Are you seriously googling creationist scientist’s names and posting them here as some sort of proof?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Bashers, bashers, bashers, don’t run away now! We’re having a kook festival complete with an old fashioned burning at the stake! Now’s your chance! Light the kindling and let’s roast these heretics!
Someone bring a match![/quote]
I am familiar with a few of them, the rest I will look up after my next class lets out. I am particularly familiar with R.A.T.E and will discuss it in an hour or two.
If we’re comparing list size, I’ll bet you the list of prominent scientists who would laugh in your face could fill the rest of this thread
[quote]pushharder wrote:
“Over-my-smarties-are-smarter-than-your-smarties-Stand?”
[/quote]
Also, what?
[quote]overstand wrote:
If we’re comparing list size, I’ll bet you the list of prominent scientists who would laugh in your face could fill the rest of this thread[/quote]
But…you aren’t a prominent scientist…or any type of scientist last I checked…so where is the attitude coming from?
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
In regards to your point #3, whether “many Orthodox Jews will readily acknowledge” what you mentioned or not, a careful study of the book of beginnings will cause a reasonable man to eliminate the idea that the word yom can mean anything other than a literal 24 hour day. To do otherwise requires too many gymnastic moves.[/quote]
There is no “day” (as we understand it) without the Sun. But here:
http://www.aish.com/ci/sam/48951136.html
Torah trivia. G-d declared all days “good” except Monday. It has sucked since the beginning of time. (Seriously, read it.)[/quote]
Hey Jewbacca, I miss reading your posts on PWI.
I wanted to offer a great big thank you for this article. It was absolutely mind-boggling.
It is very, very rare that I encounter any ideas anymore that cause an actual paradigm shift in my thinking. I’m honestly speechless. I’m going to go and chew on this for a while. In the meantime, thanks, again.
Wow.
[/quote]
WOW! That was one of the best articles I have ever read on the subject. Very well done. I might buy that guy’s book, but I have one cued up and it’s huge. I have read about people digging into Genesis and it’s finer points taking into account what each days is and means by looking at the original language and such, but seeing it fleshed out is quite impressive. The fact that someone was pulling this information out of it in the 12th century makes it even more impressive.
I share the thanks Jewbacca, awesome stuff.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]overstand wrote:
If we’re comparing list size, I’ll bet you the list of prominent scientists who would laugh in your face could fill the rest of this thread[/quote]
But…you aren’t a prominent scientist…or any type of scientist last I checked…so where is the attitude coming from?[/quote]
?
Neither is pushharder. I didn’t realize you needed an advanced degree in physics or chemistry in order to have an opinion.
[quote]ranengin wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]ranengin wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Believing in God doesn’t mean you stop looking for scientific answers.[/quote]
Agreed, but…
There seems to be a sizable segment of the population that steadfastly reject any scientific answers that don’t jive with their pre-existing religious beliefs. [/quote]
‘Seems’ is the key word. This goes along with this same stereotype that Christians are rigid and archaic in there thinking. There are plenty of Christian scientists who are interested in doing accurate science. The only time most of us get a bug up our asses is centered around ethical issues…[/quote]
Does the possibility that the universe may be older than 5,700 years put a bug up your ass Pat?
[/quote]
It never has. You got me confused with someone else, bub.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Ranegin, Christine, Ano, Beefeater, et al, are you more of a “smartie” than these fellers ^ or do you just don your cheerleading skirt and pom poms and claim that your smarties are smarter than these smarties?
Do we make our decisions about how and what to think based on “polls?”[/quote]
Push,
I don’t think either you or I have the educational background needed to properly evaluate the research conducted by any scientists specializing in physics, astronomy, geology, etc…
I don’t have a problem with the age of the universe being older, younger or exactly 5,700 years old.
You seem to be working from a predefined conclusion and filter out ANY evidence to the contrary.
What makes you so cocksure you’re right about your conclusion?
Anyone ever see that “Simpsons” episode when Lisa accidently creates a microscopic world, and they (the world) see her as their God. It’s a good one.
[quote]overstand wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]overstand wrote:
If we’re comparing list size, I’ll bet you the list of prominent scientists who would laugh in your face could fill the rest of this thread[/quote]
But…you aren’t a prominent scientist…or any type of scientist last I checked…so where is the attitude coming from?[/quote]
?
Neither is pushharder. I didn’t realize you needed an advanced degree in physics or chemistry in order to have an opinion.
[/quote]
Dude, you are claiming people are going to laugh at his ideas. I’m laughing at YOURS…because you really don’t seem to have come to ANY conclusions on your own nor do you have any expertise to be running after someone else like this.
No, push isn’t a scientist last I checked…but he has provided more “science” than you have and his belief structure is sound whether we all agree with it or not.
Your attempts to make HIM look like the idiot are failing.
But then…you should be used to that.