49 Unique Guild Members
14 Level 100 characters
461 Website/Forum Members
0 Posts in 24 hours
0 Posts in 7 days
84316 Total Posts
Nelthilta is the last poster
49 Unique Guild Members
14 Level 100 characters
461 Website/Forum Members
0 Posts in 24 hours
0 Posts in 7 days
84316 Total Posts
Nelthilta is the last poster

Proof of god.
Proof of god.
[Back to Index]
Thread Tags
Primary: [Off-topic]
Secondary: None

<<< 1 2 3 4 >>>
Wow you fuckers ruined my thread with serious replys.

----


--
"Some douche bag, pony tail wearing, hippie FUCK..." -Sip

Quote
I like to troll serious threads. Pay no attention to me.




my great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great
grandpa is the dude on the left with the spear

----
"SHALOM!"
Bacardee and Cola get the job done!
http://tinyurl.com/oofrg


--
"SHALOM!"
Bacardee and Cola get the job done!
haha

----
If the Da Vinci Code, a murder-mystery novel, threatens your beliefs, then your beliefs are weak and should be threatened.


--
Ok time to bring back this thread!

Carbon dating isn't accurate you say? I'm sorry but you are incorrect there. Using carbon-14 dating you can accurately determine a substance's age as long as it's not more than 70,000 years. When was the great flood? Did the bible give a year? Did it give a vague idea of a year? The archaeologists can at least give a year accurate as long as it's within 70,000 years. There are also other methods of dating materials (fossils) that can be accurate to a wider range of dates.

Another thing that I was never able to have answered with any religious figure. If God created Adam and Eve, how did the human population get to the size it is today? Adam and Eve only had 2 sons, right? Cain and Able, and Cain killed Able, but they both had wives. If they both had wives, where did they come from if God only created Adam and Eve?

If the great flood is a reason you give for the reason why so many fossils are found to be at around the same time, then you can't actually say that the bible proves anything. The story of the great flood was actually stolen from the Babylon's Story of Gilgamesh while the jews were being enslaved by the Babylonians. Therefore you believe in the Babylonian religion, not the Christian religion.

Just some things I remembered that I wanted to say, but apparently I forgot to post it before. There are a few other things that I have to say, but I don't see this going anywhere.

----




[fag]Aigimbooze[/fag]
Quote
We should learn to block all those pias fucks from our forum


--
Quote
Ok time to bring back this thread!

Carbon dating isn't accurate you say? I'm sorry but you are incorrect there. Using carbon-14 dating you can accurately determine a substance's age as long as it's not more than 70,000 years. When was the great flood? Did the bible give a year? Did it give a vague idea of a year? The archaeologists can at least give a year accurate as long as it's within 70,000 years. There are also other methods of dating materials (fossils) that can be accurate to a wider range of dates.

Another thing that I was never able to have answered with any religious figure. If God created Adam and Eve, how did the human population get to the size it is today? Adam and Eve only had 2 sons, right? Cain and Able, and Cain killed Able, but they both had wives. If they both had wives, where did they come from if God only created Adam and Eve?

If the great flood is a reason you give for the reason why so many fossils are found to be at around the same time, then you can't actually say that the bible proves anything. The story of the great flood was actually stolen from the Babylon's Story of Gilgamesh while the jews were being enslaved by the Babylonians. Therefore you believe in the Babylonian religion, not the Christian religion.

Just some things I remembered that I wanted to say, but apparently I forgot to post it before. There are a few other things that I have to say, but I don't see this going anywhere.

----




[fag]Aigimbooze[/fag]
Quote
We should learn to block all those pias fucks from our forum


/sigh... so you wanna keep goin eh? Well I only have time to "answer" one of your questions @tm since i'm about to leave for the airport soon, but your question: "If God created Adam and Eve, how did the human population get to the size it is today? Adam and Eve only had 2 sons, right? Cain and Able, and Cain killed Able, but they both had wives. If they both had wives, where did they come from if God only created Adam and Eve?"

Remember Cain killed his brother Able, as you have clearly stated, b/c of his bitterness, but that's mostly all what people know. Here's an article to answer your question:

The following is the paraphrased essence of on of the critical junctures in American history. The scene is the 1923 Scopes Monkey Trial, and defense attorney Clarence Darrow had goaded prosecuting attorney Williams Jennings Bryan to take the stand in defense of the Bible.

"Mr. Bryan. the defense has one final question,' Where did Cain find a wife?'" "I don't know." " Could you repeat your answer Mr. Bryan? The entire nation is listening via radio broadcast and this is a pretty basic and simple question. Let me rephrase it. If, as the Bible claims, Adam and Eve were the first man and woman, and no other people existed, who did their son Cain find to marry?" "I don't know."

Darrow made Bryan appear foolish, because he did not know scripture well enough to defend the most basic of questions.

This trial marked a turning point in American education, because for the first time the Bible was openly ridiculed. Bryan's inability to answer simple and logical questions was one factor allowing the American educational establishment to accept evolution hook, line, and sinker, while rejecting the historical creation account of the Bible.

Even today most Christians do not know the answer to questions as basic as " Where did Cain find a wife?" The problem with not having reasonable answers to basic questions as basic questions is that it brings all if Christianity into question. Why should people believe in a God whom they cannot see, if believers in that God cannot answer life’s simplest questions about the past and our origin's?
The reason the answer to this question is not immediately apparent is that we have all been trained to think like evolutionists. Evolution was founded on a principle of modern geology called uniformitarianism. This is the belief that small changes over vast periods of time caused the massive geologic (and later Darwin added biological) changes we see around us. In essence, we are trained to believe that everything has essentially operated as we see it today. However, this is not what the Bible teaches. The Bible teaches that mankind was created perfect, without flaws. It was only after man's disobedience that imperfection entered God's creation. Thus mankind, as originally created, would not have had the myriad of genetic mistakes now present in our mistakes now present in our DNA. In opposition of what evolution teaches, mutations or mistakes on our DNA, do not lead to better and improved humans. These mistakes cause hundreds of debilitating illnesses and birth defects. The reason all of us are not born with enormous numbers of medical problems is because our genes are a combination of the characteristics of our parents. Only when both parents have the same mistake in their genes do their children manifest the resulting genetic problem.

Furthermore, these genetic mistakes accumulate and increase with time. In other words, the information in our DNA gets more garbled-it never increases in clarity. Since mistakes are accumulated in our DNA, it is logical to assume that as we go back in time there would be less mistakes. The reason brothers and sisters cannot marry today is because they are likely to have similar DNA errors leading to children with birth defects. However, there were no moral laws against children intermarrying until after the time of Moses. This was approximately 4,000 years ago and at least 2,000 years after the creation of mankind. Before that time sibling marriage was probably quite common. The Bible states that Adam and Eve had MANY sons and daughters. Jewish tradition suggested that they had 33 sons and 23 daughters! Cain merely married his sister.

The reason we don't realize this obvious answer is because we have been trained to believe things have always been the way they are today. The past, and the present, becomes far more understandable as we view it from a Biblical perspective. This viewpoint acknowledges that the past, has at times, been very different than the present."


----

/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3


--
/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3
That's the answer that I knew you'd post. That we are all imbreds. Unfortunately that's possibly the worst reasoning for it. Just because we have imperfections in our DNA does not mean that we all originated from the same two people. How did races develope then? Where did it ever state in the bible that he married his sister? You can't just start assuming things to make the bible work.

After a few generations of being completely imbred, birth would end up resulting in the death of the child at an early age. Look at what happens when animals become imbred. Our genetic defects would be a lot more serious than they are today if we all were populated from two people.

It also wouldn't make all the other stories in the bible make sense, due to the vast popluation shortly after those stories. Come on, you honestly think this world was popluated by two people?

----




[fag]Aigimbooze[/fag]
Quote
We should learn to block all those pias fucks from our forum


--
Quote


Carbon dating isn't accurate you say? I'm sorry but you are incorrect there.


So you're saying Radiometric dating methods are "absolute" & that they are accurate and reliable? Well the reality is although at one time there were dozens of features of the human body listed as vestigial, most have been shown to have important functions. After all, even if a few parts have lost their original function that does not prove evolution. To demonstrate evolution, you need to show the development of completely new structures, not the loss and degeneration of previous characteristics.

Quote
Using carbon-14 dating you can accurately determine a substance's age as long as it's not more than 70,000 years.


It seems whenever the worldview of evolution is questioned, this topic always comes up. Let me first explain how carbon dating works and then show you the assumptions it is based on. Radiation from the sun strikes the atmosphere of the earth all day long. This energy converts about 21 pounds of nitrogen into radioactive carbon 14. This radioactive carbon 14 slowly decays back into normal, stable nitrogen. Extensive laboratory testing has shown that about half of the C-14 molecules will decay in 5730 years. This is called the half-life. After another 5730 years half of the remaining C-14 will decay leaving only ¼ of the original C-14. It goes from ½ to ¼ to 1/8, etc. In theory it would never totally disappear, but after about 5 half lives the difference is not measurable with any degree of accuracy. This is why most people say carbon dating is only good for objects less than 40,000 years old. Nothing on earth carbon dates in the millions of years, because the scope of carbon dating only extends a few thousand years. Willard Libby invented the carbon dating technique in the early 1950's. The amount of carbon 14 in the atmosphere today (about .0000765%), is assumed there would be the same amount found in living plants or animals since the plants breath CO2 and animals eat plants. Carbon 14 is the radio-active version of carbon.

Since sunlight causes the formation of C-14 in the atmosphere, and normal radioactive decay takes it out, there must be a point where the formation rate and the decay rate equalizes. This is called the point of equilibrium. Let me illustrate: If you were trying to fill a barrel with water but there were holes drilled up the side of the barrel, as you filled the barrel it would begin leaking out the holes. At some point you would be putting it in and it would be leaking out at the same rate. You will not be able to fill the barrel past this point of equilibrium. In the same way the C-14 is being formed and decaying simultaneously. A freshly created earth would require about 30,000 years for the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere to reach this point of equilibrium because it would leak out as it is being filled. Tests indicate that the earth has still not reached equilibrium. There is more C-14 in the atmosphere now than there was 40 years ago. This would prove the earth is not yet 30,000 years old! This also means that plants and animals that lived in the past had less C-14 in them than do plants and animals today. Just this one fact totally upsets data obtained by C-14 dating.

The carbon in the atmosphere normally combines with oxygen to make carbon dioxide (CO2). Plants breathe CO2 and make it part of their tissue. Animals eat the plants and make it part of their tissues. A very small percentage of the carbon plants take in is radioactive C-14. When a plant or animal dies it stops taking in air and food so it should not be able to get any new C-14. The C-14 in the plant or animal will begin to decay back to normal nitrogen. The older an object is, the less carbon-14 it contains. One gram of carbon from living plant material causes a Geiger counter to click 16 times per minute as the C-14 decays. A sample that causes 8 clicks per minute would be 5,730 years old (the sample has gone through one half life), and so on. Although this technique looks good at first, carbon-14 dating rests on two simple assumptions. They are, obviously, assuming the amount of carbon-14 in the atmosphere has always been constant, and its rate of decay has always been constant. Neither of these assumptions is provable or reasonable.
An illustration may help: Imagine you found a candle burning in a room, and you wanted to determine how long it was burning before you found it. You could measure the present height of the candle (say, seven inches) and the rate of burn (say, an inch per hour). In order to find the length of time since the candle was lit we would be forced to make some assumptions. We would, obviously, have to assume that the candle has always burned at the same rate, and assumes an initial height of the candle.
The answer changes based on the assumptions. Similarly, scientists do not know that the carbon-14 decay rate has been constant. They do not know that the amount of carbon-14 in the atmosphere is constant. Present testing shows the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere has been increasing since it was first measured in the 1950's. This may be tied in to the declining strength of the magnetic field.

Despite what people have been led to believe, there are no dating methods which give an absolute date for the formation of the earth. All dating methods are based on non-provable assumptions about some event in the past. Furthermore, there is a strong bias to reject any dating method which does not allow enough time for evolution to have happened. To understand the validity of any date, the reader must gain an understanding of how all dating methods work. The following illustration should help:

Suppose you were up at 6:00 a.m. and happened to see a friend who lives in a nearby town. You observe that he is walking along at 2 miles an hour and you know that he lives 16 miles away. You can easily use the formula at the top of the illustration to calculate that your friend left home 8 hours earlier. You have just performed a dating method of how long your friend has been on the road. However, something doesn't make sense. Why would you friend be up all night walking? Although you used the correct formula, your assumptions may not have been correct. Perhaps your friend stayed with someone in town and woke up in minutes before for a morning stroll. In this case, you have used the 'Wrong Initial Amount' in your calculation. Perhaps he took a shortcut which cut 12 miles of his walk. In this case there was 'CONTAMINATION' of the total amount. Perhaps since you last saw your friend, he has taken up marathon running and average 8 miles and hour (only having slowed down just before you saw him). In this case you have used the wrong 'Average Rate'. The point is, wrong assumptions lead to wrong answers.

In all dating methods the initial amount is an assumption, the estimate of contamination is an assumption, and the overall rate is an assumption. The only things which can be known for sure are the present amount and the present rate.

Unless you estimate the initial amount correctly, the average rate correctly, and the amount of contamination correctly, your answer will be wrong . And depending on your assumptions, it could be very, very wrong.

There are actually very few dating methods which seem to indicate that the earth is extremely old. In the other hand there are many dating methods which indicate that the earth is quite young, then evolution is obviously a myth and creation becomes the only logical alternative. Could this be the primary reason that only those methods which seem to indicate very old ages are acceptable?




----

/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3


--
/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3
Quote
Where did it ever state in the bible that he married his sister?

It also wouldn't make all the other stories in the bible make sense, due to the vast popluation shortly after those stories. Come on, you honestly think this world was popluated by two people?

----




[fag]Aigimbooze[/fag]
Quote
We should learn to block all those pias fucks from our forum


Some people feel that there had to have been others living around the time of Adam and Eve because of a "problem" with whom Cain would have married. Cain was Adam and Eve’s son. The Bible explains how Cain killed his brother, Abel, and was banished for what he had done.

The Bible says Cain went to the land of Nod, and knew his wife. Some people feel that this means Cain met his wife in Nod. So the question is, if Adam and Even had Cain and Abel, and Cain killed Abel, who did Cain marry? It appears that the question is answered by suggesting that other people unrelated to Adam and Eve were alive at the time, however, if we learn to stick with God's Word, and not man's fallible word, we will never be let down. Genesis 5:4 explains how Adam lived 800 years and had sons and daughters!

How many kids could two people have in 800 years! So Cain would have more than likely married a sister of his. This would take us into a whole new question of "Is it right for them to marry brothers and sisters". The laws forbidding it weren't given until over 2000 years later. Secondly, they wouldn't experience any of the genetic problems we have today with close-relational breeding. This is an entirely different question, so I'll leave it at that!

----

/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3


--
/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3
Quote


If the great flood is a reason you give for the reason why so many fossils are found to be at around the same time, then you can't actually say that the bible proves anything.


Fossils do not prove evolution, garsh!

Fossils. The very name brings to mind images of untold ages past. . . dinosaurs roaming ancient swamps. . . slow but steady progression as simple sea life was transformed into today's complex variety. Is this an accurate reconstruction of the past of the past or is a worldwide flood the correct explanation of the fossil record?

Many people have been led to believe that the existence of fossils proves that millions of years have passed. In reality, fossils can form quite rapidly. Heat and pressure from rapid burial can accelerate the fossilization process. Geologic conditions following a worldwide flood would have exceeded anything imaginable today and must have led to the rapid fossilization of the plants and animals on a massive scale.

Fossilization can happen rapidly under the right conditions, but it is a rare event today. Yet there are mass burial sites throughout the world that are tightly packed with millions of fossils. Apparently, billions of organisms were washed together by the mass destruction of the worldwide flood, completely buried, and rapidly fossilized. These massive and extensive fossil graveyards would be the predictable result of a worldwide flood, but would of a worldwide flood, but would hardly fit the slow accumulation model which continues to be taught as the primary explanation of the fossil record. Something dramatically different must have happened in the past to have caused the wide spread fossilization which we find all over our planet. Noah's flood would have been this event.

Geologists and paleontologists operating from a Christian worldview acknowledge the possibility that a worldwide catastrophe buried unimaginable amounts of plants and animals. This was the disaster documented in the first book of the Bible. It lasted at least one year and had reverberations which lasted for centuries. Sea creatures would have been buried first (the salinity and temperature of the oceans would have changed during the catastrophe, wiping out massive numbers of these sea creatures). Even after the flood, plant and animal extinction would have been common as many types of creatures failed to adapt to dramatically changing conditions.

Although any order of burial in a flood would be possible, the general tendency would be for sea life to be buried in the lower rock layers and land animals to be buried in different rock layers corresponding to their ecological niche. This tendency is generally found.

Creation geologists (and there are many of them) believe that the majority of the geologic record is a result of geologic activity during and subsequent to the year-long worldwide flood. This flood would have been an incredible complex event.

Geologist and paleontologists operating from an evolutionary world view acknowledge local catastrophes, but do not allow consideration of a worldwide flood. This would wipe out the "slow change over eons of time" interpretation of the fossils which is needed to continue believing in evolution.

Only one interpretation of the evidence can be correct and only one interpretation of the evidence agrees with what the Bible claims is the history of our planet.

----

/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3


--
/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3
Ok Chezzin, I like you and everything but you aren't Dr. Kent Hovind, and what you just copy / pasted does not answer my question. Perhaps it doesn't answer my question because you cannot answer it. You can keep copy and pasting things, but it really fails to answer what I've said.

