User Tag List

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 54

Thread: Cimbing the "ladder of life" in the Grand Canyon

  1. #31
    Alumni Member V.I.P
    Overall activity: 57.0%

    Quark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    18,236
    Thanks
    29,352
    Thanked: 14,482
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    21474857
    Quote Originally Posted by Quark View Post
    Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are the same to me both are crazy. That's how I feel about religion it is the hobgoblin of little minds. Excluding pseudoscience such as Creation science, I'll go with science over any religion anytime as it is far more real in the natural world than any religion which lives in the super natural world and relies on invisible gods and spirits to explain cause.
    Sorry. I should have said, "Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are the same to me both are superstitious and ignorant." NOT Crazy.

  2. #32
    Alumni Member V.I.P
    Overall activity: 57.0%

    Quark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    18,236
    Thanks
    29,352
    Thanked: 14,482
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    21474857
    Quote Originally Posted by nonsqtr View Post
    Horsepucky. Sorry, but that's plain old bullshit. There is very solid and even converging evidence, and all you're doing by trying to deny it is flaunting your ignorance.

    You claim you've "studied" the stuff? Come on CJ. If you're claiming chaos theory is fantasy then you're denying the validity of Euclidean geometry. You really want to fight that battle?

    Some people here simply don't understand - you can be a fundie and be an evolutionist. The two positions are entirely compatible, and anyone who tells you different is lying to you. 'Kay? I'm not going to mince words here. There's a lot of people in religion who profit from telling their flock that evolution is bullshit. Maybe they even want to condition you not to believe your own lying eyes. Who knows - mostly these days they go for the baser money motive rather than the more sophisticated power motive, but who knows.

    There is no such thing as "truth" in science. There are only models. Any decent scientist will tell you that. Once again - science is not a "theory", it's something you do. It's a method, not a theory. It's amazing how many people want to talk shit about science and thoroughly misunderstand what it is.

    There's a lot of charlatans in the creationism space. There are very few "scientists" in the creation space, because it's impossible to perform reproducible experiments. You can not apply the scientific method to something you can't access. And if you want to substitute faith for science that's fine, but do not claim it's science, because it isn't. The scientific method is rigorous, it requires independent observation and reproducible results.

    If I were you, I would be very careful in terms of discerning dogma from what is actually written. You do not know the meaning of the word "create", you must investigate its meaning, and if you think otherwise you're echoing dogma, which means you've got someone else's thinking cap on and not your own.
    These people either hate science or have no idea of what science is.

  3. #33
    Alumni Member V.I.P
    Overall activity: 57.0%

    Quark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    18,236
    Thanks
    29,352
    Thanked: 14,482
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    21474857
    Quote Originally Posted by gregonejeep View Post
    I am with you on science Quark, I love it. But it was proven to me without a doubt back in 1992 thereabouts...that a "super natural" world truly exists.
    How was it proven? What scientific tests were used? Have those tests been verified?

  4. #34
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P
    Overall activity: 43.0%

    Sled Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    31,932
    Thanks
    6,748
    Thanked: 18,504
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    21474871
    Quote Originally Posted by nonsqtr View Post
    We're going to start with the stupid argument again?


    Yeah, the religious kooks can't keep their garbage in the forum reserved for their crap.

    I guess they're not so stupid as to not realize the normal won't see it if they don't infect other places.
    Freedom Takes "I Won't". - Eric Frank Russell

    Trump has been President for 280 days and Ruth Bader Ginzberg hasn't had the decency to die. What's up with that?

    ONLY Roy Moore can keep the Senate out of Rodent control and KEEP that train of conservative Trump Judges on the Confirmation Highway.

  5. #35
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P
    Overall activity: 43.0%

    Sled Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    31,932
    Thanks
    6,748
    Thanked: 18,504
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    21474871
    Quote Originally Posted by Quark View Post
    These people either hate science or have no idea of what science is.
    "And", not "or".

    Reality threatens their comforting beliefs.
    Freedom Takes "I Won't". - Eric Frank Russell

    Trump has been President for 280 days and Ruth Bader Ginzberg hasn't had the decency to die. What's up with that?

