Where did the universe come from? Atheistic origin science has no answer.

[Esquilax]

An accelerating universe is opening up just as scripture described* and cosmology has now described that the geometry is unequivocally flat, yes flat, really flat (within 3 decimal places + or -) and is disk shaped. Read, view and weep. https://www.ras.org.uk/publications/othe...t-universe  So now, it's been explained to you.
* "He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent..."

That link has nothing to do with describing the universe as physically flat.  I do not say this often, but you are an idiot.  How fucking stupid can you be?  You have brought this info up before and we have all tried to explaining it somewhat, but you are just fucking dense!  The universe is not shaped like a pancake or disk or any other physically flat object.  It is the space-time curvature to which they are referring and I know you do not understand what space-time is, so just drop it.

Sheesh!

Snowy isn't interested in the truth. He's interested in bible, bible, bible.

I could keep going, but it's just be the word "bible," broken up by the occasional piece of punctuation. The point is, you aren't interacting with someone you can teach. You're interacting with an avatar of lazy dishonesty.

[Cyberman]

What he's doing is picking out pieces from random jigsaw puzzles that can sort of be said to fit the picture in his head, jamming them together Frankenstein fashion with the odd snip here and there, and then declaring that the finished puzzle makes perfect sense; we're just not looking at it the right way.

[robvalue]

The only question that matters is: are people prepared to put their usual conclusions and beliefs aside and to work upwards from what we can observe and test? If those beliefs and conclusions are true, they can be reached without pre-supposing them, since they apparently already did this. If they can't then it is indicative of a problem, that holding onto these beliefs is more important than finding out what is actually true.

So it comes down to this: do you care about what is true?

You can never be objective or sceptical about anything while you hold pre-drawn conclusions that you will force the data to meet.

Am I perfect at doing this myself? Of course not, I'm a fucking shambles. But I try my best to make that my goal.

For those interested in truth, it is also important not to respond to questions about your beliefs with the tu quoque fallacy. This is a deflection, and an implicit admission that there are problems with your belief that you'd rather point out in others than address yourself. Of course we're told as atheists we have decided already God does not exist. For most of us, that is not the case, hence agnosticism so the tu quoque falls very flat. For Gnostics, they will generally have a pretty good case lined up which they will be happy to defend. But them defending it is still a deflection from the questions at hand.

For those not familiar, please read more about what tu quoque is here. It's a tactic that I sadly see an awful, awful lot. Probably second to the argument from ignorance. But both these tactics seem in some way to "come naturally" so I don't look down on people who fall foul of them because they are something I have to police in my own thinking. When it becomes dishonesty is when people continue to use the same tactics repeatedly after it has been explained why they are invalid.

[snowtracks]

An accelerating universe is opening up just as scripture described* and cosmology has now described that the geometry is unequivocally flat, yes flat, really flat (within 3 decimal places + or -) and is disk shaped. Read, view and weep. https://www.ras.org.uk/publications/othe...t-universe  So now, it's been explained to you.
* "He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent..."

So when you look out into space and see galaxies all around you in every direction you're actually seeing something that resembles a flat pancake instead of something like the inside of a sphere?  

Yes, because we are inside the universe and don't have the perspective from outside as diagram depicted. The 'flat pancake' has 4 dim's so viewing from the inside may give a sphere perspective.

[snowtracks]

The only question that matters is: are people prepared to put their usual conclusions and beliefs aside and to work upwards from what we can observe and test? If those beliefs and conclusions are true, they can be reached without pre-supposing them, since they apparently already did this. If they can't then it is indicative of a problem, that holding onto these beliefs is more important than finding out what is actually true.

So it comes down to this: do you care about what is true?

You can never be objective or sceptical about anything while you hold pre-drawn conclusions that you will force the data to meet.

Am I perfect at doing this myself? Of course not, I'm a fucking shambles. But I try my best to make that my goal.

For those interested in truth, it is also important not to respond to questions about your beliefs with the tu quoque fallacy. This is a deflection, and an implicit admission that there are problems with your belief that you'd rather point out in others than address yourself. Of course we're told as atheists we have decided already God does not exist. For most of us, that is not the case, hence agnosticism so the tu quoque falls very flat. For Gnostics, they will generally have a pretty good case lined up which they will be happy to defend. But them defending it is still a deflection from the questions at hand.

For those not familiar, please read more about what tu quoque is here. It's a tactic that I sadly see an awful, awful lot. Probably second to the argument from ignorance. But both these tactics seem in some way to "come naturally" so I don't look down on people who fall foul of them because they are something I have to police in my own thinking. When it becomes dishonesty is when people continue to use the same tactics repeatedly after it has been explained why they are invalid.

You must new here:
When I post, I’m not trying to prove, persuade, cajole or influence board members to believe in God’s existence or change their worldview to a creation model. Why I am posting: to give the Christian old earth perspective. Think about it, if God gave people free will to choice, I should and do fully endorse the exercise thereof. After all, God made the Garden-of-Eden very good, and then He may it even better by introducing ‘free-will’, so far be it from me to interfere with that. ‘Old earth’ Christians embrace science that’s what the term means. Over 90% of the replies from atheist are non-scientific so for them they fully embrace ‘Tu quoque’ and you lead the pack, sermonizer. After all, you're on the 'Christianity' sub-menu which is not exclusively reserved for atheists to tell each other how wonderful they think they are.

[robvalue]

My post was a general one and not aimed specifically at you.

I can't understand your post at all I'm afraid.

[Longhorn]

What he's doing is picking out pieces from random jigsaw puzzles that can sort of be said to fit the picture in his head, jamming them together Frankenstein fashion with the odd snip here and there, and then declaring that the finished puzzle makes perfect sense; we're just not looking at it the right way.

You know, if you squint really, REALLY hard.....
....it still looks like bullshit

[ignoramus]

snowtracks wrote:
When I post, I’m not trying to prove, persuade, cajole or influence board members to believe in God’s existence or change their worldview to a creation model

We want you to! Please! We want you to prove and/or influence us about gods existence. Otherwise why are you here? You know all about the science stuff?

[robvalue]

It's a good question. What's your purpose in being here? Not that I object to you being here at all, of course. I wonder this of all our theists. I've heard a few reasons given but they do not correlate with what I experience. I wonder if anyone would like to dig down deep and find out why they really are here. I have a few pet theories hypotheses but hey, I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth.

[ignoramus]

you can tell me {secrethandshake}