You posted contradicting articles as well. Do better at googling.

----




[fag]Aigimbooze[/fag]
Quote
We should learn to block all those pias fucks from our forum


--
Quote
Ok Chezzin, I like you and everything but you, and what you just copy / pasted does not answer my question. Perhaps it doesn't answer my question because you cannot answer it.


As I have learned in experiences w/ people; you can sit & try to have a good discussion (public internet forums is not the best place imo) w/ people, but no matter how/what you do to answer people's questions; sometimes w/ some ppl they never fully grasp that certain type of comprehension of the different retrospects in the discussion & inside of them they think you never really answered the question & sometimes have more to ask. Not just particularly this thread, but eventually some discussions (especially on a thread merely titled "Proof of God") result in not astutely accomplishing anything and are left unsettled/uncomprimised from where it first started.

"People will debate and will usually walk away w/ absolutely accomplishing nothing. Sometimes no matter what you say, how much you argue you rarely change a person/their beliefs and as Paterooni mentioned often get scolded. Some people tho tend to walk away w/ mixed emotions on these issues, but w/e this is <PiaS>; not a religious debate orginization. We play wow & we're here to have fun, but when people "start"/want to "stir the water" after someone just makes a post to "poke fun at" your bound to get people who will take it a step over the "line", which can be clearly seen here in this post.

All I have to say is GO PLAY SOME WOW, and if your gonna post something about the issues of religion and politics be careful!"

PS. Get level 60 again, lol. ><


Quote
You can keep copy and pasting things[QUOTE]

This week has been a very hectic,busy,sleepless, & raidless week for me as I have mentioned while we were talking on AIM. Which is the reason why @tm I do not have the time to get beasty like Paterooni & go through every one of your questions & provoke a good discussion out of them, which is rare on public forums & usually turn into a "lol internets" fight.

[QUOTE]but it really fails to answer what I've said


I'ts pretty good... Test, do research yourself of credible things; some of the stuff we study can be total BS & if we're not sure we can just ask, but don't always go to the beehive when you have jars of honey @ your disposal.

Ask yourself:
http://drdino.com/articles.php?spec=76
Copied & Pasted for your sake
The test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to basic questions. Some well-meaning, but misguided, people think evolution is a reasonable theory to explain man’s questions about the universe. Evolution is not a good theory—it is just a pagan religion masquerading as science. The following questions were distributed to the 750-plus people who attended my debate at Winona State University in Winona, Minnesota, on January 9, 1993. (The videotaped debate is #6, $9.95.) Questions added since the debate remarked with an asterisk (*).

1. Where did the space for the universe come from?
2. Where did matter come from?
3. Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)?
4. How did matter get so perfectly organized?
5. Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing?
6. When, where, why, and how did life come from non-living matter?
7. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?
8. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?
9. Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to surviv e, or the species? How do you explain this?)
10. How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce Chinese books.)
11. Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor?
12. Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occ urred if evolution were true?
13. When, where, why, and how did:
* Single-celled plants become multi-celled? (Where are the two and three-celled intermediates?)
* Single-celled animals evolve?
* Fish change to amphibians?
* Amphibians change to reptiles?
* Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are all very different!)
* How did the intermediate forms live?
14. When, where, why, how, and from what did:
* Whales evolve?
* Sea horses evolve?
* Bats evolve?
* Eyes evolve?
* Ears evolve?
* Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve?
15. Which evolved first (how, and how long; did it work without the others)?
* The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body’s resistance to its own digestive juice (stomach, intestines, etc.)?
* The drive to reproduce or the ability to reproduce?
* The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them, the throat, or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs?
* DNA or RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts?
* The termite or the flagella in its intestines that actually digest the cellulose?
* The plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants?
* The bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or muscles to move the bones?
* The nervous system, repair system, or hormone system?
* The immune system or the need for it?
16. There are many thousands of examples of symbiosis that defy an evolutionary explanation. Why must we teach students that evolution is the only explanation for these relationships?
17. How would evolution explain mimicry? Did the plants and animals develop mimicry by chance, by their intelligent choice, or by design?
18. When, where, why, and how did man evolve feelings? Love, mercy, guilt, etc. would never evolve in the theory of evolution.
19. *How did photosynthesis evolve?
20. *How did thought evolve?
21. *How did flowering plants evolve, and from that?
22. *What kind of evolutionist are you? Why are you not one of the other eight or ten kinds?
23. What would you have said fifty years ago if I told you I had a living coelacanth in my aquarium?
24. *Is there one clear prediction of macroevolution that has proved true?
25. *What is so scientific about the idea of hydrogen as becoming human?
26. *Do you honestly believe that everything came from nothing?

After you have answered the preceding questions, please look carefully at your answers and thoughtfully consider the following questions.

1. Are you sure your answers are reasonable, right, and scientifically provable, or do you just believe that it may have happened the way you have answered? (Do these answers reflect your religion or your science?)
2. Do your answers show more or less faith than the person who says, "God must have designed it"?
3. Is it possible that an unseen Creator designed this universe? If God is excluded at the beginning of the discussion by your definition of science, how could it be shown that He did create the universe if He did?
4. Is it wise and fair to present the theory of evolution to students as fact?
5. What is the end result of a belief in evolution (lifestyle, society, attitude about others, eternal destiny, etc.)?
6. Do people accept evolution because of the following factors?
* It is all they have been taught.
* They like the freedom from God (no moral absolutes, etc.).
* They are bound to support the theory for fear of losing their job or status or grade point average.
* They are too proud to admit they are wrong.
* Evolution is the only philosophy that can be used to justify their political agenda.
7. Should we continue to use outdated, disproved, questionable, or inconclusive evidences to support the theory of evolution because we don’t have a suitable substitute (Piltdown man, recapitulation, archaeopteryx, Lucy, Java man, Neanderthal man, horse evolution, vestigial organs, etc.)?
8. Should parents be allowed to require that evolution not be taught as fact in their school system unless equal time is given to other theories of origins (like divine creation)?
9. What are you risking if you are wrong? As one of my debate opponents said, "Either there is a God or there is not. Both possibilities are frightening."
10. Why are many evolutionists afraid of the idea of creationism being presented in public schools? If we are not supposed to teach religion in schools, then why not get evolution out of the textbooks? It is just a religious worldview.







----

/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3


--
/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3
please post the points he made that were contradictory, that would make your position more understandable

----
Kylera - 60 Discipline Priest - Good Twin
Kyriel - 60 Shadow Priest - Evil Twin
300 Alchemy, 300 Herbalism, 300 Tailoring, 300 Facemelting


--
Kylera - 60 Discipline Priest - Good Twin
Kyriel - 60 Shadow Priest - Evil Twin
300 Alchemy, 300 Herbalism, 300 Tailoring, 300 Facemelting
ahhh i wish your guys posts weren't so long, cuz i'm kinda lazy and don't feel like reading them....sorry

----
RICE OR DIE motha fucka!!
----
Bruce Lee FTW


--
I Pledge to ALWAYS do it for the Lobster.
Some people are starting to take things personally I think, not chezzin or myself though, considering I am pretty sure each other knows that we could care less on the religious beliefs of others.

I have done this research out of school for my own reasons. Different sources will of course have different comments because nothing can be proven about this. If you have "faith" then you're going to be blinded by everything else, not a bad thing, it's pretty much the definition that religious people give to faith. It's believing without seeing any proof.

Contradictory statements meaning that you are still picking and choosing certain parts of sience to believe to explain parts of the bible. Earlier you used fossils similar dates to explain the great flood. Now you say that you can't accurately determine the date of a fossil. Point being, you are defending religion like people defend the beliefs of a cult. Without listening to reasonable ideas.

----




[fag]Aigimbooze[/fag]
Quote
We should learn to block all those pias fucks from our forum


--
I would also like to say that this is my last post in this thread, so I wanted to make it good.




CHEZZIN

----




[fag]Aigimbooze[/fag]
Quote
We should learn to block all those pias fucks from our forum


--
well i dunno who's taking things personally, things seem civil to me.

But I just want to know what you're talking about. I didnt see chezzin say anything that was blinded or contradictory.

Allow me to pose a hypothesis here. It sounds to me like you have even more faith than Chezzin and I.

Chezzen and I make detailed indepth posts, with all sorts of evidence, empirical and anecdotal yet all you say is "there's all sorts of proof of evolution and all sorts of stuff that disproves the Bible" yet provide no specific facts to back this up.

The crux of your argument seems to be: "if you believe in a creator, and have faith in Him, then you are disqualified from participating in an intelligent debate." I find that logic a little suspect, when we're the ones actually explaining our positions.



----
Kylera - 60 Discipline Priest - Good Twin
Kyriel - 60 Shadow Priest - Evil Twin
300 Alchemy, 300 Herbalism, 300 Tailoring, 300 Facemelting


--
Kylera - 60 Discipline Priest - Good Twin
Kyriel - 60 Shadow Priest - Evil Twin
300 Alchemy, 300 Herbalism, 300 Tailoring, 300 Facemelting
Quote
Earlier you used fossils similar dates to explain the great flood. Now you say that you can't accurately determine the date of a fossil.


