Creationists: Why not teach supernatural gravity?

Question

Instead of teaching our children that events within the universe have reasons within the universe, why not look for supernatural explanations? I'm wondering why the double standard is only being applied to evolution. Why aren't we teaching our American children that the theory of gravity is false? Why not teach them we're being held onto the planet by invisible loving arms of the earth god/intelligent hugger?

Why the double standard? Why not use a supernatural explanation for everything scientific?


(Cigarettes can't cause cancer, it's the angry lung god attacking the smoker; lightning has nothing to do with electricity, it's the weather sky god; mental illness can't be expained naturally, it's from supernatural demon possession)

Ad hominems in place of real explanations are welcome:) I know it's hard to answer unemotionally when defending something irrational.

digm: appeals to ignorance shouldn't be your basis for forming an opinion. go to talkorigins. There are tons of *observed* instances of macroevolution. Denying reality isn't a good look:)

All4Him: so 6 billion years isn't long enough for a self-replicating molecule to mutate into a self-replicating molecule with a membrane? It only took a few thousand years to get Paris Hilton's purse dog from wild wolves. That's not even a thousandth of the percent of time you're ignoring.

peacetime actually provides good insight. The criteria seems to be a lack of understanding of what science is and belief in the bible. But I wonder what she thinks of all the "four corners" of this planet mentioned in the bible. Maybe it's just another implementation of the pick-and-choose tactic.

Answer 1

it's called Intelligent Falling

Answer 2

Gravity is supernatural by definition, at least until someone can properly explain what it really is and how it really works. At that point we can place it into the category of what is called the phenomenon of "natural law". "Natural law" is of course supernatural by definition until someone can explain what natural law is, why it must be the way it is, and so forth. It is merely a subclassification of supernatural.

"Looking for supernatural explanations" is a misleading concept. By that you do not mean that they are looking for supernatural explanations, but rather, what you mean (most likely) is that they are looking for made-up or superstitious explanations.

The theory of gravity, as we know it, is false. We know this, scientists admit this; it is simply the best that we can do with our current limitations and knowledge. I have always been taught this, even by the evolutionist professors in college. As far as we know, gravity might be done by invisible elves holding us down, however, everyone tends to agree that this is highly improbable.

Supernatural explanations are not inherently unscientific, in fact, they should be scientific, especially if you want them to be believable and reasonable. I believe that you might be confusing the word "supernatural" with the word "superstition", these words are not related.

A supernatural explanation does not require an evil "lung god" angry at smokers, again, you seem to be thinking of the word "superstition". A supernatural explanation of lung cancer can be the exact scientific defintion, but more than likely it would include the rest of the picture as well. For instance, more than likely, one cannot go around defying gravity and get away with it for very long.

Reality must be faced at some point, and supernatural is defined as that which makes reality real. Do not confuse it with superstition, which has to do pretty much with the opposite.

Answer 3

As ridiculous as it may seem, I read a post on www.fstdt.com from someone claiming that gravity was caused by sin:

"Gravity: Doesn't exist. If items of mass had any impact of others, then mountains should have people orbiting them. Or the space shuttle in space should have the astronauts orbiting it. Of course, that's just the tip of the gravity myth. Think about it. Scientists want us to believe that the sun has a gravitation pull strong enough to keep a planet like neptune or pluto in orbit, but then it's not strong enough to keep the moon in orbit? Why is that? What I believe is going on here is this: These objects in space have yet to receive mans touch, and thus have no sin to weigh them down. This isn't the case for earth, where we see the impact of transfered sin to material objects. The more sin, the heavier something is. "

Hahahahahahahaha!!!

Answer 4

k, really, we're not all THAT medieval!

we are completely aware of the cause and effect nature of the universe!

we believe that GOD set down the natural laws that science studies. i know that gravity exists. i know that the solar eclipse is the shadow of the moon. i am very aware of the correlation between cigarettes and cancer. these are not "theorie" in the scientific community b/c they are repeatable,testable, and observable. something cannot become a FACT until we have been able to observe it happening. we did not OBSERVE the beggining of the universe, therefore all we can have is a theory.

please understand, i, as a christian, do believe in the Creation of the universe. but i cannot consiously object to you teaching YOUR children otherwise. i just ask that my theories be treated with the same amount of respect that i will treat yours. (and i have always been respectful about it)

i'm sorry, if you have been angered by a hot-headed defender of creationism, but please dont hold all Christians (and Jews, and Muslims) responsible for that.

Answer 5

Ed,
We don't teach children lies because they are lies. Science does not debunk Creation. In fact more and more scientest are moving from the "irrational" theory of evolution to the more realistic explanation of creative design.

I don't know about you, but I use logic and rationalism in all my decisions. I conclude based from the best evidence that can be presented what I believe to be true and what I believe to be false. I hold to my conclusions unless something more convincing changes my mind. So far Science has only proven me right, not wrong.

There is a better chance of winning the lottery while being stuck by lighting in a plane crash than life being pure chance. I don't know how you feel about that, but I would have a hard time telling my kids that that is good enough for me.

Answer 6

What you making fun of The Anti-Gravity League Church of Jesus? We know gravity isn't real. Yesterday the first day of spring was anti gravity day we had our church outing in celebration. We know gravity was just an invention of scientist to try and destroy the church. We know God let the apple fall on that guys head to try and knock some sense into him. God holds every thing down. If there was a thing called gravity how could Jesus have walked on water? God let him that's how. Gravity would have pulled him under. How do you explain trees growing straight up? God lets them. If we had gravity pulling at them they would grow flat across the ground. How do you explain that with your gravity eh? We know Lightning is Electricity but God made it. Lightning's not use to run your electric lights. I wish I could explain more but it will take you long enough to make excuses for the two examples I have mentioned. You have probably heard of intelligent falling. That's not anti gravity. That's just a stupid term you Atheists made up to try and reticule us Christians.
God Bless kisses Betty.

Answer 7

i think of that's a nicely written and useful attitude. yet be careful. Atheists are offended by means of reason. that's one rationalization why the Christ substitute into spoke of as emblems. :) lo?gos??/?lo?g?s, -go?s, ?l?g?s/ [loh-gos, -gohs, log-os] –noun a million. (often preliminary capital letter) Philosophy. the rational concept that governs and develops the universe. 2. Theology. the divine be conscious or reason incarnate in Jesus Christ. John a million:a million–14. i don't think of your query could be posed as an the two/or, i think the respond is the two. Why can not God be the two organic and supernatural? Why can not God artwork by using nature and technology, and likewise by means of miracles? For that rely, who says God even has to exist to be genuine? A countless sort of precis issues which in simple terms exist in our minds are noneless genuine. stable, to illustrate, is an precis concept that does not exist in any actual capacity, and there can under no circumstances be a scientific rationalization of what's powerful and why. yet that does not in any way recommend that human beings can not of course comprehend goodness while that's shown to them.

Answer 8

We're not teaching that because most of the people in charge of the curriculum aren't idiots. As a teacher, I would probably quit my job before I filled those childrens' heads with nonsense like we stay on the Earth because it's flat. (Or any of the other ridiculous explanations I've heard.)

Answer 9

God is a God of science. Physics, chemistry, biology, He created all of it - even gravity.

All I can say for evolution, besides that it's impossible (scientifically) and that there is no scientific evidence proving evolution is that the scientific evidence we have from the universe
overwhelmingy points TOWARD a creator, not AWAY from one...

The truth is there is no division between true faith and true science. The one true God reigns over it all.

Answer 10

God creating man rather than man arising on his own makes scientific sense and it's in the Bible.

Supernatural gravity does not make scientific sense and it is not anywhere in the Bible

*******RESPONSE:

Four corners of the earth, I believe, is a figure of speech, not a commentary on the physical shape of the earth. :-)