Posted on 02/06/2014 1:58:22 PM PST by celmak
On many mornings, I wake up and think, “You know what this country needs? More culture war.” As I scramble up a couple eggs, I find myself wishing—fervently wishing—that we could spend more time reducing substantive issues to mere spectacle. Later, as I scrub the pan, I’ll fantasize about how those very spectacles might even funnel money toward some of the country’s most politicized religious groups.
Fortunately, Bill “the Science Guy” Nye has heard my wish—which, really, is the wish of a nation. Why else would he have traveled to Kentucky this week in order to debate Ken Ham, the young-earth creationist founder of Answers in Genesis, about the origins of the world?
Actually, there are two other reasons that Nye might have done so, and I’ve given both possibilities a great deal of thought in the past few days. The first is that Nye, for all his bow-tied charm, is at heart a publicity-hungry cynic, eager to reestablish the national reputation he once had as the host of a PBS show. When his stint on Dancing With the Stars ended quickly, Nye turned to the only other channel that could launch him back to national attention: a sensationalized debate, replete with the media buzz that he craves.
Possibility number two is that Nye is clueless—that, for all his skill as a science communicator, Nye has less political acumen than your average wombat.
After watching the debate, I’m leaning toward that second possibility. Last night, it was easy to pick out the smarter man on the stage. Oddly, it was the same man who was arguing that the earth is 6,000 years old.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Number two I don't know, but there are biotic and abiotic theories of petroleum. The abiotic theory is not well supported.
You should probably research shale gas formation, but the rocks are porous and contain liquids and gas that build up after millions of years of pressure. I'm very surprised that no geologist you ever met could ever explain the origin of natural gas. Chesapeake Energy even has it on their website:
The chesapeake page details the theory I said I was familiar with.
Nope.
But it does prove that various claims made in the Bible are nonsense.
You should know darned well that before the singularity science is left with - gulp - nothing.
There may or may not be anything before the singularity. There may be no actual "before." There are various theories. But for the sake of advancing the discussion I will stipulate that IF you are arguing that science deals only with Contingent Reality and not Necessary Reality [or Supreme Reality,] that's fine. But do not then try to invoke something that science doesn't deal with as something that's "wrong." And do not then claim that science has to be wrong when your book of legends make claims as to material facts in Contingent Reality which are mistakes.
Gods said He created - ex nihilo in the Hebrew - out of nothing!
Ex Nihilo is actually Latin.
This is exactly why we don't teach Creationism, and why Creation "science" isn't science. Your "science" doesn't explain anything. It's not useful in any way. It can't be refuted in any way. You just say it, and boom, there's the moon.
I withdraw my objection to teaching Creation "science." We don't need to waste any time on it after all, because all a teacher needs to do in order to cover it in detail and in summary is to get up on the first day of class and say, Here's Creationism: "God made everything. The End."
And then the teaching of actual science can begin.
Somehow I can’t see Kraus trashing a hotel room, much less raging, “HAMMER OF THE GODS, BABY!”
Yes, I have. And I’m afraid that if your faith rests upon a foundation based in these crackpot ideas, you are far more deserving of my pity than my scorn.
“Somehow I can’t see Kraus trashing a hotel room, much less raging, “HAMMER OF THE GODS, BABY!””
Oh, it’s much, much worse than that. Since he doesn’t believe in God he uses the Hammer of Inquiry.
Evolution is the theory that there are changes in population allele frequencies over time. These changes can be caused by the random breakdown of codons or by environmental factors. [So far you -- or at least most Creationists -- agree that this happens.] Over long enough periods, these changes give rise to new taxa. [You do not agree with this, or at the very least, most Creationists do not agree that this is the cause of most varieties of life we see on Earth; some disallow it, some allow that it could accidentally and occasionally happen, but is not likely to have produced the biodiversity we see.]
That's the theory of evolution. It does not now, nor did it ever say anything about abiogenesis. You have to already have live organisms with heritable characteristics before you have evolution.
You are confusing the theory of evolution with the so-called "materialist program" which includes Standard Model Cosmology, materialist theories of biogenesis, evolution, and a lot more besides.
You see... christianity is and always has been, and always will be about faith. I don't apologize for that. I spend a life time developing and growing that faith. It's a belief system that comes through revelation. The bible says "all scripture is useful teaching and training". I believe that.
You readily admit that science doesn't have all of the answers yet. And science is based on theory that either proves correct or incorrect. And when it proves incorrect a new theory takes its place. That's what it is.
God's word is the same today and yesterday. Its settled as a matter of faith. If science or humanism proves it wrong, it is just a matter of unsettled science that some day gets righted.
Can science prove out scripture? Sometimes. Sometimes not. Its called faith for a reason. Where science proves scripture... that's great. Where it doesn't... that's great too. That's where we find God. In faith.
Gee, one would think you would have to bury a lot of living material in order to mine these vast quantities of natural resources, huh? Maybe, just maybe, something like a global flood could create that much material worldwide and that much sedimentary rock.
Thoroughly enjoyed your website, and at first surprised that they dared to quote Dr. Walt Brown. Even had a link to his site.
But then I realized they were just trying to throw doubt on his claims. Why, would you believe they even mis-quoted him?
“On a theoretical basis, his model makes three fatally wrong assumptions.
The Earth is a perfect sphere.
The surface of the Earth is smooth.
The surface of the Earth is covered with water.”
However, where I accept that the Bible is instructive in the supernatural and in its portrayal of human nature, I do not accept that it is a scientific or historical textbook. Nor do I even think it is anything but extremely harmful to claim that it is. Harmful to the world because it propagates ignorance, and that is never beneficial; and harmful to your faith because it portrays faithful people who believe this as obstinate ignoramuses tilting at scientific windmills.
Most Christians -- and by most I mean all but a few percent -- do NOT believe that the Bible says the world was created in six literal days. About the same number of Christians do not believe that the Earth is only a few thousand years old. The tiny minority who do attempt to invoke science to "prove" their spiritual beliefs. It is a lost cause. The objections are silly and the "theories" are ridiculous.
We have as much evidence that the Earth is billions of years old as we have that it is round. When people of faith attempt to argue that the Earth is really flat because the Bible says so, they are guaranteeing that future generations will not believe in God.
No, no evidence for that. The fossils are where they should be if many living things exist over vast amounts of time, and sediment is carried by denudation. There are no rabbits in the same layer as trilobites, and there are no dinosaurs in the same layer as mastodons.
In some places on earth rivers cut deep deep ravines rather than fill up with sediment. Why? We should be able to go to these areas that are filling up with sediment and find all manner of organisms, fish, animals that are being buried. Except that process only happened billions of years ago. And nobody can say exactly how tall the mountains had to be to cover the whole flat part of the earth with miles of sedimentary rock.
Its easy to describe a process, but sometimes the very simple questions (like maybe out of the mouths of a babe) end up with them answering by saying "science hasn't proved or answered that yet"
And for them, that's okay to say science has proved or answered that yet". Because their hope is in science and that someday it will reveal everything. Our hope is in God and that someday he will reveal everything.
They don’t misquote him. The inverse cube relationship he claims is only possible under those completely simplistic assumptions.
Nope, my faith rest on the perfect work and sacrifice of Jesus Christ. But in teaching others I’ve found a true passion for defending the faith and every word of the Holy Bible.
I mean think about for a moment, you have a book inspired by God, written down by 40 godly men, in 66 books covering more than 1,500 years to complete, on 3 different continents, number 1 book worldwide, originally in a couple of different languages and now being translated into every language and working fervently to translate into any newly discovered language by simple believers who may or may not have the university credentials you think are required in order to posit truth.
I start with what scripture says. And I personally don't let science guide me away from that. I let God's understanding given to his followers through the Holy Spirit develop theology. I don't let science develop theology.
Science readily admits that it is wrong sometimes and new theories have to replace wrong ones. Why would I let science develop theology?
The Bible says that, and is wrong. And that is why even most Christians do not believe it.
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.