[Pim Pendergast]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

For example...

For example, where's your proof God doesn't exist?

[Infinity]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

Islam and Atheism don't have any evidence to support their claims whereas Christianity does.

For example...

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

Muslims say the same thing about the Quran. Everyone thinks they're right. Atheists don't claim to know for certain.

Islam and Atheism don't have any evidence to support their claims whereas Christianity does.

Relating to the science of your quote, Fuuu...Bu......goddamned it! Take a science class! You're guessing that the Bible is truthful events. You don't understand science at all. You should have learned this in 3rd or 4th grade. The Bible IS the claims. It IS the hypothesis. The evidence, the real world, doesn't match up to it. You have to spin reality to fit it to your worldview, rather than let reality guide and change your worldview according to the evidence. It's true that you completely absolve yourself of thinking when you accept bronze age mythology at face value. It is not true that science operates on the assumption that a conclusion with support a hypothesis. More often than not, it doesn't. The entire scientific process is rooted in forming a hypothesis, and then trying to disprove it. That's why it tends to work so well. It might behoove you to actually understand science before attacking it.

You might be interested in knowing Christian science does, in fact, have evidence to support it, and is, thankfully, taught in schools. Here are a few resources with which you might wish to familiarize yourself.

Bob Jones University K-12 science for private and home schools

Apologia elementary and middle/high school science for private and home schools

Institute for Creation Research curriculum supplements for private and home schools

Creation Education Resources for personal and educational needs

Answers in Genesis various educational resources

Creation Worldview Ministries, helping to "improve public understanding of the Bible's incredibly accurate perspective on the origins and history of our world"

Even the State of Louisiana supports teaching Creationism Science at the state level, and offers vouchers for residents to pay for private schools rather than watching their tax dollars go to public, darwinist education.

By that logic, you won't have a large number of "True Christian™" in Heaven.

Quite right. We ought to expect no less. The LORD has already pointed this out.

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Matthew 7:21-23

We get our hypothesis based on observation.

So you have observed Lamarkian evolution, and aquatic Apes? How interesting.

I don't understand why you had to put the word evidence in Quotation marks?

I'll let you figure that one out.

[ScienceisforFools]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

No, you're guessing the calculations based on the assumption your conclusion will support the hypothesis.

Muslims say the same thing about the Quran. Everyone thinks they're right. Atheists don't claim to know for certain.

Relating to the science of your quote, Fuuu...Bu......goddamned it! Take a science class! You're guessing that the Bible is truthful events. You don't understand science at all. You should have learned this in 3rd or 4th grade. The Bible IS the claims. It IS the hypothesis. The evidence, the real world, doesn't match up to it. You have to spin reality to fit it to your worldview, rather than let reality guide and change your worldview according to the evidence. It's true that you completely absolve yourself of thinking when you accept bronze age mythology at face value. It is not true that science operates on the assumption that a conclusion with support a hypothesis. More often than not, it doesn't. The entire scientific process is rooted in forming a hypothesis, and then trying to disprove it. That's why it tends to work so well. It might behoove you to actually understand science before attacking it.

I have read the documents which went into the bible AND the ones which didn't. I know how, when, why and by whom Yahweh was created.

I have the evidence to prove he was an amalgamation of the mountain god El Shaddei and fertility god Ba'al and the warrior god first known as Yahweh who was not at that time omnipotent, good, monotheistic or a creator. They were all merged at various times due to dynastic alliances. This is how society worked then. When two dynasties wanted to make an alliance they would frequently 'discover' that their gods were related or were the same gods going by different names and the gods decreased in number and grew in power.

Just read a bit more history and you will have that evidence too.

Which I don't. No True Christian™ does.

By that logic, you won't have a large number of "True Christian™" in Heaven.

You change based on what's fashionable.

We get our hypothesis based on observation.

Then you find new "evidence" to lend support.

I don't understand why you had to put the word evidence in Quotation marks?

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

Such as...

Confirmed evidence

We know the earth isn't flat because we ca n calculate its circumference, together with going out into space to find out for ourselves. We know the sun isn't 500 miles away because we can calculate its distance. We know other planets do exist because we can observe them ourselves. We know there isn't a firmament because we've been into space. The evidence is factual and reliable evidence you can do yourself.

No, you're guessing the calculations based on the assumption your conclusion will support the hypothesis.

...Until you put your own interpretation into it.

Which I don't. No True Christian™ does.

Such as...

Start here.

We change based on evidence.

You change based on what's fashionable. Then you find new "evidence" to lend support. Global cooling was popular in the 1970's, and now it's all about global warming. Whatever is stylish at the time, that's what scientists will find their so-called "evidence" to support.

[ScienceisforFools]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

No dear, the Bible has been confirmed as evidence for God in many ways.

Such as...

No, it denies the stories you've been led to trust as evidence.

We know the earth isn't flat because we ca n calculate its circumference, together with going out into space to find out for ourselves. We know the sun isn't 500 miles away because we can calculate its distance. We know other planets do exist because we can observe them ourselves. We know there isn't a firmament because we've been into space. The evidence is factual and reliable evidence you can do yourself.

I don't. I let the Holy Bible speak for itself.

...Until you put your own interpretation into it.

It's been confirmed many times, publicly and privately.

Such as...

You change based on what is fashionable at the time.

We change based on evidence.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

You've been tricked into thinking the Bible is evidence for God.

No dear, the Bible has been confirmed as evidence for God in many ways. People who aren't prideful and stubborn are able to see this.

I can say the same for you. Believing the Earth is Flat, other planets don't exist, there's a firmament around the Earth, the Sun is 500 miles away - all this is foolish because you deny the evidence that is easily available.

No, it denies the stories you've been led to trust as evidence.

If you put your own interpretation on the Bible like all Christians do, how do you know what it actually means?

I don't. I let the Holy Bible speak for itself.

How do you know it's true?

It's been confirmed many times, publicly and privately.

We change based on evidence.

You change based on what is fashionable at the time.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

You've been tricked into thinking the Bible is evidence for God.

No dear, the Bible has been confirmed as evidence for God in many ways. People who aren't prideful and stubborn are able to see this.

I can say the same for you. Believing the Earth is Flat, other planets don't exist, there's a firmament around the Earth, the Sun is 500 miles away - all this is foolish because you deny the evidence that is easily available.

No, it denies the stories you've been led to trust as evidence.

If you put your own interpretation on the Bible like all Christians do, how do you know what it actually means?

I don't. I let the Holy Bible speak for itself.

How do you know it's true?

It's been confirmed many times, publicly and privately.

We change based on evidence.

You change based on what is fashionable at the time.

[ScienceisforFools]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

Are past theories still best possible explanations you have to explain a specific aspect of nature? Even when new theory has replaced it and is only waiting for yet another new theory to take it's place. Note, possible explanation, not fact.

Again, understanding, not fact. In fact, you need the hypothesis of dark matter to make current theory of gravitation to work. If there is no dark matter, universe and gravitation as secular science it sees cannot exist.

Good scientific theories aren't replaced, but expanded upon.

Newton's theory of gravity had problems, namely:
1) It couldn't predict irregularities in the orbit of Mercury
2) It couldn't explain how the force of gravity was transmitted

When Einstein came along and introduced relativity, the first problem was resolved. Newtonian mechanics still worked wonderfully, but only at non-relativistic velocities. But Relativity still had trouble because it didn't explain how gravity was transmitted and with the discovery of quantum mechanics, there was an instant problem because it was impossible to describe relativity on a quantum scale

Now we're entering into quantum gravity and the discovery of the Higgs boson. Our understanding of gravity is getting better which allows us to further refine and complete the theory.

Scientific theories are based on facts - old theories are discarded when new ones are formulated but no theory is ever considered proved - they are all incomplete and grow as our knowledge increases yet the facts and proved hypotheses within theories remain facts.

Einstein's theory of general relativity is our current theory of gravity - it posits that gravity bends 4-dimensional space - this is supported by facts, yet it's incomplete. We also have several quantum theories of gravity that require the exchange of gravitons between massive objects - these are also supported by facts (yet incomplete). All theories of gravity include Newton's law of gravity which simply measures the force of attraction not the reason why it's there - also this law has been modified after Einstein proved it was not entirely universal in scope (it fails for objects moving at relativistic speeds).

It's unfortunate that modern physics cannot combine Relativity with quantum theory - both theories are wildly accurate at predicting physical events but we know they are both incomplete, so what gravity actually is and how it manifests and propagates, are still open questions - of course there's no doubt it exists, so gravity IS a fact.

To reinforce what I said, you really need to take some time to understand what scientists mean by hypothesis, fact, and theory

A fact is something quantifiable. It is a fact that the speed of light in a vacuum is 299792458 meters per second. You can test it and verify it.

A hypothesis is a testable question. You ask a question about a subject, make a prediction, and test it. A hypothesis, by definition, must be possible to refute (there has to be some way that the prediction can be tested and found wrong), but the hypothesis itself is only a thought until it is tested.

A theory is a collection of confirmed hypotheses and facts that describe the nature of something. A theory must be testable, verifiable, and falsifiable. It must be able to make predictions and it must include all relevant information about its subject. This is why creationists sound like mormons when they say things like, "The Theory of evolution can't explain how life started or how the universe began." The theory of evolution doesn't address those things at all. The theory on how life started is called the Theory of Abiogenesis. Evolution doesn't deal with how life started, instead it deals with what life is doing once it exists. Similarly, The biological theory of evolution doesn't address the origin of the cosmos, because that would be astronomy and cosmology. That's like saying that the theory of gravity is pure crap because it can't explain a nuclear explosion.

So all I can tell you is that you need to educate yourself.

Tell me now, how can something be considered even remotely fact if it needs hypothesis of some other thing to work?

Because in very many other situations the theory gives answers which are more accurate than any other explanation. The fact that Newtonian gravity works pretty well for flying to the moon and general planetary motion in our solar system indicates it is more or less a good model. The fact that General Relativity explains the shortcomings of Newton's model, and that we have verified varies forms of time dilation, indicates that GR is an even more complete model.

Even if the GR model is incomplete, the next model will still have to simplify to GR and Newton in the cases we commonly use.

Dark matter, or whatever it turns out to be, is unlikely to be a systematic error in modelling gravity, the effects we see have too much local variation. You can't really hope to explain an isolated case of gravitational lensing around a non shining centre, as being due to a new theory of gravity which happens to cause lensing in that specific place.

You've been tricked into thinking this is somehow evidence that moving closer to the truth

You've been tricked into thinking the Bible is evidence for God.

You should be embarrassed. I'm embarrassed for you.

I can say the same for you. Believing the Earth is Flat, other planets don't exist, there's a firmament around the Earth, the Sun is 500 miles away - all this is foolish because you deny the evidence that is easily available.

People can have any interpretation they want, it doesn't change what the Bible actually says, and what it actually means

If you put your own interpretation on the Bible like all Christians do, how do you know what it actually means?

The Bible doesn't change because the Truth© doesn't change.

How do you know it's true?

just like your science.

We change based on evidence.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

You have probably convinced yourself that *your* interpretation is correct and any other interpretation is wrong. That is a delusion. It is sad that you think changes in science are a weakness. It's actually its great strength.

Oh, well, if you say so.

The best part about science is that it is always changing, always growing, moving closer to the truth. Science is willing to admit to errors when new evidence shows something is in error, and it will work to correct the error in light of the evidence. Also, "theory" is not a guess in science; it is substantiated by a large body of evidence to account for observation. In that sense, gravity is also a theory, along with microbes, atoms, and cells. The Theory of Evolution overall won't change now, but details within it will as new fossils are found, DNA analysis of more species is done, both of which will give more details of what species evolved from what others.

Son, I'm afraid society has done you a great disservice. You've been brainwashed into thinking the best thing about science is that it's not consistent, always changes its mind, grabs onto whatever new scientific idea is fashionable at the time. You've been tricked into thinking this is somehow evidence that moving closer to the truth (and of course how would anyone know what the Truth is when it's always changing?). Frankly speaking, this is foolish. You should be embarrassed. I'm embarrassed for you. You've been duped by Big Pharma who spews this garbage out for the sake of profit, and you eat it up like a pig at the trough.

The Bible doesn't change, even when evidence shows something in it is false or impossible. The failure to accommodate new information makes it dated and unreliable. The earth is not a flat circle like Isaiah 40:22 claims. Christians can't even decide what God's Word says. Some say it's literal, some say it's not. Everyone has a different interpretation. The words might not change, so people change the interpretation to fit the current attitudes and ideals of that age.

People can have any interpretation they want, it doesn't change what the Bible actually says, and what it actually means (hint - it says what it means, and it means what it says). The Bible doesn't change because the Truth© doesn't change. If the Bible did change, it would be unreliable, just like your science.

