User talk:Fourchannel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[1] It always amuses me, you know? A religion's published material makes some statement that does not lend itself to literal, hard science exploration, i.e. there was a great flood ... or, the universe is trillions of years old ... and *BLAMBO*, some critic comes along and says that Science^tm has demonstrated otherwise. HEH ! Terryeo 11:54, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

The edit you made and the information you referenced seemed to be valid. And there is a broad agreement in the science community and it is taught in schools that way and is widely recognized as the actual situation. I'm simply expressing an amusement of how science and religion meet. I did not mean to imply your editing wasn't good and did not mean to imply your editing was not appropriate. Science says our physical universe is something less that 20 billion years old, probably less than 15 billion years old. Scientology scripture says time is something like 60 trillion years old. This is a difference of 3.0 times three orders of magnitude and a significantly large difference. I'm expressing an amusement in the difference. Terryeo 22:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Differences emerge rather quickly, lol. I think the difference is based on science requiring demonstrable knowledge while religion's knowledge need not be demonstrated. Christ, for example, performed a number of small miricles which, most likely, he couldn't demonstrate again and again and again. Terryeo 01:45, 29 October 2006 (UTC)