That's some brain twisting shiite. Wouldn't it have left a dent though? Seriously? I haven't read the book obviously but I'll have to check it out.
That's some brain twisting shiite. Wouldn't it have left a dent though? Seriously? I haven't read the book obviously but I'll have to check it out.
its worth it trust me, great bookOriginally Posted by CosmoLTW
"god only exsist because science has not proven his non existence.... yet"
I don't think you can explicitly disprove the existence of something "transcendent".
Feel better? I have not a single problem with reading comprehension as I have not a single problem with science as a whole. My problem comes from smug little pseudo-intellectuals who want to attack what I want to believe when I have no problem letting you believe what you will. Read what you just wrote. You in no way proved the existence of evolution, but merely quoted what someone else had to say about those pesky Christian and their naive arguments. Go ahead and look for your evidence all you want. There is nothing concrete whatsoever to ever back up evolution as a completely irrefutable fact. They merely find fossils and quote someone else who quotes someone else and so on and so forth until it goes back to Darwin's original notes. And even he didn't completely buy into it. He called it merely a theory as well. And for every scientist who says he has "proved" atheistic evolution there are as many who say they have proved him wrong. So believe what you want and I'll believe what I will. I'm not going to spend hours looking up ways to disprove evolution and bring it back to you because frankly I don't care enough. You're way too arrogant to ever listen to anything I have to say anyways. So, how about this, prove me wrong. I dare you if you are so dam smart. Actually find evidence. Not a fossil related to another one because that could just as easily be another species. Not some scientist coming up with a very compelling argument. I am talking about irrefutable, scientifically stable, undeniable evidence. And I promise you I will be waiting a while. As far as your micro vs. macro cop out, ever heard of checks and balances? Adaptation? If I move to Northern Canada, my body and face will grow more hair. Does that mean that my great great great great great grandchildren will look like Chewbacca? No! That's absurd! It's all theories and it all takes faith. If you are actually interested in finding the truth of the matter rather than arguing and making an ass of yourself then go read these books and prove them wrong: "The Case for the Creator" by Lee Strobel (former atheist trying to disprove the possibility of creation), "The Collapse of Evolution" by Scott M. Huse, and "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael J. Behe, a Professor of Biochemistry. Like I said I'm not gonna sit here all night and pull facts out for you because I just don't care enough, but if you are so set on your anti-religion vendetta to open the naive and ignorant world's eyes, then by all means, prove your point and I'll be right behind you.
I actually didn't say anything anti-religious. Not surprisingly, you are just displaying reactionary behavior towards anything that might undermine your beliefs however slightly. It is not my fault you are a moron who only contests science accepted when they don't like it's implications.
The only people who don't accept evolution as fact are religious nuts, not scientists. You're not going to find any real biologists who share your opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
Shockingly, you're not going to find a section labeled "Scientific criticism of the theory of evolution" or the like.
Like I said before, there are plenty of other discoveries in the field of paleontology, archaeology, geology and astronomy that are contradictory to the "facts" set forth in the bible. Better start working on shooting down the existence of dinosaurs etc while you are out looking to discredit evolution.
But I suppose those dinosaur bones or their scientifically determined age have a perfectly rational Christian explanation, like being placed in the ground already fossilized by the devil to erode your faith. Afterall, the bones just being there isn't rock solid proof of their existence.
SNOOZE. YOU ARE PAINFULLY DUMB.
I am going to bed.
Last edited by The12lber; 04-14-2008 at 02:34 AM.
Actually dinosaurs are mentioned twice in the Old Testament in the book of Job, one called the Leviathon which was probably a Liopleurodon or something like it, and one is a land-going plant eater called the Behemoth, which was probably a Brontosaurus or Apatosaurus. But nice try. Is that the best you got?
I think you mean "Leviathan" which is referred to as a giant sea monster that had multiple heads and breathed fire.
Clearly, a well documented dinosaur species.
Have you read the passage? Nothing about multiple heads and breathing fire, I just read it. Maybe you were thinking of a hydra? Wrong belief system. That would be Greek mythology.
And for the record, you are the only one I have ever met that sees it solely as Science vs. Religion. I can and do believe in both. But keep going because you are clearly showing your ignorance in both fields. I really don't have to say anything, I just thought I would make it apparent to you because I have developed a strong distaste to you. You came in here, insulted me, then called me defensive when I fired back. You're digging your own hole.
I don't see it as science vs religion. They're totally different things. That's why its idiotic to come in here and go.
EVOLUTION IS A FALLACY BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH ITS RELIGIOUS IMPLICATIONS.
If you don't think evolution is true, fine, write evolutionary science off as the deceptive work of the devil. But don't come in here and say its because it isn't well accepted by science as fact. Because that's pretty clearly bull****.
No what I said is that I do believe in micro-evolution and that evolution as a whole is just a theory. That doesn't mean I don't think it could be true. Maybe you are the one who needs to work on your reading comprehension. The only thing I will openly say I think is bull is the big bang theory and the idea that we all came from primordial goo. I think humans were there in the beginning and the book of Job, which was written well before any fossils of dinosaurs were found, documents us and them living side by side. Do I know that as complete and total fact? Nope, wasn't there. But then how did they know about these creatures? And how come almost all societies have some mythical creature that resembles a dinosaur?
Yes, like the Chinese belief in dragons, flying snake like creatures which breathe fire. There's actually not a whole lot of mythical creatures which are similar to dinosaurs in anything but the vaguest way.
I'm sorry, but I think if Humans and dinosaurs lived side by side they would get more than one unverifiable mention in the book of job.
.
"Similar confusion is involved in objections that evolution is "unproven";[20] strict proof is possible only in logic and mathematics, not science, so this is trivially true, and no more an indictment of evolution than calling it a "theory" is. The confusion arises, however, in that the colloquial meaning of proof is simply "compelling evidence", in which case scientists would indeed consider evolution "proven". The distinction is an important one in philosophy of science, as it relates to the lack of absolute certainty in all empirical claims, not just evolution. "
Your precious wikipedia has betrayed you
And wikipedia? Seriously?! Anybody can go in there and make changes to what anything says so that is nowhere near a reliable source. Besides, I read what THE THEORY of evolution was in like what the sixth grade? And that was out of a real encyclopedia, Einstein.
Wikipedia is actually extremely reputable and well maintained. Seriously, go in there and try to make some bull**** changes. They'll be deleted quite quickly and you'll be banned from editing. If only you understood the internet.
As a side note, you clearly didn't understand anything I said early about the orbit of the planets in the solar system, elemental periodicity or general relativity also being "theories".
Theory
"a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity."
IF ONLY YOU UNDERSTOOD SCIENCE.
God damn you are dumb.
And how do any of those other theories have anything to do with what we are talking about? Look at the thread you are in dumbass.
Are you contesting any of those? Do you think any of those aren't true?
The point is you're only contesting evolution because you don't like it. Use your brain.
Don't take it out of context from some other person cynically trying to prove everything that someone else believes as wrong. Here I'll make it easy for you:
1 “Can you draw out Leviathan with a fishhook? Or press down his tongue with a cord?
2 “Can you put a rope in his nose Or pierce his jaw with a hook?
3 “Will he make many supplications to you, Or will he speak to you soft words?
4 “Will he make a covenant with you? Will you take him for a servant forever?
5 “Will you play with him as with a bird, Or will you bind him for your maidens?
6 “Will the traders bargain over him? Will they divide him among the merchants?
7 “Can you fill his skin with harpoons, Or his head with fishing spears?
8 “Lay your hand on him; Remember the battle; you will not do it again!
9 “Behold, your expectation is false; Will you be laid low even at the sight of him?
10 “No one is so fierce that he dares to arouse him; Who then is he that can stand before Me?
11 “Who has given to Me that I should repay him? Whatever is under the whole heaven is Mine.
12 “I will not keep silence concerning his limbs, Or his mighty strength, or his orderly frame.
13 “Who can strip off his outer armor? Who can come within his double mail?
14 “Who can open the doors of his face? Around his teeth there is terror.
15 “His strong scales are his pride, Shut up as with a tight seal.
16 “One is so near to another That no air can come between them.
17 “They are joined one to another; They clasp each other and cannot be separated.
18 “His sneezes flash forth light, And his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
19 “Out of his mouth go burning torches; Sparks of fire leap forth.
20 “Out of his nostrils smoke goes forth As from a boiling pot and burning rushes.
21 “His breath kindles coals, And a flame goes forth from his mouth.
22 “In his neck lodges strength, And dismay leaps before him.
23 “The folds of his flesh are joined together, Firm on him and immovable.
24 “His heart is as hard as a stone, Even as hard as a lower millstone.
25 “When he raises himself up, the mighty fear; Because of the crashing they are bewildered.
26 “The sword that reaches him cannot avail, Nor the spear, the dart or the javelin.
27 “He regards iron as straw, Bronze as rotten wood.
28 “The arrow cannot make him flee; Slingstones are turned into stubble for him.
29 “Clubs are regarded as stubble; He laughs at the rattling of the javelin.
30 “His underparts are like sharp potsherds; He spreads out like a threshing sledge on the mire.
31 “He makes the depths boil like a pot; He makes the sea like a jar of ointment.
32 “Behind him he makes a wake to shine; One would think the deep to be gray-haired.
33 “Nothing on earth is like him, One made without fear.
34 “He looks on everything that is high; He is king over all the sons of pride.”
Good job reinforcing what I said before. You really are dumb.
Aside from Leviathan breathing fire and being described in other books of Christianity as having multiple heads, therefore clearly not being a dinosaur, this is laughable.
LOOK, THIS MIGHT VAGUELY BE LIKE A DINOSAUR. IF IT IS, CLEARLY HUMANS AND DINOSAURS ONCE COEXISTED EVEN THOUGH SOME DINOSAURS ARE ****ING HUGE CARNIVORES SO YOU'D THINK THEY'D GET MENTIONED MORE THAN ONCE OR TWICE.
Again, you take it completely out of context. Look at it in the way it was written. I mean, in the beginning of the passage, do you think based on what it says, God wants us to go talk to the huge dinosaur? No the whole passage is written in a sarcastic tone at first but it written to stress the power and awe of this creature. If you are familiar with the way old hebrew texts were written this wouldn't seem like such a weird passage.
I love it
THE PARTS THAT ARE CONVENIENT FOR MY ARGUMENT ARE FACT.
THE PARTS THAT ARE INCONVENIENT ARE LITERARY DEVICES.
Dude, you are painfully stupid. It is terrible. My kidney hurts reading this ****.
That is meant to be expressing the power of this creature in poetic form, not just to say that he breathes fire. But, if you read this, clearly it is talking about something much bigger than a crocodile. This wasn't written pre-society. You don't think they could easily capture a crocodile in these times? The point of this passage is to illustrate the strength of God in to say that man cannot control this beast, but God can.
And, I am not contesting evolution. I think we are in an ever-changing world so God gave all of creation the ability to adapt, hence micro-evolution and maybe macro too to some degree. All I am trying to get across is that evolution doesn't necessarily rule God out, but people get all gung ho about it because the new fad religious belief during this time is anti-religion; the death/ nonexistence of God. The old church used to think that the universe was geocentric. Galileo proved them wrong. That has nothing to do with the core beliefs of my faith and is actually never backed up in scripture.
No, when you read back a few pages you were definitely contesting it, you are just backing off now as your argument has become so desperate you are citing bad poetry from the Bible.
There's nothing anti-religious in any of my statements. There's hostility towards idiots who want to contest science just because it intrudes on their metaphysical comfort zone.
Read through my posts. I said it is not a proven fact. I did not say it doesn't exist. And you have got to be kidding when you say you have not made any anti-religious statements. Look at what you have posted and come back to me.
