Atlantis Online
March 28, 2024, 09:10:41 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Ancient Crash, Epic Wave
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/11/14/healthscience/web.1114meteor.php?page=1

 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Science, the Bible & Evolution

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 93   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Science, the Bible & Evolution  (Read 13359 times)
0 Members and 214 Guests are viewing this topic.
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #60 on: December 11, 2007, 01:19:55 pm »

Andrew Waters

Member
Member # 914

  posted 12-14-2005 10:28 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sarah said,''In my personal opinion, those who are looking for science in the Bible are missing the entire point of the book.''

Actually that was the point since science started looking at it to see if there is any science involved.

If I was a scientist I certainly would want to see if I could prove or disprove, depending on my belief, that science is or isn't involved simply by the questions and comments the books presents. No self-respecting scientist would do otherwise, especially since that's what that discipline does anyway. (Obviously some simply aren't interested.)

In essence, science has effectively ignored the bible because of the ''no science,'' but this changes once a ''faith'' scientist gets involved. (The faith comment doesn't automatically assume a religious perspective here. Just fact seeking.)

It changes the tone of the conversation enough for scientists to say, ''Well, we'll see about this,'' from both sides of the belief spectrum.

That said, it seems to me a book that's been around for thousands of years and not necessarily in it's present form and meaning, depending on who's reading it of course, captures a lot of imagination, pro and con. So to say it's instructive from a morality aspect to the dismissal of science says nothing about the ''hidden'' content therein.

The ''live a better life-style'' and morality play can be found in any family oriented setting without benefit of the Bible. It's a natural thing to do without being told the Bible recommends it.

These are non-aggressive(?) comments Sarah, and to anyone else reading. 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #61 on: December 11, 2007, 01:20:17 pm »

oscar

Member
Member # 1390

Rate Member   posted 12-14-2005 05:24 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven't seen so much data from Brooke. Just pasting and pasting (mainly the whole translation of the Bible and my words and her expert opinion). That's why I love to use links that are ignored by Brooke. I love when she doesn't read and I am quoting not only for Creationists. Let it be. ""Maimonides wrote millennia after the Bible was written..she says. He was qualified cos he understood Hebrew and you don't. In fact, Hebrews also have oral tradition that passes through generations. You're so cocky that not only you want to refuse listening me or reading the links, but now you think -I don't know with what habilities- you know better than the very Hebrews? In your arrogance you're also dismissing these traditions. Greeks and Chinese do have myths about mud that can only corroborate what is written in the Bible and Sumerian accounts. When a myth is local, is only that but is different when is universal. I'm even quoting the very texts of the translation in the Bible admitting there are many meanings of the word "day" (yown) even in Genesis and other texts. I'm quoting Isaiah admitting light was not created but merely formed and Brooke uses a modern translation without investigatiing the issue and wants to say HER opinion is more important and valid?
Mountains are getting higher even now and not only millions of years ago. I have discussed with geologists who don't know even what were the causes of the splitting of the sole continent Pangea and you wanna talk to me about millions? Are you capable to discuss -science and not zelous faith- the methods used by scientists to measure "time"? You were the one saying mountains were taller and I just corrected your imbecil statement and now you wanna discuss other thing, that is "when". Are you prepared to discuss that?
In your wrath you wanna say Ishtar and Johnee support everything I say. That's a lie! I know Ishtar a long time and she has her own thought without needing me at all. Johnee was just asking a question. You're new comer and you wanna judge us all and interpret if we are Christians or Jews or what is our faith? WHAT THE HECK IS HAPPENING WITH YOU?
If any fool can believe in evolution, please FOOL DUMB STUPID EMPTY HEAD GIRL, please open a tread about why you believe in evolution and we will discuss that science -without mentioning the Bible- and we will see if your arguments are wise or foolish.
The Jews have believed the days of Creation are simultaneous times and that's why I even quoted a translation of the Bible Onkelos using the Jewish old interpretation implicit in the TRANSLATION of the Hebrew saying "day ONE" instead of "first day". I'm not guilty if you wanna remain ignorant and narrow minded. It's not my fault if Christians ignore the meaning of Hebrew because they want to use a modern interpretation. Obviously the Jews who know the language know better than Christians who ignore why even in English the names ISrael or ISaiah sound like "EEs" while "ISis" sounds like "Ay" though using the same vowel "I" followed by "S". Or why the sound is different in "though a tough cough and hiccough plough me through" using "ough".
You wrote "I’m not the one who believes every creeping thing after it’s kind was loaded aboard a 400 ft long ark, Oscar, YOU ARE." I'm just explaining to you the word translated "kind" means a certain type or kind of specie and not your idiotic assumption "all animals" but kind of all animals existing at that time.
The Hebrew expression OF COURSE WOULDN'T MENTION THE EXPRESSION "PANGEA" WHICH IS MODERN. That's idiotic, yet it mentions the Pheleg times where literalk division of the "country" or land or earth happened in many levels. The "dinosaurs" is also a modern name, STUPID GIRL. Yet in Genesis we read the expression in Hebrew "tanniyim" meaning great monsters appearing before other earthy animals in the 5th day.
We don't have to believe all possible myths but the universal ones and not only the Bible quotes the Noah episode and his children. That's why I quote links for readers to read. You keep repeating the same thing and read nothing.
Sorry, I rest my case. Write whatever answer. Please give data, SCIENTIFIC DATA backing up what you think. I'm providing links and information. You're just responding personal opinion.
What else you wanna add except pasting my own paragraph endlessly?

