Why is naturalism considered scientific and creationism is not ?

[Hollie]

For the same reason Voodoo isn't equated with auto mechanics , I guess. Ever sacrifice a chicken to fix your transmission? No? Me either. I don't think it will work anymore than praying to JESUS, knock on wood! YOU NEVER KNOW...but until otherwise, facts and science will do just fine. Facts are a wonderful thing. Superstition, not so well.

Since nature gives the appearance of design who or what is the designer ? Dawkins made the comment about appearing to have been designed.

Since nature does not give any such appearance of supernatural design, we can presume your subjective opinions derive from your extremist beliefs.

 

[Youwerecreated]

For the same reason Voodoo isn't equated with auto mechanics , I guess. Ever sacrifice a chicken to fix your transmission? No? Me either. I don't think it will work anymore than praying to JESUS, knock on wood! YOU NEVER KNOW...but until otherwise, facts and science will do just fine. Facts are a wonderful thing. Superstition, not so well.

Since nature gives the appearance of design who or what is the designer ? Dawkins made the comment about appearing to have been designed.

Since nature does not give any such appearance of supernatural design, we can presume your subjective opinions derive from your extremist beliefs.

An Extreme belief would be both animate and inanimate objects were developed from a natural unguided processes. An Extreme belief would be to believe that non living matter could produce life through unguided natural processes. All the order observed in the universe and on this planet it is an Extreme view to believe it just simply happened through natural unguided processes.

You have such Ideological views of reality.

 

[daws101]

The earth is a sphere and that is what the bible declares.

bullshit !

There is not one passage in the Bible indicating that the earth is a sphere. Isaiah 40:22 refers to it as a circle. The Hebrew word translated as "circle" there is chuwg, which means "circle" not "sphere." There are many passages in the Bible that indicate the earth is flat. Dan 4:10-11 is clear about it, and Dan 2:28 is clear that the visions of Nebuchadnezzar are from God. If God says it, it must be so.

The physical aspect of a circle is a disk, so the biblical earth is disk-shaped. Since the biblical earth is flat, it has an underside and under the earth is the abyss. That is what is being referred to in Job 26:7 when it says that the earth hangeth over nothing.

The Bible also says that the earth is set upon pillars and is immovable, so it can hardly be orbiting the sun.

amazing how you can intentionally misquote the thing you base you pov on..

Alter2ego does a good job explaining this to Huggy.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/7483522-post37.html

explaing what?
all it explains is Alter2ego suffers the same mental deficiency you do I does nothing to change what the bible says ..



WHAT? YOU REALLY THINK A SPHERE IS A CIRCLE?! YOU REALLY THINK THAT?
December 22, 2008 · by Firefly · in Religion
What might get one to adamantly maintain a sphere is a circle?

This all stems from a conversation I had with someone who believes the Bible is scientifically accurate and precise. As a budding scientist and very new to skepticism, this type of claim intrigues and irritates me, to say the least. The scripture in discussion here is Isaiah 40:22, which refers to ”the circle of the earth”. Most Christians of whatever denomination point to this scripture as proof Yahveh (the god of the Hebrews in the Bible) teachers that the Earth was spherical and not flat as most believed around those times. Further inquiry however, paints a very different picture. This argument is entirely without merit and here is why.


Firstly, with a little effort and research one can positively show that around the time Isaiah was written (8th Century BC), it was not an uncommon belief among the educated that the Earth had to be a sphere. For those interested start with Pythagoras an ancient Greek mathematician most noted for the Pythagorean theorem. Even if the Bible writer meant sphere, divine inspiration (a clear “God of the gaps” argument) is not needed to explain how he knew this.

Secondly, neither that verse nor any other verse in the Bible indicates that the Earth is a sphere. The Hebrew word for circle is chuwg and has a primary meaning of circle (no lexicons I have read give the primary or secondary meaning as sphere). The point was argued to me that there was no ancient Hebrew word for sphere, so chuwg (circle) was used in its place. This is total baloney and here is why. There are in fact numerous passages in the bible where a sphere is described, in Isaiah 22:18 it describes Yahveh ”will turn and toss you like a ball…” A ball is ALWAYS without exception a sphere. The Hebrew word translated as ball by the way, is duwr (I am studying ancient Hebrew). Furthermore, in no mathematical or geometrical sense is a circle ever a sphere, and would not an omniscient and omnipotent being know this? Most Bibles translate that bit of scripture correctly as circle and not sphere.

Thirdly, when you trace back the lexicology of the word chuwg, you see that it is derived from a larger Hebrew word which means ‘a circle as drawn from a compass’. As a former Christian (and ashamed to admit, fundamentalist) I am aware that this scripture is not there to attest to the shape of the Earth. If you read on it is there to explain how God spread his people over all the lands like grasshoppers. So any Christian using this scripture to attest to the Bible’s scientific accuracy is taking that scripture WAY out of context!

Finally, just think for one second logically about what may have gone on when Isaiah was written. What the writer of Isaiah would have seen when he looked at the Moon, was not a sphere but a circle! What did he see if he was game enough to take a glimpse at the Sun, that’s right a circle. Is it not more probably that the writer of Isaiah was simply making an inference from observations he had made previously about the universe and the Earth specifically? Seems logical to me, is it?

It was after I had made all the previous points that this one particular Christian pointed out that a circle and sphere are the same, wow, I know, but it’s so sadly true. He then tried to elaborate, ”What is a box?”, my reply ”It’s a cube, it is three dimensional”, he said, ”It’s a square” and I nearly fell over. I know this is hard to believe but it is oh so true, I have never blogged before this being my first time. I have commented others blogs occasionally, but I was so irritated at this reasoning that I just had to write down my thoughts and decided I should join the other bloggers and post them. I did try to explain further that a cube can be made of 6 squares but it is not a square. At that point I realized I was getting nowhere and decided to end the conversation. These people were not open to evidence and reason and simply dismissed others with no proof of their own as they often remarked ”You have to have faith”.

http://youngausskeptics.com/2008/12...k-a-sphere-is-a-circle-you-really-think-that/

 

[daws101]

For the same reason Voodoo isn't equated with auto mechanics , I guess. Ever sacrifice a chicken to fix your transmission? No? Me either. I don't think it will work anymore than praying to JESUS, knock on wood! YOU NEVER KNOW...but until otherwise, facts and science will do just fine. Facts are a wonderful thing. Superstition, not so well.

Since nature gives the appearance of design who or what is the designer ? Dawkins made the comment about appearing to have been designed.

nice dodge!
the operative word is " appearance" not design....

 

[Youwerecreated]

For the same reason Voodoo isn't equated with auto mechanics , I guess. Ever sacrifice a chicken to fix your transmission? No? Me either. I don't think it will work anymore than praying to JESUS, knock on wood! YOU NEVER KNOW...but until otherwise, facts and science will do just fine. Facts are a wonderful thing. Superstition, not so well.

Since nature gives the appearance of design who or what is the designer ? Dawkins made the comment about appearing to have been designed.

Since nature does not give any such appearance of supernatural design, we can presume your subjective opinions derive from your extremist beliefs.

Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)

Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100 billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be entirely unique." (25)

There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His MindAntony Flew (Professor of Philosophy, former atheist, author, and debater) "It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design." (26)

Quotes from Scientists Regarding Design of the Universe

 

[Youwerecreated]

For the same reason Voodoo isn't equated with auto mechanics , I guess. Ever sacrifice a chicken to fix your transmission? No? Me either. I don't think it will work anymore than praying to JESUS, knock on wood! YOU NEVER KNOW...but until otherwise, facts and science will do just fine. Facts are a wonderful thing. Superstition, not so well.

Since nature gives the appearance of design who or what is the designer ? Dawkins made the comment about appearing to have been designed.

nice dodge!
the operative word is " appearance" not design....

How can you conclude it wasn't designed for something that gives the appearance of design without evidence backing that view ?

 

[daws101]

Since nature gives the appearance of design who or what is the designer ? Dawkins made the comment about appearing to have been designed.

Since nature does not give any such appearance of supernatural design, we can presume your subjective opinions derive from your extremist beliefs.

An Extreme belief would be both animate and inanimate objects were developed from a natural unguided processes. An Extreme belief would be to believe that non living matter could produce life through unguided natural processes. All the order observed in the universe and on this planet it is an Extreme view to believe it just simply happened through natural unguided processes.

You have such Ideological views of reality.

OK ,slapdick, how is your pov any less Ideological than the evidence based model all rational people use?
don't use the bible as it's all Ideological...

 

[Youwerecreated]

bullshit !

There is not one passage in the Bible indicating that the earth is a sphere. Isaiah 40:22 refers to it as a circle. The Hebrew word translated as "circle" there is chuwg, which means "circle" not "sphere." There are many passages in the Bible that indicate the earth is flat. Dan 4:10-11 is clear about it, and Dan 2:28 is clear that the visions of Nebuchadnezzar are from God. If God says it, it must be so.

The physical aspect of a circle is a disk, so the biblical earth is disk-shaped. Since the biblical earth is flat, it has an underside and under the earth is the abyss. That is what is being referred to in Job 26:7 when it says that the earth hangeth over nothing.

The Bible also says that the earth is set upon pillars and is immovable, so it can hardly be orbiting the sun.

amazing how you can intentionally misquote the thing you base you pov on..

Alter2ego does a good job explaining this to Huggy.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/7483522-post37.html

explaing what?
all it explains is Alter2ego suffers the same mental deficiency you do I does nothing to change what the bible says ..



WHAT? YOU REALLY THINK A SPHERE IS A CIRCLE?! YOU REALLY THINK THAT?
December 22, 2008 · by Firefly · in Religion
What might get one to adamantly maintain a sphere is a circle?

This all stems from a conversation I had with someone who believes the Bible is scientifically accurate and precise. As a budding scientist and very new to skepticism, this type of claim intrigues and irritates me, to say the least. The scripture in discussion here is Isaiah 40:22, which refers to ”the circle of the earth”. Most Christians of whatever denomination point to this scripture as proof Yahveh (the god of the Hebrews in the Bible) teachers that the Earth was spherical and not flat as most believed around those times. Further inquiry however, paints a very different picture. This argument is entirely without merit and here is why.


Firstly, with a little effort and research one can positively show that around the time Isaiah was written (8th Century BC), it was not an uncommon belief among the educated that the Earth had to be a sphere. For those interested start with Pythagoras an ancient Greek mathematician most noted for the Pythagorean theorem. Even if the Bible writer meant sphere, divine inspiration (a clear “God of the gaps” argument) is not needed to explain how he knew this.

Secondly, neither that verse nor any other verse in the Bible indicates that the Earth is a sphere. The Hebrew word for circle is chuwg and has a primary meaning of circle (no lexicons I have read give the primary or secondary meaning as sphere). The point was argued to me that there was no ancient Hebrew word for sphere, so chuwg (circle) was used in its place. This is total baloney and here is why. There are in fact numerous passages in the bible where a sphere is described, in Isaiah 22:18 it describes Yahveh ”will turn and toss you like a ball…” A ball is ALWAYS without exception a sphere. The Hebrew word translated as ball by the way, is duwr (I am studying ancient Hebrew). Furthermore, in no mathematical or geometrical sense is a circle ever a sphere, and would not an omniscient and omnipotent being know this? Most Bibles translate that bit of scripture correctly as circle and not sphere.

Thirdly, when you trace back the lexicology of the word chuwg, you see that it is derived from a larger Hebrew word which means ‘a circle as drawn from a compass’. As a former Christian (and ashamed to admit, fundamentalist) I am aware that this scripture is not there to attest to the shape of the Earth. If you read on it is there to explain how God spread his people over all the lands like grasshoppers. So any Christian using this scripture to attest to the Bible’s scientific accuracy is taking that scripture WAY out of context!