You don't like the dinosaur argument anymore? ...Which by the way you brought up. Here, how about the flood and Noah:
In a recent article from the Washington Post, explorer Robert Ballard (discoverer of the Titanic) led a team to the Black Sea in search of evidence for Noah’s Flood. About 550 feet below the surface, they found evidence of a ‘sudden, catastrophic flood around 7,500 years ago—the possible source of the Old Testament story of Noah.’
They captured sonar images of a ‘gentle berm and a sandbar submerged undisturbed for thousands of years on the sea floor.’ Then using radiocarbon dating, they determined that the remains of the freshwater mollusks found on this submerged beach were 7,500 years old and that the saltwater species were only 6,900 years old. (By the way, radiocarbon is not reliable in giving accurate dates going back thousands of years. AiG believes that Noah’s Flood should be dated to about 4,300 years ago.)
In an interview, Ballard said, ‘What we wanted to do is prove to ourselves that it was the biblical flood.’
According to Columbia University geologists William Ryan and Walter Pitman, who had predicted where this shoreline would be found in the Black Sea, describe the flood as such: ‘The Black Sea was created when melting glaciers raised the sea level until the sea breached a natural dam at what is now the Bosporus, the strait that separates the Mediterranean Sea from the Black Sea. An apocalyptic deluge followed, inundating the freshwater lake below the dam, submerging thousands of square miles of dry land, flipping the ecosystem from fresh water to salt practically overnight, and probably killing thousands of people and billions of land and sea creatures.’
Hershel Shanks, editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review, replied to Ballard, Ryan, and Pitman’s claim with, ‘All modern critical Bible scholars regard the tale of Noah as legendary. There are other flood stories, but if you want to see the Black Sea flood in Noah’s flood, who’s to say no?’
We agree that they indeed have found evidence for a huge flood in the Black Sea area. But we do not support their claim that this was Noah’s Flood. You see, in order to justify their assertion, they declare that the record of Noah’s Flood in the Bible is legendary and just a myth. They say the ‘myth’ originated from a real event (their Black Sea flood), but that it has been grossly distorted and exaggerated as it was relayed by word of mouth before eventually being written down. By using the term ‘myth’ they can disregard all the details of the biblical account that do not fit their Black Sea claim.
Pitman recently spoke about this idea during an Australian lecture tour. Now in his mid 70s, Pitman has an interesting talk. He has conducted some excellent geological work in the Black Sea area. He presented good geological evidence that the Black Sea suddenly rose in level when a land barrier with the Mediterranean Sea failed, allowing water to flow in suddenly.
Unfortunately, he handles the biblical record carelessly. Noah’s Flood was not a local flood in the Black Sea area, but a world-wide flood that has left its mark on every continent on this planet.
Pitman knows that his link between the Black Sea flood and Noah’s Flood does not fit with the Bible. For example, his Black Sea flood does not have 40 days and nights of rain (He says the ‘whole event probably lasted about 40 years’), does not have a 140-meter ark as described in the Bible, does not cover the highest mountains, does not recede off the Earth etc, etc. Pitman knows it does not fit, shrugs his shoulders and when questioned about it he simply said he does not read the Bible literally. Therefore, his link with Noah’s Flood is totally arbitrary. He wants a flood, so plucks Noah’s Flood out of the air. It is a good flood to pick because it sells lots of books. Furthermore, the geologists love him. They think by saying that Noah’s Flood was a local flood then they can dismiss the implications of the real global Flood described in the Bible.
This is just another attempt to undermine the integrity of the biblical account of Noah’s Flood. However, the Bible claims to be the Word of God and ‘All scripture is given by inspiration of God,’ (2 Tim. 3:16). To say that Noah’s Flood was anything other than what Scripture says it was (i.e., a global flood) is tantamount to declaring that God is a liar. If God is lying, then we cannot trust any part of the Bible, including the Gospel message of the Cross, which means there is no hope for salvation and eternal life. The implications of Ballard’s claims are far more serious than many realize.