--------------------
inca
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #62 on: December 11, 2007, 01:20:39 pm »

Morrison

Member
Member # 2156

Member Rated:
   posted 12-14-2005 11:19 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That said, it seems to me a book that's been around for thousands of years and not necessarily in it's present form and meaning, depending on who's reading it of course, captures a lot of imagination, pro and con. So to say it's instructive from a morality aspect to the dismissal of science says nothing about the ''hidden'' content therein.

The ''live a better life-style'' and morality play can be found in any family oriented setting without benefit of the Bible. It's a natural thing to do without being told the Bible recommends it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No question, the Bible is a very powerful book that inspires so many strong feelings, both pro and con. And yet, it was meant to be. My own personal "take" on it is that science took second or even third place to the morality meant to be imparted in it. Not only is it not scientically accurate, there was little attempt to even make it scientifically accurate. Couple that with all the various mistranslations that Oscar alluded to, the same idea of "oral tradition" that also plagues the Atlantis dialogues, and we're not even sure just what was supposed to be taken as allegory and what was as fact.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 391 | From: New England | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged |   
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #63 on: December 11, 2007, 01:21:01 pm »

oscar

Member
Member # 1390

Rate Member   posted 12-15-2005 04:42 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morrison: When you wrote: "Not only is it not scientically accurate, there was little attempt to even make it scientifically accurate". That's as general statement as we read from Brooke. When you make a statement like that it means nothing but an opinion like a butt (everyone has one). So, in order to discuss the issue I would beg to be strictly SPECIFIC and please, read the texts I quote and compare with many translations. Usually the spirit of the thing is not as different as people critize without knowing for sure and doing homework. We have to understand this is Hebrew book and mainly people should investigate the Hebrew source, not just Christian translations. An example would be Jehova's Witness "version" with an angel saying to Mary "good morning" which doesn't exist in Hebrew but "shalom" equivalent to Arabic "salaam" meaning "have peace". If those millions of Christians invest time studying the Hebrew source and reading the Bible from Genesis to Apocalipsis instead of "pasting" a fistful of texts, we could have an interesting dialogue. People who haven't done this are not in position to discuss anything at all in that issue cos it would be like talking with a Communist who never read Karl Marx's Capital.
Regarding Atlantis, is different for many reasons. In the case of the Bible, many things the critics thought it was legend or myth -as exhausting repeated by Brooke- was not a myth at all. Names and places were discovered years before by the shovel of the archeologists and historians, names of people and places that only existed in the Bible. Therefore when you wanna make an statement about your doubts, be specific to consider you different from the rest of people who dare to talk abot something and yet they usually ignore the theme.
What do you wanna talk about in first place? C'mon, who knows maybe both of us can learn in that dialogue. Express yourself not just about your general opinion but WHY, the reasons behind your point of view....
There are thousands of copies of Bible documents all over the world and not just a copy of a document written by Plato. Even Plato's writing can't be consider myth unless the studies continues to discredit the whole thing. Troy was also consider "myth" and yes, it was discovered by a sole individual who was consider imbecil or naïve. So, it doesn't matter if those millions of cynical and skeptical people "thought" about truth or hoax of Troy story. At the end the only thing that matters is that it took centuries to be re-discovered. So, don't you ever talk to me about "impossible". Sometimes it could be "improbable" to be "demonstrated" but in the path of science there's no final period but ......

--------------------
inca
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #64 on: December 11, 2007, 01:21:21 pm »

oscar

Member
Member # 1390

Rate Member   posted 12-15-2005 04:55 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An example of Hebrew ignorance. Brooke wrote "On the sixth day, God was finishing up the heavens. The rest of the universe would merit at least a whole day". This is ignorance to cube level. I said and repeat a thousand times, the text in Genesis 1:1 is clear, all the universe was already created in undetermined "beginning" (bere$hit in Hebrew). The other texts I mentioned -for anyone capable to read and understand- are also clear in the sense there are several meaning of "days" (yown in Hebrew). Also, the Hebrew text makes a whole difference between "barah" (create out from nothing or ex-nihilo) and "form" or "model".
To the rest of the posters, when you wanna discuss about MORALITY in the Bible, that's social theme. Here we are discussing about scientific facts and I have shown specific texts about "nothingness" holding the earth, rotatory movement as expressed in Job, the strings loosening in Orion and Pleiads (term superstring), the creation of black fire which reminds us the dark energy and I could mention other things. If you wanna talk about morality in the Bible, please open the proper tread and DON'T BEAT AROUND THE BUSH lacking anything proper to discuss in this tread.

--------------------
inca
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #65 on: December 11, 2007, 01:21:49 pm »

Ishtar

Member
Member # 736

  posted 12-15-2005 02:08 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is trivial but remember the bible story of Job's wounds being licked by dogs?

There is new evidence that the enzymes in god's, lol, I mean dog's saliva, does help wounds heal quicker, so don't waste your money on Neo na na na na na, sporin, na na na na na na na.

Peace, I will find more.

[ 12-15-2005, 02:11 PM: Message edited by: Ishtar ]

--------------------
“Ad initio, alea iacta est.”
And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
it's Later Than You Think
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #66 on: December 11, 2007, 01:22:12 pm »

Ishtar

Member
Member # 736

  posted 12-15-2005 02:14 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How about their views on dietary laws, take Ezekiel Bread, for instance.

http://www.fitnessandfreebies.com/christian/ezekielbread.html

Does this count as science?

--------------------
“Ad initio, alea iacta est.”
And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
it's Later Than You Think
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #67 on: December 11, 2007, 01:22:35 pm »

oscar

Member
Member # 1390

Rate Member   posted 12-15-2005 04:24 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Science includes this of course or John Baptist diet with locust (incredible source of protein)or the fact the circumsition was made at the 8th day where protrombin and vitamin K are more powerful than ever (coagulating blood) compared with any other day (while Western doctors learned to wash their hands after thousands of years). The Israelites had to do their excrements and use a shovel to cover the thing (avoid spreading diseases with flies)even before bacteria were discovered. The dog's saliva substance had a name like ptialina or ptialin name...something like that.. in Latin source.
In spite of mentioning about expanding earth theory and the fact is naïve to believe 100% of what is said by geologists, is good to remember they even ignore the very reasons of the splitting of Pangea. Paleonthologist NOW re rejecting the idea dinosaurs were as faster (70 km per hour) compared with modern elephants (24 km per hour) because now the pressure of scientists who defy the ancient dogmas is increasing. These beast were so huge than a slow elephant is a dwarf compared with them, they should've collapsed under the weigh of their own bodies and couldn't even breath if the gravity of the earth was like is now! Specially the Sauroposeidon. GiGaNtIsM of beast couldn't be isolated mutations, so the answers won

