Science, Creation & EvolutionSomething for Tuppence: Science definedHi Tuppence. Just want to be polite and introduce myself to you first. No hard feelings and nothing personal, but I have an issue with something you posted. Ok, sounds reasonable to start..... Whoa, whoa WHOA "The Bible does not give us all of science"? The Bible gives us NOTHING of science. For you to say "But it does give us the parameters within which to find the truth", you have to COMPLETELY pervert the whole concept of science. There are NO parameters to science other than the ones you discover by observation. Period. What you are suggesting is the idea of believing a certain viewpoint and discovering facts to fit the theory. This is completely OPPOSITE to true science. Science claims nothing. Absolutely nothing. It's not in the business of "I believe". They are firmly in the realm of "I hypothesize". The difference between these approaches are huge. Belief requires nothing objective or verifiable to sustain it. However a hypothesis for the purposes of testing a theory, does. When science "discovers" things, it is simply describing HOW things are, and how they are working. That's it. It's really not any more complicated than that. There is not a system of beliefs involved. That's why it can be trusted totally. If something is proven to be true, then anyone in the WORLD can test the theory, and if it's reproducible, we have proof as in objective evidence. Hence peer-reviewed literature. For you to suggest that any scientist could start with the Bible and try to fit what they see and test in that framework is crazy. It's a perversion of the whole concept. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame