₦airaland Forum

felixomor:
Of course, i dont expect u to see ur bias.
U r asking a question, yet ur conclusion is already boldly written.
"Scientific" indeed.

felixomor:
The bolded statement already shows ur bias behind ur question.
So u dont deserve any answers.
Sorry!
And by the way is this the type of bias "science" taught u?

GRIMMJOE:
This guy know how to evade questions he can't answer

talktonase:
Power of 'choice' is the most powerful gift that he gave man...

felixomor:
Do you in the first place believe that God exists?

Why are you then asking questions about God and God's word? Somebody who doesnt exist to you?

gaelllic:
Perhaps one original pair into many.

Perhaps a few original pairs into many more.

The point is it is an unfolding of[b] inherent complexity[/b] and not a sequence of errors.

Think on how just 8 character spaces...

Just 8...

Contain enough inherent complexity to compose all the motor vehicle number plates in a country.

Maybe that'll help.

gaelllic:
Not the way you think.

Here is the difference.

Evolutionists

believe that lifeless chemical compounds organized themselves into living creatures. These creatures then replicate.

There are mistakes (mutations) in the replication process. These mistakes may coincidentally confer survival advantage.

The survivors replicate. The mistake persists as a desirable trait.

Creationists

believe that God made creatures and made them able to reproduce 'after their own kind. These creatures possess

within themselves the information to produce variety[b] within that kind[/b]. Demonstrated as follows:

Humans have 20 687 protein-coding base pairs.

Humans have an average heterozygosity of 6.7%. (This means 67 out of every thousand gene pairs 67 have different

alleles.)

Thus gives us 1340 heterozygous pair locations, called loci (singular- locus).

Thus every human can produce a vast number of different sperm or egg cells.

2¹³⁴⁰in fact.

That's Creationist variation. An unfolding of inherent complexity, inbuilt by God, and restricted within kinds.

Evolutionism teaches a series of mistakes and lucky breaks, completely unrestricted between kinds (fish evolve into

apes, apes into people, etc.)

gaelllic:

And thus shalt thou make it: The length
of the ark shall be three hundred cubits: the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty
cubits.
- Genesis 6: 15 (Douay-Rheims)

300 x 50 x 30 cubits =

140 × 23 × 13.5 metres =

43,500 m³ (1.54 million cubic feet).

I believe that's equivalent to 522 standard American livestock cars ( for train transportation)

each of which holds up to 240 sheep.

They and every beast according to its kind,...
Went...
into the ark,

-Genesis 7: 14 & 15

Species belong to larger biological groups called 'genera' ( singular - 'genus')

This is similar to the meaning of 'kinds'.

E.g. Horses, donkeys, zebras and giraffes all have a common equine ancestor.

Coyotes, jackals, wolves, and all dogs have a common canine ancestor.

Remember that these events took place at the beginning of the world, and so it

was these ancestors of your 3 000 000 species which were rescued from the flood.

Remember also that there was no need to take sea creatures (obviously).

Redo the maths and you'll find it fits - with more than enough room for food and drinking water.

gaelllic:
Preamble.

Inductive reasoning

is a logical process in which multiple premises, all believed true or found true most of the time, are combined to obtain a specific conclusion. Inductive reasoning is often used in applications that involve prediction, forecasting, or behavior.

From the above, then, if the premise is false, the theory inducehall add notes for those who may not know the basics.



This is an excellent place to begin.

A basic premise upon which the theory rests is the immutability of natural constants.

[ Note - Natural constants are certain phenomena assumed to be constant throughout nature and presumably throughout the history

of Creation. Examples are the speed of light in a vacuum, the weight of an electron, the gravitational constant, something called

'alpha' (another mathematical value). These numerical values and expressions are the basis of all the magic maths of the Big Bangers.

These calculations rely on these values being immutable (unchangeable) and universal (true at every point in space).

Let's see if it is so. And let's see if some of these constants are accurate to begin with.

Remember, if they fail to hold, so does the theory.]

On light.

- As far back as the 17th century, Olaf Roemer (Denmark) observed decay in the speed of light over time.

- Trevor Norman and Barry Setterfield (Stanford Research Institute, 1987), postulated speed of light decay.

- In 1987 Dr. V. S. Troitskii (Radio-physical Research Institute, Nizhniy Novgorod, Russia), postulated that a huge decay
in the speed of light had occurred over time. See British journal Astrophysics and Space Science 139 (1987) 389-411
"Physical Constants and Evolution of the Universe."

- In the February 18 1999 edition of Nature, a scientific paper was published that detailed an experiment in which the speed of light
was reduced to 17 meters per second. The experiment was conducted by the Lene V. Hau and an international team from Harvard and
Stanford Universities. They sent light through a sodium vapor that had been cooled to an nanokelvin temperature.


On alpha

Formally known as the 'fine-structure constant'. Defined as

‘The strength of the electromagnetic force that governs how electrically charged elementary particles (e.g., electrons, muons) and
light (photons) interact.’

- NIST (National Institute for Standards and Technology, USA)

- “By doing so, they have found evidence that one of the constants of nature, which are never ever supposed to vary,
was smaller billions of years ago than it is today. The quantity that was measured, known as alpha, wasn’t smaller by much
- less than 1 part in 100,000 - but the finding has sent tremors through physics and astronomy."

- Science News, Vol. 160, October 6, 2001

- ". . . although changes in the fine-structure constant [alpha] do not affect the expansion of the universe significantly, the expansion
affects alpha. . . . About six billion years ago dark energy took over and accelerated the expansion, making it difficult for all
physical influences to propagate through space. So alpha became nearly constant again.”

- Scientific American, June 2005.
Inconstant Constants - Do the inner workings of nature change with time?

These examples are by no means exhaustive. I'm trying to keep this short.

You have not heard about this because Big Bangers do a good job keeping it out of mainstream media

and because you have been trained to be pliant and incurious, because the information is out there.

In a subsequent post I shall treat CMB simultaneously with Big Bang Theory's total failure to pass the

test of Occam's Razor. The two subjects go together quite well, as you shall see.

KingEbukasBlog:
Can you prove God does not exist ?

Seun:
It bothers me when I see religious people making fools of themselves by trying to disprove evolution, because they perceive a conflict between their religious views and the scientific theory. You should know that many Christians and Muslims in developed countries accept evolution as a fact. They believe that God created everything but evolution is the tool that God used to do the work. They see Genesis 1 and 2 as parables that aim to communicate spiritual truths about God's pre-eminence rather than a literal account of how the universe was created.

Theistic evolution, theistic evolutionism, or evolutionary creationism are views that regard religious teachings about God as compatible with modern scientific understanding about biological evolution. Theistic evolution is not a scientific theory, but a range of views about how the science of general evolution relates to religious beliefs in contrast to special creation views.

Supporters of theistic evolution generally harmonize evolutionary thought with belief in God, rejecting the conflict thesis regarding the relationship between religion and science – they hold that religious teachings about creation and scientific theories of evolution need not contradict each other.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOPJXCDsMLI

gaelllic:
No, it is not. Not entirely.

Right now, in some places, you are required (by law) to refer to a transsexual man by his preferred pronoun. Even though the cells in his

body still carry XY chromosomes. This is the precise opposite of 'intellectually established truth'.

So you see, human experience may also rest on dementia and wishful thinking. And scientists are not immune.



1. You assume that worship must involve ritual. It need not. Certain Buddhists are not required to 'do' anything.

2. Let us agree that religion is

'Any strongly held belief, absent empirical evidence'. (I think that covers all bases)

Since your strong belief in the non-existence of a Creator lacks any empirical support, is it not a religious one?



I'll dig as I please, thanks. There's much that needs burying.


I can't possibly engage you on all fronts. Let's take one after another.
We shall come back to these later. Let's start with the literary stand of the Bible first.

gaelllic:
I'm somewhat leery of engaging someone who thinks I was discussing 'astral physics(?)', to be frank.

But if you can keep it civil, perhaps we can give it a go.

Please note that I represent traditional Catholicism, so please do not require me to defend or explain

antics of Protestant stage-performers.



Yes. Bearing in mind

'The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation'.

E,g. If I say, "it's raining cats and dogs", the literal meaning does not refer to animals falling from the sky.

I could go further but I trust you get my drift.

honourhim:
Thanks my brother. Even here they have a whatsapp group where they meet and discuss religious issues. It was those of them here that made this known to us. In this same nairaland religion section they create various threads where they promote atheism. They also create threads of "conversion from christianity to atheism" stories(testimonies) of atheists just like we do yet that guy is busy pretending as if he doesnt know.

honourhim:
Thanks my brother. Even here they have a whatsapp group where they meet and discuss religious issues. It was those of them here that made this known to us. In this same nairaland religion section they create various threads where they promote atheism. They also create threads of "conversion from christianity to atheism" stories(testimonies) of atheists just like we do yet that guy is busy pretending as if he doesnt know.

gaelllic:
Worship

is an act of religious devotion usually directed towards a deity

The word is derived from the Old English weorþscipe, meaning worship, honour shown to an object, which has been etymologised as "worthiness or worth-ship"—to give, at its simplest, worth to something.


From the above, it is obvious, etymologically, that Atheists may be said to worship the intellect, science or human knowledge.

Readers may also notice the word is Old English in its origin.

Incidentally, the actual word translated as 'worship' from the original Greek (into English) is 'proskuneo'

which means, 'to bow down', 'to show obesiance', 'to prostrate oneself' or even 'to kiss (a ring)'.

Further,

this 'worship of the intellect' or 'worship of knowledge' and its resultant apostasy correlates well

with the Serpent's promise of knowledge to Eve,

...your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil.

Genesis 3: 5 (Douay-Rheims)

and her (and humanity's) resultant estrangement from God.


Truly, apples do not fall far from the tree.

gaelllic:
Humanism -

A philosophical and ethical stance that emphasizes the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers critical thinking and evidence (rationalism, empiricism) over acceptance of dogma or superstition.

An outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human netional ways of solving human problems.

Let me show why the above is long-winded, articulate nonsense.

The question is, 'After cutting religion out of the affairs of men, what next?'

In this brave, new, non-religious world, someone must still decide 'what-is-good-and-what-is-evil', 'what-is legal-versus-what-is-illegal'.

This is far from a straightforward matter. There is no universal, enduring non-religious standard for anything.

As such, these rulings must be made on the whim of the individual(s) in power.

This is why every single society that has wilfully pursued an Atheist policy has descended straight into dictatorship.

There is no need to fantasize about a world without religion. That experiment's been run several times.

Cambodia, the USSR, Cuba, Myanmar, Mao's China, Nazi Germany, Poland, Ceausescu's Romania - the list goes on.

At a cost of millions of lives - which puts to flight the wicked accusation that Christianity is the source of bloodshed in the world.

This, then, is humanism. It is Socialism-lite, which itself is Communism-lite, which is death.

And yet the half-bright, half-baked, half-wit sponsors of such discredited philosophies bridle when justly told they

merit the Second Death.

gaelllic:
From the same people who call the Eternal Existence of God illogical:

"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist."

- Stephen Hawking
"The Grand Design"

In which classroom is that called 'an exhaustive explanation?'

You all are liars - like your spiritual father below.



Please provide one falsifiable and reproducible experiment that is evidence for the 'big bang'.

Or you could just try to be an honest man (I know it's asking a lot)...and admit there isn't one.

ValentineMary:
Is absence of evidence the evidence of absence ?

ValentineMary:
Should we believe in this watchman based on religious doctrins alone?

honourhim:
Continue ranting. I have no extra time to waste on you.

honourhim:
Oga you are giving yourself too much heat. I ve told you that the submission i made is true. You can verify it by taking your time to go through some threads in this section biko. I dont have time to waste in raising false statement against anybody or group of people. I dont need your acceptance to make my points true. Its not me alone that is aware of this here pls. Other people who are aware of it knows i am not lying. If you are not aware of it then thats it for you but it does not mean that i am lying. If you dont understand the submission i made in the OP(as it appears you dont) then thats your problem to sort out.

Beelow is a similar observations by someone else

felixomor:
Deep inside u, But u know this thread doesnt make sense?

ValentineMary:
But is this logical to humans to believe this based on religious concept that are not open to scrutiny ?

Kingdanitez97:
I see people who call themselves atheistic as an act of cowardice.... Even native doctors nd their fellow Idol worshipers believe in their shrines nd idols bt they also believe that there is a supreme being who is in heaven.. Long before Christianity came to Nigeria, the ogbo's have been using the word "Chukwubinaigwe" (God who art in heaven).. Yoruba's have been calling olorun... Even the Greeks that worship Zeus believe in uranus(God of heaven)... Biko my brothers nd sister, let us join hands nd save this lost souls(Atheists)

EyeHateGod:
It would be good If u had dealt with Islam to in that post

felixomor:
Ecactly!

ValentineMary:
Over the years theist and atheist have argued about the possibility of us having a conscious watchman who looks over every of our activities. So this thread is for us to discuss how logical it is for us to claim to have a watchman. Pls only matured comments.

Cc Johnnydon22, Seun , Raphiemontella, Dorox, Doctoralien, Lordnicklaus, Shadeyinka, hopefullandlord, Hahn, Dakol, cloudgoddess, Donnffd, Ifenes, et al