Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

One Million-Years-Old (Human) Footprints Found At Margalla Hills (Pakistan)
Dawn ^ | 7-27-2007 | Sher Baz Khan

Posted on 07/28/2007 6:00:30 PM PDT by blam

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 421-440 next last
To: Alamo-Girl; blam
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. That is the clearest piece of prose I have ever seen you pen (keyboard?).

What brought up the subject is the deliberate pinging of the creationist list to one of Blam's threads. Blam posts mostly in the field of archaeology, and tries to keep the dogmatists off his threads. He has been pretty successful.

The use of the creationist ping list on pure science threads really amounts to trolling, just as would be my example of a scientist invading the Religion Forum with multiple and vigorous posts challenging everyone's religious beliefs.

Scientists (those still here) tend to avoid the Religion Forum out of courtesy; would that others were as considerate.

181 posted on 07/30/2007 7:44:07 AM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: betty boop; Coyoteman
Very true! Thank you so much for sharing your insights, dearest sister in Christ!

In reference to Coyoteman's objections, there exists evidence of a worldwide physical collapse of all major civilizations around 2350 B.C.: Comets and Disaster in the Bronze Age. Also, there are a number of scientists (e.g. Lanza) who posit that time is an illusion. Indeed, Einstein said that "reality is an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." He was speaking of local realism here, but the same concept is often extended to the whole.

Therefore, it is inaccurate to say that science has "debunked" either a belief in the Noah flood or a 6,000 year old universe. It can however be said that the mainstream view of science is thus and so.

182 posted on 07/30/2007 7:45:18 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
I gather your thesis requires Einstein to be a mindless materialist, and preferably atheist. Though a genius, of course.

If, by materialist, you mean that Einstein believed the laws of nature were constant throught time, and therefore subject to discovery through science, then I suspect he was.

Materialist in contrast to supernaturalist, someone who believes that the laws of nature are suspended at the caprice of demiurges.

183 posted on 07/30/2007 7:47:26 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman; blam
Scientists (those still here) tend to avoid the Religion Forum out of courtesy; would that others were as considerate.

As would the Romney supporters. But the religious are known for their zeal.

Thank you so much for your kind reply!

184 posted on 07/30/2007 7:48:52 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Lijahsbubbe; sodpoodle; doc30

Lijahsbubbe, ;’).

Sodpoodle, I liked the third category.

Doc30, the trash started in post #3.


185 posted on 07/30/2007 8:00:43 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Profile updated Monday, July 30, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: .30Carbine; Alamo-Girl; BuckeyeForever; CholeraJoe; Christopher Lincoln; CottShop; Dr.Zoidberg; ...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1873114/posts?page=141#141


186 posted on 07/30/2007 8:06:24 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Profile updated Monday, July 30, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman
A global flood 4350 years ago and a 6000 year old earth are two examples where religious beliefs have been falsified by science.

On my reading, Genesis does not stipulate a 6000 year old earth. Genesis 1 is not even in the same time order that we, as humans, experience. As for a global flood, I don't see how present-day science can claim to have ruled out such a thing beyond a reasonable doubt. We know there have been cataclysmic events on this planet in its history, some of which have been associated with comet/meteor strikes. It is thought that the dinosaurs met their demise as the result of global climate change occasioned by the latter. A massive comet or meteor landing in the ocean could cause a catastrophic rise in sea levels. Present-day science is not in a position to rule this possibility in, nor rule it out.

Science has falsified neither of these two points.

187 posted on 07/30/2007 8:37:34 AM PDT by betty boop ("Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." -- A. Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: js1138; Alamo-Girl; Coyoteman
Materialist in contrast to supernaturalist, someone who believes that the laws of nature are suspended at the caprice of demiurges.

Well jeepers, js1138, if that's the definition of a "supernaturalist," then according to your way of thinking (either/or), I must be a "materialist."

I believe that the laws of nature are universally operative and absolutely consistent throughout time. Which is precisely what I would expect, given their divine origin.

188 posted on 07/30/2007 8:48:46 AM PDT by betty boop ("Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." -- A. Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; Coyoteman; Caesar Soze; js1138; hosepipe; .30Carbine
The view I hold, which betty boop also holds, is that Creation and Evolution are not mutually exclusive - provided when one says "Evolution" he does not mean to include atheism as part of the theory (which it is not.)

Well said, Alamo-Girl! Atheism is, in my view, either an ersatz religion or a religion substitute. As such, it has no place in a scientific theory.

189 posted on 07/30/2007 9:10:45 AM PDT by betty boop ("Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." -- A. Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: narby

And Humans are only 200K years old....


190 posted on 07/30/2007 9:12:36 AM PDT by Dead Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Therefore, it is inaccurate to say that science has "debunked" either a belief in the Noah flood or a 6,000 year old universe.

Can a belief ever be "debunked" by anything since beliefs only exist in mind?

