If God doesn't exist...

[james bond]

.

Do you mean cosmology? That is just scientific philosophy or guessing. One can't trust that as being scientific.

reading your post is entertaining ...

the universe being created would have both a beginning and an end point, have you their locations to determine your 6000 year model for it's existence ?

.

Good question, BreezeWood. Humans would like to know definitively the beginning and end point of life, the earth, and the universe. However, God wanted to keep some things secret. The Bible says that we will never know. This is another evidence for the existence of God. However, people will try to find the answer. The whole universe can be explored and the answers found except for this.

This includes the age of the earth, too. We will not get the exact time and place, but radiocarbon dating of diamonds show that the earth is not billions of years old, but relatively young.

Radiocarbon dating can't proof a young or old earth since it's usually only acurate to, on the outside 50000 years. And your wording makes me think the radiocarbon dating of diamonds gave you an age wich was older then 6000 years so provide the link to what your reffering to please. And btw this post makes you look either stupid or dishonest. If you accept radiocarbon dating you exept a world wich is at least 20000 years old. That's the minimum age that radiocarbon dating is accurate.Carbon Dating Gets a Reset this article pushes it even farther. So either you have no idea what radiocarbon dating does, or in my opinion more likely, deliberatly tried to apply it selectivly.

Ho hum. More atheist science bias from its wrong conclusions. See my diamonds statements above. Also, dinosaur fossils have been dated to a young earth.

He was experiencing cognitive dissonance

You fergit a vid sealybob. Yer slippin' me bucko.

The radiocarbon dating of diamonds found deep in the earth were claimed to be millions of years old by evolutionists. What was surprising was they were thought to be very old, but it still had traces of carbon-14 in them. Thus, the creationists measured the carbon-14 to that of something 90,000 years old. These diamonds should have had all their carbon-14 decayed. Evolutionists claimed groundwater contamination provided the carbon-14. This would show different rates of contamination because the diamonds came from different depths, but the dating of the diamonds were fairly uniform. Secular researchers also checked the findings with their own diamond samples which are impervious to most forms of contamination and found the same uniform results. Diamonds are a girl's and creationist's best friend.

 

[BreezeWood]

Yes, the Almighty gave us our Spirit and a written document that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

this is the etching in stone from the Almighty you destroyed, scripturalist - by proxy without your condemnation for the heretic moses that is necessary.


... that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

the biblicist is only interested in their own self interest and have plagiarized their document to do so.


you speak of atheism as though you are not one and are the better for it where in fact your own self deception far exceeds anything you proclaim as a fault for their honest opinion.

.

 

[forkup]

I guess it's come to that time where I wrap up. Clearly, it seems that people today have been brainwashed into thinking the Bible isn't good for you. Most here talk about it, but have no idea what is in it. The Bible is excellent in providing nourishment for your heart, mind, body, and spirit. It is still the good book and helps one to cleanse all the toxins that are out there in today's world. It's message is one, so it holds the answers to many of the questions that we have. The Bible isn't a science book, but science does back up the Bible and not the stuff some have been talking about here. Today, it is easier to read as the questions one has can be answered from the internet. An example of one site is gotquestions.org to help read the Bible.

The more things change, the more things stay the same. There are still the Truthseekers who are open-minded and find what is true and right and incorporate it into their lives with the help of the Bible. There are still the Sadducees and the Pharisees who put their politics before religion or those who put oral traditions or self-serving gains above those of the Scripture. These are the people who are ruled by political gains or those who seek to put that which is popular and self-serving, against the word of Christ, into the world today. They will say their science is the truth and will claim to put science above all. These are the ones who bring you what we have been discussing and more. For out of the heart come evil thoughts--murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, and slander (Matthew 15:19).

Well keep on holding to your truth if it makes you happier. If it means denying 150 years of scientific discovery in order for you to keep hold of your bibletexts it's none of my bussinuis. Just don't try to sell it as science. Science depends on observing the universe as it is, not as you want it to be. In the course of these posts I've seen what I consider somebody trying to fit a round peg in a square hole, but I do have to say I appreciate the willingness to at least have the conversation. I wish you well James and I think we will probably run in to eachother again.

Yes, the truth helps the truthseekers here in this life and the next.

And it appears to no one's surprise that you did not learn anything from our discussions. I looked up some of your claims about astronomy and learned something new. While no one here is denying actual scientific discovery, since the believers are into science, as well. It's not just the non-believers as you appear to suggest. Where we draw the line is at evolution since it is a wrong and misleading theory. As I pointed out, evo science has been wrong. The atheists are usually wrong, too. What's laughable is the non-believers try to point this out to believers about how science works. It actually should be the other way around. Theories in science can be wrong and end up as pseudoscience while science ends up backing the Bible. The Bible can't change. It's not the believers who try to put a round peg in the square hole, but people like you. This is more of atheists' stubbornness and adhering to false science instead of keep an open mind. It's the birds are dinosaurs smug mentality that exists today. He who laughs last laughs best, so we shall see when all is said and done.

As I pointed out before.You have to do only 1 thing to prove evolution wrong.Find me a fossil that goes against the chronology. Finds dinosaurs and ppl in the same strata.Or a dinosaur in the precambrian Or about a dozen other variations on the theme.It is my best argument for macroevolution.If you deny microevolution there is truly no hope. Since proven both in the la be and out. I do want to say 1 thing about piltdown man. It took science 40 years to find out the hoax .But science did find it and what's more it was taken out and no scientist uses or teaches piltdown man as truth anymore.There is litteraly no piece of research not a single article that conceivably helps the Creationist cause that is ever truly abondened.Every theory that comes with Creationism is rehashed over and over again no matter how thoroughly it gets refuted.The lack of selfcorrecting mechanism is one of the main things that makes bit faith and not science.I urge you to read the supreme court ruling on why creationism is not science and then try to deny it.I doubt you'll be succesfull.

I think I explained this already, but fossilization is difficult to come by. There appear to be many fossils, and the archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists, and others have done a fine job in digging them out. Overall, it is still not an easy thing to come across although there could be a big find. Thus, we have not come across the conclusive evidence yet. There is plenty of other evidence that tells of dinosaurs and humans living together -- Evidence of Dinosaurs with Men | Genesis Park ,
Physical Evidence for the Coexistence of Dinosaurs and Humans [Part I] , or Dinosaurs in History . Unfortunately, the evidence is forbidden because it would destroy evolution and people would lose their jobs. So, there is your one thing. Yet, your macroevo evidence is weak. Natural selection is just as much as part of creation science and creationists have developed baraminology to explain the different species and how they can mingle. Some of things to prove evolution has been pointed out in the 75 theses. Give me an example of abiogenesis. Humans can't even create a blade of grass without a pre-existing living organism. I've already explained the chicken and the egg and science backs it up. The Bible is truly ahead of its time as we have not been able to prove it all, but eventually we will. Despite this happening, it is foretold that other powers that be will disallow it and so comes the end of the world. Some people think it is coming in our lifetime, but I have no idea.

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture

look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

 

[james bond]

I guess it's come to that time where I wrap up. Clearly, it seems that people today have been brainwashed into thinking the Bible isn't good for you. Most here talk about it, but have no idea what is in it. The Bible is excellent in providing nourishment for your heart, mind, body, and spirit. It is still the good book and helps one to cleanse all the toxins that are out there in today's world. It's message is one, so it holds the answers to many of the questions that we have. The Bible isn't a science book, but science does back up the Bible and not the stuff some have been talking about here. Today, it is easier to read as the questions one has can be answered from the internet. An example of one site is gotquestions.org to help read the Bible.

The more things change, the more things stay the same. There are still the Truthseekers who are open-minded and find what is true and right and incorporate it into their lives with the help of the Bible. There are still the Sadducees and the Pharisees who put their politics before religion or those who put oral traditions or self-serving gains above those of the Scripture. These are the people who are ruled by political gains or those who seek to put that which is popular and self-serving, against the word of Christ, into the world today. They will say their science is the truth and will claim to put science above all. These are the ones who bring you what we have been discussing and more. For out of the heart come evil thoughts--murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, and slander (Matthew 15:19).

Well keep on holding to your truth if it makes you happier. If it means denying 150 years of scientific discovery in order for you to keep hold of your bibletexts it's none of my bussinuis. Just don't try to sell it as science. Science depends on observing the universe as it is, not as you want it to be. In the course of these posts I've seen what I consider somebody trying to fit a round peg in a square hole, but I do have to say I appreciate the willingness to at least have the conversation. I wish you well James and I think we will probably run in to eachother again.

Yes, the truth helps the truthseekers here in this life and the next.

And it appears to no one's surprise that you did not learn anything from our discussions. I looked up some of your claims about astronomy and learned something new. While no one here is denying actual scientific discovery, since the believers are into science, as well. It's not just the non-believers as you appear to suggest. Where we draw the line is at evolution since it is a wrong and misleading theory. As I pointed out, evo science has been wrong. The atheists are usually wrong, too. What's laughable is the non-believers try to point this out to believers about how science works. It actually should be the other way around. Theories in science can be wrong and end up as pseudoscience while science ends up backing the Bible. The Bible can't change. It's not the believers who try to put a round peg in the square hole, but people like you. This is more of atheists' stubbornness and adhering to false science instead of keep an open mind. It's the birds are dinosaurs smug mentality that exists today. He who laughs last laughs best, so we shall see when all is said and done.

As I pointed out before.You have to do only 1 thing to prove evolution wrong.Find me a fossil that goes against the chronology. Finds dinosaurs and ppl in the same strata.Or a dinosaur in the precambrian Or about a dozen other variations on the theme.It is my best argument for macroevolution.If you deny microevolution there is truly no hope. Since proven both in the la be and out. I do want to say 1 thing about piltdown man. It took science 40 years to find out the hoax .But science did find it and what's more it was taken out and no scientist uses or teaches piltdown man as truth anymore.There is litteraly no piece of research not a single article that conceivably helps the Creationist cause that is ever truly abondened.Every theory that comes with Creationism is rehashed over and over again no matter how thoroughly it gets refuted.The lack of selfcorrecting mechanism is one of the main things that makes bit faith and not science.I urge you to read the supreme court ruling on why creationism is not science and then try to deny it.I doubt you'll be succesfull.

I think I explained this already, but fossilization is difficult to come by. There appear to be many fossils, and the archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists, and others have done a fine job in digging them out. Overall, it is still not an easy thing to come across although there could be a big find. Thus, we have not come across the conclusive evidence yet. There is plenty of other evidence that tells of dinosaurs and humans living together -- Evidence of Dinosaurs with Men | Genesis Park ,
Physical Evidence for the Coexistence of Dinosaurs and Humans [Part I] , or Dinosaurs in History . Unfortunately, the evidence is forbidden because it would destroy evolution and people would lose their jobs. So, there is your one thing. Yet, your macroevo evidence is weak. Natural selection is just as much as part of creation science and creationists have developed baraminology to explain the different species and how they can mingle. Some of things to prove evolution has been pointed out in the 75 theses. Give me an example of abiogenesis. Humans can't even create a blade of grass without a pre-existing living organism. I've already explained the chicken and the egg and science backs it up. The Bible is truly ahead of its time as we have not been able to prove it all, but eventually we will. Despite this happening, it is foretold that other powers that be will disallow it and so comes the end of the world. Some people think it is coming in our lifetime, but I have no idea.

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

 

[james bond]

Yes, the Almighty gave us our Spirit and a written document that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

this is the etching in stone from the Almighty you destroyed, scripturalist - by proxy without your condemnation for the heretic moses that is necessary.


... that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

the biblicist is only interested in their own self interest and have plagiarized their document to do so.


you speak of atheism as though you are not one and are the better for it where in fact your own self deception far exceeds anything you proclaim as a fault for their honest opinion.

.

You'll have to explain further because I am not sure what you are claiming scripturalists (first time I heard that term) or I did.

