Question about flood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-04-2015, 11:22 AM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2015 11:26 AM by Dusky.)
RE: Question about flood
(06-04-2015 11:13 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(05-04-2015 10:20 AM)Dusky Wrote:  True, lots of debates are. With this debate in particular, however, Kent somehow decides that evolution is 6 different types of things. Some of which I could agree with, then there is the final portion of macro evolution. His concept of macro evolution is so incorrect, that he is arguing against a form of evolution that most "evolutionists" do not even hold. He builds up what he thinks macro evolution is, then proceeds to knock down his own idea of it.

What is macroevolution other than the idea that long ago, animals were producing different "kinds" of animals? Now again, whether you believe this occurred gradually over long periods of time, or whether it occurred in a split second...regardless of HOW LONG it took to happen, you believe it happened.

Again, this is just a prime example of the old "You just don't understand what evolution is" quip that evolutionists often use against people that don't believe it. The bottom line is, when you take away the technical mumbo jumbo and alllll of the bio-babble, that is what it all comes down to.

The non-evolutionists just simply takes away the technical crap, and eliminates all of the bio-babble, and simply call it what it is...so when the non-evolutionists say things like "you guys believe that animals were producing different kinds of animals", you guys don't know what to make of this, because you are used to the technical babble that normally accompany it.

Bio-babble excluded, and that is what you ultimately have Laugh out load Hey, don't get mad at us, it is YOUR theory, not ours.

Wrong, that's your theory of it. There was no "a time long long ago animals were producing different kinds". The funny part of it, you use your own terminology of "kinds" thrown into it.

As far as we can tell, a duck will always produce a duck. A human will always produce another human. The difference here is that over time those small, little, tiny changes eventually add up. They add up to such a difference, it's hard to see where we could consider a beginning. It's hard pressed to tell when the actual line of what we WOULD call human began, we only have the fossils of the precursors.

Now granted, this is an extremely simple explanation for it, but I'm sure others will agree:

1) You will never find a first human.
2) You will never see a direct transition into another "species" being born from the initial species.

EDIT: "Hey, don't get mad at us, it is YOUR theory, not ours."

I'm sorry, you're being completely dishonest here. Nowhere in the theory of evolution today does it state "long ago animals were producing different kinds". It states exactly what most people here have been kind enough to teach you about. You wonder why they're getting mad and just making fun of you? It's because you aren't reading what they are saying, and implying something completely different from what they are. If you want to argue against the position, make sure you know what the position is of those you are arguing against. Make sure you know it just as well as they do, otherwise, you're just looking to offend, troll, or be a pain in someone's ass just for fun. All three of those accomplish nothing, and we're all wasting our time dealing with it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Dusky's post
06-04-2015, 11:38 AM
RE: Question about flood
(06-04-2015 11:22 AM)Dusky Wrote:  Wrong, that's your theory of it. There was no "a time long long ago animals were producing different kinds". The funny part of it, you use your own terminology of "kinds" thrown into it.

Lets pretend as if a boa constrictor isn't a different "kind" of animal than an elephant. Lets just pretend, shall we Big Grin

(06-04-2015 11:22 AM)Dusky Wrote:  As far as we can tell, a duck will always produce a duck. A human will always produce another human.

Of course.

(06-04-2015 11:22 AM)Dusky Wrote:  The difference here is that over time those small, little, tiny changes eventually add up.

Now STOP RIGHT THERE!!! Hold it!!! Pause!!!! Stop!!! Cease!!! Freeze!!! Did you just see what just happened?? You didn't see it??? It happened so fast, you probably didn't see it (as Kent Hovind said :lolSmile You've just left science right there. With one statement, you've just left science and drove right into the portal of religion, and it happened so fast, you didn't even see it.

The statement "over time, those small, little, tiny changes eventually add up"...that statement right there is PART of the INTERPRETATION. That isn't part of the OBSERVATION...and that is exactly what my point was in an earlier post...evolutionists add the interpretation (opinion) in with the observation (fact). The statement that you made, that is part of the theory/interpretation, that isn't part of the fact (observation).

You are letting your presuppositions interpret the observation, which is, with all due respect, fallacious.

(06-04-2015 11:22 AM)Dusky Wrote:  They add up to such a difference, it's hard to see where we could consider a beginning. It's hard pressed to tell when the actual line of what we WOULD call human began, we only have the fossils of the precursors.

All part of the theory.

(06-04-2015 11:22 AM)Dusky Wrote:  Now granted, this is an extremely simple explanation for it, but I'm sure others will agree:

1) You will never find a first human.
2) You will never see a direct transition into another "species" being born from the initial species.

All part of the theory.

(06-04-2015 11:22 AM)Dusky Wrote:  EDIT: "Hey, don't get mad at us, it is YOUR theory, not ours."

I'm sorry, you're being completely dishonest here. Nowhere in the theory of evolution today does it state "long ago animals were producing different kinds". It states exactly what most people here have been kind enough to teach you about. You wonder why they're getting mad and just making fun of you? It's because you aren't reading what they are saying, and implying something completely different from what they are. If you want to argue against the position, make sure you know what the position is of those you are arguing against. Make sure you know it just as well as they do, otherwise, you're just looking to offend, troll, or be a pain in someone's ass just for fun. All three of those accomplish nothing, and we're all wasting our time dealing with it.

If we all share a common ancestor, and the common ancestor looks nothing like the modern day elephant...yet, here we have the modern day elephant...then it becomes apparent that there was some voodoo stuff going on millions of years ago.

Now sure, you can downplay it all you'd like, but it is what it is.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2015, 11:42 AM
RE: Question about flood
(06-04-2015 11:16 AM)Esquilax Wrote:  Talking to you is completely pointless; you never listen and misrepresent the views of anyone communicating with you with a creepily sociopathic ease. At a certain point you can't blame us for giving up when everything we say gets a response that's nothing more than giggling like a toddler and habitual lying. Dodgy

Hey, I am a humorist...what can I say Cool And no, no one is lying or misrepresenting the views of anyone...actually, regarding evolution, I just don't believe it..so much so that even if the claim is that GOD orchestrated it all, I STILL wouldn't believe it, and I believe in God.

So that should tell you something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2015, 11:46 AM
RE: Question about flood
(06-04-2015 11:20 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  I have zero concern about your view of me, it would be like someone saying Ken Ham doesn't like me, *wipes tear*.

I tried talking to you, at you and of you. I have rained a plethora of substantial facts upon you, provided recommended books and courses of study to help you understand you have been lied to, and have a misconstrued concept of the world around you...to no avail. As I have said before, philosophy is subjective, but facts like ....who didn't write the synoptic gospels, when they were written, no one who ever met jesus knew him, exodus never happened, the 2349 BCE mythical global flood never happened, moses never existed, noah never existed etc are not subjective. Not when there is an EXHAUSTIVE amount of evidence that proves this. The reality that you hope these facts aren't true, doesn't change anything, the fact you refuse to do the research outside of answersingenesis.com or jesusistheway.com (madeup to make a point) not only reflects you are not here to interact on an intellectual level, but are incapable of doing so. I was a Christian, an ordained minister, brought up drinking the kool aid, baptized and "saved"...I know it is hard to accept the truth, after devoting so much of ones life to a lie, but an intelligent person must accept the evidence at hand....not how we WANT the world to be, or how we WISH and HOPE it would be, but how it truly is. To embrace a clearly fabricated "transcendental" fairy tale as the methodology for which one considers the real world is to close off ones mind to learning. The blindfold called faith convinces you to reject, avoid and delude yourself with the myth, even though deep inside, your inner doubt is SCREAMING.

Seek knowledge on the very thing you purport to believe so strongly in. The more I learned, the less I believed...life is beautiful without the chains of religion strangling your ability to comprehend it. The realization that there isn't a magical being reading our every thought, watching over us, protecting us, and giving us a convenient exit through prayer and subjugation...we are accountable to ourselves and our fellow man...not by an invisible judge...so we must live our life in a manner befitting the wonder of life....god doesn't exist, and if he does, he could give two shits about his alleged creations, as millions of children starve every year, are raped every year, are born with terminal diseases every year....these children aren't born into sin in accordance with that BS incarnation and atonement theory...they haven't done anything to deserve that birth into a terminal disease...religion was made by man, for man, to subjugate man....be smarter than that, recognize the madness for what it is. Over 4,000 different versions of religion, over 40,000 strains of xtian delusion, hundreds of gods....each made up off of older made up gods...research, learn...evolve

Giving me everything but a "Yes, I accept your challenge to a debate on the Resurrection of Jesus."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2015, 11:48 AM
RE: Question about flood
(06-04-2015 11:38 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(06-04-2015 11:22 AM)Dusky Wrote:  Wrong, that's your theory of it. There was no "a time long long ago animals were producing different kinds". The funny part of it, you use your own terminology of "kinds" thrown into it.

Lets pretend as if a boa constrictor isn't a different "kind" of animal than an elephant. Lets just pretend, shall we Big Grin

No, we aren't going to pretend. Why? This means that we would be accepting portions of what you think the theory should be. Why would we discuss the theory of evolution with someone who wants to interpret the theory in their own way to knock down?

Again, I implore you to learn what it actually is, so that you can actually argue against the correct version of evolution.