[Alphonse Alban]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

No, that's not true. In the scientific sense, and not in common parlance, a theory is the best possible explanation we have to explain a specific aspect of nature.

Are past theories still best possible explanations you have to explain a specific aspect of nature? Even when new theory has replaced it and is only waiting for yet another new theory to take it's place. Note, possible explanation, not fact.

Theory of gravity: we have a very good understanding of how gravity behaves--

Again, understanding, not fact. In fact, you need the hypothesis of dark matter to make current theory of gravitation to work. If there is no dark matter, universe and gravitation as secular science it sees cannot exist.

Tell me now, how can something be considered even remotely fact if it needs hypothesis of some other thing to work?

[ScienceisforFools]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

Sure, until another "best possible explanation we have to explain" comes along. In essence, you're talking about best guesses. Other best guesses, oh excuse me, theories, have included spontaneous generation, Lamarckism, the theory of maternal impression (the theory that the mother's thoughts created birth defects), miasma theory of disease (the theory that diseases are caused by "bad air"), and many others. Just as each one of these has been replaced, so too will the theory of evolution when the next scientific fad comes along. God's Word, on the other hand, never changes.

You have probably convinced yourself that *your* interpretation is correct and any other interpretation is wrong. That is a delusion. It is sad that you think changes in science are a weakness. It's actually its great strength.

The best part about science is that it is always changing, always growing, moving closer to the truth. Science is willing to admit to errors when new evidence shows something is in error, and it will work to correct the error in light of the evidence. Also, "theory" is not a guess in science; it is substantiated by a large body of evidence to account for observation. In that sense, gravity is also a theory, along with microbes, atoms, and cells. The Theory of Evolution overall won't change now, but details within it will as new fossils are found, DNA analysis of more species is done, both of which will give more details of what species evolved from what others.

The Bible doesn't change, even when evidence shows something in it is false or impossible. The failure to accommodate new information makes it dated and unreliable. The earth is not a flat circle like Isaiah 40:22 claims. Christians can't even decide what God's Word says. Some say it's literal, some say it's not. Everyone has a different interpretation. The words might not change, so people change the interpretation to fit the current attitudes and ideals of that age.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

No, that's not true. In the scientific sense, and not in common parlance, a theory is the best possible explanation we have to explain a specific aspect of nature.

Sure, until another "best possible explanation we have to explain" comes along. In essence, you're talking about best guesses. Other best guesses, oh excuse me, theories, have included spontaneous generation, Lamarckism, the theory of maternal impression (the theory that the mother's thoughts created birth defects), miasma theory of disease (the theory that diseases are caused by "bad air"), and many others. Just as each one of these has been replaced, so too will the theory of evolution when the next scientific fad comes along. God's Word, on the other hand, never changes.

[ScienceisforFools]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

It's not a fact, it's a secular theory. In science they always call things as theories when they are not sure about them. Such as theory of gravitation, theory of dark matter and this theory of evilution.

No, that's not true. In the scientific sense, and not in common parlance, a theory is the best possible explanation we have to explain a specific aspect of nature. It isn't an indication that we aren't sure of something, it's our deepest understanding to date. That doesn't mean we know everything about a topic. What it means is that we have observed a phenonomen. We have formed a tenative explanation of it--an hypothesis. We devise a way of testing the hypothesis, and preform the test. We modify the hypothesis to match the outcome of the test, and repeat as needed. When an hypothesis is rigorous enough to stand up to all of the tests we can think of, it becomes a theory.

Theory of gravity: we have a very good understanding of how gravity behaves--we are able to send spacecraft billions of miles away with perfect confidence they will arrive when and where we expect, based on that understanding. Have we been able to merge gravity with quantum physics? Not yet, but research is being done toward such ends.

"Theory of Dark Matter" No such thing. Dark matter is at best an hypothesis, and an as yet untested one.

Theory of Evolution: probably the most well supported scientific theory ever devised. There are both virtual and literal mountains of evidence supporting evolution--there is absolutely no doubt it is correct, thus becoming a fact. The only people who doubt it are those believers in unsupportable and unproven supernatural superstitious nonsense. You know who I mean.

[Alphonse Alban]

Re: World’s smartest man debunks secular archaeology and history

Evolution is a facts.

It's not a fact, it's a secular theory. In science they always call things as theories when they are not sure about them. Such as theory of gravitation, theory of dark matter and this theory of evilution.