There is no reason to believe that Ballard’s Black Sea Flood was Noah’s Flood.
I saw you were talking about the Exodus earlier, so how about this:
Many people do not believe the Exodus took place. They often claim that there is no historical evidence, other than that found in the Bible. But there is evidence of the Exodus as stated by Grant Jeffrey in his book "Unveiling Mysteries of the Bible". An important Egyptian historical manuscript was discovered in Egypt more than a century ago.
Remarkably, this ancient papyrus parallels the history of the Exodus account as found in the Scriptures. This manuscript recorded the writings of an ancient Egyptian named Ipuwer. The papyrus manuscript, now called the Ipuwer Papyrus, was discovered by someone named Anastasi in the area of Memphis, near the pyramids of Saqqara in Egypt.
The museum of Leiden in the Netherlands acquired the papyrus in 1828. It was translated and published in English for the first time in 1909 by Professor Alan H. Gardiner. Gardiner wrote that the manuscript was one that recorded a genuine historical catastrophe when the whole country of Egypt was in distress and violence. "It is no merely local disturbance that is here described, but a great and overwhelming national disaster."
Gardiner suggests that Ipuwer was an Egyptian sage who directed his writing to the king as a complaint that the national catastrophe was in part caused by the king’s failure to act and deal with the crisis.
A comparison of several key passages from the Biblical Book of Exodus with the ancient Egyptian papyrus reveals remarkable correspondences and parallels that point to a real historical catastrophe.
1. The Plague of Blood
In Ipuwer Papyrus 2:5-6, it says: Plague is throughout the land. Blood is everywhere. Compare this with the Book of Exodus 7:21: There was blood throughout all the land of Egypt.
In Ipuwer Papyrus 2:10, it says: The River is Blood. Compare with Exodus 7:20: All the waters that were in the river were turned to blood.
In Ipuwer Papyrus 2:10, it says: Men shrank from tasting...and thirst for water. Compare with Exodus 7:24: And all the Egyptians digged round about the river for water to drink; for they could not drink of the water of the river.
2. The Plague of Hail
Ipuwer papyrus 9:23: The fire ran along the ground. There was hail, and fire mingled with the hail. Exodus 9:25: And the hail smote every herb on the field, and brake every tree in the field.
3. The Plague of Darkness
Ipuwer Papyrus 9:11: The land is not light. Exodus 10:22: And there was a thick darkness in all the land of Egypt.
4. The Plague of Egyptian Cattle
Ipuwer papyrus 5:5: All animals, their hearts weep. Cattle moan. Exodus 9:3: Behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thy cattle which is in the field, upon the horses, upon the asses, upon the camels, upon the oxen, and upon the sheep: there shall be grievous murrain (disease).
5. The Plague of the Firstborn of Egypt
Ipuwer Papyrus 2:13: He who places his brother in the ground is everywhere. Exodus 12:27: He (the angel of the Lord) smote the Egyptians. Ipuwer Papyrus 4:3: Forsooth, the children of princes are dashed against the walls. Exodus 12:29: At midnight the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt. Ipuwer Papyrus 6:12: Forsooth, the children of the princes are cast out in the streets, Exodus 12:30: There was not a house where there was not one dead.
6. Response of the Egyptians to the Loss of their First born
Ipuwer Papyrus 3:14: It is groaning that is throughout the land, mingled with lamentations. Exodus 12:30: There was a great cry in Egypt.
In light of the ample evidence accumulated from ancient Jewish and Greek historians, together with the Ipuwer Papyrus that parallels several of the 10 Biblical plagues, it is clear that there is compelling non-Biblical evidence to confirm the scriptural account about the Exodus of the Jews from Egypt. Further proof of the Exodus is the fact; the Jews have annually celebrated three great festivals in commemoration of their Exodus (Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles) for 3500 years. Therefore, logically, the public observance of the Exodus Passover festival can only be explained if the Jewish people actually participated in these historical events as recorded in the Torah, the first five books of the Bible.