 

[Mudda]

Well keep on holding to your truth if it makes you happier. If it means denying 150 years of scientific discovery in order for you to keep hold of your bibletexts it's none of my bussinuis. Just don't try to sell it as science. Science depends on observing the universe as it is, not as you want it to be. In the course of these posts I've seen what I consider somebody trying to fit a round peg in a square hole, but I do have to say I appreciate the willingness to at least have the conversation. I wish you well James and I think we will probably run in to eachother again.

Yes, the truth helps the truthseekers here in this life and the next.

And it appears to no one's surprise that you did not learn anything from our discussions. I looked up some of your claims about astronomy and learned something new. While no one here is denying actual scientific discovery, since the believers are into science, as well. It's not just the non-believers as you appear to suggest. Where we draw the line is at evolution since it is a wrong and misleading theory. As I pointed out, evo science has been wrong. The atheists are usually wrong, too. What's laughable is the non-believers try to point this out to believers about how science works. It actually should be the other way around. Theories in science can be wrong and end up as pseudoscience while science ends up backing the Bible. The Bible can't change. It's not the believers who try to put a round peg in the square hole, but people like you. This is more of atheists' stubbornness and adhering to false science instead of keep an open mind. It's the birds are dinosaurs smug mentality that exists today. He who laughs last laughs best, so we shall see when all is said and done.

As I pointed out before.You have to do only 1 thing to prove evolution wrong.Find me a fossil that goes against the chronology. Finds dinosaurs and ppl in the same strata.Or a dinosaur in the precambrian Or about a dozen other variations on the theme.It is my best argument for macroevolution.If you deny microevolution there is truly no hope. Since proven both in the la be and out. I do want to say 1 thing about piltdown man. It took science 40 years to find out the hoax .But science did find it and what's more it was taken out and no scientist uses or teaches piltdown man as truth anymore.There is litteraly no piece of research not a single article that conceivably helps the Creationist cause that is ever truly abondened.Every theory that comes with Creationism is rehashed over and over again no matter how thoroughly it gets refuted.The lack of selfcorrecting mechanism is one of the main things that makes bit faith and not science.I urge you to read the supreme court ruling on why creationism is not science and then try to deny it.I doubt you'll be succesfull.

I think I explained this already, but fossilization is difficult to come by. There appear to be many fossils, and the archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists, and others have done a fine job in digging them out. Overall, it is still not an easy thing to come across although there could be a big find. Thus, we have not come across the conclusive evidence yet. There is plenty of other evidence that tells of dinosaurs and humans living together -- Evidence of Dinosaurs with Men | Genesis Park ,
Physical Evidence for the Coexistence of Dinosaurs and Humans [Part I] , or Dinosaurs in History . Unfortunately, the evidence is forbidden because it would destroy evolution and people would lose their jobs. So, there is your one thing. Yet, your macroevo evidence is weak. Natural selection is just as much as part of creation science and creationists have developed baraminology to explain the different species and how they can mingle. Some of things to prove evolution has been pointed out in the 75 theses. Give me an example of abiogenesis. Humans can't even create a blade of grass without a pre-existing living organism. I've already explained the chicken and the egg and science backs it up. The Bible is truly ahead of its time as we have not been able to prove it all, but eventually we will. Despite this happening, it is foretold that other powers that be will disallow it and so comes the end of the world. Some people think it is coming in our lifetime, but I have no idea.

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

We already are traveling into the future, it's called Time, and never stops propelling us forward into the future.

 

[Mudda]

The radiocarbon dating of diamonds found deep in the earth were claimed to be millions of years old by evolutionists. What was surprising was they were thought to be very old, but it still had traces of carbon-14 in them. Thus, the creationists measured the carbon-14 to that of something 90,000 years old. These diamonds should have had all their carbon-14 decayed. Evolutionists claimed groundwater contamination provided the carbon-14. This would show different rates of contamination because the diamonds came from different depths, but the dating of the diamonds were fairly uniform. Secular researchers also checked the findings with their own diamond samples which are impervious to most forms of contamination and found the same uniform results. Diamonds are a girl's and creationist's best friend.

Is that the best you have for proving the story of creation? Personally, if you could show me a logical way how Noah got marsupials from Australia and then back and, I'd believe anything at all.

 

[forkup]

Well keep on holding to your truth if it makes you happier. If it means denying 150 years of scientific discovery in order for you to keep hold of your bibletexts it's none of my bussinuis. Just don't try to sell it as science. Science depends on observing the universe as it is, not as you want it to be. In the course of these posts I've seen what I consider somebody trying to fit a round peg in a square hole, but I do have to say I appreciate the willingness to at least have the conversation. I wish you well James and I think we will probably run in to eachother again.

Yes, the truth helps the truthseekers here in this life and the next.

And it appears to no one's surprise that you did not learn anything from our discussions. I looked up some of your claims about astronomy and learned something new. While no one here is denying actual scientific discovery, since the believers are into science, as well. It's not just the non-believers as you appear to suggest. Where we draw the line is at evolution since it is a wrong and misleading theory. As I pointed out, evo science has been wrong. The atheists are usually wrong, too. What's laughable is the non-believers try to point this out to believers about how science works. It actually should be the other way around. Theories in science can be wrong and end up as pseudoscience while science ends up backing the Bible. The Bible can't change. It's not the believers who try to put a round peg in the square hole, but people like you. This is more of atheists' stubbornness and adhering to false science instead of keep an open mind. It's the birds are dinosaurs smug mentality that exists today. He who laughs last laughs best, so we shall see when all is said and done.

As I pointed out before.You have to do only 1 thing to prove evolution wrong.Find me a fossil that goes against the chronology. Finds dinosaurs and ppl in the same strata.Or a dinosaur in the precambrian Or about a dozen other variations on the theme.It is my best argument for macroevolution.If you deny microevolution there is truly no hope. Since proven both in the la be and out. I do want to say 1 thing about piltdown man. It took science 40 years to find out the hoax .But science did find it and what's more it was taken out and no scientist uses or teaches piltdown man as truth anymore.There is litteraly no piece of research not a single article that conceivably helps the Creationist cause that is ever truly abondened.Every theory that comes with Creationism is rehashed over and over again no matter how thoroughly it gets refuted.The lack of selfcorrecting mechanism is one of the main things that makes bit faith and not science.I urge you to read the supreme court ruling on why creationism is not science and then try to deny it.I doubt you'll be succesfull.

I think I explained this already, but fossilization is difficult to come by. There appear to be many fossils, and the archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists, and others have done a fine job in digging them out. Overall, it is still not an easy thing to come across although there could be a big find. Thus, we have not come across the conclusive evidence yet. There is plenty of other evidence that tells of dinosaurs and humans living together -- Evidence of Dinosaurs with Men | Genesis Park ,
Physical Evidence for the Coexistence of Dinosaurs and Humans [Part I] , or Dinosaurs in History . Unfortunately, the evidence is forbidden because it would destroy evolution and people would lose their jobs. So, there is your one thing. Yet, your macroevo evidence is weak. Natural selection is just as much as part of creation science and creationists have developed baraminology to explain the different species and how they can mingle. Some of things to prove evolution has been pointed out in the 75 theses. Give me an example of abiogenesis. Humans can't even create a blade of grass without a pre-existing living organism. I've already explained the chicken and the egg and science backs it up. The Bible is truly ahead of its time as we have not been able to prove it all, but eventually we will. Despite this happening, it is foretold that other powers that be will disallow it and so comes the end of the world. Some people think it is coming in our lifetime, but I have no idea.

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

-Define proof. You use that word alot, what to you is proof. So far you have used "artistic representation", " It's a conspiracy", "myth". what of those things you consider proof?
-I'll put 2 questions up for you.
Do you consider Radiocarbon dating accurate?
Give me a clear set of parameters for classification of kinds using baraminology? You say it's scientific so it has to have parameters.
- Now to the rest. There are plenty of fossils beds, usually it used to be a pool of somekind where a flash flood hit. Since that ensures rapid burial. But you seem to not understand something. I'm making it way easier for you then show me humans and dinosaurs buried togheter. Al I'm asking of you is to show me any human buried in the strata under the KT boundarary, or a dinosaur buried in the layers before the permian extinction. You don't have to show me a human buried with a dinosaur just a human in those strata. I say they're buried chronologically. If you can break that chronoligy you will have proven your point. Just don't tell me, the reason it hasn't happened is a conspiracy. I've pointed out to you, that it would have to be a massive conspiracy and not only that. A paleontoligist who can break that chronligy would be famous so it's completly counterintuitive to keep it a secret.
- You know dragons all fly now tell me. Flying dinosaurs looked way different then dragons. I have another hypothesis.It's save to assume large bones have been dug up before Owen did it in the 1800's . I put the question what would happen if a huge bone is dug up in the dark ages. A bone nobody can put on an indigenous animal. Without any reference I can picture any dark age monk put the spin of a mytholigical creature on that. See, dragon Myths and other mytholigical beasts explained without having to resort to dinosaurs and man lived togheter
- Now your thaught experiment, I don't know what the point is but I'll answer.
Yes I do believe in alien life. No I don't believe we will ever make contact. It's a matter of scale not rarity. We as a human race are at a certain lvl in our development, we can communicate using radiowaves, microwaves, lightwaves and probably a few more. The universe is vast and we've only started to transmit call it 80 years ago. So the outer limit is 40 lightyears, because the signal has to get back to us.So the aliens. First have to be intelligent, at the same technoligical lvl, willing to talk, and within a radius of 40 lightyears. In other words pretty much a longshot.
In all time travel theories allowed by real science, there is no way a traveler can go back in time to before the time machine was built.
I'm confident time travel into the future is possible, but we would need to develop some very advanced technology to do it. We could travel 10,000 years into the future and age only 1 year during that journey. However, such a trip would consume an extraordinary amount of energy. Time travel to the past is more difficult. We do not understand the science as well.
I stole the bit on time travel but that's the science.

 

[BreezeWood]

Yes, the Almighty gave us our Spirit and a written document that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

this is the etching in stone from the Almighty you destroyed, scripturalist - by proxy without your condemnation for the heretic moses that is necessary.


... that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

the biblicist is only interested in their own self interest and have plagiarized their document to do so.


you speak of atheism as though you are not one and are the better for it where in fact your own self deception far exceeds anything you proclaim as a fault for their honest opinion.

.

You'll have to explain further because I am not sure what you are claiming scripturalists (first time I heard that term) or I did.

bond: You'll have to explain further because I am not sure what you are claiming scripturalists (first time I heard that term) or I did.

that's because you are unwilling to justify your statements from one fallacy to the next by answering the posts.

or those who put oral traditions ... above those of the Scripture.

- and you believe one would survive the test of time over the other any differently, you indeed are a sad case.

did you answer the question bond ? - the implication your written scriptures are more valid than oral tradition over time - where time does not shed well the validity of "your" written scriptures - 6000 year old universe.

Yes, the Almighty gave us our Spirit and a written document that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

this is the etching in stone from the Almighty you destroyed, scripturalist - by proxy without your condemnation for the heretic moses that is necessary - (* Hint: to validate what is otherwise written).

there is no written document from the Almighty, bond by their own etching it was destroyed. there is only an oral tradition, whether by writing or verbal and because of the heresy without condemnation the written is textually inaccurate from the time of moses foreword ... scripturalist and accordingly suspect throughout.

- only the oral tradition remains as the true path to the Everlasting.

.

 

[james bond]

Yes, the Almighty gave us our Spirit and a written document that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

this is the etching in stone from the Almighty you destroyed, scripturalist - by proxy without your condemnation for the heretic moses that is necessary.


... that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

the biblicist is only interested in their own self interest and have plagiarized their document to do so.


you speak of atheism as though you are not one and are the better for it where in fact your own self deception far exceeds anything you proclaim as a fault for their honest opinion.

.

You'll have to explain further because I am not sure what you are claiming scripturalists (first time I heard that term) or I did.

bond: You'll have to explain further because I am not sure what you are claiming scripturalists (first time I heard that term) or I did.

that's because you are unwilling to justify your statements from one fallacy to the next by answering the posts.

or those who put oral traditions ... above those of the Scripture.

- and you believe one would survive the test of time over the other any differently, you indeed are a sad case.

did you answer the question bond ? - the implication your written scriptures are more valid than oral tradition over time - where time does not shed well the validity of "your" written scriptures - 6000 year old universe.

Yes, the Almighty gave us our Spirit and a written document that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

this is the etching in stone from the Almighty you destroyed, scripturalist - by proxy without your condemnation for the heretic moses that is necessary - (* Hint: to validate what is otherwise written).

there is no written document from the Almighty, bond by their own etching it was destroyed. there is only an oral tradition, whether by writing or verbal and because of the heresy without condemnation the written is textually inaccurate from the time of moses foreword ... scripturalist and accordingly suspect throughout.

- only the oral tradition remains as the true path to the Everlasting.

.

Did you get this from Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code? "Dan Brown's fictional book The Da Vinci Code has his storyline “expert” say the following about the Bible: “The Bible did not arrive by fax from heaven. . . . The Bible is the product of man, my dear. Not of God. The Bible did not fall magically from the clouds. Man created it as a historical record of tumultuous times, and it has evolved through countless translations, additions, and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the book.” Brown’s charge does indeed belong in a work of fiction because the assertion is simply not true."

AFAIK, the originals, called "autographs" are not in the possession of any person or group. They may have been lost or destroyed during the exile of the Jews, but the works have been copied for other use. Thus, the content was preserved and handed down for later generations.

Is the original Bible still in existence?

 

[james bond]

Yes, the truth helps the truthseekers here in this life and the next.

And it appears to no one's surprise that you did not learn anything from our discussions. I looked up some of your claims about astronomy and learned something new. While no one here is denying actual scientific discovery, since the believers are into science, as well. It's not just the non-believers as you appear to suggest. Where we draw the line is at evolution since it is a wrong and misleading theory. As I pointed out, evo science has been wrong. The atheists are usually wrong, too. What's laughable is the non-believers try to point this out to believers about how science works. It actually should be the other way around. Theories in science can be wrong and end up as pseudoscience while science ends up backing the Bible. The Bible can't change. It's not the believers who try to put a round peg in the square hole, but people like you. This is more of atheists' stubbornness and adhering to false science instead of keep an open mind. It's the birds are dinosaurs smug mentality that exists today. He who laughs last laughs best, so we shall see when all is said and done.

As I pointed out before.You have to do only 1 thing to prove evolution wrong.Find me a fossil that goes against the chronology. Finds dinosaurs and ppl in the same strata.Or a dinosaur in the precambrian Or about a dozen other variations on the theme.It is my best argument for macroevolution.If you deny microevolution there is truly no hope. Since proven both in the la be and out. I do want to say 1 thing about piltdown man. It took science 40 years to find out the hoax .But science did find it and what's more it was taken out and no scientist uses or teaches piltdown man as truth anymore.There is litteraly no piece of research not a single article that conceivably helps the Creationist cause that is ever truly abondened.Every theory that comes with Creationism is rehashed over and over again no matter how thoroughly it gets refuted.The lack of selfcorrecting mechanism is one of the main things that makes bit faith and not science.I urge you to read the supreme court ruling on why creationism is not science and then try to deny it.I doubt you'll be succesfull.

I think I explained this already, but fossilization is difficult to come by. There appear to be many fossils, and the archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists, and others have done a fine job in digging them out. Overall, it is still not an easy thing to come across although there could be a big find. Thus, we have not come across the conclusive evidence yet. There is plenty of other evidence that tells of dinosaurs and humans living together -- Evidence of Dinosaurs with Men | Genesis Park ,
Physical Evidence for the Coexistence of Dinosaurs and Humans [Part I] , or Dinosaurs in History . Unfortunately, the evidence is forbidden because it would destroy evolution and people would lose their jobs. So, there is your one thing. Yet, your macroevo evidence is weak. Natural selection is just as much as part of creation science and creationists have developed baraminology to explain the different species and how they can mingle. Some of things to prove evolution has been pointed out in the 75 theses. Give me an example of abiogenesis. Humans can't even create a blade of grass without a pre-existing living organism. I've already explained the chicken and the egg and science backs it up. The Bible is truly ahead of its time as we have not been able to prove it all, but eventually we will. Despite this happening, it is foretold that other powers that be will disallow it and so comes the end of the world. Some people think it is coming in our lifetime, but I have no idea.

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

-Define proof. You use that word alot, what to you is proof. So far you have used "artistic representation", " It's a conspiracy", "myth". what of those things you consider proof?
-I'll put 2 questions up for you.
Do you consider Radiocarbon dating accurate?
Give me a clear set of parameters for classification of kinds using baraminology? You say it's scientific so it has to have parameters.
- Now to the rest. There are plenty of fossils beds, usually it used to be a pool of somekind where a flash flood hit. Since that ensures rapid burial. But you seem to not understand something. I'm making it way easier for you then show me humans and dinosaurs buried togheter. Al I'm asking of you is to show me any human buried in the strata under the KT boundarary, or a dinosaur buried in the layers before the permian extinction. You don't have to show me a human buried with a dinosaur just a human in those strata. I say they're buried chronologically. If you can break that chronoligy you will have proven your point. Just don't tell me, the reason it hasn't happened is a conspiracy. I've pointed out to you, that it would have to be a massive conspiracy and not only that. A paleontoligist who can break that chronligy would be famous so it's completly counterintuitive to keep it a secret.
- You know dragons all fly now tell me. Flying dinosaurs looked way different then dragons. I have another hypothesis.It's save to assume large bones have been dug up before Owen did it in the 1800's . I put the question what would happen if a huge bone is dug up in the dark ages. A bone nobody can put on an indigenous animal. Without any reference I can picture any dark age monk put the spin of a mytholigical creature on that. See, dragon Myths and other mytholigical beasts explained without having to resort to dinosaurs and man lived togheter
- Now your thaught experiment, I don't know what the point is but I'll answer.
Yes I do believe in alien life. No I don't believe we will ever make contact. It's a matter of scale not rarity. We as a human race are at a certain lvl in our development, we can communicate using radiowaves, microwaves, lightwaves and probably a few more. The universe is vast and we've only started to transmit call it 80 years ago. So the outer limit is 40 lightyears, because the signal has to get back to us.So the aliens. First have to be intelligent, at the same technoligical lvl, willing to talk, and within a radius of 40 lightyears. In other words pretty much a longshot.
In all time travel theories allowed by real science, there is no way a traveler can go back in time to before the time machine was built.
I'm confident time travel into the future is possible, but we would need to develop some very advanced technology to do it. We could travel 10,000 years into the future and age only 1 year during that journey. However, such a trip would consume an extraordinary amount of energy. Time travel to the past is more difficult. We do not understand the science as well.
I stole the bit on time travel but that's the science.

Last points first. Why do you believe in alien life? There is no evidence for it except in science fiction and opinions from secular scientists with today's fancy and expensive equipment to look into the universe. Yet, I'll keep an open mind even though I think they do not exist. It's popular to think they do. You probably believe that human civilizations can exist on Mars, too. The evidence shows that Mars in a terribly inhospitable planet and life can't possibly exist there.

Furthermore, this belief is just based solely on "faith" isn't it. Isn't this the same attitude you hold against me when I say dinosaurs and humans coexisted? Yet, I have provided much historical and physical evidence that they did and yet you consider it myth and you do not believe me. (In baraminology, they have a hidden class for creatures that are cryptids. Today, some dinosaurs are thought to still exist. People look for them like the zoologists and other scientists looked for new animals and plants in the not too distant past, i.e. they talked with people and set out to search for it.) The coalacanth fish was thought to be the link between man evolving from the sea and 100-million years old. Yet, we all know that they exist today. Another blow to evolution. You believe based on nothing but hypotheses of secular scientists. Just because the universe is vast, even though the creation scientists told you about fine tuning (which is accepted by some secular scientists). SETI is scientific, but it has not been very productive in gathering the evidence for other intelligent life. Isn't this evidence for fine tuning and what the creation scientists are saying?



I'll try to answer your earlier points later today.

 

[forkup]

As I pointed out before.You have to do only 1 thing to prove evolution wrong.Find me a fossil that goes against the chronology. Finds dinosaurs and ppl in the same strata.Or a dinosaur in the precambrian Or about a dozen other variations on the theme.It is my best argument for macroevolution.If you deny microevolution there is truly no hope. Since proven both in the la be and out. I do want to say 1 thing about piltdown man. It took science 40 years to find out the hoax .But science did find it and what's more it was taken out and no scientist uses or teaches piltdown man as truth anymore.There is litteraly no piece of research not a single article that conceivably helps the Creationist cause that is ever truly abondened.Every theory that comes with Creationism is rehashed over and over again no matter how thoroughly it gets refuted.The lack of selfcorrecting mechanism is one of the main things that makes bit faith and not science.I urge you to read the supreme court ruling on why creationism is not science and then try to deny it.I doubt you'll be succesfull.

I think I explained this already, but fossilization is difficult to come by. There appear to be many fossils, and the archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists, and others have done a fine job in digging them out. Overall, it is still not an easy thing to come across although there could be a big find. Thus, we have not come across the conclusive evidence yet. There is plenty of other evidence that tells of dinosaurs and humans living together -- Evidence of Dinosaurs with Men | Genesis Park ,
Physical Evidence for the Coexistence of Dinosaurs and Humans [Part I] , or Dinosaurs in History . Unfortunately, the evidence is forbidden because it would destroy evolution and people would lose their jobs. So, there is your one thing. Yet, your macroevo evidence is weak. Natural selection is just as much as part of creation science and creationists have developed baraminology to explain the different species and how they can mingle. Some of things to prove evolution has been pointed out in the 75 theses. Give me an example of abiogenesis. Humans can't even create a blade of grass without a pre-existing living organism. I've already explained the chicken and the egg and science backs it up. The Bible is truly ahead of its time as we have not been able to prove it all, but eventually we will. Despite this happening, it is foretold that other powers that be will disallow it and so comes the end of the world. Some people think it is coming in our lifetime, but I have no idea.

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

-Define proof. You use that word alot, what to you is proof. So far you have used "artistic representation", " It's a conspiracy", "myth". what of those things you consider proof?
-I'll put 2 questions up for you.
Do you consider Radiocarbon dating accurate?
Give me a clear set of parameters for classification of kinds using baraminology? You say it's scientific so it has to have parameters.
- Now to the rest. There are plenty of fossils beds, usually it used to be a pool of somekind where a flash flood hit. Since that ensures rapid burial. But you seem to not understand something. I'm making it way easier for you then show me humans and dinosaurs buried togheter. Al I'm asking of you is to show me any human buried in the strata under the KT boundarary, or a dinosaur buried in the layers before the permian extinction. You don't have to show me a human buried with a dinosaur just a human in those strata. I say they're buried chronologically. If you can break that chronoligy you will have proven your point. Just don't tell me, the reason it hasn't happened is a conspiracy. I've pointed out to you, that it would have to be a massive conspiracy and not only that. A paleontoligist who can break that chronligy would be famous so it's completly counterintuitive to keep it a secret.
- You know dragons all fly now tell me. Flying dinosaurs looked way different then dragons. I have another hypothesis.It's save to assume large bones have been dug up before Owen did it in the 1800's . I put the question what would happen if a huge bone is dug up in the dark ages. A bone nobody can put on an indigenous animal. Without any reference I can picture any dark age monk put the spin of a mytholigical creature on that. See, dragon Myths and other mytholigical beasts explained without having to resort to dinosaurs and man lived togheter
- Now your thaught experiment, I don't know what the point is but I'll answer.
Yes I do believe in alien life. No I don't believe we will ever make contact. It's a matter of scale not rarity. We as a human race are at a certain lvl in our development, we can communicate using radiowaves, microwaves, lightwaves and probably a few more. The universe is vast and we've only started to transmit call it 80 years ago. So the outer limit is 40 lightyears, because the signal has to get back to us.So the aliens. First have to be intelligent, at the same technoligical lvl, willing to talk, and within a radius of 40 lightyears. In other words pretty much a longshot.
In all time travel theories allowed by real science, there is no way a traveler can go back in time to before the time machine was built.
I'm confident time travel into the future is possible, but we would need to develop some very advanced technology to do it. We could travel 10,000 years into the future and age only 1 year during that journey. However, such a trip would consume an extraordinary amount of energy. Time travel to the past is more difficult. We do not understand the science as well.
I stole the bit on time travel but that's the science.

Last points first. Why do you believe in alien life? There is no evidence for it except in science fiction and opinions from secular scientists with today's fancy and expensive equipment to look into the universe. Yet, I'll keep an open mind even though I think they do not exist. It's popular to think they do. You probably believe that human civilizations can exist on Mars, too. The evidence shows that Mars in a terribly inhospitable planet and life can't possibly exist there.

Furthermore, this belief is just based solely on "faith" isn't it. Isn't this the same attitude you hold against me when I say dinosaurs and humans coexisted? Yet, I have provided much historical and physical evidence that they did and yet you consider it myth and you do not believe me. (In baraminology, they have a hidden class for creatures that are cryptids. Today, some dinosaurs are thought to still exist. People look for them like the zoologists and other scientists looked for new animals and plants in the not too distant past, i.e. they talked with people and set out to search for it.) The coalacanth fish was thought to be the link between man evolving from the sea and 100-million years old. Yet, we all k now that they exist today. Another blow to evolution. You believe based on nothing but hypotheses of secular scientists. Just because the universe is vast, even though the creation scientists told you about fine tuning (which is accepted by some secular scientists). SETI is scientific, but it has not been very productive in gathering the evidence for other intelligent life. Isn't this evidence for fine tuning and what the creation scientists are saying?



I'll try to answer your earlier points later today.

Lol I said in my previous post I don't even believe there are advanced civilazation within 40 lightyears so how you get to me believing theres civilazations on Mars makes me question you even read my posts.And to that point science has ruled out men on mars before we ever send a probe.
I believe, and your right it is a belief that there is alien life for a couple of reasons. Science has found that liquid water is basicly the one condition that life needs. Wherever we find liquid water on earth we find life. Now the last couple of years we have found thousands of planets and quite a few of those planets seem to be in an orbit suitable for liquid water. So we have 2 conditions for life. Planets and the possibility of water wich is a simple compound of 2 of the most common elements . So since the universe is so vast that it's not unreasonable to assume that some kind of life will exist outside earth. Yes I belief in something without proof. There's 3 big differences between your faith and mine. My belief is based on observable facts, it isn't an unbelievable statement as an almighty being did it all ,and most importantly I allow for the possibility that I'm wrong. So you think that the finding of a coelacant is a blow to evolution. It isn't, it simply means that the bonefish was an evolutionary model good enough to survive until this day. There are other examples of those. Single cell organisms, turtles, crocs, sharks all have proven good enough to survive several mass extinction events.
How do you classify kinds in baraminoligy??????? What makes something one kind and not another, seems to be a simple question.

 

[forkup]

As I pointed out before.You have to do only 1 thing to prove evolution wrong.Find me a fossil that goes against the chronology. Finds dinosaurs and ppl in the same strata.Or a dinosaur in the precambrian Or about a dozen other variations on the theme.It is my best argument for macroevolution.If you deny microevolution there is truly no hope. Since proven both in the la be and out. I do want to say 1 thing about piltdown man. It took science 40 years to find out the hoax .But science did find it and what's more it was taken out and no scientist uses or teaches piltdown man as truth anymore.There is litteraly no piece of research not a single article that conceivably helps the Creationist cause that is ever truly abondened.Every theory that comes with Creationism is rehashed over and over again no matter how thoroughly it gets refuted.The lack of selfcorrecting mechanism is one of the main things that makes bit faith and not science.I urge you to read the supreme court ruling on why creationism is not science and then try to deny it.I doubt you'll be succesfull.

I think I explained this already, but fossilization is difficult to come by. There appear to be many fossils, and the archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists, and others have done a fine job in digging them out. Overall, it is still not an easy thing to come across although there could be a big find. Thus, we have not come across the conclusive evidence yet. There is plenty of other evidence that tells of dinosaurs and humans living together -- Evidence of Dinosaurs with Men | Genesis Park ,
Physical Evidence for the Coexistence of Dinosaurs and Humans [Part I] , or Dinosaurs in History . Unfortunately, the evidence is forbidden because it would destroy evolution and people would lose their jobs. So, there is your one thing. Yet, your macroevo evidence is weak. Natural selection is just as much as part of creation science and creationists have developed baraminology to explain the different species and how they can mingle. Some of things to prove evolution has been pointed out in the 75 theses. Give me an example of abiogenesis. Humans can't even create a blade of grass without a pre-existing living organism. I've already explained the chicken and the egg and science backs it up. The Bible is truly ahead of its time as we have not been able to prove it all, but eventually we will. Despite this happening, it is foretold that other powers that be will disallow it and so comes the end of the world. Some people think it is coming in our lifetime, but I have no idea.

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

-Define proof. You use that word alot, what to you is proof. So far you have used "artistic representation", " It's a conspiracy", "myth". what of those things you consider proof?
-I'll put 2 questions up for you.
Do you consider Radiocarbon dating accurate?
Give me a clear set of parameters for classification of kinds using baraminology? You say it's scientific so it has to have parameters.
- Now to the rest. There are plenty of fossils beds, usually it used to be a pool of somekind where a flash flood hit. Since that ensures rapid burial. But you seem to not understand something. I'm making it way easier for you then show me humans and dinosaurs buried togheter. Al I'm asking of you is to show me any human buried in the strata under the KT boundarary, or a dinosaur buried in the layers before the permian extinction. You don't have to show me a human buried with a dinosaur just a human in those strata. I say they're buried chronologically. If you can break that chronoligy you will have proven your point. Just don't tell me, the reason it hasn't happened is a conspiracy. I've pointed out to you, that it would have to be a massive conspiracy and not only that. A paleontoligist who can break that chronligy would be famous so it's completly counterintuitive to keep it a secret.
- You know dragons all fly now tell me. Flying dinosaurs looked way different then dragons. I have another hypothesis.It's save to assume large bones have been dug up before Owen did it in the 1800's . I put the question what would happen if a huge bone is dug up in the dark ages. A bone nobody can put on an indigenous animal. Without any reference I can picture any dark age monk put the spin of a mytholigical creature on that. See, dragon Myths and other mytholigical beasts explained without having to resort to dinosaurs and man lived togheter
- Now your thaught experiment, I don't know what the point is but I'll answer.
Yes I do believe in alien life. No I don't believe we will ever make contact. It's a matter of scale not rarity. We as a human race are at a certain lvl in our development, we can communicate using radiowaves, microwaves, lightwaves and probably a few more. The universe is vast and we've only started to transmit call it 80 years ago. So the outer limit is 40 lightyears, because the signal has to get back to us.So the aliens. First have to be intelligent, at the same technoligical lvl, willing to talk, and within a radius of 40 lightyears. In other words pretty much a longshot.
In all time travel theories allowed by real science, there is no way a traveler can go back in time to before the time machine was built.
I'm confident time travel into the future is possible, but we would need to develop some very advanced technology to do it. We could travel 10,000 years into the future and age only 1 year during that journey. However, such a trip would consume an extraordinary amount of energy. Time travel to the past is more difficult. We do not understand the science as well.
I stole the bit on time travel but that's the science.

Last points first. Why do you believe in alien life? There is no evidence for it except in science fiction and opinions from secular scientists with today's fancy and expensive equipment to look into the universe. Yet, I'll keep an open mind even though I think they do not exist. It's popular to think they do. You probably believe that human civilizations can exist on Mars, too. The evidence shows that Mars in a terribly inhospitable planet and life can't possibly exist there.

Furthermore, this belief is just based solely on "faith" isn't it. Isn't this the same attitude you hold against me when I say dinosaurs and humans coexisted? Yet, I have provided much historical and physical evidence that they did and yet you consider it myth and you do not believe me. (In baraminology, they have a hidden class for creatures that are cryptids. Today, some dinosaurs are thought to still exist. People look for them like the zoologists and other scientists looked for new animals and plants in the not too distant past, i.e. they talked with people and set out to search for it.) The coalacanth fish was thought to be the link between man evolving from the sea and 100-million years old. Yet, we all know that they exist today. Another blow to evolution. You believe based on nothing but hypotheses of secular scientists. Just because the universe is vast, even though the creation scientists told you about fine tuning (which is accepted by some secular scientists). SETI is scientific, but it has not been very productive in gathering the evidence for other intelligent life. Isn't this evidence for fine tuning and what the creation scientists are saying?



I'll try to answer your earlier points later today.

" historical and physical evidence" Using evidence instead of proof doesn't change anything. What historical proof, the dragon MYTH? What physical evidence?? You mean a picture like this that creationist call an apatosaur.

 

[BreezeWood]

Yes, the Almighty gave us our Spirit and a written document that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

this is the etching in stone from the Almighty you destroyed, scripturalist - by proxy without your condemnation for the heretic moses that is necessary.


... that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

the biblicist is only interested in their own self interest and have plagiarized their document to do so.


you speak of atheism as though you are not one and are the better for it where in fact your own self deception far exceeds anything you proclaim as a fault for their honest opinion.

.

You'll have to explain further because I am not sure what you are claiming scripturalists (first time I heard that term) or I did.

bond: You'll have to explain further because I am not sure what you are claiming scripturalists (first time I heard that term) or I did.

that's because you are unwilling to justify your statements from one fallacy to the next by answering the posts.

or those who put oral traditions ... above those of the Scripture.

- and you believe one would survive the test of time over the other any differently, you indeed are a sad case.

did you answer the question bond ? - the implication your written scriptures are more valid than oral tradition over time - where time does not shed well the validity of "your" written scriptures - 6000 year old universe.

Yes, the Almighty gave us our Spirit and a written document that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

this is the etching in stone from the Almighty you destroyed, scripturalist - by proxy without your condemnation for the heretic moses that is necessary - (* Hint: to validate what is otherwise written).

there is no written document from the Almighty, bond by their own etching it was destroyed. there is only an oral tradition, whether by writing or verbal and because of the heresy without condemnation the written is textually inaccurate from the time of moses foreword ... scripturalist and accordingly suspect throughout.

- only the oral tradition remains as the true path to the Everlasting.

.

Did you get this from Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code? "Dan Brown's fictional book The Da Vinci Code has his storyline “expert” say the following about the Bible: “The Bible did not arrive by fax from heaven. . . . The Bible is the product of man, my dear. Not of God. The Bible did not fall magically from the clouds. Man created it as a historical record of tumultuous times, and it has evolved through countless translations, additions, and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the book.” Brown’s charge does indeed belong in a work of fiction because the assertion is simply not true."

AFAIK, the originals, called "autographs" are not in the possession of any person or group. They may have been lost or destroyed during the exile of the Jews, but the works have been copied for other use. Thus, the content was preserved and handed down for later generations.

Is the original Bible still in existence?

.




the post was about what is written in the book not just its authenticity, the implication of moses who destroyed stone etchings carved by the Almighty as the true and only text form the deity themselves ... your response must have someone else in mind or just does not make any sense.

.

 

[james bond]

I think I explained this already, but fossilization is difficult to come by. There appear to be many fossils, and the archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists, and others have done a fine job in digging them out. Overall, it is still not an easy thing to come across although there could be a big find. Thus, we have not come across the conclusive evidence yet. There is plenty of other evidence that tells of dinosaurs and humans living together -- Evidence of Dinosaurs with Men | Genesis Park ,
Physical Evidence for the Coexistence of Dinosaurs and Humans [Part I] , or Dinosaurs in History . Unfortunately, the evidence is forbidden because it would destroy evolution and people would lose their jobs. So, there is your one thing. Yet, your macroevo evidence is weak. Natural selection is just as much as part of creation science and creationists have developed baraminology to explain the different species and how they can mingle. Some of things to prove evolution has been pointed out in the 75 theses. Give me an example of abiogenesis. Humans can't even create a blade of grass without a pre-existing living organism. I've already explained the chicken and the egg and science backs it up. The Bible is truly ahead of its time as we have not been able to prove it all, but eventually we will. Despite this happening, it is foretold that other powers that be will disallow it and so comes the end of the world. Some people think it is coming in our lifetime, but I have no idea.

