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.

[Clownboat]

I understand science better than most here, if you need training wheels when debating me then get some.

I am embarressed on your behalf.

I stand by those remarks, they are truths.

Wow. Just wow. If I said these words, or the words above, would they come across as prideful and arrogent to you?

There is no "correctly" though, once again you err at a fundamental level.

Such a compeling argument you have made.

There is not and never has been any conflict between God and what God has created.

What god are you referring to and what did this god create? I'm starting to suspect that we are seeing the debilitating effects of taking Genesis literally right before our eyes here and now.

[Jose Fly]

I understand science better than most here, if you need training wheels when debating me then get some.

I am embarressed on your behalf.

Amazing to see such a boast from the guy who thinks "Answers in Genesis" (a self-described Christian apologetic ministry) is a scientific organization and didn't know that bacteria are a Domain.

I refer back to the thread I started: viewtopic.php?t=39688 and it's reference to a "dramatic lack of humility" among staunch denialists.

[Inquirer]

I understand science better than most here, if you need training wheels when debating me then get some.

I am embarressed on your behalf.

Amazing to see such a boast from the guy who thinks "Answers in Genesis" (a self-described Christian apologetic ministry) is a scientific organization and didn't know that bacteria are a Domain.

I refer back to the thread I started: viewtopic.php?t=39688 and it's reference to a "dramatic lack of humility" among staunch denialists.

Ha! funny, but as Wilde once said, there's only one thing worse than being talked about !

[Inquirer]

I understand science better than most here, if you need training wheels when debating me then get some.

I am embarressed on your behalf.

I stand by those remarks, they are truths.

Wow. Just wow. If I said these words, or the words above, would they come across as prideful and arrogent to you?

There is no "correctly" though, once again you err at a fundamental level.

Such a compeling argument you have made.

There is not and never has been any conflict between God and what God has created.

What god are you referring to and what did this god create? I'm starting to suspect that we are seeing the debilitating effects of taking Genesis literally right before our eyes here and now.

You, like several others here, complain an awful lot about what some people say, but sorry, tough.

If you contest something I said then state your case, don't berate me just because you don't like what I said.

Example, I stand by what I said here:

1. Questions always reflect one's worldview, one's existing beliefs about reality.
2. Research requires faith in one's abilities to interpret what they find, correctly.

I stand by it, I'm willing to defend it and argue my case, all you can do is whine and cry because you don't like what I said.

[Jose Fly]

I understand science better than most here, if you need training wheels when debating me then get some.

I am embarressed on your behalf.

Amazing to see such a boast from the guy who thinks "Answers in Genesis" (a self-described Christian apologetic ministry) is a scientific organization and didn't know that bacteria are a Domain.

I refer back to the thread I started: viewtopic.php?t=39688 and it's reference to a "dramatic lack of humility" among staunch denialists.

Ha! funny, but as Wilde once said, there's only one thing worse than being talked about !

Posting ridiculous boasts just to get reactions is trolling.

[Inquirer]

I understand science better than most here, if you need training wheels when debating me then get some.

I am embarressed on your behalf.

Amazing to see such a boast from the guy who thinks "Answers in Genesis" (a self-described Christian apologetic ministry) is a scientific organization and didn't know that bacteria are a Domain.

I refer back to the thread I started: viewtopic.php?t=39688 and it's reference to a "dramatic lack of humility" among staunch denialists.

Ha! funny, but as Wilde once said, there's only one thing worse than being talked about !

Posting ridiculous boasts just to get reactions is trolling.

Do you plan on getting back on topic at some point?

[Jose Fly]

I understand science better than most here, if you need training wheels when debating me then get some.

I am embarressed on your behalf.

Amazing to see such a boast from the guy who thinks "Answers in Genesis" (a self-described Christian apologetic ministry) is a scientific organization and didn't know that bacteria are a Domain.

I refer back to the thread I started: viewtopic.php?t=39688 and it's reference to a "dramatic lack of humility" among staunch denialists.

Ha! funny, but as Wilde once said, there's only one thing worse than being talked about !

Posting ridiculous boasts just to get reactions is trolling.

Do you plan on getting back on topic at some point?

Do you plan to keep trolling?

[Inquirer]

I understand science better than most here, if you need training wheels when debating me then get some.

I am embarressed on your behalf.

Amazing to see such a boast from the guy who thinks "Answers in Genesis" (a self-described Christian apologetic ministry) is a scientific organization and didn't know that bacteria are a Domain.

I refer back to the thread I started: viewtopic.php?t=39688 and it's reference to a "dramatic lack of humility" among staunch denialists.

Ha! funny, but as Wilde once said, there's only one thing worse than being talked about !

Posting ridiculous boasts just to get reactions is trolling.

Do you plan on getting back on topic at some point?

Do you plan to keep trolling?

Another fallacy, this time the loaded question fallacy.

[Jose Fly]

I understand science better than most here, if you need training wheels when debating me then get some.

I am embarressed on your behalf.

Amazing to see such a boast from the guy who thinks "Answers in Genesis" (a self-described Christian apologetic ministry) is a scientific organization and didn't know that bacteria are a Domain.

I refer back to the thread I started: viewtopic.php?t=39688 and it's reference to a "dramatic lack of humility" among staunch denialists.

Ha! funny, but as Wilde once said, there's only one thing worse than being talked about !

Posting ridiculous boasts just to get reactions is trolling.

Do you plan on getting back on topic at some point?

Do you plan to keep trolling?

Another fallacy, this time the loaded question fallacy.

LOL...I'm invoking Poe's Law.

[dad1]

Why wouldn't we assume it was the same when it is in fact the same every time we check?

No one checked before Babel.

How far does good history go back? Egypt? We have records of people and what life was like, how long they lived etc. Would that not be evidence nature was the same?

Yes? All the more reason to think past nature on earth was the same as it is now.

The records say men lived many centuries. All the more reason to question a same state past. Records in Sumer and Scripture.

The dubious appeal to the Bible aside, that's the whole point of extrapolation, to fill in the gaps where we lack direct access.

You can't the bible is the only record man has from before the flood, period. Ignore it and you have nothing.

Yes? So use extrapolate and conclude that nature and forces were the same?

You cannot do that since there are no records.

Okay, why is the cut off point at the edge of the universe and not Mars?

It isn't. I use the limits of where man has been or not, limits based on knowledge.

The rovers and probes we sent there, could be operating under different laws of physics for all you really know, the data it sends back could have just been distorted as it travel back to us in such a way that it looks like it's the same.

Man has been to Mars via probes. That is not in question. The furthest probe is less than one light day away! That is the limit so far, approx the solar system and area. You may make claims about less than one light day. Not about millions of light years away! (regarding what space and time there are like)

Again, so what, when we can extrapolate? You keep point it out there are things that we don't have direct access to, as if it's some shocking revelation, I really don't get why you have such a big problem with extrapolation.

It must be based on knowledge. No one was ever there to record life before Babel. So any guess you make as to what nature was like then is not based on fact or knowledge at all.

You asked for empirical evidence, it's not my fault the request can be fulfilled trivially with a mere drop of a pen.

That does not cover the distant universe or the nature on earth long before records existed.