ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Creation Science question

jtk2jlp

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 709

Report this Oct. 03 2004, 2:49 pm

For about a year a have heard this topic.
And two weeks ago I found it again in a Christian article.

In siting medical foreknowledge in the Christian Holdy Bible (particulary the King James Version), this person stated the Leviticus: 12? command of God to circumcise a baby on the 8th day.

Using medical references, this person stated that on the the 8th day after birth a male baby's Vitamin K skyrockets to 110 the normal level? allowing for support of a protein ( I have forgotten the name of, but I believe it started with a P.) that helps blood clotting during circumcision.

Can anyone comment on this.  And perhaps educate me a little more.  Remember, this person was writing about supposed medical foreknowledge in the Bible.

It has been two weeks since I've read the article, so I might have gotten several things outa whack (example, the part about the protein).  However, the basic gist is still present.

Can anyone comment on this?

charlie_x

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1058

Report this Oct. 03 2004, 3:47 pm

Creation Science. That always cracks me up.

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Oct. 03 2004, 7:44 pm

Quote (jtk2jlp @ Oct. 03 2004, 11:49 am)
For about a year a have heard this topic.
And two weeks ago I found it again in a Christian article.

In siting medical foreknowledge in the Christian Holdy Bible (particulary the King James Version), this person stated the Leviticus: 12? command of God to circumcise a baby on the 8th day.

Using medical references, this person stated that on the the 8th day after birth a male baby's Vitamin K skyrockets to 110 the normal level? allowing for support of a protein ( I have forgotten the name of, but I believe it started with a P.) that helps blood clotting during circumcision.

Can anyone comment on this.  And perhaps educate me a little more.  Remember, this person was writing about supposed medical foreknowledge in the Bible.

It has been two weeks since I've read the article, so I might have gotten several things outa whack (example, the part about the protein).  However, the basic gist is still present.

Can anyone comment on this?

Why oh why do you plaque us with this nonsense? Creational science use pseou science to attempt to prove the Unprovable.

The question of the proof of a divine or intelligent creator have haunted he Greatest minds of all history, and in the end the Only answer is, "A leap of Faith".

God is not meant to be proven but requires one to either Believe or believe not, and all those so call Creationalist are doing Faith a great disservice.


As for Issue of Circumise, the earily christian deem that it was not required so using this as proof of a creator seem lost on me, and the fact that writers of this book of the bible, pick the 8th day may have been a matter of Trial and effort and the Idea that thousand of infants may have been mained or killed by this Barbaric Practice performed by the earily jews to realize that this was the best day to do it, make me want to vomit.

There is no mystic knowledge invovled. Earily Aryans wrote a Series of Books of knowledge called the Vedics, one deal with Medical knowledge and involved cures such as willow Bark for Headache ( Contains the Chemical found in Asprin), Cimmonan ( enhance production of insulin and lower the Blood sugar) for Sweet urine ( Diabeties). According to the Hindus these book are greater than 10,000 year old.

Does this mean I should Shave my head and worship a cow, no it means that Anicent man was smart and that alot of knowledge has been lost till modern times.

jtk2jlp

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 709

Report this Oct. 03 2004, 11:52 pm

DerSpiess is a smart cookie, baby!

Commodore_64

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2299

Report this Oct. 04 2004, 4:14 am

Quote (DerSpiess @ Oct. 03 2004, 12:46 am)
Yeah, me too. And while we're on the subject and everything, I would like my foreskin BACK. Nobody freakin' asked ME how I felt about it.

Bastards.

I thought those Pork Rinds were a little chewy?

Mabsadack

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5

Report this Oct. 04 2004, 11:14 am

It is now proven that circumsion greatly reduces the likelihood of transmitting aids, developing infections, and lengthens the period of one's orgasm, as you can see im not complaining...

Ellessar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1848

Report this Oct. 04 2004, 9:26 pm

Gents and ladies,

I am not an advocate of Creationism. I would not even consider myself religious in even the slightest way. I tend to believe in the potential of humanity.