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

-Define proof. You use that word alot, what to you is proof. So far you have used "artistic representation", " It's a conspiracy", "myth". what of those things you consider proof?
-I'll put 2 questions up for you.
Do you consider Radiocarbon dating accurate?
Give me a clear set of parameters for classification of kinds using baraminology? You say it's scientific so it has to have parameters.
- Now to the rest. There are plenty of fossils beds, usually it used to be a pool of somekind where a flash flood hit. Since that ensures rapid burial. But you seem to not understand something. I'm making it way easier for you then show me humans and dinosaurs buried togheter. Al I'm asking of you is to show me any human buried in the strata under the KT boundarary, or a dinosaur buried in the layers before the permian extinction. You don't have to show me a human buried with a dinosaur just a human in those strata. I say they're buried chronologically. If you can break that chronoligy you will have proven your point. Just don't tell me, the reason it hasn't happened is a conspiracy. I've pointed out to you, that it would have to be a massive conspiracy and not only that. A paleontoligist who can break that chronligy would be famous so it's completly counterintuitive to keep it a secret.
- You know dragons all fly now tell me. Flying dinosaurs looked way different then dragons. I have another hypothesis.It's save to assume large bones have been dug up before Owen did it in the 1800's . I put the question what would happen if a huge bone is dug up in the dark ages. A bone nobody can put on an indigenous animal. Without any reference I can picture any dark age monk put the spin of a mytholigical creature on that. See, dragon Myths and other mytholigical beasts explained without having to resort to dinosaurs and man lived togheter
- Now your thaught experiment, I don't know what the point is but I'll answer.
Yes I do believe in alien life. No I don't believe we will ever make contact. It's a matter of scale not rarity. We as a human race are at a certain lvl in our development, we can communicate using radiowaves, microwaves, lightwaves and probably a few more. The universe is vast and we've only started to transmit call it 80 years ago. So the outer limit is 40 lightyears, because the signal has to get back to us.So the aliens. First have to be intelligent, at the same technoligical lvl, willing to talk, and within a radius of 40 lightyears. In other words pretty much a longshot.
In all time travel theories allowed by real science, there is no way a traveler can go back in time to before the time machine was built.
I'm confident time travel into the future is possible, but we would need to develop some very advanced technology to do it. We could travel 10,000 years into the future and age only 1 year during that journey. However, such a trip would consume an extraordinary amount of energy. Time travel to the past is more difficult. We do not understand the science as well.
I stole the bit on time travel but that's the science.

Last points first. Why do you believe in alien life? There is no evidence for it except in science fiction and opinions from secular scientists with today's fancy and expensive equipment to look into the universe. Yet, I'll keep an open mind even though I think they do not exist. It's popular to think they do. You probably believe that human civilizations can exist on Mars, too. The evidence shows that Mars in a terribly inhospitable planet and life can't possibly exist there.

Furthermore, this belief is just based solely on "faith" isn't it. Isn't this the same attitude you hold against me when I say dinosaurs and humans coexisted? Yet, I have provided much historical and physical evidence that they did and yet you consider it myth and you do not believe me. (In baraminology, they have a hidden class for creatures that are cryptids. Today, some dinosaurs are thought to still exist. People look for them like the zoologists and other scientists looked for new animals and plants in the not too distant past, i.e. they talked with people and set out to search for it.) The coalacanth fish was thought to be the link between man evolving from the sea and 100-million years old. Yet, we all k now that they exist today. Another blow to evolution. You believe based on nothing but hypotheses of secular scientists. Just because the universe is vast, even though the creation scientists told you about fine tuning (which is accepted by some secular scientists). SETI is scientific, but it has not been very productive in gathering the evidence for other intelligent life. Isn't this evidence for fine tuning and what the creation scientists are saying?



I'll try to answer your earlier points later today.

Lol I said in my previous post I don't even believe there are advanced civilazation within 40 lightyears so how you get to me believing theres civilazations on Mars makes me question you even read my posts.And to that point science has ruled out men on mars before we ever send a probe.
I believe, and your right it is a belief that there is alien life for a couple of reasons. Science has found that liquid water is basicly the one condition that life needs. Wherever we find liquid water on earth we find life. Now the last couple of years we have found thousands of planets and quite a few of those planets seem to be in an orbit suitable for liquid water. So we have 2 conditions for life. Planets and the possibility of water wich is a simple compound of 2 of the most common elements . So since the universe is so vast that it's not unreasonable to assume that some kind of life will exist outside earth. Yes I belief in something without proof. There's 3 big differences between your faith and mine. My belief is based on observable facts, it isn't an unbelievable statement as an almighty being did it all ,and most importantly I allow for the possibility that I'm wrong. So you think that the finding of a coelacant is a blow to evolution. It isn't, it simply means that the bonefish was an evolutionary model good enough to survive until this day. There are other examples of those. Single cell organisms, turtles, crocs, sharks all have proven good enough to survive several mass extinction events.
How do you classify kinds in baraminoligy??????? What makes something one kind and not another, seems to be a simple question.

Lol the evidence above shows you do not read my posts. Are they too complex for you? I never said anything about intelligent "aliens" living on Mars. I was questioning why NASA and other secular scientists are proposing to colonize there? In an earlier post, I said that money would be better spent colonizing the moon and trying to build a shuttle station and resupply outpost for space stations. That's what Europeans, Russians and Chinese will be doing with the goal of making money. Besides, Jesus loves the moon and the Bible talks about the moon. There is money to made on the moon. Trying to colonize Mars would be a death sentence. So, we agree on not colonizing Mars.

And just because they found some water, if it is indeed water, it does not mean life. There has to be other conditions for life as pointed out by the fine tuning theory. Thus, vastness and billions of planets and stars does not mean life. I guess you just chose to ignore that. If I had to guess on which planet to try and colonize besides Earth, then it would be Europa. It's a moon of Jupiter and holds vast oceans of underground water. Otherwise, we will probably not find life on the other planets even within 40 lightyears assuming we can travel that far. I think you understand that we can travel forward in time, but you did not know how. The hypothesis is that by traveling at the speed of light and going into space and then returning, one can travel into the future on Earth. Those of the spaceship able to make the journey will only have aged a year while those on Earth would have aged around 30. The answer to how one can travel at the speed of light could be in the Bible, too, and that is by using magnetic propulsion. This is explained in Genesis. The thinking behind magnetic propulsion systems came out the Bible. The secular scientists have their own propulsion systems, but they are still theory.

At least, you admit you believe in some of these wacky ideas without proof. That is "faith," but in the wrong faith-based system. Evolution is also a faith-based system. If it was not, then their scientists would have the experiments to back their theories up. That is one method of proof in science to the creation scientists which you asked for. Another would be some logical argument. Another would be scientific facts and historical truth. I mentioned all of these before as "proof." Where is that with evolution? Between the two systems, the Kalam Cosmological argument tells us logically that God created the universe and all that is in it. There is nothing in evolution that remotely comes close.

In conclusion, I'll just continue to believe that you did not understand the things I was saying and kept continuing to believe in your scientific fairy tales. In the end, truth will win out. There is no way I can convince anyone that their worldview may be wrong. They would have to have an open mind and consider the other side. Only they have the power to change their own mind. In the end, truth will win out and my faith-based system tells me that there are no atheists in the afterlife.

To answer your questions about baraminology, here is a link as an introduction and one as an overview -- Introduction to Baraminology -- http://christiananswers.net/q-crs/baraminology.html . I am trying to follow this one right now -- OBJECTIVE: Creation Education | Baraminology . Does it show that humans could not have descended from apes?

 

[james bond]

Yes, the Almighty gave us our Spirit and a written document that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

this is the etching in stone from the Almighty you destroyed, scripturalist - by proxy without your condemnation for the heretic moses that is necessary.


... that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

the biblicist is only interested in their own self interest and have plagiarized their document to do so.


you speak of atheism as though you are not one and are the better for it where in fact your own self deception far exceeds anything you proclaim as a fault for their honest opinion.

.

You'll have to explain further because I am not sure what you are claiming scripturalists (first time I heard that term) or I did.

bond: You'll have to explain further because I am not sure what you are claiming scripturalists (first time I heard that term) or I did.

that's because you are unwilling to justify your statements from one fallacy to the next by answering the posts.

or those who put oral traditions ... above those of the Scripture.

- and you believe one would survive the test of time over the other any differently, you indeed are a sad case.

did you answer the question bond ? - the implication your written scriptures are more valid than oral tradition over time - where time does not shed well the validity of "your" written scriptures - 6000 year old universe.

Yes, the Almighty gave us our Spirit and a written document that helps us enjoy the fruits of our lives.

this is the etching in stone from the Almighty you destroyed, scripturalist - by proxy without your condemnation for the heretic moses that is necessary - (* Hint: to validate what is otherwise written).

there is no written document from the Almighty, bond by their own etching it was destroyed. there is only an oral tradition, whether by writing or verbal and because of the heresy without condemnation the written is textually inaccurate from the time of moses foreword ... scripturalist and accordingly suspect throughout.

- only the oral tradition remains as the true path to the Everlasting.

.

Did you get this from Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code? "Dan Brown's fictional book The Da Vinci Code has his storyline “expert” say the following about the Bible: “The Bible did not arrive by fax from heaven. . . . The Bible is the product of man, my dear. Not of God. The Bible did not fall magically from the clouds. Man created it as a historical record of tumultuous times, and it has evolved through countless translations, additions, and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the book.” Brown’s charge does indeed belong in a work of fiction because the assertion is simply not true."

AFAIK, the originals, called "autographs" are not in the possession of any person or group. They may have been lost or destroyed during the exile of the Jews, but the works have been copied for other use. Thus, the content was preserved and handed down for later generations.

Is the original Bible still in existence?

.




the post was about what is written in the book not just its authenticity, the implication of moses who destroyed stone etchings carved by the Almighty as the true and only text form the deity themselves ... your response must have someone else in mind or just does not make any sense.

.

All I can say is you do not explain enough for me to understand you, and will let it go at that.

 

[james bond]

I think I explained this already, but fossilization is difficult to come by. There appear to be many fossils, and the archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists, and others have done a fine job in digging them out. Overall, it is still not an easy thing to come across although there could be a big find. Thus, we have not come across the conclusive evidence yet. There is plenty of other evidence that tells of dinosaurs and humans living together -- Evidence of Dinosaurs with Men | Genesis Park ,
Physical Evidence for the Coexistence of Dinosaurs and Humans [Part I] , or Dinosaurs in History . Unfortunately, the evidence is forbidden because it would destroy evolution and people would lose their jobs. So, there is your one thing. Yet, your macroevo evidence is weak. Natural selection is just as much as part of creation science and creationists have developed baraminology to explain the different species and how they can mingle. Some of things to prove evolution has been pointed out in the 75 theses. Give me an example of abiogenesis. Humans can't even create a blade of grass without a pre-existing living organism. I've already explained the chicken and the egg and science backs it up. The Bible is truly ahead of its time as we have not been able to prove it all, but eventually we will. Despite this happening, it is foretold that other powers that be will disallow it and so comes the end of the world. Some people think it is coming in our lifetime, but I have no idea.

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

-Define proof. You use that word alot, what to you is proof. So far you have used "artistic representation", " It's a conspiracy", "myth". what of those things you consider proof?
-I'll put 2 questions up for you.
Do you consider Radiocarbon dating accurate?
Give me a clear set of parameters for classification of kinds using baraminology? You say it's scientific so it has to have parameters.
- Now to the rest. There are plenty of fossils beds, usually it used to be a pool of somekind where a flash flood hit. Since that ensures rapid burial. But you seem to not understand something. I'm making it way easier for you then show me humans and dinosaurs buried togheter. Al I'm asking of you is to show me any human buried in the strata under the KT boundarary, or a dinosaur buried in the layers before the permian extinction. You don't have to show me a human buried with a dinosaur just a human in those strata. I say they're buried chronologically. If you can break that chronoligy you will have proven your point. Just don't tell me, the reason it hasn't happened is a conspiracy. I've pointed out to you, that it would have to be a massive conspiracy and not only that. A paleontoligist who can break that chronligy would be famous so it's completly counterintuitive to keep it a secret.
- You know dragons all fly now tell me. Flying dinosaurs looked way different then dragons. I have another hypothesis.It's save to assume large bones have been dug up before Owen did it in the 1800's . I put the question what would happen if a huge bone is dug up in the dark ages. A bone nobody can put on an indigenous animal. Without any reference I can picture any dark age monk put the spin of a mytholigical creature on that. See, dragon Myths and other mytholigical beasts explained without having to resort to dinosaurs and man lived togheter
- Now your thaught experiment, I don't know what the point is but I'll answer.
Yes I do believe in alien life. No I don't believe we will ever make contact. It's a matter of scale not rarity. We as a human race are at a certain lvl in our development, we can communicate using radiowaves, microwaves, lightwaves and probably a few more. The universe is vast and we've only started to transmit call it 80 years ago. So the outer limit is 40 lightyears, because the signal has to get back to us.So the aliens. First have to be intelligent, at the same technoligical lvl, willing to talk, and within a radius of 40 lightyears. In other words pretty much a longshot.
In all time travel theories allowed by real science, there is no way a traveler can go back in time to before the time machine was built.
I'm confident time travel into the future is possible, but we would need to develop some very advanced technology to do it. We could travel 10,000 years into the future and age only 1 year during that journey. However, such a trip would consume an extraordinary amount of energy. Time travel to the past is more difficult. We do not understand the science as well.
I stole the bit on time travel but that's the science.

Last points first. Why do you believe in alien life? There is no evidence for it except in science fiction and opinions from secular scientists with today's fancy and expensive equipment to look into the universe. Yet, I'll keep an open mind even though I think they do not exist. It's popular to think they do. You probably believe that human civilizations can exist on Mars, too. The evidence shows that Mars in a terribly inhospitable planet and life can't possibly exist there.

Furthermore, this belief is just based solely on "faith" isn't it. Isn't this the same attitude you hold against me when I say dinosaurs and humans coexisted? Yet, I have provided much historical and physical evidence that they did and yet you consider it myth and you do not believe me. (In baraminology, they have a hidden class for creatures that are cryptids. Today, some dinosaurs are thought to still exist. People look for them like the zoologists and other scientists looked for new animals and plants in the not too distant past, i.e. they talked with people and set out to search for it.) The coalacanth fish was thought to be the link between man evolving from the sea and 100-million years old. Yet, we all know that they exist today. Another blow to evolution. You believe based on nothing but hypotheses of secular scientists. Just because the universe is vast, even though the creation scientists told you about fine tuning (which is accepted by some secular scientists). SETI is scientific, but it has not been very productive in gathering the evidence for other intelligent life. Isn't this evidence for fine tuning and what the creation scientists are saying?



I'll try to answer your earlier points later today.

" historical and physical evidence" Using evidence instead of proof doesn't change anything. What historical proof, the dragon MYTH? What physical evidence?? You mean a picture like this that creationist call an apatosaur.

I can see the apatosaurus quite clearly, if that's what you meant. How did Native Americans draw such animals?

Would you have a different reaction if they drew an alien lol?

 

[forkup]

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

-Define proof. You use that word alot, what to you is proof. So far you have used "artistic representation", " It's a conspiracy", "myth". what of those things you consider proof?
-I'll put 2 questions up for you.
Do you consider Radiocarbon dating accurate?
Give me a clear set of parameters for classification of kinds using baraminology? You say it's scientific so it has to have parameters.
- Now to the rest. There are plenty of fossils beds, usually it used to be a pool of somekind where a flash flood hit. Since that ensures rapid burial. But you seem to not understand something. I'm making it way easier for you then show me humans and dinosaurs buried togheter. Al I'm asking of you is to show me any human buried in the strata under the KT boundarary, or a dinosaur buried in the layers before the permian extinction. You don't have to show me a human buried with a dinosaur just a human in those strata. I say they're buried chronologically. If you can break that chronoligy you will have proven your point. Just don't tell me, the reason it hasn't happened is a conspiracy. I've pointed out to you, that it would have to be a massive conspiracy and not only that. A paleontoligist who can break that chronligy would be famous so it's completly counterintuitive to keep it a secret.
- You know dragons all fly now tell me. Flying dinosaurs looked way different then dragons. I have another hypothesis.It's save to assume large bones have been dug up before Owen did it in the 1800's . I put the question what would happen if a huge bone is dug up in the dark ages. A bone nobody can put on an indigenous animal. Without any reference I can picture any dark age monk put the spin of a mytholigical creature on that. See, dragon Myths and other mytholigical beasts explained without having to resort to dinosaurs and man lived togheter
- Now your thaught experiment, I don't know what the point is but I'll answer.
Yes I do believe in alien life. No I don't believe we will ever make contact. It's a matter of scale not rarity. We as a human race are at a certain lvl in our development, we can communicate using radiowaves, microwaves, lightwaves and probably a few more. The universe is vast and we've only started to transmit call it 80 years ago. So the outer limit is 40 lightyears, because the signal has to get back to us.So the aliens. First have to be intelligent, at the same technoligical lvl, willing to talk, and within a radius of 40 lightyears. In other words pretty much a longshot.
In all time travel theories allowed by real science, there is no way a traveler can go back in time to before the time machine was built.
I'm confident time travel into the future is possible, but we would need to develop some very advanced technology to do it. We could travel 10,000 years into the future and age only 1 year during that journey. However, such a trip would consume an extraordinary amount of energy. Time travel to the past is more difficult. We do not understand the science as well.
I stole the bit on time travel but that's the science.

Last points first. Why do you believe in alien life? There is no evidence for it except in science fiction and opinions from secular scientists with today's fancy and expensive equipment to look into the universe. Yet, I'll keep an open mind even though I think they do not exist. It's popular to think they do. You probably believe that human civilizations can exist on Mars, too. The evidence shows that Mars in a terribly inhospitable planet and life can't possibly exist there.

Furthermore, this belief is just based solely on "faith" isn't it. Isn't this the same attitude you hold against me when I say dinosaurs and humans coexisted? Yet, I have provided much historical and physical evidence that they did and yet you consider it myth and you do not believe me. (In baraminology, they have a hidden class for creatures that are cryptids. Today, some dinosaurs are thought to still exist. People look for them like the zoologists and other scientists looked for new animals and plants in the not too distant past, i.e. they talked with people and set out to search for it.) The coalacanth fish was thought to be the link between man evolving from the sea and 100-million years old. Yet, we all k now that they exist today. Another blow to evolution. You believe based on nothing but hypotheses of secular scientists. Just because the universe is vast, even though the creation scientists told you about fine tuning (which is accepted by some secular scientists). SETI is scientific, but it has not been very productive in gathering the evidence for other intelligent life. Isn't this evidence for fine tuning and what the creation scientists are saying?



I'll try to answer your earlier points later today.

Lol I said in my previous post I don't even believe there are advanced civilazation within 40 lightyears so how you get to me believing theres civilazations on Mars makes me question you even read my posts.And to that point science has ruled out men on mars before we ever send a probe.
I believe, and your right it is a belief that there is alien life for a couple of reasons. Science has found that liquid water is basicly the one condition that life needs. Wherever we find liquid water on earth we find life. Now the last couple of years we have found thousands of planets and quite a few of those planets seem to be in an orbit suitable for liquid water. So we have 2 conditions for life. Planets and the possibility of water wich is a simple compound of 2 of the most common elements . So since the universe is so vast that it's not unreasonable to assume that some kind of life will exist outside earth. Yes I belief in something without proof. There's 3 big differences between your faith and mine. My belief is based on observable facts, it isn't an unbelievable statement as an almighty being did it all ,and most importantly I allow for the possibility that I'm wrong. So you think that the finding of a coelacant is a blow to evolution. It isn't, it simply means that the bonefish was an evolutionary model good enough to survive until this day. There are other examples of those. Single cell organisms, turtles, crocs, sharks all have proven good enough to survive several mass extinction events.
How do you classify kinds in baraminoligy??????? What makes something one kind and not another, seems to be a simple question.

Lol the evidence above shows you do not read my posts. Are they too complex for you? I never said anything about intelligent "aliens" living on Mars. I was questioning why NASA and other secular scientists are proposing to colonize there? In an earlier post, I said that money would be better spent colonizing the moon and trying to build a shuttle station and resupply outpost for space stations. That's what Europeans, Russians and Chinese will be doing with the goal of making money. Besides, Jesus loves the moon and the Bible talks about the moon. There is money to made on the moon. Trying to colonize Mars would be a death sentence. So, we agree on not colonizing Mars.

And just because they found some water, if it is indeed water, it does not mean life. There has to be other conditions for life as pointed out by the fine tuning theory. Thus, vastness and billions of planets and stars does not mean life. I guess you just chose to ignore that. If I had to guess on which planet to try and colonize besides Earth, then it would be Europa. It's a moon of Jupiter and holds vast oceans of underground water. Otherwise, we will probably not find life on the other planets even within 40 lightyears assuming we can travel that far. I think you understand that we can travel forward in time, but you did not know how. The hypothesis is that by traveling at the speed of light and going into space and then returning, one can travel into the future on Earth. Those of the spaceship able to make the journey will only have aged a year while those on Earth would have aged around 30. The answer to how one can travel at the speed of light could be in the Bible, too, and that is by using magnetic propulsion. This is explained in Genesis. The thinking behind magnetic propulsion systems came out the Bible. The secular scientists have their own propulsion systems, but they are still theory.

At least, you admit you believe in some of these wacky ideas without proof. That is "faith," but in the wrong faith-based system. Evolution is also a faith-based system. If it was not, then their scientists would have the experiments to back their theories up. That is one method of proof in science to the creation scientists which you asked for. Another would be some logical argument. Another would be scientific facts and historical truth. I mentioned all of these before as "proof." Where is that with evolution? Between the two systems, the Kalam Cosmological argument tells us logically that God created the universe and all that is in it. There is nothing in evolution that remotely comes close.

In conclusion, I'll just continue to believe that you did not understand the things I was saying and kept continuing to believe in your scientific fairy tales. In the end, truth will win out. There is no way I can convince anyone that their worldview may be wrong. They would have to have an open mind and consider the other side. Only they have the power to change their own mind. In the end, truth will win out and my faith-based system tells me that there are no atheists in the afterlife.

To answer your questions about baraminology, here is a link as an introduction and one as an overview -- Introduction to Baraminology -- What are the Genesis “kinds”? • ChristianAnswers.Net . I am trying to follow this one right now -- OBJECTIVE: Creation Education | Baraminology . Does it show that humans could not have descended from apes?

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

-Define proof. You use that word alot, what to you is proof. So far you have used "artistic representation", " It's a conspiracy", "myth". what of those things you consider proof?
-I'll put 2 questions up for you.
Do you consider Radiocarbon dating accurate?
Give me a clear set of parameters for classification of kinds using baraminology? You say it's scientific so it has to have parameters.
- Now to the rest. There are plenty of fossils beds, usually it used to be a pool of somekind where a flash flood hit. Since that ensures rapid burial. But you seem to not understand something. I'm making it way easier for you then show me humans and dinosaurs buried togheter. Al I'm asking of you is to show me any human buried in the strata under the KT boundarary, or a dinosaur buried in the layers before the permian extinction. You don't have to show me a human buried with a dinosaur just a human in those strata. I say they're buried chronologically. If you can break that chronoligy you will have proven your point. Just don't tell me, the reason it hasn't happened is a conspiracy. I've pointed out to you, that it would have to be a massive conspiracy and not only that. A paleontoligist who can break that chronligy would be famous so it's completly counterintuitive to keep it a secret.
- You know dragons all fly now tell me. Flying dinosaurs looked way different then dragons. I have another hypothesis.It's save to assume large bones have been dug up before Owen did it in the 1800's . I put the question what would happen if a huge bone is dug up in the dark ages. A bone nobody can put on an indigenous animal. Without any reference I can picture any dark age monk put the spin of a mytholigical creature on that. See, dragon Myths and other mytholigical beasts explained without having to resort to dinosaurs and man lived togheter
- Now your thaught experiment, I don't know what the point is but I'll answer.
Yes I do believe in alien life. No I don't believe we will ever make contact. It's a matter of scale not rarity. We as a human race are at a certain lvl in our development, we can communicate using radiowaves, microwaves, lightwaves and probably a few more. The universe is vast and we've only started to transmit call it 80 years ago. So the outer limit is 40 lightyears, because the signal has to get back to us.So the aliens. First have to be intelligent, at the same technoligical lvl, willing to talk, and within a radius of 40 lightyears. In other words pretty much a longshot.
In all time travel theories allowed by real science, there is no way a traveler can go back in time to before the time machine was built.
I'm confident time travel into the future is possible, but we would need to develop some very advanced technology to do it. We could travel 10,000 years into the future and age only 1 year during that journey. However, such a trip would consume an extraordinary amount of energy. Time travel to the past is more difficult. We do not understand the science as well.
I stole the bit on time travel but that's the science.

Last points first. Why do you believe in alien life? There is no evidence for it except in science fiction and opinions from secular scientists with today's fancy and expensive equipment to look into the universe. Yet, I'll keep an open mind even though I think they do not exist. It's popular to think they do. You probably believe that human civilizations can exist on Mars, too. The evidence shows that Mars in a terribly inhospitable planet and life can't possibly exist there.

Furthermore, this belief is just based solely on "faith" isn't it. Isn't this the same attitude you hold against me when I say dinosaurs and humans coexisted? Yet, I have provided much historical and physical evidence that they did and yet you consider it myth and you do not believe me. (In baraminology, they have a hidden class for creatures that are cryptids. Today, some dinosaurs are thought to still exist. People look for them like the zoologists and other scientists looked for new animals and plants in the not too distant past, i.e. they talked with people and set out to search for it.) The coalacanth fish was thought to be the link between man evolving from the sea and 100-million years old. Yet, we all k now that they exist today. Another blow to evolution. You believe based on nothing but hypotheses of secular scientists. Just because the universe is vast, even though the creation scientists told you about fine tuning (which is accepted by some secular scientists). SETI is scientific, but it has not been very productive in gathering the evidence for other intelligent life. Isn't this evidence for fine tuning and what the creation scientists are saying?



I'll try to answer your earlier points later today.

Lol I said in my previous post I don't even believe there are advanced civilazation within 40 lightyears so how you get to me believing theres civilazations on Mars makes me question you even read my posts.And to that point science has ruled out men on mars before we ever send a probe.
I believe, and your right it is a belief that there is alien life for a couple of reasons. Science has found that liquid water is basicly the one condition that life needs. Wherever we find liquid water on earth we find life. Now the last couple of years we have found thousands of planets and quite a few of those planets seem to be in an orbit suitable for liquid water. So we have 2 conditions for life. Planets and the possibility of water wich is a simple compound of 2 of the most common elements . So since the universe is so vast that it's not unreasonable to assume that some kind of life will exist outside earth. Yes I belief in something without proof. There's 3 big differences between your faith and mine. My belief is based on observable facts, it isn't an unbelievable statement as an almighty being did it all ,and most importantly I allow for the possibility that I'm wrong. So you think that the finding of a coelacant is a blow to evolution. It isn't, it simply means that the bonefish was an evolutionary model good enough to survive until this day. There are other examples of those. Single cell organisms, turtles, crocs, sharks all have proven good enough to survive several mass extinction events.
How do you classify kinds in baraminoligy??????? What makes something one kind and not another, seems to be a simple question.

Lol the evidence above shows you do not read my posts. Are they too complex for you? I never said anything about intelligent "aliens" living on Mars. I was questioning why NASA and other secular scientists are proposing to colonize there? In an earlier post, I said that money would be better spent colonizing the moon and trying to build a shuttle station and resupply outpost for space stations. That's what Europeans, Russians and Chinese will be doing with the goal of making money. Besides, Jesus loves the moon and the Bible talks about the moon. There is money to made on the moon. Trying to colonize Mars would be a death sentence. So, we agree on not colonizing Mars.

And just because they found some water, if it is indeed water, it does not mean life. There has to be other conditions for life as pointed out by the fine tuning theory. Thus, vastness and billions of planets and stars does not mean life. I guess you just chose to ignore that. If I had to guess on which planet to try and colonize besides Earth, then it would be Europa. It's a moon of Jupiter and holds vast oceans of underground water. Otherwise, we will probably not find life on the other planets even within 40 lightyears assuming we can travel that far. I think you understand that we can travel forward in time, but you did not know how. The hypothesis is that by traveling at the speed of light and going into space and then returning, one can travel into the future on Earth. Those of the spaceship able to make the journey will only have aged a year while those on Earth would have aged around 30. The answer to how one can travel at the speed of light could be in the Bible, too, and that is by using magnetic propulsion. This is explained in Genesis. The thinking behind magnetic propulsion systems came out the Bible. The secular scientists have their own propulsion systems, but they are still theory.

At least, you admit you believe in some of these wacky ideas without proof. That is "faith," but in the wrong faith-based system. Evolution is also a faith-based system. If it was not, then their scientists would have the experiments to back their theories up. That is one method of proof in science to the creation scientists which you asked for. Another would be some logical argument. Another would be scientific facts and historical truth. I mentioned all of these before as "proof." Where is that with evolution? Between the two systems, the Kalam Cosmological argument tells us logically that God created the universe and all that is in it. There is nothing in evolution that remotely comes close.

In conclusion, I'll just continue to believe that you did not understand the things I was saying and kept continuing to believe in your scientific fairy tales. In the end, truth will win out. There is no way I can convince anyone that their worldview may be wrong. They would have to have an open mind and consider the other side. Only they have the power to change their own mind. In the end, truth will win out and my faith-based system tells me that there are no atheists in the afterlife.

To answer your questions about baraminology, here is a link as an introduction and one as an overview -- Introduction to Baraminology -- What are the Genesis “kinds”? • ChristianAnswers.Net . I am trying to follow this one right now -- OBJECTIVE: Creation Education | Baraminology . Does it show that humans could not have descended from apes?

The Origin of Species: The Beak of the Finch | HHMI's BioInteractive
This is field research of 2 bioligist over 40 years on finches. I urge you to watch the entire thing, but since I don't believe you will watch, I'll give some highlights. It records both a drought and a uncommenly wet period. Both of those have a significant effect on the population. Proving evolutionary changes. It also explains how they experimentally proved that altough there are about a dozen different species of finches they don't interbreed. Experiments have also been done under labconditions with fruitflies and I have already pointed out the whole bacteriel thing. So when you say evolution is faith without any proof you are plainly wrong.
How do we know that evolution is really happening? . Another link to summaries. It doesn't just reiterate (better then I can) the fossil records. But it also show experimentally both in the lab and in the field different experiments that have been done confirming evolution. You know the thing you say no experiments confirm.Now about baraminology. They say that there are no genetic simularities between kinds. That's a whopper of a lie.Percentage of genetic similarity between humans and animals . This link provides a blip of genetic relationships between the different species. It has sources. It also illustrates something else, genetics act as a time capsule recording how closely in history the different species are related. Try to explain that in another way?

 

[forkup]

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

-Define proof. You use that word alot, what to you is proof. So far you have used "artistic representation", " It's a conspiracy", "myth". what of those things you consider proof?
-I'll put 2 questions up for you.
Do you consider Radiocarbon dating accurate?
Give me a clear set of parameters for classification of kinds using baraminology? You say it's scientific so it has to have parameters.
- Now to the rest. There are plenty of fossils beds, usually it used to be a pool of somekind where a flash flood hit. Since that ensures rapid burial. But you seem to not understand something. I'm making it way easier for you then show me humans and dinosaurs buried togheter. Al I'm asking of you is to show me any human buried in the strata under the KT boundarary, or a dinosaur buried in the layers before the permian extinction. You don't have to show me a human buried with a dinosaur just a human in those strata. I say they're buried chronologically. If you can break that chronoligy you will have proven your point. Just don't tell me, the reason it hasn't happened is a conspiracy. I've pointed out to you, that it would have to be a massive conspiracy and not only that. A paleontoligist who can break that chronligy would be famous so it's completly counterintuitive to keep it a secret.
- You know dragons all fly now tell me. Flying dinosaurs looked way different then dragons. I have another hypothesis.It's save to assume large bones have been dug up before Owen did it in the 1800's . I put the question what would happen if a huge bone is dug up in the dark ages. A bone nobody can put on an indigenous animal. Without any reference I can picture any dark age monk put the spin of a mytholigical creature on that. See, dragon Myths and other mytholigical beasts explained without having to resort to dinosaurs and man lived togheter
- Now your thaught experiment, I don't know what the point is but I'll answer.
Yes I do believe in alien life. No I don't believe we will ever make contact. It's a matter of scale not rarity. We as a human race are at a certain lvl in our development, we can communicate using radiowaves, microwaves, lightwaves and probably a few more. The universe is vast and we've only started to transmit call it 80 years ago. So the outer limit is 40 lightyears, because the signal has to get back to us.So the aliens. First have to be intelligent, at the same technoligical lvl, willing to talk, and within a radius of 40 lightyears. In other words pretty much a longshot.
In all time travel theories allowed by real science, there is no way a traveler can go back in time to before the time machine was built.
I'm confident time travel into the future is possible, but we would need to develop some very advanced technology to do it. We could travel 10,000 years into the future and age only 1 year during that journey. However, such a trip would consume an extraordinary amount of energy. Time travel to the past is more difficult. We do not understand the science as well.
I stole the bit on time travel but that's the science.

Last points first. Why do you believe in alien life? There is no evidence for it except in science fiction and opinions from secular scientists with today's fancy and expensive equipment to look into the universe. Yet, I'll keep an open mind even though I think they do not exist. It's popular to think they do. You probably believe that human civilizations can exist on Mars, too. The evidence shows that Mars in a terribly inhospitable planet and life can't possibly exist there.

Furthermore, this belief is just based solely on "faith" isn't it. Isn't this the same attitude you hold against me when I say dinosaurs and humans coexisted? Yet, I have provided much historical and physical evidence that they did and yet you consider it myth and you do not believe me. (In baraminology, they have a hidden class for creatures that are cryptids. Today, some dinosaurs are thought to still exist. People look for them like the zoologists and other scientists looked for new animals and plants in the not too distant past, i.e. they talked with people and set out to search for it.) The coalacanth fish was thought to be the link between man evolving from the sea and 100-million years old. Yet, we all k now that they exist today. Another blow to evolution. You believe based on nothing but hypotheses of secular scientists. Just because the universe is vast, even though the creation scientists told you about fine tuning (which is accepted by some secular scientists). SETI is scientific, but it has not been very productive in gathering the evidence for other intelligent life. Isn't this evidence for fine tuning and what the creation scientists are saying?



I'll try to answer your earlier points later today.

Lol I said in my previous post I don't even believe there are advanced civilazation within 40 lightyears so how you get to me believing theres civilazations on Mars makes me question you even read my posts.And to that point science has ruled out men on mars before we ever send a probe.
I believe, and your right it is a belief that there is alien life for a couple of reasons. Science has found that liquid water is basicly the one condition that life needs. Wherever we find liquid water on earth we find life. Now the last couple of years we have found thousands of planets and quite a few of those planets seem to be in an orbit suitable for liquid water. So we have 2 conditions for life. Planets and the possibility of water wich is a simple compound of 2 of the most common elements . So since the universe is so vast that it's not unreasonable to assume that some kind of life will exist outside earth. Yes I belief in something without proof. There's 3 big differences between your faith and mine. My belief is based on observable facts, it isn't an unbelievable statement as an almighty being did it all ,and most importantly I allow for the possibility that I'm wrong. So you think that the finding of a coelacant is a blow to evolution. It isn't, it simply means that the bonefish was an evolutionary model good enough to survive until this day. There are other examples of those. Single cell organisms, turtles, crocs, sharks all have proven good enough to survive several mass extinction events.
How do you classify kinds in baraminoligy??????? What makes something one kind and not another, seems to be a simple question.