I can't use fossils to age anything, I didn't say that. All I'm saying is fossils have to be formed rather quickly. Yet those who claim evolution is absolute truth seem to tell us that the existence of fossils proves the world is millions of years old.

Living creatures do not slowly become fossils, they break down. A rapid pressurization is required to fossilize living creatures, because, as I said, they break down. They're biodegradeable.

Now, for actually looking at the earth and seeing how old it looks, you can refer to this article for some amazing evidence of a young earth.

http://answersingenesis.org/creation/v23/i1/howold.asp

Really the age of the earth can't be proven, you can only look at evidence supporting a position and determine which cases add up more. I simply think the millions of year/evolution case is illogical and there is no real evidence for it. All I hear is intellectuals telling me to believe what they say or I will be labeled as a blinded by faith koolaide drinker.

Yet when you ask them to justify their positions, I get snide responses reminding me how I am not qualified to question their position.

Appealing to authority doesn't impress me. Convince me by building a case, not by building a convential wisdom.

----
Kylera - 60 Discipline Priest - Good Twin
Kyriel - 60 Shadow Priest - Evil Twin
300 Alchemy, 300 Herbalism, 300 Tailoring, 300 Facemelting


--
Kylera - 60 Discipline Priest - Good Twin
Kyriel - 60 Shadow Priest - Evil Twin
300 Alchemy, 300 Herbalism, 300 Tailoring, 300 Facemelting
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,/:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ,; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,/`:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::`\,; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,/`:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::`\,; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,/`::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;::::::::::::::::::::`\, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,/`:::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;:::::::::::::::::::`\, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; __; ; ,/`:::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;:::::::::::::::::`\,; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ,~``:::::```/`:::::::::::::::::::::::,______;;;;:::::::::::::::::::`\,; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; |::::::::::::|:::::::::::::::::::::: ::---.,|::::|::: :::::::::::::`\, ; ; ; HEEEEEY; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; |::::::::::::|:::::::::::::::::::::: ___O__ /::: ::::: ::::::::::::`\,; ; ; ; ; ;YOOOUUUU; ; ; ; ; ;
; ;-,:::::::::|::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_,,/:::::::::|:::,___:::`\;_; ; ; ; ; ; GUUUUUYYYS; ;
; ; ; -,::::::|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ``::::::::::::: : ,,O\:::|::|; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ;`-,:::|::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ,_:o:___:o__\::::-,__|::|: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; -,|::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,/`:::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::: | ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; \:::::::::::::::::::::::::::,/:::,-~~~-,: ::::::::::::|/ ; ; ; ; ; WHAT'S; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::|: ``U```|_|``````\: ::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ;GOING ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;`\::::::::::::::::::::::::::|/`: : : : : : : :|:::|::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;ON ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;\:::::::::::::::::::::::::|\,: :,_ : : : :_: /: :::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; IN; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; \::::::::::::::::::::::::|:`\~-| |____| |/: :::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ;THIS ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,/:::::::::::::::::::::::: :: ,,_____,/: :::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ;THREAD? ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; /:::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ___,,,,,,__/::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;`~--,,_::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;`~--,::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; `~,::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; `~,_:::::::::::::::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; `~,::::::::::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; `~-_______/; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

----


--
"Some douche bag, pony tail wearing, hippie FUCK..." -Sip

Quote
If you have "faith" then you're going to be blinded by everything else, not a bad thing, it's pretty much the definition that religious people give to faith. It's believing without seeing any proof.


That's not exactly the case in a scientific sense, but faith has a greater effect on the spiritual side of things. Notice, that you said "religious" people; that mainly deals w/ the spiritual scene as in a faith that you believe in God that you have never seen, which is totally a different subject usually dealing w/ athiests & agnostics (notice how this threads name is proof of God, but the main issues have been about evolution & creation; all of it evidentally goes back to spirituality & what people choose to believe). Now don't misunderstand/misinterpret me, Faith also has a role when it come to scientific issues. People are not blinded and do see a spiritual & scientific correlation b/w the two; often people who don't really comprehend this associate their faith as being just a "blind faith".

People, w/o picking and choosing certain parts of sience to believe the bible, have that faith because they do see the evidence in science that prove their beliefs are correct and they see that both go hand-in-hand. For instance, people like Lurther who believe that there is a God, but question the credibility of evolution.

Quote from Luther in a previous post: "I don't believe in evol (evol in the science does not equate speciation - that is simple organisms -> cat-> dog-> ape-> human being. I have study biology at the university of wisconsin milwaukee and have a master in microbiology - the more i learn about how our world works - the complexity of it...i question how one would believe in evol...

evol assumes 1) everything happen by chance 2) no goals/purpose etc."



Quote
Contradictory statements meaning that you are still picking and choosing certain parts of sience to believe to explain parts of the bible.


How can any of that be contradictory statements if someone picks & chooses certain parts of sience to explain the bible (You can take anything from sience; there's will be an explanation for an issue/topic & you can take any issue/topic from the bible and do the same).
When you asked you questions you picked and choosed which parts you'd like to be answered and discussed all for debates sake; if we were to pull out every issue/topic under the sun we'd be here forever (moving @ a slower rate on public forums).



Quote
Earlier you used fossils similar dates to explain the great flood. Now you say that you can't accurately determine the date of a fossil.


There’s no such thing as a “fossil record”; there are simply fossils in the dirt. This is much more evidence for a worldwide flood than for a slow, gradual, evolutionary change over time. None of the fossils found so far have shown any evidence for the evolutionary theory. They only show evidence of rapid burial, often in mass graves of millions of fossils, indicated the Biblical flood story is the most likely explanation for their existence.



Quote
Point being, you are defending religion like people defend the beliefs of a cult.


We are not defending religion like people defending the beliefs of a cult. We are basically having a discussion not for us, but for people/outside observers who'll take a look @ both sides and comtemplate on the issues & figure out which are right or wrong.

Quote
Without listening to reasonable ideas.


Orly?

I always see this pattern in other discussions & is obvious also in this one. For example, Camera was a catalyst that started the discussion. Camera then asks questions & provokes a discussion. People then are provoked to make detailed and indepth posts that answer Camera's questions with different evidences, but yet are accused of not listening to "reasonable ideas". What reasonable ideas, I might ask; you mainly threw stuff/questons out there for us to answer & provoke us to prove that our beliefs are infallible, and while you sat there w/ no specific facts or anything to see that your end would be credible. You replies were mainly critiquing our post and saying we are just wrong b/c we believe in a creator and have faith, but you never really set your "reasonable ideas" out on the dinner table. It seems your saying this is what the higher intellectuals say about this and here are some of the questions, but never give anything/"reasonable ideas" for us to listen to.

Nothing personal, lol.


----

/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3


--
/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3
Quote
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,/:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ,; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,/`:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::`\,; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,/`:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::`\,; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,/`::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;::::::::::::::::::::`\, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,/`:::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;:::::::::::::::::::`\, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; __; ; ,/`:::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;:::::::::::::::::`\,; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ,~``:::::```/`:::::::::::::::::::::::,______;;;;:::::::::::::::::::`\,; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; |::::::::::::|:::::::::::::::::::::: ::---.,|::::|::: :::::::::::::`\, ; ; ; HEEEEEY; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; |::::::::::::|:::::::::::::::::::::: ___O__ /::: ::::: ::::::::::::`\,; ; ; ; ; ;YOOOUUUU; ; ; ; ; ;
; ;-,:::::::::|::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_,,/:::::::::|:::,___:::`\;_; ; ; ; ; ; GUUUUUYYYS; ;
; ; ; -,::::::|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ``::::::::::::: : ,,O\:::|::|; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ;`-,:::|::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ,_:o:___:o__\::::-,__|::|: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; -,|::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,/`:::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::: | ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; \:::::::::::::::::::::::::::,/:::,-~~~-,: ::::::::::::|/ ; ; ; ; ; WHAT'S; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::|: ``U```|_|``````\: ::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ;GOING ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;`\::::::::::::::::::::::::::|/`: : : : : : : :|:::|::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;ON ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;\:::::::::::::::::::::::::|\,: :,_ : : : :_: /: :::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; IN; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; \::::::::::::::::::::::::|:`\~-| |____| |/: :::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ;THIS ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,/:::::::::::::::::::::::: :: ,,_____,/: :::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ;THREAD? ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; /:::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ___,,,,,,__/::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;`~--,,_::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;`~--,::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; `~,::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; `~,_:::::::::::::::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; `~,::::::::::::::::: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; `~-_______/; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

----


HEY IAN, WHAT'S GOIN ON W/ YOU; WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN LATELY NIG?!?! I MISSED RECIEVING YOUR BLESSINGS!

----

/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3


--
/KillaCAMera
AZN blud = 1337 54uc3


<<< 1 2 3 4 >>>
[Back to Index]