₦airaland Forum

iameugene:
where did thr land came from... Was d water dried by d sun, last tym i check no smallest amount of water or oxygen leaves the earth

starlingslimnet:
I don't even do Christainity,I don't practice religion I am only a Christain;a follower of Christ.

starlingslimnet:
If that is the case why bother yourself about it? Oo it's that same eternal conviction in every human soul about reunification with God his Creator... the same thing that keeps drawing man back to Eden.

starlingslimnet:
Do you believe in Christ as Your Saviour from sin and your redeemer from Death?

OLAADEGBU:
I believe I have debated you on this topic before.

starlingslimnet:
You miscontrued the Scripture

OLAADEGBU:
Humans are created in God's image and after His likeness, and are to have dominion over other creatures such as the animals.

vooks:
Negro,
When you explain the origin of the universe, you will really have matured enough to debate me

erusen:
no one knows the age of the earth science gives large numbers of years but they are not certain just absumption but one thing is clear when God created the world the earth was already there full of water and void

Macelliot:
Atheists are scared of Satanists..

belabela:
Oh I am just seeing your response.

As I noted in my first reponse to you on this topic you are no scientist.

The above quote only proves that. I once attended an international conference where a Professor of Chemistry made a presentation which as far as I am concerned was "destroying" the work of a nobel laurate,as a research student I asked my professor what he thought about the presentation and he said "I don't like the prersentation myself but I can't fault the science". Why did I tell you this? to point out to you that no theory in science is an outlier ( Just to note you have only used a dictionary definition to "prove" ( which is no prove) that there is a theory in science that is an outlier - you are just like a clown).

Darwins theory of the origin of species was once considered silly. Galileo theory that the earth was not flat was equally once considered silly. You do not wake up and say this theory is an outlier.

me
And as a "scientist", you'd be aware or I believe you should know that outliers or detractors of a theory exists in all fields ....from geocentricists,to anti-vaccinators and then your lot the creationists....so either you bring up some factual papers backing up your case or stay mute...it's that simple

Saying that immediately gives away the fact that you are not a scientist at all. In the science community we use outliers for data (statistics) not theory.

You make a circular argument - where you assume a position to be true and argue around it.

Another evidence that you know nothing of scientific argument or philosphy for that matter. Where does your assumption of wikipedia come from? What evidence of copy and paste do you have? Have you opened the book and find that quote missing? how did you come up with these random rants? Is it a case that when an argument is made you first consult wikipedia to check if you can find it there? Wikipedia can be written by a 12 year old boy but if a 12 year old boy quotes a journal on wikipedia that doesnt make the journal invalid nor does it mean anyone quoting the journal is quoting from wikipedia. I have given a quote from a book that was published you have responded with newspaper articles that does not disprove the quote. I noted that Eisntein may have issues with how God was presented to him but he never claimed there is no God. He was never an atheist and your rants wouldn't change the facts. It will not change the fact that you need FAITH to believe in macro evolution just as you would need FAITH that God exist.

It will not change the fact that scientists have no consensus on the origin of life nor will it change that fact that your religious belive has nothing to do with your science (which is a philosophy) or the ability to carry out scientific research.

Science is not a democracy where you say lets us vote - how many of you agree that evolution is the way we should go? If such votes occur you can talk about consensus. The media talks about science says this or that - which are usually politically driven - because there is no such consensus . In science you are free to think as you like. Your quotes of newspapers indicate that media may inform most of your "science"

me
Eitherway, I don't care for his religious views nor his quotes, the above is just a response to yours..

- when you attend a science conference you will understand that there is no such consensus. For example climate change as a result of human activities is being pushed by western media however there is never a consensus that humans are responsible.

Some claim humans are ultimately responsible, some claim it's a cycle that will pass, others claim nature should be blamed each with solid scientific facts. You dont wake up in your room and say this one is an outlier the other one is the consensus.

In a bid to make an argument you ended up making assumptions for which you have no prove. You sounded more like a clown as I read your response. You even mock science daily - I am sorry to say this but you are really a clown.

lexiconkabir:
against western education, how does that go against western education? if exams are schedued for sunday(i'm assuming you are a xtian) around 8am to 2am maybe maths on that day, will you be happy? please dont be parochial!

AllNaijaBlogger:
Goes both ways.

AllNaijaBlogger:
ah.....but "alive" is a vague term.


You say that you're alive but you could very well be a computer in a lab simulating real life....matrix style.

AllNaijaBlogger:
Someone being dead does not prove that you are alive.


Sci-fi is not always suspended reality. Total recall as a movie is sci-fi but the technology in the movie is quite practical.


Wishiful thinking?

AllNaijaBlogger:
What facts do you have that you are alive? No, what evidence do you have to say that you are not in the matrix right now? Facts and evidence are meaningless in uncharted territories. How do you have facts for something you don't even understand or haven't experienced in any form?

What we are doing here is hypothetical thinking mixed with logic. That is what makes sci-fi interesting. The possibilities are infinite.

aIrbenIc:
Great! Thanks bro.

AllNaijaBlogger:
Think about this-




"Energy is material . Energy does not die.

What if our consciousness is more like energy?

What if this earth is a simulation within a simulation? Like inception, a dream within a dream.

You only know you are dreaming when you wake up.


What if you die and you truly wake up? Wake up in an alternate earth?

There are so many theories concerning an afterlife that it shouldn't be readily dismissed."

gatiano:
It is not darkness. There are different types of darkness. Darkness is a matter on its own. It is ether or plasma or melanin or dark matter, It is not darkness.

AllNaijaBlogger:
Energy does not die, it just changes form.

What if our consciousness is like energy and it changes to another form of consciousness?


There are lots of scientific hypothetical explanations for an afterlife.

belabela:
You obviously sounded more naive than I thought. Let me first clarify one thing for you. Your believe in a God or no God has nothing to do with your science or ability to carry out science research.

belabela:
Most pioneers of modern science including charles darwin, isaac newton, albert einstein etc were religious men, they weren't atheist. They believed in God. You may say they have a probelm with the way the church at the time presented God to them - but they did not claim there is no God.

I cited Einstein because alot of atheists try to convince themselves that Einstein was an atheist. But does it matter if Einstein is an atheist or not? I guess it doesn't but just to satisfy your curiosity I will give you a quote from a book you can read in the library.

"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views." - Albert Einstein (Clark, Ronald W. (1971). Einstein: The Life and Times. New York: World Publishing Company, Page 425)

No opinion is ever dismissed in science. You only use outliers for a data not for a theory. In science we debate opinions not ideas. When a theory is out there, it is a scientific opinion and no scientists will call it an outlier.

And as a "scientist", you'd be aware or I believe you should know that outliers or detractors of a theory exists in all fields ....from geocentricists,to anti-vaccinators and then your lot the creationists

[s]
There is no consensus on the origin of life in science. And by the way "scientific consensus" is more of a political term than a scientific term. Modern evolution theory, big bang theory, intelligent design theory, and now "life came from aliens" theory etc are all there to explain the origin of life. One thing that is common to all these theories is that you need FAITH because none is testable over time. If you believe modern evolutionary theories for example, we are talking about millions of years to see an ape become a man. That's definitely not testable and not observable.

A scientific method "is based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning, the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses." - Science Daily

If you are part of the science community you will know that those with the big money dictate what research is done today. Research grants are no longer granted to you out of curiosity of knowledge but how it will benefit the guy with the big money or as it's said "benefit the society". [/s]

AllNaijaBlogger:
Why is an afterlife a baseless concept?

Please check out below the comment I gave Johnydon22 earlier-




"But you don't believe in the afterlife. But then again, some scientists accept that there could be another dimension where matter and space do not matter. That could be a form of afterlife.
What about alternate earths?"

Thoniameek:
Yeah? Read it.... Anything?

OLAADEGBU:
Is that not true?