The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

[Diogenes]

The proposition for debate is that when one takes the tales of Genesis literally, one becomes intellectually disabled, at least temporarily. Taking Genesis literally requires one to reject biology (which includes evolution) and other sciences in favor of 'magic.' Geology and radiometric dating have to be rejected since the Earth formed only about 6000 years ago, during the same week the Earth was made (in a single day).

Much of the debate in the topic of Science and Religion consists of theists who insist on a literal interpretation of Genesis rejecting basic science. Most of the resulting debates are not worth engaging in.

[dad1]

You complain that we can't know anything outside of some alleged fishbowl, but you know what some character you can't even demonstrate exists has been doing. Too funny.

It can be absolutely demonstrated. Man has not even been via probes one light day away. The 'fishbowl' is just a name for that limit. Denial is futile.

Please demonstrate the existence of Satan.

Rather than admit that you were wrong and that the fishbowl represents the real limits man has been, you start talking about the devil. Strange.

If you start at the top of this post you will notice that YOU who introduced Satan, and in a way that suggests you know exactly what he has been doing. Now it is your turn to justify some claims. I'm guessing that you will not be able to and will now do a lot of tap-dancing. By the way, there is no fishbowl and there is no Satan.

Noting that the message of so called science is identical to that of Satan in the bible is germane. Yes there are limits to where man has been. You don't get a vote on that.

[dad1]

That's funny considering that you have done nothing more than throw around a bunch of wild claims and not been able to support a single one of them with any evidence or even speculative science. It is that section of the forum after all.

It is pure fact that man has only been so far to observe anything. So pony up and support the claim there are no limits and man knows it all about time in the far universe? Speaking of a science forum, this is something you are required to do (or keep failing for comic relief)

[dad1]

No one here is pretending that the probes man has sent do not reveal data. Ironic coming from the guy who is pretending that stars across the universe do not reveal data.

The data the universe screams out and reveals is that the heavens declare the glory of God. The light entering here reveals diddly squat about what time is like out there.

How many times do I have to state that how far man has been, is not under dispute before you realise you are attacking a strawman?

Long as you admit your limits, fine. Keep it up.

That's not an issue, we assume time is the same everywhere, then we test that assumption repeatedly, the observation confirms the assumption as knowledge.

Except that has not been tested ever. Try to be honest.

As I pointed out it's fairly easy to demonstrate the speed of light out there: all you have to do is sit in your little closet here and clock light speed and assume that applies to the universe and beyond. Then test that assumption and turn it into knowledge.

That is an admission of total defeat. Yoo admit that you do not clock anything out there only here. For the win/

That's why I am only talking about what we know, such as the speed of light everywhere in the universe.

Except when I asked someone here for evidence they resorted to how light is clocked IN the fishbowl. You need to demo how you clock it a billion light years away.

The failure lies entirely on your side,

Admitting what man does not know is anything but a failure.

What is ridiculous is tripling down on this after you've admitted that you have no argument. There is only one reality.

Word salad. Your little belief set is anything but a reality let alone the only reality.

Don't be sorry, you are getting very close. That's the point, it's not faith based, we do have knowledge about the distant universe, since it is based on the same model, same assumption, we use for the solar system.

The probes did not go into the distant universe. Try to admit the obvious.

Good thing we have knowledge then.

If you had knowledge you could post it. How do you know what time is like in the far universe exactly? (hint: do not offer anything from this fishbowl)

[Bust Nak]

The light entering here reveals diddly squat about what time is like out there.

Well, there you go. Thanks once again for affirming that you do hold a conspiracy theory about signals from stars do not reveal data about what it's like there. I said you have no justification for treating Mars probes differently from distant stars, you confirmed it by saying "no argument is needed." I said your objection was arbitrary, you confirmed it by appealing to your own personal generosity. I said all you have is your religious zeal, you confirmed it with your rhetorical question "why not ask God!?" Every accusation I've made, turned out to be true by your own account. Take your own advice: better to just admit defeat than to keep trying to raise that canard.

Long as you admit your limits, fine. Keep it up.

Then kindly refrain from your further strawman attack.

Except that has not been tested ever. Try to be honest.

Same old denial. No longer interested in your naysaying. Honesty comes easy to me, because I have a consistent worldview.

That is an admission of total defeat. Yoo admit that you do not clock anything out there only here.

I admit no such thing. I said we do clock things out there, we do that by clocking it here. That's how science is supposed to work. You had no problem with this method, not until it clashed with your religious views.

Except when I asked someone here for evidence they resorted to how light is clocked IN the fishbowl. You need to demo how you clock it a billion light years away.

We demo that by clocking light around here. It's not an issue for us scientific minded people.

Admitting what man does not know is anything but a failure.

It is a failure when we actually do know. As you said before, "learn the difference between known and unknown. Pretty basic stuff." The only thing stopping you from getting something this basic is the very same "debilitating effect" referred to in the OP.

Word salad. Your little belief set is anything but a reality let alone the only reality.

More irony from someone who questioned my comprehension. Nothing I said would be difficult to understand.

The probes did not go into the distant universe. Try to admit the obvious.

That's easy to admit: the probes did not go into the distant universe, as I've stated so many times before. You acknowledged it near the top of this very post, but did that stop you from misrepresenting my position? No, you felt right back into the comfort of your strawman fallacy in the space of a dozen or so sentences.

More to the point, you've once again failed to address my counterpoint: The model of the cosmos we use for the distant universe is the very same model we use for our solar system, based on the same assumptions. Where probes have or haven't been, is irrelevant to the point I am making. You try admitting the obvious.

If you had knowledge you could post it.

The record would show that I did post it on multiple occasion. Most recently in post #413, repeated here for your convenience, we know what time is like in the far universe: "by doing experiments right here on Earth."

(hint: do not offer anything from this fishbowl)

Hint noted and denied.

[dad1]

Well, there you go. Thanks once again for affirming that you do hold a conspiracy theory about signals from stars do not reveal data about what it's like there.

It is plain fact that you do not know and have been nowhere beyond (and not even) a light day away. Those are your boundaries. Beyond that you speak by faith.

I said you have no justification for treating Mars probes differently from distant stars,

Since we have been there via probes that is not relevant.

Then kindly refrain from your further strawman attack.

It is neither a strawman nor an attack to face the facts you have limits. Try not to be a sore loser.

Same old denial. No longer interested in your naysaying. Honesty comes easy to me, because I have a consistent worldview.

You are consistent in being able to face the reality that man does not know what time in the far universe is like. You have also consistently smeared your fishbowl beliefs over evidence, You have also consistently failed to even address the issue.

I admit no such thing. I said we do clock things out there, we do that by clocking it here.

So you sit in your closet and apply what is real there to infinity and beyond. We get it.

That's how science is supposed to work. You had no problem with this method, not until it clashed with your religious views.

I have no problem applying what applies.

We demo that by clocking light around here. It's not an issue for us scientific minded people.

That means you sit here and clock stuff and belief it must apply to all infinity. Comical.

It is a failure when we actually do know. As you said before, "learn the difference between known and unknown. Pretty basic stuff." The only thing stopping you from getting something this basic is the very same "debilitating effect" referred to in the OP.

It has become obvious whose closed minded region and beliefs have rendered such an effect.

More irony from someone who questioned my comprehension. Nothing I said would be difficult to understand.

IF only they first believed as you do..real hard.

That's easy to admit: the probes did not go into the distant universe, as I've stated so many times before. You acknowledged it near the top of this very post, but did that stop you from misrepresenting my position? No, you felt right back into the comfort of your strawman fallacy in the space of a dozen or so sentences.

The moral of the story is that you are unable to accept the limits of man's knowledge and range.

The model of the cosmos we use for the distant universe is the very same model we use for our solar system

Thanks for admitting that. The problem is that here near earth it is based on experience and for the unknown universe it is only faith.

If you had knowledge you could post it.

The record would show that I did post it on multiple occasion. Most recently in post #413, repeated here for your convenience, we know what time is like in the far universe: "by doing experiments right here on Earth.[/quote]
From your post --

"Easy, it confirms our assumptions, solidifying them into knowledge"

Nothing about sitting in your closet looking at a flashlight solidifies anything. It just shows you sit in the fishbowl and project beliefs into the unknown.

(hint: do not offer anything from this fishbowl)

Hint noted and denied.
[/quote]Right you have nothing else except the fishbowl. We get it.

[brunumb]

[Replying to dad1 in post #425]

The real fishbowl that matters here is the one that has Christians swimming around in giving them a distorted view of the reality that lies outside. You are welcome to your delusion dad1 because it changes nothing.

[Bust Nak]

It is plain fact that you do not know and have been nowhere beyond (and not even) a light day away. Those are your boundaries. Beyond that you speak by faith.

If you have any evidence why the data we received from beyond a light day away would be skewed, post it. Without evidence, you just have a faith-based conspiracy theory.

Since we have been there via probes that is not relevant.

You kept saying that, but when I ask you how probes changes anything, you had no answer. I kept pushing for an answer until you literally told me "no argument is needed."

It is neither a strawman nor an attack to face the facts you have limits.

But it is a strawman to keep mispresent my position as somehow being in denial of the fact that the furthest probe is around a light day away. Try not falling back on known fallacies.

You are consistent in being able to face the reality that man does not know what time in the far universe is like.

But we do know what time is like in the far universe: it's just like here. It's an assumption that has been tested repeatedly, and the evidence turned the assumptions into knowledge.

You have also consistently smeared your fishbowl beliefs over evidence, You have also consistently failed to even address the issue.

That's because it's a non-issue. Nobody cares. You didn't.

So you sit in your closet and apply what is real there to infinity and beyond. We get it.

Yes, that's what scientists do, and we are glad for all the knowledge they gain by sitting in their closet and apply what is real there to infinity and beyond.

I have no problem applying what applies.

Your own posts showed otherwise: you've repeatedly failed to apply what is real there to infinity and beyond.

That means you sit here and clock stuff and belief it must apply to all infinity. Comical.

Nobody else thinks it's funny. It's just you. Either way, funny does not imply false. It's an appeal to ridicule, another fallacy.

It has become obvious whose closed minded region and beliefs have rendered such an effect.

It's obvious to everyone else from the get-go, you dismissed evolution as "flatly ridiculed and utterly rejected as nonsense." That was literally your first post in this thread.

IF only they first believed as you do..real hard.

One does not have to believe as I do, to understand what I said, it's just a matter of English comprehension.

The moral of the story is that you are unable to accept the limits of man's knowledge and range.

Whether I am able to accept the limits of man's knowledge and range or not, does not change the fact that I've consistently affirmed that our furthest probe had barely left the solar system. Yet you kept talking as if I was in denial of that fact. It's a strawman fallacy to misrepresent my position.

Thanks for admitting that.

A bit late for thanks, don't you think? I admitted that almost a month ago, better late than never I guess. It's easy to admit to because like I keep saying, no one cares, it's a feature, not a bug.

The problem is that here near earth it is based on experience and for the unknown universe it is only faith...

Again, nobody cares. It's not a problem to us scientific minded people, because that's how science is supposed to work.

[dad1]

[Replying to dad1 in post #425]

The real fishbowl that matters here is the one that has Christians swimming around in giving them a distorted view of the reality that lies outside. You are welcome to your delusion dad1 because it changes nothing.

No. What matters are the real and present limits of where man has been.

[dad1]

If you have any evidence why the data we received from beyond a light day away would be skewed, post it. Without evidence, you just have a faith-based conspiracy theory.

If you have any evidence why the data we received from beyond a light day away would the same in respect to telling us what time out there is like, post it. Without evidence, you just have a faith-based conspiracy theory. Worse still a faith based conspiracy theory offered as scientific knowledge.

You kept saying that, but when I ask you how probes changes anything, you had no answer. I kept pushing for an answer until you literally told me "no argument is needed."

When exact distances and gravity and etc etc are needed to land a probe on Mars that changes it from being the unknown.

But it is a strawman to keep mispresent my position as somehow being in denial of the fact that the furthest probe is around a light day away. Try not falling back on known fallacies.

Not that you could deny that if you wanted to. Facts are facts.

But we do know what time is like in the far universe: it's just like here. It's an assumption that has been tested repeatedly, and the evidence turned the assumptions into knowledge.

Nothing has been tested regarding time in the far universe. You sit here in the fishbowl looking at incoming light screaming that this must be the same as the unknown. No. All your little observations are here. Nowhere else.

That's because it's a non-issue. Nobody cares. You didn't.

Yes I took the bull by the horns and directly addressed the issue of whether man knows what time itself is like in the far universe. He doesn't know. Period.

Yes, that's what scientists do, and we are glad for all the knowledge they gain by sitting in their closet and apply what is real there to infinity and beyond.

Projecting belief blindly into the unknown distant universe is anything but knowledge.

you've repeatedly failed to apply what is real there to infinity and beyond.

I prefer to stick to what is known rather than blind beliefs that are splattered willy nilly onto infinity and beyond.

Nobody else thinks it's funny. It's just you. Either way, funny does not imply false. It's an appeal to ridicule, another fallacy.

They should if they had a lick of sense and honesty.

It's obvious to everyone else from the get-go, you dismissed evolution as "flatly ridiculed and utterly rejected as nonsense." That was literally your first post in this thread.

It is worse than that, perhaps why no one has tried to defend that belief here.

One does not have to believe as I do, to understand what I said, it's just a matter of English comprehension.

We know what you said. You sit here in the fishbowl and project blind beliefs.

Whether I am able to accept the limits of man's knowledge and range or not, does not change the fact that I've consistently affirmed that our furthest probe had barely left the solar system. Yet you kept talking as if I was in denial of that fact. It's a strawman fallacy to misrepresent my position.

So nan has been no further. All comments on anything further are faith based.

A bit late for thanks, don't you think? I admitted that almost a month ago, better late than never I guess. It's easy to admit to because like I keep saying, no one cares, it's a feature, not a bug.

When you admit not having knowledge and imposing beliefs, that is defeat.

Again, nobody cares. It's not a problem to us scientific minded people, because that's how science is supposed to work.

False, science is supposed to deal with knowledge and facts.

[Bust Nak]

If you have any evidence why the data we received from beyond a light day away would the same in respect to telling us what time out there is like, post it.

That's easy, I already mentioned your GPS. In contrast, you have not even tried to show evidence for your own conspiracy theory for how signals from deep space would be skewed, after multiple requests from me. If you have any, post it.

When exact distances and gravity and etc etc are needed to land a probe on Mars that changes it from being the unknown.

And the exact distances and gravity and etc etc are needed for the signal from stars to arrive here that changes it from being the unknown. You are still not telling us how probes change things.

Not that you could deny that if you wanted to. Facts are facts.

Ah huh, still a complete lack of acknowledgment that you were attacking a strawman. And you had the nerve to attack my honesty.

Nothing has been tested regarding time in the far universe...

Same old denial. Not interested. We test time in the far universe by sitting here in the fishbowl looking at incoming light confirming that this must be the same as out there.

I prefer to stick to what is known rather than blind beliefs that are splattered willy nilly onto infinity and beyond.

So don't splatter it willy nilly. Do it carefully like us, only applying what applies.

They should if they had a lick of sense and honesty.

False by counterexample. I have a great deal of sense and honesty, yet I did not find it funny. Either way, funny or not, you have appealed to a fallacy.

It is worse than that, perhaps why no one has tried to defend that belief here.

I don't really want to know how much worse you can be.

We know what you said.

Knowing what I said and understanding it are different things. You said you couldn't even make sense of what I said when it was in simple, straight forward, plain English. Ironic that you thought to question my comprehension. It's all projection.

So nan has been no further. All comments on anything further are faith based.

Still no acknowledge for repeatedly misrepresenting my position.

When you admit not having knowledge and imposing beliefs, that is defeat.

Good luck waiting for that. Don't hold your breath.

False, science is supposed to deal with knowledge and facts.

Yes, supposed to deal with knowledge and facts, starting from assumption. What you said here does not invalidate my claim. In an earlier post you've already called a core assumption of science "an unsupportable belief." At this point you are arguing as much with yourself as you are arguing with me. That's what happens when you try to have your cake and eat it, I can just throw your own words back at you. This is why consistency is so important in intellectual discord.