Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's still a young earth.
About 4 billion years is not young in human dimensions but young in the dimensions of a universe.
There is no evidence of an old earth except erroneous radiometric dating. There is evidence for a young earth.
If you think "young earth" means 6,000-10,000 years old planet Earth then normally no one is able to take such a nonsense serious.
That's the point.
Reality cares not about such an absurde "point" in verbal discussions of human beings about the nature of the nature. Cocodiles for example existed 350 million years ago too. About 1.5 million years ago our ancestors made camp fires and so and so on.
We should be teaching real science of a young earth in school instead of erroneous evolution.
Good grief. Do you like to teach analphabetism in schools too? Truth is always true - completely independent from anything else. Sure is criticism an important thing, specially in philosophy and science - also in politics and society - because critics helps to find what's true. But what you say here has nothing to do with critics nor with reality or truth. It's just simple nonsense.
Good God. Trying to talk false science in the religion forum.
The lizard didn't learn how to eat a pig from Darwin.
Do you really say you are convinced from the totally stupid nonsense you try to tell others in the name of the Christian religion? Why are you convinced from anti-knowledge and pseudo-belief? You are a cliche of atheists about Christians but not a real Christian on your own. What kind of game is this?
It's no game, but creation science. It was part of the scientific theory of origins prior to the 1850s until uniformitarianism and evolution replaced it. Most of the greatest scientists throughout history were Christians and creation scientists. Today, secular science has arbitrarily denied creation. There is no creation in evolution. We can observe creation. We cannot observe evolution. Humans cannot create a blade of grass from non-life. Yet, we can see that life begats life. Where did you go wrong with Catholicism?
Science has DISPROVEN the creation story. Nothing arbitrary about it.
We've been around 6,000 to 10,000 years.
That's a joke now, isn't it? Do you honestly say to me you believe the universe is 6,000 to 10,000 years old? Good grief. What did you learn in school?
It's still a young earth.
About 4 billion years is not young in human dimensions but young in the dimensions of a universe.
There is no evidence of an old earth except erroneous radiometric dating. There is evidence for a young earth.
If you think "young earth" means 6,000-10,000 years old planet Earth then normally no one is able to take such a nonsense serious.
That's the point.
Reality cares not about such an absurde "point" in verbal discussions of human beings about the nature of the nature. Cocodiles for example existed 350 million years ago too. About 1.5 million years ago our ancestors made camp fires and so and so on.
We should be teaching real science of a young earth in school instead of erroneous evolution.
Good grief. Do you like to teach analphabetism in schools too? Truth is always true - completely independent from anything else. Sure is criticism an important thing, specially in philosophy and science - also in politics and society - because critics helps to find what's true. But what you say here has nothing to do with critics nor with reality or truth. It's just simple nonsense.
Good God. Trying to talk false science in the religion forum.
The lizard didn't learn how to eat a pig from Darwin.
Do you really say you are convinced from the totally stupid nonsense you try to tell others in the name of the Christian religion? Why are you convinced from anti-knowledge and pseudo-belief? You are a cliche of atheists about Christians but not a real Christian on your own. What kind of game is this?
There are scum bags in every group. My experience with preists was much different, my preist Father Ray never did any thing I found even remotely suspect in the many years I spent socializing with him! He was one of the biggest influences in my life as a teen ager and I hate what few bad apples could do for his name!The bishops allowed 1000 children to be molested by priests, a grand jury has found.
I might be done with carrying the water of a Church that has failed on such an epic level to live up to their own moral rules.
As long as my father is alive, I will continue to go to Mass with him, because I don't want to break his heart.
But after that, I think I'm done.
You do not even know what "Reich" means, Nazi.
it's where you live, i.e., Doucheland.
Ah you speak about the so called "Deutsches Reich" - "German empire" - which was a national state under the Prussians. The correct expression would had been "Prussian empire", because the Prussian made the countries of the "german empire" to their colonies. Prussia was where Poland and Russia is. I on my own never think about national states when I think about "Reich". I think abtzu the nholy Reichj -. the one and only german (=united) empire. The Prussians for example were Germans - but they were never a member of the the holy empire ("Heiliges Reich"). Others who were not Germans were part of the Reich of the "german" empire. The Reich was an institution in the tradtiosn of the Latin and Greek culture. The holy Reich - founded from Charlesmagne in 800 AD, it died in 1806 beause of Napoleon - was never a national state.
Now forget this all and do not try to undertqand anything what someone else tells you and continue your wrong way to hell.
Prussians aren't ethnically fully German, anyways, they have probably just as much Eastern European tribal blood, including the blood of West Slavs like the Wends, Poles, Kashubians, as well as actual Prussian lineages of a Baltic origins.
But, a strong disproportionate amount of superior Germans both in leaders, and in science, and especially Philosophy were in fact Prussian types (Eastern Germans)
I heard that Germans had sex with Poles and that's how we got Prussian Pussies.
Many of Germany's toughest leaders, and military men were East Germans a part of the Prussian Empire , like Friedrick the Great, Moltke the Younger, Moltke the Elder, Von Steinmetz, Von Bismarck, and Von Hiddenberg, Friedrich Karl, Von Roon, Von Tirpitz, Von Falkenhayn, Von Gallwitz, the Red Barron Von Richthofen etc.
Muslims are trying to turn your country into a Sharia country. Don't you care about the Reich at all?
You do not even know what "Reich" means, Nazi.
it's where you live, i.e., Doucheland.
Ah you speak about the so called "Deutsches Reich" - "German empire" - which was a national state under the Prussians. The correct expression would had been "Prussian empire", because the Prussians made all countries of this pseudo-"german empire" to their colonies - an idea they got from the Brits. Prussia was a part of the territory where Poland and Russia is.
I on my own never think about national states, when I think about "Reich". I think about the holy Reich - the one and only german (=united) empire. The Prussians for example were Germans - but they were never a member of the the holy empire ("Heiliges Reich"). Others, who were not Germans, were part of the Reich of the "german" empire. The Reich was an institution in the traditions of the Latin and Greek culture, of the Christian Orient and the Christian Occident. The holy Reich - founded from Charlesmagne in 800 AD, it died in 1806 because of Napoleon Bonaparte - was never a national state. It was a project of revitalizing the lost ancient roman empire and a process of activation of the progress of civilization.
Now forget this all and do not try to understand what I told you and continue your wrong way to hell, Nazi, US-American one.
So you love Muslims?
Mentally retarded? You are a Nazi - you should live in fear of me and every real German.
Do you kiss carpets as well?
No. I kiss pets only, when they are not driving in my car.
About 4 billion years is not young in human dimensions but young in the dimensions of a universe.
If you think "young earth" means 6,000-10,000 years old planet Earth then normally no one is able to take such a nonsense serious.
Reality cares not about such an absurde "point" in verbal discussions of human beings about the nature of the nature. Cocodiles for example existed 350 million years ago too. About 1.5 million years ago our ancestors made camp fires and so and so on.
Good grief. Do you like to teach analphabetism in schools too? Truth is always true - completely independent from anything else. Sure is criticism an important thing, specially in philosophy and science - also in politics and society - because critics helps to find what's true. But what you say here has nothing to do with critics nor with reality or truth. It's just simple nonsense.
Good God. Trying to talk false science in the religion forum.
The lizard didn't learn how to eat a pig from Darwin.
Do you really say you are convinced from the totally stupid nonsense you try to tell others in the name of the Christian religion? Why are you convinced from anti-knowledge and pseudo-belief? You are a cliche of atheists about Christians but not a real Christian on your own. What kind of game is this?
It's no game, but creation science. It was part of the scientific theory of origins prior to the 1850s until uniformitarianism and evolution replaced it. Most of the greatest scientists throughout history were Christians and creation scientists. Today, secular science has arbitrarily denied creation. There is no creation in evolution. We can observe creation. We cannot observe evolution. Humans cannot create a blade of grass from non-life. Yet, we can see that life begats life. Where did you go wrong with Catholicism?
Science has DISPROVEN the creation story. Nothing arbitrary about it.
Blind assertions Taz. What is the scientific evidence against creation? OTOH, I have the fine tuning facts and chicken came before the egg facts. Again, we cannot observe evolution using observational science. This is macroevolution. We observe God's design of natural selection and that's part of creation science. There you go. You lost in more ways than one.
.Sin is anything which distances us from God.
that is not true, sin is only what is evil that is not controlled, conquered. - not following the Almighty in of itself is not sin, the Almighty has used evil they at one time conquered ... evil is not allowed in the metaphysical, Everlasting.
Today, secular science has arbitrarily denied creation. There is no creation in evolution.
There is no creation in evolution.
how can you be so wrong, bond - there is nothing physiological that is not evolutionary, its very nature and existence depends upon change and began from the living elements to the present unlimited possibilities it has evolved into - and is guided by the metaphysical forces that relay the information from the spiritual to the physical and by the laws of the Everlasting.
BreezeWood, you are just repeating yourself from years ago. There is a difference between knowledge and repetition. One keeps you fresh, alive. The latter which you subscribe to is dead.
BreezeWood, you are just repeating yourself from years ago. There is a difference between knowledge and repetition. One keeps you fresh, alive. The latter which you subscribe to is dead.
And they were all good at saying "Ich gebe auf".I heard that Germans had sex with Poles and that's how we got Prussian Pussies.it's where you live, i.e., Doucheland.
Ah you speak about the so called "Deutsches Reich" - "German empire" - which was a national state under the Prussians. The correct expression would had been "Prussian empire", because the Prussian made the countries of the "german empire" to their colonies. Prussia was where Poland and Russia is. I on my own never think about national states when I think about "Reich". I think abtzu the nholy Reichj -. the one and only german (=united) empire. The Prussians for example were Germans - but they were never a member of the the holy empire ("Heiliges Reich"). Others who were not Germans were part of the Reich of the "german" empire. The Reich was an institution in the tradtiosn of the Latin and Greek culture. The holy Reich - founded from Charlesmagne in 800 AD, it died in 1806 beause of Napoleon - was never a national state.
Now forget this all and do not try to undertqand anything what someone else tells you and continue your wrong way to hell.
Prussians aren't ethnically fully German, anyways, they have probably just as much Eastern European tribal blood, including the blood of West Slavs like the Wends, Poles, Kashubians, as well as actual Prussian lineages of a Baltic origins.
But, a strong disproportionate amount of superior Germans both in leaders, and in science, and especially Philosophy were in fact Prussian types (Eastern Germans)
Many of Germany's toughest leaders, and military men were East Germans a part of the Prussian Empire , like Friedrick the Great, Moltke the Younger, Moltke the Elder, Von Steinmetz, Von Bismarck, and Von Hiddenberg, Friedrich Karl, Von Roon, Von Tirpitz, Von Falkenhayn, Von Gallwitz, the Red Barron Von Richthofen etc.
Good God. Trying to talk false science in the religion forum.
The lizard didn't learn how to eat a pig from Darwin.
Do you really say you are convinced from the totally stupid nonsense you try to tell others in the name of the Christian religion? Why are you convinced from anti-knowledge and pseudo-belief? You are a cliche of atheists about Christians but not a real Christian on your own. What kind of game is this?
It's no game, but creation science. It was part of the scientific theory of origins prior to the 1850s until uniformitarianism and evolution replaced it. Most of the greatest scientists throughout history were Christians and creation scientists. Today, secular science has arbitrarily denied creation. There is no creation in evolution. We can observe creation. We cannot observe evolution. Humans cannot create a blade of grass from non-life. Yet, we can see that life begats life. Where did you go wrong with Catholicism?
Science has DISPROVEN the creation story. Nothing arbitrary about it.
Blind assertions Taz. What is the scientific evidence against creation? OTOH, I have the fine tuning facts and chicken came before the egg facts. Again, we cannot observe evolution using observational science. This is macroevolution. We observe God's design of natural selection and that's part of creation science. There you go. You lost in more ways than one.
Everything wasn't made in 6 days, the earth is only around 5 billion years old, and the universe is about 13.8 billion years old. Light didn't appear until 400 million years after the Big Bang.
.Sin is anything which distances us from God.
that is not true, sin is only what is evil that is not controlled, conquered. - not following the Almighty in of itself is not sin, the Almighty has used evil they at one time conquered ... evil is not allowed in the metaphysical, Everlasting.
Today, secular science has arbitrarily denied creation. There is no creation in evolution.
There is no creation in evolution.
how can you be so wrong, bond - there is nothing physiological that is not evolutionary, its very nature and existence depends upon change and began from the living elements to the present unlimited possibilities it has evolved into - and is guided by the metaphysical forces that relay the information from the spiritual to the physical and by the laws of the Everlasting.
BreezeWood, you are just repeating yourself from years ago. There is a difference between knowledge and repetition. One keeps you fresh, alive. The latter which you subscribe to is dead.
BreezeWood, you are just repeating yourself from years ago. There is a difference between knowledge and repetition. One keeps you fresh, alive. The latter which you subscribe to is dead.
you are not alone, posters that do not respond meaningfully when their worldview does not fit the subject matter presented contrary to their homespun beliefs.
..Sin is anything which distances us from God.
that is not true, sin is only what is evil that is not controlled, conquered. - not following the Almighty in of itself is not sin, the Almighty has used evil they at one time conquered ... evil is not allowed in the metaphysical, Everlasting.
Today, secular science has arbitrarily denied creation. There is no creation in evolution.
There is no creation in evolution.
how can you be so wrong, bond - there is nothing physiological that is not evolutionary, its very nature and existence depends upon change and began from the living elements to the present unlimited possibilities it has evolved into - and is guided by the metaphysical forces that relay the information from the spiritual to the physical and by the laws of the Everlasting.
BreezeWood, you are just repeating yourself from years ago. There is a difference between knowledge and repetition. One keeps you fresh, alive. The latter which you subscribe to is dead.
BreezeWood, you are just repeating yourself from years ago. There is a difference between knowledge and repetition. One keeps you fresh, alive. The latter which you subscribe to is dead.
you are not alone, posters that do not respond meaningfully when their worldview does not fit the subject matter presented contrary to their homespun beliefs.
It's hilarious that you keep trying and failing to understand what the Bible says. It's Genesis theory. Actual science. Otherwise, why does opposition make up words like abiogenesis?
It's hilarious that you keep trying and failing to understand what the Bible says.
..Sin is anything which distances us from God.
that is not true, sin is only what is evil that is not controlled, conquered. - not following the Almighty in of itself is not sin, the Almighty has used evil they at one time conquered ... evil is not allowed in the metaphysical, Everlasting.
Today, secular science has arbitrarily denied creation. There is no creation in evolution.
There is no creation in evolution.
how can you be so wrong, bond - there is nothing physiological that is not evolutionary, its very nature and existence depends upon change and began from the living elements to the present unlimited possibilities it has evolved into - and is guided by the metaphysical forces that relay the information from the spiritual to the physical and by the laws of the Everlasting.
BreezeWood, you are just repeating yourself from years ago. There is a difference between knowledge and repetition. One keeps you fresh, alive. The latter which you subscribe to is dead.
BreezeWood, you are just repeating yourself from years ago. There is a difference between knowledge and repetition. One keeps you fresh, alive. The latter which you subscribe to is dead.
you are not alone, posters that do not respond meaningfully when their worldview does not fit the subject matter presented contrary to their homespun beliefs.
It's hilarious that you keep trying and failing to understand what the Bible says. It's Genesis theory. Actual science. Otherwise, why does opposition make up words like abiogenesis?
It's hilarious that you keep trying and failing to understand what the Bible says.
the christian bible is a 4th century document that has a history from that time to the present of persecution and victimization of the innocent, it is you who have faltered. that publication and its followers fail to understand the Triumph of Good vs Evil because they are given no choice and are destined to perish in sin through their errant bible as yourself.
I understand the spoken Religion of Antiquity represented by the events of the 1st century as there is nothing more necessary to know.
Otherwise, why does opposition make up words like abiogenesis?
what opposition - a double play on words ... nothing new there.
everything in the universe is composed of the living elements, everything in the universe is alive there is a clear path from the elements to physiological life, water from hydrogen and oxygen undoubtedly was an initial step -
simply, evil is not allowed to play a role in life's creation by the metaphysical forces that gives warning.
... your science is the one lacking, wrong and pseudoscience. There are some questionable practices of the Catholic religion.
Where is your evidence? All you make are worthless assertions.
Basically, evolution is based on historical science or forensic science.
One cannot observe macroevolution happening.
In fact, it's gotten to ridiculous in that we can have multiverses.
Many evo scientists believe our universe isn't special and that universes can just pop up at the drop of a hat.
One cannot conduct an experiment for evo.
OTOH, one can observe life being created. We have scientific methodology that backs it up. There is evidence for a young earth through scientific evidence and radiocarbon dating.
I cannot take you seriously. It sounds like you are advocating Catholics give up the Sacrament of Reconciliation with God--and take up masturbation in its place.you'd realize, the one missing the mark, is you!
I speak not about my, yours or anyones science. Science is science. You make me angry now.
The eye is sun-like - it fits to the [light of the] sun. Your hand is tree-like: it fits to the tree. Your 3D-coordination is one nof the best on planet Earth. The reason: The ape who did not use automatically and blindly the best limb of a tree, so he felt down to the ground and died before he made babies, is not your ancestor.
We are doing "macro-evolution" (cultivation) since about 10,000 years. Longhorns have for example long horns because we made this. The Watussi-cows look in another way. Oh! ... We started even 20,000 years ago to use the laws of evolution, when we started to transform wolves to dogs.
Not ridiculous - only not and never provable. But this could explain problems of our understanding of quantum physics, where reality is not local and excluding alternatives exist in the same time. In this case god created all possible worlds and not only our world. But it is "only" a plausible speculation. No way to prove anything in this context.
I never heard anything about such a theory. Perhaps one of the three kings of wisdom has something to do with. Humorful men with nice hats.
Sorry - but as a Christian I'm only able to say: Leave this wrong way. Who denies any truth denies the truth too. Visit a school and learn something about the things which you likte to use and try to give the same time on paradox reasons the attribute "not-existing for me". What you say is just simple nonsense.
I speak not about my, yours or anyones science. Science is science. You make me angry now.
There, there. Have a candy.
The eye is sun-like - it fits to the [light of the] sun. Your hand is tree-like: it fits to the tree. Your 3D-coordination is one nof the best on planet Earth. The reason: The ape who did not use automatically and blindly the best limb of a tree, so he felt down to the ground and died before he made babies, is not your ancestor.
Nah, your common ancestor to the ape-human doesn't pass the unicorn test.
We are doing "macro-evolution" (cultivation) since about 10,000 years. Longhorns have for example long horns because we made this. The Watussi-cows look in another way. Oh! ... We started even 20,000 years ago to use the laws of evolution, when we started to transform wolves to dogs.
There are no laws of evolution. Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Not ridiculous - only not and never provable. But this could explain problems of our understanding of quantum physics, where reality is not local and excluding alternatives exist in the same time. In this case god created all possible worlds and not only our world. But it is "only" a plausible speculation. No way to prove anything in this context.
You believe in fairy tales. No experiment to show it. Not falsifiable. No evidence whatsover. That's evolution.
I never heard anything about such a theory. Perhaps one of the three kings of wisdom has something to do with. Humorful men with nice hats.
Try to keep up. You never heard of dark energy? It's invisible, but can cause multiverses.
Our Universe Is Not As Special As Previously Thought — Scientists Make Shocking Discovery
Sorry - but as a Christian I'm only able to say: Leave this wrong way. Who denies any truth denies the truth too. Visit a school and learn something about the things which you likte to use and try to give the same time on paradox reasons the attribute "not-existing for me". What you say is just simple nonsense.
I probably know more about evolution than you. That's why I can compare it and creation science and can tell that creation science is the truth. It's based on real science. Not made up science like evolution. You do not even know where evolution was created by Satan.
And they were all good at saying "Ich gebe auf".I heard that Germans had sex with Poles and that's how we got Prussian Pussies.Ah you speak about the so called "Deutsches Reich" - "German empire" - which was a national state under the Prussians. The correct expression would had been "Prussian empire", because the Prussian made the countries of the "german empire" to their colonies. Prussia was where Poland and Russia is. I on my own never think about national states when I think about "Reich". I think abtzu the nholy Reichj -. the one and only german (=united) empire. The Prussians for example were Germans - but they were never a member of the the holy empire ("Heiliges Reich"). Others who were not Germans were part of the Reich of the "german" empire. The Reich was an institution in the tradtiosn of the Latin and Greek culture. The holy Reich - founded from Charlesmagne in 800 AD, it died in 1806 beause of Napoleon - was never a national state.
Now forget this all and do not try to undertqand anything what someone else tells you and continue your wrong way to hell.
Prussians aren't ethnically fully German, anyways, they have probably just as much Eastern European tribal blood, including the blood of West Slavs like the Wends, Poles, Kashubians, as well as actual Prussian lineages of a Baltic origins.
But, a strong disproportionate amount of superior Germans both in leaders, and in science, and especially Philosophy were in fact Prussian types (Eastern Germans)
Many of Germany's toughest leaders, and military men were East Germans a part of the Prussian Empire , like Friedrick the Great, Moltke the Younger, Moltke the Elder, Von Steinmetz, Von Bismarck, and Von Hiddenberg, Friedrich Karl, Von Roon, Von Tirpitz, Von Falkenhayn, Von Gallwitz, the Red Barron Von Richthofen etc.
Indeed, in the Battle of Grunwald in 1410 when Catholic Poland whooped Protestant German Teutons (The forebearers of the Prussian state)
Poland ultimately dismantled the Teutons, made them pay war reparations, and bow before Poland in the Prussian Homage, they ultimately became a vassal state of Catholic Poland called Royal Prussia.
Unfortunately as Poland was fighting Russians, Swedes, Tatars, and Cossacks to the East, and North, and Ottoman Turks to the South, it allowed German Prussians to re-group.
You sound very, very stupid, and very, very primitive.
Lol...the devil is a liarI cannot take you seriously. It sounds like you are advocating Catholics give up the Sacrament of Reconciliation with God--and take up masturbation in its place.you'd realize, the one missing the mark, is you!
And they were all good at saying "Ich gebe auf".I heard that Germans had sex with Poles and that's how we got Prussian Pussies.it's where you live, i.e., Doucheland.
Ah you speak about the so called "Deutsches Reich" - "German empire" - which was a national state under the Prussians. The correct expression would had been "Prussian empire", because the Prussian made the countries of the "german empire" to their colonies. Prussia was where Poland and Russia is. I on my own never think about national states when I think about "Reich". I think abtzu the nholy Reichj -. the one and only german (=united) empire. The Prussians for example were Germans - but they were never a member of the the holy empire ("Heiliges Reich"). Others who were not Germans were part of the Reich of the "german" empire. The Reich was an institution in the tradtiosn of the Latin and Greek culture. The holy Reich - founded from Charlesmagne in 800 AD, it died in 1806 beause of Napoleon - was never a national state.
Now forget this all and do not try to undertqand anything what someone else tells you and continue your wrong way to hell.
Prussians aren't ethnically fully German, anyways, they have probably just as much Eastern European tribal blood, including the blood of West Slavs like the Wends, Poles, Kashubians, as well as actual Prussian lineages of a Baltic origins.
But, a strong disproportionate amount of superior Germans both in leaders, and in science, and especially Philosophy were in fact Prussian types (Eastern Germans)
Many of Germany's toughest leaders, and military men were East Germans a part of the Prussian Empire , like Friedrick the Great, Moltke the Younger, Moltke the Elder, Von Steinmetz, Von Bismarck, and Von Hiddenberg, Friedrich Karl, Von Roon, Von Tirpitz, Von Falkenhayn, Von Gallwitz, the Red Barron Von Richthofen etc.
