Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 224 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
12/07/19 03:58 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 1
True 1
Page 5 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >
Topic Options
#13381 - 07/26/06 10:23 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
Aireal, matter and energy came from something, it just that what it was is beyond the ability of present day physics to explain what it was. apparently (at least from my understanding of it), it was a basic building block much smaller than any thing our understanding can explain. for that reason it was much more compatible than even quarks and things of that nature or energy.

there is a saying about infinity being the time that is required for any and all possibilities to happening. it would not matter how little possible life is, it is possible, so it would have to happen sometime.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
.
#13382 - 07/27/06 06:52 AM Re: genisis is NOT possible
Aireal Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 03/28/06
Posts: 30
Loc: Mayfield, Kentucky
DA Morgan

You said in your post "How much space does all of the matter in the universe actually require? None. There is no theory of which I am aware that requires space to have matter." I am not sure what you are talking about, or how you got that from my post. Sorry, I should have went into greater detail.

As for John Barrow, professor of astronomy at the University of Sussex in England, he is one of the more prolific writers on current cosmology, so he is not ill-informed. As for being a fool, I don't have a clue, never meet the man.

So here is my point.

No theory of science, at this point in time, is able to explain the origins of the universe well enough to exclude God. Genisis or any number of other creation myths can be inseted into the gaps, or taken as a metaphore.
Therefore it is a waste of time to try and "prove" genisis is NOT possible.

Top
#13383 - 07/27/06 07:27 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
genisis claimed the world was created in 7 days. that is something that science can disprove.

genisis claimed that man was not connected in any fassion to any older animal. science has proved there is a connection.

genisis claimed that only the animals that were needed at the time man came forth were made. science has proven a solid link between the first protocell, though the one cell ameba, though multicell simple plants, to higher level animals and plants.

genisis claimed that the original humans were two single people called adam and eve. it can easily be proven that there had to be more people than them, just by the fact that their child cain, was able to find a mate. he could not have done so with primates or any nonhuman creature. in addition there would have been more mates needed for any other children and their children.

therefore any claim that genisis cant be disproven is not valid. you have to have belief in the bible to accept it as gospel. Its possible, without that belief, to accept it as a parable, something to teach and explain things to those who cant understand the reality due to lack of scientific knowedge.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#13384 - 07/27/06 09:18 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
soilguy Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/28/05
Posts: 414
Loc: North Carolina
Quote:
Originally posted by Aireal:
So here is my point.

No theory of science, at this point in time, is able to explain the origins of the universe well enough to exclude God. Genisis or any number of other creation myths can be inseted into the gaps, or taken as a metaphore.
Therefore it is a waste of time to try and "prove" genisis is NOT possible.
No theory of science can INclude God. Science is about studying the physical universe -- stuff we can weigh, sense or otherwise measure, either directly or indirectly.
_________________________
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
--S. Lewis

Top
#13385 - 07/28/06 06:05 AM Re: genisis is NOT possible
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Aireal wrote:
"No theory of science, at this point in time, is able to explain the origins of the universe well enough to exclude God."

And you are an expert on astrophysics and quantum mechanics and are speaking to this as a subject matter expert? Where can I find you in the citation index? Or perhaps you are just a very well read person and can provide a citation to an article that says what you wrote above. Didn't think so. You are just trolling for god ... and that's good because he needs sales and marketing support given his track record of failure.

The truth is that science can, by using Boolean logic, exclude god. Simply put there is nothing in the entire universe that has proven beyond the ability of science to explain. There is no problem that existed 1000 years ago that has not been solved. Unless you expect instant satisfaction then history clearly demonstrates that within a few hundred years, at most, all currently known issues will similarly be resolved.

God is logically impossible. Who created god? Oh god has always existed. Who created the universe? Oh you can't say it too has always existed as that would be blasphemy.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#13386 - 07/28/06 07:48 AM Re: genisis is NOT possible
Aireal Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 03/28/06
Posts: 30
Loc: Mayfield, Kentucky
First off, I am not some religious nut "trolling for God" nor am I trying to prove God in any way, nor am I suggesting that science take God into account. Gee, one mention of religion and everyone flies of the handle. If you people really want to waste your time bebunking the bible, I suggest you learn it first, than bebunk it. Your "proof" would not sway anyone, and is a waste of your time and talents. You could be doing something productive.

soilguy

You said. "No theory of science can INclude God. I never said it should, only that you can not keep religious people from sticking god in the cracks.

dehammer

Should someone bother to read a a theory and try to understand it before they debunk it? Yes, of course. Yet you try to bebunk the bible without any understanding of it. Any student of theology could run circles around your "dis-proof" of genisis, if you let them. As for my not listing refrences in my post. I gave author, book title, and page number for the qoute used. Thats more than I have seen from a lot of other posts.

1. 7 days, by whose reckoning. The bible also says that a thousand years is but a blink in the eye of God. It takes about 3/1000 of a second to blink. How many years would a day be to God. How many years in the "7" days it took God in genisis for creation.

2 & 3. Genisis claimed man was not connected in any fashion to any other animial. Only animals that were needed were made. It makes no such claims, have you even read it. If you have, you are making wild assumptions in the process.

4. Adam, Eve, and Cain Genitic evidence points to a common male ancester only 60,000 years in the past. Simular results for a common female ancsester. The human population went through a severe bottelneck starting 5,000 to 15,000 years before that. This makes it nearly impossable to disprove the Adam Eve thing. As for Cain, bible scholars have a number of theories to explain that, so I will only list one. If you notice the are two locations in genisis relates the creation of man. One speaks in the plural, and is commonly overlooked. The other is the Adam account. Some scholars belive God created an early version of man in the first one, and a perfected Adam in the second. Cain interbreed with the first version.

I could go on, but I am not trying to prove God or the bible in any way. I mearly believed trying to debunk the bible is a waste of time that could better spent. Nor will I waste any more time trying to show that your attempts to do so are feeble at best, and will not sway anyones opinion.

Top
#13387 - 07/28/06 08:57 AM Re: genisis is NOT possible
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
sorry, good try, but not that good.

according to most believers the 7 days is an actual earth week. not thousands of years, let alone billions.

im not sure what bible youve read, but the one in the household i was raised in said that adam was created in the sixth day, and there was no mention of any man created before. Adam was created in gods image, while all the other creations were not. Even if cain had been able to breed with the "first man" (notice also that woman was a after thought, according to the bible, made just to keep adam company) where did his children find their mates.

yes there was a bottle neck from which all people are derived. It had something in the neighborhood of 1000 women (its not possible to determine the number of males that survived) any of which could have been eve. the thing is they were all human already. according to the bible, (espicially when read by the people that claim the earth is about 5000 years old) adam was created from dust, not from other animals.

oh, and i have read genisis, something that was required in bible school, and yes it did claim that all the animals had been created in a few days, not millions of years.

ive heard these arguements many times. the thing is, either the bible is a teaching guide and not to be taken litterally, or its litteral and its claim that the earth was made in 7 days has to be taken as it is. creationist will tell you that it took god less than a week to create the heavens and the earth. these people have no problem using all the technology science has to offer, but refuse to accept the history of the world that science has proven.

ive stated that genisis could be a parable, but not reality. you turn around and attack it claiming in essesance that it is both.

in case you had not noticed, when you regestered in that everyone else was wrong, this thread had already died by a month and a day. we were not wasting any time with it.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#13388 - 07/28/06 01:46 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Aireal wrote:
"Gee, one mention of religion and everyone flies of the handle"

Not everyone ... just me. ;-)
This is a science forum. Try resisting the urge to be orthogonal.

But you continue on with:
"I mearly believed trying to debunk the bible is a waste of time that could better spent." which is quite easy to challenge.

You say "bible" as though it is one thing ... it is not. There are multiple versions, almost all admittedly altered after the fact. All but one not in its original language. All authorless. And all, 100% of them, with easily proved errors of fact.
Where is the value in reading such a book other than to study the weakness of the human mind and to learn why so many pepole are willing to follow dictators, kings, and other self-annointed despots?
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#13389 - 07/28/06 03:34 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
soilguy Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/28/05
Posts: 414
Loc: North Carolina
Quote:
Originally posted by Aireal:
First off, I am not some religious nut "trolling for God" nor am I trying to prove God in any way, nor am I suggesting that science take God into account. Gee, one mention of religion and everyone flies of the handle. If you people really want to waste your time bebunking the bible, I suggest you learn it first, than bebunk it. Your "proof" would not sway anyone, and is a waste of your time and talents. You could be doing something productive.

soilguy

You said. "No theory of science can INclude God. I never said it should, only that you can not keep religious people from sticking god in the cracks.
I have no interest in debunking the Bible. I have little interest in the Bible, period. The only reason I get involved in discussions about Genesis is that in the US, Genesis literalists are either trying to change science so that it can back up their beliefs, or water down the teaching of science so that no student is aware that science cannot back up these literalist beliefs.

To me, this is an important issue, because the US is falling behind the rest of the modern world in science education. I don't care what people believe, as long as they don't demand that science back up those beliefs, and use political action to dumb down science education any further.

I have zero interest in keeping people from spackling god into the gaps of human knowledge. That's none of my business. People should understand the danger of such God of the Gaps thinking -- that they will either have to fight the increase in human knowledge to defend their beliefs, or risk having the rug pulled from under their understanding of the universe whenever a gap is closed.
_________________________
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
--S. Lewis

Top
#13390 - 07/28/06 10:18 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Soilguy wrote:
"I have zero interest in keeping people from spackling god into the gaps of human knowledge."

I would too were it not for the fact that people who don't think for themselves. Those willing to follow self-annointed rulers and authorless books. Have been proven, by history, equally willing to burn people at the stake.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#13391 - 07/28/06 10:54 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
Where is the value in reading such a book other than to study the weakness of the human mind and to learn why so many pepole are willing to follow dictators, kings, and other self-annointed despots?
there are a few good lessons, IF one can stay awake listening to all the self-grandalizations (sorry if i totally messed up the spelling or actually created a word, but it gets the message) to reach them.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#13392 - 07/28/06 10:58 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
Anonymous
Unregistered


Did you mean "self-agrandizment"?

Top
#13393 - 07/28/06 11:20 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
It is like listening to another Texan ... George W. Bush.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#13394 - 07/28/06 11:50 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
Quote:
Originally posted by Amaranth Rose:
Did you mean "self-agrandizment"?
yes, i tried repeatedly to come up with the proper spelling, but could not. thanks.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#13395 - 07/29/06 12:02 AM Re: genisis is NOT possible
anyman Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 12/18/04
Posts: 134

Top
#13396 - 07/29/06 01:45 AM Re: genisis is NOT possible
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
thanks, that looks like it could be very usefull.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#13397 - 08/16/06 09:20 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
Tim Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/16/06
Posts: 192
Loc: California
The Book of Genesis is scientifically correct. The earth is about 6,000 years old. Evolutionists find it hard to answer that how did the earth and the universe come out of nothing. In fact, C.S. Lewis said, ?Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the universe has no meaning, we should have never found out that it has no meaning..? C.S. Lewis also pointed out that even our ability to reason would be called into question if atheistic evolution were true:
?If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our thought processes are mere accidents, the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the materialists? and astronomers? as well as for anyone else?s. But if their thoughts, i.e., of Materialism and Astronomy are merely accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give a correct account of all the other accidents.?
Created is the only way to describe the universe. For more information, go to my website at www.freewebs.com/biblicalcreation

Top
#13398 - 08/16/06 10:07 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Tim wrote:
"Evolutionists find it hard to answer that how did the earth and the universe come out of nothing."

No we don't. How do you answer the quesion where did god come from? When you have that answer ... you have the answer. But thank you for bringing it up as we'd never ever heard that argument before.

BTW: If Genesis is scientifically correct then you can of course answer the following question:

Why is it that you think giving virgin girls to a mob to be raped is a good thing? Genesis 19:8.

And for those that don't ,know the text here it is:

"Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof."
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#13399 - 08/16/06 10:35 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
SaMH Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 08/16/06
Posts: 4
The bible often records history, including human failures, without explicitly making judgment on the events.

The verse quoted above (Gen 19:8) in which Lot attempts a feeble and reprehensible solution to an immediate problem, is not promoted as virtuous; but rather in the context it comes across as a useless and repulsive.

Let's not pretend that in an account of, say, the holocaust, in which the phrase ??and Hitler exterminated six million Jews?? occurred, we would immediately jump to the conclusion that the work promoted the act, unless we had a prior commitment to de-legitimize it.

Samh

Top
#13400 - 08/17/06 04:21 PM Re: genisis is NOT possible
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
SaMH wrote:
"The bible often records history, including human failures, without explicitly making judgment on the events."

Often: But not in this case. If you are going to believe in the text then you can't pick and choose which sentences you choose to acknowledge. According to the biblical story Lot was saved precisely because he was a good person. So, by definition, good people give their virgin daughters to mobs to be raped. It was just 7 paragraphs earlier in Genesis 19:1 where god sends not one but two angels to help him out. And not that many paragraphs later when again god helps him out because he is not one of the evil people that was destroyed with the city.

While you are trying to deal with it ... deal with this:

Plants are made on the third day before there was a sun to drive their photosynthetic processes (1:14-19). 1:11

So much for scientific accuracy.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
Page 5 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.