No God, No Science - Dr. Jason Lisle 

Dr. Jason Lisle is a very insightful man, thumbs up!

Another interesting point to add to all this is that it's not just creationist scientists whose work gets censored, and whose views get ridiculed every time they offer ANY alternative to the "evolutionary theories" which have truly hand-cuffed honest modern scientific endeavor. This fact was the basis for an article written back in 2004 by Eric Lerner, "Bucking The Big Bang", published in New Science Magazine, and at that time signed by 32 very reputable scientists, apparently most of whom (including Lerner) fell outside the Christian community, and included some (perhaps most) who were openly atheistic in their views. The article is still available on-line, but now has over 400 signatures attached from the world-wide scientific community. The first 2 paragraphs in the article read as follows: "BIG bang theory relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities - things that we have never observed. Inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent. Without them, there would be fatal contradictions between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory. In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the validity of the underlying theory. But the big bang theory can't survive without these fudge factors. Without the hypothetical inflation field, the big bang does not predict the smooth, isotropic cosmic background radiation that is observed, because there would be no way for parts of the universe that are now more than a few degrees away in the sky to come to the same temperature and thus emit the same amount of microwave radiation." The paper also goes on to say, "Yet the big bang is not the only framework available for understanding the history of the universe. Plasma cosmology and the steady-state model both hypothesise (sic) an evolving universe without beginning or end", and I point out once again that the author is referring to other SECULAR theories, reinforcing my point that the evolutionists are ham-stringing whatever you may choose to call "true" scientific inquiry, whether it comes from Christians or non-Christians alike. And just so no one claims I'm taking these scientists' opinions out-of-context, let's hear it directly from the article one more time: "Even observations are now interpreted through this biased filter, judged right or wrong depending on whether or not they support the big bang. So discordant data on red shifts, lithium and helium abundances, and galaxy distribution, among other topics, are ignored or ridiculed. This reflects a growing dogmatic mindset that is alien to the spirit of free scientific enquiry. Today, virtually all financial and experimental resources in cosmology are devoted to big bang studies. Funding comes from only a few sources, and all the peer-review committees that control them are dominated by supporters of the big bang. As a result, the dominance of the big bang within the field has become self-sustaining, irrespective of the scientific validity of the theory." So when I hear people say, "but scientists admit when they're wrong", you'll have to forgive me if I laugh. www.newscientist.com/article/mg18224482-900-bucking-the-big-bang/

There does not need to be a god for us to have invented Science.

I find it so incredible how many people who say that they don't believe in God yet they come to websites where people talk about God. Why are you here if you don't believe? What I choose to do with my life is none of your business. That goes to all non believers who troll Christian videos.

Fortunately for Dr. Lisle, all it takes to earn a legitimate Ph.D. in astrophysics from as legitimate a program as the one in astrophysics at the University of Colorado (Boulder) is to do the required work. Once you've done all the necessary work to fulfill the requirements for the Ph.D., you get the Ph.D. As theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss once said (words to the effect), having a Ph.D. means that you have a Ph.D. It doesn't mean that your opinions are worth a damned thing. In fact, even with a Ph.D., your opinions _aren't_ worth a damned thing. No one in science is an authority on anything, especially in science. All that matters is the evidence. As the late Nobel laureate in physics, Dr. Richard Feynman said, _“It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.”_ Dr. Lisle's opinion about how only those with a presuppositional Christian worldview can actually know anything is the poster child of this type of inanity. Another quote from Feynman is particularly apropos for Lisle. _“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”_

ONLY THE BIBLICAL WORLD VIEW, IS THE ONLY WORLD VIEW THAT MAKES SENSE OF THE WORLD.

Praise the Lord Jesus. Wide is the path to destruction, but narrow is the way to salvation.

You're correct. You never "realize" the need, importance, of "fingures, until you are missing one or a part of one. I know; THEN, you will reconsider the design of the "hand and fingures." Try it and see.

"Now you non believers may be wondering how the bible is right and not the budhists..... well in other news.." Lol? I know he gave a link to his classes but that seems like a pretty important question to address on the show. And im sure the answer consists of: the bible says so.

Concerning "Nebraska man" and "ramaphithecus," that's the difference between science and religion. Science admits when it made a mistake.

Lisle is clearly a smart guy who knows a bit more than most creationists, particularly about space. He is a confident speaker and quite passionate about science education when he isn't trying to replace science textbooks with the Bible. However, some of the points put into his essays and talks - to highlight perceived problems in "secular" theories - have been considered as highly misrepresented, or even non-existent. Some of them are, in fact, well known creationist arguments rehashed by someone who, frankly, should damn well know better. As someone who is torn between the worlds of science and Biblical literalism, Lisle mostly ends up shoehorning various random points into an ad hoc framework of bullshit that supports a recent creation regardless of what his scientific training must be screaming at him on a daily basis. A summary of some of Lisle's dumber points are outlined below.[7] Earth’s magnetic field is decaying - This is a well known creationist argument. The dipole component of the Earth’s magnetic field is indeed decreasing, but other components are not necessarily decreasing. The magnetic field is due to a dynamo effect in the Earth interior, and has fluctuated and changed polarity many times in the geological past. At the moment it happens to be decreasing. Recession of the Moon - He is making uniformitarian assumptions about its recession rate, and conveniently did not mention other lunar processes. However, he did mention that the creationist dust on the Moon argument should not be used. Most of the 150 (then) known extra-solar planets are more massive than Jupiter and close to their parent star, quite different to the solar system - This is simply because we can detect such planets much more easily than lower mass planets in longer period orbits. How many planets which are similar to our own in existence is still unclear. Until recently, creationists denied that extra-solar planets even existed.[13] (It should be noted that the book this statement was taken from was written in 1982 before extra-solar planets were discovered.) Deep time is a 'false god.' [14] Climate Change, which he calls Global Warming - Lisle denies that climate change is caused by humans.

we'll wait a minute, I thought Christ reincarnate..and didn't Christ say that John the Baptist was elijah..

Not the bible glasses again.

The lie of creationism cannot be asserted or defended with honesty.

"But I would argue that unless your ultimate standard is the Bible, you can't know anything... you can have beliefs but you can never justify them." - Jason Lisle ********************** No wonder this clown believes the universe is only 6000 years old.