Now, you and I may not share the creationist view of the universe. You may even think it is silly, but it is a valid belief to have. Having faith in a god takes courage especially in a culture that is tending to leave behind ideas of religion. Besides science requires leaps of faith at times as well. How much do we really know about the universe? We make observations and conduct experiments, but in the end we are left only with theories. So believing in science is a religion as well. Just one of a different breed.

Inherent to any belief system should be two features. Acceptance of other systems of belief and the acceptance of the possibility that you and your beliefs are wrong. I think both are essential to a healthy system. You need to be open to criticism (tastful) on your beliefs. Because if your beliefs can't stand a little heat then what good are they really?

And last let us not forget that despite what many may have learned in grade school and high school western civ classes, the scientific revolution of Europe's 16th and 17th centuries was not anti-religious. The reality of the matter is that most scientists of the period were very spirtual and sought a greater understanding of the universe. They would use their god given free will and human reason to understand the universe. And in so doing they would honor god and as they learned about the universe they would validate their faith. Even at its core science can go hand in hand with faith. Science can only take us so far. Perhaps a bit of faith is also needed at times.

So lets not jump on Christian scientists or creationsits. Just ike your views their's are valid as well.

Ellessar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1848

Report this Oct. 04 2004, 11:53 pm

Ok we are flying way off topic an into a very odd discussion.  But hey what do you expect with a touchy topic like this.  I refer you all to an Episdoe of Sienfeld that dealt with circumscion.  Very funny stuff.  

But on topic, I doubt very much that anything in the book that is commonly called the "Bible" can be taken as literal fact or as proof of anything.  The Bible was assembeled by Emperor Constantine at the Council of Nyceia (spelling?) in an attempt to unifiy christian doctrine and create a "legitimate" claim for his position as emperor or the Roman Empire (what we today call the Byzantine Empire).  It was political and had a definate aim in mind.  This is not to say the messsage in the Bible is not good.  The message the bible tells on on how to live and treat each other is ok.  Becasue the ideas are solid.  But please remember that many books did not make the "cut" at the council as to what Constatine was looking for.   The Bible is not meant to be fact.

Yes I know loads of people out there would disagree.  And I appreciate their view and respect it.  This is simply my view.  I am student of history and as such tend to gain my explanations of events from the best historical evidence and information avaliable.  Fortuantly for us the Romans never threw anything away.  Which is why we know so much about them.  this trait was kept in the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire). SO we have good records that seem to support what I have said.

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Oct. 05 2004, 12:31 am

Quote (Ellessar @ Oct. 04 2004, 6:26 pm)
Gents and ladies,

I am not an advocate of Creationism.  I would not even consider myself religious in even the slightest way.  I tend to believe in the potential of humanity.

Now, you and I may not share the creationist view of the universe.  You may even think it is silly, but it is a valid belief to have.  Having faith in a god takes courage especially in a culture that is tending to leave behind ideas of religion.  Besides science requires leaps of faith at times as well.  How much do we really know about the universe?  We make observations and conduct experiments, but in the end we are left only with theories.  So believing in science is a religion as well.  Just one of a different breed.

Inherent to any belief system should be two features.  Acceptance of other systems of belief and the acceptance of the possibility that you and your beliefs are wrong.  I think both are essential to a healthy system.  You need to be open to criticism (tastful) on your beliefs.  Because if your beliefs can't stand a little heat then what good are they really?  

And last let us not forget that despite what many may have learned in grade school and high school western civ classes, the scientific revolution of Europe's 16th and 17th centuries was not anti-religious.  The reality of the matter is that most scientists of the period were very spirtual and sought a greater understanding of the universe.  They would use their god given free will and human reason to understand the universe.  And in so doing they would honor god and as they learned about the universe they would validate their faith.  Even at its core science can go hand in hand with faith.  Science can only take us so far.  Perhaps a bit of faith is also needed at times.  

So lets not jump on Christian scientists or creationsits.  Just ike your views their's are valid as well.

Actually their views are not valid, since at the least they play loose with actual science at the worst completely lie about scientific facts.

let list the lies that are common to creational:

Radioactive dating is not Valid, Funny since the same laws that dictate Radioactive decay allows us to create Atomic weapons, maybe the bombs drop on the Japan where Blanks..

The Universe is not Billions of years old, but only 25,000!..
Let see this make us believe that Einstein law of Relativity is false, and that the speed of light in a vacuum is not constant. Or that the cloud of Photons that make up the Back ground radiation doesnot exist. Or even the laws of Thermodynamics dealing with heat transfer is incorrect.

Evolution is false, and man ( and all species that exist) sprung up in his present form without any transition..And that the fossile record was created by satan to fool man...

The Earth is at the center of the universe, yes some creationalist do believe this still!!!!!

That Stars are not power by Nuclear Fusion!!!!! Kid you not on this one....

and the list goes on...

Science is not a Belief system, creationalism is. Science is a process that allow us to learn about things around us. It create model and theories that allow us to predict and even control the world around us.

If the facts donot match the theory then a new theory is created. Theories requires Experiments to constantly prove that they are valid or usable.

Creationalism is an attempt to elevate Religion to the status of science, it offers no experiment data or even any valid formulas that can equal what is true science...

causality

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 129

Report this Oct. 05 2004, 7:12 am

Quote (Ellessar @ Oct. 05 2004, 2:26 am)
Gents and ladies,

I am not an advocate of Creationism.  I would not even consider myself religious in even the slightest way.  I tend to believe in the potential of humanity.

Now, you and I may not share the creationist view of the universe.  You may even think it is silly, but it is a valid belief to have.  Having faith in a god takes courage especially in a culture that is tending to leave behind ideas of religion.  Besides science requires leaps of faith at times as well.  How much do we really know about the universe?  We make observations and conduct experiments, but in the end we are left only with theories.  So believing in science is a religion as well.  Just one of a different breed.

Inherent to any belief system should be two features.  Acceptance of other systems of belief and the acceptance of the possibility that you and your beliefs are wrong.  I think both are essential to a healthy system.  You need to be open to criticism (tastful) on your beliefs.  Because if your beliefs can't stand a little heat then what good are they really?  

And last let us not forget that despite what many may have learned in grade school and high school western civ classes, the scientific revolution of Europe's 16th and 17th centuries was not anti-religious.  The reality of the matter is that most scientists of the period were very spirtual and sought a greater understanding of the universe.  They would use their god given free will and human reason to understand the universe.  And in so doing they would honor god and as they learned about the universe they would validate their faith.  Even at its core science can go hand in hand with faith.  Science can only take us so far.  Perhaps a bit of faith is also needed at times.  

So lets not jump on Christian scientists or creationsits.  Just ike your views their's are valid as well.

"Creationism" a valid view!?
Creationism and religion in general devolves responsibility from the individual, stunts the growth of society and allows the worst atrocitys imaginable to be perpetrated for "the glory of god"

Argh, the very words "Creationism" and "religion" leave a bad taste in my mouth. :angry:

decoder34

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 109

Report this Oct. 05 2004, 12:39 pm

Quote (Ellessar @ Oct. 05 2004, 2:26 am)
Gents and ladies,

I am not an advocate of Creationism.  I would not even consider myself religious in even the slightest way.  I tend to believe in the potential of humanity.

Now, you and I may not share the creationist view of the universe.  You may even think it is silly, but it is a valid belief to have.  Having faith in a god takes courage especially in a culture that is tending to leave behind ideas of religion.  Besides science requires leaps of faith at times as well.  How much do we really know about the universe?  We make observations and conduct experiments, but in the end we are left only with theories.  So believing in science is a religion as well.  Just one of a different breed.

Inherent to any belief system should be two features.  Acceptance of other systems of belief and the acceptance of the possibility that you and your beliefs are wrong.  I think both are essential to a healthy system.  You need to be open to criticism (tastful) on your beliefs.  Because if your beliefs can't stand a little heat then what good are they really?  

And last let us not forget that despite what many may have learned in grade school and high school western civ classes, the scientific revolution of Europe's 16th and 17th centuries was not anti-religious.  The reality of the matter is that most scientists of the period were very spirtual and sought a greater understanding of the universe.  They would use their god given free will and human reason to understand the universe.  And in so doing they would honor god and as they learned about the universe they would validate their faith.  Even at its core science can go hand in hand with faith.  Science can only take us so far.  Perhaps a bit of faith is also needed at times.  

So lets not jump on Christian scientists or creationsits.  Just ike your views their's are valid as well.

i like your way of seeing things Ellessar... at least u dont agree and are formal and decent about things...

as much as we may not agree with another view, or idea, we should respect it... ulike some people on this thread that have decided that THEY are right and more inteligent than anyone else...
all of what has been spoken about is to do with faith... be it with creationisum, or evolution.... period... u cant say one is science and the other isnt just because YOU believe it to be so... there are faults and doubts in many and all theories ideas or even science (yes, you guessed it: science isnt always right!;)
personally i think you need faith to believe in C or E... both have huge variables... but personally, i wud preffere to have 'come about' by the hand of a powerfull God, than have evolved from a monkey... that would be what i prefere... but hey... thats me right?
if you dont or do, good for u! dont bite my head off or anyone elses if they dont believe YOU! ok?

thank you Ellessar for your insightful, peacefull and educational insight....

you are a history student right? can i ask you a couple of quick questions?

when did the first empire (babylon) start and fall?
who came next... (are there the dates?)
and all of them untill the romans...

im just interested to test a theory of my own... my own quest...

thank you  :cool:

Dan

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Oct. 05 2004, 8:39 pm

Quote (decoder34 @ Oct. 05 2004, 9:39 am)
Quote (Ellessar @ Oct. 05 2004, 2:26 am)
Gents and ladies,

I am not an advocate of Creationism.  I would not even consider myself religious in even the slightest way.  I tend to believe in the potential of humanity.

Now, you and I may not share the creationist view of the universe.  You may even think it is silly, but it is a valid belief to have.  Having faith in a god takes courage especially in a culture that is tending to leave behind ideas of religion.  Besides science requires leaps of faith at times as well.  How much do we really know about the universe?  We make observations and conduct experiments, but in the end we are left only with theories.  So believing in science is a religion as well.  Just one of a different breed.

Inherent to any belief system should be two features.  Acceptance of other systems of belief and the acceptance of the possibility that you and your beliefs are wrong.  I think both are essential to a healthy system.  You need to be open to criticism (tastful) on your beliefs.  Because if your beliefs can't stand a little heat then what good are they really?  

And last let us not forget that despite what many may have learned in grade school and high school western civ classes, the scientific revolution of Europe's 16th and 17th centuries was not anti-religious.  The reality of the matter is that most scientists of the period were very spirtual and sought a greater understanding of the universe.  They would use their god given free will and human reason to understand the universe.  And in so doing they would honor god and as they learned about the universe they would validate their faith.  Even at its core science can go hand in hand with faith.  Science can only take us so far.  Perhaps a bit of faith is also needed at times.  

So lets not jump on Christian scientists or creationsits.  Just ike your views their's are valid as well.

i like your way of seeing things Ellessar... at least u dont agree and are formal and decent about things...

as much as we may not agree with another view, or idea, we should respect it... ulike some people on this thread that have decided that THEY are right and more inteligent than anyone else...
all of what has been spoken about is to do with faith... be it with creationisum, or evolution.... period... u cant say one is science and the other isnt just because YOU believe it to be so... there are faults and doubts in many and all theories ideas or even science (yes, you guessed it: science isnt always right!;)
personally i think you need faith to believe in C or E... both have huge variables... but personally, i wud preffere to have 'come about' by the hand of a powerfull God, than have evolved from a monkey... that would be what i prefere... but hey... thats me right?
if you dont or do, good for u! dont bite my head off or anyone elses if they dont believe YOU! ok?

thank you Ellessar for your insightful, peacefull and educational insight....

you are a history student right? can i ask you a couple of quick questions?

when did the first empire (babylon) start and fall?
who came next... (are there the dates?)
and all of them untill the romans...

im just interested to test a theory of my own... my own quest...

thank you  :cool:

Dan

Mighty judgemental are we decoder?....Funny since Creation science is base on a single belief system , and not on the many that exist in the world.

Following Ellesar logic, the Universe springing from a lotus flower that emerged from the Belly button of Vishnu is as valid as the Big bang or Jehova issuing the Statement "let there be light"...

No one here is stating that they are smarter than any one else, but some of us are stating that Creational science is not Science, as much as Astrology or Numerology is.

Everyone has a right to their belief, my father god rest his soul, was a minister and a Chemist..Never did he attempt to use the Bible to predict a Chemical process and never did he use the Periodic chart to give a sunday school lesson.

He believed that God and Regilion was to guide man to what he should be (A better and just individual), while science was the guide to understanding the world around us.

The problem lies in the fact that Universe is a complex place, and it is soo simple to take comfort in the Belief in God, but this should never blind us to the fact.

Science works, the fact that you and I can exchange ideas over the internet is only proof on how valid current scientific theories are. While Creationalists would have you believe that these theories are incorrect in areas dealing with Radioactive dating ( which is  base on Quantum mechanics), Relativity, and a host of other theories that disprove their view point.

It they that believe that they are smarter and righter than other, as for me I just want proof that would stand up to the same standard that I would apply to any new theory that any scientists would come up with...

Giantevilhead

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1175

Report this Oct. 06 2004, 2:34 am

Well, Creationism and most Religions are based on logical fallacies that are constructed in a way so that they cannot be disproved. It's like me saying that there are magical invisible and intangible faeries living in the forest and they dance around all day long. I may not be able to prove that they exist but no one can prove that they dont exist because theyre invisible and intangible. Its the same kind of logical fallacy most religions use to prove the existence of god.

Madlib

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 546

Report this Oct. 06 2004, 2:58 am

After my brother got expelled from public school he went to a a christian school that taught such things in science classes.  I looked at the texts, if you have never seen them you should look because they are a hoot.  Creationism is by no stretch of the imagiantion a viable scientific theory and I shall comment no further as many have already pointed this out.

I want to add that I think that it is strange that in a country like the US that has been the home of great technological and scientific advancements that theories such as creationism are so prevalent.

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Oct. 06 2004, 3:46 am

Quote (Madlib @ Oct. 05 2004, 11:58 pm)
After my brother got expelled from public school he went to a a christian school that taught such things in science classes. I looked at the texts, if you have never seen them you should look because they are a hoot. Creationism is by no stretch of the imagiantion a viable scientific theory and I shall comment no further as many have already pointed this out.

I want to add that I think that it is strange that in a country like the US that has been the home of great technological and scientific advancements that theories such as creationism are so prevalent.

Well there a good reason why, and usually has to do with cousin interbreeding. :) just kidding...

actually it due to a general trend in ignoring the hard sciences in school in the last severa decades and the poltical power of the So call Christian right/ fundamentalist.

It truely a shame, I have fought hard to prevent such trash from being added to Lesson plans in the school district my own childern attent.

As you stated the ideas express by Creationalism are easily pick apart be anyone with a strong science background, but as said before they trend to set up unprovable agruements, such as the scientific constants may have changed, or discount physical evident as being planted by the Devil ( I Kid you not).

And this is back by the mistaken belief that Science is a belief system, instead of a procedure that is used to create models of physical reality. These model can be used to provide predictable outcome to physical processes, Unlike a system which depends on a leap of faith which comprises a belief system.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum