Al Gore will be excited!!!

Pages

422 posts / 0 new
Last post
doublebarrelsaloon's picture
doublebarrelsaloon
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 4/22/09

WormWiggler Said:
Why does the Bible have to be a part of this thread?

"Glacier Girl" is in a museum in Kentucky, doubtful to ever fly again.  More damage found than they expected,  but I only went to a couple of links, with thousands more to go.  maybe I will find some info about buried vs. sunk,

Dust storm in patch today.

Ya got that right!

I dont go around guessing cup sizes either I just know a nice rack when I see one.

espringers's picture
espringers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/25/07

it doesn't take a liberal to question folks who continue to take the bible literally and ignore the scientific process and its results when it contradicts the literal interpretation of the bible.  you are not "considering all points of view" if you continue down this path of defending the bible's interpretation of evolution, the age of the earth, etc... like you continue to do.  in fact, you are completely ignoring the one point of view that relies on a process that ferrets out things whose sole basis lies in faith without proof.  

Plainsman Said:

 how you can talk about dating core samples from 10-20,000 years ago in ND wetlands and then take the positions you do regarding the age of the earth, science v bible, human divergence, etc.... is completely beyond me.

Lack of arrogance I guess.

 how is that? seriously, the bible and science are so far apart on this issue there is no way they will ever agree

I asked that question simply to see if you had an idea of either the science I was speaking of or the part of he Bible that may have a coinciding incident.    It's hard to tell since there are three or four people that you  can't tell if it's simple hate for the Bible or if it's that they think they/we know everything.   My view is we are advancing so fast that in 100 years they will laugh at our science as if we were cave men.  Lets not get to full of ourselves.  Why is it opened minded when a liberal considers all points of view, but stupid when a conservative does it?   I would rather be remembered as open minded, perhaps at times naive, but kind, rather than arrogant and foolish. 

Born to hunt and fish... Forced to work!

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

faith without proof.

Your talking about evolution right?

Why does the Bible have to come into it?  Because some liberals who hate it have to make a preemptive strike, falsely thinking one has to be destroyed  to support the other.

Of course, according to our Scientific expert Plainsman and his reference book, the earth is only what? 5000 or 10000 years old, so all this Scientific jumbo jumbo is all BS anyway, especially if we don't ant to believe it anyway....
espringers's picture
espringers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/25/07

U won't admit there is a mountain of evidence supporting evolution will you? My time here is done

Born to hunt and fish... Forced to work!

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

a mountain of evidence

Uuuuum sure. 

bobkat's picture
bobkat
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 12/16/01

 As far as I'm concerned the Bible is full of all kinds of good stuff, the golden rule, 5/10 of the commandments, and a lot of good "podium of the masses" stuff.   Absolutely nothing wrong with that at ll.
When it was writte, 300+ years BC, the writers (Constantine and co) put in a lot of flowery stuff that was deemed necessary to compete with paganism, its main competition.  Thus the tales that are scientifically in compatable  with our current level of knowledge now.   Personally I just ignore most of that, though theologians will criticize me for having a Cafeteria sort of Christinity.  Take th good stuff and leave the impossible to digest stuff. 
I have yet to be convinced of a lot of metaphysical stuff, like resurrection from the dead, a nebulous supposedly always ther and doing great thing God, etc.   all that doesn't,t detract from the good stuff.   
When I watch communion (I abstain) I wonder how many people actually understand what "Jesus dying to save our souls" really mean, or try as I might what "the Communion of the Saints" is?  et the whole congregation must be smarter than me because they keep saying this out old, too.   They are either all smarter and better religiously educated than me, or they don't understand that studs either and are going with the program like sheep!, 

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

Plainsman Said:

a mountain of evidence

Uuuuum sure. 

the actual act of evolution is as much a fact as is possible in science. It isn't even debated anymore since it is observable and testable. Now, whether you think humans are here because of evolution is a whole other thing.

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

As for science being arrogant, which I think I read somewhere on here? maybe not.. I would have to disagree since we all owe everything to science. You can't say the same for the Bible.

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

 It isn't even debated anymore since it is observable and testable.

Then why do they still call it theory?  It's not a very good scientist that says something can be proven, but it's still theory.

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

I forgot to ask for a reference to that "evolution has been proven".   Please post that.  I would have thought that would have made major news.  I noticed you did separate human evolution from ???? natural selection. 
The most recent I have read is that what we have called mutations are actually simple manifestations of what is already mapped but recessive within the DNA of a species.  Even more interesting is what we thought controlled a single physical trait, like blue eyes, may control three or more traits.  We keep finding that what we thought is wrong.  It's a huge universe and I don't think we know 1% of the knowledge there is out there.  I think you have to look at it that way or you fall into the flat earth tribe. 

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

Plainsman Said:

 It isn't even debated anymore since it is observable and testable.

Then why do they still call it theory?  It's not a very good scientist that says something can be proven, but it's still theory.

We've gone over this a few times now.  There is nothing above scientific theory. Scientific theory is the highest form of scientific achievement. And you're right, it isn't a very good scientist to say something can absolutely be proven in science. Just like any good scientist understands that a theory never becomes a law. People need to understand that something isn't, "only a theory". I shouldn't have to explain this stuff to you.

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
Joined: 2/28/07

BringingTheRain Said:

Plainsman Said:

 It isn't even debated anymore since it is observable and testable.

Then why do they still call it theory?  It's not a very good scientist that says something can be proven, but it's still theory.

We've gone over this a few times now.  There is nothing above scientific theory. Scientific theory is the highest form of scientific achievement. And you're right, it isn't a very good scientist to say something can absolutely be proven in science. Just like any good scientist understands that a theory never becomes a law. People need to understand that something isn't, "only a theory". I shouldn't have to explain this stuff to you.

seems you just said a law is a higher form than a theory. 

 

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

BringingTheRain Said:

Plainsman Said:

 It isn't even debated anymore since it is observable and testable.

Then why do they still call it theory?  It's not a very good scientist that says something can be proven, but it's still theory.

We've gone over this a few times now.  There is nothing above scientific theory. Scientific theory is the highest form of scientific achievement. And you're right, it isn't a very good scientist to say something can absolutely be proven in science. Just like any good scientist understands that a theory never becomes a law. People need to understand that something isn't, "only a theory". I shouldn't have to explain this stuff to you.

Oh, you mean like the theory of gravity?

Here is my problem, and even from a scientific standpoint.  If you loose your car keys and after searching for five minutes you find them do you keep searching?  Of course not that would be silly.  Science is supposed to search for the truth.  As long as something is theory we should keep searching for answers.  Some scientists do, some don't.  The reason some don't is because they are sure they know.  Those scientists should have taken up another occupation.  Often we find new things even after we think we know.  If not we would all be crowded in Europe not sailing our ships much beyond the sight of shore because we would be afraid of falling of the edge of the flat earth. 

Capt Ahab's picture
Capt Ahab
Offline
Joined: 6/14/11

Basically yes. Google ice core data. 

eyexer Said:

WormWiggler Said:
The level of the most important heat-trapping gas in the atmosphere, carbon dioxide, has passed a long-feared milestone, scientists reported Friday, reaching a concentration not seen on the earth for millions of years.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/11/science/earth/carbon-dioxide-level-passes-long-feared-milestone.html?hp&_r=1&

not sure shy the ampersand is black at the end of the link, it is present on the other tab.

"not seen on earth for millions of years"?  haha, did they dig up the readings of millions of years ago in a time capsule?

I have a bad feeling that whenever a lesbian looks at me they think “That’s why I’m not a heterosexual”. -George Costanza

I was in the pool! I was in the pool! You don’t understand! There was shrinkage!   -George Costanza

You know if you take everything I’ve ever done in my entire life and condense it down into one day, it looks decent. -George Costanza

Don’t insult me, my friend. Remember who you’re talking to. No one’s a bigger idiot than me. -George Costanza

Alpine's picture
Alpine
Offline
Joined: 1/13/12

" have yet to be convinced of a lot of metaphysical stuff, like resurrection from the dead, a nebulous supposedly always ther and doing great thing God, etc.   all that doesn't,t detract from the good stuff.   
When I watch communion (I abstain) "

We're getting way off topic here so I'll add that Al Gore is a self serving moron.   But to refer back to this snippet of your post, the question begs to be asked.  Why do you bother going to church?  For social reasons only?  To go to Communion is to say I believe.  To abstain as you do is to say I do not believe. You're saying that your smarter than all of this and won't participate.   I guess if you're going to please your partner, as you might to go to the mall, to go to church would have some bearing for you.  In reality though to paint on a smiley face and spit at the hand of God makes you the worst kind of hypocrite of all.

Oh, you do believe in god, or a creator of some sorts??   What do you call this god you've made up for yourself?

 

svnmag's picture
svnmag
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/3/02

TIME seems to have nailed it in reverse.  It was hotter than hell yesterday then it got nippy this morning.

 Nuke the Whales

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

Back on topic, it's hard to believe global warming when two prominent scientists were caught falsifying their data.  Even the liberals are shying away from it and now calling it global change.  They don't want to give it up.  Not because it's good science, but because they got their base to believe it so they can't drop it.  It never was science with the democrat party, it was simply a club to beat conservatives with because most people have some faith in science.

If this goes away the liberals will invent another club that the naive will believe without question.   

Global warming has been useful to fund science.  All you had to do was include the words "global warming" in your proposal and abracadabra you were funded. 

espringers's picture
espringers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/25/07

Naive??? Like evolution isn't real cause the bible says it isnt? That kind of naive? Or just regular run of the mill naivete?

Born to hunt and fish... Forced to work!

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

Neat

Wags86's picture
Wags86
Offline
Joined: 12/14/10

 HAHA!

 

 "I get what you're saying:  Like a sausage replica featuring a Polander holding a sacred illumination device." 

 

guywhofishes's picture
guywhofishes
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 5/4/07

HAHAHA!
funny! (and one more than wags, I win)

 

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

Plainsman Said:

BringingTheRain Said:

Plainsman Said:

 It isn't even debated anymore since it is observable and testable.

Then why do they still call it theory?  It's not a very good scientist that says something can be proven, but it's still theory.

We've gone over this a few times now.  There is nothing above scientific theory. Scientific theory is the highest form of scientific achievement. And you're right, it isn't a very good scientist to say something can absolutely be proven in science. Just like any good scientist understands that a theory never becomes a law. People need to understand that something isn't, "only a theory". I shouldn't have to explain this stuff to you.

Oh, you mean like the theory of gravity?

Here is my problem, and even from a scientific standpoint.  If you loose your car keys and after searching for five minutes you find them do you keep searching?  Of course not that would be silly.  Science is supposed to search for the truth.  As long as something is theory we should keep searching for answers.  Some scientists do, some don't.  The reason some don't is because they are sure they know.  Those scientists should have taken up another occupation.  Often we find new things even after we think we know.  If not we would all be crowded in Europe not sailing our ships much beyond the sight of shore because we would be afraid of falling of the edge of the flat earth. 

You still don't understand what a scientific theory is.

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

eyexer Said:

BringingTheRain Said:

Plainsman Said:

 It isn't even debated anymore since it is observable and testable.

Then why do they still call it theory?  It's not a very good scientist that says something can be proven, but it's still theory.

We've gone over this a few times now.  There is nothing above scientific theory. Scientific theory is the highest form of scientific achievement. And you're right, it isn't a very good scientist to say something can absolutely be proven in science. Just like any good scientist understands that a theory never becomes a law. People need to understand that something isn't, "only a theory". I shouldn't have to explain this stuff to you.

seems you just said a law is a higher form than a theory. 

No. I did not. 

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

You still don't understand what a scientific theory is.

I have understood theory since 1964, and treat it as it was meant to be.  Today to often it is abused by the liberals along party lines.  They forsake science for their agenda.  If you want an example of arrogance it would be someone with less professional experience explaining something to someone with four times the experience. 

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

Plainsman Said:

You still don't understand what a scientific theory is.

I have understood theory since 1964, and treat it as it was meant to be.  Today to often it is abused by the liberals along party lines.  They forsake science for their agenda.  If you want an example of arrogance it would be someone with less professional experience explaining something to someone with four times the experience. 

You've clearly shown again and again on threads like this that you don't understand scientific theory and law.

guywhofishes's picture
guywhofishes
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 5/4/07

bobkat Said:
 Eyexer. The ww2 aircraft, b-17's and Lightnings, landed on a glacier.  Theyweren't "covered" with snow and ice, but rather sunk in the icecap till they hit the underlying rock!  Have you ever left an ice spud laying on the ice overnight?  Same thing but add 60 years and you get the idea! 
The recovery and rebuilding these planes is a fascinating story and fills several lectures by the guys who did it, but they do make it clear that the plans sank, NOT got covered, so it is a poor argument against global warming.  Thinking about it, the warmer the average temps, the faster they might sink, but that,s probably as hollow an argument than the ice thicknng and covering them up theory.  
BTW, I have no opinion about the global warming theory, but just thought I'd straighten out this meaningless argument as I've seen it on every GW discussion pretty well on every website!  Couldn't help but straighten it out.  No disrespect intended.
I appologise to Plainsman and made my comment partly in jest to pull his chain after some of the earlier anti Muslim stuff he was proselytizing  on a different thread.  The "Bible is always right because God wrote it and can't be wrong and every other religion is nasty and wring" attitude that is so prevelant.  Sorry For the attitude of my post, though MANY, MANY self described Christians firmly still believe the earth is about 5000 years old, as PROVEN inGenesis! 

sorry, but that just pegged my howdanggoofyisthatstatement meter

 

espringers's picture
espringers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/25/07

Not everything is liberal v conservative. I am sure there are plenty of conservatives on this site who don't share your view on the theory of evolution... But, then they must not be conservative?

Born to hunt and fish... Forced to work!

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

You've clearly shown again and again on threads like this that you don't understand scientific theory and law.

Your making me think your not science educated even though you speak as if you are.  It is law of gravity, and theory of evolution.  You stated theory was as sure as science could be.  That is not correct.  So you need to brush up on science.  It's little wonder that true scientists are being questioned because of the integrity of scientists with an agenda.  An agenda other than the truth. 

 the theory of evolution

Thanks espringer.  Does this  mean you have theory in the proper perspective? 

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

algore had a theory that he invented the internet,

however the law of common sense says otherwise.

Neat

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

 There is nothing above scientific theory.

I was in a discussion today where a friend had just read about a man who tested our education system this way:  He took an eighth grade graduation test and had four year college grads take the test.  Most failed.  We have been dumbing down our society in the name of fairness for some time now.  The above statement should have been taken to task by a third grade teacher. 

Pages