Finally, just think for one second logically about what may have gone on when Isaiah was written. What the writer of Isaiah would have seen when he looked at the Moon, was not a sphere but a circle! What did he see if he was game enough to take a glimpse at the Sun, that’s right a circle. Is it not more probably that the writer of Isaiah was simply making an inference from observations he had made previously about the universe and the Earth specifically? Seems logical to me, is it?

It was after I had made all the previous points that this one particular Christian pointed out that a circle and sphere are the same, wow, I know, but it’s so sadly true. He then tried to elaborate, ”What is a box?”, my reply ”It’s a cube, it is three dimensional”, he said, ”It’s a square” and I nearly fell over. I know this is hard to believe but it is oh so true, I have never blogged before this being my first time. I have commented others blogs occasionally, but I was so irritated at this reasoning that I just had to write down my thoughts and decided I should join the other bloggers and post them. I did try to explain further that a cube can be made of 6 squares but it is not a square. At that point I realized I was getting nowhere and decided to end the conversation. These people were not open to evidence and reason and simply dismissed others with no proof of their own as they often remarked ”You have to have faith”.

What? You really think a sphere is a circle?! You really think that? | Young Australian Skeptics

You don't ?

cir·cle
/ˈsərkəl/
Noun
A round plane figure whose boundary (the circumference) consists of points equidistant from a fixed center.
Verb
Move all the way around (someone or something), esp. more than once: "the two dogs circle each other"; "we circled around the island".
Synonyms
noun. ring - round - cycle - sphere
verb. revolve - surround - encircle - wheel - compass

https://www.google.com/search?q=def...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

 

[daws101]

Since nature gives the appearance of design who or what is the designer ? Dawkins made the comment about appearing to have been designed.

Since nature does not give any such appearance of supernatural design, we can presume your subjective opinions derive from your extremist beliefs.

Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)

Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100 billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be entirely unique." (25)

There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His MindAntony Flew (Professor of Philosophy, former atheist, author, and debater) "It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design." (26)

Quotes from Scientists Regarding Design of the Universe

non credible source...
false premise..

 

[daws101]

Since nature gives the appearance of design who or what is the designer ? Dawkins made the comment about appearing to have been designed.

nice dodge!
the operative word is " appearance" not design....

How can you conclude it wasn't designed for something that gives the appearance of design without evidence backing that view ?

that view has been explained to, you countless times...why do you need to rehash it.
you were wrong then.....and nothings changed.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Since nature does not give any such appearance of supernatural design, we can presume your subjective opinions derive from your extremist beliefs.

Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)

Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100 billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be entirely unique." (25)

There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His MindAntony Flew (Professor of Philosophy, former atheist, author, and debater) "It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design." (26)

Quotes from Scientists Regarding Design of the Universe

non credible source...
false premise..

Just as credible as your many sources. Look at the quotes plus you have dawkins agreeing as well. Sorry you guys do not know how to pick your battles.

 

[Youwerecreated]

nice dodge!
the operative word is " appearance" not design....

How can you conclude it wasn't designed for something that gives the appearance of design without evidence backing that view ?

that view has been explained to, you countless times...why do you need to rehash it.
you were wrong then.....and nothings changed.

You can't say wow that looks as though it was designed but it wasn't with no evidence to support it.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Since nature does not give any such appearance of supernatural design, we can presume your subjective opinions derive from your extremist beliefs.

An Extreme belief would be both animate and inanimate objects were developed from a natural unguided processes. An Extreme belief would be to believe that non living matter could produce life through unguided natural processes. All the order observed in the universe and on this planet it is an Extreme view to believe it just simply happened through natural unguided processes.

You have such Ideological views of reality.

OK ,slapdick, how is your pov any less Ideological than the evidence based model all rational people use?
don't use the bible as it's all Ideological...

My views are based on rationale, sorry chap.

