jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (129 posts)

Be Prepared.

  1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
    EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago

    Yes, be prepared. Discussion forums are for discussions and not teaching others about things they don't understand. The idea is to prepare yourself about the subject matter before contributing to a thread. Of course, if someone actually does wish to take the time to educate someone else about a topic, that is fine, but it is certainly not expected.

    With religion, it is a simple matter of reading the scriptures, usually one book covers it all. The Bible covers Christianity, the Quran covers Islam and so forth. So, it is a simple matter for any of us to read these books to educate and prepare ourselves for those discussions.

    One of the biggest problems here is most believers are ill prepared for some of the discussions here because they have never taken the time to learn about them. Evolution and cosmology are two of subjects most believers have never understood. All the manage to do is wave their bibles around frantically as if it is supposed to refute the subjects of evolution and cosmology. They don't.

    I have recently been asked to provide the "evidence for evolution" from a believer who claims to understand evolution. They went on to claim evolution was a belief system. It is so very obvious that person does not understand it at all.

    In order to refute these topics, one has to understand them and then address the actual postulates or evidence contained within them. Stating that Genesis, for example declares we were created in our current forms does not refute evolution or abiogenesis.

    Of course, you can't fool anyone who does understand the subject matter into believing you understand them. It is so very obvious if you don't. By saying you do understand them when it's clear you don't only shows dishonesty, and no one is ever going to take you seriously.


    So please, stop denying and rejecting the facts about our world when you don't even understand them. Take the time to do so and then come back with your refutations, if you have any.

    You can't contribute to a thread if you have no idea what everyone is talking about. smile

    1. 0
      Emile Rposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      lol lol

      It's even funnier because you couldn't fathom why you honestly couldn't understand why I'm laughing.

      Yes, if one sets out to argue against something they should be knowledgeable about the subject matter. However, that goes across the board. I can't count the times you've chimed in on spiritual issues when you don't appear to grasp the concept. Much less take it any more seriously than some believers can grasp, or take seriously, discussions on evolution. smile

      1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
        EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Is it because you are so very often not prepared for the discussions here?



        Yes, I have asked many questions about "spiritual issues" because there is no evidence of "spiritual issues" even though so many believers here talk about it. Of course, when you ask them, they usually refer to emotions.

        1. 0
          Emile Rposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I just read your exchange with Jerami in another thread. That's the point. You not only have no idea what you are talking about, you don't understand the subject matter well enough for anyone to explain to you why you don't. And, that's OK. I promise i won't start a thread specifically to lament that fact, or to suggest you refrain from posting until you have a clue.  smile

          1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
            EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            You and I both know that's not true, but I can see why you would fabricate falsehoods, it's your forte. smile

            1. 0
              Emile Rposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Well, it is obvious you don't know what i think, so maybe you are the one who has the need to fabricate falsehoods. smile

              1. janesix profile image59
                janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Emile, don't be absurd!

                It's obvious that someone who believes in God has no understanding of science, let alone has ever opened a book in their entire life.

                And therefore, fabricate falsehoods, believe in unicorns, and have illogical fallacies.

            2. janesix profile image59
              janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I can't believe all the believers around here, frantically fabricating falsehoods!

              The nerve,

    2. Don W profile image84
      Don Wposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Which Bible are you talking about? Catholic? Orthodox? Protestant? Church of the East? There are different biblical cannons depending on denomination. The shared parts are then subject to different interpretations based on denomination. So exactly which Bible, and which interpretation of that Bible is it that "covers Christianity"? Likewise different denominations of Islam have different interpretations of the Quran. Which interpretation "covers Islam"?



      One of the biggest problems I've seen here is that many "non believers" are ill prepared for discussions because they have never taken the time to learn about religion. This leads to the belief that Christians, for example, are a homogeneous lump that all believe exactly the same things. It also leads some to suggest that reading the Bible is the same as understanding Christianity. It isn't.


      I agree completely.

      Edit: actually I think someone can contribute, as long as they don't confuse the limitations in their own understanding of a subject, with being correct.

  2. aka-dj profile image79
    aka-djposted 2 years ago

    I don't agree that all (or even most) believers know nothing about evolution theory.

    Nor is it true that they don't understand what is being accepted as commonly taught on the subject.

