Relativity and quantum mechanics has been experimentally tested. It used to be that ALL science was done by experimentation and observation. Unfortunately, nowadays cosmology is mostly mathematical modeling using powerful supercomputers. These mathematical models are getting increasingly complicated, in order to take into account many recent measurements and observations coming from modern telescopes and space probes. According to present theories, these models require esoteric, never yet discovered entities, such as dark matter and energy and black holes. It appears that present theories are based on fundamental assumptions that are evidently wrong.
There is an alternate theory that explains all observations in terms of electric and magnetic laws that are well understood and used every day here on earth. Because electric forces are so much greater than gravity, electricity gets things done much faster. This causes a great conflict with theories that try to explain how things came into being by processes that take immense amounts of time. This electrical theory CAN be tested by experiment and observations.
There were many scientists in earlier times when most people still believed in God, who did groundbreaking work in science and mathematics. There are names like Nicholas Copernicus, Sir Francis Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, René Descartes, Blaise Pascal, Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, Gregory Mendel, William Thomson Kelvin, Max Planck and Albert Einstein. There are others that could be added to this list. It is quite clear from history, that belief in a Creator God does not preclude great scientific discovery and mathematics.
Is it possible that dark matter, dark energy, black holes and the Oort cloud don't exist at all, but are fanciful constructs that are required to explain certain observations according to currently “accepted” cosmological theories? There is a theory based upon known laws of electricity, that can explain the all observations without resorting to these esoteric constructs, which are nothing more than mathematical fiction. When the accepted picture of the universe put the Earth at the center, it also took fanciful models to account for the limited observations that were possible before telescopes were invented. When increasing technological ability made many observations and measurements of the solar system, the stars and eventually the galaxies, it was finally necessary to discard the old earth centric cosmology. In the same way, modern instruments have brought back a lot of results that are “puzzling” the scientists adhering to the present accepted view of the gravitational universe model. Interpreting these results by postulating that electricity and magnetism are the dominant forces, rather than gravity, the picture of the universe becomes much more coherent. Far out stuff like parallel universes and other exotic explanations are no longer necessary, but many PhD theses and science funding will have to be re-done. A fundamental paradigm shift of our view of the universe is necessary.
If a crummy story is printed on fancy paper, it is still not worth reading. A second-rate movie does not become first-rate, just because they make it 3-D and run it at a higher frame rate. Once upon a time, people would go to the cinema for the content of the motion picture. Now they make many films with fantastic special effects, but mediocre story lines. Many people, myself included, would rather watch a movie on an ordinary TV with a good story, than a fancy production with lots of imaginative special effects, but a mediocre story or performance. For the $6 popcorn, I can make the same thing at home with our popcorn popper for $.50.
I am not a follower of any religion, even Christianity. The word “religion” comes from the Latin root meaning to “bind”. Religions, all of them without a single exception bind and enslave people to a set of man-made rules. This is true no matter which country you might want to decide to live in. Some enslavement may be more severe than others, but it will be there, anywhere on the planet where there are people.
I am a follower or at least try to be of a person, the God–Man Jesus Christ. I believe that the Bible, as it has been brought down to us is a true historical record. It is recorded therein that Jesus Christ had nothing but trouble, not from the secular, pagan Romans, but the highly religious governing elite of the Jewish people. Jesus had some very choice words for these religious hypocrites. That's why they hated him and eventually instigated his crucifixion by their Roman governmental overlords. You have rightly pointed out that the Christian religion is no different, but is likewise filled with religious hypocrites. You would do well to let the life and ministry of Jesus Christ speak to you directly, rather than going by the proclamations and rules of those who claim to follow the Scriptures, but don't.
Jesus did not come to start another religion, for God knows humanity has enough of those already. All religions, including traditional Christianity are human attempts to reach out to God. Only the gospel, as recorded in the Bible, unadulterated by human religiosity tells of God becoming man and thereby reaching down to us, rather than people climbing up to God by their own religious efforts. Jesus said, "I have come so that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly." (John 10:10) Jesus offers a new life through forgiveness of your past mistakes and a new start for anyone willing to believe his words. It really is that simple.
Science is really the study of what God has already put into creation. Scripture encourages the study of science as a means of appreciation of the grandeur of God. When people create a work of art, an intricate machine, complex software or anything else, they don't like it if someone or something else takes credit for their work. There definitely is evolution going on. That cannot be denied. It is part of the operation of God's creation. However, attributing the origin of a complex structure like the human brain to anything other than a superb mind is utter nonsense.
