If God doesn't exist...

[Clement]

...and science holds the answer to all questions....

Then what kick started the universe?

After all we wouldn't want to violate one of Newton's three laws now would we?

If the scientific answer at this time is we don't know...

Then doesn't that mean a miracle occurred?

*****CHUCKLE*****

If God didn't exist it would be necessary for atheists to create Him so they could have someone to hate.

 

[BreezeWood]

...and science holds the answer to all questions....

Then what kick started the universe?

After all we wouldn't want to violate one of Newton's three laws now would we?

If the scientific answer at this time is we don't know...

Then doesn't that mean a miracle occurred?

*****CHUCKLE*****

If God didn't exist it would be necessary for atheists to create Him so they could have someone to hate.

.

If God didn't exist it would be necessary for atheists to create Him so they could have someone to hate.

very far from the truth but we do know what kind of people will write a book to believe in rather than accept the challenge of life irregardless the hazard of not having false pretenses to hide behind ... as history is their witness.

.

 

[james bond]

Huh? I think you're mixing apples and oranges. Here's the carbon-14 dating and guess what happened? It was rejected by the evos as obvious error in the data when they never looked at the data nor the researchers contacted. They still can't past their prejudices and preconceived notions of ToE.

Carbon-14 dating dinosaur bones

Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating | NCSE
These people explain it all. My question remains. If it is an error why is it consisent????????

They do not explain this as there was C-14 remaining to date. Again, it shows their preconceived notions.

I showed you actual measurements using SEVERAL different methods and locations. Explain How the result is always the same???????????? Anything, a far fetched hypothesis instead of deflections.

They aren't equal or equivalent. They only are made to fit a range which you call the same. The others are discarded. Look up how calibration is done with RD companies. I answer your questions, but you have no answers for mine.

Question: A sample that is more than fifty thousand years old shouldn't have any measurable C-14. Coal, oil, and natural gas are supposed to be millions of years old; yet creationists say that some of them contain measurable amounts of C-14, enough to give them C-14 ages in the tens of thousands of years. How do you explain this?

Answer: Very simply. Radiocarbon dating doesn't work well on objects much older than twenty thousand years, because such objects have so little C-14 left that their beta radiation is swamped out by the background radiation of cosmic rays and potassium-40 (K-40) decay. Younger objects can easily be dated, because they still emit plenty of beta radiation, enough to be measured after the background radiation has been subtracted out of the total beta radiation. However, in either case, the background beta radiation has to be compensated for, and, in the older objects, the amount of C-14 they have left is less than the margin of error in measuring background radiation.
This was in the last link. So when you say I didn't answer you mean "I didn't read it".

Last point first, you must've not read or comprehended over 50% of what I wrote. If you could answer my questions, then you would have read and provided it since that is what you did for the others. I do not think that most creationists and I are unreasonable people. If science finds error in our thinking or results, then we would use rd. Right now, we probably use rd just to check with your findings. We do use carbon-14 dating on organic samples and compare them with current atmosperic levels. Where we think that there is significant difference in the atmosphere is with pre-flood levels. Also, one has to be careful not to make false assumptions such as the past levels were the same as today. .

And your argument only backs what I have been saying and that evos make WRONG assumptions. There was carbon remaining and it provided the dates less than 40K years old. Thus, the evos tossed results out as data error even though they did not investigate (more assumptions). If the results are not in the EXPECTED range of evolution's millions of years, then the results are tossed as being in error. They have gotten some samples far removed from where the actual fossil was found in order to make the data fit their preconceived results. My contention is all of those dates should be tossed because they're all wrong.

 

[james bond]

Here is an example of a process that happens and science cannot explain it, but the Bible does.

"Powerful Cosmic Rays
Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity has been instrumental in the world of science for many reasons. One of those reasons is its application to the GZK Limit. The GZK Limit sets a proposed ceiling on how powerful cosmic rays can be when they hit Earth and filter through our atmosphere. However, scientists across the ocean at the Akeno Observatory of Japan have found powerful cosmic rays that have routinely blown through this ceiling. The source of these powerful rays has never been identified and further research has come up dry when trying to get an answer. Surely, there’s no Marvin the Martian pointing his gun at our planet. So what’s the deal? Activities like this remind us that while we have come so far, there is just so very far to go."

16 Amazing Mysteries that Science Can't Explain | Page 10 of 25 | DailyForest

The creationists explain:

"However, creationists argue that these dramatic fluctuations occurred during the post-Flood Ice Age. Thus, within a creationist framework, these dramatic fluctuations occurred as a result of a unique, non-repeatable (Genesis 9:11–16) catastrophic event. Hence a biblical worldview helps to guard against ‘panic’ over possible future changes in climate.

Another reason for a judicious approach to this issue is the fact that a major source of uncertainty in climate modelling is a lack of understanding of cloud behaviour.
Another reason for a judicious approach to this issue is the fact that a major source of uncertainty in climate modelling is a lack of understanding of cloud behaviour.3 Hence a better understanding of the microscopic physical processes occurring within clouds is essential in order to construct theoretical models that accurately predict the amount of warming that may be occurring.4 Predictions about future climate change are based heavily upon computer modelling, and there is a very real possibility that climate models are not taking into account all the relevant physics. Obviously, such a failure will be a source of error in climate predictions.

In particular, there has been considerable recent interest in the possibility that cosmic rays could somehow be affecting weather and climate. A leaked early draft of the ‘Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 5th Assessment Report’ includes a discussion of a possible cosmic ray-weather/climate connection.5 Since the final version of the report will likely discuss this possible link, it seems appropriate to now discuss possible mechanisms behind such a connection.

There are at least two other reasons that such a link might be of interest to creationists. First, although no obvious ‘worldview’ issues are involved in the ‘global warming’ controversy (one could presumably be an orthodox Christian and still believe in catastrophic man-made global warming), there does seem to be a ‘spiritual’ component to this issue. For instance, the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) has now made ‘climate change’ a priority issue, in addition to its opposition to creation science and the Intelligent Design movement.6 Second, a convincing cosmic ray-weather/climate link might help to explain the severity of European winters during the coldest part of the so-called ‘Little Ice Age’ (~AD 1350–1885). In my opinion, such a plausible link has been proposed. Although the ‘Little Ice Age’ was not caused by a global flood, as was the post-Flood Ice Age, Klevberg and Oard have noted that a better understanding of the ‘Little Ice Age’ might result in improved understanding of the post-Flood Ice Age.7 For these reasons, J. Creation readers are likely to find this to be a topic of interest."

...

"Hence, there are two main theories as to the manner in which cosmic rays could affect weather and climate. One of the main differences between the CMAS and IMN mechanisms is that the IMN mechanism focuses entirely on cosmic rays, whereas the CMAS mechanism regards cosmic rays as only one of five different inputs which modulate the charge density on cloud droplets and aerosols via changes in the fair-weather current density Jz. Apparent difficulties with the IMN mechanism were discussed in this article, and a second article33 discusses apparent difficulties with the CMAS mechanism."

Linking cosmic rays to weather and climate - creation.com

 

[BreezeWood]

Hence a better understanding of the microscopic physical processes occurring within clouds is essential in order to construct theoretical models that accurately predict the amount of warming that may be occurring.4

it seems appropriate to now discuss possible mechanisms behind such a connection.

the creationist has no problem discussing the mechanisms for their contrivances ... but a theoretical explanation for evolutionary change somehow escapes their profound need to know.


pre and post "flood" world event - -....

.

 

[Clement]

...and science holds the answer to all questions....

Then what kick started the universe?

After all we wouldn't want to violate one of Newton's three laws now would we?

If the scientific answer at this time is we don't know...