Lol the evidence above shows you do not read my posts. Are they too complex for you? I never said anything about intelligent "aliens" living on Mars. I was questioning why NASA and other secular scientists are proposing to colonize there? In an earlier post, I said that money would be better spent colonizing the moon and trying to build a shuttle station and resupply outpost for space stations. That's what Europeans, Russians and Chinese will be doing with the goal of making money. Besides, Jesus loves the moon and the Bible talks about the moon. There is money to made on the moon. Trying to colonize Mars would be a death sentence. So, we agree on not colonizing Mars.

And just because they found some water, if it is indeed water, it does not mean life. There has to be other conditions for life as pointed out by the fine tuning theory. Thus, vastness and billions of planets and stars does not mean life. I guess you just chose to ignore that. If I had to guess on which planet to try and colonize besides Earth, then it would be Europa. It's a moon of Jupiter and holds vast oceans of underground water. Otherwise, we will probably not find life on the other planets even within 40 lightyears assuming we can travel that far. I think you understand that we can travel forward in time, but you did not know how. The hypothesis is that by traveling at the speed of light and going into space and then returning, one can travel into the future on Earth. Those of the spaceship able to make the journey will only have aged a year while those on Earth would have aged around 30. The answer to how one can travel at the speed of light could be in the Bible, too, and that is by using magnetic propulsion. This is explained in Genesis. The thinking behind magnetic propulsion systems came out the Bible. The secular scientists have their own propulsion systems, but they are still theory.

At least, you admit you believe in some of these wacky ideas without proof. That is "faith," but in the wrong faith-based system. Evolution is also a faith-based system. If it was not, then their scientists would have the experiments to back their theories up. That is one method of proof in science to the creation scientists which you asked for. Another would be some logical argument. Another would be scientific facts and historical truth. I mentioned all of these before as "proof." Where is that with evolution? Between the two systems, the Kalam Cosmological argument tells us logically that God created the universe and all that is in it. There is nothing in evolution that remotely comes close.

In conclusion, I'll just continue to believe that you did not understand the things I was saying and kept continuing to believe in your scientific fairy tales. In the end, truth will win out. There is no way I can convince anyone that their worldview may be wrong. They would have to have an open mind and consider the other side. Only they have the power to change their own mind. In the end, truth will win out and my faith-based system tells me that there are no atheists in the afterlife.

To answer your questions about baraminology, here is a link as an introduction and one as an overview -- Introduction to Baraminology -- What are the Genesis “kinds”? • ChristianAnswers.Net . I am trying to follow this one right now -- OBJECTIVE: Creation Education | Baraminology . Does it show that humans could not have descended from apes?

"I think you understand that we can travel forward in time, but you did not know how. The hypothesis is that by traveling at the speed of light and going into space and then returning, one can travel into the future on Earth. Those of the spaceship able to make the journey will only have aged a year while those on Earth would have aged around 30." Check page 126 of this threat guess where you got that from. You don't even want to acknowledge that science can meassure distance to distant stars and your trying to claim I don't understand special relativity. As to life on other planets. This boils down to how we look at the world. If you believe God created us in it's image. Life on other planets would pose a problem, because it would proof earth for starters isn't unique. I start from the standpoint earth isn't unique. Logically then I start from the position that life is possible, because it is here on earth. Logically if I identify liquid water as the main catalyst and we find liquid water exist(ed) on at least 2 other places in our solar system. And I furthermore can establish that exoplanets are commmon in the universe. And a rough estimate of stars in the universe is 100 octillion stars. That's 1 with 29 zero's. Statisticly that would mean that life is not only possible but likely somewhere.

 

[forkup]

So your first argument is the dragon myth. Sorry to tell you, but you cant proof 1 myth by citing another myth. At best you can call it circumtential. Your second part was that stegosaur picture View attachment 77803
look closely you see a large head and horns. Weirdest stegsaurus I've ever seen. So call that wishfull thinking.
Then you said it's a conspiracy. Like I pointed out before. It would involve all paleontiligist litteraly thousands of ppl keeping a secret. And remember a scientist who would find proof of your claims his career would be made so weird argument. You also said we simply haven't found enough fossils yet. We have found litteraly hundreds of thousands of fossils. None of them show an intermingling of species like your suggesting. Homonids and large mamals in some strata, dinosaurs in other, only marine life in others. It's universal, predictable and always true. The truth is none of your arguments against macroevolution do anything to discredit it.
As to your abiogenesis argument. Couple of things. I already conceded several times that the start of life is an hypothesis not a theory yet. Who knows some higher intelligence put the first simple cell organisms on earth. But what happened after those first simple cell organisms where put here is a theory which is massivly supported. Btw when you say I believe in survival of the fittest but not in evolution, your saying I believe in rain but not that it's wet. One is the mecanism for the other. Baraminoigy is not a science
Creationists have been repeatedly grilled for a clear explanation of how to tell if two creatures are part of the same "kind", but have been unable to formulate a consistent answer. It is evident that the only thing that defines a group as a baramin is whether or not a given creationist claims a group to be one.[10]

Baraminologists often put forward that a baramin is a group composed of creatures that can interbreed, pointing to examples of tiger-lion and horse-zebra offspring to show that separate "species" can interbreed. However, the vast majority of organisms are incapable of hybridization,[11] leaving this definition insufficient to trim down the number of animals Noah would have had to bring. Current baraminological "research" indicates[12] that the possibility of hybrids definitely means the same baramin, but the lack thereof does not mean different baramins.

The clearest summary of the art of baraminological classification is given by Roger W. Sanders in his 2010 paper on placing plants into baramins:[13]

The cognita are not based on explicit or implicit comparisons of characters or biometric distance measures but on the gestalt of the plants and the classification response it elicits in humans.
Or: "Forget all this 'measurement' stuff and just follow your my feelings."

Ultimately, the only consistent definition of a baramin is a set of creatures whose common ancestry is so mind-blowingly obvious that even creationists have trouble denying it. Unless it's human, of course, in which case it shares its baramin with no non-human primate.[14] Where various hominids go is another story.[15]

Not wishful thinking. It is an artistic representation and looks like a stegosaraus or similar dinosaur. I'll go by your hundreds of thousands of fossils, but in those which ones show two dinosaurs living together and being buried together? Not many I bet. What I have to come up with is one where both man and dinosaur were buried together. They can't just die together or had lived nearby. They had to be buried together and put under pressure. Moreover, the dinosaurs being buried together is evidence of a global flood. Perhaps, the evidence has been found, but secular scientists hid the evidence so as to not destroy evolution? That is possible.

Let's stop here and do a thought experiment. Do you believe that we can travel into the future? Do you believe that we can travel back to the past and possibly change history?

I say we can travel into the future and I have evidence to show how it can be done. There is no evidence, but science fiction that we can travel into the past.

Or do you believe aliens exist? Many atheist scientists think we'll discover aliens within the next 35 years because of their expensive telescopes and equipment. Yet, they have no evidence that they exist. Just large numbers of planets and stars and wishful thinking. We have shown that life is fine-tuned in the universe and that life bearing environments are extremely rare.

So, I have made a hypothesis from hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted and yet you do not believe me. This isn't pie in the sky as the secular scientists such as Carl Sagan theorized. Sagan even sent time capsules with two satellites into space so if intelligent aliens found them, they would learn about us and know we are here. What a waste of money and how scientific was that lol?

So between the two worldviews, which group has committed more fraud. It's the secular scientists. Which group has been show to be more wrong. Again, the secular scientists.

As with the Bible, your lack of knowledge of baramins is showing. Baraminology has been developed so that it can be taught in schools.



I have shown you evidence of dinosaurs and man living together. They weren't called dinosaurs back then, but dragons. Many representations of dragons exist all over the world.

-Define proof. You use that word alot, what to you is proof. So far you have used "artistic representation", " It's a conspiracy", "myth". what of those things you consider proof?
-I'll put 2 questions up for you.
Do you consider Radiocarbon dating accurate?
Give me a clear set of parameters for classification of kinds using baraminology? You say it's scientific so it has to have parameters.
- Now to the rest. There are plenty of fossils beds, usually it used to be a pool of somekind where a flash flood hit. Since that ensures rapid burial. But you seem to not understand something. I'm making it way easier for you then show me humans and dinosaurs buried togheter. Al I'm asking of you is to show me any human buried in the strata under the KT boundarary, or a dinosaur buried in the layers before the permian extinction. You don't have to show me a human buried with a dinosaur just a human in those strata. I say they're buried chronologically. If you can break that chronoligy you will have proven your point. Just don't tell me, the reason it hasn't happened is a conspiracy. I've pointed out to you, that it would have to be a massive conspiracy and not only that. A paleontoligist who can break that chronligy would be famous so it's completly counterintuitive to keep it a secret.
- You know dragons all fly now tell me. Flying dinosaurs looked way different then dragons. I have another hypothesis.It's save to assume large bones have been dug up before Owen did it in the 1800's . I put the question what would happen if a huge bone is dug up in the dark ages. A bone nobody can put on an indigenous animal. Without any reference I can picture any dark age monk put the spin of a mytholigical creature on that. See, dragon Myths and other mytholigical beasts explained without having to resort to dinosaurs and man lived togheter
- Now your thaught experiment, I don't know what the point is but I'll answer.
Yes I do believe in alien life. No I don't believe we will ever make contact. It's a matter of scale not rarity. We as a human race are at a certain lvl in our development, we can communicate using radiowaves, microwaves, lightwaves and probably a few more. The universe is vast and we've only started to transmit call it 80 years ago. So the outer limit is 40 lightyears, because the signal has to get back to us.So the aliens. First have to be intelligent, at the same technoligical lvl, willing to talk, and within a radius of 40 lightyears. In other words pretty much a longshot.
In all time travel theories allowed by real science, there is no way a traveler can go back in time to before the time machine was built.
I'm confident time travel into the future is possible, but we would need to develop some very advanced technology to do it. We could travel 10,000 years into the future and age only 1 year during that journey. However, such a trip would consume an extraordinary amount of energy. Time travel to the past is more difficult. We do not understand the science as well.
I stole the bit on time travel but that's the science.

Last points first. Why do you believe in alien life? There is no evidence for it except in science fiction and opinions from secular scientists with today's fancy and expensive equipment to look into the universe. Yet, I'll keep an open mind even though I think they do not exist. It's popular to think they do. You probably believe that human civilizations can exist on Mars, too. The evidence shows that Mars in a terribly inhospitable planet and life can't possibly exist there.

Furthermore, this belief is just based solely on "faith" isn't it. Isn't this the same attitude you hold against me when I say dinosaurs and humans coexisted? Yet, I have provided much historical and physical evidence that they did and yet you consider it myth and you do not believe me. (In baraminology, they have a hidden class for creatures that are cryptids. Today, some dinosaurs are thought to still exist. People look for them like the zoologists and other scientists looked for new animals and plants in the not too distant past, i.e. they talked with people and set out to search for it.) The coalacanth fish was thought to be the link between man evolving from the sea and 100-million years old. Yet, we all know that they exist today. Another blow to evolution. You believe based on nothing but hypotheses of secular scientists. Just because the universe is vast, even though the creation scientists told you about fine tuning (which is accepted by some secular scientists). SETI is scientific, but it has not been very productive in gathering the evidence for other intelligent life. Isn't this evidence for fine tuning and what the creation scientists are saying?



I'll try to answer your earlier points later today.

" historical and physical evidence" Using evidence instead of proof doesn't change anything. What historical proof, the dragon MYTH? What physical evidence?? You mean a picture like this that creationist call an apatosaur.

I can see the apatosaurus quite clearly, if that's what you meant. How did Native Americans draw such animals?

Would you have a different reaction if they drew an alien lol?

You can basicly draw anything if you want to . I made a campfire and a hilly terrain. It's kind of like looking at clouds. You can make it mean watever you want it to mean.Upon close inspection by Senter and Cole, the "sauropod dinosaur" turned out to be made up of distinct carvings and mud stains.Debunking the "Dinosaurs" of Kachina Bridge | Science | Smithsonian


there you go