Silkroad Online Forums

No such thing as religious theories. I haven't generalized for awhile. A, B, and C are based off people that posted in this thread. I should make A say "RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE" instead of /face palm.



Also people don't "believe" in scientific theories. You either disagree and adhere to another theory that is supported by facts/evidence found in nature, or you agree with the most popular one. Most people accept and agree with the big bang, but there are other scientific theories that are supported by the same evidence and facts as the big bang that people agree with. I don't see you getting worked up about them. Creationism is not a theory. =]

That's a prediction. That is based on the fact that you seem to believe theories are proven ideas. =/

made off of...

creationism is not the theory... the details into how it started are

This post wins both god and science

It was based exclusively on your post in this thread; it was not based off the actions of another person.



When you put the "details" together, that are only found in your holy book, it's called creationism.

all hail the great science? because science is 100% true? expand your horizons and get out of ur science pit

W/e floats your boat.


Someone's getting angry. What is science to you? Just the study of nature (oversimplification, sue me).


Sorry, dood, the study of nature/how nature works is to awesome. I would rather know how something works than not at all. =] If I don't know then I'll work on it.

angry? nah i'm just smiling through this whole thing

on topic of this discussion, imo, scientific views on how we were born are theories. the bible's thoughts in my opinion is also a theory. a theory is not true until proved. Thats why i remain neutral, because neither are correct. There could be a religious "spiritual" meaning for life or there could be a scientific meaning for life. No one knows, so no one should be jumping to a conclusion that either are "stupid" or "wrong". Believing in one thing doesnt mean that u can put down the other.

Ain't Science the study of creation?

Science is nothing but bunch [s] theories. The bible's thoughts aren't [s] theories. There are two types of theories; allow me to demonstrate.

Men create theories to explain the natural events occurring around them. They use evidence (facts) from nature and mathematical equations to support their theories. If an idea is not supported by evidence (facts) from nature then it isn't a theory; It's just a guess. The idea of being able to replicate an experiment and get the same results is the criterion used to distinguish theory from law. I think you see science as religion and vice-versa. If your hypothesis lacks the necessary support (if evidence can't be found, if the facts don't occur) to become a theory then I have all the right to call it (the hypothesis) wrong, invalid, incorrect, false, etc... Creationism seeks to explain how we were created but creationism isn't supported by facts in nature. They try to explain the existence of a creator but first you must witness creatures being created in the manner creationism proposes. Evolution just says [oversimplification] shit changes over time; this explanation is how and why, and here are the facts that support this explanation.[/oversimplification]. It explains variety and adaptation. It's like writing a thesis essay. I think that's a great comparison. I need an expert. I'm a novice.



No.

my god is an awesome god he reigns with terror and love he kills with guns and bugs my god is an awesome god

What probably confuses people is that they interchange the definition of "theory" in a colloquial sense (a wild guess, or even a hypothesis) with the definition in a scientific context - as defined a couple of times in this thread.

@XemnasXD: -.-" I feel this thread is going to get locked pretty soon. It just needs Zombies.

this thread should just be nuked no one here is saying anything new, thought provoking, or just worth reading...hence raptor jesus....if he saved my soul i figured he can save this thread

Raptors kill things, yo. Giant killer turkeys, son.

ur not a novice your point is clear and i see your perspective. Personally, I find that we shouldnt be able to call it wrong but its all about self-preference is it not? Ty for a few clear ups there as well~

Damn where is that site they posted here a while back where some christian extremist was saying dinosaurs were around during the time of Jesus?

This is just an endless argument, IMO. If you want meaning to your life, then give it meaning; its rude to try to take other people's meaning away from them.

20 pages thread, best long thread ever.
If only in the title, "god" is changed to "ghost"...

So where did human come from?

Mushrooms.

Just like the orkz.

So where did mushrooms come from?
.
..
...

U see that if we keep ask the same question for the origin of smt, we'll end up to reach the Big Bang.

Where did the ball of matter that create the Big Bang come from?
No answer.

Same with God, where did God come from?
No answer.

If u believe in the Big Bang, u must believe in God.
If u dont believe in the Big Bang, u must not believe in God.

Nothing cannot create something, it has to be there smt always exist from the beginning, smt that trigger time, space, dimension and create matter

Self-ownage at it's best.

Barotix, you seem to be struggling under the false impression that scientific theories get promoted into laws. They don't. Laws describe specific analytical relationships and don't go through the evolutionary process.

The problem centers on the fact that the concept of a scientific "LAW" is anachronistic because it originated at a time when the Almighty was thought to have established the laws of nature and to have decreed that nature must obey them...

Today, all theories are subject to scrutiny and observation and revision. It is a common misconception that "good theories" are promoted into scientific laws, they aren't, never have been and never will be. A quick example would be if you dropped two objects from a tower, one a cannonball, the other a golf ball. One could state that it is a FACT that the objects were observed to have fallen toward the earth. Two differing theories have been advanced to describe the fall, Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation and Einsteins Specific Theory of Relativity. Neither theory will become a Scientific LAW. In Physics the first law of Thermodynamics deals with Conservation.

Issac Asimov postulates his theory of ORIGIN OF MATTER:
Asimov again - here speaking of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics:
The concept of the Big Bang began with the thought that since we could observe the universe expanding we could also imagine time being rolled backwards. 1 hundred years ago the universe was smaller, obviously. A thousand years ago it was smaller still. Given a million or a trillion years the imagined contraction of the universe would result in a universe that was necessarily small enough to be called "TINY".

The concept of the Big Bang fulfills this prophecy perfectly. "Everything goes on just as it has since the beginning."

If you wish to call my understanding of creation an opposing "theory", fine. My "theory" predicts that scoffers will come and that one of their main messages will be, "Everything goes on just as it has since the beginning."

I guess we just proved something at least, right?

Thank goodness for people with more knowledge than me. Newton's law of gravity is what threw me off. I was under the impression theories never became laws until I encountered physics then I got confused, assumed theories get promoted, and left it at that. Wasn't interested enough to see if I was right or wrong; I just went with it. Thx, granps. =]

good read

more controversial topics should be brought up in OTL and discussed

i know right conversations like this are always engaging, also when we get into a discussion there arent any " oh el oh elle i disagree with nooob " posts, just a proper discussion

Baro

I believe everyone came from energy that pre-existed in the universe =O.