Why do science hide the truth?

[Dan From Smithville]

That's according man's teachings, but since I don't follow the teachings of scientist.

Of course. What is the point of listening to people that know things?

So as a Christian I only go by what God teaches in his word.

You mean literal interpretation of the Bible as infallible and a complete disregard for knowledge acquired from observation?

What you call nonsense maybe to you, but not to me.

Do you not find it amusing to how nonsense is never nonsense to some people?

Just because people want to call something that they have no understanding or knowledge about doesn't mean it's nonsense.

I understand what you did. It was nonsense.

 

[Faithofchristian]

The thread is about science hiding the truth from the world. Maybe there is some truth that science is hiding from the world and it was revealed there. It seems like the perfect time for pseudoscience to come true.

That's right the Thread is about science hiding the truth, so why are scientist hiding the truth about not knowing exactly what happened trillions and trillions and trillions of years ago.
Which they have no understanding or knowledge about, just hiding the truth of having no understanding or knowledge

 

[Polymath257]

Well you just proved, that had you any understanding of and knowledge about the bible/scriptures then you would know what your asking

I'm pretty sure the Bible never uses the number 'a trillion', nor does it describe anything as being 'trillions and trillions of years ago'.

 

[sooda]

That's according man's teachings, but since I don't follow the teachings of scientist.
So as a Christian I only go by what God teaches in his word.
What you call nonsense maybe to you, but not to me.
Just because people want to call something that they have no understanding or knowledge about doesn't mean it's nonsense.

God didn't write Genesis and neither did Moses. The story was borrowed from Babylon after the Babylonian exile. Its their origin myth.. and it was adapted by the Hebrews, but unless you are Jewish its their history back to their ancestor Adam, not yours.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That's right the Thread is about science hiding the truth, so why are scientist hiding the truth about not knowing exactly what happened trillions and trillions and trillions of years ago.

Why are theists hiding the truth about what happened trillions and trillions of years ago?

Which they have no understanding or knowledge about, just hiding the truth of having no understanding or knowledge

So you are saying that some truth that you do not know exists is being held captive by scientists in a plot that you do not know exists and those scientists do not understand the evidence that you do not understand or know exists? That is some tremendous truth you are setting on.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I'm pretty sure the Bible never uses the number 'a trillion', nor does it describe anything as being 'trillions and trillions of years ago'.

You have to read between the lines. You have read what is not written there and then reinterpret that.

 

[exchemist]

You have to read between the lines. You have read what is not written there and then reinterpret that.

Bearing in mind that what is not written is the inerrant word of God......

 

[ratiocinator]

...so why are scientist hiding the truth about not knowing exactly what happened trillions and trillions and trillions of years ago.
Which they have no understanding or knowledge about, just hiding the truth of having no understanding or knowledge

This is nonsense. No scientist is hiding anything about not knowing the answer to a (possibly meaningless) question.

If there was such a time as "trillions and trillions and trillions of years ago", then science can't say what was happening then.

Now what?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Bering in mind that what is not written is the inerrant word of God......

That is the ultimate paradox of the literalist. To claim that the Bible is the literal word of God and then follow a revised version that is not a literal interpretation of the Bible.

It has been an incredible production to watch as it unfolds and continues to unfold.

 

[exchemist]

Well, this thread has been a riot from start to finish, I must say. Reading it back, one bursts out laughing at several points.

 

[SkepticThinker]

That's what I'm asking you, how far back do you suppose scientist can go, it's evidence that scientist goes back to some billion years ago.
What about trillions and trillions and trillions of years ago, can scientist do that.

No, no.

You said, "Let's take the big bang theory for example of scientist.
So what happened for this big bang to happen.
Scientists will say two planets or meteorites collided.
Ok so where did these planets and meteorites come from."

I asked who says that.

So ... who says that's how the big bang happened?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

No, no.

You said, "Let's take the big bang theory for example of scientist.
So what happened for this big bang to happen.
Scientists will say two planets or meteorites collided.
Ok so where did these planets and meteorites come from."

I asked who says that.

So ... who says that's how the big bang happened?

That is right. He did say that about the big bang. I thought to comment on that, but forgot to.

I cannot even imagine where he came up with that as something anyone has said other than himself.

I think if I were going to deny the claims of science, I would find out what those claims actually were and not just make stuff up.

 

[SkepticThinker]

That is right. He did say that about the big bang. I thought to comment on that, but forgot to.

I cannot even imagine where he came up with that as something anyone has said other than himself.

Well, there have been a lot of um .... odd claims made on the thread. It's hard to get them all.

I think if I were going to deny the claims of science, I would find out what those claims actually were and not just make stuff up.

So would I, but ...well, you know.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Well, there have been a lot of um .... odd claims made on the thread. It's hard to get them all.

The list keeps growing and is a tribute to the imagination of people.

So would I, but ...well, you know.

Yes. I know.

I will never understand why it is so easy to believe made up stories about pyramids, aliens and secret ancient superpowers that left no trace, but somehow someone knows about it. At the same time, acceptance of information that has the backing of existing knowledge, theory and evidence is viewed as an anathema.

I think the core of it is fear that belief would be shattered by the knowledge, but faith does not exist on evidence and I see no reason to fear evidence or accepting evidence would destroy it.

 

[SkepticThinker]

The list keeps growing and is a tribute to the imagination of people.

Yes. I know.

I will never understand why it is so easy to believe made up stories about pyramids, aliens and secret ancient superpowers that left no trace, but somehow someone knows about it. At the same time, acceptance of information that has the backing of existing knowledge, theory and evidence is viewed as an anathema.

I think the core of it is fear that belief would be shattered by the knowledge, but faith does not exist on evidence and I see no reason to fear evidence or accepting evidence would destroy it.

Maybe it's more fun to believe in fanciful things. Or maybe it's just that one gets to feel special in some way, somehow being privy to secret information that nobody else supposedly knows about.

I read this book once that I found at a yard sale ... it was written by Erich von Daniken and it was about how aliens had genetically altered our ancestors' DNA to create modern day humans. The best part of the book was his assertion that there is no evidence because the aliens would have destroyed it all. So the evidence is that there is no evidence. Brilliant!

 

[Earthling]

I don't think science is in the position to establish "truth." Science is about speculation. Possibilities. Likelihood.

 

[QuestioningMind]

The pyramids was ( when they worked) a powerplant for energy from place to place. I do not know all how it worked yet but i hope to find the full answer.
There are written books about this so i am not alone to clame this

Gosh, all you need is a book and a fantastical claim and your IN! Kind of how you do religion, I've noticed.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Maybe it's more fun to believe in fanciful things. Or maybe it's just that one gets to feel special in some way, somehow being privy to secret information that nobody else supposedly knows about.

Yes. Maybe. It is hard to say what motivates people to gravitate to ideas like this. Certainly those are pretty good possibilities and I think they are spot on for some.

I read this book once that I found at a yard sale ... it was written by Erich von Daniken and it was about how aliens had genetically altered our ancestors' DNA to create modern day humans. The best part of the book was his assertion that there is no evidence because the aliens would have destroyed it all. So the evidence is that there is no evidence. Brilliant!

I had to look him up. I was more familiar with his works than with him. I am familiar with "Chariots of the Gods", but did not have the author committed to memory. This was big when I was a child. I think we may have had a paperback copy lying around the house then too.

I understand that some people believe this, but it is another thing to claim it is a fact. It is a riot to do that with a straight face while claiming there is no evidence to support why you believe it is a fact. Another paradox that fascinates me. He must have made a lot of money off this scheme. A Google search says that he is worth $30 million dollars. It is good to know that belief in aliens does not impede ones ability to earn a living otherwise poor Erich would have had to find another way to make his fortunes.

I prefer David Brin, Larry Niven and Robert Heinlein. At least they were honest that there work is fiction.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I don't think science is in the position to establish "truth." Science is about speculation. Possibilities. Likelihood.

What does this mean?

Are you claiming that modern medicine, hygiene, technology, and all of science is speculation?

 

[Polymath257]

I don't think science is in the position to establish "truth." Science is about speculation. Possibilities. Likelihood.

Science is about *testing* ideas and likelihood. It is better at eliminating falsehoods than establishing truths, that much is the case.