Jump to content


Photo

Retrograde And Direct Motion


  • Please log in to reply
192 replies to this topic

#181 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 28 January 2010 - 02:40 AM

Hello X-Atheist,

So in other words, nothing can disprove your idea of God and creation, as your entire response to anything you don't know is essentially 'God did it'. Is that a fair statement to say?

View Post

Well, if God did it, would that change your opinion of believing it? :P

#182 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 28 January 2010 - 02:42 AM

This is not even wrong.  I'm not trying to be belligerent I promise however this is just breathtaking.  It is my duty as a scientist to educate you.  Bohles gas law relates pressure, temperature, and volume in a confined gas.  This has absolutely nothing to do with gravitation.  Thus it is not 60 times "more powerful than gravity".  This is a non-sensical assertion.

View Post

This is kind of like saying that evolution has nothing to do with geology or the theory of how life began but evolutionists love distorting both these topics to 'prove' evolution. :P

#183 Guest_Darkness45_*

Guest_Darkness45_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 January 2010 - 06:46 AM

Well, if God did it, would that change your opinion of believing it? :P

View Post


I was mainly responding to this section of X-Atheist's post, "Distant star light is no problem for young earth creationists! We believe in miracles! No problem!" It is suggesting that no matter what we observe, what we prove, nothing can change/disprove anything Paul believes because when he comes to anything he doesn't like he will invoke the cop out 'God did it'.

But whether God did it or not can't change my opinion on it unless there's something to support it, even if it is subjective.

#184 X-Atheist

X-Atheist

    Newcomer

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 28 January 2010 - 02:36 PM

RE>>Hello X-Atheist,

So in other words, nothing can disprove your idea of God and creation, as your entire response to anything you don't know is essentially 'God did it'. Is that a fair statement to say?<<

No, not at all. 

All I am saying is that if you believe in the young earth creation model (And I do) then you must believe in a miraculous creation, for there is no natural scientifically acceptable explanation of how the universe could have been formed in 6 literal days by any natural process.  (If there is, then please share.)  And I am OK with that, because I have experienced enough of God (just like some well known and highly respected scientist of the past, i.e. Newton, Kepler, Faraday...etc) to believe he has and does do great miracles.  And I believe that the first one we know about was the creation of the universe , in it's present form.

So, suggesting that things like distant starlight are some sort of stumbling block for the young earth creationist, is utter nonsense.

Also, I am stating that I do not believe in the infallibility of science and it's methods, and that for the bible to make any sense, it must be infallible.

The Heavens Declare the Glory of God!  Psalm 19

X-Atheist,
Paul


View Post



#185 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 28 January 2010 - 03:14 PM

The universe WAS NOT created by natural processes.

View Post


That's a pretty big statement. How can you show that to be true?

#186 X-Atheist

X-Atheist

    Newcomer

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 28 January 2010 - 03:49 PM

RE>>

That's a pretty big statement. How can you show that to be true?

View Post

>>

Because I have never seen any suggestion or theory or hypothesis for the creation of the universe in 6 literal days by natural processes. Do you have one? I am willing to hear it and in no way be opposed to it and in fact would welcome it. Please share if you know of one.

I think that when God said "Let there be Light" a miracle happened and there was light.

Thanks,
Paul

#187 Guest_Darkness45_*

Guest_Darkness45_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 January 2010 - 06:02 PM

Because I have never seen any suggestion or theory or hypothesis for the creation of the universe in 6 literal days by natural processes.  Do you have one?  I am willing to hear it and in no way be opposed to it and in fact would welcome it.  Please share if you know of one.

I think that when God said "Let there be Light" a miracle happened and there was light.

Thanks,
Paul

View Post


This is really the heart of what I was seeing before. You have a preconceived notion about reality without even looking at the evidence, and you throw out any evidence against your preconceived notion as a "miracle". The problem is reality doesn't bend to what you believe it to be, you have to bend what you believe and think to fully understand reality.

#188 X-Atheist

X-Atheist

    Newcomer

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 28 January 2010 - 09:06 PM

RE>>

This is really the heart of what I was seeing before. You have a preconceived notion about reality without even looking at the evidence, and you throw out any evidence against your preconceived notion as a "miracle". The problem is reality doesn't bend to what you believe it to be, you have to bend what you believe and think to fully understand reality.

View Post

<<

Listen, I was an atheist for 11 years and devoutly committed to the theory of evolution and I know intimately all of the atheistic and so-called scientific arguments. I ask you again what hypothesis do you or anyone else have to show how, by natural processes alone, the universe and all life forms in it could be formed in six literal days without divine intervention. If you don't have any then you are just blowing wind trying to make your argument sound scientific. That's reality.

If the truth is that God did create it miraculously, why do you incessantly fight against the truth? We have God's word that says he did it miraculously. It has been proven over centuries to absolutely reliable when taken in faith. When God has shown himself and his word faithful, and science has fails all the time, why do we still close our eyes and hearts to the truth?

No, my friend, it is you who must come to grip with reality. Science has given no believable answers as to how we got here, and what the scientific community mostly has accepted is showing more and more as we peer deeper and deeper into the complexities of life and subatomic entities, that they are poorly devised theories that are childlike in their naivete.

For example, the theory that says a long long long time ago, something, that was nothing, blew up, for no reason, and then became everything for no reason ( You may know this as the Big Bang Theory).

Or the one that say chemicals for no reason and with no help became miraculously complex semi-intelligent molecular machines that duplicated themselves, without help and changed over a long long time into every living thing on earth, including human beings. Even though, the facts are that bacteria prove every day that this just has never happened.

As a former evolutionist and atheist, I can assure you that the most religiously devout people in the world today, who will cast aside all reason and cling to their religion regardless of the facts are evolutionist.

That is reality.

X-Atheist,
Paul

#189 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 28 January 2010 - 09:32 PM

RE>><<

Listen, I was an atheist for 11 years and devoutly committed to the theory of evolution and I know intimately all of the atheistic and so-called scientific arguments.  I ask you again what hypothesis do you or anyone else have to show how, by natural processes alone, the universe and all life forms in it could be formed in six literal days without divine intervention.  If you don't have any then you are just blowing wind trying to make your argument sound scientific.  That's reality. 

If the truth is that God did create it miraculously, why do you incessantly fight against the truth?  We have God's word that says he did it miraculously.  It has been proven over centuries to absolutely reliable when taken in faith.  When God has shown himself and his word faithful, and science has fails all the time, why do we still close our eyes and hearts to the truth?

No, my friend, it is you who must come to grip with reality.  Science has given no believable answers as to how we got here, and what the scientific community mostly has accepted is showing more and more as we peer deeper and deeper into the complexities of life and subatomic entities, that they are poorly devised theories that are childlike in their naivete. 

For example, the theory that says a long long long time ago, something, that was nothing, blew up, for no reason, and then became everything for no reason ( You may know this as the Big Bang Theory).

Or the one that say chemicals for no reason and with no help became miraculously complex semi-intelligent molecular machines that duplicated themselves, without help and changed over a long long time into every living thing on earth, including human beings.  Even though, the facts are that bacteria prove every day that this just has never happened.

As a former evolutionist and atheist, I can assure you that the most religiously devout people in the world today, who will cast aside all reason and cling to their religion regardless of the facts are evolutionist.

That is reality.

X-Atheist,
Paul

View Post

Hi Paul,
Welcome. You said it right. I was raised somewhat around church and always believed in God. But my best friend growing up was an atheist, along with his dad. I went through the party time in my teen years with him as my best friend. I finally came to grips with my faith and gave my heart to Christ at 22. I began praying for my friend, who I did not see as much because he was still partying alot. He always wanted to to drink, but I declined, so it separated us.

Finally, I got a chance to talk one on one about what "had happened" to me--the vigorous partier. During the conversation I asked him if he ever thought about his soul? His quote was, "Yes, because sometimes I feel guilty about the things I do."

Now my question was this: Why would an atheist have any feeling of guilt, or think about his soul--unless the Word was true that the Holy Spirit "would convict the world..." (those outside of Christ) "...of sin..." (he felt guilty), "...of righteousness, and judgment..." (he was becoming somewhat conscious that he was more than a biological unit, because he understood the concept of "soul")?

#190 X-Atheist

X-Atheist

    Newcomer

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 28 January 2010 - 10:17 PM

RE>>

Hi Paul,
Welcome.  You said it right.  I was raised somewhat around church and always believed in God.  But my best friend growing up was an atheist, along with his dad.  I went through the party time in my teen years with him as my best friend.  I finally came to grips with my faith and gave my heart to Christ at 22.  I began praying for my friend, who I did not see as much because he was still partying alot. He always wanted to to drink, but I declined, so it separated us.

Finally, I got a chance to talk one on one about what "had happened" to me--the vigorous partier.  During the conversation I asked him if he ever thought about his soul?  His quote was, "Yes, because sometimes I feel guilty about the things I do."

Now my question was this:  Why would an atheist have any feeling of guilt, or think about his soul--unless the Word was true that the Holy Spirit  "would convict the world..." (those outside of Christ) "...of sin..." (he felt guilty), "...of righteousness, and judgment..." (he was becoming somewhat conscious that he was more than a biological unit, because he understood the concept of "soul")?

View Post

<<

Good evening AFJ!

It is so wonderful to have friends that pray for you! That is truly awesome! And you are right! Just as Romans 1:19 says, "For the truth about God is known to them instinctively. God has put this knowledge in their hearts." -NLT We all instinctively know that there is a God, and we instinctively feel shame when we live lives contrary to his good will. I did when I was an atheist. So in order to become an atheist, we must be educated (indoctrinated) out of the truth. Not the education is bad, no no no, but indoctrination that is against the truth is.

But isn't wonderful when you get to see the light come on in one of your friends and get to experience the joys of the knowledge of God with them.

You are blessed!
X-Atheist,
Paul

#191 Guest_Darkness45_*

Guest_Darkness45_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 January 2010 - 11:43 PM

Listen, I was an atheist for 11 years and devoutly committed to the theory of evolution and I know intimately all of the atheistic and so-called scientific arguments.  I ask you again what hypothesis do you or anyone else have to show how, by natural processes alone, the universe and all life forms in it could be formed in six literal days without divine intervention.  If you don't have any then you are just blowing wind trying to make your argument sound scientific.  That's reality.


There is no model of how completely natural processes can create a planet w/life forms in six days from a proto-planet, as we have no reason such an event ever took place beyond here say evidence. Not only is there no evidence to support a six day creation, but a myriad of evidence to the contrary. To forgo all this evidence seems to me like forgoing the gifts of intelligence, reason, and the ability to understand and comprehend the majestic universe around us. Or is such things curses from the tree of knowledge?

If the truth is that God did create it miraculously, why do you incessantly fight against the truth?


For the same reason the Greeks proclaimed that the Sun revolves around the Earth.

We have God's word that says he did it miraculously.  It has been proven over centuries to absolutely reliable when taken in faith.  When God has shown himself and his word faithful, and science has fails all the time, why do we still close our eyes and hearts to the truth?


The truth to what exactly? Exactly what has science failed to explain all the time that God has revealed to us that would make all proclaim the truth in our hearts?

No, my friend, it is you who must come to grip with reality.  Science has given no believable answers as to how we got here, and what the scientific community mostly has accepted is showing more and more as we peer deeper and deeper into the complexities of life and subatomic entities, that they are poorly devised theories that are childlike in their naivete.


Believable is in the eye of the beholder. It is only believable to you that the creation account in Genesis is accurate in detail on the natural level of the universe, thus anything that would contradict it is automatically disregarded as simply non-believable. You force these theories into your preconceived notion, distorting reality, whether it is conscious or subconscious.

For example, the theory that says a long long long time ago, something, that was nothing, blew up, for no reason, and then became everything for no reason ( You may know this as the Big Bang Theory).


If this is truly how you understand the big bang than I am skeptical to the validity of your claim that you "know intimately all of the atheistic and so-called scientific arguments." As no one who knows what they are talking about would seriously say the big bang postulates that [nothing blew up and became everything].

Or the one that say chemicals for no reason and with no help became miraculously complex semi-intelligent molecular machines that duplicated themselves, without help and changed over a long long time into every living thing on earth, including human beings.  Even though, the facts are that bacteria prove every day that this just has never happened.


I am troubled by your continuous use of the phrase "for no reason". What are you saying?

As a former evolutionist and atheist, I can assure you that the most religiously devout people in the world today, who will cast aside all reason and cling to their religion regardless of the facts are evolutionist.


Do you see yourself as one of those people "who will cast aside all reason and cling to their religion regardless of the facts"?

Just as Romans 1:19 says, "For the truth about God is known to them instinctively. God has put this knowledge in their hearts." -NLT We all instinctively know that there is a God, and we instinctively feel shame when we live lives contrary to his good will.


"Nature herself has imprinted on the minds of all, the idea of God." - Cicero

#192 X-Atheist

X-Atheist

    Newcomer

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 29 January 2010 - 03:27 PM


Darkness,

First I would like to commend you in one thing, that is you are obviously a deep thinker and I never want to display such arrogance as to give the idea that we can't be friends. In fact, and you may find this odd, but you remind me of myself! I predict that as you keep searching, you too will come full circle and end up back in fellowship with God.

When I was about your age, maybe slightly younger, I made the final decision to become an atheist. I had been seriously contemplating it since about 16. But then I made to all out commitment to search out all knowledge to prove that God did not exist. Both to myself and to the rest of the world.

I had already began watching every scientific documentary I could get my hands on. I started reading books like: The Blind Watchmaker (Dawkins), Panda's Thumb (Gould). Coming of Age in The Milky Way (Ferris), Life Itself (Crick/Watson), In Search of Schrodinger's Cat (Gribbin), and many more. Books about evolution, cosmology, geology, astronomy, physics, super string theory, super symmetry and other books about Grand Unified Theories. All of these books I read as a devout atheist. And boy did they ever prop up my faith in my atheistic beliefs.

I also enrolled in college (major physics). I joined the Houston, TX chapter of the American Atheist. Bought their propaganda, posted it on bulletin boards, attended their meetings, and tried converting friends.

I discovered that the decision to become an atheist really had nothing to do with science, but was based on emotional events in my life. Such as, my mom died when I was 16 even though I prayed for her, my father was an alcoholic, and my favorite cousin was killed in a terrible crash. I did not understand that none of these things were God's will but I blamed him for them nonetheless. These events planted the seeds and a perverted view of science and its discoveries watered and fertilized the garden and it grew into full blown atheism.

But I found out that when you are truly seeking the truth and you crack the door to your heart, to allow the possibility that maybe we have missed something, that God is there standing by and ready to rush in, answer questions, fill the void and remove the darkness.

So, I do have great hope for you!

Now, with regard to your response, I am not going to be so juvenile as to go through all of your bullets and try to refute them one by one. But in my brief bio above, I pointed all of that out so that you can see that yes, I do truly understand the "scientific" arguments. What the exclusively "scientific mindset" religiously refuses to accept is that scientific methods are not the only way to truth, in fact, it is a deceivingly limited way to try to understand many truths.

If you look at my first statement, I was pointing out the limitations of science to discover the truth of the origin of the universe. If you want to understand what I mean then you must understand that I have decisively cast off the belief that scientific methods are infallible.

Also, because I have personally experienced miracles (healed heart for one) and I have many friends who have experienced miracles, and have been witness to miracles, I no longer have any preconceived ideas of the impossibility of miracles. I don't have any problem with miracles and I am no longer limited by any grandiose illusion of the superiority or infallibility of scientific thought or methods.

Now with that in mind, consider this; I have an ink pen sitting on my desk right now. If I pick it up and examine it, I can clearly see evidence of its construction. With the proper scientific instruments, I could most likely discover much about its manufacture, the processes that were used, the materials used, and probably a reasonably accurate date and location of manufacture.

Now, as I have already abundantly expressed, I have no problem with the miraculous power of God. So, I believe that God could, if it suited his purpose, create instantaneously, an I identical ( identical even on a microscopic level and beyond) pen and place it on the table behind me.

Now if I pick up this pen and examine it as before, I will get the exact same results as before and would be convinced that it was created by the same processes and at approximately the same time. I could use the best of scientific methods and technologies and would still get the same results.

So what? So, If the universe was created by a miracle, in it's present form, it would show the same, evidence that it is of great age. And just as with the miracle pen, all of science would be unable to discern its true age or origin.

So again I say, science has no ability to determine how or when the universe and everything in it was made because it was a miracle! So, distant starlight and other evidences are definitely NOT a problem for young earth creationists.

Now I do want to point out that I am in no way suggesting that we should stop our journeys of discovery. In fact, I enjoy scientific discovery also. I just think we need to take the blinders and limitations off and not be afraid of the Super-Natural, as well as the natural.

Many of the greatest discoveries were made by men of great and unwavering faith in God, and it is long time overdue that educational elitist of the scientific establishment stop treating people as imbeciles because of their faith.

Have to go now!

Regards,
X-Atheist Paul

#193 Guest_Darkness45_*

Guest_Darkness45_*
  • Guests

Posted 01 February 2010 - 01:16 PM

Darkness,

First I would like to commend you in one thing, that is you are obviously a deep thinker and I never want to display such arrogance as to give the idea that we can't be friends. In fact, and you may find this odd, but you remind me of myself! I predict that as you keep searching, you too will come full circle and end up back in fellowship with God.


I am somewhat reminded of the story about scientists climbing up the mountain only to find a bunch of clergymen at the top. I see no reason why we can't be friends; growing up one of my best friends was a YEC, we wasted many hours in school 'debating' on evolution and creationism.

When I was about your age, maybe slightly younger, I made the final decision to become an atheist. I had been seriously contemplating it since about 16. But then I made to all out commitment to search out all knowledge to prove that God did not exist. Both to myself and to the rest of the world.


My first atheistic thought that I remember came to me when I was 9, and it had to do with the flood. Needless to say, at the tender age of 9 I did not deem it feasible that you could put every species that couldn't survive in the water on a boat for a year while it rained for 40 days and nights straight, covering all the land and mountains in the world. I remember that brief 10 minutes of my life very clearly. It was in that same conversation, that I had my first real doubts to the validity of Adam and Eve, and scripture in general.

I had already began watching every scientific documentary I could get my hands on. I started reading books like: The Blind Watchmaker (Dawkins), Panda's Thumb (Gould). Coming of Age in The Milky Way (Ferris), Life Itself (Crick/Watson), In Search of Schrodinger's Cat (Gribbin), and many more. Books about evolution, cosmology, geology, astronomy, physics, super string theory, super symmetry and other books about Grand Unified Theories. All of these books I read as a devout atheist. And boy did they ever prop up my faith in my atheistic beliefs.


I see many things prop up people's faith, beliefs and conclusions. In many ways over the short life I've possessed so far, I've noticed many things prop up my inkling for atheism, while other experiences have revived/sustained my theism. Good or bad, I've only heard of "The Blind Watchmaker", but I've never read a page of it.

I also enrolled in college (major physics). I joined the Houston, TX chapter of the American Atheist. Bought their propaganda, posted it on bulletin boards, attended their meetings, and tried converting friends.


At college some atheist club tried to recruit my friend, apparently their whole goal is to convert everyone in the world to atheism. I suppose those types of clubs were around when you were there, and it looks like they're gonna stay. I've also met Christian groups on campus, and of course many of the members try to proselytize the faith. So I guess it works both ways.

I discovered that the decision to become an atheist really had nothing to do with science, but was based on emotional events in my life. Such as, my mom died when I was 16 even though I prayed for her, my father was an alcoholic, and my favorite cousin was killed in a terrible crash. I did not understand that none of these things were God's will but I blamed him for them nonetheless. These events planted the seeds and a perverted view of science and its discoveries watered and fertilized the garden and it grew into full blown atheism.


I bet it was very freeing, those first few breaths as an atheist.

But I found out that when you are truly seeking the truth and you crack the door to your heart, to allow the possibility that maybe we have missed something, that God is there standing by and ready to rush in, answer questions, fill the void and remove the darkness.

So, I do have great hope for you!


I'm glad to hear it.

Now, with regard to your response, I am not going to be so juvenile as to go through all of your bullets and try to refute them one by one. But in my brief bio above, I pointed all of that out so that you can see that yes, I do truly understand the "scientific" arguments. What the exclusively "scientific mindset" religiously refuses to accept is that scientific methods are not the only way to truth, in fact, it is a deceivingly limited way to try to understand many truths.


It depends on what truths. When it comes to the natural world I'll stick with science. When it comes to the nature of God then the science methodology is not equipped to discuss such things.

If you look at my first statement, I was pointing out the limitations of science to discover the truth of the origin of the universe. If you want to understand what I mean then you must understand that I have decisively cast off the belief that scientific methods are infallible.


If the origins of the universe has a naturalistic component then science can (theoretically) look into the origins of the universe. It is not that the scientific method is infallible, rather, it is the best methodology we have to understand the unknown, and specifically the unknown nature and phenomena of the natural.

Also, because I have personally experienced miracles (healed heart for one) and I have many friends who have experienced miracles, and have been witness to miracles, I no longer have any preconceived ideas of the impossibility of miracles. I don't have any problem with miracles and I am no longer limited by any grandiose illusion of the superiority or infallibility of scientific thought or methods.


While your experiences convince you, and quite strongly too, it doesn't augment the validity of scripture. The most powerful persuasions seem to stem from the subjectivity of emotion and our primal instinct to follow them. Perhaps nature has left this cruel handicap upon humanity, or perhaps God

Now with that in mind, consider this; I have an ink pen sitting on my desk right now. If I pick it up and examine it, I can clearly see evidence of its construction. With the proper scientific instruments, I could most likely discover much about its manufacture, the processes that were used, the materials used, and probably a reasonably accurate date and location of manufacture.

Now, as I have already abundantly expressed, I have no problem with the miraculous power of God. So, I believe that God could, if it suited his purpose, create instantaneously, an I identical ( identical even on a microscopic level and beyond) pen and place it on the table behind me.

Now if I pick up this pen and examine it as before, I will get the exact same results as before and would be convinced that it was created by the same processes and at approximately the same time. I could use the best of scientific methods and technologies and would still get the same results.

So what? So, If the universe was created by a miracle, in it's present form, it would show the same, evidence that it is of great age. And just as with the miracle pen, all of science would be unable to discern its true age or origin.

So again I say, science has no ability to determine how or when the universe and everything in it was made because it was a miracle! So, distant starlight and other evidences are definitely NOT a problem for young earth creationists.


Then why did God plague us with the ability to think?! Is such a merit to be used in limitation? Are we supposed to cure diseases, feed the hungry, protect the weak and innocent through science and technology, yet shut our eyes to the progress made about the very nature of the universe around us because it is declared taboo?

Now I do want to point out that I am in no way suggesting that we should stop our journeys of discovery. In fact, I enjoy scientific discovery also. I just think we need to take the blinders and limitations off and not be afraid of the Super-Natural, as well as the natural.

You seem to be afraid of the natural, imposing limitations on it because of your faith. If the origins of the universe are supernatural, then any attempt to understand it on a natural level will end in shoulder shrugging.

Many of the greatest discoveries were made by men of great and unwavering faith in God, and it is long time overdue that educational elitist of the scientific establishment stop treating people as imbeciles because of their faith.

From what I've noticed a person's religious preference doesn't hamper their scientific credentials, only when their faith impairs their ability to be scientific. While this statement might be mean, creationism can easily impair someone's ability to be scientific.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users