Question about flood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-04-2015, 09:47 PM
RE: Question about flood
(01-04-2015 09:27 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  Lets look at the next 2000 generations of your family tree.

You are assuming it will fork.

"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
[+] 1 user Likes The Organic Chemist's post
01-04-2015, 10:36 PM
RE: Question about flood
(01-04-2015 09:47 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  
(01-04-2015 09:27 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  Lets look at the next 2000 generations of your family tree.

You are assuming it will fork.
And that they don't forget how to reproduce.

Using Tapatalk
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TubbyTubby's post
02-04-2015, 12:04 AM
RE: Question about flood
(01-04-2015 10:36 PM)TubbyTubby Wrote:  
(01-04-2015 09:47 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  You are assuming it will fork.
And that they don't forget how to reproduce.

Sounds forked up

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
02-04-2015, 12:05 AM
RE: Question about flood
(01-04-2015 09:05 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(01-04-2015 04:49 AM)Chas Wrote:  This proves you have a childish, willfully ignorant misunderstanding of evolution.

Are you really this stupid? It's hard to differentiate this from mental illness.

(01-04-2015 06:10 AM)Rahn127 Wrote:  I wish stupidity could be bred out of our species, but unfortunately religion attaches itself to the gullible mind.

Make a list of your family tree going back five generations and you don't need actual names. Great Great Great grandfather on down, including distant cousins.

You share a common ancestor with your distant cousin.

We share a common ancestor with great apes.

Its as simple as that.

(01-04-2015 04:54 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  ahhhhh nothing starts my day off better than reading the absolute stupidity that falleth from Wail of the Child's mouth as he tries vainly to validate his delusion Laugh out load

Ahhh yes. This kinda reminds me of when I very first started the "life suddenly arose from nonliving material" stuff...and one of the joker atheists said something like "who said it "suddenly" arose...it happened gradually over long periods of time".

So basically, he just threw time in there as if that somehow solved the problem, and that is exactly what you jokers are doing....you guys are basically saying "No, we didn't evolve from apes...both humans and apes share a common ancestor"...as if that is supposed to somehow solve the problem Laugh out loadLaugh out load

I don't believe evolution happened AT ALL, ok? Whether it happened suddenly in a split second, or gradually over millions of years....whether humans evolved from apes, or whether humans and apes BOTH evolved from something else...how it happened is IRRELEVANT.

I am saying IT DIDN'T HAPPEN AT ALL. Hear me? IT....DID...NOT...HAPPEN...ALL...ALL.

Then you're simply delusional and refusing to face facts. Science has proof. Your proof is that god told you. Which once do you think a rational person believes?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BeardFist McFistBeard's post
02-04-2015, 12:07 AM
RE: Question about flood
(01-04-2015 09:17 AM)Russ Wrote:  
(01-04-2015 09:06 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Kind of like how atheists use the old "Oh yeah, well if the universe began to exist and everything has a cause, well...where did GODDDD come from??"

Laugh out load
Seems like a valid question to me. If everything has a cause you can't just say god is a special case. If god can not have a cause, why not remove god from the equation and say the universe is a special case and didn't have a beginning?

And see, that's rational thinking, but we're dealing with irrationality here. It's the same with the how did something come from nothing argument. Nothing is not exactly 'nothing'.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-04-2015, 06:36 AM
RE: Question about flood
(01-04-2015 09:29 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  ... when I look at a fossil, that is NOT what I interpret ...

True enough, no fossil gazing at himself in a mirror can see the calcification everyone else sees.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Airportkid's post
02-04-2015, 12:22 PM
RE: Question about flood
(01-04-2015 02:08 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Well Robert T. Bakker would disagree. So would many other christians and muslims who accept evolution. Evolution isn't a cop out it is the explanation for why life is diverse. Evolution is:
"Change in heritable traits of biological populations over successive generations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including the level of species, individual organisms, and at the level of molecular evolution."

Hey, if you are a theist and believe in theistic evolution, I don’t really have a problem with that, per say…because at LEAST you are smart enough to realize that God had to be the orchestrator of such an occasion. Now of course, I will still disagree with you, but that is more of an internal different that we will have among ourselves…Christians don’t agree on everything, obviously.

(01-04-2015 02:08 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  So when GWG pointed out the evidence he did really show evolution by definition. He wasn't playing. There is much more to evolution than just those examples.

You listened to GWG? It all went downhill from there, didn’t it?

I read what you said regarding the definitions, I just didn’t include it here.

(01-04-2015 02:08 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Because years of research and study from scientist big or small, black or white, atheist or theist,male or female, heterosexual or homosexual. Evolution happens every time you need to get a shot.

Um, what does me getting a shot have to do with a reptile changing to a bird or a whale making its way to the ocean after having previously dwelled on land?

(01-04-2015 02:08 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  And you are wrong. As we went over observation before let us go over what happens when you make an observation. Let us take for example tiktaalik.. Tiktaalik is the best example of the observation of evolution. Before tiktaalik was found we have had transitional fossils like panderichthys and acanthostega but nothing to complete what would be in the middle. So not only did they predict the look and the traits of tiktaalik but they also knew exactly what age the rock it should be found in. And with that prediction based on the observation of fossils they found exactly what they said should happen. That is what is know as a prediction.

This is a prime example of letting your presupposition interpret the observation. When you find a fossil, there is absolutely NO reason whatsoever for you to conclude anything regarding evolution. All you know at that point is this once living thing has now died….how it died, when it died, and who its parents were is something you have to BRING IN to the observation, and with that comes a presupposition. That is how it really works.

(01-04-2015 02:08 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  First let me say that you don't believe in science you except it.

Well, what is science? A methodology based on observation, experiment, and prediction. Well, in that case, I shouldn’t accept anything related to nature that can’t be observed, experimented on, and make predictions.

(01-04-2015 02:08 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Now evolution has tons of scientific papers on it and connected to it even recently as shown here
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.l...evolution/ and look it is on a science website
http://www.scientificamerican.com/evolutionary-biology/ Here is another one (though the name is an oxymoron). Also let us go over this macro and micro evolution thing by definition.

Those links are from folks that already believe in the theory, bro. What I like to do is just simply watch debates on the subject of evolution, where I can hear BOTH sides of the argument, which is about as fair and balanced as it can get...and of course, I think the con side comes out victorious.

Here is the definition of micro evolution.
(01-04-2015 02:08 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  "Microevolution is evolution on a small scale — within a single population. That means narrowing our focus to one branch of the tree of life"

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_37

Here is the definition of macro evolution

"Macroevolution generally refers to evolution above the species level. So instead of focusing on an individual beetle species, a macroevolutionary lens might require that we zoom out on the tree of life, to assess the diversity of the entire beetle clade and its position on the tree."

However we have observed macro evolution through fossils or eyewitness it has been proven. If it was different show us the scientific paper.

Dude, why are you wasting my time with these links? We’ve never observed macroevolution. Of all of the debates that I’ve seen, the evolutionists never said “Look at all of the TRANSITONAL FOSSILS that we have!!!” No…that has never happened, and I’ve seen a lot.

Show me a video of a debate where transitional fossils was used as evidence for evolution, then.

(01-04-2015 02:08 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  It is not predicting the changes, it is predicting the evidence, like my tiktaalik example.

If you have the evidence, then what the hell is there to predict??

(01-04-2015 02:08 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Yes evolution is a theory to account for species and not needing god for it, like gravity accounts for masses attracting without god, and germ theory explains sickness without god, and how much more science that explains things without god.

Gravity and germs only exist in a universe that began to exist. But where did the universe come from? Hmmm?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-04-2015, 12:29 PM
RE: Question about flood
"Smart enough to realize that god" blah, blah, blah?????"


Right there. That's what he believes. He believes in an invisible man who lives in the sky - and that makes him MUCH smarter than the rest of us....

....

Fine genius.

Go talk to the Mensa people....... You'll have so much more in common with them....

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-04-2015, 12:31 PM
RE: Question about flood
(01-04-2015 07:28 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Do you realize you have actually described yourself here?

No, I didn't realize that. I didn't dodge that question, did I?

(01-04-2015 07:28 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  This is exactly why you dodge questions.

See above.

(01-04-2015 07:28 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  You just said that chas has only mustered three sentences

Which was/is a true statement.

(01-04-2015 07:28 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  but why should he do more if you ignore the one sentence challenges he has laid out?

Then why should he do any?

(01-04-2015 07:28 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  You have dodged so many questions by so many people that you only make yourself look even more stupid.

Its funny you say that, since it is the complete opposite of what actually ocurrs. I actually like answering questions..hell, I even like taking surveys, and questionaires...so where you get off saying I "dodged questions" is just one of those things in life where you briefly think about it, shrug to yourself, and then move on.

(01-04-2015 07:28 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Edit: and you would be crying bullshit if any of us said "Dawkins said it, i believe it". No one has done that but you have on more than obe occasion. Hold yourself to the same standard of scrutiny that you hold us to. Evidence or STFU.

What authority did I appeal to?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-04-2015, 12:48 PM
RE: Question about flood
(01-04-2015 06:52 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I doubt that's enough time for you to even comprehend what a "debate" entails. Some brains just don't seem to be primed for it. It's not your fault, you just have too much cartilage getting in the way.

You guys are gonna just run that cartilage shit into the ground, aren't you? Kinda reminds me of when I used to watch WWF wrestling...and how, let's say, one of the wrestlers (wrestler A) is nursing an injury, or BECOMES visually injured during the match (usually an arm or leg), but he still wrestles, because he won't let an injury hold him back, right?

Usually, the guy with the injury is the "good guy", and his opponent is usually the "bad guy" (wrestler B).

So, the match begins, and wrestler B's PRIMARY focus is to work on the injured part of wrestler A. Even if wrestler B isn't necessarily a "submission" kind of wrestler, now all of a sudden he is performing all kinds of submission holds and locks...just to focus on the one particular area of wrestler A's body, the one that is hurting hahahahaha.

Even if wrestler A gets some momentum, all wrestler B does is give a quick kick or punch to wrestler A's injured part...and it is right back to square one for wrestler A hahahahahahhaaaa Laugh out loadLaugh out load

Only those that watched/watches wrestling knows what I am talking about. That is what is going on with this cartilage shit. If it wasn't for that shit, my report card would be an A+, instead of... A- Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: