₦airaland Forum

ApostleT:


Your quotes are quite funny. I suspect you haven't even being to a science conference and see how opinions are exchanged. There is no pitty in academics. If you make a statement be ready to defend it with facts and always remember that your fact/theory is not absolute.

Most of the great scientists quoted today do not believe in evolution rather in creation. So being a creationist or an evolutionsit has nothing to do with your ability to do science. It is quite arrrogant for you to think that the evolutionsit is the scientist whilts the creationist is the pseudo scientist.

I attended a conference at the University of Nottingham on artificial bone and it was interesting that one of the pioneers said " when I read in the bible that God created man from the dust. I reckon that the answer to having an aritifical bone lies in the dust. So we tried ceramics"

Real scientists do not dismiss ancient text whether it's the bible, , torah or Sumerian literature.

ApostleT:
I am a scientist by training and an engineer by profession

it's quite silly to quote google as a reference material.

The rate of expansion in our galaxy and the assumption that there was a big bang has helped created models that would suggest the earth must be about a billion years old.

Which of the rocks is 4.6 billion years old? I would not be suprised if there is one rock that old but the method of calculating such an age will be interesting.

Lucario007:
Tell me then, were you born a Christian or a theist? If your answer is yes, then whence cometh this logic reason and knowledge? Or did you suddenly wake up one morning and thought "my beliefs don't make sense, I need to reevaluate them"?

Your claim of logic and reason without first the need for introspective recollection is rather hard to believe.

Lucario007:
Perhaps tragedy was too strong a word. Perhaps hardships or trials would be more fitting. But regardless, it has to be something fundamental in them which is affected that causes the radical change in beliefs.

Lucario007:
Back to my topic: As I have come to observe, most Nigerian atheists were not born atheists, but rather had an experience in time which made them distort their view of religion and begin to see its flaws and dangers. This is sometimes mostly due to a tragedy.

CAPSLOCKED:

THEY SAID HE MADE ADAM WITH CLAY, AND EVE FROM A SINGLE BONE.
THEY SAID HE CREATED ALL THE ANIMALS ON EARTH, TREES, WATER BODIES, ROCKS, MOUNTAINS, BEER, PLANETS, MOONS, ASTEROIDS, GALAXIES... AND THE WHOLE GIGANTIC UNIVERSE, FROM NOTHING.

BUT TO RESTORE AN AMPUTEES LIMBS, OR DAMAGED EYES, OR ANY MISSING BODY PARTS HAS BEEN A PROBLEM FOR HIM SINCE 00 AD.

prettydpri:
God made you

Macelliot:
where are you from??

SenatePresdo:
I don't think you are very sure of what you chose.

johnydon22:
If nobody talks about you then you are nobody... the constant mention of atheists/atheism shows the growing effects of atheism on this board, some are bothered and threatened by it so wage war against it while others are just curious.

Even my name has become a constant topic of discussion among theists these days, i get up to 20 - 30 mentions when ever i log in, half of them are unnecessary mentions from people using my name as their topic of discussion.

ApostleT:
There is no overwhelming evidence for your claims. There is an overwhelming believe in the science community that the earth is at least over a billion years based on modelling not geological or archaeological evidence.

Also there is no overwhelming evidence that the modern man has existed more than 7000 years. Archaeological evidences are limited to 7000 years. There are some archaeological findings that point to existence of creatures on earth beyond 7000 years but not the modern man.

ireneony:
Atheists will say they don't believe in God and religion blah blah..
But technically atheist is a religion on it own.
What an irony

joyandfaith:
nice.so you cannot use 'changing science' to discredit the Bible.

yorme:
Based on your earlier response, there is obviously a huge difference. It would have made more sense if you made this new clarification earlier.

Macelliot:
There's a difference. Unless, if you have a low IQ with which comprehend things..

yorme:
I have taken time to analyze statements of Atheists like Seun (NL owner), Ymodulus and I've noticed conflicts in their statements. Sometimes, their statements potray the fact that God does not exist and at other times, their statements potray God as wicked.

Now, i need clarifications. Which of these do you guys (Atheists) believe or stand for:

1. God does not exist.
2. God is wicked.

Awaiting your responses.

4everGod1:
Have you discovered DNA origins yet?

felixomor:
Please answer this question: are theories true?
Yes or no?
If u cannot answer with only either yes or no, then forget it.

felixomor:
Did anybody say "theory will become law"?
Moreover my first post was evolution and others will forever remain theorems.
If they really held any water. U probably would av grown up to see them as laws of evolution, etc. Just as u have newton laws and other laws.
Thats what i mean.

4everGod1:
You are wrong!

A scientific theory is not the end result of the scientific method; theories can be proven or rejected, just like hypotheses. Theories can be improved or modified as more information is gathered so that the accuracy of the prediction becomes greater over time.

4everGod1:
And all this mumbo jumbo is fron where? Science? I'll pass.

Does DNA not have an origin? Before you befin talking about mutations and errors in genetic codes first ask yourself about the origin of the DNA and when you do find out if the DNA was deliberately flawed. Whenever science tries to explain DNA origins all you hear are words like, " probably, could have, maybe" you know why? Its because theg cannot explain it.

Some have even gone ahead to assume that the first DNA existsd before life itself but how? Did it just pop up? They all agree that its way too complex and are stil trying to figure it out. So according to scientists if they cannot understan the origin then all the explanations about mutations and flawed genetic coding is rubbish as those assumptions do not have a foundation.

You said these mutations "create" genes. How is it that this plant has been designed to even do that in the first place? For thag to occur so perfectly and deliberately shows it isnt by mistake.....it has been engineered or created to function that way.

Same way a human cannot give birth to a plant or to a pig but to a human as well. Before you attemot answering first find out if you can about DNA origins then you can speak sensibly

felixomor:
U still dont get what a theory is do u?
And u think laws fall all of a sudden from the sky, without passing the stage of "theory".
Example Boyles law.
U think people just one day woke up and suddenly saw it in textbook or what?
It was once an observation or statement or theory by somebody called Boyle and was then regarded as 'law' after verification by other scientists.

Please what cant u get in this simple explanation? That u r busy listing theorems that did not become laws.

4everGod1:
Since you are the enlightened one kindly explain this:

According to evolutionary theory, any fruit that developed the ability to clearly indicate the ripeness of fruit (i.e., green – too early; yellow - just right; black – too late) had an advantage reproducing over those that did not, and in time would out-reproduce other members of its own species right?

Who gave these fruits the ability to think for themselves and come ul with such an intelligent way of reproducing faster than others? Do these fruits have a consciousness, do they have the ability to think and make decisions for themselves?

felixomor:
My God.
Are u trying to show the difference between laws and theories (which of course are not thesame, I never said so anyway)
Or u should be trying to find out how theories became laws and conclusions?

Simple explanation, a law is formed after a theorem or statement is confirmed.
E.g. Newton made theories, people laughed at him, others liked it.. People tested it, confirmed it and it became laws.
Period.

Nobody said there is no difference between law and theorem.
Thats not what you should have searched for.

4everGod1:
Arent monkeys or gorillas supposed to be giving birrh to humans by now or at least a slightly higher level of apes assuming evolution is a fact and not a theory

felixomor:
My brother stop deceiving yourself.
Science and atheism doesnt mean the same thing.
Many inventors and scientists believed in God.
Nobody is condemning science. Its just a study of what God has done.
Some people may take it to the extreme, even Darwin believed in God, he started theory of evolution based on assumption.
Some other people took it to the extreme from there.

Evolution and big bang will forever remain theories.
Simple, because they contradict the very foundations of science. They contradict the laws of thermodynamics.
If not, they would have become laws or principles long ago.