Science IS religion

[dad]

@dad

Sinai could not have supported 2 million Israelites and their herds.. Even now Sinai on has about 800,000 population. Harsh, harsh climate. Sinai was always the buffer zone that protected Egypt from its enemies. Egypt did have garrisons stationed there.

Ridiculous. They ate food of angels, not just food of goats.

 

[dad]

Jeez Louise.. Have you ever been to the Sinai or Libyan desert or Arabia. Dust devils are not uncommon and they certainly aren't supernatural.

So?

 

[sooda]

Ridiculous. They ate food of angels, not just food of goats.

Its a myth...….. and its childish.

 

[dad]

Its a myth...….. and its childish.

Personal incredulity that has no basis in fact or evidence. Just admit you have no clue and save some face.

 

[sooda]

Personal incredulity that has no basis in fact or evidence. Just admit you have no clue and save some face.

Has nothing to do with me. Study some history. There are NO serious scholars who believe that the Exodus is anything more than a didactic tale of redemption.

 

[dad]

Has nothing to do with me. Study some history. There are NO serious scholars who believe that the Exodus is anything more than a didactic tale of redemption.

They believe...not really so serious as you think. Ignoramuses.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They believe...not really so serious as you think. Ignoramuses.

No, that is your sin. They test their ideas with evidence. All you have is a book of myths that you are afraid to test properly. You are a victim of your own actions and the abuse that you use to describe others appears to apply to you..

Tell me dad, how would you properly test the Bible? Let me give you some examples of failed tests. Tests that rely on confirmation bias. Tests that result on the "proof" of other beliefs. Your beliefs must stand or fail on their own merits. If you cannot think of a proper way to test your beliefs then they fail by default. They are no different from a belief in the Great JuJu or the Great Spirit of Native Americans.

 

[gnostic]

@dad

Sinai could not have supported 2 million Israelites and their herds.. Even now Sinai on has about 800,000 population. Harsh, harsh climate. Sinai was always the buffer zone that protected Egypt from its enemies. Egypt did have garrisons stationed there.

Its a myth...….. and its childish.

Personal incredulity that has no basis in fact or evidence. Just admit you have no clue and save some face.

The only person believing in his or her personal opinion, is you, dad.

You cannot distinguished reality from myth or children’s fairytale.

Believing in the manna episode in Exodus would be no different than believing in tooth fairy paying a child a penny for lost tooth.

Neither of them you would evidences for.

Unless you can provide evidence that manna exist, it is just another unsubstantiated myth that you have chosen to believe.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

All evidence agrees, and the KT layer seems like possible evidence for a worldwide event of a sedimentary nature that caused extinctions/death. That layer even has stuff IN it that science says comes from space and deep under the planet! SAME places flood waters came from.

If you study some science, it will become more clear to you why there are materials within our sediment that comes from outer space. No sediment layer provides evidence for a world wide flood. Literalists have been looking there for years and have come up empty handed.

God destroys a wicked city with fire from heaven, and you claim He should have left some rubble?? Ha. One material associated with remains of that event is salt though. Funny enough the dead sea area is, well very salty!

Strange how there is so much salt around, and salt was the chosen material. Salt also had certain representative power of purity back in those days. Now, if he had say, turned her into a pillar of something not indigenous to the area? That would be much more convincing!

As delusional and desperate as you may be, sorry, no support whatsoever has been given that is not wholly belief based. None. I kid you not. That is why we see no link to said fantasy.

Waste of time to show it to you.

Prove there was a same nature in the past and that time is the same in deep space or lose uniformitism as your basis for models of the past or future!

You still fail to understand that it is an "assumption"; not a "belief" Not a "conclusion". When you get that through your head, we can discuss it more.

No you do not! You have no way of knowing distances to the stars, or the stuff orbiting out there far far out of this solar system. What you thought was a galaxy could actually be ten times the size, or the size of a marble! What you imagined was some planet could be closer to the size of a grain of sand for all science knows! ALL the calculations of cosmology regarding the deep universe are wrong! Religion.

This is so laughable. So not only are the "origin sciences" wrong; but all the sciences that tell us about space and what's out there. Thermodynamics, Light Theory, Color Theory, the physics of light itself. Do you see how deep you are digging? That to subscribe to your beliefs, you must assume (or believe) that we know nothing about everything?

Thankfully, the time table of the Almighty for man on earth will not allow man to probably get to the stars. (as in actual stars far from the solar system). I would not want to see the disappointment if man actually got out there thinking he had some place to run from earth, and found out that it was nothing remotely similar to what he thought!

We already know they are out there. We've found several possible planets suitable for human habitation.

But you feel you can wave away human experience of the ages just because physical only science can't deal with them!!!

I have had a few strange experiences for which I have found a lack of scientific explanation. I don't know the explanation of these experiences. So, because I don't know the explanations of these experiences I don't "make one up" like: Hey! Demons and Spirits!

A tree is known by it's fruit. When people condone child sacrifice that tells us they are either not of God, or very far from His heart and will.

Soooooo ..... anywone who disagrees with you are not of God. Got it!

Sacrificing babies to causes that are 'greater', such as a better lifestyle, career, etc etc.

I do not agree with abortion as a form of "birth control" nor do I condone late-term abortion. But you perception about this very complex topic is utterly myopic.

For starters, if it is not the offspring of the husband, God actually commands it:

Numbers 5:11-31

Maybe start a thread for your plethora of bible misconceptions.

It is very clear. If victorious, J promised to sacrifice the 1st thing he saw when he returned. God is omnicient, so already knew what the first thing he saw would be. God accepted that promise. Upon returning, J's little girl comes out of the house to celebrate his return. God could have stopped that from occurring, but did not. So J placed his little girl on an alter to God. He sacrificed her and burned her. God did not intervene as he did for Isaac. God accepted this sacrifice unto Him. So the verdict is: God accepts child sacrifice.

When science admits to only covering the natural world it would not be a sound endeavor to ask it about the supernatural.

Knowledge is not restricted to earth or the natural world of today.

God's GPS avoided dangers and led them precisely. That is a matter of record as we see that by night and day He had the pillar of fire or smoke leading them. Additionally, He is a great recycler! Notice how He disposed of remains each day with the manna! I suspect He also disposed of bodies, garbage, pots, and whatever else may have been left by the people similarly! He may have took only memories and left only footprints in the sand.

God's a garbage scowl, now. But he left all that evidence to convince us of evolution and old earth? Tricky, tricky, tricky!

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Lurkers: in common English, this means he cannot prove the same nature in the past that he insists on using in ALL models of the past and then claiming they are science and fact!!!!

Hahaha

No. It just means that the null hypothesis is the default, not in need of any defending or support.
The claims that deviate from the null hypothesis, is what requires defending and support.

Do you even know what a null hypothesis is?

Sounds like you don't.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I see that dad does not understand why the Dead Sea is so salty. The sea lies in a natural depression formed by the boundary between two pkates, the African and Arabic. The lake itself is at a bit over 1,400 feet below sea level. It is a fairly arid region so the rather small amount of water that enters it evaporates. All water has some salts dissolved in them. If you keep adding water to an area and evaporating it the salinity level will continually rise until the water is saturated. No magic needed.

The same sort of problem, but not to such a high degree, is sometimes felt by farmers that irrigate fields. They pump "fresh" water through their systems, but if most of it evaporates it too will continually increase the salinity of the fields. Eventually irrigation in arid regions can make a field no longer productive.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Misconception. It all agrees. Name anything.

No genetic bottleneck in living things dating to the same period.
Boom. Done. Tale disproven.

You may enter crazy denial mode now and start your last thursdayism "defense".

Scripture is the record.

A record of claims.

Origin science makes a claim of uniformitism!

Which is a reasonable assumption that is 100% consistent with the evidence and the null hypothesis.

 

[sooda]

They believe...not really so serious as you think. Ignoramuses.

NO they don't.. Do you comprehend the symbolism behind Yam Suf?

 

[dad]

The only person believing in his or her personal opinion, is you, dad.

You cannot distinguished reality from myth or children’s fairytale.

God disagrees, and your fairy tales have no fact or evidence behind them. You have an opinion.

Believing in the manna episode in Exodus would be no different than believing in tooth fairy paying a child a penny for lost tooth.

Not believing in the manna episode in Exodus for NO reason would be no different than believing in tooth fairy paying a child a penny for lost tooth. (by the way, kids don't want pennies these days, but dollars)

Neither of them you would evidences for.

The rest of the bible such as fulfilled prophesy and observed miracles are validation for it all. You have no evidence against.

Unless you can provide evidence that manna exist, it is just another unsubstantiated myth that you have chosen to believe.

Manna exists?? Ridiculous. No more than Moses exists. That was long ago, and even then, the manna vanished each day after people took what they wanted.

 

[Subduction Zone]

God disagrees, and your fairy tales have no fact or evidence behind them. You have an opinion.
Not believing in the manna episode in Exodus for NO reason would be no different than believing in tooth fairy paying a child a penny for lost tooth. (by the way, kids don't want pennies these days, but dollars)
The rest of the bible such as fulfilled prophesy and observed miracles are validation for it all. You have no evidence against.
Manna exists?? Ridiculous. No more than Moses exists. That was long ago, and even then, the manna vanished each day after people took what they wanted.

How do you know God disagrees? Who made you a spokesman for him?

And not believing in a fairy tale, such as the Exodus manna one, is justified by the lack of evidence for it. You have the concept of a fairy tale backwards. If you want to claim that the Bible is a valid source the burden of proof is upon you. If you can't support the Bible then you lower it to being just a book of myths and fairy tales.

 

[Earthtank]

It appears that your science education ended in elementary school. You probably do not even understand the concept of evidence. I will gladly go over the basics with you and then we can move on from there.

There is a reason that creationists lose every court case that they are in. It has nothing to do with judicial prejudice. The fact is that all of the evidence is on the side of evolution.

