Materialistic-only scientists, with their limiting worldview, waste an enormous amount of time going down rabbit trails that lead nowhere. Do you know what a checksum is in computer programming? If you checksum a routine, and it doesn't add up, don't you stop, find the problem, and then continue? What if you say, "Heck, I *want* to keep going even if this routine is broken?" Will you *ever* have a working program? No. God gave us the Bible as the "checksum" for man's quest for knowledge. If the Bible says it aint so, it aint so. Period. No need to go farther. That's why creation scientists are doing much, much better science than materialistic-only scientists.
33 comments
If that view was still popular we'd still be living in stone castles terrified of pixies and gremlins stealing our children.
"God gave us the Bible as the "checksum" for man's quest for knowledge. If the Bible says it aint so, it aint so. Period. No need to go farther. That's why creation scientists are doing much, much better science than materialistic-only scientists."
"If the Bible says it aint so, it aint so. Period. No need to go farther."OK, but that means that if you get sick you have to use the wacko Bible treatments and eschew all modern medicine. You need to use a geocentically based calendar. You must adhere to a flat-earth world view.
"That's why creation scientists are doing much, much better science than materialistic-only scientists."
Given all their diligent work, what is it exactly that creation scientists have proven or discovered?
Amigone201 - that was absolutely beautiful. Thanks, Julian :) I'm not sure where I came up with it. I have a BA in Political Science and can barely program a VCR.
Ok. I'm going to say this slowly.
That's why creation scientists are doing much, much better science than materialistic-only scientists.
themann1086: creation scientists have used that lack of published articles as evidence that they are being censored. When you have a chance, and if you have access, also look up how many submitted articles. I can't remember the link, but someone looked it up, and they barely have any articles submitted.
Have fun with your oval wheels, gods that can't fight iron chariots and complete lack of modern medicine.
"If the Bible says it aint so, it aint so. Period. No need to go farther. "
You ain't real bright, are you?
Well yes, but my half elven half dragon level 12 cosmic retributor/level 9 imaginary scientist is doing much better than your creation scientists.
Or put in a way that you will understand, creation scientists are not real, made up, fiction. And it is easy to ascribe awesome powers to fictional beings, just look at Jesus.
The best work is being done by reality based scientists. y'know, the ones who work within scientific principles and ignore supernatural claims. y'know: science!
"If the Bible says it aint so, it aint so. Period."
There are no creation scientists as not one of them use scientific methods, they are liars and false witnesses against science.
They are why Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens have come out to expose the lies and misinformation of the fundamentalist Christians. The fundie religion is losing it's flock to modern knowledge, they have to villify and lie about science, restrict education and keep people stupid to retain and continue the scam, they never use science except to lie about it.
No. God gave us the Bible as the "checksum" for man's quest for knowledge. If the Bible says it aint so, it aint so. Period. No need to go farther. That's why creation scientists are doing much, much better science than materialistic-only scientists.
No, reality is the checksum for man's quest for knowledge. If actual evidence says your theory is wrong, it is wrong. Period. No need to go farther. And thats why blinded-by-faith-and-scripture creationists aren't 'scientists' at all.
Your checksum is invalid; You've errantly entered a stated value rather than attempting to generate a true checksum. What real scientists are doing that you so readily belittle, is code research of undocumented systems (The Bible again does not count as "documentation" for reality, sorry). And please, never, *ever* apply the pure-logic terminology of programming to religion ever again. Here's a more apt computer analogy;
Religion is a program-hijack rootkit, and science is the registry-value fix for it that enables the brain to start operating at full capacity again, regardless of the application it needs to run.
The checksum analogy is completely wrong. You don't "checksum a routine" unless you're typing it in from one of those old magazines like Compute; in that situation you're just using it to avoid typos.
Of course, science doesn't work that way anyway...
Yeah, totally, the provably false bible is the source of all knowledge, and anything that disagrees with it is wrong. It's not like we can prove that the bible has errors or anything. (try counting the legs on an insect)
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
