I don't need to know everything about science to know that when it contradicts what is proven to be true that it is wrong in that specific point it contradicts.
[11/12/2007 9:28:44 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Is there any reason why this isn't true with the Bible?
11/12/2007 9:30:06 AM
Well that would be true assuming whatever truth it contradicted was observably and undoubtably true. I can't think of a single example where this has ever happened though...
11/12/2007 9:30:38 AM
11/12/2007 9:32:46 AM
Bible Says - You can make striped goat babies by making goats screw while looking at striped rods.
Science Says - Visual stimuli during copulation does not affect the dna of offspring, regardless of species.
Conclusion - Well obviously those godless scientists need to "bone up" on biblical breeding practices!
11/12/2007 9:35:08 AM
where's your faith? Don't you know that "written in the Bible" and "proved to be true" mean exactly the same thing? ;-)
11/12/2007 9:35:10 AM
Is that actually so? Or just a humourous example? I'd love to be able to quote that bit about breeding stripped goats by making them see a stripped post. Can you give me the verse? or an aproximate placing?
11/12/2007 9:56:40 AM
You fail English as well.
11/12/2007 9:57:07 AM
It's actually so. Genisis chapter 30, beginning with verse 37:
"Genesis 30:37-39. "And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chesnut tree; and pilled white strakes in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods. 38. And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the
flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink. 39. And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstreaked, speckled, and spotted."
11/12/2007 10:02:21 AM
True enough. Science is the business of refining our understanding of proven truths. The stuff that some people wrote thousands of years ago, has either been disproven or dismissed as myth.
11/12/2007 10:26:03 AM
11/12/2007 10:49:31 AM
You seem to be under the false belief that the bible is true.
11/12/2007 10:52:37 AM
So, reality disagrees with reality?
11/12/2007 11:01:34 AM
"I don't need to know everything about science to know that when it contradicts your mythology, your mythology is wrong."
11/12/2007 11:15:10 AM
Science is self correcting. If new evidence is found that contradicts something that was considered to be proven, science revises its ideas about what is proven.
11/12/2007 11:23:19 AM
Irony meter is in meltdown mode
11/12/2007 11:33:05 AM
Right you are, Jake M!
Years ago, biologists were of the opinion that only one strand of the DNA double-helix takes part in genetic transcription. Today, based on evidence, biologists now believe that BOTH strands of a DNA double-helix take part in transcription.
So, the opinion of biologists years ago turned out to be wrong, based on later evidence. It's good to see you have such an appreciation for the self-correcting nature of the Scientific Method, Jake M!
11/12/2007 12:52:30 PM
11/12/2007 1:13:12 PM
Congrats on admitting to willfull ignorance dumbass.
11/12/2007 1:30:44 PM
You can make that sentence as convoluted as possible, but that won't make you right.
11/12/2007 1:35:18 PM
11/12/2007 2:28:20 PM
Jake, there's just not a whole hell of a lot in the Bible that been proven to be even remotely true. Sorry.
11/12/2007 2:53:48 PM
when it contradicts what is proven to be true that it is wrong in that specific point it contradicts
That's true. When science finds facts that contradict a theory, the theory is replaced. If the theory still holds, it means no such facts have been found yet. Jake sure isn't likely to find them.
11/12/2007 3:21:14 PM
As it stands, this quote isn't remotely fundie. It isn't even untrue.
11/12/2007 4:50:42 PM
However, you should know what the word "proven" means before making a statement such as that.
11/12/2007 5:16:47 PM
Something tells me the word "proven" doesn't mean what you think it means.
11/12/2007 5:36:08 PM