Why do some creationists think evolution = atheism?

[Shadow Wolf]

Unlike natural medicines, these were not compatible with the body which resulted in awful side effects.

I take ibuprofen (or other NSAIDs - I tend to rotate them) as needed, Premarin and Spironolactone 2x daily, Xanax as a sleep aid, and Benedryl during allergy season (so I've been popping them like candy over the past week). These are all compatible with my body, doing what they are supposed to be doing, and though they can cause side effects I've had none. I am also never more thankful and grateful for antibiotics than when I have an ear infection. I also take a few other things when I need them. Docusate sodium is definitely a way better alternative than having pain and bloating from constipation and getting fissures and bleeding from your butt. A couple Tums are also pretty good for heartburn.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I take ibuprofen (or other NSAIDs - I tend to rotate them) as needed, Premarin and Spironolactone 2x daily, Xanax as a sleep aid, and Benedryl during allergy season (so I've been popping them like candy over the past week). These are all compatible with my body, doing what they are supposed to be doing, and though they can cause side effects I've had none. I am also never more thankful and grateful for antibiotics than when I have an ear infection. I also take a few other things when I need them. Docusate sodium is definitely a way better alternative than having pain and bloating from constipation and getting fissures and bleeding from your butt. A couple Tums are also pretty good for heartburn.

Not to mention 'natural medicine' does have side-effects. Some incredibly severe. We just recently had a state wide revision on lavender products with pregnant women because it can cause miscarriage.

Meanwhile the side-effect of homeopathic medicine is that it doesn't do anything.

Also, if you don't mind my asking, do you have PCOS? I take spironolactone for it and have associated gastro issues too.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Also, if you don't mind my asking, do you have PCOS? I take spironolactone for it and have associated gastro issues too.

No. I take the spiro and Premarin for my hormone replacement therapy. Heartburn I started getting somewhat frequently after I developed IBS - C.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

No. I take the spiro and Premarin for my hormone replacement therapy. Heartburn I started getting somewhat frequently after I developed IBS - C.

Ah I see. PCOS causes too much androgen hormones for me so the Spiro blocks it. But the cysts and hormones also cause IBS style symptoms.
Bodies are fun aren't they?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You're only repeating what you've heard; I doubt you've ever it.

Actually, I have. And what exactly am I repeating?

Now, Mahatma Gandhi read it (at least some of it). He said to the British Viceroy of India, Lord Irwin,
"When your country and mine shall get together on the teachings laid down by Christ in this Sermon on the Mount [i.e., the Bible], we shall have solved the problems not only of our countries but those of the whole world."

Sounds quite relevant to me, on the important issues.

What Mahatma Ghandi said is also irrelevant to facts.

Even on matters of science: Job 26:7; Isaiah 40:22; Job 38:33; Ecclesiastes 1:7; etc.

I really don't think you understand my position, do you?

Oh, but they did. They realized it all existed for a reason, a purpose; and it gave them the impetus and desire to search for that purpose.

That's just baseless bluster. Their natural curiosity is what lead the to make their discoveries. Do you honestly believe that, without the Bible, those scientitsts would never have made their discoveries? I very much doubt that's something you can demonstrate.

Newton said about the Bible:
"I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by men who were inspired. I study the Bible daily."

I'd say the Bible affected his view of the world profoundly

But it didn't affect his research. What he discovered stood on its own merits and was neither Biblically inspired nor interpreted.

About atheism, he stated:
"Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system. I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance."

Newton was living in a time when belief in God was not only expected, but absolutely a requirement in both social and professional circles. He also died almost 300 years ago. Since his time, we have discovered many things which make this statement fallacious.

I'm sure, if he had known about the complexity of the cell and the information systems contained in its RNA & DNA, these facts would have reinforced his scientific viewpoint and interest, even more.

Which is another claim you can't possibly demonstrate. You seem to enjoy making them.

However, something we CAN demonstrate is that there is a direct, negative correlation between theism and scientific education, with 41% of scientists not believing in God (and a further 7% undecided) compared to just 4% of the general population. Conversely, 51% of scientists profess a belief in God compared to 95% of the general population. This means that a scientist is almost half as likely to be a theist as a non-scientist, and is more than ten times more likely to be an atheist.
SOURCE: Scientists and Belief

Fact is, the more people actually analyze and understand the information, the less likely they are to be theists.

The Bible does not 'shackle' any scientific exploration. The only things it shackles, are selfish actions and attitudes that lead to self-destruction.

The Bible is full of scientific inaccuracies, and people use the Bible to justify positions as far-ranging as flat-earthism, medicine denial, geocentricism, spirit healing and anti-evolution positions. The Bible has demonstrably been used to hinder scientific progress throughout history.

And, BTW, it's not religion I'm espousing per se (most religion is wrong), it's the Bible I support.

Okee doke. Doesn't change the fact that it's irrelevant.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

How are you connecting doing valid scientific work to a god belief or scripture?

I'm not 'connecting' anything, that's a strawman.

I'm highlighting the fact that believing in a god doesn't disconnect the two. it doesn't keep anyone from making new discoveries.

That's the issue that seems to be pervasive on this thread, and many others.

Believing the Scriptures, that God created everything, doesn't stifle scientific research, anymore than knowing that unearthed artifacts and complex monuments (like the Egyptian pyramids) were created by someone, hinders us from discovering and exploring how they were made. In fact, knowing they were created by an intelligence, gives us added interest in searching for the purpose behind their existence.... that it wasn't 'just by accident'!

Having that viewpoint, might lead to the answers to other questions

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Actually, I have. And what exactly am I repeating?


What Mahatma Ghandi said is also irrelevant to facts.


I really don't think you understand my position, do you?


That's just baseless bluster. Their natural curiosity is what lead the to make their discoveries. Do you honestly believe that, without the Bible, those scientitsts would never have made their discoveries? I very much doubt that's something you can demonstrate.


But it didn't affect his research. What he discovered stood on its own merits and was neither Biblically inspired nor interpreted.


Newton was living in a time when belief in God was not only expected, but absolutely a requirement in both social and professional circles. He also died almost 300 years ago. Since his time, we have discovered many things which make this statement fallacious.


Which is another claim you can't possibly demonstrate. You seem to enjoy making them.

However, something we CAN demonstrate is that there is a direct, negative correlation between theism and scientific education, with 41% of scientists not believing in God (and a further 7% undecided) compared to just 4% of the general population. Conversely, 51% of scientists profess a belief in God compared to 95% of the general population. This means that a scientist is almost half as likely to be a theist as a non-scientist, and is more than ten times more likely to be an atheist.
SOURCE: Scientists and Belief

Fact is, the more people actually analyze and understand the information, the less likely they are to be theists.


The Bible is full of scientific inaccuracies, and people use the Bible to justify positions as far-ranging as flat-earthism, medicine denial, geocentricism, spirit healing and anti-evolution positions. The Bible has demonstrably been used to hinder scientific progress throughout history.


Okee doke. Doesn't change the fact that it's irrelevant.

Not that this means anything-- I wouldn't care if it was 99% -- but 41% (or 48%) does not make a majority. Apparently, according to your statistic, the majority of scientists believe in a Higher Intelligence to be behind the origin of the order and complexity we observe.

(Thanks for the statistic.)

You say irrelevant still....are Gandhi's words meaningless then?

You said: "The Bible is full of scientific inaccuracies".
Show me a distinct inaccuracy. That Newton and Boyle missed.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Not that this means anything-- I wouldn't care if it was 99% -- but 41% (or 48%) does not make a majority.

I didn't say it was a majority.

Apparently, according to your statistic, the majority of scientists believe in a Higher Intelligence to be behind the origin of the order and complexity we observe.

(Thanks for the statistic.)

I absolutely love how you have completely dishonestly spun the statistics in your favour, ignoring the actual significance of them. Once again, I will repeat it for you:

Statistically, a scientist is HALF AS LIKELY to be a theist and MORE THAN TEN TIMES MORE LIKELY to be an atheist.

If science confirms theism, why is that true?

You say irrelevant still....are Gandhi's words meaningless then?

When it comes to the actual truth value of the Bible (or any holy book), yes.

You said: "The Bible is full of scientific inaccuracies".
Show me a distinct inaccuracy. That Newton and Boyle missed.

Birds pre-dating land mammals.

 

[Deeje]

I asked you to "Explain again please how believing in an afterlife makes this life more satisfying."

You didn't do that, which was expected. You can't. The only belief that brings satisfaction is knowing that you have lived life well - that you chose your values well and were true to them. Satisfaction comes from right living and a good heart, not a belief in heaven. Bring integrity, beneficence, industry, responsibility, courage and the like to the situations and relationships in your life, and you will experience satisfaction as you look back upon it.

The alternative is shame, regret, guilt, loss of self-respect, and the like.

I guess you misunderstood what I said....perhaps it got lost in the translation.....

Understanding what the Bible really teaches, gives this life meaning and purpose....not a bunch of unanswered questions and nowhere to go but six feet under.

I have a logical reason for the sorry state of mankind and this world.....a reason why their hopeless efforts to fix anything fail.....and something to look forward to in the future that man can never provide. It is based on faith and only those who have it, and can maintain it in the face of all the devil's attempts to undermine it, will reap the reward. Even if I died tomorrow, no one can take that hope away from me.

God did not go to all this trouble for no good reason. I have every reason to believe that what he says is true. You have provided nothing that answer any questions for me. What good is it to search for answers as to how life changed, if you have no idea how it began? I know which question I would consider more important.

People promoting religious belief typically tell us how their hearts are brimming with joy, how they are filled with the Spirit, how much extra meaning and purpose life has with such beliefs, how they have the victory, and the like.

You're actually calling that satisfaction.

Ah, perhaps you've never had the joy of teaching someone the scriptures and see them turn their whole lives around?
Have you ever seen someone go from hopeless to hopeful in the space of a few short weeks? That is what brings satisfaction. "There is more happiness in giving than there is in receiving", Jesus said.....That is so true.

God's spirit has directed so many things I have done in my life. There are too many to be "accidental" or co-incidental.

Many of us have experience in religion. We've read and studied our Bibles, prayed, witnessed, and fellowshipped with other believers on a regular basis. There was a sense of community there, and a sense of having a promise made to us that seemed exciting, but none of that gives satisfaction, just a kind of comfort. They are different.

You may have had fellowship with other humans but have you ever had fellowship with God? Comfort is indeed what the Bible provides, but satisfaction only comes from knowing you have done the will of God first in all things. I have no divided loyalties. My God and his service shapes everything I do. There is much satisfaction in helping others to find the path to life.

How are you less "stuck with the ill informed, and badly executed plans of men" because you believe the Jehovah's Witnesses and their doctrine? That actually subjects you to more "plans of men"

I am stuck with no such plans.

Since all our doctrines come from the Bible, we are never "stuck" with the 'plans of men'. If our teachers were to drop some weird doctrine on us that was not fully backed up by the Bible, we would not support it. If there are grey areas where the scriptures are not specific, we are told to pray about the matter and abide by the direction of our own conscience. No man tells us what to believe or what to do. Jesus is our only leader and teacher.

It's a promise that was made to you that doesn't have to be kept. You wouldn't know if it wasn't.

Would you know if it was...would you be there to witness it?

Who says that it doesn't have to be kept? God cannot lie.....its not that he doesn't lie, but that he can't...its impossible. I trust a being who can and already has, kept all his promises. (Isaiah 55:11)

I think you missed the point of the metaphor. It doesn't include me or even a bus - just a person, you in this case, waiting for one, looking down the road to see of it's coming as life passes by unnoticed.

Look at what you turned it into. You stuck me into it, put me in the middle of the road apparently where the bus was headed, and had me getting hit presumably because I had my back to the bus while watching you at the bus stop.

That's pretty funny.

It won't be funny if the bus hits you whilst you are busy telling me that it will never turn up.

If you can put me into a scenario, why can't I do the same to you?

 

[sayak83]

I guess you misunderstood what I said....perhaps it got lost in the translation.....

Understanding what the Bible really teaches, gives this life meaning and purpose....not a bunch of unanswered questions and nowhere to go but six feet under.

I have a logical reason for the sorry state of mankind and this world.....a reason why their hopeless efforts to fix anything fail.....and something to look forward to in the future that man can never provide. It is based on faith and only those who have it, and can maintain it in the face of all the devil's attempts to undermine it, will reap the reward. Even if I died tomorrow, no one can take that hope away from me.

God did not go to all this trouble for no good reason. I have every reason to believe that what he says is true. You have provided nothing that answer any questions for me. What good is it to search for answers as to how life changed, if you have no idea how it began? I know which question I would consider more important.



Ah, perhaps you've never had the joy of teaching someone the scriptures and see them turn their whole lives around?
Have you ever seen someone go from hopeless to hopeful in the space of a few short weeks? That is what brings satisfaction. "There is more happiness in giving than there is in receiving", Jesus said.....That is so true.

God's spirit has directed so many things I have done in my life. There are too many to be "accidental" or co-incidental.



You may have had fellowship with other humans but have you ever had fellowship with God? Comfort is indeed what the Bible provides, but satisfaction only comes from knowing you have done the will of God first in all things. I have no divided loyalties. My God and his service shapes everything I do. There is much satisfaction in helping others to find the path to life.



Since all our doctrines come from the Bible, we are never "stuck" with the 'plans of men'. If our teachers were to drop some weird doctrine on us that was not fully backed up by the Bible, we would not support it. If there are grey areas where the scriptures are not specific, we are told to pray about the matter and abide by the direction of our own conscience. No man tells us what to believe or what to do. Jesus is our only leader and teacher.



Would you know if it was...would you be there to witness it?

Who says that it doesn't have to be kept? God cannot lie.....its not that he doesn't lie, but that he can't...its impossible. I trust a being who can and already has, kept all his promises. (Isaiah 55:11)



It won't be funny if the bus hits you whilst you are busy telling me that it will never turn up.

If you can put me into a scenario, why can't I do the same to you?

It appears to me, from Deeje's portrayal, that Jehovah's Witnesses are a bunch of pessimistic escapist cowards who, by their ideological blindness have thrown in the towel at the first sign of adversity. They have no hope for a better future in this world, either for themselves or for their children and are only exhorting their God for this world to end, so that they can flee it. They are fools and betrayers of all good men and women who have striven relentlessly to make this world a little more perfect for their descendants. How dare they speak the name of Gandhi, who, seeing the great imperfections, flaws and suffering of people took up the mantle of giving a billion people in India and South Africa hope, dignity, self-autonomy and a brighter life free from oopression....with nothing but words of peace and self-abnegation. How dare they speak about such people, MLK, Mandela...who strove with great optimism and hope against relentless odds to bring new light to the people they loved for they believed in this world and this human project called living. What, I wonder, would have been the fate of this civilization if such people and all those who followed them, thought so little of the promise of men and women and the hopes and dreams for this earth here? What, I wonder, would have been the fate of this civilization if the English people, the people of the colonies, and the people of US and Russia thought the world to be unsalvageable as the insanity of Nazism and Fascism threatened to engulf the world?

The people of JW are misinformed, this world is not sick with some fatal disease with rapid euthanasia as the only deliverence. No, this world and the human spirit is but partially formed, like a half made painting, but with breathtaking potential for much greater richness. I, as a Hindu, believe that God (in the form of Krishna) has asked us to strive relentlessly with our various gifts from one generation to the next to bring this world a bit more towards completion, and maturing and shaping our own spirit in that striving. For we are co-creators of this world, and this half finished work ( the world and also the self within) was bequeathed to us as an expression of faith in its potential and our potential to make something great, beautiful and perfect out of it. One does not need to be a Hindu, for I see that same drive in people of all beliefs and of all times like Socrates, Confucious, Buddha, Newton, Einstein, MLK, Gandhi, the first space-farers or the countless brave men and women who still strive and fight for that the one more step towards perfection in ethics, in society, in law, in empathy, in character or in knowledge of the world or the self... no matter how hard it seems to be. And not only the great men, this striving continues in every soul, in the smile of a harassed single mom when she looks at her baby, in the promise of a delinquent father to do better so that he can be with his kids, in the kind words between long estranged brothers during thanksgiving. So no, Deeje, no matter how hard you try to proclaim the death of this world, as many others before who proclaimed it or tried to crucify it in their hatred borne of despair and ignorance, this world has always resurrected all the greater and brighter from such ordeals, for it is animated by the spirit of man and that spirit is one with the great essence that animate all that is, was or ever will be.

Think on that as you celebrate Easter tomorrow. Who is the true non-believer here? The humanist atheist who fight for this world or you, who have abandoned it?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Ah I see. PCOS causes too much androgen hormones for me so the Spiro blocks it. But the cysts and hormones also cause IBS style symptoms.
Bodies are fun aren't they?

I've learned to just take it as a cruel ironic joke of fate that I still yet I have cramps (even in the "right" areas), and bloat, and feel moody and just ugh. I even occasionally bleed, though not from a place that should be normally bleeding.
And I have to correct myself. For a few weeks after I started spiro I did have a rather inconvenient side effect of having to pee all the time. There are times I have to a lot with my IBS, and add the spiro and top of that and for awhile I was going a few times an hour. And my muscles ached and cramped very easily for awhile. Apparently it's not known why that happens, but my guess is it may have something to do with the testosterone receptors being switched off and the muscle mass beginning to decrease. I've only been on a consistent and high enough dose for a couple months now, about six all together, and though I retain a good deal a strength, my usual "breaking back into the gym routine" workout a few weeks ago was total overload and I quit early so I didn't hurt myself.
And another odd effect of the drugs, is for some inexplicably reason, women in their late teens/early 20s have started to somehow draw a more feminine behavior out of me without me having to consciously think about it. I also talk a lot more than I used to. These drugs by no means turned me into an extrovert, and I'm still quiet overall, but it's as if estrogen demands that one talk.
And because I tend to not like anti-medication posts, I am very aware hormone therapy does tend to shave a few years off your life. But I tried to drain to life from myself once, so what really is a few years? Especially when emotionally I'm feeling far better than what I ever thought was a thing. And instead of crying myself to sleep, I snuggle up with a comfy fuzzy blanket and smile knowing things are going in the right direction.
I am also forever greateful and thankful that things like polio and smallpox were not a part of my childhood, and that I read about iron lungs instead of knowing friends and classmates in them. And that anymore it's incredibly rare to die from a simple cut or insect bite.
(might as well have some productive discussion 42 pages later even if it is completely and entirely off topic. I must obey the thingies in the pill I just took )

 

[Thumper]

.....
Now, Mahatma Gandhi read it (at least some of it). He said to the British Viceroy of India, Lord Irwin,
"When your country and mine shall get together on the teachings laid down by Christ in this Sermon on the Mount [i.e., the Bible], we shall have solved the problems not only of our countries but those of the whole world."
....

Mahatma Gandhi — 'I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.'

.....
Newton said about the Bible:
"I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by men who were inspired. I study the Bible daily."
...

Sir Issac Newton was one of the greatest minds ever. But even he was limited by his religious beliefs. In Prinicipia he wrote
"The six primary Planets are revolv'd about the Sun, in circles concentric with the Sun, and with motions directed towards the same parts, and almost in the same plane. . . . But it is not to be conceived that mere mechanical causes could give birth to so many regular motions. . . . This most beautiful System of the Sun, Planets, and Comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being."

A century later, the French astronomer and mathematician Pierre-Simon de Laplace solved Newton's dilemma of unstable orbits.

 

[Thumper]

I'm not 'connecting' anything, that's a strawman.

I'm highlighting the fact that believing in a god doesn't disconnect the two. it doesn't keep anyone from making new discoveries.

That's the issue that seems to be pervasive on this thread, and many others.

Believing the Scriptures, that God created everything, doesn't stifle scientific research, anymore than knowing that unearthed artifacts and complex monuments (like the Egyptian pyramids) were created by someone, hinders us from discovering and exploring how they were made. In fact, knowing they were created by an intelligence, gives us added interest in searching for the purpose behind their existence.... that it wasn't 'just by accident'!

Having that viewpoint, might lead to the answers to other questions

Yes, religious beliefs often get in the way of science, Everytime someone reaches the edge of their knowledge and invokes God as the answer, pursuit of knowledge stops.

Neil deGrasse Tyson did an excellent rant on this - The Perimeter of Ignorance | Neil deGrasse Tyson.

 

[gnostic]

Show me a distinct inaccuracy. That Newton and Boyle missed.

Joshua 10, when the Israelites fought a battle against the Amorites at Gibeon, it say:

12 On that occasion, when the LORD routed the Amorites before the Israelites, Joshua addressed the LORD; he said in the presence of the Israelites:"Stand still, O sun, at Gibeon,
O moon, in the Valley of Aijalon!"

13 And the sun stood still
And the moon halted,
While a nation wreaked judgment on its foes
-- as is written in the Book of Jashar. a Thus the sun halted in midheaven, and did not press on to set, for a whole day; 14 for the LORD fought for Israel. Neither before nor since has there ever been such a day, when the LORD acted on words spoken by a man.

A number of things is scientifically inaccurate about that quoted passage above, about Earth science and astronomy.

We know today, and know for some times now, that the Sun is really not moving, when get day and night, from sun rise to sun set, because of the Earth revolving on its axis, and the sun will shine on specific part of the Earth's surface for given hours of the day.

And that passage give us every indication that the author (of JOSHUA) believed in the very popular belief, but very inaccurate Geocentric Planetary Motion model.

In the geocentric model, people believed that the earth is the centre of the universe (actually this. "universe" is our solar system, not the actual "universe"), where the sun, all the planets and stars moved across the sky. They were correct about the moon's motion, but wrong just about everything else.

The heliocentric model is the more accurate system, where the sun is the centre of the system, and the planets including the Earth, orbited around the Sun.

As I stated earlier, the Earth rotates on its axes, and only the surface currently facing the sun would have daylight.

The Sun only looks like it is moving across our sky, but it is actually the Earth moving.

For the Sun to remain in one spot in the sky, that would mean stopping the Earth from rotating, not stopping the motion of the Sun.

Second mistake in that passage, is the Sun would only stop moving at Gibeon. Meaning, either the Sun is moving everywhere else, like in Egypt, Babylonia, Greece, but only stationary at one called Gibeon.

I don't see how that's possible in heliocentric model.

Third mistake, that for the Sun seem to be stationary in the sky, God would have to stop the Earth from rotating, wait for some hours, then start the Earth spinning again.

You can't stop and restart Earth's rotation like that, and expect the Earth is spinning at the exactly the same rotational speed AS BEFORE stopping the Earth spinning.

This is why the episode of the battle of Gibeon, about the Sun, is nothing but pure myth, due to its inaccuracies and the author's ignorance about the real world.

 

[leibowde84]

I returned to share this, but I am not reading anymore of the attacks on me on here: I am ignoring the notifications on here and ignored the personal message I got from someone on here!

But anyway, we had earlier discussed the pepper moth, fruit flies, and bacteria and I pointed out that these are examples of microevolution, nor macroevolution! There was a "chorus" of "You're wrongs" but I didn't give enough time to the subject, so I will explain it further: Evolutionists point to populations of bacteria, insects and peppered moths being "selected" by nature as a mechanism for evolution! What they don't tell you is that the genes for resistance to various antibiotics, insecticides, or for the color of the moths were already present in their gene pools and nature simply selected which would survive! Both light and dark peppered moths were present before and after the Industrial Revolution in England! Moths turning into moths is not evolution in the true sense! Any breeder of cats, dogs, cows, or horses knows that you can do a lot with a wild gene pool-within limits! And when those limits are reached you screech to a halt! Macroevolution would require new genetic material!

Now I know I will be bombarded with replies, I am a strong person as I have shown in dealing with ten people at once, but am kind of weary of it! So will just let you all carry on! I know you are shook up but what I am saying, so you will all scramble to respond! But try to be intellectually honest this time! Saying to someone: "I don't suffer fools" does not prove evolution, facts do! And if I am a fool, you are too, for joining a fool in his folly! Fools usually don't alarm and rattle others so much!

And please don't belittle my claims of being good at drawing, to prove evolution! Try not to prove I am wrong by saying things like "horsepucky" Calling names, using expressions like this, do not make a case for one's beliefs! I admit it did it once myself, when I simply replied "bogus"

Try not to clutter the conversation with word arguments, try not to use fallacious reasoning! Too often people learn about critical thinking and fallacious arguments, then never apply it to themselves, only misapply it to others! Refresh yourself about fallacious reasoning, there is an article in Wikipedia! Then ponder over it and think "How do I do this"

I will leave it at that! Bring on the sharks! I am ducking out because although I have all the time in the world (am recovering from foot surgery) there are wiser uses of my time! Since you are all scientists from good schools, I am surprised you spend every waking moment arguing with the fools here! My sister in law is a Veterinary Professor and spends her time getting grants for her school by improving the Iams diet! She goes on speaking engagements to Holland, Japan, Mexico and so on! She went to an Iams recognition award party which also honored Betty White and talked to her! Not bragging about her, only pointing out that there are much nobler uses of ones time when they are the educationally elite! So long and peace to one and all!

Even if they aren't evidence of macroevolution, they don't disprove or contradict the theory of evolution by natural selection in any way.

Do you have any evidence that contradicts the theory of evolution? Remember, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Not to mention 'natural medicine' does have side-effects. Some incredibly severe. We just recently had a state wide revision on lavender products with pregnant women because it can cause miscarriage.

Meanwhile the side-effect of homeopathic medicine is that it doesn't do anything.

Also, if you don't mind my asking, do you have PCOS? I take spironolactone for it and have associated gastro issues too.

You've hit the nail on the head, and it's basic common sense. Either a chemical modifies a metabolic pathway and can effect some change in physiology, or it is inert in the body. In the the former case, such a product make cause beneficial changes, undesirable changes, or both at once (a benefit, but with side effects). In the latter, it can't help or hurt.

This is yet another non-religious area where faith based thinking becomes evident and evidence be damned. I include voting and climate change denial in that category.

I wasn't aware of the issue with lavender and miscarriages, but I recently read this about a so-called homeopathic treatment for teething babies that caused twitching, seizures, cyanosis (blue skin color), and occasionally death:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2017/02/23/far-from-being-useless-one-brand-of-homeopathic-medicine-allegedly-harmed-hundreds-of-babies/

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I'm not 'connecting' anything, that's a strawman.

I'm highlighting the fact that believing in a god doesn't disconnect the two. it doesn't keep anyone from making new discoveries.

That's the issue that seems to be pervasive on this thread, and many others.

Believing the Scriptures, that God created everything, doesn't stifle scientific research, anymore than knowing that unearthed artifacts and complex monuments (like the Egyptian pyramids) were created by someone, hinders us from discovering and exploring how they were made. In fact, knowing they were created by an intelligence, gives us added interest in searching for the purpose behind their existence.... that it wasn't 'just by accident'!

Having that viewpoint, might lead to the answers to other questions

OK, but you're blending a little non-science into that. Science isn't looking for the purpose for which anything was created, and posits no intelligent designer.

And yes, you are correct: If a Christian wants to do good science, he can. He just needs to learn how to compartmentalize his faith based beliefs and keep them out of his work.

To the extent that such beliefs inform his choices such as his experimental set up, or his interpretation of results, he is not doing science any more. If his work isn't exactly what an atheist might do as well, it's not science. Modern atheists read Newtons work in physics and mathematics, and it still rings true. There is nothing in there that an atheist wouldn't agree with.

Then they look at his alchemy, which is pseudoscience based on faith in nonexistent principles, and reject it all.

This is part of the problem with ID. Instead of examining nature and turning their attention to what they find, the scientists there are looking for a god, which affects what they study and what they see. So, for example, they keep seeing irreducible complexity that isn't there and has never been found in any biological system, a nice example of how when a faith based idea creeps in and affects your work, you're no longer doing science.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Understanding what the Bible really teaches, gives this life meaning and purpose....not a bunch of unanswered questions and nowhere to go but six feet under.

Is that what your Bible teaches you - that without a god belief, life is meaningless? That without the hope of an afterlife, there is nothing else to give life meaning or purpose?

I have a logical reason for the sorry state of mankind and this world.....a reason why their hopeless efforts to fix anything fail

That's an inaccurate description of mankind and the human condition. We are not in a sorry state, and not all effort fails.

.....and something to look forward to in the future that man can never provide. It is based on faith and only those who have it, and can maintain it in the face of all the devil's attempts to undermine it, will reap the reward. Even if I died tomorrow, no one can take that hope away from me.

Man does provide the promise that you believe.

He also provides other ways of viewing reality that require no promise of a god or an afterlife to have a fulfilling life. I can vouch for that personally.

God did not go to all this trouble for no good reason. I have every reason to believe that what he says is true.

I have no reason to believe that.

You have provided nothing that answer any questions for me. What good is it to search for answers as to how life changed, if you have no idea how it began? I know which question I would consider more important.

Neither question is more important than the other.

I'm also pretty sure that if abiogenesis had a strong theory behind it and evolution was the weaker link, you'd reverse your appraisal of which question was more important. For you, it would be the least well answered one. There's an implied god of the gaps argument there. You will want to make what we don't know more important than what we do, which you probabaly think implies the need for a god.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Ah, perhaps you've never had the joy of teaching someone the scriptures and see them turn their whole lives around? Have you ever seen someone go from hopeless to hopeful in the space of a few short weeks? That is what brings satisfaction. "There is more happiness in giving than there is in receiving", Jesus said.....That is so true.

Yes, that would be satisfying. But notice that your satisfaction didn't come from a belief, but from an act. I've been arguing that satisfaction doesn't derive from any belief other than that one has lived life well. Helping others is doing that. Believing in an afterlife is not.

You may have had fellowship with other humans but have you ever had fellowship with God? Comfort is indeed what the Bible provides, but satisfaction only comes from knowing you have done the will of God first in all things. I have no divided loyalties. My God and his service shapes everything I do. There is much satisfaction in helping others to find the path to life.

There is no evidence that anybody has fellowshipped with a god, and I don't need to be comforted. I get satisfaction doing my will.

Since all our doctrines come from the Bible, we are never "stuck" with the 'plans of men'. If our teachers were to drop some weird doctrine on us that was not fully backed up by the Bible, we would not support it. If there are grey areas where the scriptures are not specific, we are told to pray about the matter and abide by the direction of our own conscience. No man tells us what to believe or what to do. Jesus is our only leader and teacher.

Men wrote the Bible. Men told you that Jesus said such-and-such. Men tell you to pray.

Who says that it doesn't have to be kept? God cannot lie.....its not that he doesn't lie, but that he can't...its impossible. I trust a being who can and already has, kept all his promises. (Isaiah 55:11)

Well, that's another story - the unkept promises: Prayer works, with faith you can move mountains, you can safely play with vipers, He will return again soon, and with faith you will be filled with the Spirit and experience unspeakable joy, spiritual discernment, and a peace that passeth all understanding.

If your god doesn't have to keep those promises, why would you believe the ones that can't be tested?.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Joshua 10, when the Israelites fought a battle against the Amorites at Gibeon, it say:


A number of things is scientifically inaccurate about that quoted passage above, about Earth science and astronomy.

We know today, and know for some times now, that the Sun is really not moving, when get day and night, from sun rise to sun set, because of the Earth revolving on its axis, and the sun will shine on specific part of the Earth's surface for given hours of the day.

And that passage give us every indication that the author (of JOSHUA) believed in the very popular belief, but very inaccurate Geocentric Planetary Motion model.

In the geocentric model, people believed that the earth is the centre of the universe (actually this. "universe" is our solar system, not the actual "universe"), where the sun, all the planets and stars moved across the sky. They were correct about the moon's motion, but wrong just about everything else.

The heliocentric model is the more accurate system, where the sun is the centre of the system, and the planets including the Earth, orbited around the Sun.

As I stated earlier, the Earth rotates on its axes, and only the surface currently facing the sun would have daylight.

The Sun only looks like it is moving across our sky, but it is actually the Earth moving.

For the Sun to remain in one spot in the sky, that would mean stopping the Earth from rotating, not stopping the motion of the Sun.

Second mistake in that passage, is the Sun would only stop moving at Gibeon. Meaning, either the Sun is moving everywhere else, like in Egypt, Babylonia, Greece, but only stationary at one called Gibeon.

I don't see how that's possible in heliocentric model.

Third mistake, that for the Sun seem to be stationary in the sky, God would have to stop the Earth from rotating, wait for some hours, then start the Earth spinning again.

You can't stop and restart Earth's rotation like that, and expect the Earth is spinning at the exactly the same rotational speed AS BEFORE stopping the Earth spinning.

This is why the episode of the battle of Gibeon, about the Sun, is nothing but pure myth, due to its inaccuracies and the author's ignorance about the real world.

How about the Magi following a star to a manger under it? Imagine trying to decide when to stop, and which manger was directly under the star when you did. Imagine your camel galloping about 1000 mph through the sand at night to keep up with the star. You might spill your myrrh.