Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Quark2005
The science is quite simply not on the side of a literal Biblical interpretation, and has not been for several hundred years. If people can't deal with that, it's not a problem with the science, it's their own personal problem.

Not necessarily.

You forgot that there are certain metaphysical underpinnings to the science, namely that there is now, and never has been, any interference or misunderstanding of the physical data; and that the laws of nature as currently observed, and extrapolated, have always held true -- at least to great enough of an extent that the findings remained consistent.

Those are metaphysical and / or theological considerations, however.

Cheers!

1,519 posted on 09/30/2006 10:32:44 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1361 | View Replies ]


To: grey_whiskers
You forgot that there are certain metaphysical underpinnings to the science, namely that there is now, and never has been, any interference or misunderstanding of the physical data; and that the laws of nature as currently observed, and extrapolated, have always held true -- at least to great enough of an extent that the findings remained consistent.

That is true - that's why I keep using the word consilience over and over again here; consilience between separate lines of data is essential when looking at information concerning the distant past, and why any science theory can only be considered as good as the consistency of its models and the veracity of its predictions.

1,535 posted on 10/01/2006 7:42:28 AM PDT by Quark2005 ("Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs." -Matthew 7:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1519 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson