Creationists

[Hollie]

The Bible speaks of dinosaurs but it doesn't go into great lengths as to what their diet consisted of or how the competition for food was.

Try Reading the book of Enoch, it has a lot about the dinosaurs in it.

I have no idea who Ken Hamm is, nor do I care.

Why do you think such little detail is devoted to the gawds wiping humanity from the planet? That seems like an important detail.

Any thoughts as to why the gawds would litter the planet with fosill relics that depict an ancient earth when the planet is only 6,000 years old?

Have the gawds played a cruel joke on you?

What are gawds? Humanity hasn't been wiped from the planet.

6,000 years old is a number you keep bringing up. Not me.

It's clear that you cannot have an honest debate. You have done nothing but pettifog, insult and ridicule that which you don't believe nor know anything about.

You cannot even muster a defensible argument to support your position without cut and pasting.

I'll take your inability to discuss manners in a rational manner as a concession.

Class dismissed.

Bailing out when the questions are difficult, as usual. That's a common tactic of fundies. It's a simple matter to make grandiose claims and cut and paste alleged bible prophesies but when you're pressed to defend such silliness, you head for the exits in panic.

I will admit to an inability to discuss supernaturalism, your alleged spirit world, magic and a litany of creationist claims to magic in a rational fashion when creationists are unable to themselves discuss such silliness in a rational manner.

What is rational about supermagicalism?

 

[daws101]

Top Ten Creationist Arguments - YouTube

bravo!

 

[pjnlsn]

Actually it was from the Discovery Channel.

Tell me when did evolution begin if not at the origin of life?

As noted, yours is a common misrepresentation of Christian ministries. Have you ever studied science at an accredited school?

Answer my question please.

By the definition of 'begin' and 'origin,' if the other terms coincide, a question asking if the origin of A is the beginning of B will have an affirmative answer.

"When did * begin if not at the origin of *?" or: "* began when it originated"

But, if by chance you thought that an answer to your question would be of some great value, it's merely true by definition.

Also, if you meant to link this with other things you have written or quoted:

According to evolutionary theory, life began billions of years ago, when a group of chemicals inadvertently organized themselves into a self-replicating molecule. This tiny molecule gave rise to everything that has ever lived on the planet. Different and more complex organisms grew from this simple beginning through mutation of DNA and natural selection.

Calling something by a name doesn't change what it is, and defining something a certain way doesn't mean anyone you communicate with defines it similarly.

You could define evolutionary theory as the change from when there was no cellular matter to when there was, you could say evolutionary theory is the study of strawberry cultivation, it's still not, if I know what he means, what he is talking about, in the posts which precede the above by a few pages. What has been referenced is that section of biology.

If perhaps your question bolded at the top stands alone, and you associate it with nothing, then so be it. But the answer is unsurprising, if you expected otherwise.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Why do you think such little detail is devoted to the gawds wiping humanity from the planet? That seems like an important detail.

Any thoughts as to why the gawds would litter the planet with fosill relics that depict an ancient earth when the planet is only 6,000 years old?

Have the gawds played a cruel joke on you?

What are gawds? Humanity hasn't been wiped from the planet.

6,000 years old is a number you keep bringing up. Not me.

It's clear that you cannot have an honest debate. You have done nothing but pettifog, insult and ridicule that which you don't believe nor know anything about.

You cannot even muster a defensible argument to support your position without cut and pasting.

I'll take your inability to discuss manners in a rational manner as a concession.

Class dismissed.

Bailing out when the questions are difficult, as usual. That's a common tactic of fundies. It's a simple matter to make grandiose claims and cut and paste alleged bible prophesies but when you're pressed to defend such silliness, you head for the exits in panic.

I will admit to an inability to discuss supernaturalism, your alleged spirit world, magic and a litany of creationist claims to magic in a rational fashion when creationists are unable to themselves discuss such silliness in a rational manner.

What is rational about supermagicalism?

I've answered your questions. And I haven't bailed out on or dodged any of them with the exception of the strawmen arguments you created. Those are not worth my time.

You haven't challenged any prophecies for me to have to defend. Oh but that's just yet another strawman of your creation.

Supermagicalism isn't even a word. Just another creation of your own delusional thinking.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

As noted, yours is a common misrepresentation of Christian ministries. Have you ever studied science at an accredited school?

Answer my question please.

By the definition of 'begin' and 'origin,' if the other terms coincide, a question asking if the origin of A is the beginning of B will have an affirmative answer.

"When did * begin if not at the origin of *?" or: "* began when it originated"

But, if by chance you thought that an answer to your question would be of some great value, it's merely true by definition.

Also, if you meant to link this with other things you have written or quoted:

According to evolutionary theory, life began billions of years ago, when a group of chemicals inadvertently organized themselves into a self-replicating molecule. This tiny molecule gave rise to everything that has ever lived on the planet. Different and more complex organisms grew from this simple beginning through mutation of DNA and natural selection.

Calling something by a name doesn't change what it is, and defining something a certain way doesn't mean anyone you communicate with defines it similarly.

You could define evolutionary theory as the change from when there was no cellular matter to when there was, you could say evolutionary theory is the study of strawberry cultivation, it's still not, if I know what he means, what he is talking about, in the posts which precede the above by a few pages. What has been referenced is that section of biology.

If perhaps your question bolded at the top stands alone, and you associate it with nothing, then so be it. But the answer is unsurprising, if you expected otherwise.

Definiton of "origin":

1: ancestry, parentage
2(a) : rise, beginning, or derivation from a source (b) : the point at which something begins or rises or from which it derives <the origin of the custom>; also : something that creates, causes, or gives rise to another <a spring is the origin of the brook>

 

[daws101]

You do know that what your doing is fulfulling biblical prophecy.

So keep it up!

right.....more paranoid shit ..no biblical prophecy has ever come to pass..

Sure it has and there is plenty of evidence that proves it. Here a just a few of the most recent ones.

sadly no what you posted is a intentional misinterpretation of un provable past events and not present day or future events.
not one has any quantifiable evidence to bolster those claims

 

[Lonestar_logic]

right.....more paranoid shit ..no biblical prophecy has ever come to pass..

Sure it has and there is plenty of evidence that proves it. Here a just a few of the most recent ones.

sadly no what you posted is a intentional misinterpretation of un provable past events and not present day or future events.
not one has any quantifiable evidence to bolster those claims

Same has been said about the dating methods of evolutionist.

 

[daws101]

You and Hollie tell me where you went to college and I will gladly answer your question.

hey slapdick you already did (Mechanical Engineering at the University of Arizona)

I've posted my educational background several times...no needed to post it again.

Mechanical Engineering at the University of Arizona (7 words)

I've posted my educational background several times...no needed to post it again. (13 words)

Wouldn't it have been easier just to post it again?

no.. why? funny that you would get all anal about the number of words as you've used ten of thousands to describe A steaming pile of shit (5) words.

 

[daws101]

I've witnessed lives that were changed immediatly after accepting Jesus as their Savior. Mine included. I would not be where I'm at now if not for the grace of God.

how did I know you'd say that...people changing their behavior is no proof that Jesus had any thing to do with it.

it has far more to do with with early indoctrination to a belief system and the individual personality of the "acceptor".
studies have shown that nearly all "the saved" are undereducated and highly sugestable.
there are also the conditions called suspension of disbelief and crowd psychology

Link to those studies please.

it's called google ..maybe you should try it..

 

[daws101]

Don't judge until you've walked a mile in my shoes.

no need, your story is no different from any other of the saved.
it most likely goes like this...you were raised in some branch of fundamentalism and some how lost faith , someone died or you got addicted or got someone pregnant etc..

OR you were raised in a family that had a faith but didn't attend church a lot and some or all of the previously mentioned stuff happened.
then you hit bottom or fucked up hard and went looking for answers.
no matter how you answer, I know I'm fairly close to the truth.

You don't know the first thing about my life. So please don't flatter yourself.

And your assumptions were not even close to the truth.

I'm not assuming and your answer proves it.

 

[daws101]

Sure it has and there is plenty of evidence that proves it. Here a just a few of the most recent ones.

sadly no what you posted is a intentional misinterpretation of un provable past events and not present day or future events.
not one has any quantifiable evidence to bolster those claims

Same has been said about the dating methods of evolutionist.

and it was wrong done for the same reason you needed to answer my statement.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

how did I know you'd say that...people changing their behavior is no proof that Jesus had any thing to do with it.

it has far more to do with with early indoctrination to a belief system and the individual personality of the "acceptor".
studies have shown that nearly all "the saved" are undereducated and highly sugestable.
there are also the conditions called suspension of disbelief and crowd psychology

Link to those studies please.

it's called google ..maybe you should try it..

You made the claim. Either you support it or admit you lied.

Makes no difference to me.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

no need, your story is no different from any other of the saved.
it most likely goes like this...you were raised in some branch of fundamentalism and some how lost faith , someone died or you got addicted or got someone pregnant etc..

OR you were raised in a family that had a faith but didn't attend church a lot and some or all of the previously mentioned stuff happened.
then you hit bottom or fucked up hard and went looking for answers.
no matter how you answer, I know I'm fairly close to the truth.

You don't know the first thing about my life. So please don't flatter yourself.

And your assumptions were not even close to the truth.

I'm not assuming and your answer proves it.

Sure you were. You have no knowledge of my upbringing or what trials I may or may not have had in my life.

Nice try but a major fail on your part.

 

[daws101]

Link to those studies please.

it's called google ..maybe you should try it..

You made the claim. Either you support it or admit you lied.

Makes no difference to me.

BY posting what I did, automatically means I support it.
the onus is on you to prove it wrong..
calling me a liar is chicken shit.
doesn't the bible say something about bearing false wittiness?

 

[emilynghiem]

The Bible speaks of dinosaurs but it doesn't go into great lengths as to what their diet consisted of or how the competition for food was.

Try Reading the book of Enoch, it has a lot about the dinosaurs in it.

I have no idea who Ken Hamm is, nor do I care.

Why do you think such little detail is devoted to the gawds wiping humanity from the planet? That seems like an important detail.

Any thoughts as to why the gawds would litter the planet with fosill relics that depict an ancient earth when the planet is only 6,000 years old?

Have the gawds played a cruel joke on you?

What are gawds? Humanity hasn't been wiped from the planet.

6,000 years old is a number you keep bringing up. Not me.

It's clear that you cannot have an honest debate. You have done nothing but pettifog, insult and ridicule that which you don't believe nor know anything about.

You cannot even muster a defensible argument to support your position without cut and pasting.

I'll take your inability to discuss manners in a rational manner as a concession.

Class dismissed.

Gee, I hope this debate/discussion does not go on another 2,000-6,000 years!

The simplest way I know to settle this is to interpret 1,000 years as 1 day or age.
So the world is created in 6 stages, and in the 7th stage we are supposed to
evolve to spiritual maturity and achieve heavenly peace on earth.

it does not have to be LITERALLY 6 days or 6,000 years, but it is SYMBOLIC of stages.

The 6,000 years refers to the Mosaic lineage under Judaic law, for the Jews Christians and Muslims. The Gentiles under natural laws are going through a similar but separate process.

 

[daws101]

You don't know the first thing about my life. So please don't flatter yourself.

And your assumptions were not even close to the truth.

I'm not assuming and your answer proves it.

Sure you were. You have no knowledge of my upbringing or what trials I may or may not have had in my life.

Nice try but a major fail on your part.

wrong again it's not assuming, simply because your individual tale of woe falls into well worn patterns of behavior.
you're not nearly as seperate as you wish you were.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

it's called google ..maybe you should try it..

You made the claim. Either you support it or admit you lied.

Makes no difference to me.

BY posting what I did, automatically means I support it.
the onus is on you to prove it wrong..
calling me a liar is chicken shit.
doesn't the bible say something about bearing false wittiness?

No, it means you made the claim. Now it's up to you to support it with some documentation.

The onus is own you to prove your claim. Otherwise I have no choice but to think you are lying.

 

[daws101]

You made the claim. Either you support it or admit you lied.

Makes no difference to me.

BY posting what I did, automatically means I support it.
the onus is on you to prove it wrong..
calling me a liar is chicken shit.
doesn't the bible say something about bearing false wittiness?

No, it means you made the claim. Now it's up to you to support it with some documentation.

The onus is own you to prove your claim. Otherwise I have no choice but to think you are lying.

your ignorance prevents you from doing anything else.
like finding out for yourself

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I'm not assuming and your answer proves it.

Sure you were. You have no knowledge of my upbringing or what trials I may or may not have had in my life.

Nice try but a major fail on your part.

wrong again it's not assuming, simply because your individual tale of woe falls into well worn patterns of behavior.
you're not nearly as seperate as you wish you were.

Sorry to dissappoint you but your assumption is still incorrect.

I have no tales of woe.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

BY posting what I did, automatically means I support it.
the onus is on you to prove it wrong..
calling me a liar is chicken shit.
doesn't the bible say something about bearing false wittiness?

No, it means you made the claim. Now it's up to you to support it with some documentation.

The onus is own you to prove your claim. Otherwise I have no choice but to think you are lying.

your ignorance prevents you from doing anything else.
like finding out for yourself

So you admit there is no such information available.

Duly noted.