Vomit Comet Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 No, no. They say "it's hot as hell", so IMO, Hell for the climate. I love it hot! I read a funny study that some scientists threw together in their spare time. The sun in heaven is several times bigger than it appears in earth's sky, and hell is presumably as hot as the combustion temperature of sulfur. Therefore, heaven is about three times hotter than hell. Then again, God could have installed the mother of all air conditioners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpion Posted May 22, 2009 Author Share Posted May 22, 2009 Then again, God could have installed the mother of all air conditioners. Powered by Faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LilaMae Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Then again, God could have installed the mother of all air conditioners. Powered by Faith. Actually, that would be an interesting theory. Heaven is really really hot, and so doubles up as hell. But if you have Faith you don't realise how hot it is! Why yes, I am a theological genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpion Posted May 22, 2009 Author Share Posted May 22, 2009 Actually, that would be an interesting theory. Heaven is really really hot, and so doubles up as hell. But if you have Faith you don't realise how hot it is! Why yes, I am a theological genius. I can see the headlines: SINNERS HAVE FAULTY AIR-CONDITIONING Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 The National Geographic has reported on this missing link three years ago. Or is this the same? Fossil Find Is Missing Link in Human Evolution, Scientists Say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 The National Geographic has reported on this missing link three years ago. Or is this the same? Fossil Find Is Missing Link in Human Evolution, Scientists Say That link is about Australopithecus anamensis. This recent find is about Darwinius masillae. Not the same. Curiosity Badger, do you accept the ToE as valid science, and if so how do interpret the first two chapters of Genesis in light of this? I'd like to hear a point of view from someone I suspect doesn't feel a need to reject science in order to support a particular theology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 What the heck is ToE science? Sorry my ignorance (I'm finn) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mriana Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Then again, God could have installed the mother of all air conditioners. Powered by Faith. Actually, that would be an interesting theory. Heaven is really really hot, and so doubles up as hell. But if you have Faith you don't realise how hot it is! Why yes, I am a theological genius. Powered by Faith and double as hell. Freud voice: Wery interesting. Guess this means they are so sick they don't know the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthOkkata Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Theory of Evolution. Science Should be obvious considering the topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 The National Geographic has reported on this missing link three years ago. Or is this the same? Fossil Find Is Missing Link in Human Evolution, Scientists Say You SEE!!! They keep on losing this link over and over again. Someone needs to put a GPS on it so it won't go missing again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 What the heck is ToE science? Sorry my ignorance (I'm finn) That's the one you keep on stubbing against the chair, and it makes you swear for half-an-hour. And it's always the pinkie-toe. Here's the basic vocab for this kind of discussion: ToE: Theory of Evolution YEC: Young Earth Creationism (the world is only 6,006 years old) OEC: Old Earth Creationism (allow Big Bang) Theistic Evolution: Like OEC, but also accept Evolution. God created life by using Evolution, but planted his spirit in human beings (at some point in time) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Oh, of course. Should be obvious yes. Thanks. Curiosity Badger, do you accept the ToE as valid science, and if so how do interpret the first two chapters of Genesis in light of this? I'd like to hear a point of view from someone I suspect doesn't feel a need to reject science in order to support a particular theology. I accept the evolution. Not that I have studied it, but I don't have reason to deny it. Both can be true, God and the evolution, without conflict. I haven't pondered this issue much, but I think it's like the Bible telling us who did it, but the science how it was done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Oh, of course. Should be obvious yes. Thanks. Curiosity Badger, do you accept the ToE as valid science, and if so how do interpret the first two chapters of Genesis in light of this? I'd like to hear a point of view from someone I suspect doesn't feel a need to reject science in order to support a particular theology. I accept the evolution. Not that I have studied it, but I don't have reason to deny it. Both can be true, God and the evolution, without conflict. I haven't pondered this issue much, but I think it's like the Bible telling us who did it, but the science how it was done. Ok, I used to share your view until I started reading more and more about archeology and science. I'm curious how you reconcile carbon dating with the genesis account of creation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Ok, I used to share your view until I started reading more and more about archeology and science. I'm curious how you reconcile carbon dating with the genesis account of creation? What carbon dating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loren Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 You SEE!!! They keep on losing this link over and over again. Someone needs to put a GPS on it so it won't go missing again. The link wasn't so much missing as broken. Up until now, when researchers would pull some dusty fossil out of a drawer and click on it, they'd just get an "error code 401." Now when they click on another fossil, it takes them directly to Darwinius masillae. Yay! Happy researchers! Here are a couple of pictures of broken links: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 ooooooh... the left one looks like a cross, and the second must be the lost plate from the last supper, and the third is one of the fishishes during the feeding miracle... So maybe they just need some archeological glue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthOkkata Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Radiocarbon Dating: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating Learn to use Google. Wikipedia is your friend. While not always completely accurate, it is a good starting point for most internet research. It's fast and easy to use. If you ever have a question or need information about just about anything just remember that little search bar in the top [probably] right corner of your browser. It will even check your spelling and send you to the correct place if you're a little off. Wikipedia pages are almost always near the top, and are usually the best place to start from if available. Google is the true God, http://www.thechurchofgoogle.org/Scripture...gle_Is_God.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loren Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 ooooooh... the left one looks like a cross, and the second must be the lost plate from the last supper, and the third is one of the fishishes during the feeding miracle... So maybe they just need some archeological glue? My god, Hans! I think you may just be on to something there! You're a theological genius! I'll bet the Holy Spirit put that thought in your head. That first one could actually be a fossilized piece of the True Cross! And we know from our scientifically reliable friend Ken Ham that even though all those items from Jesus' life were geologically recent, insto-fossilization is how fossils are actually formed. Of course, they were all formed in Noah's flood, which was long before Jesus, but this is just scientific proof that God can do anything! Hallelujah! *Ready to fall to my face and suck God's cock again (the Bible tells us He likes that kind of thing) so He won't lovingly throw me into the lake of fire for eternity because I had Satanic understandings about fossils.* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 DarthOkkata, thanks. Well, I know what carbon dating means but I didn't understand Kyle's question. "I'm curious how you reconcile carbon dating with the genesis account of creation?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 DarthOkkata, thanks. Well, I know what carbon dating means but I didn't understand Kyle's question. "I'm curious how you reconcile carbon dating with the genesis account of creation?" My question is that since science has found a way to accurately date ancient artifacts/fossil, how do you reconcile that with the 6000 year old earth as detailed in the Bible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 What the heck is ToE science? Sorry my ignorance (I'm finn) ToE = Theory of Evolution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 My question is that since science has found a way to accurately date ancient artifacts/fossil, how do you reconcile that with the 6000 year old earth as detailed in the Bible. My Bible doesn't say the earth is 6000 years old. Weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 My question is that since science has found a way to accurately date ancient artifacts/fossil, how do you reconcile that with the 6000 year old earth as detailed in the Bible. My Bible doesn't say the earth is 6000 years old. Weird. Do you believe God guided evolution to create man? That he guides nature into a certain formation? Or some other variation, like he choose a smart ape to reveal himself to instead of, say a zebra or a praying mantis or some other animal? Not sure if you realize it, but since you don't question that scientists know what they're talking about, did you know that the evidence points to all animal life on the planet evolved from a single animal? That it's not this animal evolved, and another type of animal evolved elsewhere? That all the animals started with one? Guess what animal that was? Don't say Adam. That would be the wrong answer. Think really simple animal. One clue... it lives in the water and is still around today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Do you believe God guided evolution to create man? That he guides nature into a certain formation? Or some other variation, like he choose a smart ape to reveal himself to instead of, say a zebra or a praying mantis or some other animal? I don't know. I haven't thought this much. Maybe I should? Not sure if you realize it, but since you don't question that scientists know what they're talking about, did you know that the evidence points to all animal life on the planet evolved from a single animal? That it's not this animal evolved, and another type of animal evolved elsewhere? That all the animals started with one? Guess what animal that was? Don't say Adam. That would be the wrong answer. Think really simple animal. One clue... it lives in the water and is still around today. That's interesting... kind of fish, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpion Posted May 22, 2009 Author Share Posted May 22, 2009 DarthOkkata, thanks. Well, I know what carbon dating means but I didn't understand Kyle's question. "I'm curious how you reconcile carbon dating with the genesis account of creation?" My question is that since science has found a way to accurately date ancient artifacts/fossil, how do you reconcile that with the 6000 year old earth as detailed in the Bible? Maybe Badger isn't a literalist... The general consensus in Catholic Europe is that the Bible is very metaphorical. (Jesus never walked on water, water was simply a metaphore for evil; the seven days of creation weren't exactly seven days, etc...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts