Who created Dinosaurs ?
-
my dad created dinosaurs and aliens.
-
Originally posted by 24/7:
Are you aware of your most basic presupposition? One that excludes God a priori because of your commitment to materialism. From this perspective, can you prove to me using your materialist assumptions that the material world is all that exists?
The practice of science doesnt necessarily preclude the existence of God; as I've asked earlier, on what basis can naturalists assume that the universe is structured, ordered and whose laws can be subjected to testing and verifiability?
Most basic presupposition ?
-
Originally posted by TTFU:
Most basic presupposition ?
http://creation.com/missing-or-misinterpreted
-
Cos it is called the bible. It's for human and not dinosaurs.
-
my great great great..........................................................
grandfather's best friend's great, great great great......................................
grandfather's mother-in-law's.................... sister-in-law's......................
pet parrot dictated the entire bible to the ghost-writer....................
it's all true.................boh hao siao one..............
-
Originally posted by 24/7:
Are you aware of your most basic presupposition? One that excludes God a priori because of your commitment to materialism. From this perspective, can you prove to me using your materialist assumptions that the material world is all that exists?
The practice of science doesnt necessarily preclude the existence of God; as I've asked earlier, on what basis can naturalists assume that the universe is structured, ordered and whose laws can be subjected to testing and verifiability?
In naturalism it means that the world is in terms of physics quantifiable. Every event should then be possible to be calculated, and the results would go on to cause a chain of other events, interfering, bumping, and changing other things in the world as if the world were one huge symphony without a conductor. That in the end there is this idea of a total system in which everything is mechanical.
After all despite the word mechanical, that is in terms the world of nature, there are no irregularities, only the simple cause and effect with nothing in between. Plants grow from a seed in some form of Earth, they require nutrients from the Earth and water and sunlight, to continue growing, and upon reaching adulthood proliferate and give birth to offspring and die, or be eaten by another species. The same can be said of animals, if you wish possibly even humans too -
Originally posted by TTFU:
In naturalism it means that the world is in terms of physics quantifiable. Every event should then be possible to be calculated, and the results would go on to cause a chain of other events, interfering, bumping, and changing other things in the world as if the world were one huge symphony without a conductor. That in the end there is this idea of a total system in which everything is mechanical.
After all despite the word mechanical, that is in terms the world of nature, there are no irregularities, only the simple cause and effect with nothing in between. Plants grow from a seed in some form of Earth, they require nutrients from the Earth and water and sunlight, to continue growing, and upon reaching adulthood proliferate and give birth to offspring and die, or be eaten by another species. The same can be said of animals, if you wish possibly even humans tooexactly. my problem with operational science is in that word, "quantifiable". What about the things that exist but are not in the language of physics, "quantifiable". Is it possible? Do they exist? What does physics do with them? A priori rejection, that is, reject they exist because they fail to comply with their first principles of quantity?
These are the limits of operational science. It measures only that which is observable, seen. If it's "one huge symphony without a conductor", who started to play the first note? I'm not positing God, but what else could be there?
-
Originally posted by 24/7:
exactly. my problem with operational science is in that word, "quantifiable". What about the things that exist but are not in the language of physics, "quantifiable". Is it possible? Do they exist? What does physics do with them? A priori rejection, that is, reject they exist because they fail to comply with their first principles of quantity?
These are the limits of operational science. It measures only that which is observable, seen. If it's "one huge symphony without a conductor", who started to play the first note? I'm not positing God, but what else could be there?
It comes back to Einstein's problem and that is point of reference. We are observers in limited to 4 dimensions no matter how you look at it. Then comes back to a question of our very existence., whether we are just some statistical theory that was inevitable the moment the first particle moved, or if there was a grand mover in the universe that directed the way this world became. AhhhhHH...
-
At least the flames stopped. I ended it
-
no u didnt
tsk
-
Originally posted by ditzy:
Jack Bauer created dinosaurs.
He did?
