Christian Schools Bring Suit Against UC

[Bobblehead]

Originally posted by Flaming Homer@Aug 31 2005, 03:32 PM
what created these masses that crashed into each other how was the first atom created?

That isn't "The big bang"

Initially there was a dense and hot cloud, that suddenly burst forth and spewed matter across the universe (like a star going nova).

Things like the astral telescopes are still gathering information, so this is still a very dynamic and changing area of science.

[Patek23]

Originally posted by Bobblehead+Aug 31 2005, 02:40 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bobblehead @ Aug 31 2005, 02:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Flaming Homer@Aug 31 2005, 03:32 PM
what created these masses that crashed into each other how was the first atom created?

That isn't "The big bang"

Initially there was a dense and hot cloud, that suddenly burst forth and spewed matter across the universe (like a star going nova).

Things like the astral telescopes are still gathering information, so this is still a very dynamic and changing area of science. [/b][/quote]
Sorry I'm getting confused with some one I saw on TV a month ago, some scientest was talking about two large masses orbiting around the universe until they crashed causing them to go in every which way, I guess like Big Bang 2 or something.

[FireFly]

Originally posted by Hakan@Aug 31 2005, 03:27 PM

WRONG.

There is substantial evidence for the big bang.

Take your god loving melon out of your god loving ass.

And as I said, the SAME evidence can be used for creation. Hmph. A planet forming out of essentially nothing. Cool. There absolutely cannot be a supernatural explaination for it, and yet, we cannot scientifically prove it either! There's 'evidence' of science involved though, so we'll go with that! Take your intolerant head out of your intolerant ass.

So a scientist can make amino acids in a test tube provided that oxygen is not present. How then can life form if oxygen cannot be present or else there will be no amino acids? Did you question that one?

There's no proof either way, and I'm the first to admit that. There's evidence of evolution, but nothing to say how life started in the first place. That to me is a rather large gap in 'scientific knowledge'. Unlike scientists however, while I am willing to accept that there may be a scientific explaination for the development of the earth, most scientists are unwilling to accept that there may be a supernatural explaination. It's called tolerance.

I am not preaching about creation, I'm just saying there's no proof for the big bang any more than there is for creation. My Christianity has nothing to do with that. I just like to question everything. (And yes, I've questioned the existance of God many times as well. I just prefer to have faith in the afterlife, than have faith in that this is it for us.)

[peter12]

Originally posted by Hakan@Aug 31 2005, 03:16 PM
There's a great article on the hypocrisy of Christian nations in the July Harper's. This is a little off topic but it relates to Firefly's comment. I can't understand why Christians are so obsessed with the Old Testament instead of the actual words of Christ.

Anyone have some bandwidth to host the PDF?

Right on the money. What should only matter to Christians are the words that Jesus spoke. Everything else is just sitting on the side.

[FireFly]

Originally posted by Flashpoint+Aug 31 2005, 03:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Flashpoint @ Aug 31 2005, 03:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-FireFly@Aug 31 2005, 04:26 PM
Science only holds itself back.# There is no 'evidence' for the big bang... the same evidence can be used for creation.

Ahem...

Evidence for the big bang - draw your own conclusions

I'm sorry, but to equate creationism (where there is no evidence, nor will there be any, because it is static and unable to change) with a scientific theory (for which more and more evidence will be accumulated in an adaptive form until it is proven or disproven, or CHANGED - unlike the dogma or "faith" of religion) is foolhardy.

Science changes. Dogma doesn't. This is the undoing of creationism. [/b][/quote]
Isn't gravity static and unable to change? Did we not develop evidence for it? I fail to see how a theory that cannot change, can also not be proven.

[Cheese]

Originally posted by Flaming Homer+Aug 31 2005, 05:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Flaming Homer @ Aug 31 2005, 05:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Hakan@Aug 31 2005, 02:34 PM

I see your point. If we can't understand it then it must be god!

Maybe it was Paris Hilton's dog who made the first atom for all I know. That's completely unconvincing as to the presence of a God.

Well I thought that it was a scientific fact that nothing cannot create anything? which way is it? or is science wrong? Science doesn't know shinguard, for years it was facts for all sorts of thing, look at facts from 200 years ago to facts now, we have proven most wrong, in another 200 years it will be the same thing. If someone can give me 100% proof that god didn't create the universe than I'll believe it. I'm talking like a written statement from god with witnesses to where he was at the time of the creation [/b][/quote]
better yet....with your vast understanding of the bible why dont you enlighten us? We are waiting for something, anything, that the Christian masses can do/say/prove to make us non believers change over to the white side...LOLOL
All you can "suggest" is that some God...some man or being of infinite wisdom. snapped his fingers and voila! OK...using your theory...who created God then? This can go on and on and on...except you have nothing to prove or disprove science at any stage.

[Patek23]

Originally posted by Cheese+Aug 31 2005, 02:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cheese @ Aug 31 2005, 02:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Well I thought that it was a scientific fact that nothing cannot create anything? which way is it? or is science wrong? Science doesn't know shinguard, for years it was facts for all sorts of thing, look at facts from 200 years ago to facts now, we have proven most wrong, in another 200 years it will be the same thing. If someone can give me 100% proof that god didn't create the universe than I'll believe it. I'm talking like a written statement from god with witnesses to where he was at the time of the creation

better yet....with your vast understanding of the bible why dont you enlighten us? We are waiting for something, anything, that the Christian masses can do/say/prove to make us non believers change over to the white side...LOLOL
All you can "suggest" is that some God...some man or being of infinite wisdom. snapped his fingers and voila! OK...using your theory...who created God then? This can go on and on and on...except you have nothing to prove or disprove science at any stage. [/b][/quote]
And you have nothing to prove that he didn't so we are arguing over a moot point. There's no way I would want to or try to convert you 1) I think everyone is entitled to whatever they want to believe and 2) I'd love to be proven wrong.


Until then were arguing something that neither of us can prove wether we were created by something super ficial, I won't argue the big bang I don't have a problem with it. Without 100% proof of anything this is just a passing match and nobodies going to win.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by Flaming Homer@Aug 31 2005, 03:38 PM
Science doesn't know shinguard, for years it was facts for all sorts of thing, look at facts from 200 years ago to facts now, we have proven most wrong, in another 200 yethars it will be the same thing.

You recognize, of course, the irony in stating "science doesn't know shinguard" on the internet.

As for the 200 years stuff, what is your point? Of course they'll be more advanced in 200 years and will know more than we know now. They call it progress. Do you have a problem with it?

[Patek23]

Originally posted by RougeUnderoos+Aug 31 2005, 02:49 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RougeUnderoos @ Aug 31 2005, 02:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Flaming Homer@Aug 31 2005, 03:38 PM
Science doesn't know shinguard, for years it was facts for all sorts of thing, look at facts from 200 years ago to facts now, we have proven most wrong, in another 200 yethars it will be the same thing.

You recognize, of course, the irony in stating "science doesn't know shinguard" on the internet.

As for the 200 years stuff, what is your point? Of course they'll be more advanced in 200 years and will know more than we know now. They call it progress. Do you have a problem with it? [/b][/quote]
No all I'm saying is that science doesn't know anything for certain, years ago everyone was CERTAIN that the world was flat, 200 years from now we could be CERTAIN of something else. I guess nobody really knows till we die.

EDIT- as for the irony statement I guess in hindsight that was a stupid thing to say, but whatever I say stupid shinguard all the time.

[Flashpoint]

Originally posted by Flaming Homer@Aug 31 2005, 04:38 PM
If someone can give me 100% proof that god didn't create the universe than I'll believe it.

Negative evidence isn't accepted as a valid scientific method! Yet another example of religous arguments missing the boat.

Too bad the religious lobby groups in DC aren't exposed to the general public as badly as they are in this thread.

[Patek23]

Originally posted by Flashpoint+Aug 31 2005, 02:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Flashpoint @ Aug 31 2005, 02:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Flaming Homer@Aug 31 2005, 04:38 PM
If someone can give me 100% proof that god didn't create the universe than I'll believe it.

Negative evidence isn't accepted as a valid scientific method! Yet another example of religous arguments missing the boat.

Too bad the religious lobby groups in DC aren't exposed to the general public as badly as they are in this thread. [/b][/quote]
If you had read what I wrote earlier you would have noticed that I neither support religion nor science. I just have a hard time getting over the hypocricy of someone saying that science is right and religion is wrong when it is a scientific fact that matter cannot be created from nothing. So what created the first atom? I do realise the question of who created god and such, but I guess theres something that we don't know that would straighten it all out, and IMO the answer is a mix of religion and science, not 1 or the other.


EDIT- as for your general public statement, you do realize that there are roughly 2 billion christians right? that accounts for 33% percent of the worlds population, then add in the 1 billion muslims and such, Atheists and others form a small percentage of the general public, I guess most just have a high affection for hockey teams?

[Hakan]

I know people who have never went to Church a day in their life but I can confidently call them more 'Christian' then most of the Christian's I know. They don't judge other people, they listen to other people, they hold an open mind, and their usually quite friendly and not full of anger, suspicion or ill will. Most Christian's I know have a good dosage of judgement and hate. Something Jesus said to get rid of.

Oh I forgot, way back God told us in the Old Testament to hate Gays. Screw Jesus, the Old Testament is the real word!

[FireFly]

Originally posted by peter12+Aug 31 2005, 03:43 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (peter12 @ Aug 31 2005, 03:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Hakan@Aug 31 2005, 03:16 PM
There's a great article on the hypocrisy of Christian nations in the July Harper's. This is a little off topic but it relates to Firefly's comment. I can't understand why Christians are so obsessed with the Old Testament instead of the actual words of Christ.

Anyone have some bandwidth to host the PDF?

Right on the money. What should only matter to Christians are the words that Jesus spoke. Everything else is just sitting on the side. [/b][/quote]
That's what I said! There are certainly lessons in the Old Testament, but Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ. If anyone should be lobbying for the inclusion of Creationism in schools, it's the Jews, who only believe in the Old Testament....

[FireFly]

Originally posted by Hakan@Aug 31 2005, 04:02 PM
I know people who have never went to Church a day in their life but I can confidently call them more 'Christian' then most of the Christian's I know. They don't judge other people, they listen to other people, they hold an open mind, and their usually quite friendly and not full of anger, suspicion or ill will. Most Christian's I know have a good dosage of judgement and hate. Something Jesus said to get rid of.

Oh I forgot, way back God told us in the Old Testament to hate Gays. Screw Jesus, the Old Testament is the real word!

That's actually in the New Testament as well, but we're not to hate gay people, just the sin of homosexual acts... However, in some versions of the New Testament it isn't there. So it depends which Bible you read....

[Patek23]

Originally posted by Hakan@Aug 31 2005, 03:02 PM
I know people who have never went to Church a day in their life but I can confidently call them more 'Christian' then most of the Christian's I know. They don't judge other people, they listen to other people, they hold an open mind, and their usually quite friendly and not full of anger, suspicion or ill will. Most Christian's I know have a good dosage of judgement and hate. Something Jesus said to get rid of.

Oh I forgot, way back God told us in the Old Testament to hate Gays. Screw Jesus, the Old Testament is the real word!

I live my life judging no one, a Tupac cliche which I agree with is that only God can judge me. I don't hate gays,blacks,indians none of it. I rarely judge someone, Since I could talk my parents were very strict to Catholicism (If thats what you would call it) and believed very strongly that everyone was equal and never to judge anyone (except for the gay and abortion stuff) when I went to school and it would have been my opportunity to start judging peole and forming my own opinion I just decided that no matter what anyone did they could still be a good person and no matter how good someone was they could still be bad.I've never judged someone on the position that they've been put in, though I admit that I have judged people on they're choices. Whichisn't always a bad thing, but I refuse to hold it against them for longer than need be.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally posted by Flaming Homer+Aug 31 2005, 09:32 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Flaming Homer @ Aug 31 2005, 09:32 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Hakan@Aug 31 2005, 02:27 PM

WRONG.

There is substantial evidence for the big bang.

Take your god loving melon out of your god loving ass.

How does Big Bang discredit creationism? it deiscredits the modern and generally accepted form of thought on creationism, but answer me this? what created these masses that crashed into each other how was the first atom created? [/b][/quote]
That is the prime cause argument that I was reffering to earlier, something caused every effect, if you go all the way back then something must have started it all.......ie God.....


Or time is a loop...where the last thing to happen causes the first thing...but that is a mind fata that I can't handle
________
Daniella_rush

[Patek23]

Originally posted by Fozzie_DeBear+Aug 31 2005, 03:09 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Fozzie_DeBear @ Aug 31 2005, 03:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

How does Big Bang discredit creationism? it deiscredits the modern and generally accepted form of thought on creationism, but answer me this? what created these masses that crashed into each other how was the first atom created?

That is the prime cause argument that I was reffering to earlier, something caused every effect, if you go all the way back then something must have started it all.......ie God.....


Or time is a loop...where the last thing to happen causes the first thing...but that is a mind fata that I can't handle [/b][/quote]
True, the person who can take this whole mess, solve it and then figure it out is a god himself, you have to really open your mind to get a wrap on some of the things that are possible.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally posted by FireFly+Aug 31 2005, 09:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FireFly @ Aug 31 2005, 09:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Ahem...

Evidence for the big bang - draw your own conclusions

I'm sorry, but to equate creationism (where there is no evidence, nor will there be any, because it is static and unable to change) with a scientific theory (for which more and more evidence will be accumulated in an adaptive form until it is proven or disproven, or CHANGED - unlike the dogma or "faith" of religion) is foolhardy.

Science changes. Dogma doesn't. This is the undoing of creationism.

Isn't gravity static and unable to change? Did we not develop evidence for it? I fail to see how a theory that cannot change, can also not be proven. [/b][/quote]
Actually we know that gravity exists as one of the primary four forces in nature...what exactly gravity IS though...we know fata all practically.
________
Weedmaps

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally posted by Hakan@Aug 31 2005, 10:02 PM
Oh I forgot, way back God told us in the Old Testament to hate Gays. Screw Jesus, the Old Testament is the real word!

Yeah and in Leviticus where all the Gay bashing justification comes from I believe (but could be mistaken) that equal sins include eating pork and wearing red dresses.

I could be mistaken about the details, my Bible is at the dry cleaners, but essentially the section of the bible that says homosexuality is a sin is filled with other items that are inane and 'conveniently' overlooked.
________
Nicki live

[Faid1]

Originally posted by Fozzie_DeBear+Aug 31 2005, 03:12 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Fozzie_DeBear @ Aug 31 2005, 03:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Isn't gravity static and unable to change? Did we not develop evidence for it? I fail to see how a theory that cannot change, can also not be proven.

Actually we know that gravity exists as one of the primary four forces in nature...what exactly gravity IS though...we know fata all practically. [/b][/quote]
"Gravity" is merely God's love keeping us on Earth.