25% of Americans are idiots

[Roger.Smith]

Originally Posted by bojulay

The main problem (what I refer to as strict evolutionist, ones who believe that
evolution and evolution alone is the only answer) have, is the question of the
origin of life.

They will not accept that by their explanation it would have to be some form
of spontaneous generation.

But that is what it would be, life arising from non living matter through some
form of natural means, the very definition of spontaneous generation.

They then automatically throw "God of the gaps" out there as if that
were some kind of legitimate response, when in fact it is more like
Darwin of the gaps. They hold the burden of proof to show a demonstration
through purely natural means when purely natural means is the claim
being made

Molecules to man evolution through purely natural means would also have
a purely natural explanation for the origin of life, and there is none.

We are still working on it is no answer, and when you do a little research
on the subject you find that just about every avenue through a purely
natural means has been exhausted.

You should also expect the process to still be found being demonstrated in
nature, and not one single event of life arising from non living matter has
ever been observed in nature.

Like Not-so-wellendowed, you need to look up the meaning of circular logic. You speak about "what should" happen like you have a clue about science. You don't. You start off with a bad assumption, and then ask for proof to back up the bad assumption you made.

Dinosaurs existed, and humans didn't walk alongside them. That alone pretty much proves Genesis is Bronze Age bullshit. If you were a thinking or an educated man, it would have occurred to you that the Earth was much different then than it is now. The climate, length of days, the orbit around the sun, plus so many other changes are what are know as variables in science. The planet has not been in a constant state since the beginning.

You start talking about molecules like you know what you're talking about. Do you even know why living organisms on Earth are called carbon based life forms? What was your science degree in?

[pwood]

Why such hostility?
Why the need to put others or their beliefs down because they do not allign with yours?

[bojulay]

Originally Posted by Roger.Smith

Like Not-so-wellendowed, you need to look up the meaning of circular logic. You speak about "what should" happen like you have a clue about science. You don't. You start off with a bad assumption, and then ask for proof to back up the bad assumption you made.

Dinosaurs existed, and humans didn't walk alongside them. That alone pretty much proves Genesis is Bronze Age bullshit. If you were a thinking or an educated man, it would have occurred to you that the Earth was much different then than it is now. The climate, length of days, the orbit around the sun, plus so many other changes are what are know as variables in science. The planet has not been in a constant state since the beginning.

You start talking about molecules like you know what you're talking about. Do you even know why living organisms on Earth are called carbon based life forms? What was your science degree in?

Ha! you are truly guilty of what you accuse me of.

Genesis in no way makes the claim that men and dinosaurs lived in the same time period, the Hebrew word Yom is translated day in genesis and in
proper context means finite but long period of time, not literal 24 hour
periods of time.

We are still in the seventh day of Gods creation which began right after the
creation of man, Gods pinnacle of creation.

It is a silly young earth creationist view that tries to claim 24 hour periods
of time, not the scripture itself

What a ridicules concept that God would base all of creation on one rotation of the earth.
So God needed 24 hours then, just give me 24 hours and I can get it done, but I need
those 24 hours, hahaha laughable.


The earth isn't in the same state??? what does that have to do with the evolutionist
claim of spontaneous generation except give it even less credibility?

But yeah that is correct, the earth wasn't in the same state, it was a molten mass
due to the late bombardment of asteroids and meteorites and there were no
pre-biotics present which are essential for life.

Your silly assumptions are in your arse where they belong.

[Roger.Smith]

Originally Posted by bojulay

Ha! you are truly guilty of what you accuse me of.

Genesis in no way makes the claim that men and dinosaurs lived in the same time period, the Hebrew word Yom is translated day in genesis and in
proper context means finite but long period of time, not literal 24 hour
periods of time.

We are still in the seventh day of Gods creation which began right after the
creation of man, Gods pinnacle of creation.

It is a silly young earth creationist view that tries to claim 24 hour periods
of time, not the scripture itself

What a ridicules concept that God would base all of creation on one rotation of the earth.
So God needed 24 hours then, just give me 24 hours and I can get it done, but I need
those 24 hours, hahaha laughable.

I didn’t use circular logic, which means even with an example provided; you still don’t understand the concept. That is a textbook example of poor reading comprehension. Over this thread, you’re demonstrated repeatedly you have the inability to grasp concepts whether they’re abstract or not. The inability to understand concepts is why you don’t understand science. It’s easier for you to believe in superstition and magic.

Dinosaurs existing before humans isn’t circular logic, it’s been verified. We have fossils in museums that we’ve dated proving dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. The Flintstones isn’t real or a documentary. Humans and dinosaurs didn’t live together. The fact you even argue that point says a lot.

Bronze Age nomads didn't have any other concept of a day other than the Sun rising and setting when they told their fables. This new-age "Well, it doesn't literally mean a day" is apologetics.

Secondly, we know how planets and stars are formed. We have telescopes. Stars and planets are formed in nebulae, not by some old man in the sky with magical powers. That’s not circular logic, that's observable evidence.

You're using apologetics for Genesis like the nonsense can be validated. Unlike you, I have read and understand the Bible. Here's a list of problems which just part of one chapter in Genesis:


Genesis 1 and Genesis 2:4-25 contradict each other. Even if your “day” apologetics was true (it’s not).

Genesis 1 says that the Earth is created before light, the sun, and the stars. That’s a problem because light the primary source of light in the Universe are stars. Our sun happens to be a star. Genesis 1 also says that humans were created before birds, whales, reptiles, insects, the other animals, and plants.

It would have been pretty hard for people to survive before plants and animals, considering that we have to eat. It also says plants were made before the Sun. I think God should have read the instructions for plants.

Genesis 1:16 says God made two lights, the Sun and the Moon. The moon reflects sunlight, it doesn’t make it’s own. Bronze Age bullshit in action. To top it off, after taking a day to make one star, the Sun, god makes 300 sextillion stars as an afterthought. Keep in mind many of those stars are millions of times larger than our sun.


Those guys in the Bronze Age didn’t have telescopes and knowledge of the light spectrum. They made up bullshit to explain what they saw and to control others.

[bojulay]

Originally Posted by Roger.Smith

I didn’t use circular logic, which means even with an example provided; you still don’t understand the concept. That is a textbook example of poor reading comprehension. Over this thread, you’re demonstrated repeatedly you have the inability to grasp concepts whether they’re abstract or not. The inability to understand concepts is why you don’t understand science. It’s easier for you to believe in superstition and magic.

Dinosaurs existing before humans isn’t circular logic, it’s been verified. We have fossils in museums that we’ve dated proving dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. The Flintstones isn’t real or a documentary. Humans and dinosaurs didn’t live together. The fact you even argue that point says a lot.

Bronze Age nomads didn't have any other concept of a day other than the Sun rising and setting when they told their fables. This new-age "Well, it doesn't literally mean a day" is apologetics.



Secondly, we know how planets and stars are formed. We have telescopes. Stars and planets are formed in nebulae, not by some old man in the sky with magical powers. That’s not circular logic, that's observable evidence.

You're using apologetics for Genesis like the nonsense can be validated. Unlike you, I have read and understand the Bible. Here's a list of problems which just part of one chapter in Genesis:


Genesis 1 and Genesis 2:4-25 contradict each other. Even if your “day” apologetics was true (it’s not).

Genesis 1 says that the Earth is created before light, the sun, and the stars. That’s a problem because light the primary source of light in the Universe are stars. Our sun happens to be a star. Genesis 1 also says that humans were created before birds, whales, reptiles, insects, the other animals, and plants.

It would have been pretty hard for people to survive before plants and animals, considering that we have to eat. It also says plants were made before the Sun. I think God should have read the instructions for plants.

Genesis 1:16 says God made two lights, the Sun and the Moon. The moon reflects sunlight, it doesn’t make it’s own. Bronze Age bullshit in action. To top it off, after taking a day to make one star, the Sun, god makes 300 sextillion stars as an afterthought. Keep in mind many of those stars are millions of times larger than our sun.


Those guys in the Bronze Age didn’t have telescopes and knowledge of the light spectrum. They made up bullshit to explain what they saw and to control others.

More arse mining assumption and demonstration of your total lack of
understanding of the text.

The claim is not that the sun was created after the earth, it is
giving an explanation from the perspective of being on the earth,
let there be light upon the earth not let there be light as in the
creation of the sun.

The haze that surrounded the earth was cleared away so that the sun,
moon and stars became visible, the same haze that has been observed
on other planets.

You try and call clear translation and understanding of the text
circular reasoning. Quit pulling phrases out of your ass and trying
to falsely apply them, and go do a little research on your own.

Bonus: The Bible was also the only book for a few thousand years
that claimed a beginning for the universe, science only recently
has caught up, before they thought there was no beginning to the
universe.

[Roger.Smith]

Originally Posted by bojulay

More arse mining assumption and demonstration of your total lack of
understanding of the text.

The claim is not that the sun was created after the earth, it is
giving an explanation from the perspective of being on the earth,
let there be light upon the earth not let there be light as in the
creation of the sun.

The haze that surrounded the earth was cleared away so that the sun,
moon and stars became visible, the same haze that has been observed
on other planets.

You try and call clear translation and understanding of the text
circular reasoning. Quit pulling phrases out of your ass and trying
to falsely apply them, and go do a little research on your own.

Bonus: The Bible was also the only book for a few thousand years
that claimed a beginning for the universe, science only recently
has caught up, before they thought there was no beginning to the
universe.

I understand what the text said, I even gave you the Bible verses. Since you have no reading comprehension, I should have guess you wouldn't understand them anyway.
What I wrote about the Bible verses were pretty clear and you avoided it like the plague. You didn't even touch the science.

That haze you talk about hasn't been observed on other planets, humans have only walked on Earth and the moon. When did this fantasy take place? Who observed this?

What quotes did I pull out of my ass?

Originally Posted by bojulay

You try and call clear translation and understanding of the text
circular reasoning.

I explained to you why dinosaur fossils and nebulae are evidence and not circular logic, and you write something about translating text. What text are you referring to exactly?

[hungryhippo]

Pwood and Wellen.

I've asked this question twice and it keeps getting ignored.

What real world applications are there with Creationism?

[theboss21422]

Originally Posted by Roger.Smith

They made up bullshit to explain what they saw and to control others.

Why are you making this an argument when scientists do the same exact thing.

[Roger.Smith]

Originally Posted by theboss21422

Why are you making this an argument when scientists do the same exact thing.

That's one of the dumbest things I've ever read. It's because of science you're on the Internet now. It's science that have provided medical advances to improve how we treat diseases. It's because of science we were allowed to end World War II without having to invade Japan thanks to the atom bomb. Discovering the Polio vaccine and penicillin, you guessed it, science. Clean abundant water for millions, science again. Electricity that powers your home, brought to you by science. We wouldn't have plastic without chemistry. We wouldn't have oil and natural gas if not for science. I bet if you get seriously ill, when you're given the choice between prayer and science, you'll choose science. I could go on, but this post would be a book.

When a scientist makes a claim, they publish that claim for other scientists to review and evaluate. The science community doesn't take the claim of a person or group and accept it without thorough review. Scientists will change their mind about a particular topic if enough credible evidence that leads in another direction. Religion doesn't do that.

You statement is the kind of thing I hear from poorly educated people. Why don't you provide us an example of how science it trying to control us since you're so convinced? Let me guess, Climate Change and evolution. Sorry, there's plenty of evidence for both. You should go back to living in a cave, and using prayer and leeches to treat diseases.

[Guest092216]

I think he means scientific *theory* (theory being the "made up" part of science). Which, yes, is a stupid statement.

I'm sure this has already been covered but the Bible is full of literal contradictions when picked apart bit by bit and is best seen as a whole piece of fact, fiction and art. It is the most complex thing ever created by man and should be revered as such.

It is full of analogies, metaphors and enlightened concepts. Anyone who attempts to take the words literally or translate it's meaning independently is headed in the wrong direction and will end of exploiting the text in some form or fashion.

Idk, its how I was raised to understand biblical scripture. It tends to help science and religion meet somewhere in the middle. People get hung up on this or that and pretty soon no one is able to understand each other.

[Roger.Smith]

Originally Posted by thathottnurse

I think he means scientific *theory* (theory being the "made up" part of science). Which, yes, is a stupid statement.

I'm sure this has already been covered but the Bible is full of literal contradictions when picked apart bit by bit and is best seen as a whole piece of fact, fiction and art. It is the most complex thing ever created by man and should be revered as such.

It is full of analogies, metaphors and enlightened concepts. Anyone who attempts to take the words literally or translate it's meaning independently is headed in the wrong direction and will end of exploiting the text in some form or fashion.

Idk, its how I was raised to understand biblical scripture. It tends to help science and religion meet somewhere in the middle. People get hung up on this or that and pretty soon no one is able to understand each other.

First off, there is nothing made up about theories. A theory isn't some tobacco chewing redneck coming up with some idea. A theory is a product of the scientific method:

Step 1 - Ask a question
Step 2 - Do background research
Step 3 - Form a Hypothesis
Step 4 - Test your hypothesis by doing an experiment
Step 5 - Analyze the data and form a conclusion. If your results support your hypothesis, go to Step 6. If not, go back to Step 3.
Step 6 - Report you results for others to test and verify

It's only when multiple scientists repeat the steps of your published experiments and come up with the same results repeatedly, that the hypothesis is accepted as a theory. To lay people, a theory is something unproven or speculative, which is totally incorrect.

Religion doesn't help science in any way. I've never been in the lab or on the job and cracked open a Bible, Koran, or Torah to solve an issue. Angels have never come down from the sky to hand us anything of the things that makes our lives so convenient today. It was all humans.


Saying the Genesis isn't literal an apologetic cop-out. Humans being created before animals and plants is pretty literal. Plant's being created before the Sun is also literal. How in the world would that be a metaphor?

Genesis says that black people came into being because one of Noah's son's saw him naked after the got drunk. Noah then put the "mark of Cain" on him to give him black skin. That's absolutely fucking stupid. Black people are black because they bodies produce an increased amount of melanin, which is nothing more than a derivative of an amino acid, which in turn creates pigment. People whose ancestors come from warmer climates with higher levels of sunlight and UV radiation tend to have darker skin that people who come from cooler, northern climates without as much UV radiation.

The Bible says that women who get raped have to marry their rapists, tells parents to stone disobedient children, and it says that men who have had their testicles or dicks cut off can't get into heaven. Same for those that are uncircumcised. For a being that supposedly hates gays, god made a lot of them and he really has a preference of how he wants a man's dick to look like.

How is god sending two female bears to kill 42 kids for making fun a bald man a metaphor?

Both God and Jesus have absolutely no problem with slavery, even if the slave master is cruel. That's no metaphor. You'll see that in red letters in the New Testament. God and Jesus support human trafficking.

People used to think that getting sick was a punishment from god. Now we know a lot of illnesses can be avoided with proper hygiene and proper food handling. We know that bacteria, viruses, and genetic defects cause a great number of health issues. People used to believe a condition like Down Syndrome was a punishment from god. We know now it's cause by a extra chromosome.

I grew up Christian too, and I was able to figure out that it wasn't all on the up and up when I was about 12. Unlike most Christians, I actually took the time to read my Bible instead of being spoon-fed whatever it was someone wanted me to hear. I could see the gears turning in people's head when I asked them questions like; "Who created god or where did god come from?" or "How come god only showed himself and powers to Jews living in the Middle East thousands of years ago." Preachers aren't suckers. They don't want you reading the Bible, because they know it's collection of Bronze Age fables told by nomads in the Middle East.

It's a lot easier for them to tell you what to believe, and even better if you accept it without question.

[Guest092216]

I didn't say scientific theory was made up. I said I believe that is what he meant. I think that guy is a pimp and a total idiot so I'm not defending him whatsoever. I see your points. Did you hear me???? I said I see your points!!! Don't get all defensive.

