Question about flood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-03-2015, 11:29 AM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 11:27 AM)Chas Wrote:  The one who actually reads wins. You lose.

Can't win'em all Sad
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2015, 11:29 AM
Question about flood
(27-03-2015 11:26 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(27-03-2015 10:35 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  You ever look at any of the texts I posted for you?

No, because I can just as easily post links to back up my position too. So in the end, who wins?

You asked for evidence of something when you didn't really want it?

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
27-03-2015, 11:38 AM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 11:29 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(27-03-2015 11:27 AM)Chas Wrote:  The one who actually reads wins. You lose.

Can't win'em all Sad

You haven't won any here. Not one.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
27-03-2015, 11:54 AM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 11:19 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(27-03-2015 07:15 AM)H4ym4n Wrote:  How epic would it be if COtW was really an atheist playing the roll of a whacked out f'd up christian.

So I will pretend to be whacked out f'd up christian, when I am actually a whacked out f'd up atheist? Makes no sense.

Well if I wanted to show how whacked out Christianity was and want to have fun doing it, I would do exactly like what you are doing.

Btw, you're doing a fine job at showing how f'd up and whacked out Christianity is. Thumbsup

Kudos if you are doing it as an atheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like H4ym4n's post
27-03-2015, 11:56 AM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 11:28 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(27-03-2015 10:42 AM)The Polyglot Atheist Wrote:  Considering you said that Evolution and Abiogenesis are dependent on each other (if one falls, the other follows), or that they are even the same thing... well, maybe you don't understand it quite properly.

Actually I never said they are the same thing, but I did say that one is dependent upon the other (if God is negated), which is a 100% factual statement...so why you are sitting there questioning a factual statement is beyond me.

But some people just feel the need to say something.

I can't find the exact post but you were conflating them somewhere... Anyway, I'm not questioning any factual statement, you're the one doing that, since Abiogenesis and Evolution are totally separated. I'll say this very plainly:

1. Evolution explains the diversity of life. It makes one important first assumption: Life exists. (Duh.) So it doesn't matter how life arose: naturalistic explanations, God, a genie in a bottle, it doesn't matter. Evolution only explains how existing life (already existing life) diversifies over time due to various factors, that can be summarised in the famous non-random selection from random mutation.

2. Abiogenesis explains how life might have arose. It's not at same level as Evolution, as far as evidence goes, but we're getting there.

So:

How did life come to be? Abiogenesis.
How does life diversify? Evolution.

The questions are different, and totally independent. If we discover tomorrow that one of them is false or wrong, it will not have any effect on the other one because their field of study is totally different.

孤独 - The Out Crowd
Life is a flash of light between two eternities of darkness.
[Image: Schermata%202014-10-24%20alle%2012.39.01.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2015, 12:01 PM (This post was last modified: 27-03-2015 12:09 PM by The Organic Chemist.)
RE: Question about flood
(26-03-2015 05:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(26-03-2015 10:56 AM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Except in the beginning of the universe, the Earth wasn't here.

You are assuming that the "and" in between "heavens/earth" isn't over a long period of time.

Again, this does not go with the stars being created later. If the earth is older than the stars which were created on day 4, this means that the earth is older than the sun. Can you provide some concrete evidence that shows cosmology is wrong? It does not matter how much time elapsed between days 1 and 4. It still says that the stars came AFTER the creation of the Earth. Prove it.

(26-03-2015 05:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(26-03-2015 10:56 AM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  There is absolutely no evidence that supports that claim and plenty of it that shows that statement is false.

After a potentially false assumption from the previous statement, the above statement does not necessarily follow.

Um no. You have yet to present any evidence in spite of repeated requests to do so. This is not a false assumption, it is the conclusion that one can draw from your lack of presentation.

(26-03-2015 05:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(26-03-2015 10:56 AM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  There were no stars in the sky until day 4 so where are the heavens?

So are you saying that it isn't possible for there to have been a sky with no stars?

As far as the Earth goes, yes. Again, you have no foundation at this point because you have yet to establish the Earth being older than the stars.


(26-03-2015 05:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(26-03-2015 10:56 AM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  This is of course completely ignoring that there is no light source (i.e. stars) for the first 3 days in the sky

Yet, in Gen 1:3-4 is when God said "let there be light". So how you are falsely concluding that there was no light source for the first 3 days is beyond me, especially since it clearly states that God made the light even before the first offical day was over.

If there is no sun, we have no light and no sense of "day". Gen 1:8 "God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day." Explain then how there can be light with no light source and no dark without that light source going somewhere. There is no false conclusion here. There can be no day, night, evening, or morning without a light source.

(26-03-2015 05:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(26-03-2015 10:56 AM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  so how was there light and dark with no light source especially since the sun is a star? [

First off, I am not clear as to what light was actually manifested in Gen 1:3-4, we can only speculate. Second, lets not assume that there has to be literal sunshine outside for it to be considered "day". At 5am in the morning, it is still considered "day", whether the sun is out or not.

That is because "day" is a term that humans invented use to describe a 24 hour period. It has no other meaning besides. In terms of "light", considering the book was written by primitive goat herders who didn't know that the moon isn't a light source and that vegetation need the sun to live, I think it is a pretty safe bet that we are talking visible light. I have an explanation, you don't.

(26-03-2015 05:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(26-03-2015 10:56 AM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Also, if dark is really the absence of light, you can't really "create" dark can you?

As the earth rotates, the light from the sun is separated from the darkness. I assume that this is what it means.

But if there is no SUN, there can be no light and dark. Apparently, you DON'T know what this means given your first 2 answers.

(26-03-2015 05:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(26-03-2015 10:56 AM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  You only need to remove the light source which of course you didn't have until day 4.

On day 4, God said "Let there be lights in the vault of the sky"....do you see that? "Lights"....that is plural. I am not sure as to how many sources of light there were at that specific time in history.

So lights on top of the light that was apparently there? Again, with no sun, there are no days. Even the damn text itself says that on day 4, the lights were created to separate the night from the day. So again, how do you have night, day, morning, and evening the previous 3 "days" when there is NO SUN? Do you see that?

(26-03-2015 05:05 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(26-03-2015 10:56 AM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Your mental gymnastics have got to be the caliber of an Olympian to think this is accurate with what we know of the universe now. For primitive people, sure. For us now, no excuse.

I'm sure I will get by Cool

What scares me is that there are people like you who would kill your kids because the voice in your head tells you to. If you are supposed to be god's spokesman, god is one bat-shit crazy, intellectually dishonest creep.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
27-03-2015, 01:11 PM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 11:54 AM)H4ym4n Wrote:  Well if I wanted to show how whacked out Christianity was and want to have fun doing it, I would do exactly like what you are doing.

Btw, you're doing a fine job at showing how f'd up and whacked out Christianity is. Thumbsup

Kudos if you are doing it as an atheist.

Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2015, 01:14 PM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 11:38 AM)Chas Wrote:  You haven't won any here. Not one.

Of course not, Chas.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2015, 01:22 PM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 11:26 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(27-03-2015 10:35 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  You ever look at any of the texts I posted for you?

No, because I can just as easily post links to back up my position too. So in the end, who wins?

Hey Call of the Willfully stupid, why don't you just admit to all of us here that you just cannot acknowledge evolution to be true, no matter what evidence is presented. You cannot allow it to be true since is will so incredibly shake the foundation of the mental condition, or "faith", which you have this need to cling to. It just cannot be credible in order for your belief system to remain intact. You are fooling yourself if you do not confirm this explanation, mister "I don't give a damn" in regards to evidence contrary to the fantasy you hold so dear. Or you can keep digging in your heels, abandon rational thought, and remain stupid.

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Timber1025's post
27-03-2015, 01:51 PM
RE: Question about flood
(27-03-2015 01:22 PM)Timber1025 Wrote:  
(27-03-2015 11:26 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  No, because I can just as easily post links to back up my position too. So in the end, who wins?

Hey Call of the Willfully stupid, why don't you just admit to all of us here that you just cannot acknowledge evolution to be true, no matter what evidence is presented. You cannot allow it to be true since is will so incredibly shake the foundation of the mental condition, or "faith", which you have this need to cling to. It just cannot be credible in order for your belief system to remain intact. You are fooling yourself if you do not confirm this explanation, mister "I don't give a damn" in regards to evidence contrary to the fantasy you hold so dear. Or you can keep digging in your heels, abandon rational thought, and remain stupid.


Leave this one alone. Let him believe.

You won't like him if he finds out god/jesus/ghost isn't real.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: