Posted on 04/20/2003 10:36:35 AM PDT by JHL
On Easter of all days, Gary Trudeau uses his Doonesbury cartoon to insult Christians in general, and George Bush's faith in particular. How quick the liberals are to condemn someone else's faith and belief system, but just let a Christian say anything negative about another's belief system and how quick they are to invoke an injunction against "judgementalism."
You can read the cartoon for yourself at the following link CLICK HERE for cartoon
I appreciate your, Dr. Scholastics and ThinkPlease's very reasoned arguments against my theory. I've got to continue this research tonight, or my boss is going to big bang me.
There are some of us Christians (mostly Catholics) that do make the effort. Of course, our "Christian" brethren on these threads cast us as atheists for our efforts. Sometimes, you just can't win...
You've evidently never encountered 18th century correspondence. People used to debate at great length on all sorts of topics via the mail. I believe they used to call them "commitees of correspondence" or some such.
I don't think this is a change in the theory as originally proposed; the "explosion" idea was more of a popular explanation than an accurate summary of the actual theory. But yes, to those of us who believe in God and modern science, the Big bang Theory is indeed very reminiscent of genesis 1:3.
There is also the ancient legal practice of written arguments for appeals. The written brief contains the lawyer's arguments, presumably logically presented and carefully footnoted to indicate the sources of the propositions presented. The opposing side then responds, also in writing, to answer each of those points. Oral arguments get lots of attention by the press, especially in cases before the US Supreme Court (reporters rarely visit state appellate courts); but oral arguments are definitely not the core of the process. (And the oral arguments are always about what's contained in the written briefs; no wild surprises ever happen.) In many appellate cases the lawyers waive oral argument and just rely on their briefs (perhaps not US Supreme Court cases, which are great publicity opportunities).
Anyway, the law operates with written arguments, clearly defined issues presented in numbered paragraphs, footnotes, and opposing briefs in the same format. That's the very best way to have a careful debate about important issues. Creation "scientists" always avoid going the route of written, carefully documented debate. They favor the razzle-dazzle of the lecture circuit. Good entertainment, perhaps, but it's no way to decide important scientific questions.
At one point, about 15 or so years ago, per Hubble Space Telescope, we were closing in on a 20 billion year age. However, with the Key Project of the HST complete, it narrowed down quite a bit to the current estimate. It's been hovering there for almost 5 years now.
I wish I understood the math for the redshift phenomonon. I'll check out the site BMCDA posted and do my own research. Funny thing is, if the big bang doesn't have a center or original point, isn't your current understanding of this process more consistant with the biblical account of, "let there be light" than the original big bang theory as it was proposed?
Some people think so. I'm generally not one of them, though I used to be (long long ago). I do happen to think that religion should not be diametrically opposed to science in anyway. They are two different endeavours.
Even with 90 to 1 compression from one inch snowfall (if true, you have given no supporting evidence for your claim) wou would need a mile of snowpack for every 5 million years. Let's see, the earth is close to 5 billion years old so the snow in greenland must be a thousand miles high correct?????
Wrong, they become atheists because they love themselves more than the Creator of the marvels that they are discovering. Arrogance, which we see displayed so fully in evolutionists on these threads is the path to atheism.
Since you know so much more then take apart my statement yourself. Explain what I said has been proven wrong. You cannot. The atheists cannot explain how life arose and no I will not waste my time with your snow job of articles. If they prove me wrong, show it right here.
Hint: The first life had to be able to reproduce. Proto-organisms do not cut it. Proto-organisms, not being reproductive beings cannot evolve.
Because refuting the first one was enough to refute the whole dumb theory of evolution. How come none of you 'scientists' can refute it?????????????
I have read the ENTIRE statement in question several times and believe it or not the Pope is Catholic! He has been seriously misquoted by the press. The first thing that you have to realize is the title of the encyclical "TRUTH CANNOT CONTRADICT TRUTH". He is not praising evolution, he is condemning it. He starts: "rather than the theory of evolution, we should speak of several theories of evolution. On the one hand, this plurality has to do with the different explanations advanced for the mechanism of evolution, and on the other, with the various philosophies on which it is based. Hence the existence of materialist, reductionist and spiritualist interpretations. What is to be decided here is the true role of philosophy and, beyond it, of theology." Now, he really goes after Darwinian evolution: "man is "the only creature on earth that God has wanted for its own sake" (No. 24). In other terms, the human individual cannot be subordinated as a pure means or a pure instrument, either to the species or to society; he has value per se. He is a person. With his intellect and his will, he is capable of forming a relationship of communion, solidarity and self-giving with his peers."And now for the final kick at evolution:" " Consequently, theories of evolution which, in accordance with the philosophies inspiring them, consider the spirit as emerging from the forces of living matter or as a mere epiphenomenon of this matter, are incompatible with the truth about man. Nor are they able to ground the dignity of the person. " "
The whole encyclical can be found at: Encyclical
Evolution is materialistic beyond a doubt and the Pope is specifically warning against materialistic evolution.
We can see God's design everywhere in life and the Universe. We cannot see random materialistic creation of anything anywhere. It is the evolutionists that do not have a single iota of evidence for their theory that is why they must insult opponents at every post. They seem to think that insults are proof of evolution. You are all like spoiled children having a tantrum. None of you can discuss an issue like human beings.
Yup, somebody else has the proof of evolution, but no one can tell us what it is! It's a deep secret!
You are not a Catholic, you are not a Christian. You constantly attack just about everything in the Bible. You have said called both Genesis and the Words of Christ fairy tales. You refuse to even believe that God created life or man. You are a deceitful person trying to induce (like your hero Darwin who you believe in more than your supposed religion) into your atheistic philosophy.
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.