Survivalist Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Religion and Science

Jump to Latest
161 - 180 of 232 Posts
#161 ·
Robot said:
Your still working with a "model" that came from very little data. I will concede the "model" appears to have gained accuracy over the years.

Accuracy does not guarantee the model is correct.
Click to expand...
I am having some trouble understanding your position on this. Is the "model" you refer to the "standard model"? If so, the standard model only theorizes a relationship amongst the various subatomic particles that have been experimentally confirmed. At one time the standard model predicted a number of particles that had not been observed. However, the last "predicted" particle was the Higgs Bosun, which was finally experimentally observed in the last year or two. Are you denying that quarks have been observed in particle accelerator experiments?
 
  • Like
Reactions: spaceman
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#162 ·
Ankylus said:
Are you denying that quarks have been observed in particle accelerator experiments?
Click to expand...
From the begining, Quark was a "model" with only small circumstantial supportive evidence,(yet mathematically sound). Gel-Mann actually called it such, it was repeated as such in many books, (Gel-Mann confirms this).

I'm saying that a "thing" that resembles the quark model has gained more supportive evidence for the model. A fictional character,(with a name from a comic strip), was created to explain data points. Now the fictional character seems to exist.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#163 ·
Robot said:
How about chiming in on some science related discussions on the boards, looks like 90% + of your posts are religion. :confused:

PM sent.
Click to expand...
I almost always just come here for an occasional quick break from work, trying not to spend too much time on forums or other internet time-sinks. I usually just read one or two threads that have caught my attention, and if I have something to say I might add a reply. It might seem selfish of me, but I just come here for a light break from work.

I am attracted to the religious section because I can read what is written there and form my own arguments using reason and logic alone, or at least, that's how I contribute. I like this because it is not as time-consuming as reading through technical threads.
 
#164 ·
If you look up virtual photons, they are a useful explanation. But, virtual photons are more of a mathematical construct(model) than reality.

At least this is my take on what I have read.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#168 ·
Very Good! I especially enjoy how they show the light wavelengths, (which are larger than smaller structures).

I didnt know Haley's Comet is as big as Mt. Everest.
 
Discussion starter · #174 ·
The strange new craft of making life from scratch:

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-17436365

It's still an interesting discussion. For anyone still interested can you define man as God, or God-like if he achieves the ability to construct life from scratch?

How does one define God if man can create new life forms? Would it be simply the entity that you think created your life form? ie: Life on this planet?
 
#175 ·
REM said:
The strange new craft of making life from scratch:

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-17436365

It's still an interesting discussion. For anyone still interested can you define man as God, or God-like if he achieves the ability to construct life from scratch?

How does one define God if man can create new life forms? Would it be simply the entity that you think created your life form? ie: Life on this planet?
Click to expand...
This will lead to Zombies :eek:
 
#176 ·
I do not believe God gave us the Bible to be a history or science book. The Hebrew Bible and our Christian New Testment are to live by.

Either one must believe all that is; ever has been; and ever will be is, has been and will be in a constant change. Or one must believe in God the Creator.

Both require faith.

One seems more logical to this Christian.
 
#178 ·
Not going to read all 170 some. But it is nice to be allowed to discuss religion on this rules heavy sight.

I don't see why faith and science can't be reconciled, like someone said on the first page of responses.
Neanderthal dna was mentioned. Doubt it or not, it's testable. 23 and me's DNA test includes telling you your percentage of neanderthal. Going to pay for that one soon.
I don't have a problem if people want to go the other way either. To each their own. Not my business. My dad believed the world was only 6k old and man walked with dinosaurs in friendly coexistence.

But to me, when a Christian gets all bent out of shape trying to use pseudoscience to prove religion, all that proves to me is weak faith. I have more respect for a Christian that just says I don't know anything about science. I just rely on faith.
Of course I have more respect when a Christian can except science that's been universally accepted for longer than they have been alive.
I also have more respect for atheists who can live and let live and don't give Christians a hard time.
 
#179 ·
DNA testing, for the consumer, is a joke. My uncle was stricken to find out he was 1% black. Turns out the founder of that DNA company automatically puts that on all "pure white" DNA tests "to keep them on their toes".

Now legal system DNA I have faith in if done correctly. Here in Houston we had massive problems with that, though.

"Let's have a discussion about your faith" generally means "I'm going to try and tear down your faith".
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#180 ·
PurpleKitty said:
DNA testing, for the consumer, is a joke. My uncle was stricken to find out he was 1% black. Turns out the founder of that DNA company automatically puts that on all "pure white" DNA tests "to keep them on their toes".

Now legal system DNA I have faith in if done correctly. Here in Houston we had massive problems with that, though.

"Let's have a discussion about your faith" generally means "I'm going to try and tear down your faith".
Click to expand...
Wouldn't 1% be represented in 7 generations back. IMO if a DNA company was found to be doing that they would lose all creditability. The idea for most DNA test is ancestry. I have some of my lines traced back 8 generations and I am 72. Given you number of ancestors double for every generation on goes back a lot of things happened. This is especially true to the female side.

LOL my ancestor that was a KKK member was from NY in NY not SC.

They are who they were.

I do not expect to be guided in the wrong directions.
 
161 - 180 of 232 Posts
About this Discussion
231 Replies
64 Participants
Last post:
emmajones
Survivalist Forum
posts
12M
members
169K
Since
2007
A forum community dedicated to survivalists and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about collections, gear, DIY projects, hobbies, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Off Topic Lounge Disaster Preparedness General Discussion Firearms General Discussion New Member Introductions Financial Forum