Okay, you want to believe in evolution, fine. A basic driving principle of evolution supposedly is the idea of “survival of the fittest”. Why is it then that the vast majority of people on earth WANT to believe there is a Creator? How does that fact fit in with evolutionary theory? How does believing in the Creator helps survival?
"Logical statements can be proven 100% correct within a formal system"
A human system or method of thought still depends on certain assumptions. Human logic works only within a humanly defined box of knowledge. Human logic says they can be no resurrection from the dead. Jesus was questioned about this. You can read about the question and his reply in Luke 20:27–40. This question was very logical, based upon their understanding of Jewish law as given by Moses. Jesus gave them an answer that was completely outside of their logical box. I like the last verse of his answer: Luke 20:40 And after that they did not dare ask Him anything.
I am not poking hate at anyone! I am merely saying that you can choose which “forced religious behavior” you like better, but you cannot get away from religion and religious people. Humans are a religious creature. The only way you can get away from religion is to avoid all human contact.
"Why should somebody believe those who claim that rather than believing those who don't?"
The bottom line to all this is that nothing, especially historical records can be proved, but must be believed. It's not so much WHAT you believe, but WHOM you believe. There is no way you can convince someone who says that the moon landings are a Hollywood production. In every day life, if someone tells you something you cannot understand, you have to either believe them or not. If you do not want to believe that someone can come back from the dead, you won't. Jesus illustrated this with an example which he concludes like this:
Luke 16:31 And he said to him, If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded, even though one rose from the dead.
People often quote the Bible out of context, so you should read that whole section beginning with Luke 16:19. If you do not WANT to believe, no amount of evidence will convince you. That is just how humans are wired.
Nothing can be proven 100% correct, especially to someone who doesn't want to believe the evidence. Evolution, like every other human activity, makes certain assumptions. “Assumption” is a scientific way of saying “believe”. One underlying assumption about evolution is that time itself has always proceeded at the present pace. We do not even understand what time really is. Evolution depends upon lots of “time”. We measure time by something moving in “space”. Do we really understand the nature of space?
How do we “prove” even recent history? There are people today who will deny that the Holocaust ever took place, despite the evidence we have that it did. There are people that assert that all the evidence of man landing on the moon, is nothing more than a Hollywood production. In the end, evidence, especially historical evidence, has to be BELIEVED. It can never be proven unless someone invents a time machine. Even then, if somebody did travel in a time machine, the rest of us would still have to BELIEVE whatever evidence and testimony that person or persons brought back. The Bible, and everything it contains, cannot be proven, it can only be believed, the same as any other historical document. The fossil record is a historical document in the earth, which must also be believed.
On Slashdot, creation/evolution stories vie with global warming/climate change stories for the highest activity rate. That of course brings in advertising money, otherwise they probably wouldn't run these controversial subjects all the time. If you don't believe me, check out the record.
Why don't you move to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Turkey or any other Muslim dominated country. You have lots of choice. Maybe you will like that better.
Do you think there are many of those in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Sudan, Turkey, Iraq and other Islamic dominated countries? You may have to expand your thinking!
But that does not explain the increasing number of churches that are foregoing the IRS opportunity to censor them by not being an official IRS registered organization.The members of such churches would rather be free to say whatever they want, without being subject to censorship from the government. Therefore they are no longer tax exempt.
"...so I'm not that convinced that the presence or absence of God is going to make a big enough difference unless God directly wields the biggest weapon (without the aid of humans) to enforce his opinion...."
Someone who denies the possibility of the existence of God, will also deny the possibility that God did indeed perform judgments in history. Someone like that will also deny that human existence extends beyond physical death. Such a person will also deny that God could possibly use human beings to leave a written record of his activity and commands. Such a person will also deny that anything could ever take place that cannot be fathomed or understood by a very limited human mind.
Any historical record, no matter where it is or who created it, in the end always has to be believed by those reading and studying that record. The Bible is that record of God and his activity. Sodom and Gomorrah did exist in history. Archaeological digs around the Dead Sea have confirmed this. God wiped Sodom and Gomorrah out. When the forces of nature wipe out thousands of humans, it is still today called “an act of God” which the insurance will not cover.
There will always be deniers of historical fact. There are people today that deny there ever was a Holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis. Yet that is relatively recent history. There are people today who assert that no human being ever set foot on the moon. They claim that all the video records we have are nothing more than a Hollywood production. The bottom line is simply this: anyone convinced against his will remains unconvinced still, no matter how much evidence is presented. There is no amount of evidence that will convince someone who refuses to be convinced no matter what.
That is your opinion, and of course you are entitled to it, but what makes you think your opinion is better than anybody else's or should be binding on any other person? If there is no God, then we are only left with each other's opinion. The one that has the biggest weapon, will ultimately enforce his/her opinion on the rest.
There were no Jews back then, but then that is another discussion. Jews are people and people use many tools to kill each other, including but not limited to guns.
I don't know if it is still the case or not, but does the United States military swear to uphold the Constitution or do they swear to uphold the government (president) they happen to be under? If the government wants to do something that is perceived by most people to be unconstitutional, will that not also include the military? A military sworn to uphold the Constitution, may not be inclined to uphold a particular government intent on doing something blatantly unconstitutional. In that case, an armed population can thwart whatever cowardly goons the government may be able to hire to do their dirty work
"While I think this is a good law in theory" Yes, I agree with you in theory. In practice however, has any law ever, at any time anywhere produced law-abiding citizens, especially if the chance of getting caught are very small? People that don't want to obey laws, will not obey them, no matter how many laws are made nor how draconian the punishments for breaking them are. Only a high probability of catching the offender reduces crime. Nobody, when they notice a cop car behind them will intentionally violate traffic laws.
"I see in the US. Guns kill people no matter how you look at it,"
That is such a timeworn, utterly stupid cliché. When in history, has there even been ONE gun that has killed anybody or even injured them, where no human pulled the trigger caused the trigger to be pulled? People kill, using guns, knives, explosives, tire irons, baseball bats and 1001 other items that can be used as weapons to kill someone. I wonder what weapon Cain, the first murderer used to kill his brother Abel? It certainly was not a gun.
So if somebody finds enjoyment/fulfillment in murdering as many people as possible and calling it their purpose in life, you're okay with that? If not why not?
Homosexuality has a survival risk for the human race. If everybody were homosexual, the human race would die out. That of course would be OK with eco-anarchists. No more people, no more ecological problems.
So what, if there are no viruses, why does anybody have to scan for them? The only ones being harmed by Apple's business model of this closed system, are the developers of antivirus software. In the new OS X 10.8 OS, users who desperately want to install any software whatsoever, including a virus or Trojan, can still deliberately do so.
Slashdot Mirror
Relativity and quantum mechanics has been experimentally tested. It used to be that ALL science was done by experimentation and observation. Unfortunately, nowadays cosmology is mostly mathematical modeling using powerful supercomputers. These mathematical models are getting increasingly complicated, in order to take into account many recent measurements and observations coming from modern telescopes and space probes. According to present theories, these models require esoteric, never yet discovered entities, such as dark matter and energy and black holes. It appears that present theories are based on fundamental assumptions that are evidently wrong.
There is an alternate theory that explains all observations in terms of electric and magnetic laws that are well understood and used every day here on earth. Because electric forces are so much greater than gravity, electricity gets things done much faster. This causes a great conflict with theories that try to explain how things came into being by processes that take immense amounts of time. This electrical theory CAN be tested by experiment and observations.
There were many scientists in earlier times when most people still believed in God, who did groundbreaking work in science and mathematics. There are names like Nicholas Copernicus, Sir Francis Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, René Descartes, Blaise Pascal, Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, Gregory Mendel, William Thomson Kelvin, Max Planck and Albert Einstein. There are others that could be added to this list. It is quite clear from history, that belief in a Creator God does not preclude great scientific discovery and mathematics.
Is it possible that dark matter, dark energy, black holes and the Oort cloud don't exist at all, but are fanciful constructs that are required to explain certain observations according to currently “accepted” cosmological theories? There is a theory based upon known laws of electricity, that can explain the all observations without resorting to these esoteric constructs, which are nothing more than mathematical fiction. When the accepted picture of the universe put the Earth at the center, it also took fanciful models to account for the limited observations that were possible before telescopes were invented. When increasing technological ability made many observations and measurements of the solar system, the stars and eventually the galaxies, it was finally necessary to discard the old earth centric cosmology. In the same way, modern instruments have brought back a lot of results that are “puzzling” the scientists adhering to the present accepted view of the gravitational universe model. Interpreting these results by postulating that electricity and magnetism are the dominant forces, rather than gravity, the picture of the universe becomes much more coherent. Far out stuff like parallel universes and other exotic explanations are no longer necessary, but many PhD theses and science funding will have to be re-done. A fundamental paradigm shift of our view of the universe is necessary.
If a crummy story is printed on fancy paper, it is still not worth reading. A second-rate movie does not become first-rate, just because they make it 3-D and run it at a higher frame rate. Once upon a time, people would go to the cinema for the content of the motion picture. Now they make many films with fantastic special effects, but mediocre story lines. Many people, myself included, would rather watch a movie on an ordinary TV with a good story, than a fancy production with lots of imaginative special effects, but a mediocre story or performance. For the $6 popcorn, I can make the same thing at home with our popcorn popper for $.50.
I am not a follower of any religion, even Christianity. The word “religion” comes from the Latin root meaning to “bind”. Religions, all of them without a single exception bind and enslave people to a set of man-made rules. This is true no matter which country you might want to decide to live in. Some enslavement may be more severe than others, but it will be there, anywhere on the planet where there are people.
I am a follower or at least try to be of a person, the God–Man Jesus Christ. I believe that the Bible, as it has been brought down to us is a true historical record. It is recorded therein that Jesus Christ had nothing but trouble, not from the secular, pagan Romans, but the highly religious governing elite of the Jewish people. Jesus had some very choice words for these religious hypocrites. That's why they hated him and eventually instigated his crucifixion by their Roman governmental overlords. You have rightly pointed out that the Christian religion is no different, but is likewise filled with religious hypocrites. You would do well to let the life and ministry of Jesus Christ speak to you directly, rather than going by the proclamations and rules of those who claim to follow the Scriptures, but don't.
Jesus did not come to start another religion, for God knows humanity has enough of those already. All religions, including traditional Christianity are human attempts to reach out to God. Only the gospel, as recorded in the Bible, unadulterated by human religiosity tells of God becoming man and thereby reaching down to us, rather than people climbing up to God by their own religious efforts. Jesus said, "I have come so that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly." (John 10:10) Jesus offers a new life through forgiveness of your past mistakes and a new start for anyone willing to believe his words. It really is that simple.
Science is really the study of what God has already put into creation. Scripture encourages the study of science as a means of appreciation of the grandeur of God. When people create a work of art, an intricate machine, complex software or anything else, they don't like it if someone or something else takes credit for their work. There definitely is evolution going on. That cannot be denied. It is part of the operation of God's creation. However, attributing the origin of a complex structure like the human brain to anything other than a superb mind is utter nonsense.
Okay, you want to believe in evolution, fine. A basic driving principle of evolution supposedly is the idea of “survival of the fittest”. Why is it then that the vast majority of people on earth WANT to believe there is a Creator? How does that fact fit in with evolutionary theory? How does believing in the Creator helps survival?
"Logical statements can be proven 100% correct within a formal system"
A human system or method of thought still depends on certain assumptions. Human logic works only within a humanly defined box of knowledge. Human logic says they can be no resurrection from the dead. Jesus was questioned about this. You can read about the question and his reply in Luke 20:27–40. This question was very logical, based upon their understanding of Jewish law as given by Moses. Jesus gave them an answer that was completely outside of their logical box. I like the last verse of his answer: Luke 20:40 And after that they did not dare ask Him anything.
I am not poking hate at anyone! I am merely saying that you can choose which “forced religious behavior” you like better, but you cannot get away from religion and religious people. Humans are a religious creature. The only way you can get away from religion is to avoid all human contact.
"Why should somebody believe those who claim that rather than believing those who don't?"
The bottom line to all this is that nothing, especially historical records can be proved, but must be believed. It's not so much WHAT you believe, but WHOM you believe. There is no way you can convince someone who says that the moon landings are a Hollywood production. In every day life, if someone tells you something you cannot understand, you have to either believe them or not. If you do not want to believe that someone can come back from the dead, you won't. Jesus illustrated this with an example which he concludes like this:
Luke 16:31 And he said to him, If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded, even though one rose from the dead.
People often quote the Bible out of context, so you should read that whole section beginning with Luke 16:19. If you do not WANT to believe, no amount of evidence will convince you. That is just how humans are wired.
"it can't be proven 100% correct "
Nothing can be proven 100% correct, especially to someone who doesn't want to believe the evidence. Evolution, like every other human activity, makes certain assumptions. “Assumption” is a scientific way of saying “believe”. One underlying assumption about evolution is that time itself has always proceeded at the present pace. We do not even understand what time really is. Evolution depends upon lots of “time”. We measure time by something moving in “space”. Do we really understand the nature of space?
How do we “prove” even recent history? There are people today who will deny that the Holocaust ever took place, despite the evidence we have that it did. There are people that assert that all the evidence of man landing on the moon, is nothing more than a Hollywood production. In the end, evidence, especially historical evidence, has to be BELIEVED. It can never be proven unless someone invents a time machine. Even then, if somebody did travel in a time machine, the rest of us would still have to BELIEVE whatever evidence and testimony that person or persons brought back. The Bible, and everything it contains, cannot be proven, it can only be believed, the same as any other historical document. The fossil record is a historical document in the earth, which must also be believed.
On Slashdot, creation/evolution stories vie with global warming/climate change stories for the highest activity rate. That of course brings in advertising money, otherwise they probably wouldn't run these controversial subjects all the time. If you don't believe me, check out the record.
Why don't you move to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Turkey or any other Muslim dominated country. You have lots of choice. Maybe you will like that better.
Do you think there are many of those in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Sudan, Turkey, Iraq and other Islamic dominated countries? You may have to expand your thinking!
But that does not explain the increasing number of churches that are foregoing the IRS opportunity to censor them by not being an official IRS registered organization.The members of such churches would rather be free to say whatever they want, without being subject to censorship from the government. Therefore they are no longer tax exempt.
"...so I'm not that convinced that the presence or absence of God is going to make a big enough difference unless God directly wields the biggest weapon (without the aid of humans) to enforce his opinion...."
Someone who denies the possibility of the existence of God, will also deny the possibility that God did indeed perform judgments in history. Someone like that will also deny that human existence extends beyond physical death. Such a person will also deny that God could possibly use human beings to leave a written record of his activity and commands. Such a person will also deny that anything could ever take place that cannot be fathomed or understood by a very limited human mind.
Any historical record, no matter where it is or who created it, in the end always has to be believed by those reading and studying that record. The Bible is that record of God and his activity. Sodom and Gomorrah did exist in history. Archaeological digs around the Dead Sea have confirmed this. God wiped Sodom and Gomorrah out. When the forces of nature wipe out thousands of humans, it is still today called “an act of God” which the insurance will not cover.
There will always be deniers of historical fact. There are people today that deny there ever was a Holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis. Yet that is relatively recent history. There are people today who assert that no human being ever set foot on the moon. They claim that all the video records we have are nothing more than a Hollywood production. The bottom line is simply this: anyone convinced against his will remains unconvinced still, no matter how much evidence is presented. There is no amount of evidence that will convince someone who refuses to be convinced no matter what.
That is your opinion, and of course you are entitled to it, but what makes you think your opinion is better than anybody else's or should be binding on any other person? If there is no God, then we are only left with each other's opinion. The one that has the biggest weapon, will ultimately enforce his/her opinion on the rest.
There were no Jews back then, but then that is another discussion. Jews are people and people use many tools to kill each other, including but not limited to guns.
I don't know if it is still the case or not, but does the United States military swear to uphold the Constitution or do they swear to uphold the government (president) they happen to be under? If the government wants to do something that is perceived by most people to be unconstitutional, will that not also include the military? A military sworn to uphold the Constitution, may not be inclined to uphold a particular government intent on doing something blatantly unconstitutional. In that case, an armed population can thwart whatever cowardly goons the government may be able to hire to do their dirty work
"While I think this is a good law in theory"
Yes, I agree with you in theory. In practice however, has any law ever, at any time anywhere produced law-abiding citizens, especially if the chance of getting caught are very small? People that don't want to obey laws, will not obey them, no matter how many laws are made nor how draconian the punishments for breaking them are. Only a high probability of catching the offender reduces crime. Nobody, when they notice a cop car behind them will intentionally violate traffic laws.
"I see in the US. Guns kill people no matter how you look at it,"
That is such a timeworn, utterly stupid cliché. When in history, has there even been ONE gun that has killed anybody or even injured them, where no human pulled the trigger caused the trigger to be pulled? People kill, using guns, knives, explosives, tire irons, baseball bats and 1001 other items that can be used as weapons to kill someone. I wonder what weapon Cain, the first murderer used to kill his brother Abel? It certainly was not a gun.
“Dead corpses”; Are there any other kind of corpses?
So if somebody finds enjoyment/fulfillment in murdering as many people as possible and calling it their purpose in life, you're okay with that? If not why not?
Homosexuality has a survival risk for the human race. If everybody were homosexual, the human race would die out. That of course would be OK with eco-anarchists. No more people, no more ecological problems.
So what, if there are no viruses, why does anybody have to scan for them? The only ones being harmed by Apple's business model of this closed system, are the developers of antivirus software. In the new OS X 10.8 OS, users who desperately want to install any software whatsoever, including a virus or Trojan, can still deliberately do so.