buzsaw

They're working on it. I suppose a lot of that depends on one's mindset.

LOL, CPL Luke. If that were the case, they'd be publishing some ID stuff now, imo. Who, among them, wants to admit they might have been wrong about ID? Scarcely few, I'm afraid.

There are a number of highly degreed scientists and archeologists who believe in higher intelligence and do science on that basis as per the definition of science.

For the first century of our nation's history, creation was taught in the public schools. The science of it was not taught, largely because it was not known at that time. Christians were not involved much in archeology and the science of creationism. The more secularist minded people have gradually taken over school cirriculum and by the time creationists got their act together, it was not allowed. Hellbender, you need to read more carefully before being so meanspirited and critical. This is what I said. Please read it slowly and carefully. "I suppose it all boils down to whether God and a higher dimension of existence does exist in the universe that secularist scientists ignore." Please note that my statement did not say that all scientists were secular, now, did it? It simply designated secularist scientists as the scientists who ignore the possibility of a more intelligent dimension of existence in the universe than mankind. By now, you should remember that I've, on occasion, designated between the more secular minded scientists and those who recognize a higher intelligence in the universe, understanding that the former are by far the majority, controlling the scholastic agenda. I know you said you were quitting the thread, but imo, your above statements needed a response.

But there's a whole lot of difference in a global flood and a volcano. The point Mt St Hellens makes is that this miniature model shows how quickly a canyon can be cut with sedimentary layers. According to the ICR video and hypothesis, there would have been a body of water hundreds or thousands of time larger than the lake at Mt St Hellens which may have created the Grand Canyon.

Likely, Hellbender, that if I, buzsaw, creationist, equated you to OJ Simpson, brutal murderer, I'd end up with another 10 points or more against me, and imo, you deserve 10 points for this terribly meanspirited personal attack against another board member.

Often in churches I've been in, videos, visiting speakers, etc apprise parishoners on creation science. Creationist pastors also should be able to direct youth and others to sources of learning about creation science. After all, it's in the Bible and if I were a pastor, I'd feel a responsibility to my parish to speak appologetically for the scriptural record, be it creation or whatever. Since kids don't get this anywhere else, I think it's the responsibility of the church leaders to become apprised and apprise their parishoners on creation science that has been done. Creationists from ICR and other organizations do science and archeology for their arguments. You're not being fair here. Yes there's those who don't but some do. I suppose it all boils down to whether God and a higher dimension of existence does exist in the universe that secularist scientists ignore. I happen to believe there is plenty of evidence that there is, such as the fulfilled Biblical prophecies, verified by history. Some on both sides do some of this.

Exactly? I believe you need to reread him more carefully.

The Biblical record doesn't say God instantly created the universe, or even our planet, for that matter. It simply says that when the heavens and the earth were created, he did it. Nor does it give the length of days one through four of Genesis one, because it says the sun, moon and and an undetermined number of stars were created on day four. One of the functions of the sun and moon were to determin the length of days seasons years, etc, so before the sun and moon were finished being created, the length of the evenings and the mornings were likely undetermined and are unknown to man. When he did create things he spent some time doing it, exerting work to do it and it all came forth from something already existing according to the record, satisfying the scientific thermodynamic laws of the universe. It says everything comes from omnipotent God who has infinite energy and exists by him. Nobody can comprehend nor explain how this works, but neither can secularist minded scientists explain everything about what they teach and believe, nor can they prove much of what they believe to be scientifically correct. Yes, and if you check out how the scientists of ICR (Institute for Creation Research) you'll see that they use the geological formation of the canyon for their argument in the video which they have produced. The video is good, imo, and can be purchased from ICR. I have a copy, but it's been a while since I viewed it, so I don't remember all the details of their argument. Likely it's somewhere on their website.

So if one of the properties of space is "a few stray (floating) atoms" what are the properties of the space/area between those existing atoms? Nothing but area. Right? If you agree with this, then wouldn't those atoms be something existing/floating in space/area and not properties of space perse?

Why? Because that's all they know. Why is it all they know? Because it's all they've been exposed to and taught throughout their youth. A lot of it is also because their creationist pastors and mentors are ignorant of the subject and unable to apprise them on alternative thought in this regard. Imo, there's objective science often being presented on both sides of the debate. This is not to say that some creationists make fools of themselves at times in their weak arguments. Both sides have them also.

Can you explain more clearly, exactly what in the quote or quote context it is that I am miss-interpreting? Wrong! My contention has always been that secularist scientists have been indoctrinated on their theories throughout their education from primary grades on up. There is no deliberate conspiracy. They are sincere in what they practice and believe. Since no alternative ID viewpoint has been allowed as consideration in any phase of their education, they have simply not considered another viewpoint, for the most part. ID special creationist scientists often interpret what is observed differently than the more secularist ones do, after investigating certain aspects of the alternative view. Many ID scientists, previous to becoming such, had a more secularist viewpoint on the interpretaion of what is observed. Henry Morris, founder of ICR is one example.

You gave a context from which my quote came? I must've missed it. Which post did you give it? What exactly in the context from which the quote came diminishes from the message of the quote, relative to my point?

Regardless of the context of the book, the quote by this scientifically prestigious author was quite emphatically clear that as for the fossil record, the "tree," in Gould's view consists of branchless "nibs," and a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions being used by evolutionists to make the case for it.

That's not how I understood his quote. According to his 1980 quote, at that time there were, according to him, large gaps in the tree which, in his view left a lot unsubstantiated. I doubt that a quarter century has changed his view greatly, but could be wrong. Perhaps a more recent quote may be helpful in determining that. I did read your links and I'm sure if Mr Gish's argument is rejected in T.O. I'm in no way qualified to present an educated argument greater than his. Though your links showed what some considered to be macro transitionals, compared to all that exists in the world of the living, there seems to be a lot to yet be verified, with the links covering relatively, (I say relatively) few examples of what I would expect to be out there to fill all the gaps which Gould was referring to, whatever they were.

When you're sober, consider that the Biblical record states that there is an evil intelligence in the universe as well as the good, which accounts for the decline, decay and suffering present in the world. This seems to be evidenced by observing things happening on planet earth. This is not an attempt to convince you it exists, but to simply state what the Biblical record teaches.

So can you offer an updated refute to the 1980 quote? Has anything changed of any significance? How many gaps have been filled since then?

Do you have a response to the Gould quote?

Laugh at buz.......laugh at Harvard's Gould. I suppose Harvard's prestigious S.J. Gould also needs to go back to kindegarten. LOL! Gould: "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils. " (Gould S.J., "The Episodic Nature of Evolutionary Change", "The Panda's Thumb", Penguin: London, 1980, pp150-151) Gould's predecessor at Harvard, George Gaylord Simpson agrees: "This is true of all thirty-two orders of mammals...The earliest and most primitive known members of every order already have the basic ordinal characters, and in no case is an approximately continuous sequence from one order to another known. In most cases the break is so sharp and the gap so large that the origin of the order is speculative and much disputed...This regular absence of transitional forms is not confined to mammals, but is an almost universal phenomenon, as has long been noted by paleontologists. It is true of almost all classes of animals both vertebrate and invertebrate... it is true of the classes, and of the major animal phyla, and it is apparently also true of analogous categories of plants." (Simpson G.G., "Tempo and Mode in Evolution", 1944, pp105,107, in Sunderland L.D., "Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems", Master Book Publishers, El Cajon, CA, revised edition, 1988, p80).

How does space expand if it had no end/boundary, as you seem to be advocating? Even a balloon, which scientists often cite as an expansion model has an end/boundary. As the balloon is inflated it's edge/end/boundary expands, does it not? My question is that if you advocate that space does not end, infinite space seems to be implicated. How then can something infinite be increased/expanded? I'm not understanding how you can have it both ways.

As I read the different views on space topics, it seems to boil down the conception of each as to what the the properties of space are. mine being that it's only property is infinite boundless area in which existing energy and matter exist. I realize, of course that this is a minority viewpoint, and it has been pointed out to me before that mainline science has a more sophisticated concept of space than the layman. It seems to me that science's theories on space are skewed so as to accomodate the big bang and space expansion which must be so for the BB to have happened.

1. Try a Bible church that inspires, enlightens and blesses. Move around until you find one. 2. If you have a spiritual need and don't know it, the church that irritates you the most may be the one that is hitting on your spiritual problem as the spirit of God present in the church convicts of sin. We all need that to some degree or another and a church that does not address the problems of parisoners isn't worth your time. 3. If the church is the problem and not you, maybe by your presence you can bless and help them with their problem.

You opened this thread with this request in your message one op. "This is starting to scare me. I won't have time really to go see a doctor to see if it's something physical until tuesday or wednesday, so I thought I might ask some of you and see if anyone might think of some possible explination for this happening to me." Now you are giving thanks for "bringing me back to the light of the truth." 1. What light of truth, specifically, and who gave it? 2. How has this "truth," by "completing the process" solved the specific problems you were having, such as sleep and eating, et al? 3. Are these problems now solved, with you sleeping and eating normally?