The Can of Worms called Creation and/or Evolution

[Gold Winger]

We have faith everytime we get into an airplane because we believe that plane will fly. Sometimes the passengers are wrong and the plane falls from the sky.

 

I've never seen a black hole and I'm only taking the word of a bunch of physicists that that they exist. Is that different from religion?

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Yes, it's different. Physicists agree on why airplanes fly, they don't offer a dozen contradictory stories drawn from ancient legends to explain why they fly. Religions, meanwhile, can't even begin to agree on basic concepts like: how many gods exist, how many wives these god(s) say a man can have, or whether people should eat bacon.

[Gold Winger]

" Physicists agree on why airplanes fly . . ."

 

Actually, they don't.

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

OK, which physicist claims fairy dust keeps 'em up?

[skeptic]

Wait, which of the awful G's are we discussing????

[GernBlansten]

Gravity

[John-in-KC]

Let me see if I figure this out...

 

Gold Winger... probably has Wings of Gold, hence is a fair bet to be a Naval Aviator (read pilot) or a Naval Flying Officer (read navigator or weaponeer). I would think aviation physics are of some small import to him.

 

And Merlyn, your skillset in aviation physics is? Nothing in your name or profile, or posting history provides a reliable pointer?

[FScouter]

We do have a lot of experts in the forums. Commander McBragg comes to mind.

[CalicoPenn]

Or Gold Winger could refer to someone who rides a particular branded motorcycle, in which case he knows as much about aviation as anyone else on the board.

 

I actually thought Merlyn's question was pretty good as I'm under the impression that physicists are pretty much in agreement on how thrust and lift keep heavy metal planes in the air.

 

Calico

[Gold Winger]

Alas, I'm neither a Naval Aviator (thank you for using the correct term) nor an NFO, diabetes ended all of that for me as well as my general aviation flying.

 

However, I was a pilot, I have a Bachelor's in physics and I took a couple courses in Aeronautical Engineering back in the day. Wilbur was the instructor. As Calico said, my Gold Wings are on my motorcycle but I do know a bit about aviation.

 

So, despite my wings of gold not flying, I do have a pretty good handle on why and how planes fly. (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

[GernBlansten]

Perhaps it would be helpful if GW could give us an example of the disagreement scientists have with flight physics.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Gold Winger writes:

I do have a pretty good handle on why and how planes fly.

 

So do physicists.

[packsaddle]

OK, this time I read GoldWinger's message prior to editing by the staff. I'm curious as to what it was about the remainder of his message that required its deletion? Perhaps I just didn't understand...but I didn't see the problem. What gives?

Since I'm getting into this late, what does this discussion have to do with either creationism or evolution? I think the originator of this thread could satisfy most needs for discussion by referring to the old threads: http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=105837#id_109534

and

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=119075#id_119075

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

packsaddle, Gold Winger seems to be advancing the creationist line that opinions are interchangable, and that scientific opinions are on the same footing as religious opinions ("I've never seen a black hole and I'm only taking the word of a bunch of physicists that that they exist. Is that different from religion? "), which sets up the creationist position that the opinions of tens of thousands of current biologists, and the opinions of scientifically ignorant creationists who aren't even competent enough to understand the term "theory" should be given equal weight. While we're at it, let's give geocentrism and the demon-possession "theory" of disease a second chance.

[Beavah]

Or, Merlyn, it's an appeal to da science crowd to have a little bit of humility, eh?

 

We have theories of lift and drag, eh? One says that a mysterious force per unit area called "pressure" can be increased by creating idols, I mean objects of a certain magical shape and wavin' 'em through the air. This happens because of mysterious things that can only be described in a special language called algebra.

 

Another theory says that invisible chunks of air hit da airplane and transfer a magical, invisible thing called momentum, thus causin' the airplane to fly. A special priesthood attends to this theory, speakin' yet another language called statistical mechanics. They claim they have da real truth, even though their method doesn't seem to be as useful as those who believe in Pressure.

 

Mostly, like theology, all da invisible critters and funky language got developed after the fact, eh? Successful plane flight happened because a couple of young bicycle mechanics kept tinkerin' until they found somethin' that worked. Then people, many of whom predicted flyin' machines were impossible, came along and developed da "theory."

 

I reckon don't kill, don't commit adultery, don't steal, love your neighbor, care about things enough that you are willing to sacrifice for 'em, care enough to be willing to lay down your life for a friend - are all things we've found that worked, eh? Perhaps then we developed a few theories, each with their own special language, to explain this and go further. Along da way we might have even discovered that those "theories" are successful at inspiring and cajolin' people to do the things that we discovered worked, and so they were reinforced and considered valuable.

 

Is belief in God really that much different than belief in invisible air molecules or mystical "pressure"? Didn't, as Gern put it, man "create science to explain the mysteries that man did not understand?"

 

My problem with literal creation has little to do with science, eh? Da problem with literal creation is the claim it makes about God. If God placed evidence of erosion, continental drift, dinosaurs, expandin' universe and all the rest into a world only 4,000 years old, then yeh have to conclude that God is a deceiver, who is either tryin' to lead us astray or is just havin' fun at our expense. I'm a Christian, eh? I don't believe in Loki. That means we must be screwin' up da 4,000 years bit somehow.

 

B