Beliefsbeliefs

Sun Feb 3, 2019, 07:24 PM

Carl Sagan on our place in the Universe, eloquent as always

19 replies, 197 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Currentsitguy (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2019, 11:35 PM

1. Harvard

would not hire him after years of working at Harvard. They called him a used car sales man of science professors. "Say anything and then slip away when the truth comes out. He great for mid afternoon TV" said Dr. Ashen from Harvard school of space exploration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to outside (Reply #1)

Mon Feb 4, 2019, 04:16 AM

2. Can't please everyone.

That being said, nobody ever heard of Dr. Ashen.
You should read some of Dr. Sagan's stuff. It'll blow your mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to outside (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 10:03 AM

13. Frankly...

Considering their hire of Elizabeth Warren, I don't place much credence in their hiring practices. In any event he was good enough for Cornell and for NASA on the Pioneer, Viking and Voyager projects. Neither of them are in the habit of hiring screw-offs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2019, 11:09 AM

3. Carl Sagan now knows that their is a Creator and there is one king of Kings

named Jesus.

I spit my soda out when he said science is subject to the whims of subjectivity!

Science when trying to pontificate on how things began (Big Bang Hypothesis and the Hypothesis of Evolution)

relies very heavily on subjectivity and the whims of the scientists bias.

But at least the title is true. The Universe was not made of us, but for the glory of God!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #3)

Mon Feb 4, 2019, 12:53 PM

4. If you knew 1/1000th of what Sagan knew about the universe,

You'd still have no clue.

I know you claim a Mensa measured 162 IQ, right on par with Dr. Sagan, but we all know you are full of it.
162!!

Your posts reveal it over and over again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #3)

Mon Feb 4, 2019, 01:16 PM

5. Science does not look for evidence to satisfy a preconceived conclusion.

Science asks questions and then follows the evidence wherever it leads them, no matter how distressing the answer. That is called a "theory" which will either stand or be replaced when a better, more comprehensive theory comes along. Nothing is set in stone, all is subject to revision and reconsideration.

You show me concrete, reproducible and falsifiable under laboratory conditions, empirical proof of a supernatural supreme being, and I'll consider what you say. I need something measurable and quantifiable, then I need to know the mechanism of it's action. If, for example, I see water transformed into wine, I need to have a sample of the original water, and a sample of the subsequent wine. I will then need to ascertain the exact chemical and molecular actions taken upon the source water, and the external forces applied to it to bring about the change. I'd need to see if I can reproduce the same result and what steps I'd have to undertake to bring about the same.

The burden of proof is on those who make extraordinary claims, and the bar is very high. If someone is going to claim that the laws of physics can be violated on an arbitrary basis, then they need to explain by what processes that occurs. "Because it's a miracle" or "Because it was written down" is not an acceptable answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #5)

Mon Feb 4, 2019, 02:29 PM

6. If science only did follow the evidence where it led no matter how distressing.

'You show me concrete, reproducible and falsifiable under laboratory conditions, empirical proof of a supernatural supreme being, and I'll consider what you say.'

Show me that of you and I will consider you not a robot! You want to know God= go meet HIm, He is not far away! You won't find Him in a laboratory

But as to evolution through mutation preserved by natural selection? there is no evidence.

Fossils do not show mutations,. they just show the remains of a creature that existed X years ago! All teh concrete reproducible and falsifiable under laboratory conditions that is empirical shows that mutations cause degeneration not regeneration! They cause loss of complexity not an increase of complexity.

As for the Big Bang- Do you really want to believe that absolutely nothing existed for all eternity past. Then that nothing exploded and became something and that something then morphed to become all we see??? That is your privilege but please do not call it a valid scientific theory!~ It violates proven laws of science!

" I see water transformed into wine, I need to have a sample of the original water, and a sample of the subsequent wine. I will then need to ascertain the exact chemical and molecular actions taken upon the source water, and the external forces applied to it to bring about the change. I'd need to see if I can reproduce the same result and what steps I'd have to undertake to bring about the same."

Do you demand the same scrutiny for molecules to man? Of course you don't! You take the word of others who never saw, have never been able to even take one genus and change it to another, nor have been able to cause a truly beneficial mutation that added information and greater complexity to a genome!

So I take it you are a severe cynic and do not take others people word for things.

There are hundreds of millions of people who have a living relationship with Jesus Christ! You can have one as well. biblical faith is not a hope so kind of thing- but a belief based on teh evidence of Him being!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #6)

Mon Feb 4, 2019, 03:12 PM

8. No, I take nothing on hearsay

If one were to put it in religious terms, there is zero room in my world view for faith. I don't take a "scientist's" word for anything, I consider the data they present, the methods they obtained it, the arguments against, and the potential peer concurrence or dissent. If someone, an Astronomer for example, were to come to me today and tell me there is to be an eclipse tomorrow, I will need to see the past recorded measured movements of the sun, earth, and moon before I give them any more credence than I do some random person I meet on the street. Only a fool buys into the argument from authority position. Only a larger fool buys into the argument from majority consensus one. If I cannot prove it to my satisfaction or see very good documented evidence with a very high confidence level and an extremely low probability for error, it is most likely either an error in observation, a false conclusion, a willful self deception, or an outright lie.

I see absolutely zero measurable or quantifiable evidence whatsoever for any supernatural supreme being, Christian or otherwise.

I cannot state with absolute certainty how the current universe absolutely come into existence, or how life progressed from simpler to more complex forms. I have my own ideas, but fantasies are not facts, and are therefore unworthy of discussion or presentation. I can only rely on current theory as a potentially explanatory, albeit incomplete explanation, assuming better and more complete models are forthcoming. If a better, more explanatory theory comes along, I will be perfectly happy to toss aside any assumptions I have at this point. There are no absolutes. Even the laws of physics break down to some extent at the quantum level, because our understanding is not yet complete.

If you cannot present me evidence independently arrived at, with no scriptural reference whatsoever, that can be observed and measured, it did not and does not occur, nor was it important.

This is not science:


I am perfectly content in the knowledge that when I die I will simply cease to exist and that all that will remain is the impact I made on the lives and memories of others left behind, and my dead decomposing body in a box. My purpose for existence is as unique as I am among the other 7 billion people on earth. For me it is to love those in my life who I care for to the best of my ability, to learn and obtain as much knowledge about as many subjects as possible, and to see and experience first hand as much as I can before I finally assume room temperature. There is nothing more I need or desire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #8)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 06:22 AM

10. Well I am stunned you believe in evolution then

It is not based on any observable, verifiable, repeatable,experimentation. As a matter of fact- all experimenting to prove evolution have done much to disprove evolution! We have never seen change beyond speciation within a genre and yet those who adhere to evolution believe I repeat BELIEVE, that based on just speciation and some random Mendellian variations, life went from organic molecules to man. that is the apex of belief.

As for being content in what happens when you die-Jesus has already proven you wrong and He inspired His Word to encourage or warn of the consequences of dying with or without Him as ones' Savior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 09:03 AM

11. Lmao.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 5, 2019, 09:48 AM

12. Consequences?

Why would any being be worshiped under threat of punishment. That sounds like not a being of love, but rather a petty, insecure, vindictive one that needs throngs of slavish minions to constantly reassure them. The ultimate Snowflake, of you will. Indeed it sounds to me like the embodiment of Evil, not love. If such a being did exist they certainly would not be worthy of any devotion. I owe my respect only to those who personally earn it, and certainly do not give myself heart and soul to anyone except perhaps my wife, regardless of what they have done for me.

In any event, what exactly is under threat here? My "soul"? What is it? Can it be measured? Documented? Recorded? My heart or brain activity can be recorded and graphed. The electrical impulses that drive my muscles and be tested, plotted, and independently stimulated. I'd need quantifiable concrete evidence to even consider such a concept.

BTW: One only need look at our DNA to reconstruct our ancestors. I am of more Northern European descent and therefore carry substantial amounts of Neanderthal traits. Chickens in the egg can be observed to develop through their reptilian stage. Indeed, a simple experiment that turns off some of their more recent avian genes gives you a creature with an snout and teeth, just like the more primitive beings they evolved from. There isn't a thing alive on earth today that isn't part of an ongoing adaptation to environmental pressures and conditions stretching back billions of years, and it's all recorded right there in our genetic code. Contained in every cell of every living thing thing is the whole history of life on Earth.

I suspect when we finally get to Europa, we are going to find that the ruddy stains emanating from the cracks are bacteria being welled up from the still liquid depths, evolved completely independently from Earth, and our unique history. My wife and I have a bottle of champagne put aside for the day when life from outside of Earth is confirmed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #12)

Wed Feb 6, 2019, 06:41 AM

14. You need quantifiable concrete evidence?

But yet you believe in evolution and the BB without a shred of concrete qunatifiable evidence- just suppositions and conclusions based on supposition.

And asa far as god- you have placed the cart before the horse!

We are already under condemnation! God calls us back to Himself. He called all things into existence. Man rebelled against God not the other way around. You yourself have admitted you are in rebellion by refusing to accept He is unless you have verifiable evidence via science.

God by very nature would require fidelity to Himself in order to receive His finest.

And there are numerous things you accept by faith daily and not go through the lengthy process of scientific inquiry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #5)

Mon Feb 4, 2019, 02:32 PM

7. I will propose to you what I have proposed many times here.

This has been declared a fact by many evolutionists and many leading evolutionary departments in major universities namely that raptors evolved into birds. This is no longer an idea or theory but proven fact of science according to them!

So show the evolution of scales to feathers and the mechanisms that go with that transition and evolution wins!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #7)

Mon Feb 4, 2019, 03:59 PM

9. Birds are still dinosaurs.

You can't outgrow your lineage.
You have absolutely no clue.

Phylogeny. Look it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #5)

Wed Feb 6, 2019, 05:29 PM

15. Science is consistently looking for answers to preconceived conclusion.

They have concluded evolution and the BB are fact! I can post dozens of major scientists all saying it. Dawkins goes so far as to say that those who deny evolution is true have some kind of mental disorder!

So continuing to look for more evidences of evolution is simply looking for answers to preconceived conclusions.

Scientists when they enter the field do not reprove Darwinian evolution. they accept it as fact (except the YEC scientists) and go from there.

It is interesting all the testimonies from former evolutionary scientists in nearly every field of research who came to see YEC is the answer, not through some divine revelation but by their research and research and they came to the conclusion that evolution and the Big Bang are scientifically untenable.

Course the mainstream evolutionary science community scoffs them off and has written them off, but the numbers are impressive!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #15)

Wed Feb 6, 2019, 06:11 PM

16. It is not a preconceived notion

It is a theory, one that is constantly refined over the last 170 or so years.Since none of us have access to a time machine, the best we will ever be able to do is much like a forensic detective, assemble the clues and try to arrive at the best explanation that fits the facts. In all of what you posted, not once have you shown any independently verifiable proof or evidence of your claims. You point to gaps in fossil records as if that somehow verifies your claim. In reality it is nothing but what it appears gaps during past periods of intense geologic activity. We know that the Siberian Traps were extremely active for over two million years spanning the Permian-Triassac boundary. We can excavate the remnants today. We know when and where the Chixalub impact occurred. The crater is still there. The pattern of cenotes radiates out across the Yucatan Peninsula. The Iridium deposit layer, an element almost exclusively found in meteorites, is right there for all to see. It's easily visible in the road cut across the Raton Pass between Colorado and New Mexico.

If you are going to attempt to tear down every single established field of study on the planet, everything from geology, to biology, to genetics, to astronomy, and more then you have an extraordinary task ahead of you, far more than "the evidence isn't perfect" or "my faith tells me".

You see, there are no complete answers, and there is no ultimate truth. 100, 200, 500 years from now there may very well be different, more complete explanations, with far more detail to back them up. The whole point of asking these kind of questions is that there is never a final answer, and the questions never end. That's the whole point. Each and every answer leads to a myriad of new questions, and a greater understanding of how before we were wrong, and will be wrong again.

But, hey. To quote John Lennon "What ever gets you through the night."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #16)

Fri Feb 8, 2019, 05:05 PM

17. Well hate to burst your bubble but there is ultimate truth.

I do not challenge the physical finds science has made! But I dso challenge their assigned ages! Especially in light of the empirical research that has shown radio-isotope dating is fatally flawed as any kind of accurate chronometer.

I do not worry about gaps in the fossil record! But how can mutation preserved through natural selection be the best explanation of the past when we know through constant observation that mutations ultimately degrade and degenerate not upgrade and expand information! IOW we have never seen or been able to prodice one example of darwinian evolution at all. We have seen devoution constantly through mutation, but not one example of mutations adding complexity and new, previouosly unwritten information in any genome!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #17)

Fri Feb 8, 2019, 05:27 PM

18. Find me one single legitimate scientist who is not in one form or another associated with ID

And you just may have a point. Find me a Shintoist, Hindu, Buddhist, or better yet, an Atheist who reaches the same conclusions through their research, in other words someone without skin in the game, and again you might have a point. In other words find me a study that is peer reviewed by the general scientific community at large and accepted as valid research with valid conclusions.

And no, just because an ancient religious text claims to have a lock on truth, does not make it fact; not without independent corroborating evidence, that is testable and verifiable. Like I said, if water can be turned into wine, for example, then you are going to have to do it in a lab, under observation by neutral observers, for me to believe it.

A few other suggestions that are open to test to verify the claims:

Place a few loaves of bread and a couple of fish on a table. Invite 200 guests and see how many get to eat.

Assemble 20 people suffering from Hansen's Disease. Leave 10 as a control group, and touch the other 10. Observe over a period of time to see if the 10 who were touched's condition have any marked improvement.

The tenets I accept may eventually prove to be hopelessly wrong, and that is OK, but even that would not lend veracity to what you propose without what I have lain out. As it stands I see nothing that lends any more weight to any one religious group and their claims over any other. All have some text they claim is sacred and possesses some sort of divine truth or revelation, they wouldn't attract followers without that. Fervency, depth of faith, or devotion however, is not evidence of validity. Paranoid schizophrenics claim to see all sorts of things and often times truly believe what they see is true with every fiber of their being. That level of belief still does not make it real.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Currentsitguy (Reply #18)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 09:03 AM

19. Well go to any ID or creation site and read the testimonies!

Most of these were converts from atheistic evolution or theistic evolution and changed based on their research.

You do not understand at all do you! All scientists (and children in the govt. schools for that matter) are indoctrinated from the earliest age that evolution (I use this to refer to everything from the BB to molecules to man-evolutionists have written textbooks entitled the evolution of the universe so I shall use it for brevity sake) is true science.

Nearly all scientists start their careers fully taught how to think along naturalistic lines. They do not question a life time of education. I.E. they look at the grand canyon and automatically think millions of years of erosion! Why? They were taught to believe that! They do not even think along the lines of Mt. St. Helens and that geologic event formed a 1/40th scale model of the grand canyon in months. Along with thousands of sedimentary layers! When they do a conflict ensues- for Mt. St. Helens goes against all they were taught about how sedimentary layers are laid down!

But seeing as nearly all the converts go from evolution to ID and/or YEC we see the simple fact. Give all the groups you mentioned the hypotheses of YEC and the research done to support those hypotheses, you may find many pursuing studies into ID.

But I am surprised you reject the miraculous! YOu believe that nothing could evolve into everything and that mutations made increased complexity and added massimve new information to a simple genome (molecules to man) despite all the testable observable research shows that mutations go in the exact opposite direction evolution requires it to go!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Beliefsbeliefs