• This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.

Key assumptions about Earth and Radiometric Dating by Scientists are wrong.

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
Science is the process of eliminating ideas using evidence, reason and logic.

Notice that ideas are not material, not to mention reason and logic.

Darwinists have no appreciation for the fundamentals.

Aside from your need to throw the word "Darwinist" into every post possible, you are correct Stripey. But using science raises grave questions about Biblical creationism, in fact raises grave questions about the existence of any deity, Christian or otherwise. That may be difficult to reason to if you MUST believe in the accuracy of an ancient group of stories
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Yep, logic and numbers (math) exist in the real world.

Again, the point is that numbers themselves are not material.

You can have six cows, but the cows themselves are not numbers, they're cows. Each individual cow is not a "1," nor is one of the six cows a "1/6th."

They're cows. Not numbers. The numbers describe them, but are not them.

I accept them because objectively they work. In fact they appear to work for everyone. Even the math I don't come close to understanding works well enough to put men on the moon. The math and logic behind this laptop I am using might appear supernatural

You appear to be conflating "material" with "natural" (as in, nature), and in doing so conflate "immaterial" with "supernatural", when they describe two different things, though overlapping.

to me but I know it is based on math and logic worked out by scientist and engineers---there is no supernatural thingy squirreled away inside.

I jumped into this discussion when you stated "Science is NOT limited to the material world".

And then you conflated "material" with "natural," and are now restating that science "investigates the material world," implying that it does not investigate the immaterial world, such as mathematics.

In my experience

Anecdotes are nice an all, but they don't validate your position.

science investigates the material world.

It also investigates the immaterial world, such as mathematics.

How would you have it investigate, for lack of a better term, the supernatural world? Give me an example.

Once again, science is NOT limited to the material world, thus it studies the immaterial as well. No one said anything about "supernatural."

That which is immaterial is not necessarily supernatural.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Aside from your need to throw the word "Darwinist" into every post possible, you are correct Stripey.

So then you concede that science DOES in fact study that which is immaterial AS WELL AS the material?

But using science raises grave questions about Biblical creationism, in fact raises grave questions about the existence of any deity, Christian or otherwise.

Saying it doesn't make it so, Jonah.

That may be difficult to reason to if you MUST believe in the accuracy of an ancient group of stories

Just recently there was a Fathom event for the first part of the third film in the series called "Patterns of Evidence," which is a documentary series presenting the claims made by both sides regarding the evidence for the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt being in the 15th century BC. And if you look at just the coins mentioned in the Bible, ALL of them have been found. And most of the locations in the Bible have been found, including the semitic settlement in Egypt where Jacob and his family settled during the 7 year famine recorded in Genesis. I don't want to gish gallop you here, but there is an overwhelming amount of evidence that what the Bible says is true, just in regards to the history it contains, which means that you don't just get to dismiss the Bible as just "an ancient group of stories" offhand, because it is at best dishonest, and at worst, cowardly and an appeal to the stone.

We can take the discussion on the Exodus to another thread if you like, but the point is that saying it's just "an ancient group of stories" doesn't make it so.
 

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
So then you concede that science DOES in fact study that which is immaterial AS WELL AS the material?



Saying it doesn't make it so, Jonah.



Just recently there was a Fathom event for the first part of the third film in the series called "Patterns of Evidence," which is a documentary series presenting the claims made by both sides regarding the evidence for the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt being in the 15th century BC. And if you look at just the coins mentioned in the Bible, ALL of them have been found. And most of the locations in the Bible have been found, including the semitic settlement in Egypt where Jacob and his family settled during the 7 year famine recorded in Genesis. I don't want to gish gallop you here, but there is an overwhelming amount of evidence that what the Bible says is true, just in regards to the history it contains, which means that you don't just get to dismiss the Bible as just "an ancient group of stories" offhand, because it is at best dishonest, and at worst, cowardly and an appeal to the stone.

We can take the discussion on the Exodus to another thread if you like, but the point is that saying it's just "an ancient group of stories" doesn't make it so.

No, I did not state that science studies the immaterial.

Finding coins which support a historical fact from the Bible does not also support the accuracy of 6 day creation, Noah's flood etc.
 

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
Again, the point is that numbers themselves are not material.

You can have six cows, but the cows themselves are not numbers, they're cows. Each individual cow is not a "1," nor is one of the six cows a "1/6th."

They're cows. Not numbers. The numbers describe them, but are not them.



You appear to be conflating "material" with "natural" (as in, nature), and in doing so conflate "immaterial" with "supernatural", when they describe two different things, though overlapping.



And then you conflated "material" with "natural," and are now restating that science "investigates the material world," implying that it does not investigate the immaterial world, such as mathematics.



Anecdotes are nice an all, but they don't validate your position.



It also investigates the immaterial world, such as mathematics.



Once again, science is NOT limited to the material world, thus it studies the immaterial as well. No one said anything about "supernatural."

That which is immaterial is not necessarily supernatural.

So, my experience is an anecdote. OK, I'll bite, but then any report of a personal experience of God or a born-again experience is anecdotal and do not lend support to any claim of a god's interaction. Remember that.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
No, I did not state that science studies the immaterial.

So numbers and logic are material things?

How do you study that which is immaterial if science only studies the material?

Finding coins which support a historical fact from the Bible does not also support the accuracy of 6 day creation, Noah's flood etc.

It DOES, however, lend credibility to the Bible, and if much of the Bible is historically accurate, then the likelihood of the entire Bible being accurate goes up, and that includes Genesis.
 

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
So numbers and logic are material things?

How do you study that which is immaterial if science only studies the material?



It DOES, however, lend credibility to the Bible, and if much of the Bible is historically accurate, then the likelihood of the entire Bible being accurate goes up, and that includes Genesis.

Ah, throw science out the door and rely on the cobbled together 2000 year old+ book, got it.

And no response to this about your issue and science studying the immaterial "Assume you are correct. Again, so what?"
 

Right Divider

Body part
Yep, logic and numbers (math) exist in the real world.
Indeed they do... but they are NOT MATERIAL.... you cannot find logic in matter or energy.

I accept them because objectively they work.
Indeed they do... but you cannot find them by looking at rocks or stars or... anything material.

In fact they appear to work for everyone.
Oh boy, your scientific paper on that will ROCK the WORLD!

Even the math I don't come close to understanding works well enough to put men on the moon. The math and logic behind this laptop I am using might appear supernatural to me but I know it is based on math and logic worked out by scientist and engineers---there is no supernatural thingy squirreled away inside.
You went right off the deep end there... and you cannot swim.

You just proved nothing, except that you have a world view that you have great faith in.

I jumped into this discussion when you stated "Science is NOT limited to the material world". In my experience science investigates the material world.
That is NOT science as a WHOLE, but MATERIAL SCIENCE that you're talking about. You are attempting to "stack the deck".

How would you have it investigate, for lack of a better term, the supernatural world? Give me an example.
Any way that you like.

What scientific method would you use to prove what you had for breakfast ten years and three days ago?
 

Right Divider

Body part
Ah, throw science out the door and rely on the cobbled together 2000 year old+ book, got it.

And no response to this about your issue and science studying the immaterial "Assume you are correct. Again, so what?"

This may have been your dumbest post in this entire thread.
 

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
Please feel free to demonstrate this scientifically.


We have already demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that there are immaterial things that are scientifically determined.

You can think logically, or about logic, because the neurons in your brain work when chemical transmitters cross the synapse from one to the other and that signal is passed along the axon by changes in the electrical potential of the cell membranes. Chemistry and physics. Any other mechanism that allows you to think logically?

Please refer me back to where we demonstrated the scientific determination of immaterial things.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
You are correct.

It was bound to happen sooner or later. Are you going to retract your disagreement over the fact that science can deal with immaterial issues?

Using science raises grave questions about Biblical creationism, in fact raises grave questions about the existence of any deity, Christian or otherwise. That may be difficult to reason to if you MUST believe in the accuracy of an ancient group of stories

Sounds like you want to throw out ideas before looking at the evidence. :idunno:
 

Right Divider

Body part
well at least we agree on something. How do you study the supernatural then?

As you were shown, there are immaterial things that are known (like the laws of logic). How did that come to be?

The supernatural is also immaterial and therefore cannot be studied materially. That does NOT mean that they cannot be studied and known.

Like I asked you before: How can you prove, scientifically, what you had for breakfast ten years and three days ago?
 

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
As you were shown, there are immaterial things that are known (like the laws of logic). How did that come to be?

The supernatural is also immaterial and therefore cannot be studied materially. That does NOT mean that they cannot be studied and known.

Like I asked you before: How can you prove, scientifically, what you had for breakfast ten years and three days ago?

As I suggested, those immaterial things came to be because we thought about them, the result of chemistry and physics.

How do you study the supernatural?

Why would I want to prove "scientifically" what I had for breakfast 10 years and 3 days ago? Not really the subject of a scientific investigation. But if I was anal enough to keep a food diary I could. Or if it were the same day my father died and I got that info while eating breakfast I might remember---but that is still chemistry and physics.

Again, what is your point? Science studies the real, the natural world. Not the supernatural. We seem to agree on that. Although you, I suspect, accept the existence of the supernatural which I think is just plain silly. And finally, what is your point? What are you trying to "prove".
 
Top