Page 24 of 31 FirstFirst ... 14202122232425262728 ... LastLast
Results 346 to 360 of 464

Thread: Christians are anti-science.

  1. #346 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    76,843
    Thanks
    30,532
    Thanked 12,939 Times in 11,525 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,361 Times in 1,347 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IBDaMann View Post
    Absolutely. If you have a theism that specifies with certainty that no "The Force" exists then that is an affirmative belief, just as if you affirmatively believe that Global Warming is real. Your religious beliefs are not limited to those things that do exist; you are entitled to believe things do not exist as well. Jews will affirmatively state that no Son of God Messiah ever existed.

    Everything changes when you phrase it in a non-affirmative statement of a lack of a belief, i.e. from "There is no Force" to "I don't have any belief in the Force." In the former, your affirmative belief precludes you from accepting the possibility the Force exists whereas the atheism of the latter case allows for discovery that it does.
    Bingo.
    "The atmosphere is among the factors that determines the Earth's atmosphere." --ZenMode
    "Donald has failed in almost every endeavor he has attempted. " --floridafan
    "Abortion is not a moral issue. " --BidenPresident
    "Propaganda can also be factual." --Flash
    "Even after being vaccinated, you shed virus particles." --Jerome
    "no slavery is forcing another into labor" -archives
    "Evs are much safer from fires" -- Nordberg
    "Abortion has killed no one." -- LurchAddams

  2. #347 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    76,843
    Thanks
    30,532
    Thanked 12,939 Times in 11,525 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,361 Times in 1,347 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jacksonsprat22 View Post
    Let's take the "it's all religion" argument head on. Religions can be wrong or bad.
    Certainly. Personally, I believe the Church of Karl Marx is bad. It advocates enslaving people.
    I believe the Church of Global Warming is bad. It stems from the Church of Karl Marx.
    I believe the Church of Green is bad. It stems from the Church of Karl Marx.
    I believe the Church of Covid is bad. it stems from the Church of Karl Marx.

    All of them are trying to become state religions, in violation of the Constitution of the United States. All of them advocate destroying the Constitution of the United States.
    "The atmosphere is among the factors that determines the Earth's atmosphere." --ZenMode
    "Donald has failed in almost every endeavor he has attempted. " --floridafan
    "Abortion is not a moral issue. " --BidenPresident
    "Propaganda can also be factual." --Flash
    "Even after being vaccinated, you shed virus particles." --Jerome
    "no slavery is forcing another into labor" -archives
    "Evs are much safer from fires" -- Nordberg
    "Abortion has killed no one." -- LurchAddams

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Into the Night For This Post:

    gfm7175 (09-24-2020)

  4. #348 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    10,842
    Thanks
    6,488
    Thanked 3,781 Times in 3,068 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 124 Times in 122 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Ken Ham says otherwise.
    Try to stay focused on one thing at a time... You're all over the place, dude...

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Scientists study science obviously. Scientists are known to falsify evidence and data, as JPP posters love to claim about those Global Warming scientists.
    Global Warming is a religion, not science.

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    You yourself said that it's a different category of Creationists. That the group I was referring to.
    Creationists who also believe that the Earth is ~6,000 years old? Neither of those religious beliefs denies science.

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    BTW, those people use science to "prove" Creationism
    Not every Creationist tries to prove it. Some try, though. None of them are using science. It is a religious belief. It is accepted on a faith basis.

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    and want it taught in public schools.
    Why ban Creationism from being taught in public schools? It is a theory, like any other theory, and it is a fairly popular one at that...

  5. #349 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,919
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gfm7175 View Post
    Try to stay focused on one thing at a time... You're all over the place, dude...
    Nope. Ken Ham is an example of what I am talking about.

    Global Warming is a religion, not science.
    Moving goalpost.

    Creationists who also believe that the Earth is ~6,000 years old? Neither of those religious beliefs denies science.
    It is when they challenge science behind it.

    Not every Creationist tries to prove it. Some try, though.
    Correct.

    Why ban Creationism from being taught in public schools? It is a theory, like any other theory, and it is a fairly popular one at that...
    Because it has no basis in science. Creationism belongs in Christian schools and Sunday Schools.

  6. #350 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    10,842
    Thanks
    6,488
    Thanked 3,781 Times in 3,068 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 124 Times in 122 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    What question?
    The only question that was in the quote box of my words that I included in my response...

  7. #351 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    7,177
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2,099 Times in 1,499 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 812 Times in 726 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    Lie. I've already answered his question, idiot.
    you're an idiot

  8. #352 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    7,177
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2,099 Times in 1,499 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 812 Times in 726 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    Certainly. Personally, I believe the Church of Karl Marx is bad. It advocates enslaving people.
    I believe the Church of Global Warming is bad. It stems from the Church of Karl Marx.
    I believe the Church of Green is bad. It stems from the Church of Karl Marx.
    I believe the Church of Covid is bad. it stems from the Church of Karl Marx.

    All of them are trying to become state religions, in violation of the Constitution of the United States. All of them advocate destroying the Constitution of the United States.
    you truly are a moron

  9. #353 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,919
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gfm7175 View Post
    The only question that was in the quote box of my words that I included in my response...
    That question? I already answered that.