    Nor is it even a case of trying to "convert" believers in evolution to creationism.

    The issue, as I see it, is that evolutionists outright REFUSE to hear "us". We have legitimate doubts, based on evidence, that are never honestly addressed.

    We are constantly being thrown cliches like, you just don't understand evolution, or you need to educate yourself, etc.

    Just how much education does one need to get, before they are taken seriously?

    Do you expect everyone who "educates" themselves to only have attained enough, to be taken seriously, when they see things as you do?

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Your doubts are heard, and nearly always addressed.  You don't like the answers, but that is because you don't want to think it is all true. 

      Address your own doubts, create your own theory.  One with evidence, with peer reviewed research/testing.  You will be heard.

      1. aka-dj profile image79
        aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        The doubts I have, I don't have alone.
        Many a great scientists have moved away from evolution, based on the same evidence.

        They are clearly not heard. Why am I required to come up with my own.

        Common sense, logic and reason alone are enough to question the accepted evolutionary positions.

        Of course, these are ditched by the very ones who use it against doubters.

        I could cite a number of illogical, unreasonable evolutionary views that are all dismissed by evolutionists.

        Proving, you don't listen to real world objections.

        1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
          EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Sorry, but we know that's not true.



          By all means, there are plenty of evolution threads here, lets hear your views, that is, if they do indeed address evolution.

        2. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          How many non-believers, that do not believe in a god, do you think also do not believe in evolution?  Or is it cheating to ask that question?

          Common sense, "knowledge" passed down through generations, has nothing to say about evolution except maybe that we can see it now it was probably around back when.  About the same for logic; if we see it now it has probably been around for a while.

          Evolution is a possibility, with a great deal of evidence.  If you don't like it, supply proof that specif parts, or the whole, is impossible.  Not unlikely, impossible.  And/or supply a new theory with evidence, because evolution is absolutely possible and right now there is no other theory (with evidence) at all to take it's place.

          Second time asking for that new theory with evidence - what happened to it?

    2. EncephaloiDead profile image60
      EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this



      Those who deny or reject evolution without addressing it are usually the ones who don't understand it.



      Waving a bible around screeching out verse from Genesis are not doubts about evolution. Stating that we evolved from apes, so why are there still apes is also not addressing evolution.



      That is because those who understand evolution can plainly see those who don't.



      No one is asking you to get any education if you don't want any, but if you come to a discussion forum to reject or deny evolution, there is an expectation you would need to understand it so you can address the postulates and evidence. This goes for any topic, not just evolution.

      1. aka-dj profile image79
        aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Thank you for reinforcing/proving my point!

        You have shown just how "open minded a free thinking, logical reasonable" person you are.

    3. Phyllis Doyle profile image95
      Phyllis Doyleposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      The reason the OP started this thread is because when I asked him to answer some questions about evolution (in another thread) he refused to do so. I believe he could not answer my questions because he did not know the answers. He instead kept accusing me of being "uneducated" and "not prepared" to join in a discussion. I believe in Creation. I have studied evolution and it only confirmed and strengthened my belief.

      I do believe that there is evolution within species. This is called
      'speciation'. The OP could not reply to that, he had no answers to any question I asked -- therefore, out of frustration, I believe, for his own lack of  knowledge in what he professes to believe in, he created this thread.

      I do not mind discussing Creation and Evolution, however, I prefer to discuss with someone who has an open mind and knowledge of what he/she believes in rather than just criticizing what I believe in.

      Criticism and avoidance of questions is not an intelligent discussion.

      1. Phyllis Doyle profile image95
        Phyllis Doyleposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        This hub on evolution is one that I can totally agree with:

        http://james-a-watkins.hubpages.com/hub … -Evolution

        1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
          EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Are you serious? That is one of the most ill-informed an uneducated hubs on evolution I've read here. All it does is rant about atheism, the war on religion and teaching evolution in schools. It also makes completely false statements about evolution being refuted, which is not true at all.

          Here's the gist of the hub:

          "It was Darwinism that declared war on God; not the other way around."

          Hilarious. lol

        2. EncephaloiDead profile image60
          EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          If you actually want to learn something, start here:

          http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evohome.html

      2. EncephaloiDead profile image60
        EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        That is entirely false. What you asked would require a great deal of work on my part, the work that YOU should be doing yourself. I am not here to educate you in evolution, which is what your questions would have required. It would be like me asking you to explain the Old and New Testament. Try keeping it honest.



        And yet, your claim to have studied evolution does not resonate with your posts at all, quite the contrary. Try keeping it honest.



        Sorry, but that is entirely false, yet again. Your questions required a tremendous amount of work on my part, which is work you should be doing yourself. This is a discussion forum in which you should be prepared. I have never asked anyone to explain any concepts that I can't find our for myself. Try keeping it honest.



        Then, you wouldn't be asking questions in which entire books and essays are required to answer them. Try keeping it honest.

  3. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 2 years ago

    Evolution within any giver species ...  Sure; why would it not be so?   BUT   Life springing up out of non life never happen.   Something evolving from nothing ? 
    I've read about one scientist claims to have done it. But a sterile "Vacuum" was not substantiated.  I've not heard of any experiments of this nature being replicated successfully. If there have been I would like to read about it that I might change my mind about it.

    Can a thought exist without a seed for thought?

    1. janesix profile image59
      janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      How would you suggest God created life? Is your answer any more plausible than life evolving from inorganic, sterile matter?

      1. Jerami profile image78
        Jeramiposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I've never claimed  knowing how. All I've been saying is science can reverse engineer "how it happened" only so far until even they are stumped.
           It is traced back to a magical act.
           To tell you the truth, ...   I'm not convinced I am real.  I may be a figment of your/my imagination.

        1. janesix profile image59
          janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I see what you're saying, and I sort of agree with it.

          I don't think that God poofed the Earth into being, and then took some dirt and poofed man into being.

          I also don't believe that we accidentally came into being through random chance. I don't believe in random chance.

          I don't think that there was an accidental chemical reaction that took place a few billion years ago, by a chance lighting strike in a pool of mud with just the right combo if ingredients.

          I think that it was a CONTRIVED chemical reaction of some sort that sparked life into being. I think the Universe was carefully arranged to specifically come up with life, and that evolution is a process that took 13 billion years to get to this point.

          Yes, I also agree there was some type of "magical" thing that sparked the whole thing into motion, in the sense that whatever it was, it is so strange and indescribable that we as humans can't explain it.

          I am "egotistical" that I even think God had us in mind when creating the universe. Not because I have a big ego, but because I see evidence for it all around me.

          I don't think we are the end product of evolution though, but the end product will be our human selves evolving towards a spiritual being. Maybe one that will be able to understand God and why we are here.

          1. Dr Lamb profile image60
            Dr Lambposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            13+billion years, billions of galaxies each with billions of stars and planets all for us. Look how special we are. Please!

        2. janesix profile image59
          janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Also, don't feel alone.

          I often wonder as well whether or not I am real, or anything else is real.

          1. Jerami profile image78
            Jeramiposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Thanks for replying and I apologize for taking so long in replying.  Not going to go into details just going to say, i can only spend so many hours upright and have to spend that time wisely in this game of life.
            I agree 99% with most everything you described.
                 OK, maybe all of it.   I believe  with everything I got to believe with (???) that this physical reality and everything about it is a product of a higher plane of existence. I think the essence of who I am (DEEEEEP) down inside is having the experience, while my concious self is just coming along for the ride. Is anyone's imagination great enough to imagine more than a very small portion of the possibilities before us.  Well I been rambling long enough.

            1. janesix profile image59
              janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              You must not be rambling, because I know exactly what you mean.

              And I think it's the most important thing in the world to figure out.

              1. Jerami profile image78
                Jeramiposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Wish I had had an inkling of it 0h about 50 years ago instead of thinking about the things I was thinking about.

                1. Jerami profile image78
                  Jeramiposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  I wonder what the world would be like if everyone thought that way from childhood, instead of the way children do.

                  1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    (Warning … getting up on my soap box: We can allow children to be as they really/ naturally are. The first six years is when the psyche is forming.  We must allow the psyche to grow according to the child's own Inner Life. We need to stop bombarding them, be quieter, kinder and more helpful.
                    They follow us. Let them follow goodness.
                    Let them follow boundaries.
                    Let them follow wisdom and intelligence.
                    And they will absorb all that is in their environment.  When we get on the same page and create a worthwhile environment, children will not only surprise us, they will teach us.
                    What is the awareness of a child?
                    We need to observe.
                    We need to observe carefully...
                    and stop bombarding them with our preconceptions.)

                2. janesix profile image59
                  janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Me too.

                  I think maybe we have to go through the nonsense first, before we can wake up and start wondering what's really going on. It's like we are children, just hitting puberty.

                  1. Dr Lamb profile image60
                    Dr Lambposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    It's like when kids start to question whether Santa exists.

        3. EncephaloiDead profile image60
          EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Try to prepare yourself for the discussion. Scientists are not stumped such that they just give up.

  4. psycheskinner profile image80
    psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago

    A lot of implausible things turn out to be true.

    1. 0
      Beth37posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Can I quote you on that?

  5. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    Be prepared for the unprepared.
    OK?

  6. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 2 years ago

    It just seems to me that if the bible describes anything accurately ... and half of what we have been discussing is relevant.....   then we are not supposed to understand the whole story until close to the end of this journey through time.
    Then the most important thing to do would be to get along with everybody, enjoy the ride and spread love and happiness and not strife. If reincarnation true ???  When we come back ?  We gotta deal with all them seeds we planted in our past life.  I'm talking about society as a whole.   

        Somebody been planting a whole lote of bad seeds for a very long time.

    1. janesix profile image59
      janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I think one of the main goals is to learn that we can't be horrible to each other. To make the conscious decision to be good not for the sake of ourselves, or out of fear of retribution, but because it's the right thing to do.

      1. Jerami profile image78
        Jeramiposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I think you are right,  BUT at the same time ... when we are being selfless gotta watch out not to be surrounded with selfish folks.   I try to do what is right even when it is hard to do, I keep telling myself things are going to work out for the best whether I like it or not. Hope I'm right?

        1. janesix profile image59
          janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Yeah, I know. Sounds good, but putting it into practice is a whole different story.

          I actually don't even know where to begin with it. I know it theoretically, but I am hardly close to being "good". I am rude and judgmental. I could fill a book with my flaws. I try to consciously observe my behavior, and alter it when I catch myself being insensitive to other people.

          I guess the only way to really guage improvement is when my actions match my thoughts. When I can actually "think" more nicely about other people, instead of just behaving that way.

    2. EncephaloiDead profile image60
      EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      And, since the bible doesn't describe anything accurately, it is rather worthless. That is why we now have science, to understand things.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Science and religion are one. So, I agree. Bring the facts on board. They will back up belief.

      2. Jerami profile image78
        Jeramiposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        You didn't understand anything I said (that you replied to)  Amazing!
        You might say I was speaking in a parable which you were unable to understand.   No I wasn't.   You just didn't understand what you were reading.   Amazing!

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
          Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Science and religion can be one.  Jesus knew science… More than present day Christians know.
          IMO

          1. Jerami profile image78
            Jeramiposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            I am sure that he did.
            I wish there was more of Jesus's teachings written. I suppose there is a very good reason that not even 1% of his teachings were included in the bible. 
                 Gotta go get some glasses //   broke mine,  latter

            1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
              Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Well they are there. They are there. 100 percent. Did the people of the time understand electricity? energy? He had to speak in parables. "If thine eye be single thy whole body will be full of light."   "Light" is a non-sicientifiic word for energy. "Eye" is a non scientific word for the area of the brain where the 6th sense of intuition is located.

              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                "Light" is a non-scientific word for what the human eye can detect, not energy.

                "Eye" is also both a scientific and non-scientific word for the organ used to receive light and transmit the image to the brain.  As there "IS no 6th sense of intuition" and no area that could possibly be identified as one, the word "eye" has nothing to do with it.

                You're really grasping here, Kathryn.  You simply can't invent new meanings for words from 2,000 years ago and decide that's what they meant.  Particularly as Jesus used neither word, but another one in another language.

                1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  You are denying the obvious truth of the matter. Have it your way.

              2. Dr Lamb profile image60
                Dr Lambposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                From that you deduced Jesus understood more about the universe than our brightest minds today.

            2. Dr Lamb profile image60
              Dr Lambposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              What are you two talking about? Do you have some evidence that he had any knowledge of science? Did he explain relativity or something? How do you know the bible omitted 99% of his teachings?

              1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                The dead sea scrolls contain much that was left out of the bible.
                In them it was revealed that Jesus even referred to God as mother. As you know, Constantine threw out many other books of the bible. Probably ones that focused more heavily on reincarnation. But even in what remains as the New Testament, there are references to previous lives: ( Refer to excerpts concerning Elias and Elijah.)

                1. Dr Lamb profile image60
                  Dr Lambposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Keep in mind that they are all stories of his life written years after he was supposedly dead. One or two of the omitted scriptures states he was married. But that "Probably ones that focused more heavily on reincarnation" really is funny because I think the omitted ones were (probably) the ones where he said Mohammad will be burning in a few hundred years and will give all the right answers.

                  Probably?

                  1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Based on what was LEFT in the NT.  so yeah, probably.
                    What is your probably based on, besides nothing?

          2. Castlepaloma profile image23
            Castlepalomaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Kathryn L Hill
            Science and religion can be one.  Jesus knew science… More than present day Christians know.

            That is not saying much, 90% of professional science -ist are Atheist or agnostic

            Many Christian have told me Adam was the most intelligent man in human history , that would be de-evolution
            on. From my studies it's reverse, the average person today, is wiser than Moses was.

            1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
              Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              "That is not saying much, 90% of professional science -ist are Atheist or agnostic." Castlepaloma

              Stats please.

              Newton believed in Astrology. Einstein was searching for an equation for God. Many scientists believe in God. Don't have the stats either. Yikes we are not prepared. Ulp.
              Dunce hats for both of us.

              1. Dr Lamb profile image60
                Dr Lambposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Where do you get this stuff.

                Newtons was wrong about gravity and Einstein was right about gravity, the reason he was right is because is mind wasn't looking for a God done it answer.

                1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  He believed in God.

                  1. psycheskinner profile image80
                    psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Yes, but he did not view the universe through a lens distorted by that belief.

                  2. Dr Lamb profile image60
                    Dr Lambposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    That's up for debate isn't it. But he was certainly not looking for an equation for God.

                  3. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Einstein believed in a "miraculous order which manifests itself in all of nature as well as in the world of ideas," devoid of a personal God who rewards and punishes individuals based on their behavior. A book he wrote "rejected a conflict between science and religion, and held that cosmic religion was necessary for science.[38] He told William Hermanns in an interview that "God is a mystery."

                  4. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    "Drawing on newly discovered letters of Einstein--many translated here for the first time--years of research, and interviews with prominent mathematicians, cosmologists, physicists, and astronomers, Aczel takes us on a fascinating journey into "the strange geometry of space-time," and into the mind of a genius. Here the unthinkable becomes real: an infinite, ever-expanding, ever-accelerating universe whose only absolute is the speed of light.

                    Awesome in scope, thrilling in detail, God's Equation is storytelling at its finest."
                    I stand corrected.
                    I guess I misunderstood from hearing the title of this book which was written by Amir D. Aczel.

                  5. EncephaloiDead profile image60
                    EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    "Einstein penned the letter on January 3 1954 to the philosopher Eric Gutkind who had sent him a copy of his book Choose Life: The Biblical Call to Revolt. The letter went on public sale a year later and has remained in private hands ever since.

                    In the letter, he states: "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."

                    Einstein, who was Jewish and who declined an offer to be the state of Israel's second president, also rejected the idea that the Jews are God's favoured people.

                    "For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them."

                    http://www.theguardian.com/science/2008 … e.religion

                2. janesix profile image59
                  janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Are you suggesting Newton wasn't smart because he was wrong?

                  Of course he was smart. He was a genius.

                  You don't have to be absolutely correct to be a genius.

                  1. Dr Lamb profile image60
                    Dr Lambposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Newton was arguably the smartest person to have ever lived, but he was wrong about gravity and was wrong in stating that no math would explain the solar system because it was done by God. Once he decided God did it he stopped thinking. Einstein looked for natural causes and found them.

                3. Don W profile image84
                  Don Wposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Newton was not wrong about gravity. The theory of gravity is an extremely accurate mathematical model for specific physical conditions. Namely, non relativistic speeds and low gravitational fields. Relativity just expanded the range of physical conditions over which the theory applied. Even relativity (general) is not applicable to all physical conditions, e.g. within a singularity. That does not mean Einstein was wrong. It is fully expected that both theories of relativity will be expanded upon in future, just as the theory of gravity was. That incremental accumulation of knowledge is how science works!

                  Have you not just displayed the type of ignorance the OP is criticizing? I notice none of the non-religious contingent corrected you. How is this not an example of hypocrisy and double standards?

                  1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
                    EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Yes, he was wrong about gravity, he thought gravity was instantaneous and a pulling motion, which is termed, "action at a distance".  Einstein came along and corrected Newton.



                    Yet, the concept of a singularity came directly from derivatives of General Relativity.

                  2. Dr Lamb profile image60
                    Dr Lambposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    The thing is Newton was wrong. He thought all objects are attracted to each other, the large ones like planets and suns are more attracted to each other. That's not how gravity works and that's not how gravity is taught. His equations were valid, but not accurate.

            2. janesix profile image59
              janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Wiser? I doubt it. We know more about some things, less in others.

              1. Dr Lamb profile image60
                Dr Lambposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                You don't have to doubt it. Research it. Humans are becoming smarter and better looking.

                1. janesix profile image59
                  janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Yes, we are becoming smarter. But you said wiser, and that's an entirely different thing.

                  You don't have to be smart to be wise. Or vice versa.

            3. 0
              Emile Rposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Not certain why the myth that 90% of scientists are atheist or agnostic persists. Wishful thinking, or blatant refusal to review facts?

              As to Moses. Seriously, how would we know how intelligent any semi historical figure might have been?

              1. Castlepaloma profile image23
                Castlepalomaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                In a 1998 survey of members of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), nearly 95% of biologists declared that they were either atheist or agnostic, much higher than all scientists in general!
                There. Other surveys are lower numbers, still most nonbelievers are scientists

                Show me one survey today, updated, shows most scientists are Christian, I need a LO

                Your right, ancient Moses would be difficult to record his intelligent along with mystical magical Merlin.

                1. 0
                  Emile Rposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  I didn't say they were Christian. Not sure why you brought that up. But, unless you can prove your claim I have no need to prove anything.  From what I've read, it really depends on the field; as to the percentage of scientists within that field who are atheistic. Unless, you are going to do the Christian thing and claim that any scientist who isn't an atheist isn't a real scientist. I have heard that one, so you wouldn't be the first to make me laugh about it. Or, funnier still, you can claim only biologists are real scientists.

                  1. Castlepaloma profile image23
                    Castlepalomaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Cannot find one surveys that suspect that most scientists are Religious, that's not good, considering 80-85% of the world is religious. 

                    Wiki conducted in the United States had the best numbers on the religious side towards being Scientist. Generally about 1/3 of scientists are atheists, 1/3 agnostic, and 1/3 have some belief in God, although some may be deistic, leaving it wide open.

                    If I were to master Law like Moses, I would simplified his 10 commandment down to two
                    1 DO NOT HARM
                    2 BE HONEST
                    LIKE MY GOD VOICE?

                    Most of us are unable to achieve it or find it impossible to follow Moses commandments. Resulting in Christian predominate countries being world champions at being Sodom and Gomorrah like.  With their background of mass murder, prisons, wars, crimes, drugs etc. etc.…

                    Hope I demonstration how I can be wiser than Moses and how I’m not much smarter than the average person today.

            4. Dr Lamb profile image60
              Dr Lambposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              The average person today is smarter than the average person 50 years ago. That's why IQ tests are constantly adjusted so the average is 100.

              1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, we are evolving, but my parents generation had way more common sense and patience. We need to catch down in those ways.

  7. EncephaloiDead profile image60
    EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago

    Don, I'm not saying Newton was totally wrong about gravity, but he was wrong about how it worked. His equations are valid in low, non-relativistic gravity situations, I would agree.

  8. EncephaloiDead profile image60
    EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago

    It's amazing how fast threads get destroyed by kettles.

    1. Don W profile image84
      Don Wposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      The thread has been "destroyed"? That's a bit over dramatic. You've been criticised, that's all. Amazing how some are quick to criticise faulty reasoning in others, but can't take such criticism themselves. Not a good idea to throw stones if you live in a big glass house.

 
working