Yes the bible is complex and should be taken in its' entirety, not dissected book by book and piece by piece. Science is lending itself to the discovery of the biblical puzzle and vice versa. I cannot argue to the depth of what you are speaking amd won't pretend that I can. What I will say is that the bible is as infinite and mysterious as science is when viewed as a *whole body* of work. That is all.

[Roger.Smith]

Originally Posted by thathottnurse

I didn't say scientific theory was made up. I said I believe that is what he meant. I think that guy is a pimp and a total idiot so I'm not defending him whatsoever. I see your points. Did you hear me???? I said I see your points!!! Don't get all defensive.

Yes the bible is complex and should be taken in its' entirety, not dissected book by book and piece by piece. Science is lending itself to the discovery of the biblical puzzle and vice versa. I cannot argue to the depth of what you are speaking amd won't pretend that I can. What I will say is that the bible is as infinite and mysterious as science is when viewed as a *whole body* of work. That is all.

Apologies then, just a byproduct of responding on this thread.

I still disagree about the Bible. There was nothing I found complex about the Bible. It was a pretty straightforward read. It's not infinite either, it's pretty specific. It's our modern sensibilities that makes people try to soften the Bible's message.

I've read the entire Bible more than once (King James and New International versions). It's nothing more that the story of primitive people and Roman manipulation. The Old Testament is just the Hebrew Bible. The Romans decided to steal the book from Jews, added the New Testament, then blamed the Jews for killing Jesus even thought the Romans themselves committed the act. The bigotry against Jews in the New Testament is sickening. The books of 1 John, Romans(no surprise there), 1 Thessalonians lay it on thick with the antisemitism. Because it's a holy book, it gets treated with kid gloves by people that follow it. Same goes for any religion.

I refuse to hate an entire group of people because the Romans couldn't have Jewish people going around saying why Jesus wasn't and couldn't be the Messiah. The concept of a Messiah comes from Judaism, it doesn't originate with Christianity. They didn't want the legitimacy of their religion questioned.

[Guest092216]

The bible is contradictory on so many levels. For one declaration, its opposite can often be found whether it is literal, figurative or metaphorical. A great visual representation of biblical complexity can be seen here: http://www.chrisharrison.net/index.p...tions/BibleViz


Science and religion compliment each other very well in so far as scientific/theological debate goes. I was very blessed to overhear many discussions of this nature as a child. I wish I had absorbed more of what I heard; I might be better able to debate the finer points with you. Nonetheless, the two are an explicit paradox of the same existence.

[Look-at-Stupid]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

So you watch Coast to coast or rather listen to coast- you do realize the host George Noory is an avid supporter of Alien life as well as the creation story of Adam and Eve?
The reason why I gave you examples of the Giraffe, Bombardier Beetle, Cheetah, woodpecker, and the Mimic Octopus because those are a small number of animals that wisdom shows are obvious products of Intelligent design- each one of those animals have unique things going that all must be there at once or the animal would cease to exist- why you can't understand that obvious info is beyond me- every Woodpecker drills into a tree- if it didn't have the padding around it's brain which acts as shock absorbers than you don't have a woodpecker or rather you have a woodpecker with brain damage- you can't evolve shock absorbing cushion around your brain over millions of years- it has to be there on day one or you die. The Giraffe has to have the flap to cut of blood supply when it drops it long neck to sip water or it simply passes out each time and drinks and it gets eaten by a predator.

You should have learned in elementary school that you need 3 things to make a fire: Heat + Fuel + Oxygen. You take one out the equation you don't have a fire- all 3 things have to be there- the theory of evolution will say there was a time when you could make fire- first you had the fire- then you had heat- then millions of years later you have Furl- than another million years oxygen came into the picture- sorry doesn't work that way all 3 components must be there at the same time.

Gee, not so well endowed in the brain, and I seriously doubt you're well endowed anywhere else, what are the PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN? So easy to make a moron vanish, just ask them to back their bullshit claims!!!