Posted on 01/30/2009 10:54:50 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Since the Big Bang story of the origin of the universe has been refuted by a host of external observations and internal contradictions,1 secular science has been forced to postulate additional, exceedingly improbable events to keep it afloat. One of these is “inflation,” which attempts to explain the apparent uniformity of the universe.2 But new observations by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe are forcing cosmologists to revamp inflation, at the cost of inventing yet another miraculous event to prop it up...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
If a person believes that infection is caused by evil spirits, and not microscopic organisms, then yes, science very much contradicts their religion. What bothers me is when the people that believe in the evil spirit theory of disease insist that germ theory is atheistic because it contradicts their own religious beliefs, and insist that evil spirit theory is just as scientifically valid as germ theory.
Bosh Flimshaw wrote:
You must have mistaken my post for an invitation to converse. It was not.
Good day.
Soooo GourmetDan, are you going to share your secrets/techniques, and just as important, does it work for other liberals as well? ;)
I believe the phrase “you can’t vaudeville Vaudeville” applies.
PS You just encouraged me to step up my attacks on the Big Bang fizzle and the already crumbling Temple of Darwin. Thanks for helping me find my second wind. LOL
I'm sorry, but you don't understand the Big Bang theory at all. There was no universe before the Big Bang. There was no matter, there was no space, there was no time. There was absolutely nothing.Sounds a lot like the Bible, doesn't it?
tpanther, you inserted yourself into an exchange I was having with another poster. If you do not with to converse with me, please do not post to me.
Good day.
>>Indeed - how can you talk about the “speed of light” before light itself even exists?<<
Yeah, the phrase “speed of light” is meaningless when light has not been created yet and all you have in your hand is speed, and no water to wash it down.
Is it? Perhaps you can substantiate your calumnious assertion. Here is the footnote to the first sentence:
1. See “An Open Letter to the Scientific Community” on cosmologystatement.org, in which hundreds of scientist express their agreement with the statement “The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed—inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples.”
Hmmm, stretching of space. That is exactly what the Big Bang theory describes. Hanging the earth on nothing is pointedly obvious of reality.
I can't understand why these wacko Young Earth Creationists believe that the Big Bang theory conflicts with the Bible>
The Big Bang CREATED time.
One cannot in ANY scientific sense speak of “before the Big Bang;” it’s a nonsense phrase like “sucked into a vacuum,” or “letting the cold out.”
That’s why the Bible had to begin “In principio...”
There is—by definition—no time before that.
Then take a look at the budding universe model. There are lots of others out there.
The Big Bang is just a theory that may have outlived it usefulness.
Over 50% of the US population voted for Obama, too. Do you think that they were right to do so?
Counting hands has nothing to with truth.
==Sounds a lot like the Bible, doesn’t it?
When you read the fine print, no it doesn’t sound at all like the Bible. It’s sounds like a theory that was hatched by a bunch of God-haters hellbent on duping the masses into believing that the Earth is not a special place created by God.
I don’t know why this is not obvious to so many.
The void. Nothingness. Describing it assumes that there is something there to describe, a fallacy.
Speaking of Wackos. Augustine calls your arguments pagan. How do you respond?
PS Is it your contention that creationist cosmologies do not involve the stretching of space? You are even more ignorant than I thought.
“In the meantime, people like GodGunsGuts make it very difficult for we Christians who happen to be scientists to witness to others in our field.”
We knew, we just knew someone was to blame for Darwinism amongst scientists. ‘Fess and you get to leave with just bruises.
Mine is not the technique, but the anti-technique.
The technique is to publicly request no contact and then start using veiled references to try and make a point against the better argument without inviting a direct response. This insulates the lesser argument from direct refutation and gives it an excuse to complain if a violation is perceived (P=1).
It's the new evo tactic of completely removing the goalposts, rather than the usual tactic of just shifting them around.
Watch for it.
LOL. I know you are probably more in agreement with DallasMike. But at least you’re not an idiot about it.
Does someone maintain that all observed galaxies are no longer rushing away from ours?
Thanks. I see no conflict either. I do believe that Adam and Eve were specially created by God. I believe that evolution is an observable fact. Howewever, I have problems with the theory of evolution as it currently stands. My prolems with it are scientific, not religious -- it just does not answer all the questions satifactorily.
Evolution is an observable fact. One only has to follow the stories on how the Bird Flu virus is changing to see that. One can argue about the extent of evolution, but not about whether it exists.
All truth is God's truth, and there is no reason for Christians to fear or deny the truth.
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.