Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
It is our life's work to shed light light on the unknown and we don't like it when people waste our time trying to make the well known unknowable. It's sort of like trying to dig a ditch while some moron is filling it in at the same time, that'd piss you off too.the science guys get really worked up over this stuff, and testy, eh?
Spencer
Actually I try very hard to keep my science inside my data set, extrapolations outside or your data set, whilst sometimes the best possible "guess" are never good science.
If you call that "sin" you need to have your head examined, or at least your children need to be removed to a safe location.
I assume that you have oodles and oodles of experience in science to lend an air of authenticity to such a jaded view? Hell you didn't even know that science had corrected the Brontosaur in 1903, if it was still in the textbooks (and I remember the correction from when I was in school)that speaks to school boards and citizens like you tolerating crappy books for their children, not "science" maintaining a fraud.
I know that each of us has demonstrated far more knowledge or scripture, than you have of science. You learn a few "facts" and mistake that for a complete understanding of science. Talk about overwhelming ego ... get a reality check.
I never claimed to. But maybe you ought to get with your educational comtemporaries. I don't think they're on board with this whole, Laws are imperfect thing.
Alright - the "why" is the impetus behind testing an observation which is then written into Law. To say the Law pre-existed is correct, but it wasn't defined as such.
I wasn't accusing you, in particular. Every profession has its unethical vendors. Science is no exception to that. What I find interesting is how science fails to vet out these charlatons and in some cases even defend them. Christianities are front page news to everyone.
No. The weakness is allowing a fraud to remain on the books for 80 years without pointing it out. Even after it was discovered, nothing was done to correct it until the entertainment and exposure value was exhausted.
If you never make an educated guess, then test the guess then you are not a good scientist.
Another misunderstanding of sin. Sin, or sin nature, is born into every individual. It isn't limited to the 10 Commandments. Sin is anything unholy and therefore is all encompassing of human behavior. Any activity born out of selfishness, pride, sloth, greed, unjustified anger, lust, glutony etc is classified as sin.
Still defending this? Kids were learning this garbage until the 1970s. You remember the correction? What was the text book it was corrected in?
There's only been one group on here that have been rude, egotistical and arrogant and the posts are there for all to read. Unlike you, I don't have a complete understanding of anything. So yes that puts me at an obvious disadvantage. But to say I have no scientific acumen is simply your way of dealing with some valid questions and comments rather than answer them.
Where you're wrong? Well ... your initial concept of the "whole point of evolution ..." is beyond passing strange. Since you initial premise is who wrongheaded, so is everything derived from it.
As on of his educational comtemporaries, I'd have to say that there is no difference of opinion, except with you.
So what, what does that change?
Science has had a few, ver few, especially when compared to the liars, thieves and pederasts of "the cloth." Science does a very good job of ridding itself of ideas that don't hold up (and of people who, like you, insist on trying to advance ideas that are demonstrably wrong.
I knew that Brontosaurus was incorrect my entire life, the fact that you did not speaks not to science but to your science education, which is demonstrably inadequate, by your own example, from its earliest days.
Hey ... We don't have to do that ... that's a case you make all on your own. Witness the Brontosaurus foolishness.
On a daily basis, you should hear the arguments at a party where more than one evolutionary biologist is in attendance. How often do turn a critical eye to your bible?
Scientists are not in the business of making educated guesses. But despite that, it is my educated guess that you know nothing about science.
Ah, so sin is whatever you want it to be, and you have the termidity to accuse the lefties of relational ethics? How about activities born out of stupidity or foolishness? Are they sins also?
As I recall it was in a book that I read in third grade, in the classroom, called "Bone Hunt" or "Fossil Hunt" or some such.
If you'd raise a question or make a comment that even came close to demonstrating a bare modicum of scientific insight, or a desire to learn, we'd be trying to teach you rather than just taking pot shots at a virtual strawman.
Ah ... the crux of the problem. You have no title to that front yard, but you think you control it, a mistake many religionists have made, and continue to make, since time immemorial.If you weren't trying to dig that ditch straight through my front yard I wouldn't be trying to fill it in.
Ditto.
