| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Science and Religion | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 27 2005, 05:43 AM (840 Views) | |
| doctortobe | May 29 2005, 03:45 PM Post #46 |
|
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
|
Fes, I would refer you to the scientific definition of the meter when it comes to changing the definition of things. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| who | May 29 2005, 05:18 PM Post #47 |
|
Have light saber. Will travel.
|
"A Rose by any other name...". Words are of themselves meaningless. As I wrote before, does the Chinese language have any meaning for you unless you understan it? Words are symbols that we make up that stand for a concept for an aspect of reality. They are thus twice removed from reality. What is important here are not the words, not the concepts, but reality itself, which, I believe, we are, or can become, aware of. who |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| psyfi | May 29 2005, 05:32 PM Post #48 |
|
psyfi
|
Reading this reminded me of Kim Clement. He is a Christian minister with the gift of prophecy, very popular. I once saw him speaking in front of a huge Christian audience. He said, "You know, if I asked each of you here, do you love God?," I know most every one of you would answer yes. Well, I have a message from God for you. God says that you don't love Him half as much as you love your own idea of Him." I also believe that there is a reality out there which we can become aware of; but this awareness does indeed take a certain purging of our pet concepts, notions, and ideas. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Fesarius | May 29 2005, 06:11 PM Post #49 |
|
Admiral
|
Doc, Please explain. I don't know the scientific definition of this term (seriously). |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| doctortobe | May 30 2005, 12:00 AM Post #50 |
|
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
|
To put it shortly and simply, the meter used to be defined as the length of a hunk of metal in Paris. The meter was later redefined to be the distance that light travels in a certain time (I can't remember the exact number off the top of my head). As you can see, words are not as set in concrete as you would like them to be. Language is constantly changing (unless it is a "dead" language). |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Fesarius | May 30 2005, 08:56 AM Post #51 |
|
Admiral
|
Doc, I never wrote this, nor would I ever knowingly imply it. What I did write was this:
I agreed that language was imprecise. Obviously it depends on context, and the 'language of words' does change. To state that I asserted that it does not (i.e., is 'set in concrete') is misrepresenting what I wrote, or what I intended to convey. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| doctortobe | May 30 2005, 01:06 PM Post #52 |
|
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
|
It depends on what context you put it in.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Fesarius | May 30 2005, 03:35 PM Post #53 |
|
Admiral
|
^^^ Agreed.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Darthsith | May 31 2005, 10:53 AM Post #54 |
|
Ensign
|
http://www.creationtheory.org/ |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Fesarius | May 31 2005, 03:23 PM Post #55 |
|
Admiral
|
Darthsith, Thanks for the link. Do you happen to know how they know with certainty that the skull pictured there is 3.5 million years old? Would you be willing to explain it a bit? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dr. Noah | May 31 2005, 03:24 PM Post #56 |
|
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
|
Try this link Fes: http://science.howstuffworks.com/carbon-14.htm |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Fesarius | May 31 2005, 03:28 PM Post #57 |
|
Admiral
|
Dr. Noah, Thanks. Two of my friends--one a chemist and another an anthropologist--frequently voice how carbon-dating is often inaccurate and misleading. I weigh what they have to say against what proponents of the technique have to say. I believe there is a balance. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dr. Noah | May 31 2005, 03:30 PM Post #58 |
|
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
|
There's a significant window of variability in that you can only generally date some thing such as 50-500 years old, 500-1000 etc. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Fesarius | May 31 2005, 03:40 PM Post #59 |
|
Admiral
|
^^^ That is helpful. So, nothing is older than 500 years old? J/K.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dr. Noah | May 31 2005, 03:42 PM Post #60 |
|
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
|
ha ha. :rolleyes: |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Spiritual Journeys · Next Topic » |


1:53 PM Jul 11