Matthew Le God

Claims such as the God she believes in created the heavens and earth prevent her from potentially search an answer supported by evidence. That is a harmful mindset both for yourself and to pass on to those you interact with, it leave you vulnerable to believing all kinds of nonsensical bullshit and being conned. It is puzzling why you think I've said it would be harmful aspects of her life such as shopping or phoning a bank. You've twisted things again.

You clearly have not remotely understood because your second sentence is a mess again. I said no such thing. Claiming Elvis is still alive is a theory in one usage of the word theory. But it is not a scientific theory. Give the video a watch.

@egg Maybe the Royal Institution of Science can help you understand different usages of 'theory'

A week ago a terrible Sheff United team won at Old Trafford. Even with our injuries, our starting XI tonight will be better than the Sheff United team. I'm not saying that means we will win or even get a draw, as we remain big underdogs. But a result would hardly be a complete surprise.

You know word's can have more than one usage don't you? The 'theory of gravity' is not using the word theory in the same way that someone says 'I have a theory John Westwood is literally a fish'.

I'm not sure why you've restricted this solely to creation. But as you have... believing an idea just because you like it is harmful as it restricts human development. It is healthy to say you don't know an answer to a question, that gives the motivation to seek the evidence that gives an answer. Religion claims to have the answers already and that its followers don't need to search anymore. That is a harmful mindset both for yourself and to pass on to those you interact with.

Only because there are multiple usages of the word theory. When used in science a theory is not a guess, it is supported with demonstrable testable evidence. In other usage a theory can be a guess as the word has multiple definitions. 'Creation theory' is not in any way a scientific theory as it has not falsifiable, demonstrable, testable, repeatable evidence to support it.

Reed has Premier League quality, but which players were Hesketh and Sims blocked by who they are better than?

The scripture itself says it shouldn't be cherry picked. So if you believe the creation myth then you are instructed by the scripture to believe the rest or it is fallible and not the perfect word of a deity. Those beliefs impact your actions in every day life and your actions impact others.

Your second sentence is a logical incoherent mess.

I honestly can not remember your answer to why it isn't genocide. Many Christians believe the flood story is the literal truth. How is drowning millions of people not evil? Even if you think it is a moral tale and not literally true, those people did not deserve to die. Killing them is evil.

You appear to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the different uses of the word theory. A scientific theory is not a guess. 'Creation theory' is not using the word theory using the scientific definition and usage of the word theory.

I don't see how that makes it 'shady' Nor why it rules out also buying a European team.

Why is that shady or concerning?

Why aren't you reminding me of you excuse for the evil genocidal flood creating God? That is wriggling.

The question I was replying to was 'When did time start?'. I said I don't know. Saying nothing can exist before time as existence by definition is temporal is not an answer that says when time started. Not sure how you have managed to conflate that!

Remind me how you wriggle out of a global flood not being genocide. I can't remember every post of yours from over a year ago.

Where in that post did I say when time started? 🙄 You appear to read different things from my words!

I don't know. You appear to have an issue with I don't know as an answer. But saying I don't know is better than making up an answer without evidence.

It was an answer I got. What is your answer then?

For something to be a 'maybe' also requires evidence that it is even remotely plausible.

Claim - global flood that killed everyone apart from one small group was an evil genocide Answer I got - they weren't human so it isn't evil to kill them all You honestly think that is a valid counter argument? 🙄

1) Your description of option 2 is not accurate. 2) What method have you used to determine plausibility? 3) Why have you ruled in a man in the sky being an option, but not a flying spaghetti monster or various other answers?

Scientific theories are based on demonstrable, testable, repeatable evidence. They are the highest point in science. Religious theories are a different usage of the word theory, a colloquial 'guess'.

- Beliefs impact actions - Actions impact people Irrational beliefs cause harm to society. That is why you should care. You should want to believe as many true things and as few false things as possible. Science is the path to doing that, not religion which claims without evidence it already has the answer.