 

[daws101]

Alter2ego does a good job explaining this to Huggy.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/7483522-post37.html

explaing what?
all it explains is Alter2ego suffers the same mental deficiency you do I does nothing to change what the bible says ..



WHAT? YOU REALLY THINK A SPHERE IS A CIRCLE?! YOU REALLY THINK THAT?
December 22, 2008 · by Firefly · in Religion
What might get one to adamantly maintain a sphere is a circle?

This all stems from a conversation I had with someone who believes the Bible is scientifically accurate and precise. As a budding scientist and very new to skepticism, this type of claim intrigues and irritates me, to say the least. The scripture in discussion here is Isaiah 40:22, which refers to ”the circle of the earth”. Most Christians of whatever denomination point to this scripture as proof Yahveh (the god of the Hebrews in the Bible) teachers that the Earth was spherical and not flat as most believed around those times. Further inquiry however, paints a very different picture. This argument is entirely without merit and here is why.


Firstly, with a little effort and research one can positively show that around the time Isaiah was written (8th Century BC), it was not an uncommon belief among the educated that the Earth had to be a sphere. For those interested start with Pythagoras an ancient Greek mathematician most noted for the Pythagorean theorem. Even if the Bible writer meant sphere, divine inspiration (a clear “God of the gaps” argument) is not needed to explain how he knew this.

Secondly, neither that verse nor any other verse in the Bible indicates that the Earth is a sphere. The Hebrew word for circle is chuwg and has a primary meaning of circle (no lexicons I have read give the primary or secondary meaning as sphere). The point was argued to me that there was no ancient Hebrew word for sphere, so chuwg (circle) was used in its place. This is total baloney and here is why. There are in fact numerous passages in the bible where a sphere is described, in Isaiah 22:18 it describes Yahveh ”will turn and toss you like a ball…” A ball is ALWAYS without exception a sphere. The Hebrew word translated as ball by the way, is duwr (I am studying ancient Hebrew). Furthermore, in no mathematical or geometrical sense is a circle ever a sphere, and would not an omniscient and omnipotent being know this? Most Bibles translate that bit of scripture correctly as circle and not sphere.

Thirdly, when you trace back the lexicology of the word chuwg, you see that it is derived from a larger Hebrew word which means ‘a circle as drawn from a compass’. As a former Christian (and ashamed to admit, fundamentalist) I am aware that this scripture is not there to attest to the shape of the Earth. If you read on it is there to explain how God spread his people over all the lands like grasshoppers. So any Christian using this scripture to attest to the Bible’s scientific accuracy is taking that scripture WAY out of context!

Finally, just think for one second logically about what may have gone on when Isaiah was written. What the writer of Isaiah would have seen when he looked at the Moon, was not a sphere but a circle! What did he see if he was game enough to take a glimpse at the Sun, that’s right a circle. Is it not more probably that the writer of Isaiah was simply making an inference from observations he had made previously about the universe and the Earth specifically? Seems logical to me, is it?

It was after I had made all the previous points that this one particular Christian pointed out that a circle and sphere are the same, wow, I know, but it’s so sadly true. He then tried to elaborate, ”What is a box?”, my reply ”It’s a cube, it is three dimensional”, he said, ”It’s a square” and I nearly fell over. I know this is hard to believe but it is oh so true, I have never blogged before this being my first time. I have commented others blogs occasionally, but I was so irritated at this reasoning that I just had to write down my thoughts and decided I should join the other bloggers and post them. I did try to explain further that a cube can be made of 6 squares but it is not a square. At that point I realized I was getting nowhere and decided to end the conversation. These people were not open to evidence and reason and simply dismissed others with no proof of their own as they often remarked ”You have to have faith”.

What? You really think a sphere is a circle?! You really think that? | Young Australian Skeptics

You don't ?

cir·cle
/ˈsərkəl/
Noun
A round plane figure whose boundary (the circumference) consists of points equidistant from a fixed center.
Verb
Move all the way around (someone or something), esp. more than once:
Synonyms
noun. ring - round - cycle - sphere
verb. revolve - surround - encircle - wheel - compass

https://www.google.com/search?q=def...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

lol!

