Christians are anti-science.

[AProudLefty]

Oh really??!! How so?

Faith is required to believe in radiometric dating, you know...

How is that a faith? If it's wrong, then science evolve for the betterment.

[AProudLefty]

A Creationist need not believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old. At this point, you are speaking of an entirely different religious belief, this one about the age of Earth rather than about how life came to be on Earth.

Correct.

No, he is just expressing his religious belief that the Earth is 6,000 years old. This is not denying science in any way, which does not speculate about the past.

No. When he is saying that science is wrong and that scientists are lying or mislead, that is denying science and scientists.

Personally, there is no particular theory about the age of the Earth that I accept as a True. I simply do not care about how old the Earth is and thus do not subscribe to any particular view about it. I do, however, find various views to be reasonable and/or interesting for one reason or another...

I was a Creationist myself.

[AProudLefty]

Creationists, people such as myself who accept (on a faith basis) the Theory of Creation as a True, believe that life appeared on Earth as a result of an act of some kind of intelligence.

A Christian, such as myself, will additionally claim that the Christian God is this "intelligence", but a Creationist need not be a Christian.


How, by any of that, is a Creationist (or even a Christian) "anti-science"?

Theistic evolution is not denying science.

[gfm7175]

Let's take the "it's all religion" argument head on. Religions can be wrong or bad.

Never said that everything was religion... A few things is not everything, genius...

[gfm7175]

How is that a faith? If it's wrong, then science evolve for the betterment.

Read the bolded, then read the red...

[AProudLefty]

Read the bolded, then read the red...

That's how science works. Faith implies they won't change their belief. Like how those scientists believed in ether.

[gfm7175]

No. When he is saying that science is wrong

He is not saying that science is wrong, though... The Theory of Creation is not about science. It, in and of itself, does not contradict science in any way...

and that scientists are lying or mislead,

As you have already been told, scientists are NOT science. Scientists, like any other people, most certainly can and do lie. Science, however, does not lie. The Theory of Creation says absolutely nothing about scientists either. All it posits is that life appeared on Earth as the result of an act of some kind of intelligence.

that is denying science and scientists.

No it isn't. It has nothing to do with science or scientists.

[AProudLefty]

He is not saying that science is wrong, though... The Theory of Creation is not about science. It, in and of itself, does not contradict science in any way...

Ken Ham says otherwise.

As you have already been told, scientists are NOT science. Scientists, like any other people, most certainly can and do lie. Science, however, does not lie. The Theory of Creation says absolutely nothing about scientists either. All it posits is that life appeared on Earth as the result of an act of some kind of intelligence.

Scientists study science obviously. Scientists are known to falsify evidence and data, as JPP posters love to claim about those Global Warming scientists.

No it isn't. It has nothing to do with science or scientists.

You yourself said that it's a different category of Creationists. That the group I was referring to.

BTW, those people use science to "prove" Creationism and want it taught in public schools.

[gfm7175]

Creationists, people such as myself who accept (on a faith basis) the Theory of Creation as a True, believe that life appeared on Earth as a result of an act of some kind of intelligence.

A Christian, such as myself, will additionally claim that the Christian God is this "intelligence", but a Creationist need not be a Christian.


How, by any of that, is a Creationist (or even a Christian) "anti-science"?

Theistic evolution is not denying science.

You ignored my question.

What do you mean by "theistic evolution"? I assume that you are referring to a theist who also happens to believe in the Theory of Evolution (that current life forms are the result of mutations of more primitive life forms)?? Again, this has absolutely NOTHING to do with science... Accepting both Christianity and the Theory of Evolution as true is perfectly fine as they are not mutually exclusive beliefs.

[AProudLefty]

You ignored my question.

What question?

What do you mean by "theistic evolution"? I assume that you are referring to a theist who also happens to believe in the Theory of Evolution (that current life forms are the result of mutations of more primitive life forms)?? Again, this has absolutely NOTHING to do with science... Accepting both Christianity and the Theory of Evolution as true is perfectly fine as they are not mutually exclusive beliefs.

Correct.

[gfm7175]

That's how science works. Faith implies they won't change their belief. Like how those scientists believed in ether.

No, that is not at all what science is...

[AProudLefty]

No, that is not at all what science is...

Then what is it?

[Into the Night]

There is no observable phenomenon compelling us to ask if a god exists. You're not justified in asking if gods exists anymore than you are asking if "The Force" from Star Wars exists.

And what is your definition of "god," anyway?

Argument of ignorance fallacy. Observable phenomenon? Earth. The Sun. The Moon. They could have been created by a god or gods. They could be created by random means. We don't know.

[Into the Night]

Lol. So if I say that The Force from Star Wars doesn't exist, I'm making a religious statement?

Stop being so arrogant.

Yes. You are being religious.

[Into the Night]

Intothenight is an idiot. He does not even read posts he replies to. Troll

Lie. I've already answered his question, idiot.