Now, I leave it up to those with more scientific experience and desire to argue it than me to debate the ins and outs of what happened in scientific history. But in the plainest, most basic sense, if a scientific "fact" directly contradicts the Bible, then the scientists need to go back to the labs and come up with a new fact.
I've browsed through a great deal of the TalkOrigins website. All of the arguments there have one thing in common -- that all evolutionistic study proceeds from presuppostion that evolution is a fact. It's really a horribly dishonest, circular and unscientific way to do science when you think about it.
44 comments
"But in the plainest, most basic sense, if a scientific fact directly contradicts the Bible, then the scientits need to go back to the labs and come up with a new fact."
Fundieism in a Nutshell Award!!
Scientists don't "come up with facts," the facts exist independent the scientists or anyone else. When the Bible contradicts a known scientific fact the Christians need to go back to the bible and come up with an interpetation of the bible that does not contradict reality.
Oh, and evolution is a fact, get over it. The theory of evolution a.k.a. our understanding of evolution has changed and will continue to change as new and better evidence is discovered. However that doesn't change the fact that evolution happens, all it changes is our understanding of the process.
I'm baffled...
So if the bible states that Pi is 3 (and it does), but the "facts" show it's not, the "facts" are wrong, the bible is true and Pi really is 3?
O_o
From what I understand, even though evolution is technically a theory, it is a rather useful one. It's functional and practical, and good at explaining what we observe. It may not be 100% true yet, but it's the best we have at the moment, certainly better than "GODDIDIT." That's why most scientists work from the presupposition that evolution is true - of course, if we found something that made no sense in the scheme of evolution, it would be adjusted or scrapped as a theory.
Here, let me fix this for you:
"if a scientific "fact" directly contradicts the Bible, then the scientists need to go back to the labs and come up with a new fact.
There, thats better!
"But in the plainest, most basic sense, if a scientific "fact" directly contradicts the Bible, then the scientists need to go back to the labs and come up with a new fact."
...What? I just... but that... that just... what? I...what?
DOES NOT COMPUTE.
So your bible is disproved and instead of accepting that and adjusting your beliefs to fit the reality of the situation you decide that the scientists are wrong?
Fundy in a nutshell, definitely.
So what am I supposed to do? Keep counting the legs of insects until they equal four? Maybe pull two legs off each and every insect?
I'm sorry, I can't do that Dave
"I've browsed through a great deal of the TalkOrigins website."
I'm sure you did. And I bet you kept chanting the mantra--"nope, goddidit!" to protect your faith from all that "satanic knowledge."
Now, I leave it up to those with more scientific experience and desire to argue it than me to debate the ins and outs of what happened in scientific history.
But in the plainest, most basic sense, if a scientific "fact" directly contradicts the Bible, then the scientists need to go back to the labs and come up with a new fact.
All of the arguments there have one thing in common -- that all evolutionistic study proceeds from presuppostion that evolution is a fact. Bzzzzt.
It's really a horribly dishonest, circular and unscientific way to do science when you think about it.
"But in the plainest, most basic sense, if a scientific "fact" directly contradicts the Bible, then the scientists need to go back to the labs and come up with a new fact."
That's really a "horribly dishonest, circular and unscientific way to do science when you think about it."
"But in the plainest, most basic sense, if a scientific "fact" directly contradicts the Bible, then the scientists need to go back to the labs and come up with a new fact."
----------------Translating...-------------------
"But in the plainest, most basic sense, if a scientific "fact" directly contradicts the Bible, then the scientists should lie to me to make me feel less insecure about my faith."
"So what am I supposed to do? Keep counting the legs of insects until they equal four? Maybe pull two legs off each and every insect?"
No, you just write something, anything, and conclude that insects do indeed have four legs. It doesn't really matter what you write. As long as it looks remotely plausible and doesn't offend the religious leaders, you'll be fine. In any other case, you won't be fine. It's not like anyone is going to really read what you wrote in any case, except perhaps some historian.
Or.. people could not let these guys to power.
Okay, I went back to the lab, and I came up with a new fact:
Dave is a blathering moron with the brain-power of a bacteria colony.
I checked the Bible against this fact I came up with. It does not contradict anything in the Bible.
Tada!
After reading the Bible. I've come to the conclusion that it is a book written 2000-3000 years ago by men with absolutely no knowledge of biology, physics, astronomy, quantum mechanics, mathematics, etc. In short, they were primitive superstitious ignorant tribesmen.
If your scientific fact contradicts what's written in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix , you need to go back to the lab and come up with a new fact.
Meanwhile, I'm due for dinner at 12 Grimmauld Place.
And the vast majority of creationist websites proceed under the assumption that Earth was made in a literal 7-day span, less than ten thousand years ago.
What point were you trying to make again?
Fundies, how is it that you don't have any faith in our (scientists') theories but are happy to take the pharmaceuticals that we develop?
If you could be more consistent in these matters you would be doing us all a favor. For example, you would learn first hand all you need to know about the effects of natural selection.
> It's really a horribly dishonest, circular and unscientific way to do science when you think about it.
What, denying repeated observations that fly in the face of your personal beliefs?
"Evolution is a fact"... a silly phrase when we get taught at university that science can claim no facts since all it takes is a new piece of evidence to change everything. So I'm guessing the people who say this are either
a) lay-people who don't know what science is
The "fact" of the matter is that "science doesn't tell you anything, scientists do" all the "facts" and "theories" are brought about by scientists who are liable to personal biases and mistakes.
When you have scientists debating both sides of the arguement it isn't a case of Religion vs science otherwise all the scientists would agree.. What this means is that there are differences in worldview and how these worldviews influence people's perceptions of the data / evidence.
Me... I'm still holding my breath for EMPIRICAL evidence of evolution. Considering that all the evidence being taught at my uni is based on the pre-supposition that evolution is true, and assumes it's legitimacy... Assumptions are NOT scientific... A scientific hypothesis is verified EMPIRICALLY.
Someone's projecting like HELL.
Way to perfectly describe creationism, 'tard.
"It's really a horribly dishonest, circular and unscientific way to do science when you think about it."
You have GOT to be SHITTING me. The last time something's sported pure irony this dense it was called the Titanic.
Never actually read the babble, have you?
Happy extinction, stupid.
It's the other way, honey; if the Bible contradicts a scientific "fact", the Bible needs to be discarded in favor of reality.
All scientific studies (in the plural, silly) proceed from presupposition that heliocentricity is a "fact", too. It's neither dishonest, circular nor unscientific to accept reality for what it is, stupid!
But science has verifiable EVIDENCE to go with those facts, you freaking moron!
I guess you wouldn't know what that is, though, since there isn't any (verifiable evidence or facts) for the claims that are in your buybull.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