  10. #354 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    10,842
    Thanks
    6,488
    Thanked 3,781 Times in 3,068 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 124 Times in 122 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Nope. Ken Ham is an example of what I am talking about.
    You started with Creationism, then you added in "young-Earth"... That's why I say you're all over the place... I thought you were focused on Creationism? Anyway, yes, Ken Ham holds numerous faiths. One of them is Christianity. Another one of them is Creationism. Another one of them is the 6,000 year old Earth theory. I'm still not sure what your point is...

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Moving goalpost.
    Fallacy Fallacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    It is when they challenge science behind it.
    There is no science behind it. Science does not speculate about the past.

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Because it has no basis in science. Creationism belongs in Christian schools and Sunday Schools.
    Okay, but then you're going to likewise be banning various other theories that currently get taught in public schools, such as:

    Theory of Evolution
    Big Bang Theory
    Theory of Abiogenesis
    Church of Global Warming
    Church of Green
    Church of the Ozone Hole

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to gfm7175 For This Post:

    Into the Night (09-25-2020)

  12. #355 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    10,842
    Thanks
    6,488
    Thanked 3,781 Times in 3,068 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 124 Times in 122 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    That question? I already answered that.
    No you didn't, liar.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to gfm7175 For This Post:

    Into the Night (09-25-2020)

  14. #356 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,919
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gfm7175 View Post
    You started with Creationism, then you added in "young-Earth"... That's why I say you're all over the place... I thought you were focused on Creationism? Anyway, yes, Ken Ham holds numerous faiths. One of them is Christianity. Another one of them is Creationism. Another one of them is the 6,000 year old Earth theory. I'm still not sure what your point is...
    You said that there is a category of Creationists which fits my description. I named Ken Ham as an example of one of those people to keep the discussion straight so you won't go off tangent.

    There is no science behind it. Science does not speculate about the past.
    Correct. We have evidence and observation.

    Okay, but then you're going to likewise be banning various other theories that currently get taught in public schools, such as:
    Theory of Evolution - based on evidence
    Big Bang Theory - based on evidence
    Theory of Abiogenesis - no official theory and evidence as of yet
    Church of Global Warming - There is no such thing as Church of Global Warming
    Church of Green - What is that? LOL
    Church of the Ozone Hole - The hole has been photographed many times

  15. #357 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,919
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gfm7175 View Post
    No you didn't, liar.
    Yes. I said there are different kinds of Creationists which you yourself agreed. I was talking about the latter group.

  16. #358 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    10,842
    Thanks
    6,488
    Thanked 3,781 Times in 3,068 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 124 Times in 122 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Yes. I said there are different kinds of Creationists which you yourself agreed. I was talking about the latter group.
    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"?
    This question was never answered, and noting that there are Creationists who also hold the separate 6,000 year old Earth belief does not answer it.

    The 6,000 year old Earth belief has nothing to do with Creationism, as they are two completely separate beliefs. I don't even know what you are trying to claim is "anti-science" anymore since you keep bouncing around numerous different beliefs...

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to gfm7175 For This Post:

    Into the Night (09-25-2020)

  18. #359 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,919
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gfm7175 View Post
    This question was never answered, and noting that there are Creationists who also hold the separate 6,000 year old Earth belief does not answer it.

    The 6,000 year old Earth belief has nothing to do with Creationism, as they are two completely separate beliefs. I don't even know what you are trying to claim is "anti-science" anymore since you keep bouncing around numerous different beliefs...
    Let me try again.

    Creationists who believe in theistic evolution agree with theory of evolution.
    Creationists who believe in 6,000 years old Earth and other beliefs regardless of what science says is not anti-science.
    Creationists who try to challenge science and get it wrong are anti-science. That is evident in their statements, teachings and attempt to incorporate Creationism in public schools as a science class.

  19. #360 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    6,471
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2,699 Times in 2,031 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 56 Times in 52 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gfm7175 View Post
    I simply do not care about how old the Earth is and thus do not subscribe to any particular view about it.
    I'm right there with you. Over my lifetime, the "geologists'" generally recognized age of the earth has changed from 3.96 billion years to 4.54 billion years. The earth has 580 million years in less than a century. Imagine that. And the kicker is that my life hasn't changed at all. You'd think there would be at least a few changes with all that aging going on but nope, not a single change.
    Global Warming violates the 1st LoT by claiming a magical creation of thermal energy out of nothing, in the form of a temperature increase, which is somehow caused by a magical substance.
    Greenhouse Effect violates Stefan-Boltzmann and black body science by claiming that an increase in earth's temperature is somehow caused by a decrease in earth's radiance.
    Greenhouse Effect violates the 2nd LoT by claiming that the cooler atmosphere somehow heats the warmer earth's surface.

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to IBDaMann For This Post:

    gfm7175 (09-25-2020), Into the Night (09-25-2020)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-18-2013, 01:19 PM
  2. Anti-Science Republicans
    By Timshel in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 01-17-2013, 08:02 AM
  3. Replies: 99
    Last Post: 10-03-2012, 07:55 PM
  4. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 05-08-2012, 05:36 AM
  5. Anti Science?
    By Cancel 2016.2 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 01-18-2012, 08:39 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •