malvisguy212:
No, if I don't believe in you doesn't mean you did not exist.

Of course it would be dumb not to believe in me. And that's because you can see me
hear me, describe me and interact with me.
And If I die, there are records of me which will prove I existed.
Unlike God.

Remember atheism also means the REJECTION of belief. Rejecting something doesn't mean it does not exist

Lol, atheism does not reject.
It's not as if there was anything to accept in the first place.
Atheism is simply the lack of belief in gods.
It's telling you that God doesn't exist because of your inability to provide verifiable proof.

If I should apply your flawed logic, then I can say "because you choose not to believe that Godzilla exists, doesn't mean it doesn't exist".
See? It makes no sense.

sulasa07:

The same science that gave us fact about the Moon landing is also the science that also gave us fact about the Moon landing being false.
Science fact my foot

Please provide a verified source to this claim.

Grandmeister:

but you guys without an invention to your name think you're better than them because you don the cloak of atheism? There is NO way one can study nature deeply and still think there was no intelligent design behind it all..

You're not bright at all.
What has one's belief or non-belief got to do with his profession?
When scientists make new discoveries, do they give credit to Christianity or the body of science?
When scientists try to make breakthroughs, do they call unto God and the answer falls from heaven without them implementing what they have been taught and have learnt for years?
Obviously you're not bright.
So when a scientist who's an atheist achieves something, they applaud atheism?

you guys without an invention to your name

Such Illogical and childish statement.

kingxsamz:
...
Waiting for religious clowns to come here and try to disprove this.
If you don't believe that scientists can discover things which dates back to millions of years, but believe that a virgin gave birth to a boy who walked on water and then died, only to wake up three days later and ascend into the sky, then you're a compound fool.

the bible agrees with science.its only the ignorant folks and the fanatics who would argue.even the bible agreed that the earth was spherical long before scientist agreed it was.

tunary:
which kind lie be this now. so living things like this are already in existence long ago before God created Adam and Eve? how old is the earth now?

read ur bible well ooo.even the bible admitted that animals were first created by God before he created humans

Who took the photos of those fishes in the water since that was 380 million years ago?

Abi that’s just an imagination? These people are sick. Or does the fish still exist?

Na So.

simplesearch:



God created beast and all the living creatures on the fifth day and man on the sixth. So biblically speaking, there existed no tangible period of distance between both creatures to warrant invisibility and ignorance. Infact all animals according to biblical narratives were named by Adam the first human being created by God.

even that 6th day could be a thousand yrs since we not sure God was working with the Gregorian calender we now use today.Could be a million days could make up a week in God"s eyes.He rested on a sunday so how are we sure it was a sunday? even the jews of old had their day of rest on a saturday before it was now changed to a sunday by the Christian romans.

fortran12:

With all you wrote you only highlighted your ignorance of what faith is.
You say science is re evaluating itself meaning in some areas science has been wrong and this also supports my claim that its not constant.
Faith substance of things hoped for, its the action you perform based on things you believe in. Alot of the scientists that laid the foundations of things you enjoy now did these by faith. They believed in something others did not see and acted based on their believe. That is faith. So as you see it has nothing to do with singing and dancing and eating fruits.

There's nothing bad in realizing one's original ideas were wrong, and that you have a better idea..., built on past knowledge and new information. Even if this better idea will be proven wrong in the future, science is open to refining understanding.

A few examples of refinement involving light:
It was once proposed around 500BCE that that light was emitted from the eyes, which is what allowed people to see.
Of course, this was disproven and a new theory suggested light came from a source (e.g. sun, candle)
It was then theorized that light needed a medium in order to propagate, the way sound needs air, water, or some other substance.
This was also disproven when electromagnetic theory proved that light could travel in a vacuum
It was thought light is instantaneous; then theorized and shown that it takes a finite amount of time to travel (fast, but not instant).

I'm fully open to more refinements, but you see our understanding is broader, truer, and more useful with every iteration.

I also think I misunderstand what you mean by faith. What you describe the scientists doing is intuition: as in, "I think this is what's happening, I am going to persist in trying to understand and explain it, even if other's don't believe it". It's quite possible (as we've seen) that experimentations and further insights will actually disprove the theory. Science is not fundamentally about "being right", it's about understanding. This is quite different from the common uses of faith (i.e. acceptance without understanding, without rationale, without proof, and often with threats of violence)

To wit, definitions of faith:
1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

Here's another scenario where I would use the word intuition, and not faith: Back in 1846, Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis had a theory/intuition that hand washing was effective in preventing disease in a hospital environment. Fellow doctors thought it was a silly theory, and were even offended at the suggestion that their hands were infectious. He persisted in his experiments, demonstrated, and showed how people could repeat his findings.

simplesearch:
God created beast and all the living creatures on the fifth day and man on the sixth. So biblically speaking, there existed no tangible period of distance between both creatures to warrant invisibility and ignorance. Infact all animals according to biblical narratives were named by Adam the first human being created by God.

Oddly enough, if you substitute "day" for 1 or 2 billion years, you have a pretty good record of the scientific basis of the creation of the universe:

Day 1: Light - the Big Bang
Day 2: Atmosphere / Firmament - Gaseous clouds forming stars
Day 3: Dry ground & plants - Gas clouds solidifying into rocky planets. (not sure about the plants though )
Day 4: Sun, moon & stars - I believe our scribes got their numbering backwards (kinda hard to grow the plants in Day3 without sunlight)
Day 5: Birds & sea animals - Cambrian explosion - this is when life took off, according to the fossil records
Day 6: Land animals & humans - creatures evolved, some took to land, and few evolved to homo sapiens
Day 7: The Sabbath of rest - don't know when this is... the Universe is theorized to be getting colder and dying as it expands, so...

GOFRONT:
380 million years........I mean when did the earth came into existence??

make we ask Mr Adam & Mrs Eve.

linearity:


Radiometric dating is still reliable that is the conclusion of the scientific community.

Nothing in the article you posted disproved it. When trying to understand or disprove scientific theories, try to stick with materials that have been published in scientific journals and are have been subjected peer reviews and analysis. Avoid personal opinions that abound on the internet, with zero peer review or analysis.

The article you posted is a creationist attempt to argue at a level above his pay grade with a view to validated his limited understanding of the Bible and his myopic beliefs that the Bible stated that the earth is only about 6,000 years old.

I am also a creationist and many scientific that came up with these theories, analysis, etc are Christians. I am yet to see anywhere in the Bible that categorically stated that, the earth is just 6,000 years old, if you have such a verse, please send it my way.

There are many things in the Bible that we will never understanding, a thousand years with God is like a day. When the Bible said He created the earth in seven days, we do not know if that was a 24 hours day or seven thousand years or seven million years. One day of God's creation might even be a long period of un-quantifiable space of time and don't confuse this with when God separated the Day from the Night later in the creation analysis, this was a different measurement of time and no where in the Bible was it indicated that the measurement of time signified by the separation of the light from the night was the same unit used to judge the seven days of God's creative activities.

Ask yourself....If the Sun that separated the night from the day and is widely used unit of day's measurement was created on the 4th day of God's creation; what unit of measurement was used to determine day 1, day 2 and day 3 that dated the 4th day of creation? God is all knowing and we are finite and can't understand him, we run into many problem when we try to use our finite minds to reach some conclusions that were never reached in the Bible.

Just relax, follow a lot of research about radiometric dating and following the fascinating science of it all and the various methods being used t ensure that results are reliable....radiometric dating results do not contradict anything in the Bible, even when they estimate billions of years.

Just because you are a creationist I will answer you.

BTW, I also beleive the world could be billions or millions of years I don't really care about that. My issue is with what people easily believe and are taught.

You should watch the documentary called "Expelled" and hear scientists actually talk and go against each other.

People have been led to believe the scientific community agree on all these subjects, but its all a lie. There is a lot of false propaganda to promote a certain idea.

BTW, there are papers to show that radiometric dating is not accurate. As there is no accurate dating method. The conclusion is usually a guesstimate. I first saw this in a documentary I watched recently. But here are sample papers.


https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-paleontological-society-papers/article/introduction-to-radiometric-dating/EB988365BB6CBBBC81EFD888E4FAFC42

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170131104433.htm

nextstep:


Oddly enough, if you substitute "day" for 1 or 2 billion years, you have a pretty good record of the scientific basis of the creation of the universe:

Day 1: Light - the Big Bang
Day 2: Atmosphere / Firmament - Gaseous clouds forming stars
Day 3: Dry ground & plants - Gas clouds solidifying into rocky planets. (not sure about the plants though )
Day 4: Sun, moon & stars - I believe our scribes got their numbering backwards (kinda hard to grow the plants in Day3 without sunlight)
Day 5: Birds & sea animals - Cambrian explosion - this is when life took off, according to the fossil records
Day 6: Land animals & humans - creatures evolved, some took to land, and few evolved to homo sapiens
Day 7: The Sabbath of rest - don't know when this is... the Universe is theorized to be getting colder and dying as it expands, so...

Interesting rationalization ... what about Mr Lazarus? Let me guess, he was really sleeping?

Grandmeister:
But job 26:7 told us that the earth is spherical and was hung on nothing(space)..that's a book that's over 3000 years ago. You pseudo-atheist really think you know it all when the foremost physicians and and inventors of the past were religious men..there are more religious surgeons, physicists, biologists than there are non religious ones today, but you guys without an invention to your name think you're better than them because you don the cloak of atheism? There is NO way one can study nature deeply and still think there was no intelligent design behind it all..

