Posted on 08/03/2006 12:22:06 PM PDT by SirLinksalot
The Belgian astronomer Georges LeMaitre was also a Catholic Priest. I can only imagine that Judge Jones would have "ruled" that LeMaitre's observations were motivated by creationist leanings and forbid his work from public schools.
That's not a factual statement, it's a statement of faith. Not that I mind since I see faith as a plus mind you.
None, nada, zippo!
So is your degree in evolutionary science? Are you qualified by education in that field to speak on it? You never answered that question. I don't really care what field it's in if you're not inclined to reveal it because that's personal info but a yes of no wouldn't be revealing too much.
Not at all.
On the internet, you are what you post. If you post some nonsense, all your posts will be suspect.
If you post solid data and well-reasoned theory, and do this consistently, your posts will generally be well-received. Similarly, if you post challenges with no support, your posts often will not be well received.
I have found freedumb2003's posts to be pretty accurate.
Oh, my credentials? Ph.D. in Anthropology, half in physical anthropology (evolution, human races, human osteology, etc.) and half in archaeology.
Not that this will make any difference on these threads, because the anti-evolution folks generally do not respect hard-earned knowledge. On these threads I have found that the anti-evolution folks frequently know little science, and what little they do know is often wrong. They disagree with some of the findings of science, and are out to discredit the entire scientific method as a result. In short, they generally don't trust science as a legitimate field of knowledge.
But that doesn't stop them from having strong opinions on everything from the big bang to biology, paleontology, geology, genetics, and the rest of the sciences.
And when I am wrong, I try to listen and learn.
Thanks for the support.
So what evidence is there that the universe did indeed create itself? What is the basis for your statement? You know, something scientific, testable, falsifiable, repeatable, observable. There must be some reason that you make that statement.
Define 'universe'.
And what do you think you guys should do to blue collar guys like me who have the audacity to engage the truly gifted?
Hanging or the stocks?
I know your credentials; you've made no secret of them.
Turns out she wasn't. It was Dr-somthing-or-other was the name, but in a followup post she admitted to being NOT being a doctor.
I don't expect everyone to be an expert. But I think they should have a basic understanding of the material at hand.
Perhaps my examples were a little over the top and suggested that only super-experts like Coyoteman can participate. In that I admit to some bombast.
But I think it is fair to ask people to come to the table with the basics.
The scientific method has some specific rules.
If a great scientist starts doing creation "science" they are not following the rules of science.
Here is why: science does not have any final answers. Science has a method for discovering new information: data and theory.
Creation "science" already has a final answer--adherence to the scriptures. Creation "science" will distort scientific data and theory, and the scientific method itself, or flat out lie if necessary, in order to make everything come out supporting the scriptures. That is not science.
Don't believe me? Check out the various creationist websites. See what kind of science they are doing. See what they have to do to support the "global flood." See what they have to do to support the "young earth" belief.
Its not pretty. And its not science. Its apologetics.
Give 3 examples ;)
Why don't you? Take your pick. Probably all the natural physical world that can be observed and measured and tested since that's what evos tend to go with, nothing outtside of that that would be considered *supernatural*. So how could it physical matter and the forces that control it have just created itself?
Study and learn. There is no "gifted" -- there is only hard work.
There is a lot of information available out there. You can to seek it out and study it.
But remember, as Heinlein wrote:
Belief gets in the way of learning.Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1973
Nice try. It is a question of "knowledge" not "ability."
You have to understand the fundametals of a subject before you can discuss it.
Can you discuss logic if you don't know boolean algebra? Can you discuss chemistry without knowing what acids and bases are?
There is a lot of material available to teach science and TToE (the real one, not the strawman portrayed in these therads). Avail yourself of it.
That is tagline material -- it'll be pn my profile in a few minutes.
LOL, you really have nothing to teach me. But thanks for the offer from the truly gifted. I am humbled.
Why don't you?
Nice try. But I think the burden is on you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.