When it comes to making someone believe in something they always resort to using the word, "God." Your statement made me giggle, because I used my brain cells and came up with this conclusion. "How can something have control on something else, if that person, uses the strenght of others, to assist it." Without faith God would be nothing.
You also keep babbling about how Evolution is nothing more than a theory. Yet there is proof of it's existence. How can you not take into consideration, all the past microorganisms, who started off life cause of adaptation. I hope you don't believe that the earth is only a few thousand years old.
Your first post in this thread was directed at me, seeing as I was the one who created this thread. You say that I made this thread to argue, that I didn't have knowledge when it came to both sides of the card. I mean, who are you, to say what I have knowledge on? You obviously have the reading skills of a brain damaged baboon. I could do whatever I want here, this is a public forum after all. And if you don't like it, all you have to do is hit that red X on the upper right hand side of your screen.
sponsored by: workhard motorsports. // tuned by
Or how about the prophecies of Isaiah?
http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/isaiah.htm
"How can something have control on something else, if that person, uses the strength of others, to assist it."
Where anywhere in the Bible is this said?
"You also keep babbling about how Evolution is nothing more than a theory. Yet there is proof of it's existence. How can you not take into consideration, all the past microorganisms, who started off life cause of adaptation."
Be more specific. Which microorganisms? And there is NO proof that we can see that evolution exists to the level we think it does. It moves too slow. Show me the proof of its existence. Just one thing.
Do something other than show me that your IQ is even lower than my dogs.
Where in my post, did I say that the statement came from the bible? Read it again, einstein. I clearly said, "I" came up with this conclusion. As in, after reading your post, my brain marinated the statement you had so much trouble understanding.
Haha, dude. There is no point in trying to explain ANYTHING to you. Ancient remains, fossiles, ect etc. I mean, do you want me to show you my cat slowly evolving into a smaller version of a saber tooth tiger? You also keep saying how you don't care about this and that, yet you continue posting in here?
sponsored by: workhard motorsports. // tuned by
And none of those fossils prove evolution. Just because something is similar to something else doesn't mean it came from that. In 100,000 are people going to dig up a tiger and say that your cat came from that too?
"I came up with this conclusion."
So... if you came up with this conclusion about something you don't believe in or know anything about, then its got to be true, right? And drop the insulting remarks, little boy, I promise you I have twice the IQ you have. Just learn to express yourself a little more clearly and we'll be alright. You have yet to come up with one specific, clear rebuttal. All you have done is come back with online insults. Man, aren't you cool.
Well if you reproduce then yes. Your lack of intellect will transfer to your children and their children and so on. How can you ask such ridiculous? In 100k years the tiger will most likely look very similer to how it does now, it may have some minor changes but nothing too extreme. That is, if they don't go extinct cause of some bad judgment we make.
It's nothing more than an opinion. So yea, to me it's true. LOL
Im a day older than you man! If your birthday is on May 18th then yea, im older than you. And I wouldn't have to make remarks like those if you could prove to me that your shoe size isn't higher than your IQ. But take those remarks how ever you want, don't matter to me.
sponsored by: workhard motorsports. // tuned by
Religion. 1 of the best topics of all time lol
Honestly guys, after last night I was thinking about it, and really this is just stupid. Neither one of us is going to get anywhere with the other on this topic. I dunno about y'all but I was getting too heated to where it was arguing just to be stubborn. Both of you have your opinions and beliefs and I have mine. Agree to disagree and no hard feelings and I'm sorry if I was a ****.
The greatest minds in the universe don't have a concrete answer, why would you think a couple dumbass kids do (even though they think they do)? I think the smarter you are, the more you realize you don't know ****.
IA Rules doesn't allow these images in sigs
- IA Mgmt
You are absolutely right! Haha well said. Reps for being the smartest one in here.
You can just admit that your argument was mostly inflated by bull****.
And srsly, no hard feelings? This is the interwebs.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote