What do you all think about this paper/article?

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

So you would prescribe it to a pregnant woman, who had a drug-resistant leprosy?

Or was science wrong?

It is still prescribed, mainly in certain cases involving cancer, but in a heavily monitored environment with other contraceptive drugs and devices involved to moderate the effects of Thalidomide to protect the unborn child and the mother.

Your continued insistence on laying the blame on 'science' is noted and discarded as childish.

 

[AV1611VET]

It is still prescribed, mainly in certain cases involving cancer,

Your reluctance to answer my tough questions without watering them down first is being noted.

But then, you need to make me look anti-science, don't you?

Your continued insistence on laying the blame on 'science' is noted and discarded as childish.

QV please:

More than 60 years after the drug thalidomide caused birth defects in thousands of children whose mothers took the drug while pregnant, scientists at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute have solved a mystery that has lingered ever since the dangers of the drug first became apparent: how did the drug produce such severe fetal harm?

SOURCE

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Your reluctance to answer my tough questions without watering them down first is being noted.

But then, you need to make me look anti-science, don't you?

No, I answered it. It's just that, like many things in life, the answer is not a simple yes or no answer.

QV please:

Yes, I QVed. Scientist is not science. You routinely just blame science. Otherwise you wouldn't have used this:

Or was science wrong?

QV yourself.

 

[AV1611VET]

Scientist is not science.

This is a good stopping point.

You're off the hook.

For now.

 

[Lost Witness]

Rainbows existed before the flood. Unless you think god actually changed the laws of physics and how light refracts through water after the flood just so there would be rainbows?

He wouldn't be GOD if he couldn't change things as he pleased.
Rainbows came to be just as scripture says.

 

[Lost Witness]

Did you not even read the sub-head:

Mistakes from the past demonstrate the reliability of science​

I've got more than 10 results myself, none erroneous , so 10 is hardly "most".

Science is flawed because men are flawed.
It can't be trusted as scientific fact is only fact until new findings and advancement and they always come..
You know what doesn't change nor can be added to or subtracted from? God's word.
God's word is alive. (Jesus Christ) is that word.
Nobody can add to or take away from that Truth
He teaches us through his Holy Spirit
Leads us into all Truth.
So if he's teaching his children and leading them to all Truth.....
Who's teaching the atheists?

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

He wouldn't be GOD if he couldn't change things as he pleased.
Rainbows came to be just as scripture says.

No they didn't. Rainbows existed before the bible, before people, before the flood story, before gay people. Physics didn't change after a mythical flood.

 

[AV1611VET]

No they didn't. Rainbows existed before the bible, before people, before the flood story, before gay people. Physics didn't change after a mythical flood.

1. It had never rained before the Flood.

Genesis 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

2. Any rainbow showing because of the mist would be fine; after the Flood, God set the rainbow in the cloud.

Genesis 9:13 I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

1. It had never rained before the Flood.

Genesis 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

Absolute poppycock.

2. Any rainbow showing because of the mist would be fine; after the Flood, God set the rainbow in the cloud.

Genesis 9:13 I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth.

You mean in the clouds made of... *checks notes* ...water?

We're past Sunday school level "education" here , AV.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Science is flawed because men are flawed.
It can't be trusted as scientific fact is only fact until new findings and advancement and they always come..

That's a feature not a but. Science is self-correcting.

You know what doesn't change nor can be added to or subtracted from? God's word.
God's word is alive. (Jesus Christ) is that word.
Nobody can add to or take away from that Truth
He teaches us through his Holy Spirit
Leads us into all Truth.
So if he's teaching his children and leading them to all Truth.....

It isn't on topic and I don't care.

Who's teaching the atheists?

The same people that are teaching the Christians.

 

[AV1611VET]

Absolute poppycock.

Well, that was scholarly.

Right up there with my SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE.

You mean in the clouds made of... *checks notes* ...water?

I mean exactly that.

But since it had never rained on the earth, there were no rainbow clouds with enough water to create one.

We're past Sunday school level "education" here , AV.

Deep theology, when blended with your brand of junk science, is a drag, isn't it?

 

[AV1611VET]

Science is self-correcting.

Yup.

From one mistake to another.

"Correct science" is a contradiction in terms.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Well, that was scholarly.

Right up there with my SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE.



I mean exactly that.

But since it had never rained on the earth, there were no rainbow clouds with enough water to create one.



Deep theology, when blended with your brand of junk science, is a drag, isn't it?

Why do I need to be "scholarly"? You post bible verses as if they prove anything at all. If I post quotes from The Lord of the Rings about rainbows, the events of which took place before the events of the bible according to Tolkien's history of Middle-Earth would you accept them as facts?

"Deep theology"

 

[AV1611VET]

Why do I need to be "scholarly"? You post bible verses as if they prove anything at all.

Do don't like Bible verses?

How about this then?

Does the Bible Teach That It Did Not Rain until the Genesis Flood?

If that isn't satisfactory, then please tell me the best way to convey to you why I believe there was no rain before the Flood?

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Do don't like Bible verses?

How about this then?

Does the Bible Teach That It Did Not Rain until the Genesis Flood?

If that isn't satisfactory, then please tell me the best way to convey to you why I believe there was no rain before the Flood?

I don't care why you believe what you believe, AV. I don't care that other people believe it either. It's incorrect. It's not factual. It's a myth, fairy-tale. Nothing about how light refracts through water, the water cycle, physics in general changed after a mythical flood and it is absurd to argue that it did. There is no actual data or observation you can present that would show otherwise. Bible stories are not data or observations.

 

[AV1611VET]

Nothing about how light refracts through water,

Light refracted through water before the Flood in the same way it refracted through water after the Flood.

It's WHERE it refracted that I'm trying to get you to understand.

Before the Flood, it only refracted through the water that watered the ground.

After the Flood, it refracted through the water that started falling from the sky.

There is no actual data or observation you can present that would show otherwise.

That is correct.

I wasn't there; and neither were you.

I couldn't produce actual data or observation to convince Noah, if he was here right now.

And Noah is the one who was there and wrote about it.

And the reverse is true as well.

If Noah showed up right now, even he couldn't convince you of what I'm saying.

And he was there!

It would take, in my opinion, God taking you back in time to let you see it for yourself.

Until then, I realize you'll call it "absolute poppycock," and make snide remarks about Sunday school, etc.

But go ahead.

And I'll do the same with your college-level junk.

Bible stories are not data or observations.

That is correct.

That's why, if Jesus showed up Himself and [just] told you what He did, you would not believe it.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Light refracted through water before the Flood in the same way it refracted through water after the Flood.

It's WHERE it refracted that I'm trying to get you to understand.

Before the Flood, it only refracted through the water that watered the ground.

After the Flood, it refracted through the water that started falling from the sky.

This is the part that is not correct. The water cycle didn't change and suddenly clouds were made of water now. Clouds are, by definition, water. Are you saying there were no clouds before the flood either? No water vapor? Like water only existed as rivers and the oceans? So evaporation didn't exist? Condensation didn't exist?

And Noah is the one who was there and wrote about it.

Dude. Noah did not write the flood story in Genesis. And, no, Noah wasn't there either because Noah didn't exist because his name was probably Gilgamesh and he likely didn't exist either because they are stories. Myths.

It would take, in my opinion, God taking you back in time to let you see it for yourself.

This I agree with 100,000,000%. It absolutely would take something like that to convince me that any part of the flood story is true as told in the Bible. Can you ring him up for me and let him know I'm totally down for that experience? Guaranteed convert if he can pull it off.

That's why, if Jesus showed up Himself and [just] told you what He did, you would not believe it.

Well, when he does we'll have that conversation. He's got to show up first. It's been 2000 years. Not holding my breath.

 

[AV1611VET]

Can you ring him up for me and let him know I'm totally down for that experience?

You call Him.

His number is JEREMIAH 333.

Jeremiah 33:3 Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and shew thee great and mighty things, which thou knowest not.

 

[Lost Witness]

No they didn't. Rainbows existed before the bible, before people, before the flood story, before gay people. Physics didn't change after a mythical flood.

GOD doesn't lie.
Plain and Simple.

 

[Ophiolite]

GOD doesn't lie.
Plain and Simple.

Please select your preferred response:
1. When you confuse the metaphorical with the material you create false contradictions. The post-flood rainbow is a metaphor.
2. Which God? Vishnu, Allah, Yaweh, etc.?
3. Perhaps he does not lie, but mere humans may mishear what he told them.