Glaring Inconsistency in the Use of Science

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Diogenes
Guru
Posts: 1304
Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 862 times
Been thanked: 1265 times

Glaring Inconsistency in the Use of Science

Post #1

Post by Diogenes »

Resolved: Christian apologists only use scientific evidence and conclusions when they believe those conclusions verify some Biblical claim.
Sub-issue:
It is intellectually biased and inconsistent to claim "science provides convincing evidence" only when such evidence appears to favor the Christian fundamentalist POV, then to turn around and favor "divine revelation" over science, when the scientific evidence does not support a Biblical literalist POV.
Last edited by Diogenes on Mon Apr 18, 2022 5:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.
___________________________________

Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves

— Confucius

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Glaring Inconsistency in the Use of Science

Post #2

Post by Tcg »

Diogenes wrote: Mon Apr 18, 2022 4:30 pm Resolved: Christian apologists only use scientific evidence and conclusions when they believe those conclusions verify some Biblical claim.
Sub-issue:
It is intellectually biased and inconsistent to claim "science provides convincing evidence" only when such evidence appears to favor the Christian fundamentalist POV, then to turn around and favor "divine revelation" over science, when the scientific evidence does not support a Biblical literalist POV.
Moderator Clarification

Please take note of this tip on starting a debate topic:

7. Have a clear question for debate in the opening post.

If there is no question for debate, it will be moved to RR. If the thread title contains the question, reiterate the question in the post.

Tips on starting a debate topic

Please add a question for debate.


______________

Moderator clarifications do not count as a strike against any posters. They serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received and/or are given at the discretion of a moderator when he or she feels a clarification of the rules is required.

User avatar
Diogenes
Guru
Posts: 1304
Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 862 times
Been thanked: 1265 times

Re: Glaring Inconsistency in the Use of Science

Post #3

Post by Diogenes »

[Restated]
Isn't it intellectually dishonest for Christian apologists to only use scientific evidence and conclusions when they think the evidence agrees with some Biblical claim, while at the same time reject science and proclaim the value of 'divine revelation' when the scientific evidence refutes their claims?
___________________________________

Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves

— Confucius

User avatar
Jose Fly
Guru
Posts: 1462
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:30 pm
Location: Out west somewhere
Has thanked: 337 times
Been thanked: 906 times

Re: Glaring Inconsistency in the Use of Science

Post #4

Post by Jose Fly »

Diogenes wrote: Mon Apr 18, 2022 5:57 pm [Restated]
Isn't it intellectually dishonest for Christian apologists to only use scientific evidence and conclusions when they think the evidence agrees with some Biblical claim, while at the same time reject science and proclaim the value of 'divine revelation' when the scientific evidence refutes their claims?
Isn't that kind of a "Well duh" thing? Of course it's intellectually dishonest to cherry pick like that.

I'll be shocked if anyone shows up to disagree.
Being apathetic is great....or not. I don't really care.

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Re: Glaring Inconsistency in the Use of Science

Post #5

Post by nobspeople »

Diogenes wrote: Mon Apr 18, 2022 5:57 pm [Restated]
Isn't it intellectually dishonest for Christian apologists to only use scientific evidence and conclusions when they think the evidence agrees with some Biblical claim, while at the same time reject science and proclaim the value of 'divine revelation' when the scientific evidence refutes their claims?
There's a myriad of things dishonest christians do and get away with (at least they think they do). This shouldn't come as surprise to anyone, really:
"Science helped create the machine I'm using right now but no, all that portrays my chosen lifestyle agenda in a negative light isn't correct."
And so what? Do they care they're caught in hypocrisy? Nah, they just 'pray it away' and POOF they're fine (in their eyes).
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

Eloi
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1775
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 213 times
Contact:

Re: Glaring Inconsistency in the Use of Science

Post #6

Post by Eloi »

The phrase "the use of science" defines science as a tool. People can put whatever use they want to any tool. For a believer, the best use that can be given to any tool is to glorify the Creator of the material Universe and of our mind to observe it, analyze it and produce things from both.

Atheists try to use "science" to deny God... And yet science IS NOT ATHEIST, it is just a tool.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Glaring Inconsistency in the Use of Science

Post #7

Post by Tcg »

Eloi wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:06 am The phrase "the use of science" defines science as a tool. People can put whatever use they want to any tool. For a believer, the best use that can be given to any tool is to glorify the Creator of the material Universe and of our mind to observe it, analyze it and produce things from both.

Atheists try to use "science" to deny God... And yet science IS NOT ATHEIST, it is just a tool.
No, atheists don't deny God, we lack belief in god/gods.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

Eloi
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1775
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 213 times
Contact:

Re: Glaring Inconsistency in the Use of Science

Post #8

Post by Eloi »

Tcg wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:17 am
Eloi wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:06 am The phrase "the use of science" defines science as a tool. People can put whatever use they want to any tool. For a believer, the best use that can be given to any tool is to glorify the Creator of the material Universe and of our mind to observe it, analyze it and produce things from both.

Atheists try to use "science" to deny God... And yet science IS NOT ATHEIST, it is just a tool.
No, atheists don't deny God, we lack belief in god/gods.


Tcg
Thank you for saying how some of you want to express how you feel about it. Some people don't know how other people perceive them, and science cannot decide that.

Interestingly, and to readjust an earlier comment, atheist members of the scientific community have also committed many dishonest acts to deny God. Does anyone remember the famous Piltdown man?

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Glaring Inconsistency in the Use of Science

Post #9

Post by Tcg »

Eloi wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:23 am
Tcg wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:17 am
Eloi wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:06 am The phrase "the use of science" defines science as a tool. People can put whatever use they want to any tool. For a believer, the best use that can be given to any tool is to glorify the Creator of the material Universe and of our mind to observe it, analyze it and produce things from both.

Atheists try to use "science" to deny God... And yet science IS NOT ATHEIST, it is just a tool.
No, atheists don't deny God, we lack belief in god/gods.


Tcg
Thank you for saying how some of you want to express how you feel about it. Some people don't know how other people perceive them, and science cannot decide that.

Interestingly, and to readjust an earlier comment, atheist members of the scientific community have also committed many dishonest acts to deny God. Does anyone remember the famous Piltdown man?
Oh, my. Faking evidence of evolution is not a denial of God. A great many theists accept the fact of evolution. Besides that, the Piltdown man was exposed as a fake long ago. And guess what was used to do so... yep, science.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

Eloi
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1775
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 213 times
Contact:

Re: Glaring Inconsistency in the Use of Science

Post #10

Post by Eloi »

Tcg wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:32 am
Eloi wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:23 am
Tcg wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:17 am
Eloi wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:06 am The phrase "the use of science" defines science as a tool. People can put whatever use they want to any tool. For a believer, the best use that can be given to any tool is to glorify the Creator of the material Universe and of our mind to observe it, analyze it and produce things from both.

Atheists try to use "science" to deny God... And yet science IS NOT ATHEIST, it is just a tool.
No, atheists don't deny God, we lack belief in god/gods.


Tcg
Thank you for saying how some of you want to express how you feel about it. Some people don't know how other people perceive them, and science cannot decide that.

Interestingly, and to readjust an earlier comment, atheist members of the scientific community have also committed many dishonest acts to deny God. Does anyone remember the famous Piltdown man?
Oh, my. Faking evidence of evolution is not a denial of God. A great many theists accept the fact of evolution. Besides that, the Piltdown man was exposed as a fake long ago.


Tcg
True ... except for the fact that at that time the theory of evolution was the atheist's favorite weapon for denying God... like the knife in the hands of the murderer, not the butcher's.

Post Reply