--------------------
inca
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #68 on: December 11, 2007, 01:23:03 pm »

oscar

Member
Member # 1390

Rate Member   posted 12-15-2005 04:48 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...won't be given by them but by geologists. Even cockroaches were gigantic creatures. Due to analysis of air bubbles preserved in ambar we know the amount of 02 was completely different. In fact the shape of the earth was different (probably like an egg), the density, the atmosphere, gravity, size, rotation, movement around the Sun and probably the axis that allow the seasons. Hence, I laugh when people watch BBC documentaries about animal likeness IN MILLIONS OF YEARS INTO THE FUTURE and imagine that is real science! Or show virtual images of dinosaurs with imaginary gray colors (we don't know if they have feathers or hair sometimes) in "American forests" in a bright shiny day! Hehehehe! BBC hides dinosaurs perhaps were not living ONLY prior to men but maybe lived even until Middle Ages! Smart ambiguous Carl Sagan was worried enough about the theme cos he mentioned twice both in "Dragons of Eden" and "Contact" talking about the discussion if dinosaurs survive til the coming of earth. I know cos I have omnivorous apetite and I do read which is something some people in this forum hate to do tooth & nail. The fact squids and giant octopus have been found in the deep ocean indicates that nowadays only few specimen could survive in the water not so affected by gravity regarding the weigh of the animal. So, here again, I have to say not only Creations but ton of people have been calling attention to the fact. Will Brooke read? I doubt! It's unnecessary to say she won't read something not written by Creationist but scientists, "Scaling, Why Is Animal Size So Important", Knet Nielson, Cambridge University, Press 1984, page 163 or Natural History, December 1991, Sauropods and Gravity, Harvey Lillywhite, Florida University. The spine of Sauroposeidon wasn't so strong, it was weak and yet had a neck 3 times bigger than giraffe and its heart should've generate pressure 4 times bigger than giraffe. At least 70 or 80% of their bodies had to be only muscles and that never happened. Their existence is an impossible thing in current gravity.
www.anzwers.org/free/livedragons
www.anzwers.org/free/livedragons/evolutio.htm
www.anzwers.org/free/livedragons/dragon.htm
www.anzwers.org/free/livedragons/frameset14.htm
www.s8int.com/dino1.html
8 pages to read there before answering imbecil things, Brooke.
www.s8int.com/mega1.html
3 pages to read there and see photos wich are not hoaxes like ape-men Piltdown, Zijantropus, Man of Orce, Man of Vladimir, Java, Hesperopithecus, etc.
www.s8int.com/dinolit1.html
7 pages to be read there...
www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-241.htm
Age of the bones:
www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v21/i1/dinosaurbones.asp
Fake fossils:
www.anzwers.org/free/livedragons/birdbone.htm
http://evolition.cjb.net
www.s8int.com/boneyard1.html

--------------------
inca
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #69 on: December 11, 2007, 01:23:25 pm »

oscar

Member
Member # 1390

Rate Member   posted 12-15-2005 05:06 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...and now, as a miracle of modern "science" we see new documentaries about dragon-like dinosaurs that maybe existed in the past. Lemme tell you the ones who have been saying that during decades were Creationists and now the scientist follow their trails. HAHAHAHAHA! Now they are gonna talk about St. George and the dragon and similar UNIVERSAL legends beyond odds and talk about Kronosaurus Leviathan or others like Lambeosaurinae which could be fire throwers using hidden glands:
www.clarifyingchristianity.com/dinos.shtml
I have been saying to the "experts" here to write a special tread about evolution any time any place. They believe so much in the methods to measure time that perhaps I need to write a ton about all methods starting with granite thing:
www.halos.com
Or perhaps the zircon crystals and anomalous amount of helium...and maybe we can end about how much are we really akin to chimps:
www.creationdigest.com/archives/Archive_2005_Winter/Chimps_Not_Our_Kin.htm

--------------------
inca
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #70 on: December 11, 2007, 01:23:46 pm »

oscar

Member
Member # 1390

Rate Member   posted 12-15-2005 05:18 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brooke, the expert won't read anything against her own opinion and in narrow minded attitude would deny everything and everybody who doesn't share her point of view. More than this , this sort of people come to forums and say "I won't read anything of "that type" " ands would judge all that data is information invented by Creationists even though the links are explicit, for example quoting the very experts in dinosaurs: Philip J. Currie and Eva B. Koppelhus, 101 Questions about Dinosaurs, Dover Publications, 1996. Currie is a well-known dinosaur authority. He is Curator of Dinosaurs at the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Palaeontology, Drumheller, Alberta, Canada. Koppelhus is a visiting researcher at the same institution. Surely they know better than Miss (or Mrs) Brooke ..whoever....

--------------------
inca
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #71 on: December 11, 2007, 01:24:12 pm »

Brooke

Member
Member # 2806

Member Rated:
   posted 12-15-2005 10:23 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oscar, I have been reading a lot of your links. The problem with a lot of your links is that THEY ARE NOT OBJECTIVE!!!

Most come from Ooparts, Creationist and UFO websites. Now, we would all like to believe in flying saucers and fairytales, but you have to have PROOF of things like they are expressing. You can say what you like about evolutionists, at least they HAVE theories, Creationists have NONE. They make their living by trying to poke holes in the theories of real scientists.

For a theory to qualify as science it has to be:

consistent (internally and externally)
parsimonious (sparing in proposed entities or explanations)
useful (describes and explains observed phenomena)
empirically testable and falsifiable
based upon controlled, repeatable experiments
correctable and dynamic (changes are made as new data is discovered)
progressive (achieves all that previous theories have and more)
tentative (admits that it might not be correct rather than asserting certainty)

None of the stuff you printed meets that criteria!

--------------------
"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #72 on: December 11, 2007, 01:24:40 pm »

Brooke

Member
Member # 2806

Member Rated:
   posted 12-15-2005 10:52 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven't seen so much data from Brooke. Just pasting and pasting (mainly the whole translation of the Bible and my words and her expert opinion). That's why I love to use links that are ignored by Brooke. I love when she doesn't read and I am quoting not only for Creationists. Let it be. ""Maimonides wrote millennia after the Bible was written..she says. He was qualified cos he understood Hebrew and you don't. In fact, Hebrews also have oral tradition that passes through generations.You're so cocky that not only you want to refuse listening me or reading the links, but now you think -I don't know with what habilities- you know better than the very Hebrews?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know, the one link that you didn't supply was anything about Maimonides and how he supposedly reinterpreted the days of creation to be "age," and not "days." That night have been useful, that may have supported what you believe. Where is it?

Maimonides is one version, Oscar, I've looked around and I sure haven't seen anything about how he rewrote the Jewish concept of "days" and "time." Your point doesn't matter anyway, because as I said earlier (a point conveniently ignored by you): THERE'S NO WAY THE STORY OF CREATION COULD HAVE BEEN PASSED DOWN BY ORAL TRADITION!

How do you even explain that it was?
Did God simply take one of these guys aside and tell them which day he made what and how he did it?
And, if so, which one?

Rubbish!

Oh, and just how old do you believe the earth is, Oscar? Let's have a number.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In your arrogance you're also dismissing these traditions. Greeks and Chinese do have myths about mud that can only corroborate what is written in the Bible and Sumerian accounts. When a myth is local, is only that but is different when is universal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know what all the flood myths of the world have in common with one another, Oscar? Not one of them is ANYTHING ALIKE. Everybody WOULD have a flood myth, the ancient people built on land that got flooded when the Ice Age ended. Big whoop.

And none of the creation stories of the different cultures resemble one another either.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mountains are getting higher even now and not only millions of years ago. I have discussed with geologists who don't know even what were the causes of the splitting of the sole continent Pangea and you wanna talk to me about millions? Are you capable to discuss -science and not zelous faith- the methods used by scientists to measure "time"? You were the one saying mountains were taller and I just corrected your imbecil statement and now you wanna discuss other thing, that is "when". Are you prepared to discuss that?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I said that if you put the global flood according to it's accepted chronology it would be about 4000 bc, moron, and there's no way the waters could have covered Everest. Don't put words in my mouth.

Many very tall mountains are composed of sedimentary rocks. (The summit of Everest is composed of deep-marine limestone, with fossils of ocean-bottom dwelling crinoids [Gansser, 1964].) If these were formed during the Flood, how did they reach their present height, and when were the valleys between them eroded away? Keep in mind that many valleys were clearly carved by glacial erosion, which is a slow process.

As for the mountains not always being that size, sure, if you put the flood story back millions of years ago that might have a point. Once again, that sets it beyond oral tradition, not only that, in an age when humanity wasn't even born!

Provide more science to dispute some of this stuff? Why should I have to, the science is all around you! It's called: common sense!


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In your wrath you wanna say Ishtar and Johnee support everything I say. That's a lie! I know Ishtar a long time and she has her own thought without needing me at all. Johnee was just asking a question. You're new comer and you wanna judge us all and interpret if we are Christians or Jews or what is our faith? WHAT THE HECK IS HAPPENING WITH YOU?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, gosh, Oscar, you guys are defending the Bible as at least partially historical fact, I didn’t know I needed bios from everyone to dispute that!


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If any fool can believe in evolution, please FOOL DUMB STUPID EMPTY HEAD GIRL, please open a tread about why you believe in evolution and we will discuss that science -without mentioning the Bible- and we will see if your arguments are wise or foolish.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gee, that kind of "flattery" is sure going to get you someplace.
I don't know any scientist that doesn’t accept that evolution is at least part of the story for the human race.

Today, nearly all biologists acknowledge that evolution is a fact. The term theory is no longer appropriate except when referring to the various models that attempt to explain how life evolves... it is important to understand that the current questions about how life evolves in no way implies any disagreement over the fact of evolution.
- Neil A. Campbell, Biology 2nd ed., 1990, Benjamin/Cummings, p. 434

If you don't believe evolution played any role, pray tell, how were human beings created?
Did aliens make people?
Or did God wave his hand and just make people out of the mud?


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You wrote "I’m not the one who believes every creeping thing after it’s kind was loaded aboard a 400 ft long ark, Oscar, YOU ARE." I'm just explaining to you the word translated "kind" means a certain type or kind of specie and not your idiotic assumption "all animals" but kind of all animals existing at that time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kind?
Genes?
In that case you're arguing for EVOLUTION YOURSELF, GENIUS!!!


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Hebrew _expression OF COURSE WOULDN'T MENTION THE _EXPRESSION "PANGEA" WHICH IS MODERN. That's idiotic, yet it mentions the Pheleg times where literalk division of the "country" or land or earth happened in many levels. The "dinosaurs" is also a modern name, STUPID GIRL. Yet in Genesis we read the _expression in Hebrew "tanniyim" meaning great monsters appearing before other earthy animals in the 5th day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, the dinosaurs all died out 65 million years ago.
An oral tradition that lasted 65 million years? COME ON!!!
If not, who told the Jews about the dinosaurs, was it GOD??


