think the Genesis version is any more factual or logical than all the others? hmmm, this thread invites you to compare your search with other peoples searchings, i can only post post for that which i feel is the best(only) and logical explanation. math can yield one correct and logical analysis, our universe is defined as logically engineered/created and as long as your creation analysis meets the criteria required for logical creation , they are for practical purposes the same engineering concept, and equally true. In my opinion ? And you,- Mr. "Serious search for God" (guest), -are as much of a "mathematician" as I am Helen of Troy and Lana Turner and Madam Currie all wrapped up together as one!
|
|
|
Post by SearchforGod on Aug 4, 2018 18:22:12 GMT -5
So the next mathematical proof would involve proving that “existence “ is cohesive..
And as such it is linear and multilateral and unilateral and never ends ( eternal) .
And finite linear measurement is inherently nonexistent, as it doesn’t register as a subset of an infinite progression of said linearity. Ok? Got that! Thanks , it’s way over my head, 🤔
|
|
|
Post by Searching forGod on Aug 4, 2018 18:30:13 GMT -5
In other words, life , or as may be , “existence “ , could not be relative, if it wasn’t measurably congruent to the totality of eternity, which certainly only consists of things that have been engineered with elements that can be measured, and only eternal things can be measured in respect to eternity, right? Ok. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by SearchingforGod on Aug 4, 2018 18:46:17 GMT -5
In other words, life , or as may be , “existence “ , could not be relative, if it wasn’t measurably congruent to the totality of eternity, which certainly only consists of things that have been engineered with elements that can be measured, and only eternal things can be measured in respect to eternity, right? Ok. Thanks Oh, Q. E. D. 😉
|
|
|
Post by SearchingforGod on Aug 4, 2018 19:06:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by SearchingforGod on Aug 4, 2018 20:30:07 GMT -5
since mathematics is cohesive and eternal, existence(and its subset of corruptible time) , is also cohesive (not discreted/, not disconnected) any additions to existence need to be connected to that which already cohesive/connected
we cannot have any gaps/incohesiveness, in a cohesive existence, thankfully!
🙂
|
|
|
Post by SearchingforGod on Aug 4, 2018 21:43:04 GMT -5
so, let’s analyze the profession of Astro-physics ?
Certainly they make a concerted effort to connect all things in a cohesive theory? And why not? Does it help us , and help us to understand how we are Involved in the place we habit in ?
then to concede our human lack of cohesivity, a proposed
Unknowable theory that there exists things that are outside Our knowledge, hidden in dark energies, and dark holes?
And then we search to understand if there is cohesiveness even there. 🙂 Must be connected , even if we don’t know how?
|
|
|
Post by SearchingforGod on Aug 10, 2018 4:53:59 GMT -5
..many people like science
God is a scientist, even to all we can agree that a Scientist Created the universe . And all we have come to appreciate that goes into our earth and the consciousness of humans that live here.
It’s truly incredible that our Scientist could do completely such an amazing project, and project billions souls of humanity with individual DNA, personalities, consciousnesses...
Our Scientist would need to be infinitely intelligent to create such a marvel, truly infinite, truly marvelous.
There hopefully is no one that thinks this Creation came from a haphazard cosmic burp?
The search for knowing who the Scientist is, continues, and will know Him someday. Thanks
|
|