26
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 253:
Line 253: − - I believe they are.. Scientists often change their minds on things in the face of good evidance. Some of them may be things they have steaked their careers on. Yet in the face of data had no choice but to change their minds.+ Line 262:
Line 262: − Not true evolutionary theory changes in the face of new evidance, it must change and incorperate new findings to be relevant and fill in more details.+ − The bible is the bible AS IS, final answer.+ Line 301:
Line 301: − And would solve the problem of people saying we only expose kids to one world view.+
→response to top section
7) If it was a severly biased system where creation science had the better data, there would be a ground swell of non- christain scientists (not born into Christianity, and not biased by a pre-belief in creation science or Christianity at all) who would convert to Christianity based solely (or mostly) on the sound data collected by creation scientists(flood geology etc.)...": “That assumes that human beings are sufficiently objective to do this”
7) If it was a severly biased system where creation science had the better data, there would be a ground swell of non- christain scientists (not born into Christianity, and not biased by a pre-belief in creation science or Christianity at all) who would convert to Christianity based solely (or mostly) on the sound data collected by creation scientists(flood geology etc.)...": “That assumes that human beings are sufficiently objective to do this”
- I believe they are.. Scientists often change their minds on things in the face of good evidance. Some of them may be things they have steaked their careers on. Yet in the face of data had no choice but to change their minds.
I don’t belive the majority to be so unobjective. It wouldn’t be overnight but the popular view would change in the face of the evidance. That’s how all theories come to be accepted. You would want it to be a rigorous process and it is.
I don’t belive the majority to be so unobjective. It wouldn’t be overnight but the popular view would change in the face of the evidance. That’s how all theories come to be accepted. You would want it to be a rigorous process and it is.
9) "THE BIBLE IS NEVER WRONG": EVOLUTION IS NEVER WRONG. That works both ways as well.
9) "THE BIBLE IS NEVER WRONG": EVOLUTION IS NEVER WRONG. That works both ways as well.
Not true evolutionary theory changes in the face of new evidance, it must change and incorperate new findings to be relevant and fill in more details.
The bible is the bible AS IS, final answer.
10) There is reason, actually. If our senses are the result of a giant cosmic accident (the Big Bang) followed by myriad more accidents (including all the evolutionary mutations), then we have good reason for thinking that they can't tell us anything useful.
10) There is reason, actually. If our senses are the result of a giant cosmic accident (the Big Bang) followed by myriad more accidents (including all the evolutionary mutations), then we have good reason for thinking that they can't tell us anything useful.
And that religion should be taught in a religion class ( with a section on creation beleifs (and their “science”) of all religions
And that religion should be taught in a religion class ( with a section on creation beleifs (and their “science”) of all religions
And I am refering to in public schools for all people. It would promote tolerence.
And I am refering to in public schools for all people. It would promote tolerence.
And would solve the problem of people saying we only expose kids to one world view.
-Damien
-Damien