Evidence for God from Science

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:

SoCalExile wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:It would be interesting if it were found in something other than a woo woo site

Yeah the problem is people who believe in ET's not many people know about the former world,a lost world because of the theory of evolution.But if these pipes are legit,it is evidence for a lost world and we already know about primates and we know they did not evolve into men or have a common ancestor,they were just a different race of beings long before God created man in this world.

No chance it's pre-flood?

No chance there was a "flood", of the world wide/ark sort.

Audie,how can you still say this?I have given scientific evidence for world wide floods before.

I "can say it" because the "flood" story is so thoroughly disproved by so many different means that its plain silly to try to insist there was a flood.

Yes, you have presented "evidence" but you lack the depth of knowledge needed to make anything of it. A dead chicken is "evidence", but of what? A brain xray is evidence. Do you know what to do with it? You could advise the surgeon?

You ignore that all evidence that might suggest there really was a flood that has long since and a thousand times over been shown not to have happened. Calling it "evolutionist perspective" only accomplishes self deception.

They say that a start at wisdom is realizing how little you know. Recognizing self deception is tough. You havent made a start yet.

Audie,
Tell me why secular science has discovered world wide dust including in the oceans that dates to about Noah's flood then? just because they don't consider the bible does not mean there is no evidence for a world wide flood.We have dust world wide and it dates to the time of Noah's flood and it is science too,not AIG.I can post a link about it and you'll see it is science saying it,specifically geologists.
It is "self deception"to look at all of the evidence in the earth from an evolution perspective even though not one scientist has ever demonstrated life evolves,and because scientists have done this?The fossils are looked at as if life evolves,when it does'nt.

We have a lost world that nobody knows about.How is it that you can believe life evolves when it has never been demonstrated and yet deny my evidence for a world wide flood? I have evidence and you don't,I don't say this rudely either,it is just the way it is though.A lot of people believe life evolves and have been tricked.Without scientific evidence life evolves you cannot use the fossils as evidence that life evolves because I can say it is the life that existed in the former world that perished before God created this world.Notice that I do not use AIG evidence,I use secular science.

Something happened about the time of Noah's flood and science detects it but they don't consider the bible,so perhaps we need to help.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 080804.htm

abelcainsbrother wrote:Audie,
Tell me why secular science has discovered world wide dust including in the oceans that dates to about Noah's flood then? just because they don't consider the bible does not mean there is no evidence for a world wide flood.We have dust world wide and it dates to the time of Noah's flood and it is science too,not AIG.I can post a link about it and you'll see it is science saying it,specifically geologists.
It is "self deception"to look at all of the evidence in the earth from an evolution perspective even though not one scientist has ever demonstrated life evolves,and because scientists have done this?The fossils are looked at as if life evolves,when it does'nt.

We have a lost world that nobody knows about.How is it that you can believe life evolves when it has never been demonstrated and yet deny my evidence for a world wide flood? I have evidence and you don't,I don't say this rudely either,it is just the way it is though.A lot of people believe life evolves and have been tricked.Without scientific evidence life evolves you cannot use the fossils as evidence that life evolves because I can say it is the life that existed in the former world that perished before God created this world.Notice that I do not use AIG evidence,I use secular science.

There is no such thing as "secular science".

Audie wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:Audie,
Tell me why secular science has discovered world wide dust including in the oceans that dates to about Noah's flood then? just because they don't consider the bible does not mean there is no evidence for a world wide flood.We have dust world wide and it dates to the time of Noah's flood and it is science too,not AIG.I can post a link about it and you'll see it is science saying it,specifically geologists.
It is "self deception"to look at all of the evidence in the earth from an evolution perspective even though not one scientist has ever demonstrated life evolves,and because scientists have done this?The fossils are looked at as if life evolves,when it does'nt.

We have a lost world that nobody knows about.How is it that you can believe life evolves when it has never been demonstrated and yet deny my evidence for a world wide flood? I have evidence and you don't,I don't say this rudely either,it is just the way it is though.A lot of people believe life evolves and have been tricked.Without scientific evidence life evolves you cannot use the fossils as evidence that life evolves because I can say it is the life that existed in the former world that perished before God created this world.Notice that I do not use AIG evidence,I use secular science.

There is no such thing as "secular science".