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We don't have to believe all possible myths but the universal ones and not only the Bible quotes the Noah episode and his children. That's why I quote links for readers to read. You keep repeating the same thing and read nothing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where is the freaking science that you keep referring to?

Cut through the chase and all you're basically saying is that the Christians translated the Bible wrong and that all this science was passed down through oral tradition! There are so many holes in your theory that you can shoot whole armies of cannonballs through them.

Either you have the flood happening recently and geology doesn’t support it.

Or you have the flood happening millions of years ago (when all the mountains were smaller), and you have to set it so far in the past that not only would human beings be unable to pass it down orally, they wouldn't even be alive to know of it. Use some common sense, Oscar!!!

--------------------
"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #73 on: December 11, 2007, 01:25:06 pm »

Brooke

Member
Member # 2806

Member Rated:
   posted 12-15-2005 10:58 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An example of Hebrew ignorance. Brooke wrote "On the sixth day, God was finishing up the heavens. The rest of the universe would merit at least a whole day". This is ignorance to cube level. I said and repeat a thousand times, the text in Genesis 1:1 is clear, all the universe was already created in undetermined "beginning" (bere$hit in Hebrew). The other texts I mentioned -for anyone capable to read and understand- are also clear in the sense there are several meaning of "days" (yown in Hebrew). Also, the Hebrew text makes a whole difference between "barah" (create out from nothing or ex-nihilo) and "form" or "model
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How is it "ignorance on a cube level"?
Were you there when the universe was formed, Oscar?

I asked again, what is the big deal anyway what day that people were formed and what day the rest of the universe was created?

The text does mention the fifth day for humans. It seems to "skip" the sixth day for whatever reason, save for the line I mentioned.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To the rest of the posters, when you wanna discuss about MORALITY in the Bible, that's social theme. Here we are discussing about scientific facts and I have shown specific texts about "nothingness" holding the earth, rotatory movement as expressed in Job, the strings loosening in Orion and Pleiads (term superstring), the creation of black fire which reminds us the dark energy and I could mention other things. If you wanna talk about morality in the Bible, please open the proper tread and DON'T BEAT AROUND THE BUSH lacking anything proper to discuss in this tread.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oscar, the comments people made are perfectly fitting if you buy the fact that the Bible is basically only one big long lesson in morality that your science is supposed to back up. If you can't back it up with your science, it means that there is no overriding God-dictatorship that even gives a flying fig about people's morality.

And every text you mentioned is so vague as to mean almost anything if you're desperate enough.

And you have some nerve to talk about what people should or shouldn't say in MY THREAD. All the countless insults you keep handing me have nothing to do with Science and the Bible either, but you just keep lettin 'em fly! VERRRY SCIENTIFIC!!!

--------------------
"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Brooke
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4269



« Reply #74 on: December 11, 2007, 01:25:29 pm »

Brooke

Member
Member # 2806

Member Rated:
   posted 12-15-2005 11:04 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now let's see. Everest is rising by 6 inches per year. It's now about 29,000 ft, which means that 58,000 years ago it was a flat plane at sea level. Add a few years so it was below sea level (otherwise how did those marine fossils get there? Walking oysters might work for Lewis Carroll, but not for the Bible) - so let's say 60,000 as a nice round number. But hang on a bit - we don't have 60,000 years, we only have 6,000 - no, wait a minute, that's since creation; it's less than 5,000 since the Flood - so if the increase in height has been slowing since then, just after the deluge it must have been shooting up like a lift in a high-rise. Odd that none of the Indian legends mention this, but still, it "probably" did anyway (amazing how Genesis is not exactly overflowing with "probablies" but since God hadn't invented the word processor or the pencil then, and as it took a while to carve the stories in stone, and as "probably" is quite a long word, the writers probably left them out).

http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/aig_mt_everest_and_cricket.htm

--------------------
"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
 
Report Spam   Logged

"The most incomprehensible thing about our universe is that it can be comprehended." - Albert Einstein
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 93   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy