Creationists dealt a blow

  • Thread starter Thread starter root
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 395
  • Views Views 60K
Status
Not open for further replies.
Trumble said:
Ranma1/2 knows rather more about science than you, I suspect.

Both "laws" (plural) are just series of mathematical equations that are derived from the respective theories. The "law" is only relevant within the context of the theory from which it is derived - it has no independent existence, and when the theory gets shelved the "law" goes with it. The phrases are still applied to the 'rules' derived from Newtonian theories which, as Einstein showed, are wrong (although they approximate those deriving from relativistic theories very closely in limited sets of circumstances).
Click to expand...

We really must be careful when brining these guys up. Newton was not proven wrong. His laws break down at the very small and very massave. Einstein modified Newtons findings. The beutiful thing about science is it grows. Can you imagine the problems we would if science was stopped at 1400 years ago ... not to mention my religion stops at 2000 years ago.

well, anyway ... we must becareful when ya get to this level. Einstein, I could argue, was aslo limited. "God doesnt role dice" Both these guys were inspired by Allah just as the profits. WOW ... thank allah ARISTOTLE wasnt the last scientist ... although I knida like the robe look.

AB
 
AB517 said:
Newton was not proven wrong. His laws break down at the very small and very massave.
Click to expand...

No, they are 'wrong', or to be precise incomplete, at every level. Laws, or the theories they derive from, cannot be 'right' if they break down anywhere, although that doesn't mean the 'wrong ones' cannot be very close approximations and hence of practical use in limited circumstances (Apollo got to the moon and back on the basis of purely Newtonian equations).

It is only at the very small and very massive ends where that difference is significant but nonetheless it is always there.
 
Trumble said:
No, they are 'wrong', or to be precise incomplete, at every level. Laws, or the theories they derive from, cannot be 'right' if they break down anywhere, although that doesn't mean the 'wrong ones' cannot be very close approximations and hence of practical use in limited circumstances (Apollo got to the moon and back on the basis of purely Newtonian equations).

It is only at the very small and very massive ends where that difference is significant but nonetheless it is always there.
Click to expand...


LOL whatever. This is why we shopuld stay out of this level.

Peace Out
 
ranma1/2 said:
Just for those with a sense of humor

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p67.htm
Click to expand...


just for those whose sense has left their empty brains

what a sophomoric reading,

Isaac Newton must be turning in his grave and wanting to get out and get this
guy but i guess force of gravity is preventing him from getting out :D :D :D


this peace of scrap is not worth commenting but for the benefit of some shrimp
lovers oops!! i mean Schempp


Shrimp says:
can anyone explain a high tide on the opposite side of the earth at the same time? Anyone can observe that there are 2 -- not 1 -- high tides every day.



Mr shrimp you are a blot on physicists:

The moon’s gravity pulls on the earth, and pulls the water towards it. The water moves up into a slight bulge on the side of the earth that faces the moon. At the same time, there is a force pulling water out in the opposite direction of the moon. To understand this force, you need to picture the earth and the moon as one unit. Picture two unequal balls on the ends of a stick.

If you spin this stick around, you can imagine the force that a particle might feel if it were on the far end of either the moon or the earth. It would feel a force outward, away from the centre of the spin. This is due to inertia. The water on the far end of the earth, away from the moon is always being pulled out from the centre of the spinning earth-moon unit.

http://oceanlink.island.net/oinfo/tides/tides.html


Without getting too much into the technical details, there are two bulges because of the differential gravitational forces. The liquid at point A is closer to the Moon and experiences a larger gravitational force than the Earth at point B or the ocean at point C. Because it experiences a larger attraction, it is pulled away from the Earth, toward the Moon, thus producing the bulge on the right side. Loosely, we may think of the bulge on the left side as arising because the Earth is pulled away from the water on that side because the gravitational force exerted by the Moon at point B is larger than that exerted at point C. Then, as our idealized Earth rotates under these bulges, a given point on the surface will experience two high and two low tides for each rotation of the planet.

http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/time/tides.html


shrimp again:
Gravity totally fails to explain why Saturn has rings and Jupiter does not


:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D


Yes, Jupiter does have rings. They are fainter than Saturn's rings, and most scientists did not believe they were there until they were directly observed by Voyager 1.

http://www.smplanet.com/science/answers.html









 
AB517 said:
Hey,

You changed my quotes, that aint right dude. I did not cap it, it makes it seem I yelled it and am making some kind of point you want.

Being muslem and math/science guy is way good. Some of the best math guys are of many religions and that is great. I just mean let preachers peach and math guys add. God speaks many lang. math is clearly one of them.
Click to expand...


I'm sorry for changing your quote to bold, wont happen again
:-[




.
 
It's nice to see some positive stuff in here for a change, where members of different faiths aren't at each other's throats. Keep it up! :)
 
Pygoscelis said:
** Jumps at Muezzin's throat **

Raawr!
Click to expand...
Thanks for straightening out my tie!

Anyway, we should let everyone believe what they want. I'm not too fond of this point-scoring between 'creationists' and 'evolution-ists' (I guess). I don't really see how the origin of human life affects our everyday lives, to be honest. I mean, when we go to work or school or college, is the first thing in our minds the issue of whether we share an ancestor with apes, unless of course we're writing a thesis or something about the subject?
 
Last edited:
Muezzin said:
Anyway, we should let everyone believe what they want.
Click to expand...
Everyone will believe what they want to anyway. Dialog is good to facilitate the learning (often 2-way) from others.

I have learned much from this thread. Some very good points (not in a keeping score kind of way) were made about how animals have evolved and continue to evlove through natural processes (Thanks Br. Woodrow). I have also learned that not all evolutists are staunch atheists that are striving to disprove God's existence as I have tended to over-generalize in the past (Thanks ranma1/2).

The theory of evolution for how all species have evolved from a common ancestor is reasonable to my mind only if there is a Higher Power directing the process. Others may be comfortable in believing that evolution starting from a common ancestor and leading to the origin of new species is more random that doesn't require God to take an active role. Others may believe that God individually created each species (e.g. humans) roughly in the form they are now, but that they have changed relatively minorly through adaptation over time.

As the thread started, however, it seems that the evolutionists were trying to discredit the creation stories held by Muslims, Christians and others. Live and let live is a great policy, but sometimes conflict can lead to mutual respect and understanding.
 
MustafaMc said:
As the thread started, however, it seems that the evolutionists were trying to discredit the creation stories held by Muslims, Christians and others. Live and let live is a great policy, but sometimes conflict can lead to mutual respect and understanding.
Click to expand...

I am not aware of a creation story, in any mythology, that doesn't involve a heavy dose of magic. Talking snakes, magic fruit, or what have you.

Evolution isn't going to disprove anything in these stories that common experience would not. Snakes do not nomally talk. Apples do not normally grant knowledge. If believers can use spiritual powers to explain the defiance of common experience they can use the same powers to explain away anything evolution comes up with.
 
MustafaMc said:
....
The theory of evolution for how all species have evolved from a common ancestor is reasonable to my mind only if there is a Higher Power directing the process. Others may be comfortable in believing that evolution starting from a common ancestor and leading to the origin of new species is more random that doesn't require God to take an active role. Others may believe that God individually created each species (e.g. humans) roughly in the form they are now, but that they have changed relatively minorly through adaptation over time. ........
Click to expand...

The theory of evo has many parts that effect the selection part of evolution.
The most popular and supported theory is that of natural selection. Evolution does not however say thats the only action on selection, there is of course other factors and of course something with intellegence can cause a species to evolve in certain ways so if a god or similar being does exists it is possible that it could guide the process however that theory is currently unsupportable in science.
 
Pygoscelis said:
I am not aware of a creation story, in any mythology, that doesn't involve a heavy dose of magic. Talking snakes, magic fruit, or what have you.

Evolution isn't going to disprove anything in these stories that common experience would not. Snakes do not nomally talk. Apples do not normally grant knowledge. If believers can use spiritual powers to explain the defiance of common experience they can use the same powers to explain away anything evolution comes up with.
Click to expand...

Taking an Ape and transforming him into a human takes a dose of magic too... even if put into eloquent words.. No different than a frog turning into a prince...

here here for fairy tales...

200868oTWs_w.jpg

Peace!
 
PurestAmbrosia said:
Taking an Ape and transforming him into a human takes a dose of magic too... even if put into eloquent words.. No different than a frog turning into a prince...

here here for fairy tales...


Peace!
Click to expand...

[BANANA]
:thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

[/BANANA]
 
ajazz said:
[BANANA]
:thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

[/BANANA]
Click to expand...

Your right, Fairy tales do have a place. Science books have a place too. Why argue what is better.

God said LET THERE BE LIGHT. I am just trying to fingure out how it works, if I can.

Love the insight on both sides, making me think.

AB
 
ranma1/2 said:
The theory of evo has many parts that effect the selection part of evolution.
Click to expand...
Yes, and I agree that most of the theory is logical.

The most popular and supported theory is that of natural selection. Evolution does not however say thats the only action on selection, there is of course other factors and of course something with intellegence can cause a species to evolve in certain ways so if a god or similar being does exists it is possible that it could guide the process however that theory is currently unsupportable in science.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree again. That is where faith enters the picture.
 
root said:
Yes that sounds really stupid, probably why your ignorance has led you to not even understand what evolution represents and what it does not......

Think about it next time b4 u rush in again and spout your nonsense.......
Click to expand...

now thats not very nice is it? its no wonder you have no friends... maybe you can evolve one out of your elbow.

so they found one fish, theres still alot of missing evidence, key word is theory i.e it hasnt been proven, so id stop being so arrogant.
 
Pygoscelis said:
I am not aware of a creation story, in any mythology, that doesn't involve a heavy dose of magic. Talking snakes, magic fruit, or what have you.

Evolution isn't going to disprove anything in these stories that common experience would not. Snakes do not nomally talk. Apples do not normally grant knowledge. If believers can use spiritual powers to explain the defiance of common experience they can use the same powers to explain away anything evolution comes up with.
Click to expand...
I am not aware Quranic verses or hadith about Shaitan taking the form of a serpent to tempt Adam and Eve, but more knowledgeable brothers and sisters may point them out.

Quran 20:117-124 Then We said: "O Adam! This Shaitan is a real enemy to you and to your wife. Do not let him get you both out of Paradise and get you in trouble. Here in Paradise you shall go neither hungry nor naked; you shall neither suffer from thirst nor from the scorching heat." - But Shaitan seduced him saying: "O Adam! Should I show you the Tree of Immortality and an everlasting kingdom?" They both end up eating the fruit of the forbidden tree. As a result their private parts became apparent to them and they both began to cover themselves with the leaves from the Garden. Thus did Adam disobey His Rabb and go astray. Later on Adam repented and his Rabb chose him, accepted his repentance and gave him guidance, saying: "Get down from here all of you (Adam, Eve and Iblees); you will remain enemies to one another, whenever there comes to you guidance from Me and whosoever will follow My guidance will neither go astray nor get into trouble; but the one who will turn away from My reminder shall live a meager life and We shall raise him back to life as a blind person on the Day of Resurrection."

There is much in religion that defies logic. Perhaps the most illogical belief is that after we die, that each of us will be resurrected from the dead. It is a matter of faith that what the Quran says is true.

Quran 16:38-39 They solemnly swear their strongest oaths by Allah: "Allah will never raise the dead to life." Why not? It is a promise which He has made binding on Himself, though most among mankind may not know it. It will be fulfilled so that He may manifest to them the Truth about which they differ, and so that the rejecters of Truth may know that they were indeed liars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top