    ONLY Roy Moore can keep the Senate out of Rodent control and KEEP that train of conservative Trump Judges on the Confirmation Highway.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Sled Dog For This Useful Post:

    Quark (09-16-2017)

  7. #36
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P
    Overall activity: 43.0%

    Sled Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    31,932
    Thanks
    6,748
    Thanked: 18,504
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    21474871
    Quote Originally Posted by gregonejeep View Post
    I am with you on science Quark, I love it. But it was proven to me without a doubt back in 1992 thereabouts...that a "super natural" world truly exists.
    If it exists, it's natural. Hence there's no such thing as "supernatural".
    Freedom Takes "I Won't". - Eric Frank Russell

    Trump has been President for 280 days and Ruth Bader Ginzberg hasn't had the decency to die. What's up with that?

    ONLY Roy Moore can keep the Senate out of Rodent control and KEEP that train of conservative Trump Judges on the Confirmation Highway.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Sled Dog For This Useful Post:

    Quark (09-17-2017)

  9. #37
    Senior Member
    Overall activity: 83.0%

    gregonejeep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Ky
    Posts
    1,311
    Thanks
    1,292
    Thanked: 1,292
    Rep Power
    7607940
    Quote Originally Posted by Quark View Post
    How was it proven? What scientific tests were used? Have those tests been verified?

    WAY too long for me to type out again...so go to Jen's thread I linked to below in the Religion forum, if you want to read about my experience. Go to page 5 and then to my post #45

    http://thepoliticsforums.com/threads...hn-Burke/page5

  10. #38
    Alumni Member V.I.P
    Overall activity: 0%

    usfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    10,562
    Thanks
    12,483
    Thanked: 7,631
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    21474851
    I have spent a lot of time at the Grand Canyon. I go there at least twice a year, & i really examine the layers, the vistas, the depth, & am always in awe at the power of water, when viewing it.

    To me, the 'universal erosion' theories make no sense. The elevations at the top.. from both sides are way too high for some little river to have cut the canyon, even with 'millions & millions' of years. How are layers of strata and fossils deposited? Not by slow, constant weather patterns, but by major catastrophic events. It makes a lot more sense, to see the upper colorado plateau as a huge lake or sea, with all the strata that comprise the GC laid down at some unknown time in the past. Seashells on the rims of the canyons give credence to that model. How could there be seashells at 8000 ft elevation?

    But take a model of global upheaval.. put the colorado plateau & above areas underwater, dammed up into a huge sea. Then a breach.. a break in the 'dam' lets massive amounts of water rush out in a short time, that could easily cut such a canyon. We have seen such things on a small scale, when mount st. helens eruption dammed up some canyons, then breached to cut deep ravines. But the notion of 'millions & millions of years' of simple erosion, cut by a relatively small river, carving these canyon walls a mile deep.. with just uniformity as the only explanation, is pretty far fetched. Yet that is the official (and only) explanation, & it is dogmatically declared as 'settled science!' by the True Believers in the National Park service.

    They toss dates out they have NO WAY to prove, except by circular reasoning & mandate, & have constructed this great religious model for naturalism, & the Great Unconformity of the Grand Canyon has nothing but problems for their model. But that does not deter the True Believers, who, without blinking, assert their beliefs with renewed enthusiasm, showing contempt or disdain for any who dare question the sacred tenets of their faith.

    It is yet another example of religious dogma, usurping true scientific methodology, seizing the narrative, & banning any alternative views.

  11. #39
    Administrator V.I.P
    TPF Moderator
    Overall activity: 95.0%

    Calypso Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    54,456
    Thanks
    5,464
    Thanked: 40,931
    Rep Power
    21474896
    Quote Originally Posted by Quark View Post
    Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are the same to me both are crazy. That's how I feel about religion it is the hobgoblin of little minds. Excluding pseudoscience such as Creation science, I'll go with science over any religion anytime as it is far more real in the natural world than any religion which lives in the super natural world and relies on invisible gods and spirits to explain cause.
    then unfortunately you cannot or have not or will not make the distinction between actual science and historical science...and historical does not mean it is historical.....it means it is made up based on a fragment of bone here or there. there is a difference.

  12. #40
    Alumni Member V.I.P
    Overall activity: 57.0%

    Quark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    18,236
    Thanks
    29,352
    Thanked: 14,482
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    21474857
    Quote Originally Posted by gregonejeep View Post
    WAY too long for me to type out again...so go to Jen's thread I linked to below in the Religion forum, if you want to read about my experience. Go to page 5 and then to my post #45

    http://thepoliticsforums.com/threads...hn-Burke/page5
    That I read. That's opinion not proof. Glad you found your way.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •