Great people (Scientists) who believe'd in god
- Thread starter Alan McDougall
- Start date
Another lie.
You simply refuse to accept the truth and persist in repeating the same tired lies again and again.
Empirical refers to that which is a premise accepted and validated by humanity. Science is one of those empirical premises, so is math, history and geography, as well as judiciary laws accepted by all humanity's institutions, and the premise of crimes - the antithesis of an accepted emperical premise. NOT TO COMMIT MURDER is as valied as the universe being accepted as finite. A scientific equation is based on repeatable and observable proof.
THE FIRST SCIENTIFIC EQUATION:
The appropriate opening verse in Genesis which says there was a BEGINNING of the Galaxies and the Earth [the universe]. Feel free to put up a pre-dating similar equation of a finite universe. Now if you agree or not the universe is finite does not impact: it remains a scientific premise.
If you study the text, you will also find that Evolution comes from Genesis [the first record of life form groupings and their mode of procession]. Also the first seperation of Medicine [a scientific faculty] from the occult as well in the same book [the ID and treatment of malignancies and the effects of contagious and infectcious deseases].
Let not anyone act like these premises are not valid or that later acceptances are more scientific - all that occured was correct premises became accepted by their percieved vindication.
Bells
Staff member
Yes, go and complain - it shows you lost. You have no other responsa? You must either negate a post with counters - which you have never done - or accept:
CHECK MATE.
Actually no. He reported you because you are trolling and have failed repeatedly to back up your claims. Not only that, you are also repeating the same false and unsubstantiated claims throughout the forum.
You have reached the point where the reports have stopped and you will start to receive warnings and possible bans for not only repeatedly posting false claims, but by refusing to substantiate any of your claims and then repeating them again.
Consider this a friendly piece of advice. If you post statements as though they are facts, then you had better be able to support it said statements (links to journals, etc). Repeatedly failing to do so is a breach of the rules of this forums and can and will result in a ban.
No sir, thanks for your advice but I don't accept it. One can offer any writings from any place as a scientific premise if it stands up to the test by virtue of simple comprehension.
The text I provided have no other meaning other than the only way it can be read. If I show that the first record of life form group divisions is in Genesis, and point to such reference - then it stands. The term 'species' may not appear in an ancient text being of recent coinage, but there is no question that 'KINDS' have the same import when the textual context is considered - it refers to specific groups of life forms - given for the first time in its recording. Based on the meaning of the texts, there is no response given why it is not applicable - other than using terms such as 'trolling' - at every turn and with no informative input.
One claiming trolling and nothing else as a response is the one who is abusing forum rules. I will stand by this.
That too would be a lie on your part. Reasons were given the first and second (IIRC) times you tried using Genesis as "scientific reference".
*** NOTE FROM A MOD ***
Trolling is bad enough as is posting false claims, but lying when attempting to justify repeated trolling is worse.
Last edited:
Which creator? Which religion? Which god are you referring, there are so many to choose. Here's a list of the top ten religions I pulled from the OP link. Can you tell me which one is right and which ones are wrong? Then, we can tackle your post.
Religion Members
-------------------- ----------------------
Christianity 1.9 billion
Islam 1.1 billion
Hinduism 781 million
Buddhism 324 million
Sikhism 19 million
Judaism 14 million
Baha'ism 6.1 million
Confucianism 5.3 million
Jainism 4.9 million
Shintoism 2.8 million
Whatever point is being (or at least trying to be) made in the OP is somewhat flawed by the very fact that throughout most of history - and that includes much of the 20th century - declaring oneself as atheist would be detrimental to one's career... e.g. in politics, or if religious institutions were the main place of learning / funding.
I am not saying that all the people on the list were atheist but chose not to say so. But the significance to their careers on being seen to be religious can not and should not be ignored, as it would make them appear to be religious despite their true position on the matter.
Again, how many on this list fall into this area is unknown - and it is precisely because it is unknown that the list is somewhat flawed as evidence.
And I repeat someone else's response to the OP:
So?
I am not saying that all the people on the list were atheist but chose not to say so. But the significance to their careers on being seen to be religious can not and should not be ignored, as it would make them appear to be religious despite their true position on the matter.
Again, how many on this list fall into this area is unknown - and it is precisely because it is unknown that the list is somewhat flawed as evidence.
And I repeat someone else's response to the OP:
So?
Yeah, and they all hate each other to the point of killing them "in one form or another."
So, why aren't you a Muslim or a Hindu?
Oh yes, you weren't born into a family that believed in those religions. Funny that.