1. In spite of Job26:7 the Church (and Pope, bishops, etc) sentenced people to indefinite imprisonment or death if they suggested Earth was round.
2. Being religious was a given... everybody was so in the past (else the Church or Mosque would have your head). Scientific understanding has made people increasingly question dogmatic religion.
3. You're right... nature is absolutely fantastic, and harkens to intelligent design.
4. The next question is: "who designed the designer?" I mean such a brilliant designer must have been designed, going by the logic in 3.


Number 4 is still a very tough (even contentious) question, and religion's answer of: "the designer was always there, and was not designed..." is really quite unsatisfying.

Semaj77:



I don't need to Google anything , I'm very sure you're not acquainted with any scientific process. Even if such turns up on a search I'm very sure it was put up there to discredit science and would be riddled with witless conspiracies

That is my issue and why I don't want to provide any links to papers or documentaries.

People never do research themselves, They just sit down in one place and assume things to fit in what they want to beleive.

Jeromejnr:


That is my issue and why I don't want to provide any links to papers or documentaries.

People never do research themselves, They just sit down in one place and assume things to fit in what they want to beleive.

Your last paragraph is a good description of you

Semaj77:


Your last paragraph is a good description of you

Yeah right.

Do your research.

michlins:
It's easier to believe that a donkey and snake talked than to believe that an animal whose bones you can see lived before us.

Don't disturb me, I'm not alright

You're a lazy Nigerian youth.
Cc;
Nairaland Resident Scientists

So what happened that Sahara is now what it is, a polar shift

Denko2721987:
So what happened that Sahara is now what it is, a polar shift

Weather patterns shifted over time. I mean, just a few weeks of trade winds shifting, and we either have heavy rains (May-August), or scorching dry sunny days (November-February). Similarly, 3 fewer hours of sunshine at a shallower angle produces Winter; 3 more hours at a more incident angle produce Summer.

ReeLoaDead:

Interesting rationalization ... what about Mr Lazarus? Let me guess, he was really sleeping?

I can't comment on all the different stories in the Good Book. Some appear rational, and others, well, you have to take on faith with a grain of salt

Hmm this one hard ooo so between creation and when Jesus come, millions of years been don pass? OK MY QUESTION NOW NA WHO COME CHOP THE FISH WEY E LEAVE BONE FOR GROUND #SMH scientist

kingxsamz:


Please provide a verified source to this claim.

Google is the source

Contact us today

michlins:
It's easier to believe that a donkey and snake talked than to believe that an animal whose bones you can see lived before us.

Don't disturb me, I'm not alright

I swear

380 million what

How old is the earth itself, mtcheew!!!
Na this research them go dey do upandan sotey, till they discover and unleash covid-20..

salford1:

Or there was probably a large lake that empties into the Atlantic. Lake Chad is a remnant of an ancient giant lake or ocean in the Sahara.

Physics taught us continental drift i.e. the earth is a giant puzzle that broke into pieces that became seperate continents.

I remember my Dad schooling me about it years ago... I wasn't even interested

sulasa07:

You are the crazy fellow.How are you sure I'm from d said certain region.At least I know d production date of my phone and TV and when exactly Vacuum Tube was invented.Just coz some scientist said the carbon dating of something dates back to so and so yrs,I should just accept it like that like and stick that to my brain.
If you don't like my reply,beta go n jump inside river.

Truth is, science will never stop until they know the truth about the Earth, world, universe, planet, u name it. Soon they will discover where God is. Just imagine where science will reach in 3,000 years from now. Trust me,it's a world without end. Nothing is ending, no Armageddon..no nothing. Wars may come, but the Earth will recover. Would u have believed in the 60's that phones and emails, WhatsApp, everyone connecting.. will get this sophisticated .planes and jets..u name it. Everything is advancing..with the likes of Elon Musk and co.. science will disgrace religion

nextstep:
I can't comment on all the different stories in the Good Book. Some appear rational, and others, well, you have to take on faith with a grain of salt

Everything in the good book has to be taken in good faith, that is the basis of (any) religion. Any attempt to explain science through that would be futile. They are both diverging but can coexist IMHO.

donvicky2007:
Wow This shows that Sahara desert was once a sea

this is right.. heard something similar in Natgoe wild

sulasa07:

He rode in it a dream,maybe you've skipped that part while reading the Hadith

Did he also split the moon in a dream?

Descortes:
I don't understand why it hurts when you bite your tongue by accident and it doesn't hurt when you bite it on purpose.





I also don't understand why you're biting your tongue right now.

���