Huh? It was Greeks at least five or six hundred years before Christ.
Sorry, getting my midieval history confused with my Greek history. Pythagoras theorized... Reminder to check myself... discovery and theory are different however.
Cosmologists pretty much agree that it's around 13.5 billion years old. Creationists, who make absurd claims about a Young Earth, believe that the universe is 6000 years old, but they aren't scientists at all, and do everything in their power to reject the scientific evidence.
Cosmologists do tend to lean toward 13.5 billion in recent years. I was thinking more of the people in my experience, physicists are who I come in contact with most. And their views seem to vary more widely even in those who hold to an old universe. To presume that to believe in Creation is to disavow yourself of a belief in science is arrogant. Putting evidence in its proper place seems to be the goal that both sides of the issue should strive for. Creationist scientists put up arguments that are sidestepped or 'rejected' regularly by Evolutionist scientists. They believe in different theories and try to view the evidence with Occkam's razor. Not all of the scientific evidence is conclusive.
Can you give me the exact number of scientists who believed the Earth was 6,000 years old? Can you tell me exactly how they deal with distant red shift, the CMBR and nucleosynthesis? And what does being an expert in super conductors mean to the issue of the age of the Universe?
No...and I know it is not a majority or even a well-numbered minority. My point is that there are different theories out there and none have been proven conclusively. The idea of evolution appeals to some scientists simply because they do not want to believe that there is purpose or a creator. Not all scientists feel this way, not even all evolutionists feel this way. But there are distinctions between the different sets of scientists. As for distant red shift, the CMBR and nucleosythesis, I have not studied these and have not discussed them with the scientists I know. Super Conductors have nothing to do with the issue of the age of the universe, but the fact that he is an expert in a highly scientific and technological field AND a creationist point out that Faith and Science are not two polar opposites. They have been interjoined more than they have been separate until recent years.
Now to get back to the point I was making. There are many Christians who look at science as anything but evil. Evolution is a theory; Intelligent Design is a theory; but they are both within the realms of science. I do not want to start a flame war. I was just annoyed by the brush that is used to paint Christians as ignorant or backward. You might see how that could be taken as rather annoying. This will be all I post, so flame away or not. Just understand that I believe in a God who is not only a God of faith, but of truth. I believe that when science finishes climbing the mountain of truth it will peak over the top and see a theologian reaching down to help it up. May your hearts and minds be open to the Truth. Always.
Respectfully,
Me.
While your response to this study is typical, paints with wide brush strokes, and assumes that all people of faith are imbeciles, simpletons, or unwilling to "believe" in science; I would beg to differ. First I would like to point out that I don't know much of this study or of its previous incarnation. The first questions that I would have are to whom were they praying and what faith did they belong? How often or intense were the prayer sessions?
I am a Christian, and very conservative in my views. I know this will lose your attention as I am now pigeon-holed, but hopefully you will see that we are not as you assume. I do not disavow science, especially provable science that uses scientific theory to establish truth. The more fuel-efficient SUV is great technology, but its just creativity at work. What happens when we do this? I think this will? Let's see. Well no, it didn't but we did get this result. Trial and error. Hypothesis and review. Same with the bombs (whether they be for Iraq or whomever). Same with the cures for disease. Rogaine started out as heart medicine. Which states another point, science when it is honest, doesn't get it right all of the time. It just keeps trying.
It was a Christian who discovered the world was round. The age of the universe is neither verified or even unified. Depending on which scientists you talk to it is anywhere between 6-10000 years old to 16-20 billion years and many numbers in between. Sadly, you assume that evolution and the evolutionary theory is law and as such is held by all scientists. There are those who believe in it, and those who do not. I have had the opportunity to be taught by several who work at the National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, TN who are of the latter opinion. I have also had the opportunity to discuss this with some of the guest scientists that have come through--most recently, Ken Marken, an expert in the field of super conductors. And as for this study, a single study offering as its field of reference 700 people is not proof positive, especially considering the research team flip-flopped from their previous findings. At best it says that more data is needed before anyone's faith should be shaken. Forgive me if my faith in God and Jesus Christ is stronger than that.
The people who ARE scientifically minded will remain open minded until there is conclusive, verifiable evidence to close our minds. The rest can sit in their towers and write missives to us 'simpletons' who hold the truth as more precious than silver or costly than gold.
Slashdot Mirror
Cosmologists do tend to lean toward 13.5 billion in recent years. I was thinking more of the people in my experience, physicists are who I come in contact with most. And their views seem to vary more widely even in those who hold to an old universe. To presume that to believe in Creation is to disavow yourself of a belief in science is arrogant. Putting evidence in its proper place seems to be the goal that both sides of the issue should strive for. Creationist scientists put up arguments that are sidestepped or 'rejected' regularly by Evolutionist scientists. They believe in different theories and try to view the evidence with Occkam's razor. Not all of the scientific evidence is conclusive.
No...and I know it is not a majority or even a well-numbered minority. My point is that there are different theories out there and none have been proven conclusively. The idea of evolution appeals to some scientists simply because they do not want to believe that there is purpose or a creator. Not all scientists feel this way, not even all evolutionists feel this way. But there are distinctions between the different sets of scientists. As for distant red shift, the CMBR and nucleosythesis, I have not studied these and have not discussed them with the scientists I know. Super Conductors have nothing to do with the issue of the age of the universe, but the fact that he is an expert in a highly scientific and technological field AND a creationist point out that Faith and Science are not two polar opposites. They have been interjoined more than they have been separate until recent years.
Now to get back to the point I was making. There are many Christians who look at science as anything but evil. Evolution is a theory; Intelligent Design is a theory; but they are both within the realms of science. I do not want to start a flame war. I was just annoyed by the brush that is used to paint Christians as ignorant or backward. You might see how that could be taken as rather annoying. This will be all I post, so flame away or not. Just understand that I believe in a God who is not only a God of faith, but of truth. I believe that when science finishes climbing the mountain of truth it will peak over the top and see a theologian reaching down to help it up. May your hearts and minds be open to the Truth. Always. Respectfully, Me.
While your response to this study is typical, paints with wide brush strokes, and assumes that all people of faith are imbeciles, simpletons, or unwilling to "believe" in science; I would beg to differ. First I would like to point out that I don't know much of this study or of its previous incarnation. The first questions that I would have are to whom were they praying and what faith did they belong? How often or intense were the prayer sessions?
I am a Christian, and very conservative in my views. I know this will lose your attention as I am now pigeon-holed, but hopefully you will see that we are not as you assume. I do not disavow science, especially provable science that uses scientific theory to establish truth. The more fuel-efficient SUV is great technology, but its just creativity at work. What happens when we do this? I think this will? Let's see. Well no, it didn't but we did get this result. Trial and error. Hypothesis and review. Same with the bombs (whether they be for Iraq or whomever). Same with the cures for disease. Rogaine started out as heart medicine. Which states another point, science when it is honest, doesn't get it right all of the time. It just keeps trying.
It was a Christian who discovered the world was round. The age of the universe is neither verified or even unified. Depending on which scientists you talk to it is anywhere between 6-10000 years old to 16-20 billion years and many numbers in between. Sadly, you assume that evolution and the evolutionary theory is law and as such is held by all scientists. There are those who believe in it, and those who do not. I have had the opportunity to be taught by several who work at the National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, TN who are of the latter opinion. I have also had the opportunity to discuss this with some of the guest scientists that have come through--most recently, Ken Marken, an expert in the field of super conductors. And as for this study, a single study offering as its field of reference 700 people is not proof positive, especially considering the research team flip-flopped from their previous findings. At best it says that more data is needed before anyone's faith should be shaken. Forgive me if my faith in God and Jesus Christ is stronger than that.
The people who ARE scientifically minded will remain open minded until there is conclusive, verifiable evidence to close our minds. The rest can sit in their towers and write missives to us 'simpletons' who hold the truth as more precious than silver or costly than gold.
Respectfully Yours,
An Intelligent Christian