Posted on 04/10/2004 10:39:47 AM PDT by Tribune7
This Easter weekend, I answer one of the more disparaging questions I'm asked by secularists. That is: "How can a true scientist believe in the gospel message of Christ?" The answer begins with a proper definition of science.
Science is the study of nature through empirical evidence. A truly scientific theory, by definition, must be testable by repeatable observations or experiments. Yet there are many observations in nature that cannot be scientifically tested. Take the creation of the natural world.
As explained by the big-bang theory, all the matter and energy of the universe was compressed into a cosmic egg that inexplicably exploded. But nobody knows where the cosmic egg came from, or how it arrived. Neither has a single important prediction of this theory been confirmed. Even worse, it contradicts multiple principles, including the first and second laws of thermodynamics and the law of conservation of mass.
That means the big-bang theory is largely a faith-based idea.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Maybe I'll go on a bear hunt myself.
In other words they don't have an answer.
Don't quit your day job.
The statement is completely accurate, as you would know if you understood the theory and the associated mathematics. Don't attempt to render something into "other words" when you don't understand it in the first place.
To complicated to explain to us below your intelligence level huh? Or maybe your just not smart enough to explain it because you really don't understand it yourself. Give me a break. I've got an MS from an accredited university - heavy in the math, thermal sciences and heat transfer. Had several calculus based physics classes to. Surely you in all your superior knowledge could at least on some "elementary" level explain what came before the big bang?
I think the answer is you don't know: thus the cop out explanation (in the more intelligent than you voice playing and nose in the air) "it is without meaning".
Sounds like philosophy not science.
[In other words they don't have an answer.]
[The statement is completely accurate, as you would know if you understood the theory and the associated mathematics. Don't attempt to render something into "other words" when you don't understand it in the first place.]
To complicated to explain to us below your intelligence level huh?
Nope. Too simple too explain to people who think they know all the answers already and are arrogant enough to insult those who *do* know the topic.
Or maybe your just not smart enough to explain it because you really don't understand it yourself.
I understand it just fine. I'm also smart enough to know the difference between "your" and "you're", "too" and "to".
Give me a break.
No. You started the snideness by cockily denigrating a perfectly good explanation as if it were a cheap evasion. You're not going to get off the hook now that you find that your arrogance might have been misplaced.
I've got an MS from an accredited university - heavy in the math, thermal sciences and heat transfer. Had several calculus based physics classes to.
Then what's your excuse for not understanding basic physics? Your nuts-and-bolts engineering education isn't the best foundation for delving into theoretical physics, especially since you seemed to have stopped short of differential equations on the math side, and probably didn't get more than a taste of quantum mechanics or relativity (if that), but the basics of the Big Bang theory are understandable my most bright high schoolers -- a preliminary understanding doesn't take a PhD.
Surely you in all your superior knowledge could at least on some "elementary" level explain what came before the big bang?
No problem, son: What came before the Big Bang is the same thing that's colder than absolute zero, East of the equator, below the center of the Earth, or after eternity.
If that still doesn't help, I'm not sure how to make it any more elementary.
I think the answer is you don't know: thus the cop out explanation (in the more intelligent than you voice playing and nose in the air) "it is without meaning".
Let me know when you wind down.
Sounds like philosophy not science.
Only because you haven't understood it.
Ask a simple question....
I understand it just fine. I'm also smart enough to know the difference between "your" and "you're", "too" and "to".
I'm happy for you.
No. You started the snideness by cockily denigrating a perfectly good explanation as if it were a cheap evasion. You're not going to get off the hook now that you find that your arrogance might have been misplaced.
I haven't heard an explanation yet.
Then what's your excuse for not understanding basic physics? Your nuts-and-bolts engineering education isn't the best foundation for delving into theoretical physics, especially since you seemed to have stopped short of differential equations on the math side, and probably didn't get more than a taste of quantum mechanics or relativity (if that), but the basics of the Big Bang theory are understandable my most bright high schoolers -- a preliminary understanding doesn't take a PhD.
I thought you were a high schooler.
No problem, son: What came before the Big Bang is the same thing that's colder than absolute zero, East of the equator, below the center of the Earth, or after eternity. If that still doesn't help, I'm not sure how to make it any more elementary.
If that's your answer go home boy. Just say you don't know and keep yourself from looking like an idiot.
Let me know when you wind down.
More like when I get tired of wasting time with a scoffer who talks in circles because he thinks he knows everything and is to proud to say "I don't know".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.