INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

Science Disproves Evolution

Any topic related to science can be discussed here.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
animist
Posts: 6522
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 11:36 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#61 Post by animist » May 5th, 2016, 11:51 pm

Latest post of the previous page:

Pahu wrote:
animist wrote:As for the Stevenson book, I think this is indeed an interesting set of studies of claimed reincarnation cases, all of them in India (a nation whose religion centres on reincarnation); even if they "proved" reincarnation (which I doubt they do), it would not advance your Hindu-Xian synthesis faith
Most of the children studied are from India but there are other cases in other countries.
you are right to point out that Stevenson studied children other than Indians. However, many of these (eg the Tlingit case) seem to be in other societies which believe in reincarnation, and the wiki article on him does not point to much solid evidence: the one Western example (Edward Ryall) seems to have been discredited. I should remind you that extraordinary claims, such as reincarnation, require extraordinary evidence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Stevenson

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#62 Post by Pahu » May 6th, 2016, 1:16 pm

animist wrote:
Pahu wrote:
Dave B wrote:Pahu, you are preaching, prosetylising, evangelising or whatever in the wrong place. This is a Humanist forum where we are happy to debate .

Dunno about the others but, for me, debate means putting up a subject, idea or proposition that the other can read, consider and respond to. And then the process repeats until agreement or stalemate (hopefully friendly) is reached.

Now, if the proposition is that your god's word, as written in your bible, is the mode in shich we xhould run our lives . . . you are going to have to offer further, non-repetitive, non-cicular, evidence or proof, that this is so.

So far, despite being asked, you do not even come close to this.

In "our house" you abide by our rules.
I thought I had given you proof of God's existence and proof that He is the author of the Bible.

Here is proof God exists:

Before the universe existed there was nothing from which it appeared, which is impossible by any natural cause. Therefor the cause of the universe was supernatural, proving the existence of God. For details go here:

http://www.alwaysbeready.com/index.php? ... &Itemid=71
http://www.apologeticspress.ws/articles/1762
http://www.alwaysbeready.com/index.php? ... cle&id=137
http://www.existence-of-god.com/first-c ... ument.html
http://www.existence-of-god.com/existence-of-god.html
http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

Here is proof God is the author of the Bible: The Bible is filled with hundreds of accurately fulfilled prophecies:

http://www.100prophecies.com/
http://www.raptureforums.com/BibleProph ... stdays.cfm
http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/
http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/bible ... filled.htm
http://www.reasons.org/fulfilled-prophe ... lity-bible
http://www.allabouttruth.org/Bible-Prophecy.htm

Here is evidence the Bible is accurate:

Archaeology confirms the historical accuracy of the Bible:

http://www.inplainsite.org/html/the_rocks_cry_out.html
http://christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a008.html
http://www.christiananswers.net/archaeology/home.html
http://www.ucg.org/the-good-news/the-bi ... cal-record
http://www.biblestudysite.com/arch.htm

The Bible is not a science book, yet is scientifically accurate:

http://www.inplainsite.org/html/scienti ... bible.html
http://www.eternal-productions.org/101science.html
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml

No other book, religious or secular, comes close to those requirements.
your last statement - that may be true, but that does not support your claim that the Bible is reliable, still less infallible. Why should any, but any, ancient book be consistently true?
Since it has been proven that the Bible is the Word of God, it is true, reliable and infallible.
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#63 Post by Pahu » May 6th, 2016, 1:32 pm

animist wrote:
Pahu wrote:"
animist wrote:hi Pahu, that is interesting, but the link you quote is just a publisher blurb, so I have to ask whether you have actually read this book; if you have, please give us a taster of it.
I did provide a taste of it and yes, I have read it. You can read the book online here: https://books.google.com/books?id=XcHCA ... 52&f=false
had you noticed that the extract does not cover reincarnation?
No, I had not noticed it ends at page 38, which does not include reincarnation. Sorry about that. I thought the site included the whole book.
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#64 Post by Dave B » May 6th, 2016, 2:25 pm

Since it has been proven that the Bible is the Word of God, it is true, reliable and infallible.
I see no proof, I see only belif and faith, no facts, no concrete evidence.

The only evidence is that your god, granting for one fleeting moment its existence, is indiferent to the fate of mankind and his own "creation".

Some friend!
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#65 Post by Dave B » May 6th, 2016, 2:27 pm

Pahu wrote:
animist wrote:
Pahu wrote:"

I did provide a taste of it and yes, I have read it. You can read the book online here: https://books.google.com/books?id=XcHCA ... 52&f=false
had you noticed that the extract does not cover reincarnation?
No, I had not noticed it ends at page 38, which does not include reincarnation. Sorry about that. I thought the site included the whole book.
Looks like you need to thoroughly check your "evidence" before relying on it, Pahu.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#66 Post by Alan H » May 6th, 2016, 3:09 pm

Pahu wrote:Since it has been proven that the Bible is the Word of God, it is true, reliable and infallible.
To believers, maybe; but not to the rest of us who are perhaps inclined to be a tad more critical.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#67 Post by Dave B » May 6th, 2016, 3:54 pm

Dave B wrote:
Since it has been proven that the Bible is the Word of God, it is true, reliable and infallible.
I see no proof, I see only belif and faith, no facts, no concrete evidence.

The only evidence is that your god, granting for one fleeting moment its existence, is indiferent to the fate of mankind and his own "creation".

Some friend!
Oh, should have mentioned that your god seems to allow innocent, even good, people to die violent deaths whilst the evil literally get away with murder.

No good shirking off the responsibility and saying mankind is responsible for its own actions (which, of course, it is), that is sheer sophistry because to blame your god would mean looking at its true nature - once again allowing the assumption that it exists - and having to admit the truth of reality, which you seem unable to cope with.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#68 Post by Pahu » May 6th, 2016, 6:26 pm

Dave B wrote:
Since it has been proven that the Bible is the Word of God, it is true, reliable and infallible.
I see no proof, I see only belif and faith, no facts, no concrete evidence.

The only evidence is that your god, granting for one fleeting moment its existence, is indiferent to the fate of mankind and his own "creation".

Oh, should have mentioned that your god seems to allow innocent, even good, people to die violent deaths whilst the evil literally get away with murder.
Why do you believe that?
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#69 Post by Dave B » May 6th, 2016, 8:20 pm

Pahu wrote:
Dave B wrote:
Since it has been proven that the Bible is the Word of God, it is true, reliable and infallible.
I see no proof, I see only belif and faith, no facts, no concrete evidence.

The only evidence is that your god, granting for one fleeting moment its existence, is indiferent to the fate of mankind and his own "creation".

Oh, should have mentioned that your god seems to allow innocent, even good, people to die violent deaths whilst the evil literally get away with murder.
Why do you believe that?
Because it is evident when people die of disease, natural disasters, crime and warfare every minute of the day. Does your god, or any other god, care? Nope, because there are no gods, simply circumstances, luck or whatever you want to call the utter disregard the universe has for everything in it.

That is not defeatist, it is the sane acceptance of reality, of a universe where you and I have no more consequence in the entirety than has a grain of dust. So what? This does not stop me enjoying my life and hoping to leave this world just a touch better than I entered it. I need nothing supernatural to motivate me in this, why are you lacking this inbuilt drive? Why do you need an external entity to provide you with a reason to be?
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#70 Post by Pahu » May 6th, 2016, 9:38 pm

Dave B wrote:
Pahu wrote:
Dave B wrote:
I see no proof, I see only belif and faith, no facts, no concrete evidence.

The only evidence is that your god, granting for one fleeting moment its existence, is indiferent to the fate of mankind and his own "creation".

Oh, should have mentioned that your god seems to allow innocent, even good, people to die violent deaths whilst the evil literally get away with murder.
Why do you believe that?
Because it is evident when people die of disease, natural disasters, crime and warfare every minute of the day. Does your god, or any other god, care? Nope, because there are no gods, simply circumstances, luck or whatever you want to call the utter disregard the universe has for everything in it.

That is not defeatist, it is the sane acceptance of reality, of a universe where you and I have no more consequence in the entirety than has a grain of dust. So what? This does not stop me enjoying my life and hoping to leave this world just a touch better than I entered it. I need nothing supernatural to motivate me in this, why are you lacking this inbuilt drive? Why do you need an external entity to provide you with a reason to be?
The reason there is so much misery is because of sin, which is the transgression of God''s law. God cares enough to come to earth and shed His blood to give us the ability to repent of our sins and be forgiven. He is not willing that any should perish, but all should repent and be saved from the consequence of sin, which is eternal death.

Does God exist? Yes! Here is proof: Before the universe existed there was nothing from which it appeared, which is impossible by any natural cause. Therefor the cause of the universe was supernatural, proving the existence of God.

Is God the author of the Bible? Yes! Here is proof: The Bible is filled with hundreds of accurately fulfilled prophecies:

http://www.100prophecies.com/
http://www.raptureforums.com/BibleProph ... stdays.cfm
http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/
http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/bible ... filled.htm
http://www.reasons.org/fulfilled-prophe ... lity-bible
http://www.allabouttruth.org/Bible-Prophecy.htm
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#71 Post by Dave B » May 6th, 2016, 9:48 pm

So, an innocent child in Syria has to due because an evil person wants more power? That child has to die beczuse of the sin? What a way to run a sorld. Your god is the truly evil one in tgat equation if he ckaims any power or authirity.

Tell you what, Pahu, you carry on believing that which you wish to believe and I will carry on accepting the evidence that I see around me. Should you die in agony ftom some disease, crime or accident you do so knowing you are obeying your god's will and can go happy in that knowledge. After all, you might get to meet him in the afterlife.

Peace upon you, goodbye.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#72 Post by Alan H » May 6th, 2016, 10:21 pm

Pahu, you don't really understand argumentation, critical thinking and logical fallacies do you? Ones particularly useful for you to understand are begging the question and circular reasoning.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

Lord Muck oGentry
Posts: 634
Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:48 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#73 Post by Lord Muck oGentry » May 7th, 2016, 1:04 am

What we can't say, we can't say and we can't whistle it either. — Frank Ramsey

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#74 Post by Alan H » May 7th, 2016, 1:14 am

Lord Muck oGentry wrote:John 11:35...


http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
:hilarity:
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#75 Post by Dave B » May 7th, 2016, 9:21 am

^
^
+1

John 11:35 indeed!
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#76 Post by Pahu » May 11th, 2016, 2:29 pm

Rapid Cooling

If the Earth began in a molten state, it would have cooled to its present condition in much less than 4.5 billion years. This conclusion holds even if one makes liberal assumptions for the amount of heat generated by radioactive decay within Earth. The known temperature pattern inside Earth is consistent only with a young Earth.

[ From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#77 Post by Alan H » May 11th, 2016, 4:20 pm

Pahu wrote:
Rapid Cooling

If the Earth began in a molten state, it would have cooled to its present condition in much less than 4.5 billion years. This conclusion holds even if one makes liberal assumptions for the amount of heat generated by radioactive decay within Earth. The known temperature pattern inside Earth is consistent only with a young Earth.

[ From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
Oh dear. You're at it again.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#78 Post by Alan H » May 11th, 2016, 4:22 pm

Alan H wrote:
Pahu wrote:
Rapid Cooling

If the Earth began in a molten state, it would have cooled to its present condition in much less than 4.5 billion years. This conclusion holds even if one makes liberal assumptions for the amount of heat generated by radioactive decay within Earth. The known temperature pattern inside Earth is consistent only with a young Earth.

[ From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
Oh dear. You're at it again.
But I'll run with this for a while...
If the Earth began in a molten state, it would have cooled to its present condition in much less than 4.5 billion years.
Can you provide the thermodynamic calculations so we can verify that?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#79 Post by Dave B » May 11th, 2016, 4:36 pm

Well, according to some of you lot...
Screenshot_2016-05-11-16-32-15.png
Screenshot_2016-05-11-16-32-15.png (308.92 KiB) Viewed 2307 times
Never knew it was all so complicated!

Is all this in the bible or just out of sone-one's head, or from some-one out of their head, or...

Where does the bit about millions of years of bombardment (thus energy input) from sub-planetary debris (what we call asteroids, comets and meteors now) from the solar accretion disc come into the equation then?

Later: the author of the above, one Ken Pollinger, "PhD", did 4 years studying engineering and one studying dentistry it seems, well qualified to produce such stuff "out of his head". Searching on "ken pollinger wikipedia" finds a Wki entry about a 1980s TV programme called "The Blobs". So, not important or influential enough to qualify for a Wiki page.

About par for the course.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

Lord Muck oGentry
Posts: 634
Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:48 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#80 Post by Lord Muck oGentry » May 11th, 2016, 7:05 pm

Hebrews 13:8 KJV
What we can't say, we can't say and we can't whistle it either. — Frank Ramsey

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#81 Post by Dave B » May 11th, 2016, 7:17 pm

Lord Muck oGentry wrote:Hebrews 13:8 KJV
That's what we used to say when viewing the offerings in most RAF airman's messes!
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

Post Reply