191 posted on 07/30/2007 9:24:07 AM PDT by TigersEye (I will surrender to love but never to judgment.<>When you surrender to love there is no judgment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman; doc30

[[A global flood 4350 years ago and a 6000 year old earth are two examples where religious beliefs have been falsified by science.]]

Actually no it hasn’t- interpretations of evidence are nothing more than opinion based on assumptions- a priori assumptions- If the dating methods were infallible, and not open to interpretations and didn’t rely on assumptions, then you’d have a valid statement. You can argue that you personally htink the system has strengths enough, but that is an a priori belief/opinion on the matter- others dissagree and have strengths in their annalysis’ that support their points of interpretatiosn as well- so no, those two subjects have not been ‘falsified’ by science.

post 176 Doc30: So let me get htis straight- As long as the threads that are posted by evos are kept strictly favorable toward the a priori beleif of evolution, they are civil threads, but, should anyone jump in and give counter points and evidences, why then it becomes uncivil? Lol. Doc30, revealing his complete disdain for folks who who bring anyhting other than evolution to the table, has htis to say- “Your ping list contributes no reasonable discussion,” and “You and your ‘Lying for the Lord’ creationists, and that’s exactly what they are, don’t have the intellectual power to run a 25 watt light bulb.” and “Your ping list contributes no reasonable discussion, but simply opens up the door to a bunch of ignorant hicks who have proven time and again they don’t even know what science is, let alone are even remotely qualified to discuss the subject at hand”

A little touchy are we there Doc?

Thisi s a public forum- if folks can’t handle a public discussion about articles and aren’t secure enough in their own beleif to handle counter points and counter opinions, then perhaps a public forum isn’t the place to be posting articles of interest. Folks like Doc might like to be able to go unchallenged on a forum that is obviously counter to what they themselves might beelive, but soryy- aint gonna happen.


192 posted on 07/30/2007 9:27:50 AM PDT by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
Atheism is, in my view, either an ersatz religion or a religion substitute. As such, it has no place in a scientific theory.

Very well said, dearest sister in Christ!

193 posted on 07/30/2007 9:28:33 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Can a belief ever be "debunked" by anything since beliefs only exist in mind?

IMHO, those who value their own sensory perception and reasoning above their beliefs are subject to having their beliefs "debunked."

But that is the very weakest form of belief - like doubting Thomas demanding to thrust his hands in Christ's wounds before he would believe.

The beliefs of others cannot be shaken by anything at all.

194 posted on 07/30/2007 9:32:44 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
As for a global flood, I don't see how present-day science can claim to have ruled out such a thing beyond a reasonable doubt. We know there have been cataclysmic events on this planet in its history, some of which have been associated with comet/meteor strikes. It is thought that the dinosaurs met their demise as the result of global climate change occasioned by the latter. A massive comet or meteor landing in the ocean could cause a catastrophic rise in sea levels. Present-day science is not in a position to rule this possibility in, nor rule it out.

I was most specific: "A global flood 4350 years ago."

Comets and meteors 65 million years ago do not apply. Neither does the Cambrian 500+ million years ago.

All it takes to rule out a global flood at 4350 years ago is something that persists across that time period. That can be DNA, culture (Egypt), soil layers, fauna and flora, etc.

There are many cases where there is continuity across the 4350 time period. As far as science is concerned, this disproves a global flood at that time period. (The early geologists seeking to prove the flood gave up about 1830.)

195 posted on 07/30/2007 9:46:34 AM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl

That’s an interesting reply but it completely avoids the question I asked. Weak or strong all beliefs exist only in the mind. How can even a weak belief be “debunked” if the mind that holds it chooses to hang on to it?


196 posted on 07/30/2007 9:55:51 AM PDT by TigersEye (Intellectuals only exist if you think they do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman; Alamo-Girl
All it takes to rule out a global flood at 4350 years ago is something that persists across that time period. That can be DNA, culture (Egypt), soil layers, fauna and flora, etc.... There are many cases where there is continuity across the 4350 time period. As far as science is concerned, this disproves a global flood at that time period.

Genesis does not say that everything was wiped out in the flood. Au contraire, it says all species were preserved. So the "continuity argument" is really a strawman....

197 posted on 07/30/2007 9:58:58 AM PDT by betty boop ("Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." -- A. Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: Maynerd
If true that is very big news and pushes back homo sapien existence about 850,000 years.

That means it took us 1,000,000 years to develop the Ford Taurus.

As a species, we're awfully slow.

198 posted on 07/30/2007 10:01:11 AM PDT by Lazamataz (JOIN THE NRA: https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
Science has falsified neither of these two points.

She blinded me with science.

199 posted on 07/30/2007 10:02:27 AM PDT by Lazamataz (JOIN THE NRA: https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Can a belief ever be "debunked" by anything since beliefs only exist in mind?

Can the belief that the U.S. government planned the 9/11 attacks be debunked, if everything exists only in your mind?

200 posted on 07/30/2007 10:07:13 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 421-440 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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