(06-04-2015 11:38 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(06-04-2015 11:22 AM)Dusky Wrote:  The difference here is that over time those small, little, tiny changes eventually add up.

Now STOP RIGHT THERE!!! Hold it!!! Pause!!!! Stop!!! Cease!!! Freeze!!! Did you just see what just happened?? You didn't see it??? It happened so fast, you probably didn't see it (as Kent Hovind said :lolSmile You've just left science right there. With one statement, you've just left science and drove right into the portal of religion, and it happened so fast, you didn't even see it.

The statement "over time, those small, little, tiny changes eventually add up"...that statement right there is PART of the INTERPRETATION. That isn't part of the OBSERVATION...and that is exactly what my point was in an earlier post...evolutionists add the interpretation (opinion) in with the observation (fact). The statement that you made, that is part of the theory/interpretation, that isn't part of the fact (observation).

You are letting your presuppositions interpret the observation, which is, with all due respect, fallacious.

What presuppositions? I'm using multiple fields of science to support my idea that the earth is millions of years old. There are no "presuppositions" there. What I am making is a claim that those "small, little, tiny changes eventually add up". I've supported that claim by posting, to you, that paper I referenced earlier. It shows how those teeny tiny changes can add up, but you dismissed it as "evolutionist propaganda". Why reject something you refuse to learn about?

This is why they're getting angry with you. You claim that I am making some religious leap, but in actuality I am simply going through the evidence and using it to back up my claims.

(06-04-2015 11:38 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(06-04-2015 11:22 AM)Dusky Wrote:  They add up to such a difference, it's hard to see where we could consider a beginning. It's hard pressed to tell when the actual line of what we WOULD call human began, we only have the fossils of the precursors.

All part of the theory.

Okay?

(06-04-2015 11:38 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(06-04-2015 11:22 AM)Dusky Wrote:  Now granted, this is an extremely simple explanation for it, but I'm sure others will agree:

1) You will never find a first human.
2) You will never see a direct transition into another "species" being born from the initial species.

All part of the theory.

(06-04-2015 11:22 AM)Dusky Wrote:  EDIT: "Hey, don't get mad at us, it is YOUR theory, not ours."

I'm sorry, you're being completely dishonest here. Nowhere in the theory of evolution today does it state "long ago animals were producing different kinds". It states exactly what most people here have been kind enough to teach you about. You wonder why they're getting mad and just making fun of you? It's because you aren't reading what they are saying, and implying something completely different from what they are. If you want to argue against the position, make sure you know what the position is of those you are arguing against. Make sure you know it just as well as they do, otherwise, you're just looking to offend, troll, or be a pain in someone's ass just for fun. All three of those accomplish nothing, and we're all wasting our time dealing with it.

If we all share a common ancestor, and the common ancestor looks nothing like the modern day elephant...yet, here we have the modern day elephant...then it becomes apparent that there was some voodoo stuff going on millions of years ago.

Now sure, you can downplay it all you'd like, but it is what it is.

Sure, it looks voodoo to you because you're unwilling to read up on it and educate yourself on it. The sun moving across the sky was no doubt "voodoo" to ancient peoples, and yet here we are now with a full understanding of it.

Can you actually give some papers a read and pick out what you find illogical? I'm sure plenty of people would be more than happy to explain it to you here. Even if you aren't entirely convinced, at least you would know more about what it actually is so you can argue a wee bit better in the end instead of relying on the unreliable Kent Hovind to do the dirty work for you.

Hell, maybe I'll learn something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2015, 11:52 AM
RE: Question about flood
(06-04-2015 11:46 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(06-04-2015 11:20 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  I have zero concern about your view of me, it would be like someone saying Ken Ham doesn't like me, *wipes tear*.

I tried talking to you, at you and of you. I have rained a plethora of substantial facts upon you, provided recommended books and courses of study to help you understand you have been lied to, and have a misconstrued concept of the world around you...to no avail. As I have said before, philosophy is subjective, but facts like ....who didn't write the synoptic gospels, when they were written, no one who ever met jesus knew him, exodus never happened, the 2349 BCE mythical global flood never happened, moses never existed, noah never existed etc are not subjective. Not when there is an EXHAUSTIVE amount of evidence that proves this. The reality that you hope these facts aren't true, doesn't change anything, the fact you refuse to do the research outside of answersingenesis.com or jesusistheway.com (madeup to make a point) not only reflects you are not here to interact on an intellectual level, but are incapable of doing so. I was a Christian, an ordained minister, brought up drinking the kool aid, baptized and "saved"...I know it is hard to accept the truth, after devoting so much of ones life to a lie, but an intelligent person must accept the evidence at hand....not how we WANT the world to be, or how we WISH and HOPE it would be, but how it truly is. To embrace a clearly fabricated "transcendental" fairy tale as the methodology for which one considers the real world is to close off ones mind to learning. The blindfold called faith convinces you to reject, avoid and delude yourself with the myth, even though deep inside, your inner doubt is SCREAMING.

Seek knowledge on the very thing you purport to believe so strongly in. The more I learned, the less I believed...life is beautiful without the chains of religion strangling your ability to comprehend it. The realization that there isn't a magical being reading our every thought, watching over us, protecting us, and giving us a convenient exit through prayer and subjugation...we are accountable to ourselves and our fellow man...not by an invisible judge...so we must live our life in a manner befitting the wonder of life....god doesn't exist, and if he does, he could give two shits about his alleged creations, as millions of children starve every year, are raped every year, are born with terminal diseases every year....these children aren't born into sin in accordance with that BS incarnation and atonement theory...they haven't done anything to deserve that birth into a terminal disease...religion was made by man, for man, to subjugate man....be smarter than that, recognize the madness for what it is. Over 4,000 different versions of religion, over 40,000 strains of xtian delusion, hundreds of gods....each made up off of older made up gods...research, learn...evolve

Giving me everything but a "Yes, I accept your challenge to a debate on the Resurrection of Jesus."

I will debate you, again, anytime you wish...here. Feel free to issue a challenge in the boxing ring, and I will endeavor to educate you some more. Wish to discuss incarnation and atonement theory, sure, mythical resurrection? sure, historicity of the bible? sure, historicity, or rather lack of..for jesus? sure, fabrication of the OT? Sure, case against moses? sure...whenever you think you have watched enough youtube videos, come get some. Be ready to cite your assertions, if not, then you are just bloviating your opinion. "I think god exists" is fine to say, because that is your belief in the transcendental fairy world, but any actual attempt to discredit history, better have your citations ready....because I will Smile

As an added bonus, I will use ONLY Christian textbooks and scholarly works to prove my points, not atheists books/websites Smartass

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2015, 11:52 AM
RE: Question about flood
(06-04-2015 11:42 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(06-04-2015 11:16 AM)Esquilax Wrote:  Talking to you is completely pointless; you never listen and misrepresent the views of anyone communicating with you with a creepily sociopathic ease. At a certain point you can't blame us for giving up when everything we say gets a response that's nothing more than giggling like a toddler and habitual lying. Dodgy

Hey, I am a humorist...what can I say Cool And no, no one is lying or misrepresenting the views of anyone...actually, regarding evolution, I just don't believe it..so much so that even if the claim is that GOD orchestrated it all, I STILL wouldn't believe it, and I believe in God.

So that should tell you something.

"You believe reptiles transformed into birds!" is a misrepresentation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2015, 11:55 AM
RE: Question about flood
(06-04-2015 11:52 AM)Esquilax Wrote:  
(06-04-2015 11:42 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Hey, I am a humorist...what can I say Cool And no, no one is lying or misrepresenting the views of anyone...actually, regarding evolution, I just don't believe it..so much so that even if the claim is that GOD orchestrated it all, I STILL wouldn't believe it, and I believe in God.

So that should tell you something.

"You believe reptiles transformed into birds!" is a misrepresentation.

Isn't it amazing a person can purport to believe in the unseen and unknown (god) and yet abjectly refuse actual physical evidence that proves evolution....it is observable right now, and in the past, and of course will continue to be so in the future, on the DNA level, and on the fossil level...yet "nu unh, not real, bible says so" is the response.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
06-04-2015, 12:12 PM
RE: Question about flood
(06-04-2015 10:46 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(06-04-2015 07:05 AM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  If krav maga was derived from boxing and wrestling, why is there still boxing and wrestling.

Macroevolution = Krav maga evolving into fencing.

That is the kind of large scale change we are talking about here Laugh out loadLaugh out load

Krav maga does use knives and knives are like little swords.


You should see this

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...f-the-wild

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2015, 12:17 PM
RE: Question about flood
(06-04-2015 11:55 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(06-04-2015 11:52 AM)Esquilax Wrote:  "You believe reptiles transformed into birds!" is a misrepresentation.

Isn't it amazing a person can purport to believe in the unseen and unknown (god) and yet abjectly refuse actual physical evidence that proves evolution....it is observable right now, and in the past, and of course will continue to be so in the future, on the DNA level, and on the fossil level...yet "nu unh, not real, bible says so" is the response.

Well, I imagine it's very much easier to win an argument if you've empowered yourself to dictate to your opponents what their position must be, too; given Call of the Woo-woo's obsession with being seen as winning, it must be a relief to him, to have decided that what his opponents are saying is less important than what he thinks they should be saying, to further his own agenda.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Esquilax's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: