• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Apple Didn't Fall - It Was Pushed

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Apple Didn't Fall - It Was Pushed

    Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory

    KANSAS CITY, KS—As the debate over the teaching of evolution in public schools continues, a new controversy over the science curriculum arose Monday in this embattled Midwestern state. Scientists from the Evangelical Center For Faith-Based Reasoning are now asserting that the long-held "theory of gravity" is flawed, and they have responded to it with a new theory of Intelligent Falling.

    "Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, 'God' if you will, is pushing them down," said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.

    Burdett added: "Gravity—which is taught to our children as a law—is founded on great gaps in understanding. The laws predict the mutual force between all bodies of mass, but they cannot explain that force. Isaac Newton himself said, 'I suspect that my theories may all depend upon a force for which philosophers have searched all of nature in vain.' Of course, he is alluding to a higher power."

    Founded in 1987, the ECFR is the world's leading institution of evangelical physics, a branch of physics based on literal interpretation of the Bible.

    According to the ECFR paper published simultaneously this week in the International Journal Of Science and the adolescent magazine God's Word For Teens!, there are many phenomena that cannot be explained by secular gravity alone, including such mysteries as how angels fly, how Jesus ascended into Heaven, and how Satan fell when cast out of Paradise.

    The ECFR, in conjunction with the Christian Coalition and other Christian conservative action groups, is calling for public-school curriculums to give equal time to the Intelligent Falling theory. They insist they are not asking that the theory of gravity be banned from schools, but only that students be offered both sides of the issue "so they can make an informed decision."

    "We just want the best possible education for Kansas' kids," Burdett said.

    Proponents of Intelligent Falling assert that the different theories used by secular physicists to explain gravity are not internally consistent. Even critics of Intelligent Falling admit that Einstein's ideas about gravity are mathematically irreconcilable with quantum mechanics. This fact, Intelligent Falling proponents say, proves that gravity is a theory in crisis.

    "Let's take a look at the evidence," said ECFR senior fellow Gregory Lunsden."In Matthew 15:14, Jesus says, 'And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.' He says nothing about some gravity making them fall—just that they will fall. Then, in Job 5:7, we read, 'But mankind is born to trouble, as surely as sparks fly upwards.' If gravity is pulling everything down, why do the sparks fly upwards with great surety? This clearly indicates that a conscious intelligence governs all falling."

    Critics of Intelligent Falling point out that gravity is a provable law based on empirical observations of natural phenomena. Evangelical physicists, however, insist that there is no conflict between Newton's mathematics and Holy Scripture.

    "Closed-minded gravitists cannot find a way to make Einstein's general relativity match up with the subatomic quantum world," said Dr. Ellen Carson, a leading Intelligent Falling expert known for her work with the Kansan Youth Ministry. "They've been trying to do it for the better part of a century now, and despite all their empirical observation and carefully compiled data, they still don't know how."

    "Traditional scientists admit that they cannot explain how gravitation is supposed to work," Carson said. "What the gravity-agenda scientists need to realize is that 'gravity waves' and 'gravitons' are just secular words for 'God can do whatever He wants.'"

    Some evangelical physicists propose that Intelligent Falling provides an elegant solution to the central problem of modern physics.

    "Anti-falling physicists have been theorizing for decades about the 'electromagnetic force,' the 'weak nuclear force,' the 'strong nuclear force,' and so-called 'force of gravity,'" Burdett said. "And they tilt their findings toward trying to unite them into one force. But readers of the Bible have already known for millennia what this one, unified force is: His name is Jesus."

    Courtesy of The Onion

    #2
    Originally posted by Lucifer Box
    "Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, 'God' if you will, is pushing them down," said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.
    Sounds fine by me -- push that guy off Westminster Abbey, lets see if God will push him down thus expressing his view over his sinful living.

    Comment


      #3
      So good you get it again

      Atheist changes his mind - There is a God after all.

      Atheist changes his mind

      Tom Harpur

      The Toronto Star


      "There is a God, atheist believes." This pre-Christmas headline graced a story about the conversion to faith of one of the best-known British atheists of our time, Anthony Flew. God will not have been surprised - or even particularly moved - by this announcement, but thinkers and teachers in the English-speaking world will certainly sit up and pay attention.

      Flew has been a leading warrior for atheism for more than 50 years with a flood of articles, debates, and books to his credit. Oddly enough, our paths crossed briefly during the stirring months after he first dropped his major bombshell, an article based upon a paper first read to the Oxford Socratic Club. It was called "Theology and Falsification" and argued that since the evidence for God can't be subjected to the kind of falsification which is always possible in the empirical realm of science (where you create a theory and then test it by the hard data of experimentation), it is virtually meaningless.

      The Socratic Club, a weekly religious forum for debate and discussion, was chaired by C.S. Lewis and I had the privilege of becoming a member of it in the fall of 1951 during first term at Oxford. I remember Flew and his numerous cohorts who dominated philosophy at the time, including such worthies as A.J. Ayer, and the Logical Positivist, Professor Gilbert Ryle. Since my philosophy tutor, Richard Robinson, was also an atheist, it was an interesting atmosphere for candidates for "holy orders" like me to think and study in.

      Flew campaigned for his initial "no-God" faith for half a century while holding teaching posts at several different British universities and by regular lecture tours in the United States and Canada. His essential argument remained the same: the "evidence" for God falls like a pack of cards under scientific scrutiny.

      Now, at the age of 81, Flew has recanted. As the story announcing his change of heart put it: "He now believes in God, more or less, based upon scientific evidence." He says so in a new book, God and Philosophy, to be published next year and in a new video made for TV.

      Flew first hinted at his seismic shift in a letter to the August issue of Britain's Philosophy Now Magazine. He wrote: "It has become inordinately difficult even to begin to think about constructing a naturalistic (i.e. God-free) theory of the evolution of that first reproducing organism."

      In his video Has Science Discovered God? he clarifies this by saying that current investigations of DNA have shown "by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce (life), that intelligence must have been involved."

      In other words, some kind of super-intelligence is, he now realizes, the only adequate explanation for the origins of life and the complex multiplicity of the natural world.

      There is a slight catch, however, in the "more or less" part of this story. Orthodox believers in all faiths and camps will have to wait a long time before Flew comes knocking at their door seeking admission and acceptance.

      He has said that he is probably best labelled as a deist like Thomas Jefferson, that is, one who believes in a God who creates the world and then lets it run much in the fashion of a clockmaker who sets things going and then leaves it alone. This is not a God who gets involved in people's lives or who is in the business of answering prayer.

      The AP story, by religion specialist Richard Ostling, quotes Flew thus: "I'm thinking of a God very different from the God of the Christian and far and away from the God of Islam, because both are depicted as omnipotent, cosmic Saddam Husseins."

      He went on to add, however - and this is quite significant in my view - that "it could be a person in the sense of a being that has intelligence and purpose, I suppose." He's not thinking of a person as we think of persons (God as the "Big-Guy-in-the-Sky"), but rather of a being who can best be described as trans-personal or meta-personal instead.

      Theologians and philosophers in particular will await his book with some excitement. It will be interesting to see how far his "personalizing" of a Supreme Intelligence goes. Deism, itself, a sort of "natural religion," first came into fashion in the 17th and 18th centuries in England. The philosopher John Locke objected to being called a deist, but his book The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695) profoundly influenced the movement.

      The classical exposition of deism is J. Toland's Christianity Not Mysterious (finished at Oxford in 1696) in which he argued against the ideas of revelation and the supernatural altogether, maintaining instead belief in a God wholly comprehensible by human reason. He narrowly escaped prison over this and his books were burned in Ireland, his native land.

      Tom Harpur
      Sola gratia

      Sola fide

      Soli Deo gloria

      Comment


        #4
        Of course he is right, partially. There is no such thing as gravity. The Earth sucks.
        I am not qualified to give the above advice!

        The original point and click interface by
        Smith and Wesson.

        Step back, have a think and adjust my own own attitude from time to time

        Comment


          #5
          "Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, 'God' if you will, is pushing them down," said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.

          Ah well, that's rubbished the "Oral(?) Roberts University physics departments' credibility.
          The vegetarian option.

          Comment


            #6
            It didn't fall, it fell down the stairs by itself
            Do you think people who pack the confectionary into boxes at fudge making factories tell people what they do for a living?

            Comment


              #7
              Surely there is a flaw in gravitational theory. Hence M Theory

              Oral Roberts University
              What sort of name is Oral Roberts!? Sounds like a service offered!
              Autom...Sprow...Canna...Tik banna...Sandwol...But no sera smee

              Comment


                #8
                Mmmm.... OK, so gravitational theory is flawed. Electromagnetic theory is flawed. All theories based on gravitational theories are flawed. Right.
                Now if I am not mistaken, most of the applied engineering of today, in whichever field they are, are based on theories that are based on these theories. And lots of it work.

                Now if the religious revisionists have a better theory, I'd like to hear it and, more to the point, I'd like to see what invention and engineering they have built based on their own theory. come on, I want to see a Jesus Car, a Jesus Radio, a Jesus Ship, a Jesus Computer! Where are they? Where are the Christian Inventors?
                Chico, what time is it?

                Comment


                  #9
                  Rebecca are you being serious?
                  Sola gratia

                  Sola fide

                  Soli Deo gloria

                  Comment


                    #10
                    yes!
                    Chico, what time is it?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X