HUH?? cool story bro but completely irrelevant. Just FYI, i am a secularist not a creationist. Oh and people that believe in evolution and want to call it "evidence" why ignoring all of its glaring and gaping holes are worst and more intellectually dishonest than theists.

 

[Subduction Zone]

HUH?? cool story bro but completely irrelevant. Just FYI, i am a secularist not a creationist. Oh and people that believe in evolution and want to call it "evidence" why ignoring all of its glaring and gaping holes are worst and more intellectually dishonest than theists.

Please, only creationists make such ignorant arguments.

Clearly you have no idea what is and what is not evidence. There is a clear definition of the concept when it comes to the sciences. The definition exists regardless of the theory of evolution.

And the only "gaping holes" that you can find in evolution will be in your own understanding of the concept.

 

[ratiocinator]

Not believing in the manna episode in Exodus for NO reason would be no different than believing in tooth fairy paying a child a penny for lost tooth.

We can add logic to the list of things you don't understand. Nobody needs a reason to not believe a story for which there is no evidence - they need reasons to accept them. That applies to your book of myths just as much as it does to the tooth fairy.

See: Burden of proof (philosophy).

 

[dad]

If you study some science, it will become more clear to you why there are materials within our sediment that comes from outer space. No sediment layer provides evidence for a world wide flood. Literalists have been looking there for years and have come up empty handed.

To save time here, you need to prove that the Yucatan crater was an impact from above rather than one from below upwards. Can you do that? Also, if you claim the iridium came only from that impact and could not also have been deposited by water, show the proof! Ha.

Strange how there is so much salt around, and salt was the chosen material. Salt also had certain representative power of purity back in those days. Now, if he had say, turned her into a pillar of something not indigenous to the area? That would be much more convincing!

So when the facts meet the evidence, you claim conspiracy. Ha.

You still fail to understand that it is an "assumption"; not a "belief" Not a "conclusion". When you get that through your head, we can discuss it more.

You seem to be assuming that beliefs are not also assumed?

This is so laughable. So not only are the "origin sciences" wrong; but all the sciences that tell us about space and what's out there.

Bingo!

All the 'paleo' fraud so called sciences. Much of what is enshrined into geology, and cosmology, and theoretical astrophysics, dendrochronology, etc.

Thermodynamics, Light Theory, Color Theory, the physics of light itself.

Thermodynamics as we know it is a feature of this nature. Light theory, color, and physics are all limited to the solar system and area.

We already know they are out there. We've found several possible planets suitable for human habitation.

In your dreams. You do not know distances to any of them, therefore sizes. Yes something of some size is orbiting something else also at unknown distance. What other forces or realities out there also might exist that we have no clue about here, we do not know. What time is like there (therefore how much time any orbit or movement actually takes) we do not know!

I have had a few strange experiences for which I have found a lack of scientific explanation. I don't know the explanation of these experiences. So, because I don't know the explanations of these experiences I don't "make one up" like: Hey! Demons and Spirits!

You admit being ignorant of what they were so no one would ask you what possible spiritual connection may or may not exist.

Soooooo ..... anywone who disagrees with you are not of God. Got it!

No, His word!

I do not agree with abortion as a form of "birth control" nor do I condone late-term abortion. But you perception about this very complex topic is utterly myopic.

Child sacrifice and murder.

For starters, if it is not the offspring of the husband, God actually commands it:

Numbers 5:11-31

Of course babies are from both parents. As for your chapter, there was a command for a nation long ago to come before God (His priest at the time) and see if they had disobeyed or not. A test of drinking some water was given. Nothing to do with sacrificing people.

It is very clear. If victorious, J promised to sacrifice the 1st thing he saw when he returned. God is omnicient, so already knew what the first thing he saw would be. God accepted that promise. Upon returning, J's little girl comes out of the house to celebrate his return.

Samuel's mom sacrificed her son to God also. In the case of the foolish rash mouthed king, there are a few opinions as to what happened. I suspect the opinion that she was not killed is the best. In any case the bible abounds with bad examples of sinners, that are included in the record. The commands of God and Scripture are what they were disobeying! God clearly loves kids and hated people sacrificing them to pagan idols.


By the way, nowhere does it say God accepted the sacrifice! Knowing Jesus, He would not do so, if the guy actually tried. Now in the sacrifice of Solomon at the temple, God did send fire for the sacrifice. Not in any sacrifice of some sinner with a big yap.

God's a garbage scowl, now. But he left all that evidence to convince us of evolution and old earth? Tricky, tricky, tricky!

No evidence of the theory of evolution exists actually. None whatsoever. The mere ability in this nature to e able to slowly evolve and adapt is not evidence we came from worms or bacteria or...whatever! As for the old earth that depends how we look at it. Sciences uses belief. To them it looks old therefore!

 

[dad]

No. It just means that the null hypothesis is the default, not in need of any defending or support.

God is the null hypothesis, and the records we have passed down. The belief/fantasy of so called science is a false and unsupportable claim.