Well what do you expect me to scientificly bable on to?
The psudo magnetic force, as related to polygons, indicate that there is some subatomic mass in the nuclear level. Therefore, that implys that there is a force of nature beyond the eyespectrum. That can be proven by the ganacosis level of nuclear blasts, spursing out when force is applied to them. So, with these hard core facts, the solid theory deriven from them, is that, the force beyond nature really is God. He wrote his name on every cell, we just dont have microscopes to see that small.
There topic proven. ???
We don't expect babbling. We expect the merest hint that you've actually read the numerous replies and information therein, rather than just looked for ways to ignore it. If you're writing off replies as 'babbling', it just shows you're simply not willing to even try to understand the, because most of us have bent over backwards to phrase stuff in as clear and concise a manner as possible.
If there is such talk, im not the one to ask. Im not a scientific man. I know general facts about Evolution, ID, and Natural Selection, Genetic Mutation, Surivial of the Fittest etc., tho some, (as have been pointed out) are incorrectly stated.
Prove a beleif that is proved in various ways (GOD\Creationism\Christianity). Your beleifs are proved in single lined ways(Evolution,ID,etc.); thus more 'hard core facts', and 'scientific terms'.
As i said, I will get some books sometime and quote and respond form them, soon (week or so). Il try to get whatever else info i can from the (dammed) net, untill then.
This is very odd. your previous attempts to reconcile the bible - particularly Noahs Ark & the flood - with scientific knowledge have failed. You've not provided any proof, and at best what you have provided is a list of buzzwords, left unexplained, that correlate to scientifically flawed theories. I have no idea what a 'single lined way' is supposed to mean, but I can only assume it comes back to a general ignorance on the weight of evidence supporting evolution (not to mention how that evidence is used to form and revise the theory).
EDIT: God is not a science. God is a being. FAIK, he cant be proved totally by scientific means.
We see that there is a God, and his dealings with us, in the Bible. The old testament is full of how God saved the isralites. The new testament, is how Gods son came and did many miracles, saved the world, etc.
None of which is of any relevance here nor enters the discussion. We've seen both the Catholic church and Church of England endorse evolution. Part of the purpose of ID, of course, is to attack science because it contradicts the
literal reading of the bible (and hence the 'powerbase' of those funding ID), and in turn allow the rather disturbing promotion of religion in the science classroom.
That for one. Today, there are people who, get prayed for, and their illness goes away. They are on their death bed, of cancer, and they are prayed over, and their cancer is totally gone the next day. The SCIENTISTS dont know what hapened, or how or why the cancer went away, dissapeared. I hear of people being raised from the dead, comeing back to life, and walking and talking just like before. I myself have seen people in church services get healed. Iv seen demons being casted out. Demons are on the spiritual level. You cant always see or hear them by our physical eyes and ears. People cant exactly prove they exist, yet many have seen them. Same with god. Many have had visions, like in the bible, nowadays. You cant prove they had it, but they did. People have seen angels. People in the bible have seen angels. How can you prove with science, what people saw?
This is again illustrative of the flaws of relying upon religion as an arguement. Look at your phraseology - 'How can you prove with science, what people saw?'. you've already come up with a conclusion, before even considering how to examine the evidence. We all know the human eye, and the human mind behind it, is prone to exaggeration, misinterpretation, and inserting hidden meaning. That's why we rely upon science as a guide, not the best guess of the eye, because science provides a framework of rational investigation and neutral observation.
There's power in belief. Power over the people who share that belief. How many corrupt televangelists have we seen? Do you go and get a doctor to examine the people you see healed? Do you check the pulse of the person 'raised from the dead'? I hesitate to note that a few centuries ago mental illness was chalked up to being possession.
And even when it does happen, do we have proof of any correlation? 100 people get cancer, 100 familes pray, one goes into remission. And you assume that one person is Gods will, some divine act, even as another 99 are dying. Because it's easier to believe in a miracle than look for a hard answer.
And y'know what? None of this matters to evolution, because evolution is not inexplicable. That's the whole point. Why else, do you think, does the largest Christian denomination in the world support it?
Its a proof on a whole different level, thats what iv been saying. Some of it can coincide and be proven on the scientific level, but ATM i dont know where to start. Few if any.
Explain healing. People go to a 'faith healer' with a tumor or some disease, and they get healed. Faith, beleif. Jesus said 'your faith has made you whole' in one instance. Explain faith. Explain faith healing. Faith in God.
Placebo effect. Explain how people with heart conditions who know others are praying for them have an
increased mortality. Again, off the topic of evolution itself.
I know 
about the spiritual aspect of christianity. A bit less, as you know, about the scientific proofs of it. Yet i know God is real and he exists.
Prove subspace or hperspace exists. You dont know, you cant see it. Its a whole nother freaking realm. Same with heaven\hell. it is a whole nother world, yet we cant see or hear it. We know they exist. Some people have seen heavon (a friend of mine had a vision of hell once) when they almost died. Explain that. Explain the whole 'i saw light' thing many have said. Explain visions, scientificaly. Proficy. Explain how prophets just 'know things'. How Jesus knew, the samarian woman at the well, had 5 husbands. He only just met her a minute ago, and knew that. Prophets have spoken to me, and just knew things. Explain that.
The near death experience (light at the end of the tunnel) is believed to be caused by brain activity within the parts responsible for dreams, aka REM intrusion. There was a recent study supporting it, although a lot of the mechanisms are still being investigated (this is the brilliant thing about science, y'see - no assumptions) and you'd expect a bit of a shortage of willing test subjects.
Anything specified within the bible is to be taken, from a historical perspective, with a liberal pinch of salt. We know it's not the literal truth, because we can disprove a literal reading. If you're wanting to start and promote a religion, you're hardly likely to put it in anything beyond the most positive way, are you? Ultimately, if you want to regard the bible as literal truth, you have to accept every other religious book (Quran, Torah, Bhagavad Gita, Guru Granth Sahib, Vinaya Pitaka, etc) must be true, as they all can cite the same amount of supporting information in pretty much the same liberally interpreted manner.
That's not to say there isn't some historical correlation to the bible, as most myths have some basis in fact.
Prophecy... prophecy can be pretty reasonably said to occur in every religion that we know of; usually it's so vague as to be liberally interpreted in a way to fit the events you pick. Take Nostradamus. Or take Revelations; most non-theologans/historians recognise it as being most likely a disquised attack on Nero (who oppressed Christians as a threat to the empire), but you'll see it cited as evidence for stuff like RFID being the devils mark.
What you have to realise, is that it's very easy to pretend to read someones mind; for example, Derren Brown is a guy in the UK, usually Channel 4, who knows a bit about the psychology of tricking people into thinking he is psychic. And he basically uses subtle casual clues to trick people into this - things like common names or numbers, reciting family members (father, mother, son...) or things of that ilk until he sees a subtle involuntary action, etc. And he manages to convince (and I mena convince, as in 'that's 100% correct') people that, for example, he can read their mind, or dreams, or that he's talked to the dead, or that he knows their entire medical history, etc. It's all about psychology, basically - you can read peoples reactions, use some fairly common nouns or events as 'hints' to get them, and make them think you are geniunely able to read their minds. It's not easy, of course, and I couldn't do it - but do you think all those gypsy palmreaders are psychics?
(Actually, apparently there's a really easy trick you can try. Basically, you go up to a random person. Ask them for something simple and easy, which they'll willing give. Keep asking this for a bit, so they're in a mental chain of politely 'giving' to you. Then ask for their wallet.)
Watch this please!Here's a clip;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDCrXNVCTlY (watch right to the end)
EDIT; this one is of relation even more so;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJjNfHEpFTcRemember; this guy is a professional trickster, to lack a better term. He's a confessed fake, and those 2 clips are from a show showing how easy it is.
Again, evolution isn't challenging your belief in God. It's challenging your literalism, because we can see evidence of evolution, and we can show it works. Are you suggesting that what we cannot see means more than what we can? That an infinite possibility of things that
might not exist override what we know does?
