Utter NONSENSE!!

With the greatest respect Catalyst, a difference of opinion is ALL we discus, my respect for you wavers not one jot!

Darwin`s "theories" are nothing more, a belief system. Never proven. Never witnessed. No missing link. Not a single solitary one. Of course, we know that to raise such heresy in any of the halls of learning does nothing more than to have you ostracised and ensure you NEVER work again in your chosen field. You either "go along" with a theory being taught as FACT or chose yourself another vocation. Many, MANY good researchers and scientists have fallen after thinking outside of the box.

How`s about irreducible complexity? What of the VERY serious question of time scales? Simple, school boy experiments and observations call into question the age of the Earth. One of the most notable, approximately 1,000 metric tons of "space dust" falls Earth each year. That would mean an AWFUL lot of dust if we are to believe the 4.54 billion years currently suggested. Where is it? A large proportion of the dust is silicon carbide and we find nowhere near enough on Earth to get us anywhere near that age.

Mostly though my dear friend, I truly pity that you cannot see around you the hand of intelligent design. Fibonacci sequences all around us, in so many differing places and form. Did they all individually come up with so elegant and simple an algorithm? Or maybe the flowers told the snails, who shared it with the rest?

Even your chum Einstein wrestled with theology. His great mind struggling with a matter you dismiss so easily?

Also of note, the majority of the truly greats of science were themselves Bible believers: Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543), Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627), Johannes Kepler (1571-1630), Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), Rene Descartes (1596-1650), Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Isaac Newton (1642-1727), Robert Boyle (1791-1867), Michael Faraday (1791-1867), Gregor Mendel (1822-1884), William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907), Max Planck (1858-1947), etc, etc, etc.......

Bless you my friend. May YOUR truth bring you happiness.

 

You have it? You have PROOF of evolution? Of missing links? Of mutations actually IMPROVING rather degenerating?

AMAZING!!!

Maybe you`d best inform the scientific world in general. There is NOT one case of kind becoming, sorry, evolving, into another kind. NONE!

Also, you said Einstein was an atheist? PLEASE read the quote I printed. Reading is great don`t cha know. You learn lots by reading.

 

When there is no real evidence, evolutionary scientists simply make assumptions.

If evolution were true, then where is the evidence of different types of animals now "evolving" into other types? Where is the evidence of cats, dogs and horses gradually turning into something else? We do see changes within species, but we do not see any changes into other species. And, as mentioned, we see no evidence of gradual change in the fossil record either. Yet evolutionists continue to assume that transitional forms must have existed.

In Darwin's landmark book On the Origin of Species there are some 800 subjective clauses, with uncertainty repeatedly admitted instead of proof. Words such as "could," "perhaps" and "possibly" plague the entire book.

Evolution is still called a theory—a possible explanation or assumption—because it is not testable according to the scientific method, as this would require thousands or millions of years. Evolutionists will counter that a theory is not a mere hypothesis but is a widely affirmed intellectual construct that generally appears to fit all the facts. Yet evolution in no way fits all the facts available. Evidence does not support it—and in many respects runs counter to it.

I`m off out to enjoy my Lords magnificent creation with my beautiful Lady and 3 kids. Toodle loo!

 

I like this one Catalyst:

We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology.
-Carl Sagan

And Douglas Adams is nice Crash Davis:

And SirsSillySausage is just being a silly sausage again, but he's a nice sillysausage


It's so hard to take responsibility for our own lives. It took me ages to learn to carry such a heavy load. You can kill in the name of God (Religion), you can kill in the name of science (Nuclear weapons), but would you kill in your own name?

If we knew of Gods existence and could prove it, wouldn't God become science? If science could prove the non-existance of God, would science then not become God?

If we had the knowledge where we came from, where we are going, when and how we are going to die, would that comfort us?

God doesn't comfort me, science doesn't comfort me, in the fight of everyday life. What does comfort me is the love & warmth of another human being, the helping hand in everyday life, the music, paintings, books that many people create with their inner-selves. These are the things that last, and can be passed on to our children. We are all gonna have to die on our own,
and the only comfort is, that I know that everybody has the same problems as me, and that is what we have in common.

Hope this doesn't come across too melodramatically.

 

Art is Heart.
Your writing is a credit to the all of everything.
I would stake a week of wages that your music's great.

 

Crash Davis:

That is such a nice thing to say, you made my day!!!

 

Seems we are at totally different stages in our journey commositore.

Your explanation that we have witnessed birds evolving into a different kind just shows you didn`t understand my original statement.

Again, bacteria evolving in days, not quite what I was getting at.

Oh, btw, I aint an American.

Science can be amazing. I LOVE science. I just don`t like theories being called scientific FACT, or much worse, taught in our schools as such.

Each to his own. My own is a belief that the Bible has it right. It is the word of God, as well as an incredible book. The journeys through history, poetry, philosophy and a myriad of other subjects that I have been led to through the scriptures have enriched MY life beyond measure. Bible study is so much more than reading scripture!

Bloody hell Catalyst! Why you gotta keep posting such debatable subjects!!!

 

Yes, as Catalist said: "Science is self-corrective, if new information presents itself we will reassess our beliefs". It doesn't matter what scientists believed in, but, of course, their believes could guide their reserches. Again, as other guys said, theories can be replaced or modified by new ones. These new ones can explain reality better than the old ones and why the old ones were wrong. Nobody serious about science expects a theory can explain reality as a whole. That's the job of religion (not the only job, by the way). If you want an answer that can cover everything, and can calm you down, then you have religion. It's up to you.
The real humble people (I like to think i'm one of those) choose to say "I really don't know, and perhaps never will, but we, as humans, we want to know".
Religion offers an answer, once and for all. It can't be changed, because a god told the truth and the truth has to be allways the same. Other way, it wasn't the truth: a god created universe and humans in six days and rested the seventh. Oh, no, he worked through intelligent design.
And that's the way a beatiful info like you brought us, Catalist, went to hell...

 

“Chaos is merely order waiting to be deciphered”

― José Saramago,

 

As humans it is very hard to conceive of a thing so large, as large as imagination itself this thing that we are constantly co-creating to make literally everything that there is everywhere we look. For what does Theory say about the mechanics of chance, external phenomena influenced by internal thought? Seems to me that for in order for us to exist, something must be dreaming us, and for balance sake, for them to exist I or we must be dreaming them. Therefore everything depends on every thing else in order to exist, from a tree in a forest to a grain of sand on some far away planet in another solar system, to a bacteria living in my skin to some flea on my dog. We are an art form, yea, we are an art form waiting to be discovered by ourselves in the process of discovering ourselves as an art form. It couldn't be more simple, this E=mc2.

 

But you cannot cherry pick where you want to stop at explaining things. Especially when there are very valid questions regarding the big bang and what was before.

Like the cosmological constant which lends itself to the idea there IS some sort of "fine tuning". So, much of the herd have used the "multiverse" to just hand wave the issue.

Why are they so fixated on getting creationsist out of the way.. but never want to call each other out on their bullshit?

Look at a guy like Stephen J. Crothers who is a seriously fringe dissident. But he blows holes in Stephen Hawkings black hole theories. And nobody wants to debate the guy...they just want to hand wave him.

If all Creationists were gone tomorrow, it wold change nothing. The "new heretics" would fill the void. Just like if you wiped out all the rich elite today....the would be a huge vacuum and that void would be filled. The funny thing? Shills like Neil Degrasse Tyson actually SAID THAT SHIT...to paraphrase

"Want to solve the worlds socio-econimic disparity issues? Get rid of the rich. Solved"

This is my problem..because from what I see so far? Particle physics is a lot of bullshit. There is no Higgs-Boson...there is no direct observation of it, just a working metaphor. But the diminishing returns on research will not dissuade the field (and CERN) from seeking billions to fire up the LHC for another failed run.

Also, I don't know if you remember a few months back there was this so called "smoking gun" reported in regards to Big Bang.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/science/space/detection-of-waves-in-space-buttresses-landmark-theory-of-big-bang.html?hp&_r=1

This quote

Originally said...

The original article was edited to remove that one part and that one little comment changes EVERYTHING.

Now look at Bicep2's findings? They have been horribly skewed and ANYBODY should wonder why this propagnda-ish news was recklessly reported as a smoking gun in mainstream media....BUT the flaws are not?

Because the truth is that theoretical physics has become a "kings language". Stuffed into the shell of science and being totally infallable these special interests are totally protected. And they leverage a society of working stiffs, who the majority will NEVER understand the scope of their sophistry.

So yes, in the end it's very religion-ish....because look at how many people have FAITH in it and don't know the first fucking thing about it.

The bg bangers and the climate changers are the new "flat earthers" but that's ok...because being severely gimped with scientific talking points is somehow better than being gimped with religious ones.