The Dancing Wu-Li Masters is a great book that goes over theoretical physics and quantum mechanics in an easily digestible manner if one was interested in learning more.
LAMO
Are any of your views falsifiable? Do any of your views not rely on a omnipotent being doing miracles to fool us?
Leave Taylor Swift out of this!
10 Likes
‘The earth is 6 thousand years old’ isn’t even a fact in the Bible. Some guy decided to try and add up the dates in the Bible from Genesis and had to make guesses and assumptions. No Christian until the 1900s thought the Earth was 6k years old.
But that odd guy’s reasoning is the basis for rejecting a lot of very solid scientific ideas
I was raised in a pretty traditional evangelical environment (Southern Baptist) and even most of my Sunday school teachers and such seemed to think the Earth was pretty old and that the first seven days in chapter one of Genesis didn’t represent human days.
Kind of. The basis for rejecting science is that people prefer comforting emotional narratives to harsh reality. They’ll use any excuse - the 6,000 year old stuff is a convenience, but they would have no trouble finding a subsitute if they didn’t have that one. It is difficult to even try to understand things, but it is easy to pretend that nothing is truly knowable and therefore whatever cockamamie notion drifts into your brain is as valid as scientifically tested ideas. People are psychologically fragile and lazy. Some people develop the habit of fighting those self defeating instincts. Many do not.
Many of my views are falsifiable. For example, if a dog ever gives birth to a cat I can no longer argue against trans-speciation.
None of my views rely on an omnipotent being doing miracles to fool us.
Thanks for asking!
How old is the earth again?
I do NOT “reject science.” Science is a wonderful thing. Science and scientists have been a great blessing to virtually all of us. But, like anything else, there is good science (which is based on testability, observability, repeatability, etc.), and bad science which is NOT based on testability, observability, repeatability, and so on.
My views on cosmogony are based on my understanding of the Holy Bible, not on science.
Addendum: “Particles to People” Evolutionism ain’t based on science either.
One is unlikely to get good theology, let alone good science, from the majority of Sunday School teachers imo.
‘Psychological reductionism is the last refuge for someone without an argument.’ - Dennis Prager
This!
Even William F. Buckley, Jr. thought the Bircher’s were fruitier than nutcakes.
In my opinion, roughly 6,000 years old.
How big do you think the universe is?
The same Dennis Prager who is pro-marital rape, anti-vax and pro-Sandusky? That is who you are shaping your life and worldview around?
This topic really should really be moved to another thread. (even tho your views are mostly held by the insane GOP lol). I do enjoy tackling this subject if only to sharpen my debating skills, which I am admittedly weak at
You know there are different methods of dating, not just one as Mr.Wookie points out. And they all point to a 4.5 billion year old earth. It’s not just that you’re off by a little. You’re off by a magnitude of 750,000 fold
1 Like
Holy shit, that is a thing?
There are a lot of hardcore Christians who realize the Earth is 4+ billion years old.
What’s wrong with Gerry Sandusky? Dude’s been great for football.
Yes.
5 Likes