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.
The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Moderator: Moderators
- Diogenes
- Guru
- Posts: 1307
- Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
- Location: Washington
- Has thanked: 863 times
- Been thanked: 1266 times
The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #1___________________________________
“Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves”
— Confucius
“Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves”
— Confucius
-
- Savant
- Posts: 9855
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
- Location: Planet Earth
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 266 times
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #461Incorrect. it is evidence in at least one way: the scientific way.
You were told exactly why: Toy cars and whatnots are relating to what time is like in the far universe, because they confirm the assumption/beliefs of uniformitarianism, upon which our model of the universe is built. All you have ever offered in this thread is denial. I get that you don't care about science, but that doesn't mean much in the context of this forum.You have been shown to have nothing even relating to what time is like in the far universe and have instead offered truly foolish toys and etc as evidence. No idea why you think you can pull a Buzz Lightyear on us here.
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #462Not in any way is that remotely related to a third cousin of the truth. There IS NO evidence about what time is like in the far universe. Only belief. You thought pure belief was the 'scientific way'?
I'll let that comment stand for lurkers to read...and weep in laughter.You were told exactly why: Toy cars and whatnots are relating to what time is like in the far universe, because they confirm the assumption/beliefs of uniformitarianism,
-
- Savant
- Posts: 9855
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
- Location: Planet Earth
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 266 times
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #463Your "truth," maybe. But that's not a very interesting topic for debate, I don't care about your religious beliefs. Suffice to say, regardless of what you think is and isn't true, what I said is 100% scientific.
Not just any old beliefs of course, but for the beliefs in question it is indeed the scientific way.There IS NO evidence about what time is like in the far universe. Only belief. You thought pure belief was the 'scientific way'?
You do that. I stand by my comment and don't care if creationists laugh. That great thing about science is that it works whether people laugh at it or not.I'll let that comment stand for lurkers to read...and weep in laughter.
- The Barbarian
- Sage
- Posts: 876
- Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:40 pm
- Has thanked: 204 times
- Been thanked: 586 times
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #464(Claim that big bang is an atheistic theory)
=
You have it backwards. LeMaitre was a Catholic priest.
dad writes:
The nonbeliever was Fred Hoyle, who attacked the theory. So believers accepted it and an athiest did not.
If you believed God and His word (or even read it) you might have realized that the text itself says that it's not a literal account.. You never even made it to first base.
Why am I not surprised that you are angry at Christians?
=
You have it backwards. LeMaitre was a Catholic priest.
dad writes:
I'm just pointing out that you object to the Christian understanding of it./ So does that mean we should take his opinion on whether to get married? Or how God created the universe?
The nonbeliever was Fred Hoyle, who attacked the theory. So believers accepted it and an athiest did not.
At least you're consistent.So what?
Jesus said the world would hate us. Not a problem.Catholics accepted a lot of things. Not something I am interested in or care about.
If you believed God and His word (or even read it) you might have realized that the text itself says that it's not a literal account.. You never even made it to first base.
Why am I not surprised that you are angry at Christians?
You're wrong about that, too. Many YE creationists are valid Christians who are merely in error about some things like the nature of Genesis.Don't conflate christians with religious dreamers who invented things that are opposed to Scripture and for which there is no evidence.
Last edited by The Barbarian on Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #465No, the truth that the literal toys you offered as 'evidence' of the nature of time in the distant universe is a bad joke. WE had your truth offering, and sorry, I will stick with God's thanks.
Except the scientific way has zero to say about the nature of time itself in the far universe. Having a little time change effect IN the fishbowl has nothing to do with the far universe.Not just any old beliefs of course, but for the beliefs in question it is indeed the scientific way.
-
- Savant
- Posts: 9855
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
- Location: Planet Earth
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 266 times
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #466That's your prerogative, freedom of religion and all that.
We heard you the first time round. That's your religious view, it's acceptable as a religious view. Just don't get it mixed up with science. Do you have anything new to add?Except the scientific way has zero to say about the nature of time itself in the far universe. Having a little time change effect IN the fishbowl has nothing to do with the far universe.
- DrNoGods
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2716
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Has thanked: 593 times
- Been thanked: 1642 times
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #467[Replying to dad1 in post #465]
https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/24/world/wa ... index.html
The light emitted by the atoms and molecules from an exoplanet 700 light years away have the idential line patterns as the same atoms and molecules emitting right here on Earth. If these emiisions (photons) somehow changed their wavelengths magically when they entered the "fishbowl" this would not be the case.
Observations like this destroy your ridiculously silly idea that the emitted light is somehow "changed" close to Earth (in ways that you've yet to even attempt to explain), and show that the processes of light emission and absorption occur exactly the same way at this exoplanet as they do here. This means light has the same characteristics, travels at the same speed, interacts with the electric dipoles of atoms and molecules, in the same time frames, etc. as it does here. Light, time, atoms and molecules, etc. have the same characteristics "there" as they do here, and these kinds of spectroscopic observations prove it. Face it, you have no counter arguments or evidence to dispute this ... just continued hand-waving.
Here's yet another example of how spectroscopy provides a wealth of information on what processes, including time, are like far from Earth:Except the scientific way has zero to say about the nature of time itself in the far universe. Having a little time change effect IN the fishbowl has nothing to do with the far universe.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/24/world/wa ... index.html
The light emitted by the atoms and molecules from an exoplanet 700 light years away have the idential line patterns as the same atoms and molecules emitting right here on Earth. If these emiisions (photons) somehow changed their wavelengths magically when they entered the "fishbowl" this would not be the case.
Observations like this destroy your ridiculously silly idea that the emitted light is somehow "changed" close to Earth (in ways that you've yet to even attempt to explain), and show that the processes of light emission and absorption occur exactly the same way at this exoplanet as they do here. This means light has the same characteristics, travels at the same speed, interacts with the electric dipoles of atoms and molecules, in the same time frames, etc. as it does here. Light, time, atoms and molecules, etc. have the same characteristics "there" as they do here, and these kinds of spectroscopic observations prove it. Face it, you have no counter arguments or evidence to dispute this ... just continued hand-waving.
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #468This is an area of the forum where you must have more than beliefs for your claims. You have demonstrated that you don't. WE do not need to hear you natter on about other beliefs.Bust Nak wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:45 amThat's your prerogative, freedom of religion and all that.
We heard you the first time round. That's your religious view, it's acceptable as a religious view. Just don't get it mixed up with science. Do you have anything new to add?Except the scientific way has zero to say about the nature of time itself in the far universe. Having a little time change effect IN the fishbowl has nothing to do with the far universe.
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #469That example has ZERO to do with time in the universe. That example uses beliefs to place something 700 light years away. Man has not even been one light day away. Neither is the light you see coming in here further than that distance!! Trying to pretend that this is related to the nature and existence of time itself in the far universe is ludicrous. Yes, atoms here exist a certain way. You see all things here. Connect the dots.DrNoGods wrote: ↑Thu Nov 24, 2022 10:14 am
Here's yet another example of how spectroscopy provides a wealth of information on what processes, including time, are like far from Earth:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/24/world/wa ... index.html
The light emitted by the atoms and molecules from an exoplanet 700 light years away have the idential line patterns as the same atoms and molecules emitting right here on Earth. If these emiisions (photons) somehow changed their wavelengths magically when they entered the "fishbowl" this would not be the case.
Since the light IS HERE what else would we expect? You are trying to tack on the belief that time is the same all the way to the speck out there (that you thought was a planet), By using the belief time is the same, you GET the 700 light year number. You cannot turn around and claim that BECAUSE the speck is 700 light years away...yada yada yada! Add to that the fact that you only see light after it arrives here, and your example is so busted it is comical.This means light has the same characteristics, travels at the same speed, interacts with the electric dipoles of atoms and molecules, in the same time frames, etc. as it does here.
Light, time, atoms and molecules, etc. have the same characteristics "there" as they do here,
By looking at light here, we know zero about time out there. You also cannot use untold years of time out in the unknown universe as some distance measure to the stars. Get over it.
- DrNoGods
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2716
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Has thanked: 593 times
- Been thanked: 1642 times
Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally
Post #470[Replying to dad1 in post #469]
How far man or a physical probe has been from Earth is irrelevant as to how the distances to objects are determined. Stike 2.
It does, you just can't understand why because you know nothing about spectroscopy and related subjects. Strike 1.That example has ZERO to do with time in the universe.
.That example uses beliefs to place something 700 light years away. Man has not even been one light day away
How far man or a physical probe has been from Earth is irrelevant as to how the distances to objects are determined. Stike 2.
The atoms emitting the light are not here, they are at the distance object. Another key point that you can't seem to grasp. The atoms emitting the light at the distance object are still at the distant object (or were 700 years ago). The very fact that the multiple spectral lines from multiple atoms and molecules are in exactly the same pattern (vs. wavelength) in both places is what tells us a great deal about the environment (and time) at the distant object. Strike 3.Yes, atoms here exist a certain way. You see all things here. Connect the dots.
You've already struck out, but this makes you 0 for 4. Got any actual rebuttals, or can you only repeat the same things over and over again that have no substance or scientific support? If you only want to preach your version of a religion, or bash science without any valid rebuttals to what people have presented, there are other forum sections for that.By looking at light here, we know zero about time out there.
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain