Biblical town found.


Howard2k

macrumors 68030
Mar 10, 2016
2,536
1,818
Perhaps that is true but mainstream science does not want to believe in anything which has to do with scriptures.
Pretty sure mainstream science and Israel get on pretty well. Considering the amount of high tech and scientific industry I’m going to suggest that even the most ardent scientist would acknowledge this.


But to suggest that because “x” in the bible is true therefore everything in the bible is true is obviously totally absurd.

Spider-Man is set in the United States. The United States is a real country. Therefore Spider-Man is real. See - doesn’t work.
 

lostngone

macrumors 65816
Aug 11, 2003
1,340
2,825
Anchorage
Pretty sure mainstream science and Israel get on pretty well. Considering the amount of high tech and scientific industry I’m going to suggest that even the most ardent scientist would acknowledge this.


But to suggest that because “x” in the bible is true therefore everything in the bible is true is obviously totally absurd.

Spider-Man is set in the United States. The United States is a real country. Therefore Spider-Man is real. See - doesn’t work.
But see, there is where you are wrong. Spider-Man is real because I saw him in Time Square...
 

LordVic

macrumors 603
Sep 7, 2011
5,434
10,319
Perhaps that is true but mainstream science does not want to believe in anything which has to do with scriptures.
No.

"Mainstream Science", or, Scientific Principled researchers use fact, data and mathematical understanding to predict outcomes based on tested and verified Thoeries.

Scripture, on the other hand cannot accurately predict events.

Bill Nye, when debating the creationist a few years back had a fantastic closing arguments.

Here's the transcript a question that shows the stark difference between religious scripture and fundamentalists versus what science and the scientific principles are used for:

The question:
What if anything would ever change your mind?
Ken Ham:
The Bible says if you come to God believing that He is, He will reveal himself to you and you will know; as Christian’s we can say we know. And so, as far as the word of God is concerned, no one's ever going to convince me that the word of God is not true.
Bill Nye:
We would need just one piece of evidence, we would need the fossil that swam from one layer to another; we would need evidence that the universe is not expanding, we need evidence that the stars appear to be far away, but they're not. We would need evidence that rock layers can somehow form in just four thousand years instead of the extraordinary number. We need evidence that somehow that you can reset the atomic clock and keep the neutrons from becoming protons. Bring out any of those things, and you would change me immediately.

The question I have for you though, fundamentally, in front of the washing??, Mr. Ham, it's What can you prove? What you have done tonight has spent all of the time coming up with explanations about the past. What can you really predict? What can you really prove in a conventional scientific-- or in a conventional, “I have an idea that makes a prediction, and it comes out the way I see it.” This is this very troubling to me.


The difference between science and scripture, is worlds apart. Scripture is historical writing that cannot in any way predict outcomes of the universe. there's no real evidence about the accuracy of scripture. Scripture doesn't predict how the world works.

Science on the other hand, makes no absolute claims about anything but uses observation of the world, and research via scientific principled studies to create theories intended to explain and predict universal outcomes. And time and time again, Science based research has led to more and more discoveries every single day. From increasing yields on food preduction, to using math to directly and accurately predict the location of planets in our solar system (Uranus for example, was discovered via math, not observation first). this is what science is.

trying to equate Science to Scripture is lunacy and shows a complete, utter lack of proper education regarding what science is. especially if you put scripture on the same level of "expertise of knowledge" as science based discovery.
 

JagdTiger

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 20, 2017
325
355
No.

"Mainstream Science", or, Scientific Principled researchers use fact, data and mathematical understanding to predict outcomes based on tested and verified Thoeries.

Scripture, on the other hand cannot accurately predict events.

Bill Nye, when debating the creationist a few years back had a fantastic closing arguments.

Here's the transcript a question that shows the stark difference between religious scripture and fundamentalists versus what science and the scientific principles are used for:

The question:
What if anything would ever change your mind?
Ken Ham:

Bill Nye:




The difference between science and scripture, is worlds apart. Scripture is historical writing that cannot in any way predict outcomes of the universe. there's no real evidence about the accuracy of scripture. Scripture doesn't predict how the world works.

Science on the other hand, makes no absolute claims about anything but uses observation of the world, and research via scientific principled studies to create theories intended to explain and predict universal outcomes. And time and time again, Science based research has led to more and more discoveries every single day. From increasing yields on food preduction, to using math to directly and accurately predict the location of planets in our solar system (Uranus for example, was discovered via math, not observation first). this is what science is.

trying to equate Science to Scripture is lunacy and shows a complete, utter lack of proper education regarding what science is. especially if you put scripture on the same level of "expertise of knowledge" as science based discovery.
He has been given evidence to many things such as ufos and denies it, he is a atheist, writes for skeptic rag magazine and is a pure debunker and does some kind of non science show on showtime or wherever.
 

LordVic

macrumors 603
Sep 7, 2011
5,434
10,319
He has been given evidence to many things such as ufos and denies it, he is a atheist, writes for skeptic rag magazine and is a pure debunker and does some kind of non science show on showtime or wherever.
yes, it's agreed that Ken Ham is a quack
 
  • Like
Reactions: mudslag

mudslag

macrumors regular
Oct 18, 2010
139
9,900
He has been given evidence to many things such as ufos and denies it, he is a atheist, writes for skeptic rag magazine and is a pure debunker and does some kind of non science show on showtime or wherever.

A UFO is simply an unidentified flying object, it does not equate aliens. Just needed to point that out as you seem to have a problem understanding the difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PracticalMac

JagdTiger

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 20, 2017
325
355
A UFO is simply an unidentified flying object, it does not equate aliens. Just needed to point that out as you seem to have a problem understanding the difference.
Yes, that is true but when a object halts a missile site while it’s being filmed and bill nyes evidence is nothing more than a paper which is redacted than he is nothing more than a debunker...if skeptic magazine is so interested in debunking the paranormal of any kind than let them go to skin walker ranch.
 

LordVic

macrumors 603
Sep 7, 2011
5,434
10,319
Yes, that is true but when a object halts a missile site while it’s being filmed and bill nyes evidence is nothing more than a paper which is redacted than he is nothing more than a debunker...if skeptic magazine is so interested in debunking the paranormal of any kind than let them go to skin walker ranch.
So the idea that it's a man made object that is being engineered and tested by the military, and therefor has much of it's information redacted, is somehow less believable than Aliens.
 

JagdTiger

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 20, 2017
325
355
So the idea that it's a man made object that is being engineered and tested by the military, and therefor has much of it's information redacted, is somehow less believable than Aliens.
Yes because they are hiding something.
 

LordVic

macrumors 603
Sep 7, 2011
5,434
10,319
Yes because they are hiding something.
Yes, OF COURSE THEY ARE HIDING SOMETHING.


the military working on developing technology that can stop missiles mid-air. you don't want that technology falling into your enemies hands. So therefore, if you are forced to release documentation of the project, you are going to redact any confidential information that could lead to foreign powers gaining technological advantages over your current development.

the idea of redacting information for corporate or government security is absolutely nothing new.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PracticalMac

JagdTiger

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 20, 2017
325
355
Yes, OF COURSE THEY ARE HIDING SOMETHING.


the military working on developing technology that can stop missiles mid-air. you don't want that technology falling into your enemies hands. So therefore, if you are forced to release documentation of the project, you are going to redact any confidential information that could lead to foreign powers gaining technological advantages over your current development.

the idea of redacting information for corporate or government security is absolutely nothing new.
It was not government (that is known) but a non-human entity or a intelligence based not on earth but perhaps even the inner planet.
 

LordVic

macrumors 603
Sep 7, 2011
5,434
10,319
It was not government (that is known) but a non-human entity or a intelligence based not on earth but the inner planet.
AGAIN, your idea that the simpler answer is aliens, instead of just humans doing human things is absolutely ludicrous.

COULD it be aliens? sure, there's always that remote chance. But there are simpler, and more realistic answers.
 

JagdTiger

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 20, 2017
325
355
yes, it's agreed that Ken Ham is a quack
lol, ken ham was not there but bill nye was.
[doublepost=1562698041][/doublepost]
AGAIN, your idea that the simpler answer is aliens, instead of just humans doing human things is absolutely ludicrous.

COULD it be aliens? sure, there's always that remote chance. But there are simpler, and more realistic answers.
Yes but it doesn’t have to be aliens but a more advanced human society.
 

LordVic

macrumors 603
Sep 7, 2011
5,434
10,319
Yes but it doesn’t have to be aliens but a more advanced human society.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic

Just because you cannot fathom the technology and it seems magical to you, does not suddenly make it "alien", "Magic", "prophecy" or some other form of advanced conspiracy.

Sometimes. it's just someone's own personal incredulity that such technologies could be man made by people of our own society.