Question -- not a debate but...about life on earth

[YoursTrue]

It is a good idea that when you are asking questions and people provide you with sources you should check them out. In fact it is less than honest to not at least give a quick look at all links. If it is not a valid source then you can point it out If not then you have no excuse when people point out that that source refuted you. This one was not done to refute any of your claims, but it was done to educate you about a God with a far better heaven than yours has. Remember, you claimed to believe in God due to the promised heaven. By that standard you should be a Pastafarian. It has a more moral God and a better heaven.

I think it's better when a person puts a thought in their own words. Insofar as a far better heaven, who says I want to go to heaven? I don't.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why do you think that my personal beliefs matter? If anything that means that my answer is probably going to be more correct and honest than yours. Beliefs keep believers from being honest. We see this far too often with creationists. There is a saying that keeps getting confirmed:

There is no such thing as an honest and informed creationist.

Did you give a link to or explain what a creationist is?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think it's better when a person puts a thought in their own words. Insofar as a far better heaven, who says I want to go to heaven? I don't.

That is rather unreasonable. Quite often others can say it better. It only makes sense to use such resources when possible.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Did you give a link to or explain what a creationist is?

I could, and it would support my claim. But why do you think that one is necessary. You asked others to define it. Now that it has been done you want to move the goalposts. That is not a proper technique. Here is a clue, do you know who coined the term? I do.

 

[YoursTrue]

That is rather unreasonable. Quite often others can say it better. It only makes sense to use such resources when possible.

OK, for me -- maybe not for others -- at this point I would like a person making a claim to give it in his own words. Then perhaps he can give a link substantiating that point, if desired by the poster. Since there are many points being discussed between you and me, I will await your response to this post and hopefully future posts one at a time. Thanks.

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK, for me -- maybe not for others -- at this point I would like a person making a claim to give it in his own words. Then perhaps he can give a link substantiating that point, if desired by the poster. Since there are many points being discussed between you and me, I will await your response to this post and hopefully future posts one at a time. Thanks.

Fine, let's compare heavens. What do you do in Christian heaven?

 

[Yazata]

So I read that scientists have discovered a black hole then a huge hole in the sun

A sunspot? They aren't holes exactly. They are places where the Sun's surface isn't quite as bright as the rest of the surface. This is believed to be because the Sun's very active magnetic field is preventing hot plasma from the interior from rising to the surface in those areas. So they might better be thought of as clogs than holes.

The concentration of magnetic field in those regions can suddenly release and produce solar flares. These won't burn up the Earth, but they might interfere with radio communications and produce extraordinarily bright auroras.

-- so what's to say the sun will definitely burn up and the Earth will not be existing any more? You can debate all you want to, but I am convinced science does not have the "answers" to life.

I don't expect the Sun to destroy the Earth for a long time yet. Billions of years. Humans are unlikely to even be around then.

As to whether science has the "answers to life", that depends on what questions are being asked. Science has lots of answers about life, but there's still a tremendous amount that science just doesn't know. From how to define 'life' in the first place, through how life originated, through what other kinds of 'life' are possible out there in the universe (which depends on how we define it).

Science is making great strides in understanding how life develops from fertilized egg to complete organisms, the role of the genome in that, and evolution has supplied an over-arching paradigm that makes sense of much of what's observed in biology and its deep history from its unknown origins to now.

But it's still baby-steps.

 

[YoursTrue]

Incorrect. The ability to do right and wrong, and God clearly has that ability, means that a God can be immoral where nature cannot be.

God would have what is called agency. The ability to exert a power. Nature just is, it does not have a choice as God would have:

Definition of AGENCY

the office or function of an agent; the relationship between a principal and that person's agent; the capacity, condition, or state of acting or of exerting power : operation… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

You say God has the ability to do right and wrong. You don't believe in God, so why bother with your idea about how to figure that God defines right or wrong. You obviously determine right and wrong for yourself at least.

 

[YoursTrue]

@shunyadragon I hope this is the right thread because I wanted to get back to our discussion about sediment, for which I thank you. I checked out a couple of dictionaries from the library defining terms in geology. I specially looked up sediment and terms using the word sediment or sedimentary. The definitions, while I can't claim I understand all the terms, are very interesting. And, of course, leading to other questions about the terms or definitions. The big broohaha began because of the expression used by National Geographic including lava relating it to sediment. I will try to quote it again for your perusal. So when possible, I'd like to go over some of the definitions in those dictionaries about sediment. Thanks.

 

[YoursTrue]

A sunspot? They aren't holes exactly. They are places where the Sun's surface isn't quite as bright as the rest of the surface. This is believed to be because the Sun's very active magnetic field is preventing hot plasma from the interior from rising to the surface in those areas. So they might better be thought of as clogs than holes.

The concentration of magnetic field in those regions can suddenly release and produce solar flares. These won't burn up the Earth, but they might interfere with radio communications and produce extraordinarily bright auroras.



I don't expect the Sun to destroy the Earth for a long time yet. Billions of years. Humans are unlikely to even be around then.

As to whether science has the "answers to life", that depends on what questions are being asked. Science has lots of answers about life, but there's still a tremendous amount that science just doesn't know. From how to define 'life' in the first place, through how life originated, through what other kinds of 'life' are possible out there in the universe (which depends on how we define it).

Science is making great strides in understanding how life develops from fertilized egg to complete organisms, the role of the genome in that, and evolution has supplied an over-arching paradigm that makes sense of much of what's observed in biology and its deep history from its unknown origins to now.

But it's still baby-steps.

I realize many people do not put faith in what the Bible says. However, it makes sense to me (obviously not all will agree) when the Bible says that the Earth will last forever. Psalm 37:29 - The righteous will inherit the earth and dwell in it forever.

 

[shunyadragon]

I realize many people do not put faith in what the Bible says. However, it makes sense to me (obviously not all will agree) when the Bible says that the Earth will last forever. Psalm 37:29 - The righteous will inherit the earth and dwell in it forever.

The objective verifiable evidence has determined that the earth and our solar system are not forever. In our sun will grow, and the earth ias we know it will die. Don't worry this will for 1,5 billion years. In about 5 bullion years the earth will be a cinder and the sun will die.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You say God has the ability to do right and wrong. You don't believe in God, so why bother with your idea about how to figure that God defines right or wrong. You obviously determine right and wrong for yourself at least.

You keep bringing up my lack of belief in a god as if it makes any difference. That is a red herring on your part. Did you watch the Harry Potter movies? Was Voldemort evil? You do not have to believe in a fictional character to know whether or not he is evil.

Let's say that there is a God. But that God is definitely evil. Would you worship an evil God?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The objective verifiable evidence has determined that the earth and our solar system are not forever. In our sun will grow, and the earth ias we know it will die. Don't worry this will for 1,5 billion years. In about 5 bullion years the earth will be a cinder and the sun will die.

It does make it a bit tricky in deciding exactly when to sell one's home and making the big move to the moons of Saturn or Jupiter.

 

[shunyadragon]

It does make it a bit tricky in deciding exactly when to sell one's home and making the big move to the moons of Saturn or Jupiter.

Eventually we may try Pluto or move to a planet in the Andromeda galaxy. Captain Kirk will take us there.

 

[shunyadragon]

Did you give a link to or explain what a creationist is?

The Creationist referred to here is the fundi Creationist that believes in a literal Genesis and rejects the sciences of evolution and history of our universe billions of years old. This is an 'intentional ignorance' of reality and science based on an ancient religious agenda without science.

In the broader sense 'Creationist' may also refer to a belief that Creation is in harmony with science and natural evolution and a natural universe billions of year old

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Creationist referred to here is the fundi Creationist that believes in a literal Genesis and rejects the sciences of evolution and history of our universe billions of years old. This is an 'intentional ignorance' of reality and science based on an ancient religious agenda without science.

In the broader sense 'Creationist' may also refer to a belief that Creation is in harmony with science and natural evolution and a natural universe billions of year old

It is also the original meaning of the term. The word "creationist" appears to have been coined by Charles Darwin himself. The earliest findings of the word is in his private unpublished papers dating back to 1842 and publicly in a letter dated 1859:

creationism | Etymology of creationism by etymonline

"science teaching based on a fundamentalist interpretation of the Book of Genesis, the… See origin and meaning of creationism.

www.etymonline.com

 

[shunyadragon]

It is also the original meaning of the term. The word "creationist" appears to have been coined by Charles Darwin himself. The earliest findings of the word is in his private unpublished papers dating back to 1842 and publicly in a letter dated 1859:

creationism | Etymology of creationism by etymonline

"science teaching based on a fundamentalist interpretation of the Book of Genesis, the… See origin and meaning of creationism.

www.etymonline.com

True, but today I believe it has a broader simpler meaning as Creation by a Theistic God also including the belief that the Creation of our physical existence in harmony with science as in Theistic Evolution.

Theistic Evolution Creationism developed in response to the advancement of science and Darwin's work in the late 1900's, The Baha'i Faith was the first religion to promote that the standards for understanding the physical nature of our existence is science, and scripture including Baha'i scripture must be understood in the light of science. Up until the literal fundamentalist view of Creationism fits the definition you provided and still persists in fundamentalist Christianity today

 

[gnostic]

So I read that scientists have discovered a black hole then a huge hole in the sun -- so what's to say the sun will definitely burn up and the Earth will not be existing any more? You can debate all you want to, but I am convinced science does not have the "answers" to life. Anyway. MSN

Two giant holes opened up on Sun potentially sending million mph winds to Earth

A giant hole has opened up on the surface of the Sun, which could soon result in solar winds measuring millions of miles per hour hurtling towards Earth.The coronal hole measures 20 times larger than our planet and it’s the second of its type to be detected in the last week. The solar winds will...

www.indy100.com

the article says “coronal hole”, not your claim of it being a “black hole”.

What you are saying, and what the article is saying, are two completely different things, in which you have completely misunderstood what the article is saying.

 

[Subduction Zone]

True, but today I believe it has a broader simpler meaning as Creation by a Theistic God also including the belief that the Creation of our physical existence in harmony with science as in Theistic Evolution.

Theistic Evolution Creationism developed in response to the advancement of science and Darwin's work in the late 1900's, The Baha'i Faith was the first religion to promote that the standards for understanding the physical nature of our existence is science, and scripture including Baha'i scripture must be understood in the light of science. Up until the literal fundamentalist view of Creationism fits the definition you provided and still persists in fundamentalist Christianity today

Yes, it has a brand range now, but in all of the discussions with @YoursTrue the context of the term has always been as Darwin used the term. Her question appears to be a bit disingenuous again.

 

[shunyadragon]

Yes, it has a brand range now, but in all of the discussions with @YoursTrue the context of the term has always been as Darwin used the term. Her question appears to be a bit disingenuous again.

Usual Modus Operandi. Her self imposed ignorance is overwhelming. Of course she refused to respond.