"The Big Bang" and the Bible.

[Chook]

Those having been reared in a Christian environment are urged to believe in the literal "Six Day Creation" of the bible's book of Genesis.

Is there any remote possibility of this happening? (e.g. light originally being much faster, or something similar.)

All those respecting science experience a "hard time" in church and it would be nice to have a definite proof of the impossibility of taking the Genesis creation story literally (although it is believed that the sequence of events would scientifically feasable.)

I would appreciate your informed views.

[Qayyim]

Ok, as far back as our technology can tell, the Earth was created about 4 billion years ago. Now, that doesn't mean that there was no time before that. Many billions of years passed before our own sun became a new-born star.

From reading the Bible/Torah and speaking with religious officials, the Earth began about 260,000 years ago. This is IMPOSSIBLE! We have evidence of homosapiens living in that period, let alone the universe!

Don't be confused when I say 260,000 years ago. I don't mean that this was wehn modern man set foot on Earth according to the Bible, that is when the universe as we know began, which cannot be true. The Bible's rendition of creation cannot prove that our Universe began some 260,000 years ago. Nothing supports it (other than "the word of God").

[Josh]

Actually the bible says that creation happened 5764 years ago. This year is 5764 in the hebrew calandar which supposedly begins at creation...

There is a book (i've noted it in another thread too i think a while ago) called 'Genesis and the Big Bang' by Dr Gerald L. Schroeder. It basically uses quantum theory and modern physics and science to show that there is no discrepency between science's version of the beginning and the religious version. A good read.

[kashi]

Chook:

it is believed that the sequence of events would scientifically feasable

Genesis:

...And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day... 1:11 And God said, Let the earth put forth grass, herbs yielding seed, and fruit-trees bearing fruit after their kind, wherein is the seed thereof, upon the earth: and it was so. 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, herbs yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit, wherein is the seed thereof, after their kind: and God saw that it was good. 1:13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day.... 1:16 And God made the two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 1:17 And God set them in the firmament of heaven to give light upon the earth, 1:18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 1:19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day."

So God created the Sun after 4 consequtive days and nights hey!? Doesn't sound terribly feasable to me.

Kashi

[jenda111]

first of all it is "feasible",but that is only minor , compared to general ignorance of science(the only hope to understand anything).
religious texts notoriously lack any science,magic is what powers those texts.
Most have been translated a number of times,usually to suit the breakaway factions who have
found "the real meaning".viz anglican-catholic schism,eastern orthodox-coptic argument ..etc
I'd sugest to read more and take less on faith.Science may not have all the answers,but unlike
religion,it is open to new discoveries,
jenda111

[Faulkner]

As Kashi points out, God creates "light", and THEN "the sun"!? Doesn't make sense!

It is absurd to take the Bible literally. But that's not to say that it is a great piece of ancient literature - perhaps one of the first great science fiction epics??? The Old Testament is full of spaceships, astronauts, monsters, atomic explosions, etc... Great stuff! It would make a great film! It is also extremely sordid, and I wonder why the ol' censors haven't given it an R rating yet? - incest, bestiality, prostitution, homosexuality, child sacrifice, sex & violence galore! Personally, I love sordidness, but then I am over-18! Let's not forget that central character, "God" (= an astronaut? certainly a man-like entity who descends to Earth in "clouds" & "thunder"&#33, who is portrayed as spiteful, arrogant, constantly changing his mind, often seemingly illogical in his actions...(ie very HUMAN indeed&#33.

I believe there is a "religion" that reflects & embodies the TRUE state of the universe, and our spiritual existence within it, and what lies BEYOND...however we have not invented it yet. I don't think Christians/Muslims/Jews/Hindus etc etc even come CLOSE!

[eggplant]

We're overlooking at least two options here... What is the legnth of Gods day? ergo what's the metaphor and relation to science of the time. (What does it really mean?) and again #2 translation issues... Some versions I've read have Caine and able getting their wives from "the other people" who lived outside the garden...
The old testament is riddled with Sci-fi stuff. Only when we make it happen with science can we explian it... What looks like a giant Kiln, has overbaringly bright light emmitting from the door and has an angle/person walk out? Why close encounters of the third kind! Meanwhile there was also ergot and other causes of hallucinations throughout history that could easily be made into a Good book...
Please don't get me wrong, I've never had any issue period, between the two science v. religion. They are descriptions of a reality, maybe not mine, but educational and moving to the point of religious fanaticism and war... People make war because they are angry and afraid.
Whatever faith supports you is a good thing. Whatever communion and brotherhood you can muster helps. This is what religion is for being part of a bigger family... The trick is translating the ignorances of each different reality so they can understand and accept each other. maybe even help...
Yes you could say I'm a dreamer...
And science hasn't explained everything I've observed yet...

[Planetwatcher]

I believe I was involved in a conversation thread like this before.

The single most major problem with the Genesis accounts that we often fail to fully understand what is written. This is compounded by translation errors. :huh:

In a casual reading of the first chapter of the Bible, it appears to say that everything was created in six days some 6,000 years ago where and when nothing existed before. But that is not what it says. <_<

These verses do NOT say there was nothing before verse 3 when God said, "Let there be light".
It does NOT say there was no big bang.
It does NOT say there was no universe some 4.5 billion years ago.

But self-proclaimed religious leaders assume it does, because such are their personal views, which they want to attribute to God because it makes since to them. But what makes more since is understanding what we read. :blink:

Verse 1 says God made heaven and Earth in the beginning. If you want to assume, you may assume that it was perfect when it was first made. h34r:

Verse 2 and following appears to elaberate on how God got involved in making everything from nothing in six days, but appearances can be decieving. <_<

Properly translated, verse 2 actually says that something occured to CAUSE the Earth to become without form and void, and that this CAUSED darkness upon the face of the deep.

From that point on is the story of how God REMADE heaven and Earth in six days.
So what was there prior to when God spoke light into being? :unsure:

The Bible does not address that to any extent, so people wrongfully assume what we are asked to believe without ever checking it out. h34r:

Whatever science presents does NOT counterdict the Bible. It only counterdicts what people missunderstand about the Bible and Science.

[eggplant]

I wish I&#39;d said that...

[Planetwatcher]

Why do you wish you said that?

[Josh]

As Kashi points out, God creates "light", and THEN "the sun"&#33;? Doesn&#39;t make sense&#33;

If you have a "big bang" and think of it as an explosion which it would most certainly have been given the theory then there would have been energy dissipated as light ... as with most explosions. It is possible to have light before the sun ... just as we do in the theory that has a big bang and then millions and millions of years later the evolution of the sun.

I&#39;m not saying i agree with one or the other .. just pointing out that they can both work .. and together.

[Planetwatcher]

There would certainly had to of been light before there was a Sun, but that doesn&#39;t mean that the Sun was the ONLY source of light. B)
Now I&#39;m surprised I haven&#39;t been asked to account for a 4 billion year old Sun when light has only been around less then 6,000 years. :unsure:
Anyone who wants to line up for that one I&#39;ll save you the time and effort.

When God said,"Let there be light," does not mean it didn&#39;t exist before. :huh:
It just means it didn&#39;t exist then. In fact the Bible doesn&#39;t say anything about anything not existing before. Only that it was without form and void.
Well if you can not see an item because the light with which to see it is not there, does not make it not there, (Which is also the current arguement in favor of dark matter) however it does make it without form and void. Why? Because you can&#39;t see it, makes it without form, and void because not seeing it would be just as if it were absent. h34r:
Are you folks still with me? :blink:

A terrible cattastrophy occured sometime in the past which caused a perfect Earth to become without form and void. In this cattastrophy, light became non-existant.
It was around before, but was gone for a period of time. <_<
So naturally the first thing which was brought back into being was light. B)

It was called day and divided from the darkness which was called night.
So the Sun which would have been what astronomy calls a black body was still around, and it&#39;s light was right from the first day. The division of day and night, light and darkness, came about by the Earth spinning on it&#39;s axles. :P

By the forth day, two great lights are made. Doesn&#39;t mean the objects from where the light came wasn&#39;t there, or that they didn&#39;t emit light at all, but two great lights were made. One for day and a lesser one for night. The sources of light were not named, but readers assume it to be the Sun and the Moon. h34r:
So much for the light.

[kashi]

Why is it that everyone feels compelled to go to extraordinary lengths find a way to make the biblical stories fit in with what we "know" as a result of science? Why are they any more likely to be correct than say the Australian Aboriginal stories of creation, which involve all sorts of amazing creatures?

Planetwatcher discussed how people&#39;s personal views often get in the way of their interpretations of the bible (I have a lot of respect for this argument). Now I was obviously not raised to be religious, but the very fact that people are putting so much effort into trying to defend the bible&#39;s validity, demonstrates that their own personal views are getting in the way, in my opinion&#33; Why do we hold this text in such high esteem? It&#39;s just an old book (dare I say a not very well written one) that has been edited hundreds of times.

Kashi

[Josh]

Not very well written? It&#39;s a best seller&#33;&#33;

[imported_ROB]

ALL THE BIBLE IS IS AN EARLY ATTEMPT BY PEOPLE NOT AS CLUED UP AS US TO BUT AN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION THAT WILL ALL WAYS BE ASKED BY EVERY SINGLE PERSON EVER BORN WHY AND WHERE
THANKFULLY THESE DAYS WE DO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS GOING ON THANKS TO MISTAKES IN KNOWLEGE LIKE THE TALE CALLED THE BIBLE. "GOD CREATED ADAM AND EVE" THEN ADAM AND EVE HAD TWO SONS IN BIOLOGY DOSNT THAT SENTENCE FALL FLAT TWO SONS WHO THEN IS THE NEXT MOTHER? WHERE ARE THE MENTION OF EVELUTION DINOSAURS (WHICH WE CAN PROVE BY THE REMAINS FOUND THESE PEOPLE THOUGHT THE WORLD WAS FLAT THAT STARS WERE ONLY PIN HOLES IN A GLASS DOME OVER THE EARTH RELIGION IS OUT DATED AND HAS A LOT OF BLAME IN EVERY WAR EVER FOUGHT ON THIS EARTH :angry:

I DONT CLAIM TO UNDERSTAND EVERY THING THAT HAPPENS IN THIS UNIVERSE BUT FROM BEING 5 YEARS OLD FOUND FLOORS IN THE BIBLE AND FOUND IT FUNNY THAT SO MANY PEOPLE THE WORLD OVER ARE SUCKED IN TO A FICTISIOUS STORY THAT HAS NO PROOF AT ALL

THANK YOU AND GOOD NIGHT



WENT OFF ON ONE A BIT THERE BUT AT LEAST YOU CAN ALL SEE WHAT MY BELIF IN GOD IS 0.00000

:angry:

[Arramon]

a place called home...


figure yourself looking from the outside of all this....
and that your scope of consciousness expands even farther beyond this...
to other realms either similar in nature or not.... you can create as you see fit.... and change things to your suting... align... alter... explode.... implode....
expand... contract....

if you could do this anywhere at anytime.... the moments to you between the events may appear quickly, becuz of the dimensions you possess....

but... beeing smaller ...... ahem,...... alot.. smaller.... these events may seem to take millenia.....

so.... in God&#39;s eyes..... or eye.... or millions of eyes..... whatever... His events would be realtime... to Him..... happening as He makes it happen, or allows to happen , or whatever the reasons for whatever....


this picture is just too awesome for me to really understand.... the blue line looking area in the middle is where the mily way is...

here&#39;s a good listing of newer pics being released...


when you&#39;re bigger than everything, i&#39;m pretty sure time would be relative your size.... so if when Genesis was written, and the author/visionary/prophet/messenger was seeing what happened in the creation of earth... it may have looked like everything was forming rapidly... but that was from the Big Man&#39;s perspective.... not ours.... =)


its not time yet for us to know these things....


=) but i do like reading what everyone thinks....

. ..-={A}=-.. .

[JimSue]

Maybe its like looking down on ants or mabe like them looking up at us ,what is there perspective to us?

[eggplant]

Reply to planet watcher...
I like what you said because it was more succint than I usually am.
To wit:

possible answer to Kashi,

We try to blend the stories for those who fear the consequences of "seperating" them... meaning only one can be correct. Fear of science has a long and glorius history. So does fear of religion... if we can make peace using each others languages for the benefit of all by mutual understanding and education, we might remove some of the fears we all have about not being correct. We reflect and refract on the bible or christianity because it is deeply embedded in our culture, and if the intellectuals are to have any influence on our culture it helps if they are widely educated...
Your point is perfectly valid and hopefully well taken. And I&#39;m not sure my reply says what I first thought when I read your post, but there it is... ;)

If we try to push that rope, "reconciling religion vs science," like pushing any rope, you get a pile of rope at your feet, and some untangling to do.

[braveheart]

Been away and only just read all the comments - probably a little late to join now, but here&#39;s my 2-pence worth&#33; Personally I have no problem reconciling the biblical account of the creation and the present day scientific one.

Although some have hinted at this, no-one has mentioned that the Bible also states somewhere that to God "... a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day". Surely this leaves no doubt that one should not interpret the 6-day creation literally as "being created in 6 days of 24 hours" (as this concept of time is only valid on our little planet).

We know that space time and earth time are not the same. Also, we as humans live in a 3 dimensional world with time as a 4th dimension. However, there might well be other dimensions which we cannot perceive but in which another being(s) could exist. We already toil with concepts such as time/space warps (or bending space), worm holes and even parallel universes (multiverse?) etc. Someone greater than the universe or living in another dimension would not be bound by time.

However, one should not lose sight of the fact that the Bible (and other religious texts) was written by and for laymen (non-scientific) during a time when most of the concepts we understand today would not have made sense. Consider that even most of modern science is largely incomprehesible to the average man today, e.g try to conceptualise how large the (known) universe is considering that the light reaching earth now from distant galaxies may have been travelling around 18 billion years&#33; Quantum physics and concepts such as dark matter, anti-matter, speed of light changing, gravity bending light (and space?) etc. really make little sense to John Doe. In another thousand or more years scientific knowledge might well explain concepts we haven&#39;t even thought of yet, and a lay person writing a popular book today can surely not be judged on scientific inaccuracies which might provide plausable explanations with our present knowledge base (and to some extent perhaps makes sense today) but could be proven completely wrong in future. Just imagine trying to explain space travel to a person a mere 100 or so years ago when man had not even managed to master the art of flying&#33;

In my opinion creation is not complete and is still happening around us every day with new stars/galaxies being born and evolution taking place in all living things.
I find the vastness of the universe and the evolution of the universe (from a big bang&#33 and the immense diversity of live forms (and there probable evolution from single atoms/molecules and eventually cells) absolutely mind boggling and perhaps just a wee bit too complex for all of it to have just happened by chance. After all, where did the energy/matter which resulted in the big bang come from and why, and how did the vacuum of space in which the universe is expanding come about? Popular belief is that eventually the universe will collapse upon itself again (contract) and another big bang could happen with the whole process being repeated again (Or how many times has it been repeated before?&#33 Perhaps these concepts could make nice topics for discussion with our limited ability to understand and conceptualise them even with present day knowledge and brain power&#33 Perhaps religion (in any form) is man&#39;s way of acknowledging that a greater power than mankind exists and helps explain that which he cannot explain.

[memo]

Well i have no long and scientific phrase to say,but any of you that have been in combat remember some mean and nasty gi tha has killed men in hand to hand combat.lay there dieing from a land mine pleading with god to forgive him and tell him there is no GOD.

[civhawk]

IF it could be proven scientifically then no faith would be necessary. Believe me scientist have plenty of faith, they just call them theories. B)


"Dreams are just another battlefield."

[Arramon]

all a part of the same organism of life...
..what some call creation... others eternity....
...and others armegeddon...
life and death expresses itself throughout everything and everyone...

[joyceg98]

My father taught anatomy in a medical school in Tennessee while the "monkey law" was still in force. Every year he faced the quandary of how to teach embryology without talking about evolution. Every year I helped him write letters to all the state senators and representatives arguing that science is not in conflict with the Bible, rather the Bible explains science, simply and beautifully, to a primitive people who farmed their land and tended their flocks. Just as you don&#39;t start off telling children about the Big Bang theory and the splitting of atoms or alterations in the DNA, you begin with parables and allegories that make sense to the people you are teaching -- appropriate to their age and/or their experience.

If we take the word "day" to mean "era," and look beyond the simple verses that describe each "day," the scientific facts line up quite nicely as huge expansions of the simple explanation.

In fact the Hebrew word used in these verses can be translated as "aeon" so it is not intended to be a 24-hour day as we understand it.

Some people say that the dinosaurs prove that the Bible is wrong. Tennessee&#39;s law allowing schools to fire any teacher who taught that evolution was a fact was repealed in March 1996, only seven years ago.

My own belief is that the Bible is not intended to be a detailed explanation of how the world was created, but rather a simple and concise explanation for a simple people of the wonder of the creation of the world and the interrelationship of the complex plants and animals that inhabit this space together, and to teach us to take care of one another and be nice to one another. As we understand the details of those plants and animals, the wonder only increases. Each one is an "incredible machine&#33;"

I think that all people of good will, of every faith, would agree that "getting along" is the essence of the message in nearly all religions of the world. If we would focus on our common goals, rather than on the details that separate us, we would all be better off.

Happy New Year&#33; - Happy Birthday, World&#33; - and Peace to us all.

[Arramon]

by far the best post i&#39;ve read as of late...

...if only all could see like this...

[jmpty]

It seems to me that this is all much ado about nothing.
As humans,we always seem to think about things as "beginning" and "ending"when all the matter and energy that exists has always existed, only in different forms.
Methinks we should just relax, learn, and marvel at the beauty and wonder of our universe.

[Planetwatcher]

There are a lot of very good thoughts and responses here. Even those who disaggree have managed to refrain from name calling and cutting down one another. Perhaps there is hope for us yet.

A page or two back someone asked about the dinosaurs. I believe I answered that one in a page prior to that. But just to recapp.
The Bible does not address the issue of dinosaurs. It doesn&#39;t say they did or did not exist. Anyone who claims the Bible does is reading their own view point into the matter.

Again the biggest confusion is that most people think that the first verse of the Bible it a simple statement of the creation, and the rest of the chapter simply elaberates on it. Not so.
Actually the first two verses are simple statements of origional creation and the distruction of the origional creation. It may well be that dinosaurs, cavemen, and wooly mamaths all existed in this time frame. The Bible does not state either way, but it does say that Adam and Eve were to replenish or repopulate the Earth.

During the distruction of the first creation, light ceased to exist. That was the first thing brought back. Then the rest of the chapter tells how everything else in the current creation was brought about.
It is just that simple. Now one can believe what they want or believe nothing at all
Proof is illrelivent, because neither side can really prove anything either way.
It&#39;s a matter of faith in what one sees or faith in what one does not see, but comes to see it after the faith.

None of us can prove Newton existed. Or George Washington, or Abe Lincoln.
We know there is a structure which resembles a giant boat, high on Mt. Ararat.
No one can prove how it got there. Maybe extra-terristal beings put it there, maybe it carried a man named Noah. Who can prove either?

We have found sediments in layers of Earth which implies there was once a universal flood. Was it the flood of Noah? Or something else yet to be explained?
Again, who can say for sure?

We have fosselized bones of giant creatures which man kind has never seen alive.
Are they aliens from another world? Or fallen titans from some past remote war?
Or long extinct animals of some kind who died for reasons unknown?
I don&#39;t pretend to know for sure, but then you don&#39;t know either.

As for how the two sons of Adam and Eve propagated the human race, I explained that one too. Adam and Eve had sons and daughtors after the first two sons.
In fact they lived and bore children for over 800 years afterward. How many children can one couple have in 800 years? How many more children can those childern grow up to have? We can propagate at least three generations in an average human reproductive span of 40 or so years. By the time the first generation had stoped procreating, their grandchildren, and sometimes great-grandchildren are reproducing.
Now what if those early humans had reproductive spans of hundreds of years, and they themselves lived hundreds of years more? How many humans can come to exist in 800 years? But yet something about that is so hard to believe.

Well believe whatever you want, or nothing at all. I know what I believe.

[zephyr46]

When Humans can accept that we will probable never &#39;know it all&#39; killing people over religious differences may stop. Most cultures have creation stories as strange as genesis, I feel sorry for anyone expected to find all the answers in any creation story. I put it to any serious scientist today that the big bang may some day look as strange as genisis does to us today. We do the best understanding as much as we can with what we have now, what the bible has the science dosn&#39;t yet have is a moral code to live by. I have recenty finished reading a book by Brian Swimme &#39;the hidden heart of the cosmos&#39; that proposes a spiritual teaching of the universe and a moral code that encourages a critical non acceptence of the consumer mentality. I recommend it to anyone grappling with religion, capitalism and cosmology.
Some questions have no answers, and we should just deal with it, difficult as this may be

[stephanie_dukie]

Originally posted by kashi@Sep 22 2003, 02:47 AM
Why is it that everyone feels compelled to go to extraordinary lengths find a way to make the biblical stories fit in with what we "know" as a result of science?


It&#39;s just an old book (dare I say a not very well written one)


Kashi

Kashi,

People don’t go out of their way to make biblical stories fit, scientists go out of their way to make them not fit. But for Science precipitating arguments that the bible is wrong, there would be no argument.

It is sadly obvious that you were not given the option of learning the truth about religion as evident by your post on the “4 day creation”, but religion is and will be a staple to MOST of this world. If you would have been educated about what the bible says, you would have known that Gods definitions on the word "days" are not as we know it to mean. The views may differ as far as peoples practices, but none the less, It is not people who go out of their way, it is the scientist who spend thousands of hours trying to prove it wrong.

The Bible has been around longer then science. If there wasn’t any truth to it, it would not have survived and flourished as religion has. Besides that, it is obvious thru reading threads on this forum, that science knows very little when it comes to the universe. Scientists backtrack constantly about things they said were fact. People who are or have a belief system and the teachers of it, NEVER backtrack, EVER.


Your still a child Kashi. Your 18 and barely cooked. As you mature from the teenage state, your views will change. I feel sorry that you have grown up in such an environment that has instilled such angry feelings about religion. That angry heart of your will make your life a very unhappy place to be.

[imported_ROB]

stephanie_dukie

The Bible has been around longer then science. If there wasn’t any truth to it, it would not have survived and flourished as religion has.

THE REASON THE BIBLE HAS BEEN AROUND LONGER THAN SCIENCE IS BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO WROTE THE STORYS CAME FROM A TIME HUMAN THOUGHT WAS LIMITED TO RITUALS AND BASIC KNOWLEDGE THAT THE AVERAGE 10 YEAR OLD WOULD KNOW TODAY.
SCIENCE HAS A LOT OF THINGS TO ANSWER TO I AGREE THE H BOMB SUPER WEAPONS OF MASS DISTRUCTION BUT THE ROOT OF MOST WARS ARE RELIGION.

IF THERE WAS A CREATOR WHY ARE THERE SO MANY RELIGIONS?
THE WHOLE THING IS ANTIQUATED YOU CANT PROVE THE IS NO GOD BUT THE STORY IS SO OUT OF DATE ITS HIGHLY UNLIKLY

AGE HASNT GOT ANY THING TO DO WITH WHAT PEOPLE THINK TWO CENTURYS AGO IF I WERE TO SAY PEOPLE WOULD FLY I WOULD BE TOLD I WAS MAD WHY IN THIS DAY AND AGE MUST PEOPLE STAY IN THOUGHTS DARK AGES THEY MAY ASWELL WORSHIP DRAGONS AND UNICORNS WIZARDS &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

SCIENCE INPROVES LIFE FOR THE MOST AND THE COUNTRYS THAT STAY FANATICAL ABOUT RELIGIONS RESEMBLE THE WAY WESTERN COUNTRYS WERE CENTURYS AGO

GOD CREATED ADAM AND EVE" THEN ADAM AND EVE HAD TWO SONS IN BIOLOGY DOSNT THAT SENTENCE FALL FLAT TWO SONS WHO THEN IS THE NEXT MOTHER? WHERE ARE THE MENTION OF EVELUTION DINOSAURS

THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIVE IN A GOD

[imported_ROB]

that science knows very little when it comes to the universe. Scientists backtrack constantly about things they said were fact. People who are or have a belief system and the teachers of it, NEVER backtrack, EVER.

THATS BECAUSE SCIENCE LOOKS AT THINGS PROPERLY SCIENTIFICALY AND CAN ADMIT TO WHEN ITS PROVED WRONG SCIENCE IS PROGRESSIVE RELIGION IS STUCK IN THE PAST

RELIGIOUS PEOPLE STAY RELIGIOUS BECAUSE MOST COUNTRYS THAT ARE RELIGIOUS WONT ALLOW ANY OTHER THOUGHT
A LITTLE LIKE THE GREEK PHILLOSIPHERS WHO WERE PUT TO DEATH FOR DARING TO ASK QUESTIONS DAWIN WAS SHUNNED NOW HES A GENIOUS RELIGION WAS GOOD FOR PEOPLE WITH LITTLE KNOWLEDGE YEARS AGO WHEN THAT WAS EXCEPTABLE TO THINK BUT ARE THOUGHTHS EVOLVE THE SAME WAY WE CAME TO BE HERE WHERE IS NATURAL SELECTION IN THE BIBLE ? THAT THOUGHT MAKES MORE SENSE THAN US SUDDENLY ARIVING BECAUSE GOD WANTED US RELIGION IS A GOOD TOOL TO KEEP A POPULATION UNDER CONTROL IT HAS NO PLACE IN TODAYS WORLD .