Of course there is:
http://www.allaboutworldview.org/secular-science.htm

RickD wrote:

Audie wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:Audie,
Tell me why secular science has discovered world wide dust including in the oceans that dates to about Noah's flood then? just because they don't consider the bible does not mean there is no evidence for a world wide flood.We have dust world wide and it dates to the time of Noah's flood and it is science too,not AIG.I can post a link about it and you'll see it is science saying it,specifically geologists.
It is "self deception"to look at all of the evidence in the earth from an evolution perspective even though not one scientist has ever demonstrated life evolves,and because scientists have done this?The fossils are looked at as if life evolves,when it does'nt.

We have a lost world that nobody knows about.How is it that you can believe life evolves when it has never been demonstrated and yet deny my evidence for a world wide flood? I have evidence and you don't,I don't say this rudely either,it is just the way it is though.A lot of people believe life evolves and have been tricked.Without scientific evidence life evolves you cannot use the fossils as evidence that life evolves because I can say it is the life that existed in the former world that perished before God created this world.Notice that I do not use AIG evidence,I use secular science.

There is no such thing as "secular science".

Of course there is:
http://www.allaboutworldview.org/secular-science.htm

And this is the kind of garbage they spew:

Belief in evolution is as crucial to Humanism’s worldview as are its atheistic theology and naturalistic philosophy. In fact, the Humanist’s ideas about the origin of life can be considered a special dimension of these disciplines. Without the theory of evolution, the Humanist would have to rely on God as the explanation for life, which would necessarily destroy his atheism. Therefore, every Secular Humanist embraces the theory of evolution.

As if, not only evolution but science in general, and creation are somehow in contention.

GIGO

"Secular science" is nonsense, the "dust layer" doesnt exist.

If a person has no sense about getting info from woo woo sites, they cant expect anything they say to be given much respect.

ACB,

I've been doing a little research on the Gap Theory, and it seems you are in good company. My google search indicated that the following famous people have ties to the gap theory:

Audie wrote:GIGO

Is this one of those rare moments we agree? (hopefully I didn't misread).

Byblos wrote:

Audie wrote:GIGO

Is this one of those rare moments we agree? (hopefully I didn't misread).

It doesnt mean we are on speaking terms.

Audie wrote:

Byblos wrote:

Audie wrote:GIGO

Is this one of those rare moments we agree? (hopefully I didn't misread).

It doesnt mean we are on speaking terms.

But I did get you to answer me anyway, didn't I.

Audie wrote:

Byblos wrote:

Audie wrote:GIGO

Is this one of those rare moments we agree? (hopefully I didn't misread).

It doesnt mean we are on speaking terms.

It must mean you are on speaking terms. You just spoke to him.


And Audie,

You said:

There is no such thing as "secular science"

So, I provided you with a link that shows "secular science" is what the writers of the link believe to be a humanistic worldview. So, it does exist, at least in their minds.
Just because you or I may disagree with their beliefs, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Yec exists. It's a belief system about creation.

Flat Earth Theory Exists. It's a belief that the earth is flat.

The ToE exists. It's a theory about how life evolved.

Get it?

RickD wrote:

Audie wrote:

Byblos wrote:

Audie wrote:GIGO

Is this one of those rare moments we agree? (hopefully I didn't misread).

It doesnt mean we are on speaking terms.

It must mean you are on speaking terms. You just spoke to him.


And Audie,

You said:

There is no such thing as "secular science"

So, I provided you with a link that shows "secular science" is what the writers of the link believe to be a humanistic worldview. So, it does exist, at least in their minds.
Just because you or I may disagree with their beliefs, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Yec exists. It's a belief system about creation.

Flat Earth Theory Exists. It's a belief that the earth is flat.

The ToE exists. It's a theory about how life evolved.

Get it?

Im not on speaking terms with you either. Get it?

Audie wrote:

RickD wrote:

Audie wrote:

Byblos wrote:

Audie wrote:GIGO

Is this one of those rare moments we agree? (hopefully I didn't misread).

It doesnt mean we are on speaking terms.

It must mean you are on speaking terms. You just spoke to him.


And Audie,

You said:

There is no such thing as "secular science"

So, I provided you with a link that shows "secular science" is what the writers of the link believe to be a humanistic worldview. So, it does exist, at least in their minds.
Just because you or I may disagree with their beliefs, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Yec exists. It's a belief system about creation.

Flat Earth Theory Exists. It's a belief that the earth is flat.

The ToE exists. It's a theory about how life evolved.

Get it?

Im not on speaking terms with you either. Get it?

RickD wrote:

Audie wrote: Im not on speaking terms with you either. Get it?

Welcome to the club Rick. How does it feel to be ignored!