Not all. Just pointing out that you completely missed the issue.
I have not missed the issue. You just refuse to accept my answer. It's not the case creationists have to admit they may be wrong. Because it's not based on evidence. Creationist CHOOSE to believe in a creator God who can create the Universe in any amount of time including all the fake carbon dating and fossil evidence. You believe this is absolutely nuts because you have a different belief system with a completely different set of assumptions.
There is no evidence you will be able to provide to change the Creationists belief in an omnipotent creator God.
I do stick to my opinions, unless shown to be wrong, and, as I've done here, express them. Isn't that a ligitimate part of debating? Of course it is. The only thing I can't help is the offense some people take at them. You seem to consider my beliefs to be commands. They are not.
No you do not. Otherwise you would be talking about why your way of thinking is right as opposed other people are refusing to admit they are wrong by putting their fingers in their ears. Rather than being critical of the way other people are being maybe if you providing a strong enough argument as to why your way of thinking is better you might be more successful but I doubt you are able to do it.
Oh, I'm well aware of how chained Christians are to the necessity of their beliefs, which is the point I was making in my OP. To admit the possibility that creationism might be wrong is to open a chink in the armor of one's faith.
Faith is based on assumptions. Some people have weak faith. Many people have strong faith. For people with strong faith you are not going to be able to shake their faith with you scientific drivel. It's not that science is not a useful tool It's just science has limitations.
You make is sound like your way of thinking is absolutely truth. Good luck with that. Maybe your way of thinking is built on assumptions you are not aware of or willing to question.
Sure they do, and if you knew anything at all about cosmology you'd know how ignorant your remark here is. Science's "position on how all the energy came into existence out of nothingness" is that it's silly, principally because they reject it. Science may not know how energy came into existence, but just because they don't isn't reason enough to seriously consider it came out of "nothingness."
Rejecting the question by sticking your fingers in the your ears is not the best solution. The point I am trying to make is from a theist perspective not an anti-science position. Maybe you do not understand the reason why people have religion. People invent Gods and creation mythologies for specific reasons. Religion provides a context for people to live a meaningful life. Science does not provide this context. Religion will always exist because science doesn't answer the BIG questions about our existence.
That depends on the laws. Euler's laws of motion are very well understood and explainable. The laws of quantum mechanics not so much. So don't be painting science with any broad brushes unless you want to look like a fool. But so what? None of this has anything to do with the Christian refusal to look at and consider the evidence against creationism. Like it or not, IT IS a matter of sticking their fingers in their ears and say "la la la."
The laws of physics explain "how" nature behaves, not "why". Using mass and energy to measure mass and energy really says nothing about reality.
You seem to be under the impression science is knows everything, or knows enough. Contrary to your delusions, materialism is dead. Until science can clearly define what IT is that decides which quantum state gets realized once observed, it's all God to me:
Most scientist just ignore the evidence "idealism" is even necessary. Your choice.
You seem to be under the impression that science says it knows everything---why else claim it doesn't? Well, science has never made such a claim and it never will. That's simply not how science works. Unlike religious dogma, one of its operating principles is that it is always open to correction. It's why science progresses and can contribute to the betterment of life, like the computer you're using, AND how it can explain an awful lot about how nature behaves.
Science doesn't know everything. I was pointing it out that religion is necessary precisely because science does not answer the big questions.
Science is built on dogma and is no different than religion. "Time" for example is like the word "God". You can't see "Time", you can't hold it your hand, yet every man of science swears "Time" exists, is real, eternal, and Universal just like God. Here's a great article explaining why "Time" is a delusion:
"There Is No Such Thing As Time"
Science is great making a toaster or blowing up brown people in the Middle East. But science is not very good at the things most important to people's lives like how to live a moral life or why we are here to begin with.
But enough of your trolling.
Have a good day.
You don't think saying Creationists are sticking their fingers in their ears is not trolling? You just can't handle it when someone shoves your same dog food back in your own mouth. How's that taste?
.
