"I just want to bring up how hypocritical science can be .....To prove a god or a miracle, there must be un deniable imperical proof and evidence....yet these same doctors many times have proclaimed people dead or doomed and when they become well or live despite "undeniable illness"
...they just shrug and say we don't know......"
So your saying all science is hypocritical because
sometimes doctors make mistakes? That doesnt make any sense. Or are you saying that since they dont know EVERYTHING
they shouldn't be believed at all? That wouldn't make any sense either.
"Scientists scoff at the thought of a creator....but will blindly accept the idea of a "big bang" that just happened to put everything in the perfect spot ..."
Big difference. religious people claim that god absolutely
exists with no hard evidence. Scientists accept the big bang
as a theory (a hypothesis with some evidence), not as FACT.
""They laugh at the thought of a creator of man....but then readily accept the idea that we evolved from apes, which in light of the fact that there are still apes in the jungle, on would think there would be continued evolution...""
Certain forms of evolution ARE fact and have been
observed and are repeatable. Did we evolve from apes?
There is overwhelming evidence of this. Maybe you should read up
on the subject.
Are you implying that since apes still exist in the jungle
that this somehow disproves evolution? I once again suggest
you do some studying on evolution.
" what is more realistic in terms or percentages: The idea that ALL living creatures on earth came from a few hydrogen and oxygen cells that were hit by lightning and caused the start of all life over the course of 5 billion years....Or God created man and all the creatures? statistically and scientifically, its impossible that all living things on earth started from some dust particles and some water that got hi by lightning...."
A VERY VERY empty assertion. As far as percentages, you
are completely guessing. It also begs the question, where
did GOD come from?
Lots of holes here.
"in addition....Science has never been able to figure out where the animal cells came from..."
This seems to be your common theme.
Are you attempting to discredit all science because
it cannot explain 100% of everything?
"they know plant cells were the first ( or at least that's what they claim to know)...they just cannot figure out how plants made the jump to animal cells....what i would like to know is how come plants aren;t turning into animals today????"
What does this have to do with anything?
"Science is no different then religion....it's a giant leap of faith when they cant fill in the gaps...."
Another empty assertion.
When science cant prove something completely, it's
called a hypotheses or THEORY if there is at least SOME evidence for the claim.
Religion is wildly different because they claim with absolute
certainty that they are RIGHT without providing any hard evidence.
Religion and science are polar opposites.
You can try to lump them together and claim that science
is based on faith, but you would be wrong and would have
the burden of proof on you to backup such an incredible claim.
"but statistically speaking what would be the chances of all living cells on all living things, bird, trees, bugs, fish , mammals, lions, grass, amoeba's, worms, fungus, cancer, virus',ect,,,,,,,,,all came from a single dark planet energized by the sun and some water and a few cells that began reproducing??????....BTW Science also doesn't know how or why these so called cells started reproducing and splitting which again is a giant gap."
Once again... so what???
You can't discredit everything science has done for us just
because science can't explain everything in the universe today.
What can religion explain? NADA. Big fat zero.
In fact... I would wager that science will NEVER be able
to explain EVERYTHING, even in the future.
Does that mean I should ignore it?
Does that mean I should choose mythology over it?
Don't think so.
peace
axeman
...they just shrug and say we don't know......"
So your saying all science is hypocritical because
sometimes doctors make mistakes? That doesnt make any sense. Or are you saying that since they dont know EVERYTHING
they shouldn't be believed at all? That wouldn't make any sense either.
"Scientists scoff at the thought of a creator....but will blindly accept the idea of a "big bang" that just happened to put everything in the perfect spot ..."
Big difference. religious people claim that god absolutely
exists with no hard evidence. Scientists accept the big bang
as a theory (a hypothesis with some evidence), not as FACT.
""They laugh at the thought of a creator of man....but then readily accept the idea that we evolved from apes, which in light of the fact that there are still apes in the jungle, on would think there would be continued evolution...""
Certain forms of evolution ARE fact and have been
observed and are repeatable. Did we evolve from apes?
There is overwhelming evidence of this. Maybe you should read up
on the subject.
Are you implying that since apes still exist in the jungle
that this somehow disproves evolution? I once again suggest
you do some studying on evolution.
" what is more realistic in terms or percentages: The idea that ALL living creatures on earth came from a few hydrogen and oxygen cells that were hit by lightning and caused the start of all life over the course of 5 billion years....Or God created man and all the creatures? statistically and scientifically, its impossible that all living things on earth started from some dust particles and some water that got hi by lightning...."
A VERY VERY empty assertion. As far as percentages, you
are completely guessing. It also begs the question, where
did GOD come from?
Lots of holes here.
"in addition....Science has never been able to figure out where the animal cells came from..."
This seems to be your common theme.
Are you attempting to discredit all science because
it cannot explain 100% of everything?
"they know plant cells were the first ( or at least that's what they claim to know)...they just cannot figure out how plants made the jump to animal cells....what i would like to know is how come plants aren;t turning into animals today????"
What does this have to do with anything?
"Science is no different then religion....it's a giant leap of faith when they cant fill in the gaps...."
Another empty assertion.
When science cant prove something completely, it's
called a hypotheses or THEORY if there is at least SOME evidence for the claim.
Religion is wildly different because they claim with absolute
certainty that they are RIGHT without providing any hard evidence.
Religion and science are polar opposites.
You can try to lump them together and claim that science
is based on faith, but you would be wrong and would have
the burden of proof on you to backup such an incredible claim.
"but statistically speaking what would be the chances of all living cells on all living things, bird, trees, bugs, fish , mammals, lions, grass, amoeba's, worms, fungus, cancer, virus',ect,,,,,,,,,all came from a single dark planet energized by the sun and some water and a few cells that began reproducing??????....BTW Science also doesn't know how or why these so called cells started reproducing and splitting which again is a giant gap."
Once again... so what???
You can't discredit everything science has done for us just
because science can't explain everything in the universe today.
What can religion explain? NADA. Big fat zero.
In fact... I would wager that science will NEVER be able
to explain EVERYTHING, even in the future.
Does that mean I should ignore it?
Does that mean I should choose mythology over it?
Don't think so.
peace
axeman
)