Turn on thread page Beta

Vardy Foundation Schools Teaching Creationism watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn1)
    Show me concrete, irrefutable evidence that the world came into being because of a 'big bang' - you can't and neither can anybody else! It is a theory only and is therefore a belief system as much as a belief in God.
    But we have much more advanced scientific methods that they did thousands of years ago and as a consequence are more likely to be correct.
    And the fact that many high-powered people in religion accept that it is wrong and is more symbolic that truth is also an indication that it is false.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Peter Vardy is a complete nut. He's entitled to his own opinion, however crazy it may be, but it is a disgrace that the government actively facilitates the imposition of his extremist views on children by selling him a school!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn1)
    Show me concrete, irrefutable evidence that the world came into being because of a 'big bang' - you can't and neither can anybody else! It is a theory only and is therefore a belief system as much as a belief in God.
    There is more evidence for it however. This subject has been extensively discussed several times before and the same mistake is made the creationists - the belief that the argument which concerns our inability to disprove the existence of god actually concerns the god of Christianity.
    It does not.
    Every characteristic and attribute of the Christian god is disproved by logic with the *exception* of the creation of the universe - and this only in greatly limited form, you can forget the 7 days/10,000 years nonsense - you cannot prove what gave birth to the universe and thus its reasonable to believe in a creator god, but only in the sense of an objective, uninvolved deity which created the universe and did nothing else (not so enticing without all that died for our sins, heaven for believers hell for the rest daftness is it?)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn1)
    Show me concrete, irrefutable evidence that the world came into being because of a 'big bang' - you can't and neither can anybody else!
    Ok avoid my point totally.
    I said that creationism is not right within the relams of science, there is no evidence for it. The chance of it being right is 0.0000000000000001% or 0 for simplicy. You make no attempt to argue this and instead bring up the Big Band theory which is completely irrelevant.
    (Original post by yawn1)
    It is a theory only and is therefore a belief system as much as a belief in God.
    why is any religion better at explaining where we came from than metaphysics?
    You are wrong on this point too.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    There isn't even a need for a 'creator', but it is beyond our scope of understanding to comprehend it. Many prominent scientists believe the universe may be a continuous expansion and retraction. A big bang follows a big crunch as the universe is brought back by it's own gravity. This in turn causes another big bang, and we start all over again. But it's just to hard for us to imagine no start point, and equally, no end either.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn1)
    There is no finite proof provided by science to disprove that everything was created by an Almighty being - and science is as much a belief system as a belief in God!
    Certainly not in six days though as was mentioned above. Also science is not a belief system, it requires no belief as only theories that make accurate predictions that can be experimentally verified are accepted, and every scientist knows that no theory can be "proved", only that others can be disproved.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn1)
    It is a theory only and is therefore a belief system as much as a belief in God.
    Nobody denies its 'only' a theory but this doesnt stop creationists trumpeting this phrase as if its a winner. Yes its a theory, a theory with more evidence in its favour than there is for many 'facts' we accept today.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by savvy10)
    There isn't even a need for a 'creator', but it is beyond our scope of understanding to comprehend it. Many prominent scientists believe the universe may be a continuous expansion and retraction. A big bang follows a big crunch as the universe is brought back by it's own gravity. This in turn causes another big bang, and we start all over again. But it's just to hard for us to imagine no start point, and equally, no end either.
    no they dont, the expansion of the universe is increasing not decreasing that would be required for a big crunch

    however string theory predicts other ways in which the universe could of been formed other than using god
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    Nobody denies its 'only' a theory but this doesnt stop creationists trumpeting this phrase as if its a winner. Yes its a theory, a theory with more evidence in its favour than there is for many 'facts' we accept today.
    creationism isnt a theory it has no evidence to support it
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    "I have just one thing to say" - at the final judgement I can turn to you non-believers, smile and say "I told you so".

    Bye bye friends for now, things to do, places to go and all that.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn1)
    "I have just one thing to say" - at the final judgement I can turn to you non-believers, smile and say "I told you so".

    Bye bye friends for now, things to do, places to go and all that.
    That is the biggest cop out if i ever saw one, you got your arguement totally destroyed and now you just disappearing?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    creationism isnt a theory it has no evidence to support it
    True, i wasnt referring to creationism as a theory i was referring entirely to that of evolution.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, you've obviously missed my point all together. It is increasing at the moment. The big bang provided such an enormous burst of energy, this expansion is likely to continue for trillions of years. However, many scientists do in fact believe that over such a long period of time, the force of gravity between objects will cause matter to slow each other down, and eventually meet at a central point.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn1)
    "I have just one thing to say" - at the final judgement I can turn to you non-believers, smile and say "I told you so".

    Bye bye friends for now, things to do, places to go and all that.
    Thats the erudite level of response id expect from a creationist.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=yawn1]"I have just one thing to say" - at the final judgement I can turn to you non-believers, smile and say "I told you so". QUOTE]

    I don't know what god you worship but if I were him I wouldn't let in someone making snyde comments like that. I would also respect the integrity and openmindedness of atheists/agnostics and let them in instead. Unfortunately I am not god, ah well.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by savvy10)
    Yes, you've obviously missed my point all together. It is increasing at the moment. The big bang provided such an enormous burst of energy, this is likely to continue for trillions of years. However, many scientists do in fact believe that over such a long period of time, the force of gravity between objects will cause matter to slow each other down, and eventually meet at a central point.
    I am afriad that you cannot create energy, at the start the whole universe was all energy, slowing that is turned into mass (Enery=Mass*C^2).
    So if you like its like a ball at the top of a ramp. It has maximum amount of G.P.E
    In this case i am equating the G.P.E to the energy of the universe to start with.
    The energy is turned into Kinetic energy as it rolls down the slope, the kinetic energy in this example can be equated to mass. Slowly as the ball role down the ramp (representing the aging of the universe) G.P.E => K.E and so in real life Intial energy => mass
    You are saying the gravity is the dominant force in the universe so as the universe has more mass the speed should go down as there are greater forces of attraction between objects. Yet the speed of expansion is increasing so your arguement is invalid.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    Thats the erudite level of response id expect from a creationist.
    i dont think he was a creationist, just someone over eager to defend religion in general
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    i dont think he was a creationist, just someone over eager to defend religion in general
    A more able defence would have been achieved had he stayed silent.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    When did I ever claim you could create energy? The universe is expanding because of the, as of this moment, mysterious interaction between matter and dark energy. Therefore, your argument is invalid. Furthermore, I was simply expressing the opinion of others. Though I find it quite remarkable how you feel you have the wisdom to fly in the face of the informed opinions of professional researchers. Arrogance isn't a nice personality trait.

    http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992759
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by savvy10)
    Yes, you've obviously missed my point all together. It is increasing at the moment. The big bang provided such an enormous burst of energy, this expansion is likely to continue for trillions of years. However, many scientists do in fact believe that over such a long period of time, the force of gravity between objects will cause matter to slow each other down, and eventually meet at a central point.
    you have just changed the justification for your arguement, You are right on this matter when you talk about the possiblity of dark matter however and i do not discount that but your intial arguement is wrong using solely gravity.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: June 23, 2004
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.