"the two dogs circle each other"; "we circled around the island". true ..but they did not sphere...

syn·o·nym [ sínnə nìm ]
word meaning same as another: a word that means the same, or almost the same, as another word in the same language, either in all of its uses or in a specific context.
alternative name: a word or expression that is used as another name for something in some styles of speaking or writing or to emphasize a specific aspect or association.
rejected duplicate taxonomic name: a duplicate taxonomic name that has been rejected or replaced

 

[daws101]

Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)

Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100 billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be entirely unique." (25)

There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His MindAntony Flew (Professor of Philosophy, former atheist, author, and debater) "It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design." (26)

Quotes from Scientists Regarding Design of the Universe

non credible source...
false premise..

Just as credible as your many sources. Look at the quotes plus you have dawkins agreeing as well. Sorry you guys do not know how to pick your battles.

not even close to being credible...if you actually understood what a false premise is you'd understand that.

 

[Hollie]

Since nature gives the appearance of design who or what is the designer ? Dawkins made the comment about appearing to have been designed.

Since nature does not give any such appearance of supernatural design, we can presume your subjective opinions derive from your extremist beliefs.

An Extreme belief would be both animate and inanimate objects were developed from a natural unguided processes. An Extreme belief would be to believe that non living matter could produce life through unguided natural processes. All the order observed in the universe and on this planet it is an Extreme view to believe it just simply happened through natural unguided processes.

You have such Ideological views of reality.

There’s nothing at all “extremist” about understanding the natural world. There was quite a remarkable story not so long ago regarding the apparent discovery of an important protein found hitching a ride on a comet.

Comet dust harbors life's building blocks | Atom & Cosmos | Science News

A building block of proteins found in samples from an icy comet’s halo suggests that the ingredients of life could have hitched a ride to early Earth, researchers reported August 16 at a meeting of the American Chemical Society.

“The early Earth was bombarded with comets and meteorites,” says Jamie Elsila of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., who led the new analysis. “This is one more clue to what ingredients could have been present on the early Earth and how they could have gotten there.”

What religious extremists are not able to admit is that the methods of science have a pattern of shedding light into the dark recesses of the fundamentalist agenda that promotes fear and superstition.

Additionally, this slogan you have stolen from Christian extremist websites, “order observed in the universe”, is nonsense. Here again, this slogan, like so many others, has been shown to be a farce. Yet you continually cut and paste these silly slogans because of your inability to offer any coherent explanation for the natural world.

As we see with regularity, explaining to you some fairly simple concepts leaves you befuddled. You just repeat the same silly slogans as if your ability to lean has been severely stunted. We live in a profoundly violent and chaotic universe, but are spared direct experience with most of that chaos because it occurs on cosmic and geologic time scales, while we exist on a human time scale. This (luckily for us) means most of us live our lifetimes in the brief moments of calm between supernovae, asteroid impact, and cometary bombardment.

Remember Schumaker-Levy? How about that little dalliance that occurred on this planet 65 million years ago? These things have been pointed out to you repeatedly yet you are unable to address these issues. You do nothing more than repeat the same tired and false slogans you cut and paste from Harun Yahya.

And one of the most important questions challenging your extremist ideology is how you can remain so decidedly certain in your ignorance but call it ‘religious belief”. Yet you ignore all of this in your daily and stupendously stupid crusade against knowledge and rationality.

Other than your personal crusade to promote fear and ignorance, we still have nothing from you regarding how it is that the gods breathed life into clay thus making all of mankind.

 

[Youwerecreated]

explaing what?
all it explains is Alter2ego suffers the same mental deficiency you do I does nothing to change what the bible says ..



WHAT? YOU REALLY THINK A SPHERE IS A CIRCLE?! YOU REALLY THINK THAT?
December 22, 2008 · by Firefly · in Religion
What might get one to adamantly maintain a sphere is a circle?

This all stems from a conversation I had with someone who believes the Bible is scientifically accurate and precise. As a budding scientist and very new to skepticism, this type of claim intrigues and irritates me, to say the least. The scripture in discussion here is Isaiah 40:22, which refers to ”the circle of the earth”. Most Christians of whatever denomination point to this scripture as proof Yahveh (the god of the Hebrews in the Bible) teachers that the Earth was spherical and not flat as most believed around those times. Further inquiry however, paints a very different picture. This argument is entirely without merit and here is why.


Firstly, with a little effort and research one can positively show that around the time Isaiah was written (8th Century BC), it was not an uncommon belief among the educated that the Earth had to be a sphere. For those interested start with Pythagoras an ancient Greek mathematician most noted for the Pythagorean theorem. Even if the Bible writer meant sphere, divine inspiration (a clear “God of the gaps” argument) is not needed to explain how he knew this.

Secondly, neither that verse nor any other verse in the Bible indicates that the Earth is a sphere. The Hebrew word for circle is chuwg and has a primary meaning of circle (no lexicons I have read give the primary or secondary meaning as sphere). The point was argued to me that there was no ancient Hebrew word for sphere, so chuwg (circle) was used in its place. This is total baloney and here is why. There are in fact numerous passages in the bible where a sphere is described, in Isaiah 22:18 it describes Yahveh ”will turn and toss you like a ball…” A ball is ALWAYS without exception a sphere. The Hebrew word translated as ball by the way, is duwr (I am studying ancient Hebrew). Furthermore, in no mathematical or geometrical sense is a circle ever a sphere, and would not an omniscient and omnipotent being know this? Most Bibles translate that bit of scripture correctly as circle and not sphere.

Thirdly, when you trace back the lexicology of the word chuwg, you see that it is derived from a larger Hebrew word which means ‘a circle as drawn from a compass’. As a former Christian (and ashamed to admit, fundamentalist) I am aware that this scripture is not there to attest to the shape of the Earth. If you read on it is there to explain how God spread his people over all the lands like grasshoppers. So any Christian using this scripture to attest to the Bible’s scientific accuracy is taking that scripture WAY out of context!

Finally, just think for one second logically about what may have gone on when Isaiah was written. What the writer of Isaiah would have seen when he looked at the Moon, was not a sphere but a circle! What did he see if he was game enough to take a glimpse at the Sun, that’s right a circle. Is it not more probably that the writer of Isaiah was simply making an inference from observations he had made previously about the universe and the Earth specifically? Seems logical to me, is it?

It was after I had made all the previous points that this one particular Christian pointed out that a circle and sphere are the same, wow, I know, but it’s so sadly true. He then tried to elaborate, ”What is a box?”, my reply ”It’s a cube, it is three dimensional”, he said, ”It’s a square” and I nearly fell over. I know this is hard to believe but it is oh so true, I have never blogged before this being my first time. I have commented others blogs occasionally, but I was so irritated at this reasoning that I just had to write down my thoughts and decided I should join the other bloggers and post them. I did try to explain further that a cube can be made of 6 squares but it is not a square. At that point I realized I was getting nowhere and decided to end the conversation. These people were not open to evidence and reason and simply dismissed others with no proof of their own as they often remarked ”You have to have faith”.

What? You really think a sphere is a circle?! You really think that? | Young Australian Skeptics

You don't ?

cir·cle
/ˈsərkəl/
Noun
A round plane figure whose boundary (the circumference) consists of points equidistant from a fixed center.
Verb
Move all the way around (someone or something), esp. more than once:
Synonyms
noun. ring - round - cycle - sphere
verb. revolve - surround - encircle - wheel - compass

https://www.google.com/search?q=def...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

lol!

"the two dogs circle each other"; "we circled around the island". true ..but they did not sphere...

syn·o·nym [ sínnə nìm ]
word meaning same as another: a word that means the same, or almost the same, as another word in the same language, either in all of its uses or in a specific context.
alternative name: a word or expression that is used as another name for something in some styles of speaking or writing or to emphasize a specific aspect or association.
rejected duplicate taxonomic name: a duplicate taxonomic name that has been rejected or replaced

syn·o·nym
/ˈsinəˌnim/
Noun

A word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or phrase in the same language, for example shut is a...
A person or thing so closely associated with a particular quality or idea that the mention of their name calls it to mind.


https://www.google.com/search?q=def...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

 

[daws101]

How can you conclude it wasn't designed for something that gives the appearance of design without evidence backing that view ?

that view has been explained to, you countless times...why do you need to rehash it.
you were wrong then.....and nothings changed.

You can't say wow that looks as though it was designed but it wasn't with no evidence to support it.

sure you can ,when you know there is no evidence of a creator..
a creator or god is a false assumption based on ignorance and fear..not evidence.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Since nature does not give any such appearance of supernatural design, we can presume your subjective opinions derive from your extremist beliefs.

An Extreme belief would be both animate and inanimate objects were developed from a natural unguided processes. An Extreme belief would be to believe that non living matter could produce life through unguided natural processes. All the order observed in the universe and on this planet it is an Extreme view to believe it just simply happened through natural unguided processes.

You have such Ideological views of reality.

There’s nothing at all “extremist” about understanding the natural world. There was quite a remarkable story not so long ago regarding the apparent discovery of an important protein found hitching a ride on a comet.

Comet dust harbors life's building blocks | Atom & Cosmos | Science News

A building block of proteins found in samples from an icy comet’s halo suggests that the ingredients of life could have hitched a ride to early Earth, researchers reported August 16 at a meeting of the American Chemical Society.

“The early Earth was bombarded with comets and meteorites,” says Jamie Elsila of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., who led the new analysis. “This is one more clue to what ingredients could have been present on the early Earth and how they could have gotten there.”

What religious extremists are not able to admit is that the methods of science have a pattern of shedding light into the dark recesses of the fundamentalist agenda that promotes fear and superstition.

Additionally, this slogan you have stolen from Christian extremist websites, “order observed in the universe”, is nonsense. Here again, this slogan, like so many others, has been shown to be a farce. Yet you continually cut and paste these silly slogans because of your inability to offer any coherent explanation for the natural world.

As we see with regularity, explaining to you some fairly simple concepts leaves you befuddled. You just repeat the same silly slogans as if your ability to lean has been severely stunted. We live in a profoundly violent and chaotic universe, but are spared direct experience with most of that chaos because it occurs on cosmic and geologic time scales, while we exist on a human time scale. This (luckily for us) means most of us live our lifetimes in the brief moments of calm between supernovae, asteroid impact, and cometary bombardment.

Remember Schumaker-Levy? How about that little dalliance that occurred on this planet 65 million years ago? These things have been pointed out to you repeatedly yet you are unable to address these issues. You do nothing more than repeat the same tired and false slogans you cut and paste from Harun Yahya.

And one of the most important questions challenging your extremist ideology is how you can remain so decidedly certain in your ignorance but call it ‘religious belief”. Yet you ignore all of this in your daily and stupendously stupid crusade against knowledge and rationality.

Other than your personal crusade to promote fear and ignorance, we still have nothing from you regarding how it is that the gods breathed life into clay thus making all of mankind.

Nonsense

 

[Hollie]

Since nature gives the appearance of design who or what is the designer ? Dawkins made the comment about appearing to have been designed.

Since nature does not give any such appearance of supernatural design, we can presume your subjective opinions derive from your extremist beliefs.

Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)

Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100 billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be entirely unique." (25)

There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His MindAntony Flew (Professor of Philosophy, former atheist, author, and debater) "It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design." (26)

Quotes from Scientists Regarding Design of the Universe

And yet again, the religious extremist posts edited, falsified, parsed and phony "quotes" from extremist Christian websites.

Just another example of how lies are and integral part of the extremist agenda.