Hilbert's Hotel

Diskussionsforum zur Unendlichkeit: Theismus, Atheismus, Primzahlen, Unsterblichkeit, das Universum...
Discussing Infinity: theism and atheism, prime numbers, immortality, cosmology, philosophy...

Gamestudio Links
Zorro Links
Newest Posts
How to continuing Zorro trading statistics after restarting VPS?
by Zheka
15 minutes 25 seconds ago
Entity Memory steigt ins Unendliche
by jcl
Today at 08:42
What are you working on?
by HellThunder
Today at 03:47
Strange behaviour
by alibaba
Yesterday at 22:58
Recoil + aftershock + proper bullet creation
by 3run
Yesterday at 20:21
How to do a windows update on vps?
by mcteilchen
Yesterday at 13:57
Some general questions
by easyX
Yesterday at 00:28
AUM Magazine
Latest Screens
RPG PARTY
Triton Wing now available on Steam
AckCon'17: Lotter vs The World
Triton Wing
Who's Online
14 registered (preacherX, jenGs, DMB, Lobo, firecrest, JoFo, sivan, Dbat, MasterQ32, 1 invisible), 480 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
byano, Tuguldur717, jmgrnt7, AGI, Materz
17831 Registered Users
Page 2 of 54 < 1 2 3 4 ... 53 54 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#68781 - 04/01/06 11:39 Re: Science and Creation ***** [Re: Matt_Aufderheide]
jcl Online

Chief Engineer

Registered: 07/22/00
Posts: 25979
Loc: Frankfurt
This is not the topic of this thread. And frankly, I think the few creationists remaining today hardly indicate the decline of civilization: 500 years ago everyone was a creationist and we managed the development of science nevertheless.

The topic of this thread and only thing I'm interested in is how creationists explain all the observations that seem to contradict them.

For instance, to make a beginning: In the poll above someone voted for a 6000 years old universe. I'd like to learn how this person would explain the stars in the sky, the red shift, the background radiation, the expansion of the universe, the distances of galaxies, and supernovae?

If the universe were created 6000 years ago, how come that we can see stars much further away than 6000 light years?

Top
#68782 - 04/01/06 12:50 Re: Science and Creation [Re: jcl]
Damocles Offline
Expert

Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 4301
Creationists dont need explanations, they
solve all problems with a simple "It was created by God, and we shall not know
all his intentions"
_________________________
rtsmaker.com

Top
#68783 - 04/01/06 14:11 Re: Science and Creation [Re: Damocles]
Matt_Aufderheide Offline
Expert

Registered: 10/03/03
Posts: 4117
they say God made the light coming in mid-space, to simulate an older universe. Everything because God made it that way. Dinosaurs fossils were made by God to test our faith.

you might not see this as a problem, but you dont live in the US. I dont think Civilization is going to end either though, but they are definelty messing up the intellectual climate here. There are forces aligned against science here. I'll stop posting here now, but you have to live in the US to really understand how much stupidity is going on here.
_________________________
Sphere Engine--the premier A6 graphics plugin.

Top
#68784 - 04/01/06 14:17 Re: Science and Creation [Re: Damocles]
ventilator Offline
Senior Expert

Registered: 05/01/02
Posts: 7440
what if an almighty being created the world 6000 years ago and set up the perfect illusion for tricking us into finding evidences for big bang, evolution and so on? ...why would that being do that though? <edit> oh! matt posted the same. </edit>

Top
#68785 - 04/01/06 14:21 Re: Science and Creation [Re: Matt_Aufderheide]
Damocles Offline
Expert

Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 4301
I lived in the US for quite some time, and really apreciate the
more rational view on these scientific points in Germany...
Americans dont seem to recognize that these views are not really improving
interlectual properties.
Even if someone does not belive in the facts of science,
it needs to be taught in scool after all, to be able to understand how they argument.
And not just beeing ignorant like a hillbilly.
_________________________
rtsmaker.com

Top
#68786 - 04/01/06 14:21 Re: Science and Creation [Re: ventilator]
Matt_Aufderheide Offline
Expert

Registered: 10/03/03
Posts: 4117
Beleive it or not, that is what the young earth creationists say when it comes down to it. Its like the classic solipsist arguement: no can prove to me they aren't automatons controlled by an evil wizard, so there is no way I can really know if there is anyone else besides me. There is no way anyone can prove that God dint just "make it that way", to fool us, or test us. It's a completely unfalsifiable arguement.
_________________________
Sphere Engine--the premier A6 graphics plugin.

