Is Creationist Science Worth Believing?

[rodsky]

@ rodsky

Very concise and clear posts sir. I like the ideas.

Yw, lot's more where that came from...just give me a tap on the shoulder if you need more um, enlightenment hihihi.

-RODION

[aubrey_pearl]

@ rodsky

LOL I used to be the president of the MSU-IIT Astronomical Society. Drop me a line if you want to understand how the Chandrasekhar limit on White Dwarfs disallow the formation of larger Dwarf stars, and instead force any stellar body nga more than 8 solar masses to degenerate into Neutron Stars or Black Holes Maybe I can entertain you better hihihi

And why do you have to picture this whole thing as a "game"? I'm just expressing my thoughts as you express yours, sounds more like a decent sharing of ideas to me, rather than a game, unless you want it to be such an activity, of course.

And finally, why is it that in all your arguments, you seem to always resort to ad hominem? I invite people here to read your history of posts here in iStorya, and they'd agree with me that you constantly commit ad hominem...

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject. (from Wikipedia)

Your comments such as "ka advance nimo ug utok oi sa binisaya pa LAGPAS." is a typical example of this. Bakit ang dali mong mapikon bro? Sometimes respect is not earned by aggression--it is earned more by moderation.

-RODION

i'm stunned

sir my suggestion is to leave (idontcare) the guy alone. nagpapansin ra na siya.

[teebee]

I know Filipinos really believed in Creation, but who knows there are some who dont and want to justify what he believed...

yes or no, and why

[NASYO]

EVOLUTION..

Ngano gud tawn naay negro, intsik, kano, indian?
Unsa man jud na si Adan ug si Eba?

But GOD really made us..

[rcruman]

Ngano gud tawn naay negro, intsik, kano, indian?

so mao rani ang imo gikahibulngan og nganong sa Evolution ka og dili sa CREATION?
try to remove all the skin of negro, intsik, kano og indian then let us see kung dili ba pareha tanan.

PEace!

[NASYO]

ang pangutana,
Ngano naay intsik ug negro?

nganong ingon ana man sila? dili pareho ug color?
gikan man kuno ni adan ug ni eba.

Naa tali Gino-o nga negro ug intsik?

O mi-evolve ra jud ang tawo. Para mo-fit sa iya environment.

ako gisulti nga GOD made US..

Unsa pa man problema nimo ana bro. rcruman?

[rcruman]

ang pangutana,
Ngano naay intsik ug negro?

then you should know their environment or their location in order for you to know why they look like that.

nganong ingon ana man sila? dili pareho ug color?
gikan man kuno ni adan ug ni eba.

ikaw bro kung daghan mo sa inyo pamilya, pareha mog color tanan?
I think you should read more about GENE, taas na kaayo kung ako i-post dinhi.

Naa tali Gino-o nga negro ug intsik?
O mi-evolve ra jud ang tawo. Para mo-fit sa iya environment.

evolve? how come nihunong ang evolution?
thousands of years ago human physical features still the same profile, nothing has change only the color due to their environment. How come the evolution of egg to dinosaurs has stopped?

ako gisulti nga GOD made US..
Unsa pa man problema nimo ana bro. rcruman?

dakog problema kay "made" and "evolution" doesn't fit.

Peace!

[Jollibee]

Simply... FOR NOW... as to date... Evolution makes sense!

Dont you see?

Creation Theory - THERE HAS TO BE A CREATION AND CREATOR... and this is the very fact why creationist trip over themselves and leads to its its own demise...

why? as I said... in Creation theory... there has to be a creator and being created... BUT WHO MADE GOD?
If thats your core that there is "something" then there has someone to create it... BUT somehow no theist would ever DARE question of how God was created...

altenative theory...

Science /Evolution/Cosmology - In the first place science has no problem of explaining of what created whom... simply because...

#1 Rule of Thermodynamic is : "Energy can never be created nor destroyed, It just transforms from one form to another"

And to remind you that this theory is scrutinized by years of studies, facts, actual behaviors of atoms and energy to prove that at least this theory stands as a fact today...

This points out to the #1 Question of theist love to ask is who made the BIG BANG? This is hoping to trap athiest to saying that someone created the big bang...

BUT according to science... and proven thermodynamics... BIG BANG was not created but rather it was energy that transferred or "morphed" itself to BIG BANG...


Now creationist.... please explain who create GOD?

your answers should be proven by scrutiny and actual observations of behavior or phenomenon... and not just use...
"God Is Beyod Logic"

[bcasabee]

But big bang is just a theory.......therefore, it is just as good as the creationist theory.....

Its already given that rule:

#1. energy can never be blah blah blah......

My questions are:
1.) But where in space that large amount of energy came from inorder to produced that Big Bang? If it transferred, so where did it came from? Can a cartesian coordinate system pinpoint the exact location? If it morph, then what is it before? If you remembered your highschool science, forms of energy are, mechanical, light, heat, electrical, atomic/nuclear,magnetic,chemical,gravitational, did I miss something? Now, what form was it before the big bang?
2.) The universe is throwing away energy outside of it, and by rule #1, what will happen if all the energy will be thrown away and nothing will be left? Perhaps another big bang will occur, but how? Perhaps, the energy being thrown away had minds on their own and will decide to regroup and have another Big Bang? Even so, the ultimate question will remain, "How did those energy" came into this part of space? Obviously, physics law such as the rule #1 will fail. But will I stop from questioning just because my favorite tool rule #1 turned out to be not the right tool for the job?

My point is, every theory has its own uses. Others are use for scientific enlightenment, while others are use for spiritual enlightenment. Anyway, I believe in the end, all the mysteries will be revealed.


BUT according to science... and proven thermodynamics... BIG BANG was not created but rather it was energy that transferred or "morphed" itself to BIG BANG...

[boomer]

^creationist as a theory....it lacks certain ingredients to be a "theory"....Not a valid one though, since it isn't based on evidence and has no predictive power.

speaking about the big bang, might as well read up on the m-theory....i have to catch up on m-theory as well.