How did all the animals fit on Noah's Ark?

by hooberus 207 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  hooberus

  Sacrificing Truth

  One of the handouts at a recent youth conference of the Australian and New Zealand Association for the Advancement of Science (ANZAAS) dealing with the creationist issue had a lot of content on what is, and what is not, science. It claimed that even if a creationist has a string of degrees, if he functions as a creationist he is a pseudo-scientist by definition. And a major part of the argument was exactly what we have been discussing here. It was stated that even if the truth were that, say, pigs, horses and sheep had certain features in common because a Designer had used the same basic plan when He created them, no scientist worthy of the name could conclude such a thing and still be regarded as following science.

  http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1135.asp
• 

  hooberus

  http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-229.htm

  However, Wilson and Cann were not able to see the logical fallacy in their molecular biology when it addressed phylogeny. This approach, known as molecular taxonomy, molecular genetics, or the newer related field of molecular archaeology, also traffics in circular reasoning. Molecular genetics, hiding behind the respect we all have for the science of genetics and the objectivity of that science, is highly infused with subjective evolutionary assumptions. In this field, the commitment to evolution is so complete that Wilson and Cann understand "objective evidence" as ". . . evidence that has not been defined, at the outset, by any particular evolutionary model."[5]
• 

  hillary_step

  Hooberus,

  I asked :

  Well, you are assuming these exist. Please name one (scientist ) who has without examining creationist 'evidence', taken this stand.

  What you have quoted, despite them being context compromised ( another tool of psuedo-science! ) proves my point. The scientists you note exactly outline the process of rationalizing and adjusting theory as it moves from step to step. For example you quote :

  Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic?

  Can you not understand that science CANNOT WORK on assumptions, it has no emotion, no belief. It does not believe or disbelieve in an intelligent designer, it believes in FACTS and subsequently truth. It HAS to exclude an intelligent designer as this is a conclusion and it cannot work from a point of conclusion.

  As to the quote under 'Sacrificing Truth', that is pure evangelical, creationist pap and has no part in this conversation at all. It is an opinion, of an opinion, the equivalent of scientific gossip. The WTS, who you would like to feel that you have distanced yourself from, are past masters of using such quotations to their own ends.

  Can I ask you a question? Do you seriously believe that a scientist as aggressively Marxist as Lewontin is, would really be sympathizing in the slightest with creationist ideals.

  Take off your biased blinkers and read what he says again. He is clearly describing what I have tried to describe, the process through which science must move to prove, to define and redefine theory and evidence until it is crystallized in a truth. It MUST be MATERIAL to provide TRUTH. Any other position is bound to founder in bias and eccentricity.

  our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.?

  I agree with him entirely, and he certainly does not fit the criteria that I originally set for your to follow in my challenge.

  Best regards - HS
• 

  peacefulpete

  Science that allowed supernatural explanations would be stagnant and argumentative. It would go like this : "At this point the cell divides, then a miracle happens, then eyes form, then a bunch of miracles happen.....".
  
  Only by limiting legitimate science to materialistc explanations and study does science have purpose and direction. Rather than simply and attractively relegate the unknown to the supernatural, natural empirical mechanisms are sought, hypotheses tested and new understanding emerges. This process is always open to new discovery, and while resistace to change is human, those dedicated to scientific method are far more ready to expand their views than those who insist that a 2000 year old book has all the answers we need to know.
  
  To fault that approach to learning is to damn humans to the Dark Ages.
• 

  Valis

  *LOL* This thing would eat the rest of the animals...

  http://www.wftv.com/news/2732086/detail.html

  JAKARTA, Indonesia -- Indonesian villagers claim to have captured a python that is 49.21 feet long and weighs nearly 1,000 pounds, a local official said Monday.

  If confirmed, it would be the largest snake ever kept in captivity.

  Hundreds of people have flocked to see the snake at a primitive zoo in Curugsewu village on the country's main island of Java, Republika daily reported. It splashed two large pictures of the reptile across its back page.

  Local government official Rachmat said the reticulated python measured 14.85 meters (49 feet) and weighed in at 447 kilograms (985 pounds).

  The Guinness Book of World Records lists the longest ever captured snake to be 9.75 meters (32 feet). The heaviest--a Burmese Python kept in Gurnee, Illinois--weighs 182.76 kilograms (403 pounds), the book said on its Web site.

  Rebublika said the snake, which was caught last year but only recently put on public display, eats three or four dogs a month.

  Reticulated pythons are the world's longest snakes. They are capable of eating animals as large as sheep, and have been known to attack and consume humans.

  The species is native to the swamps and jungles of Southeast Asia.

  Copyright 2003 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  Sincerely,

  District Overbeer
• 

  U.2.K. Tha Greate$t

  Evolution is not only a enemy of GOD, but Jesus Christ and the angels, and all of GOD's creation. And 2 of the things that i plan to shut down and correct when im in the process fo changing the world is: The form of science and the theorys of the wickedness of evolution, im sick of hearing about it. And if i cant shut it down, armageddon will. Yes behold good times is coming!
• 

  drwtsn32

  U2K:

  If you lived 400 years ago you'd probably be saying the same thing about Galileo and his absurd idea of a heliocentric solar system. After all, it goes against many scriptures in the bible.

  Look at the history of religion trying to force science in a certain direction. Incredible.
• 

  Big Tex

  And 2 of the things that i plan to shut down and correct when im in the process fo changing the world

  Please tell me you are in some form of therapy, or even better, there are rational people who are responsible for your care.
• 

  hillary_step

  PeacefulPete,

  Only by limiting legitimate science to materialistc explanations and study does science have purpose and direction.

  Exactly, well said. Most pseudo-scientists view the greatest strength of science as its weakness because they live in a world preconception and cannot accept change. No truth can be founded on pre-conclusions and bias.

  Best regards - HS
• 

  Aztec

  U2K, you remind me of one of those puppies who continually bang their head on a mirror trying to play with the puppy on the other side. It'd be cute if it wasn't so sad.

  ~Aztec