Top
#68787 - 04/01/06 18:31 Re: Science and Creation [Re: jcl]
NITRO777 Offline
Expert

Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 3010
Loc: analysis paralysis
Quote:

This is not the topic of this thread. And frankly, I think the few creationists remaining today hardly indicate the decline of civilization: 500 years ago everyone was a creationist and we managed the development of science nevertheless.

The topic of this thread and only thing I'm interested in is how creationists explain all the observations that seem to contradict them.

For instance, to make a beginning: In the poll above someone voted for a 6000 years old universe. I'd like to learn how this person would explain the stars in the sky, the red shift, the background radiation, the expansion of the universe, the distances of galaxies, and supernovae?

If the universe were created 6000 years ago, how come that we can see stars much further away than 6000 light years?




I cant refute any of that. I only try to look at both sides of the argument because I have a lot of young earth creationist friends. Young earth creationism is not even a biblical concept. Just to briefly explain;

Genesis 1:1 states that "In the beginning God created the heavens and earth"

Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep.."

Then the 6 day creation account begins from Genesis 1:3 onward.

It has always been my view that there is a long unspecified period between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. A "gap" of a sizable amount of time which accounts for the dinosaurs,the age of the earth and even previous species of man.

However, the 6 day account does indeed place Adam at 6000 bc. This does not conflict with historians and archeologists placing the dawn of civilization at around 8000-10000 bc.

I do dispute the dating of civilization as older than 6000 years because of the methods used to determine it. Carbon dating can be used with some accuracy, but not precise accuracy. So I think the only real argument I would have with anyone here would be about the dating of the dawn of civilization. My question to anyone would be: hoiw do you know civilization began in 8000-10000 bc?

If any craetionist needs to know what biblical proofs I have as to why the bible agrees with the big bang and the age of the earth I would be glad to expound because I have a lot of biblical information about that subject, but I think the topic is for another thread.

So I accept the age of the earth and universe mostly, but I beleieve in a literal spontaneous re-creation and re-population of the earth at around 6000 bc. Adam was noted to be created in the "image of God" different from previous manlike creations.

Note also in Genesis 1:2 the statement "and darkness was upon the face of the waters..." implying that the first creation,or previous creations, were destroyed with a flood.

So if anyone wants to discuss the dating of the dawn of civilization I have plenty to say, however I agree with science about the age of dinos, the earth and the universe.

@Matt
Just because I disagree with science about some things does not mean I disagree about everything. I think your having trouble understanding this. I am not against science or scientist, I just dont believe evolution.

Top
#68788 - 04/01/06 19:25 Re: Science and Creation [Re: NITRO777]
jcl Online

Chief Engineer

Registered: 07/22/00
Posts: 25979
Loc: Frankfurt
I think it is largely undisputed that civilization began not earlier than 6000 BC. The earliest stone building artifacts date back to 8000..9000 BC, and the first cities, in Elam and Sumer, were founded about 5000 BC. This is often identified with the begin of civilization.

Top
#68789 - 04/01/06 19:37 Re: Science and Creation [Re: NITRO777]
A.Russell Offline
Expert

Registered: 03/15/03
Posts: 4427
Loc: Japan
Hey Nitro, the rules are no using the bible for "evidence!" Only scientific observation. As if that book has any evidence in it. It was written by men in the dark ages, fearful and superstitious. As you would expect from the geographic location, God is modeled on a Arab despot. Yes, oh most wonderful master who art so high, I bow and lick at your feet oh lord! It's like believing in Darth Vader.

You've even got the story wrong. It opens with "In the beginning there was the word..." Then finishes something like "...and so they lived happily every after." Or was that another story? I get them confused.

Try taking an objective look at the contents of the bible. There is nothing scientific about it.



Edited by A.Russell (04/01/06 19:40)
_________________________
Pachinko a Go Go! Super Excite!

Top
#68790 - 04/01/06 19:41 Re: Science and Creation [Re: A.Russell]
jcl Online

Chief Engineer

Registered: 07/22/00
Posts: 25979
Loc: Frankfurt
The word in the beginning was another story. In fact the book Genesis was quite enlightened for that time. Aside from the Adam story it's a quite precise account of the Babylonian world model. Its author was probably an educated person.

But nevertheless, the content of the bible can indeed not be used for a scientific argument.

Top
Page 2 of 54 < 1 2 3 4 ... 53 54 >


Moderator:  jcl, Lukas, old_bill, Spirit 

Kompaktes Wörterbuch des UnendlichenCompact Dictionary of the Infinite