Board index › Topical Discussion › Computers, Math, Science, and Technology

BAZINGA!! Creationists...GAME OVER

Page 1 of 2 [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

17 Mar 2014, 11:51 am

booyah!

Web Page Name



JSBACHlover
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Oct 2013
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,282

17 Mar 2014, 12:15 pm

"This page can't be displayed"

Brilliant.



El3ktra
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 3
Location: Portland, OR

17 Mar 2014, 12:19 pm

JSBACHlover wrote:
"This page can't be displayed"

Brilliant.


http://news.discovery.com/space/astrono ... 140317.htm

Sadly, the creationists will probably just say that God put that primordial cosmic microwave background radiation out there shortly after he planted the dino bones. I have found that Creationists are not moved by fact (otherwise, they wouldn't be creationists.)



TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

17 Mar 2014, 12:49 pm

El3ktra wrote:
JSBACHlover wrote:
"This page can't be displayed"

Brilliant.


http://news.discovery.com/space/astrono ... 140317.htm

Sadly, the creationists will probably just say that God put that primordial cosmic microwave background radiation out there shortly after he planted the dino bones. I have found that Creationists are not moved by fact (otherwise, they wouldn't be creationists.)


They could just as likely say it is evidence that God created the universe i.e. that God was responsible for the Big Bang. The next necessary step is to show/prove that the Big Bang was the result of a natural process i.e. did not require a god to make it happen.


_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.


JSBACHlover
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Oct 2013
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,282

17 Mar 2014, 12:53 pm

Tallyman is right. You might be surprised to learn that Georges Lemaître, the first person to propose the theory of the expansion of the universe (before Hubble) as well as what later became known as the Big Bang theory, was a Roman Catholic priest.



khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

17 Mar 2014, 1:44 pm

JSBACHlover wrote:
"This page can't be displayed"

Brilliant.


the page opens right up for me



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

17 Mar 2014, 2:08 pm

Link fixed.

"http:" was entered twice in the link.



khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

17 Mar 2014, 2:11 pm

GGPViper wrote:
Link fixed.

"http:" was entered twice in the link.


thank you



ak_born
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 78
Location: Alaska

17 Mar 2014, 2:40 pm

Science will never be able to prove or disprove the existence of a god--lies outside the domain of science. Science can only examine religion's claims made about the natural world to see if they are accurate. That said, the idea of a roughly 10,000 year old universe (or just earth?) taught by the Young Earth Creationist movement seems to be easily disproved with the immense number of scientific observations from diverse fields.

The amount of information that scientists are able to glean from photons and the CMB radiation is astounding!


_________________
Existence itself is at its roots a manifestation of information. - Wheeler


JSBACHlover
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Oct 2013
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,282

17 Mar 2014, 2:50 pm

ak_born wrote:
Science will never be able to prove or disprove the existence of a god--lies outside the domain of science. Science can only examine religion's claims made about the natural world to see if they are accurate. That said, the idea of a roughly 10,000 year old universe (or just earth?) taught by the Young Earth Creationist movement seems to be easily disproved with the immense number of scientific observations from diverse fields.

The amount of information that scientists are able to glean from photons and the CMB radiation is astounding!

The creationist theory that God made the universe to "look old" (just as God created Adam fully mature) is an idea that can't be proven or disproven, so it's ridiculous for either side to argue over it.

Personally, I don't know what to believe. On the one hand, there is carbon dating and the geological record which suggest a long historical presence of the human race (and therefore of the earth and the cosmos). On the other is linguistic-DNA analysis which predicts the origin of human language at roughly 6,000 B.C., which poses some difficult questions about how long homo sapiens sapiens has been around.

I usually try to avoid creation vs. evolution debates, since the genres of Genesis 1 and 2 (and much of Gen 1-11) indicate that they are theological reflections on history, and (probably) not history as such.



khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

17 Mar 2014, 3:15 pm

JSBACHlover wrote:
ak_born wrote:
Science will never be able to prove or disprove the existence of a god--lies outside the domain of science. Science can only examine religion's claims made about the natural world to see if they are accurate. That said, the idea of a roughly 10,000 year old universe (or just earth?) taught by the Young Earth Creationist movement seems to be easily disproved with the immense number of scientific observations from diverse fields.

The amount of information that scientists are able to glean from photons and the CMB radiation is astounding!

The creationist theory that God made the universe to "look old" (just as God created Adam fully mature) is an idea that can't be proven or disproven, so it's ridiculous for either side to argue over it.

Personally, I don't know what to believe. On the one hand, there is carbon dating and the geological record which suggest a long historical presence of the human race (and therefore of the earth and the cosmos). On the other is linguistic-DNA analysis which predicts the origin of human language at roughly 6,000 B.C., which poses some difficult questions about how long homo sapiens sapiens has been around.

I usually try to avoid creation vs. evolution debates, since the genres of Genesis 1 and 2 (and much of Gen 1-11) indicate that they are theological reflections on history, and (probably) not history as such.


Having a conversation about this topic with a "believer" is like having a conversation with a fence post.



Prof_Pretorius
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,520
Location: Hiding in the attic of the Arkham Library

17 Mar 2014, 3:42 pm

That was a bit over-reaching, wasn't it?
A little tidbit of scientific discovery was going to destroy Creationists ???


_________________
I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow. I feel my fate in what I cannot fear. I learn by going where I have to go. ~Theodore Roethke


khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

17 Mar 2014, 4:09 pm

Prof_Pretorius wrote:
That was a bit over-reaching, wasn't it?
A little tidbit of scientific discovery was going to destroy Creationists ???


You are correct. Reality is not going to drag them from their world of delusion. They have excuses for everything. Never proof, only excuses and explanations, which is acceptable if not for the fact they try to force the unprovable onto society as fact.



ak_born
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 78
Location: Alaska

17 Mar 2014, 4:23 pm

The article in the New York Times has a really cool graphic explaining inflation and includes quite a bit more information than the discovery article.

NYT Inflation Article


_________________
Existence itself is at its roots a manifestation of information. - Wheeler


slave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Age: 112
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,420
Location: Dystopia Planetia

17 Mar 2014, 6:01 pm

khaoz wrote:
Prof_Pretorius wrote:
That was a bit over-reaching, wasn't it?
A little tidbit of scientific discovery was going to destroy Creationists ???


You are correct. Reality is not going to drag them from their world of delusion. They have excuses for everything. Never proof, only excuses and explanations, which is acceptable if not for the fact they try to force the unprovable onto society as fact.


They live with a brutal pathology, Delusional Disorder.

Pity them.

It can even affect those with IQ's higher than 85.



khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

17 Mar 2014, 6:18 pm

slave wrote:
khaoz wrote:
Prof_Pretorius wrote:
That was a bit over-reaching, wasn't it?
A little tidbit of scientific discovery was going to destroy Creationists ???


You are correct. Reality is not going to drag them from their world of delusion. They have excuses for everything. Never proof, only excuses and explanations, which is acceptable if not for the fact they try to force the unprovable onto society as fact.


They live with a brutal pathology, Delusional Disorder.

Pity them.

It can even affect those with IQ's higher than 85.


booyah