Posted on 06/13/2007 8:30:23 AM PDT by presidio9
Nor can anyone explain the sudden rush of scientific advances in the late middle ages.
Scientific and medical knowledge compiled by the Greeks and Romans did not change for over a thousand years, then all of a sudden knowledge exploded. Why? Divine intervention?
Archeologists found a small toy steam engine built by the Greeks. Why didn't the Greeks or Romans look at it and think to use it for something other than a toy? Why 1500 years later out of nowhere did mankind suddenly decide to put that steam power to work to make life easier? Why did doctors for over a thousand years rely on the Greek books of medicine and make no inquiries or advances on their own? Why all of a sudden did mankind decide to do it in the late middle ages? Divine Intervention?
Sometimes things "just happen".
Except for that darn “then there was evening ... and morning ... “ thing.
Could you please elaborate in detail as to why you think they are in conflict.
The only conflict occurs if one assumes that the modern English translation is an accurate scientific treaste of the events. I don’t have a conflict because I read Genesis as a pesher (the ‘why’ of Creation and our place in the world.)
In 2 weeks, the headline will be, "Republicans believe that "Evolutionists" should be burned at the stake as heretics."
Mark
Not if translated correctly. I ask you, Is Genesis 1:14 untrue?
sigh...
We know anything only by imputation onto our senses, assimilation of those inputs and organization into understandble, intellectually "tactile", information.
We know almost all scientific "proofs" as truth because some other scientists have failed to disprove it and thus call it "true",or at least worthy of remaining an open question. Thus we put FAITH in those scientists, we put FAITH in their processes, we put FAITH in their motivations.
All scientists are political and human. All scientists are subject to political forces more powerful than them. (NAZIism is just one small discrete example, Global Warming another)
Such faith in scientists is profound and incredibily dangerous. You cannot go about proving all theories yourself, thus you are at the mercy of small numbers of scientists, and their biases.
Science and religion do not compete.
Sir Isaac Newton believed in the authenticity of the Bible and created the scientific process. He believed in the Bible because he had first hand knowledge of the Holy Spirit and was educated on the Bible.
The Holy Spirit is better proven to me than any scientific theory. I know it from direct experience. It is more real with more truth than any science.
Science cannot prove love exists either, but we accept that it is true because we either experience it personally or we see its effects on indiviuals. The very same is true for the Holy Spirit. [The Holy Spirit is not the same as love, it is different and even more profound. My Jewish wife, mathemetician, broke down in shuddering tears of joy the moment the Holy Spirit came within her upon asking Christ into her heart. A true epiphany)
Thousands of the worlds most brilliant scientists have also known the Holy Spirit to be true having the most profound effect on their lives. Once proven to them personally they never deny its reality again. Think about the profound nature of that!
More scientists cannot personally testify to the truth of the Holy Spirit than any other scientific theory. (even gravity, since we know so little about it)
Just because science cannot measure it does not make it non-existent. The universe would be non-existent were that so since we cannot measure sub-quantum structures upon which everything is built.
Someday, soon, some a new scientific understanding of the cosmos will appear and cause a revolution in the way we think about current science, making current theories mere small approximations limited by the infinitesimally minute imaginations of grunting little beings with a mere few pounds of putty like blobs of neurons which are used more to invent creative humping scenarios with other blobs of post-primordial goo.
We do not even know what we don't know. yet still some would place their faith in these barely existent lumps of goo, alive for only atto seconds relativey speaking.
These infinitesimally tiny volumes of entropy burps have somehow acquired for themselves some timeless truths about the nature of the cosmos? yeah, right...only if God gave them could it be so.
The primary product of science is untruth. When we can't call it untrue we keep working at it until we can.
I believe we do not even understand what God is, except that "He" represents a grand truth about all nature for which we do not have the brain power to begin to comprehend. That nature exists is true, because we can point a question at it. That we do not understand it is also true.
Yet because of our vast accumulation of scientific truths we can go ahead and rule out the existence of God?? really??
LOL.
Lets face it, men, scientists, are stupid. Most men spend almost all of their brainpower trying to maximize the quality or quantity of the 4 F's; Feeding, F__ck_ng, ego inFlating and Faith. In that order...perhaps
While there is definitely a spiritual motivator for scientists to pursue the truth of nature it can sure be subordinated to the 3F's at any given time.
I sure wouldn't put my faith in any animal so stupid and so easily corrupted. But go ahead and place your faith in scientists, they like it, it inFlates their egos, keeps them Fed, and if you bend over....
;^)
For the reason mnehrling stated. But also, 1:14 says "And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years"
So not only does 1:14 speak of the creation of the sun and light, but also explicitly recognizes (in the last clause) that the days could not be divided before then.
For the reason mnehrling stated. But also, 1:14 says "And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years"
So not only does 1:14 speak of the creation of the sun and light, but also explicitly recognizes (in the last clause) that the days could not be divided before then.
Perhaps you'd care to point out where Darwin was overly optimistic.
absolutely. go for it. (seriously, we do need more cash)
but don’t forget the chicks to keep the spirits up either, a necessary and underutilized scientific resource. (grin)
but the ladies don’t get too turned on by mechanical pencils or Matlab printouts, but yeah, that Chair you mentioned, there is this grad student in the lab, she is...well...she might go for a guy with that Hughes Chair. (grin)
While there is definitely a spiritual motivator for scientists to pursue the truth of nature it can sure be subordinated to the 3F's at any given time.
I sure wouldn't put my faith in any animal so stupid and so easily corrupted. But go ahead and place your faith in scientists, they like it, it inFlates their egos, keeps them Fed, and if you bend over....
The title of this thread is Most Republicans Reject Evolution
But why stop there. We can follow your lead and reject all of science!
(What color did you paint your cave?)
Both are true.
On a rainy day do you see the sun? No.
Does that mean it’s not there? No.
Things never just "happen".
In the meantime, follow the money (rewards, sponsorship, broads...), and enabling technologies (communications, colleges, manufacturing...)
[I'm probably a determinist]
I am a scientist dipsh_t.
All good scientists are skeptics and not full of themselves. We use theories until they break, but we are ready for most any of them to break at any time. I like it when they break!
In fact, in cosmology we are desperate for a new intuitive leap that will let us throw away so much of the crap we keep playing with now. Its cumbersome, ugly (full of squigglies), full of patches and cartoon-like simplifying assumptions...and disagreements, incoherences, inconsitenticies...
nature is beautiful, science is ugly.
BTW: Most Republicans don't have a clue about evolution but to their credit they aren't about to sit back and let some self-inflated, anti-Christian scientist, who doesn't understand it himself, shove it down their throat and call them an idiot if they don't swallow..
Do you swallow?
Their rejection of evolution is healthier and far better than some liberal idiots sitting around smoking pot and pretending he knows what the heck evolution is and believes in it instead of the Bible when he also doesn't have a clue what the Bible says.
Modern liberals are pretentious suckers. Blow smoke up their wide asses and tell them that it is the odor of enlightenment and they will thank you and run around wafting it in everybodies face.
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.