Religion and Science are 1000% Opposite

[Crossless2.0]

So now geologists perform their work for the purpose of disproving a story in Genesis?

The bullshit never ends with you, does it?

I don't recall saying anything of the sort.

Not explicitly, but suggesting that geologists posit ocean floor uplift as a reason to explain the presence of fossils on mountaintops (as opposed to the "Biblical flood explanation") suggests an agenda on their part.

News flash: Da Vinci figured that one out quite a while ago. At least try to catch up with the 15th-16th Centuries.

[Huggy Bear]

I don't recall saying anything of the sort.

Not explicitly, but suggesting that geologists posit ocean floor uplift as a reason to explain the presence of fossils on mountaintops (as opposed to the "Biblical flood explanation") suggests an agenda on their part.

News flash: Da Vinci figured that one out quite a while ago. At least try to catch up with the 15th-16th Centuries.

The timeline initially given for the formation of the Andes shows it was calculated to fit a preconception.

You guys proclaim that "science is self-correcting" as if it's a virtue... It's only a virtue to something that's unreliable.

Truth needs no self-correction, what is true will ALWAYS remain true.

I believe in the truth of the Bible hence why I requested an example of where science disproves it, so far no dice.

[Succubus]

It is known that all species of cats (for example) that exist today, have a common ancestor.


This shows that all that was required on the ark was two cats, not EVERY species of cat that existed, so that reduces the number of animals required significantly.

Have you just shot yourself in the foot? I thought creationists refused to accept evolution.

[Huggy Bear]

Have you just shot yourself in the foot? I thought creationists refused to accept evolution.

Evolution has nothing to do with creation.

Evolution is a fact in so much that each creature evolves after its "kind", cats evolve from cats and dogs from dogs, But the idea that we all evolved from some primordial soup is pure conjecture.

[The Grand Nudger]

Evolution works, you see, up to some murkily defined point in contradiction with observed results in the lab and field..because magic book.

If common descent is pure conjecture..what does that make all this "god" bullshit? The deluge falls well below the bar of pure conjecture no matter how one defines it. It didn't happen.

[Succubus]

What did birds evolve from?

[The Grand Nudger]

Truth needs no self-correction, what is true will ALWAYS remain true.

I believe in the truth of the Bible hence why I requested an example of where science disproves it, so far no dice.

-and the day we discovered the undeniable truth, forever and ever..about everything...was a tuesday a few thousand years ago.  

[Amarok]

Common descent speculation 

 
 

[Crossless2.0]

You guys proclaim that "science is self-correcting" as if it's a virtue...

It is.

It's only a virtue to something that's unreliable.

I'll bet there's not a single area of your life in which you characterize it as such, except insofar as it touches on your reading of the Bible. In any case, 'unreliable' is your characterization. The correct words you're groping for are 'tentative' and 'provisional'.

Truth needs no self-correction, what is true will ALWAYS remain true.

Science is an ongoing pursuit, and new things are learned all the time. The fact that you don't understand the provisional nature of science and instead cling to an ancient book as the last word on any number of subjects isn't anyone else's problem. I assure you, the scientific community gives less than a shit about your opinion.

[Amarok]

I believe in the truth of the Bible hence why I requested an example of where science disproves it, so far no dice.

Accept all the clear examples we have given.

---

You guys proclaim that "science is self-correcting" as if it's a virtue...

It is a self critical system will always have less of a chance of being wrong then one that arrogantly proclaims it's always right . 

 It's only a virtue to something that's unreliable.

Nope it's a virtue to something pursuing knowledge and understanding 

Truth needs no self-correction, what is true will ALWAYS remain true

 That does not sound like truth that sounds like dogma posing as truth. Which people like you need to conjure up apologetic s.


Science a castle every expanding  and refining on what we have learned 










The bible a decaying building which a group of lunatics insist is unbreakable and desperately keep slapping paint on hoping no one notices .