Then doesn't that mean a miracle occurred?

*****CHUCKLE*****

If God didn't exist it would be necessary for atheists to create Him so they could have someone to hate.

.

If God didn't exist it would be necessary for atheists to create Him so they could have someone to hate.

very far from the truth but we do know what kind of people will write a book to believe in rather than accept the challenge of life irregardless the hazard of not having false pretenses to hide behind ... as history is their witness.

.

Whatever that's supposed to mean....

 

[james bond]

Hence a better understanding of the microscopic physical processes occurring within clouds is essential in order to construct theoretical models that accurately predict the amount of warming that may be occurring.4

it seems appropriate to now discuss possible mechanisms behind such a connection.

the creationist has no problem discussing the mechanisms for their contrivances ... but a theoretical explanation for evolutionary change somehow escapes their profound need to know.


pre and post "flood" world event - -....

.

I am telling you like it was and is. Science backs it up.

 

[james bond]

Creationists believe in the truth and using science to help seek the truth in order to demonstrate the glory of God. That shows that God exists.

Yesterday, I found proof that we could not have evolved from chimpanzees. CASE CLOSED. There is no reason for apes to start bipedalism. They were already efficient with their own locomotion. Since humans are bipedal, we can't climb trees very well. We are limited in our locomotion, so we end up building products to help us with it. I was thinking about rock climbing and tree climbing and this is the type of gear one has to get.

 

[BreezeWood]

Hence a better understanding of the microscopic physical processes occurring within clouds is essential in order to construct theoretical models that accurately predict the amount of warming that may be occurring.4

it seems appropriate to now discuss possible mechanisms behind such a connection.

the creationist has no problem discussing the mechanisms for their contrivances ... but a theoretical explanation for evolutionary change somehow escapes their profound need to know.


pre and post "flood" world event - -....

.

I am telling you like it was and is. Science backs it up.

.

I am telling you like it was and is. Science backs it up.

Science backs it up ...


the flood or your scriptures, don't be confused the flood does not authenticate your book only the providence of the events occurrence.

all the Garden's beings at that time were purged however misconstrued your book placates to humanity.

the Triumph is sought and required for all its inhabitants to prosper in the Everlasting.

.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
at least explain how destroying evil (humans) can be accomplished by the killing of (innocent) animals at the same time is not in itself evil.


"Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."


is this your quid pro quo - good luck, loser.

.

 

[james bond]

Hence a better understanding of the microscopic physical processes occurring within clouds is essential in order to construct theoretical models that accurately predict the amount of warming that may be occurring.4

it seems appropriate to now discuss possible mechanisms behind such a connection.

the creationist has no problem discussing the mechanisms for their contrivances ... but a theoretical explanation for evolutionary change somehow escapes their profound need to know.


pre and post "flood" world event - -....

.

I am telling you like it was and is. Science backs it up.

.

I am telling you like it was and is. Science backs it up.

Science backs it up ...


the flood or your scriptures, don't be confused the flood does not authenticate your book only the providence of the events occurrence.

all the Garden's beings at that time were purged however misconstrued your book placates to humanity.

the Triumph is sought and required for all its inhabitants to prosper in the Everlasting.

.

jb listens and knows how to avoid the flood (local).

Isn't this the evidence that God exists? No global warming. No anthropogenic climate change. We already had the worst God-made climate change in Noah's Flood. God promised there won't be another by the rainbow. You missed all of it in the post I made weeks ago of the rainbow at Ark Encounter.

So, don't worry about anthropogenic climate change, be happy.

 

[james bond]

.
at least explain how destroying evil (humans) can be accomplished by the killing of (innocent) animals at the same time is not in itself evil.


"Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."


is this your quid pro quo - good luck, loser.

.

We were made stewards over them. Yet, there are humans who aren't being good stewards. They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
at least explain how destroying evil (humans) can be accomplished by the killing of (innocent) animals at the same time is not in itself evil.


"Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."


is this your quid pro quo - good luck, loser.

.

We were made stewards over them. Yet, there are humans who aren't being good stewards. They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds.

.

God promised there won't be another by the rainbow.

and you missed my post what that meant.

We were made stewards over them. Yet, there are humans who aren't being good stewards. They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds.

forkup is right, there is no objectivity to you at all - that passage is where I could READ no further, I am happy with the spoken religion as authentic than your written one, how convenient PAPYRUS sortof the whiteout for their beliefs they were afraid to put to stone ...


They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds ...

you're not very bright at all, the rainbow means in the END, everyone will be the same that's why there will be the Final Judgement - if that side is the one then you to will be punished for your failure - The Triumph of Good vs Evil - one or the other will prevail.


We were made stewards over them ...

I've suggested for others to join the hungry Lion in a room and lock the door, oh I'll bring my rifle ... ha ha

.

 

[james bond]

.
at least explain how destroying evil (humans) can be accomplished by the killing of (innocent) animals at the same time is not in itself evil.


"Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."


is this your quid pro quo - good luck, loser.

.

We were made stewards over them. Yet, there are humans who aren't being good stewards. They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds.

.

God promised there won't be another by the rainbow.

and you missed my post what that meant.

We were made stewards over them. Yet, there are humans who aren't being good stewards. They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds.

forkup is right, there is no objectivity to you at all - that passage is where I could READ no further, I am happy with the spoken religion as authentic than your written one, how convenient PAPYRUS sortof the whiteout for their beliefs they were afraid to put to stone ...


They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds ...

you're not very bright at all, the rainbow means in the END, everyone will be the same that's why there will be the Final Judgement - if that side is the one then you to will be punished for your failure - The Triumph of Good vs Evil - one or the other will prevail.


We were made stewards over them ...

I've suggested for others to join the hungry Lion in a room and lock the door, oh I'll bring my rifle ... ha ha

.

Too many pages to count, but you, forkup and the rest of the evos and atheists missed the main points as usual. No wonder you guys are usually wrong and have no answers. Several can't explain evolution in a cogent manner, but yet believe it's scientific theory and more. People can't believe most people believed in creation before and during the 1800s. At least, I can explain evolution and have compared both worldviews. Creation is complete. I think you guys will fall asleep, wake up and see a guy with your face. What does this mean? Roofie!!! That's in this life. Who knows what else is in store in the great beyond?

Furthermore, you can have all your mutations, GM products and be sold new GM products to have a "healthier and longer life." That's why you believe in evolution and who pays the bills at the universities and government scientific institutions like the Smithsonian. They don't want you to live a long time. People have and will continue to have much shorter lives. I'll stay natural and stay away from mutation and mutated products and live to 120.

This will be my last post for a while. It's not that interesting talking with people who watch Cosmos and think that's science. You may as well have Jack Chick explain it to you. Ha ha.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
at least explain how destroying evil (humans) can be accomplished by the killing of (innocent) animals at the same time is not in itself evil.


"Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."


is this your quid pro quo - good luck, loser.

.

We were made stewards over them. Yet, there are humans who aren't being good stewards. They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds.

.

God promised there won't be another by the rainbow.

and you missed my post what that meant.

We were made stewards over them. Yet, there are humans who aren't being good stewards. They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds.

forkup is right, there is no objectivity to you at all - that passage is where I could READ no further, I am happy with the spoken religion as authentic than your written one, how convenient PAPYRUS sortof the whiteout for their beliefs they were afraid to put to stone ...


They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds ...

you're not very bright at all, the rainbow means in the END, everyone will be the same that's why there will be the Final Judgement - if that side is the one then you to will be punished for your failure - The Triumph of Good vs Evil - one or the other will prevail.


We were made stewards over them ...

I've suggested for others to join the hungry Lion in a room and lock the door, oh I'll bring my rifle ... ha ha

.

Too many pages to count, but you, forkup and the rest of the evos and atheists missed the main points as usual. No wonder you guys are usually wrong and have no answers. Several can't explain evolution in a cogent manner, but yet believe it's scientific theory and more. People can't believe most people believed in creation before and during the 1800s. At least, I can explain evolution and have compared both worldviews. Creation is complete. I think you guys will fall asleep, wake up and see a guy with your face. What does this mean? Roofie!!! That's in this life. Who knows what else is in store in the great beyond?

Furthermore, you can have all your mutations, GM products and be sold new GM products to have a "healthier and longer life." That's why you believe in evolution and who pays the bills at the universities and government scientific institutions like the Smithsonian. They don't want you to live a long time. People have and will continue to have much shorter lives. I'll stay natural and stay away from mutation and mutated products and live to 120.

This will be my last post for a while. It's not that interesting talking with people who watch Cosmos and think that's science. You may as well have Jack Chick explain it to you. Ha ha.

.

People can't believe most people believed in creation before and during the 1800s.

Charles Robert Darwin: February 12, 1809 - April 19 1882 (aged 73)

" By the 1870s, the scientific community and much of the general public had accepted evolution as a fact. However, many favoured competing explanations and it was not until the emergence of the modern evolutionary synthesis from the 1930s to the 1950s that a broad consensus developed in which natural selection was the basic mechanism of evolution. "


the biblists met their match and lost - the fundamental issue based on their erroneously written genesis, it is up to them to redirect their scriptures to accommodate the facts relating to the "Great Beyond" - something you (bond) are helplessly unwilling to do.

.

 

[james bond]

.
at least explain how destroying evil (humans) can be accomplished by the killing of (innocent) animals at the same time is not in itself evil.


"Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."


is this your quid pro quo - good luck, loser.

.

We were made stewards over them. Yet, there are humans who aren't being good stewards. They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds.

.

God promised there won't be another by the rainbow.

and you missed my post what that meant.

We were made stewards over them. Yet, there are humans who aren't being good stewards. They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds.

forkup is right, there is no objectivity to you at all - that passage is where I could READ no further, I am happy with the spoken religion as authentic than your written one, how convenient PAPYRUS sortof the whiteout for their beliefs they were afraid to put to stone ...


They will be punished at the end for the their misdeeds ...

you're not very bright at all, the rainbow means in the END, everyone will be the same that's why there will be the Final Judgement - if that side is the one then you to will be punished for your failure - The Triumph of Good vs Evil - one or the other will prevail.


We were made stewards over them ...

I've suggested for others to join the hungry Lion in a room and lock the door, oh I'll bring my rifle ... ha ha

.

Too many pages to count, but you, forkup and the rest of the evos and atheists missed the main points as usual. No wonder you guys are usually wrong and have no answers. Several can't explain evolution in a cogent manner, but yet believe it's scientific theory and more. People can't believe most people believed in creation before and during the 1800s. At least, I can explain evolution and have compared both worldviews. Creation is complete. I think you guys will fall asleep, wake up and see a guy with your face. What does this mean? Roofie!!! That's in this life. Who knows what else is in store in the great beyond?

Furthermore, you can have all your mutations, GM products and be sold new GM products to have a "healthier and longer life." That's why you believe in evolution and who pays the bills at the universities and government scientific institutions like the Smithsonian. They don't want you to live a long time. People have and will continue to have much shorter lives. I'll stay natural and stay away from mutation and mutated products and live to 120.

This will be my last post for a while. It's not that interesting talking with people who watch Cosmos and think that's science. You may as well have Jack Chick explain it to you. Ha ha.

.

People can't believe most people believed in creation before and during the 1800s.

Charles Robert Darwin: February 12, 1809 - April 19 1882 (aged 73)

" By the 1870s, the scientific community and much of the general public had accepted evolution as a fact. However, many favoured competing explanations and it was not until the emergence of the modern evolutionary synthesis from the 1930s to the 1950s that a broad consensus developed in which natural selection was the basic mechanism of evolution. "


the biblists met their match and lost - the fundamental issue based on their erroneously written genesis, it is up to them to redirect their scriptures to accommodate the facts relating to the "Great Beyond" - something you (bond) are helplessly unwilling to do.

.

I am part of the God squad. Membership is based on those WILLING instead of experience, talent or skills although possessing those traits like I can't hurt. What's important is one is WILLING to serve God. That's it.

Otherwise, you just may get my retort to "evolution as a fact." Smell you later Breezy boy. I'm out.

 

[james bond]

what kick started the universe?

Gravity.

You're wrong, but think you're joking.. Your answer is not even close.

Oh god, this stupid shit.. Who created god? It's a infinite cycle both ways, I just don't give a fuck.

It's not stupid shit as it will determine everything. People's worldview will ultimately lead to the end.

No on created God. God is timeless, spaceless and omnipotent (Kalam's Cosmological Argument). If God exists, then He destroyed our world before in around 1600 years. The ancient people made Him angry in that amount of time (God is supposed to be slow to anger).

Man didn't create the concept of God as some people like to believe. Man created evolution. Evo scientists will not peer-review the God Theory or the supernatural.

 

[james bond]

the biblists met their match and lost - the fundamental issue based on their erroneously written genesis, it is up to them to redirect their scriptures to accommodate the facts relating to the "Great Beyond" - something you (bond) are helplessly unwilling to do.

.

There is no easy way to put it BreezeWood, but you are doomed. You're on the path to the underworld. The Bible states it as fact.

Blasphemy gets you the worst level in my opinion. Unless you change. Oh well, another one bites the dust.

 

[sealybobo]

what kick started the universe?

Gravity.

You're wrong, but think you're joking.. Your answer is not even close.

Oh god, this stupid shit.. Who created god? It's a infinite cycle both ways, I just don't give a fuck.

It's not stupid shit as it will determine everything. People's worldview will ultimately lead to the end.

No on created God. God is timeless, spaceless and omnipotent (Kalam's Cosmological Argument). If God exists, then He destroyed our world before in around 1600 years. The ancient people made Him angry in that amount of time (God is supposed to be slow to anger).

Man didn't create the concept of God as some people like to believe. Man created evolution. Evo scientists will not peer-review the God Theory or the supernatural.

No one created the universe. It is timeless. No beginning and no end.

No need for a god

 

[james bond]

what kick started the universe?

Gravity.

You're wrong, but think you're joking.. Your answer is not even close.

Oh god, this stupid shit.. Who created god? It's a infinite cycle both ways, I just don't give a fuck.

It's not stupid shit as it will determine everything. People's worldview will ultimately lead to the end.

No on created God. God is timeless, spaceless and omnipotent (Kalam's Cosmological Argument). If God exists, then He destroyed our world before in around 1600 years. The ancient people made Him angry in that amount of time (God is supposed to be slow to anger).

Man didn't create the concept of God as some people like to believe. Man created evolution. Evo scientists will not peer-review the God Theory or the supernatural.

No one created the universe. It is timeless. No beginning and no end.

No need for a god

Sorry, sealybobo, but you missed the discussion of the Steady State Theory and much more stuff of importance. It has been rendered pseudoscience by the Big Bang Theory. It was rendered as pseudoscience by God and Genesis, but the current batch of scientists in power will not peer-review Bible-based or supernatural theories. Creation scientists have peer-reviewed the works of other creation scientists which is the best one can do.

There is a need for God is the creator, i.e. we would not be here if not for Him. Also, He loves us and helps us. He has already provided a way to be saved by sacrificing His only Son. He is the final judge. There is no need for evolution which is something man created in order to show there is no need for God. However, God gave you free will to choose between the choices so that's why the differing worldviews exist.