My parents' dog would refuse to be lead past a house in our town that is reputedly haunted. No science textbook can explain these events, but the Bible can. That ticks another box for the Bible being divinely inspired.
[Hate mail to Richard Dawkins]
If as you say God is a delusion, and God created humanity, then humanity is a delusion. Since you think you are human, you are a delusion and do not exist. Then why do you have a website? Whhy don't you just wink out of existence since you never was real anyway? -david
How do you know you are real and am talking to me? There is no one telling you you exist! How do you know you are even human? Are you an android who thinks you are human? why do you think? If there is no god, then evolution would never have happened and humanity is a great lie.
note: Dawin says "survival of the fittest" and that means "kill or be killed" without care to morality. Therefore you are dehumanising humanity. Of course you don't care, since you are not even human. You just look human and think you are, but you are a lie. Why don't you make friends with Freddy Kreuger and Jason Vorhees, because they think just like you? They kill for fun, why not you?
i believe one creationist has suggested the "glaciers" were not ice but frozen water.
Hello all. Frosty E Hardison here. Yeah it's really ME!
On something as simple as faith? You either have it or you don't.
On something as simple as having a testimony that Jesus Christ has taken an active part in your life? You either have one or you don't. If you don't have it, you walk around in life an empty shell – often times you don't even know it! Once you are filled with HIM and the unconditional love that He is all about? You KNOW what it was to be empty and you want to help others discover the truth too. Scientists can't measure that.
On something as simple as the age of the earth? I can do the math, the lineage provided in Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38 that give the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Matthew recorded Joseph's lineage, while Luke gave the family tree of Mary) places us at what right about 12,000 years today?
As far as science goes? Observational science and speculation of new ideas? Oh yeah, what we see is what we get. Or is it an optical illusion? I have no problems keeping an open mind for new ideas, perspectives and sources of information— the thing is, even under strict circumstances: Can we as fallible humans be mis-interpreting the data that is being read? As a data and systems analyst I have to ask that question all the time. Same goes for the carbon 14 factor. Where do the calculations come from that the world is several billions of years old when carbon 14 data is only good for a few thousand years? Then when you look at the methodology of HOW carbon 14 itself is produced you come into several variances to consider as well. Under what circumstances are there fewer occurrences of C14 being produced – what increases and what decreases it? Is it steady? Is it stable? What factors produce the absorption rates into tissues, fossils and specimens we are looking at? Do they differ or vary by diet, climate, solar variances? As a hobbyist in science myself, I at least still ask those questions.
I would rather have a human witness to cross examine than a machine of any kind – any day. Neither are infallible, but at least one of them can reason, think and extrapolate a conclusion weighing ALL the evidence rather than a preprogrammed set of line codes that can be out of calibration at any given time.
And if you want a spokes person for global warming – I would have chosen Ben Stein! Not AL Gore. Have a wonderful day.
The biblical ignorance here is astounding. I was once there myself but not any more. The Bible is a difficult study no doubt and I am still a babe learning with a fantastic biblical scholar.
I wish I was further along so I could contribute here, however, it would fall on deaf ears anyway!
Did you know your body is full of phosphorus which the Bible refers too. It is mainly in your skeletal system and you know what. It must be there for you to exist! Oddly, when the physical body dies, although we still see the mass of flesh...the phosphorus dissappears!! So where does it go!
Did you know you glow? Yes, this phophorus glows yet you cannot see it with the naked eye!
Check it out! You glow but you can't see it! Why?
How can you explain that the (catholic) church exists if the man who founded it never have existed? There you go, heathen idiots!
can any of you atheists explain scientifically how or why you are alive at this very moment? What is it that makes your brain be "on" and have the ability to think, see, breath and simply "be?"
Indeed, there is no scientific explanation for being alive....which is why evolutionary science is a sham to explain life.
America will soon put an end to the English heresy. We must reclaim the American Dream.
England used to send pilgrim fathers to American shores. Now they just send big, ugly trolls.
Remember: America is the last, best hope for mankind. Evolution is the antithesis of this.
and to reply to your last statement I must add that science has no place in discussing the miracle of life. Life is not mechanistic. Your being is not defined by matter -- it's defined by what makes that matter come to life. And whatever that miracle is is something that science will never uncover and will never be able to explain or define. Life defies science at every turn...and for science to be taught in the classroom under the guize of explaining life is a sham
Atheism is not a rational conclusion, rather it's a psychological condition. You put God in the same category as twenty-footed ghosts. What would you think of someone who spends hours on end denouncing twenty-footed ghosts? If you truly beleived that God did not exist, why have you spent so much time typing over 1,346 posts about a non-existing being? What would you think of someone posting 1,346 messages dennouncing twenty-footed ghosts on a website devoted to those who did not beleive in twenty-footed ghosts? One would think that you are obsessed like the lady in the story..
The two reason the whole world is not a follower of Christ is because of ignorance, and the bad example of bad Christians..
[Get a load of this latest piece from Byers ... especially the part where he thinks that "ice" and "frozen water" are two different entities ... I kid you not ...]
The timeframes must be short enough to fit biblical chronology. Creationists differ but this one sees the "ice age' starting some 4 centuries or so after the flood, by tree ring count, and lasting a few hundred years and over with a sudden melt.
Now there are issues about glacial covering of earth. i believe one creationist has suggested the "glaciers" were not ice but frozen water. that is they were not created by weight of snow but massive frozen water from rain and snow.
Yet their movement would need explanation and other details. The source of the megameltwater events, a famous topic in geomorphology here, would be explained better if the "ice" was just frozen water mostly. However I'm just suggesting this.
I didn't know the rock this erratic came from but its fine what it is. A rock from volcanic or heating/melting rock with a source in sedimentary works for me. These rocks all from the great results of the flood year.
We just quicken the pace of moving continents and their crashing/splitting and here and there volcanic outporings under or above ground, though covered by water, and so metamorhic (sp) rock.
Then a glacier or moving frozen ice or meltwater picked up a piece and dropped it downstream.
The theory of evolution can't explain this, because, according to the first law of thermodynamics, matter cant be created or destroyed, as you said. So where did the matter for the big-bang come from? Where did the matter for the primitive soup come from? How did the first atom evolve? The first and second laws of thermodynamics disprove evolution. How did DNA evolve? The answer to your question is found in Genesis, "In the beginning, God created..."
[The Byers soap opera again! Here he claims that mathematics doesn't require intelligence. And regurgitates his usual masturbatory gibberish about the fantasy flood ...]
Its not the math but the presumptions that the problem.
Creationism today would not say the waters of the flood would cover Everest.
First because Everest like almost all or all mountains on earth today are the result of the continents splitting/crashing during the flood year.
These mts poped up only then creationism says.
Whatever mts existed before the flood would of been small most likely. so a lesser depth of water would be needed to cover the earth. We can presume this. I would add also the oceans would not need to be deep but rather were carved deeper during the commotion of the flood year.
Creationism teaches a different looking planet before the flood so you can't just prove us wrong by ignoring our claims.
Math is for kids but research and analysis is for thinking men.
In fact i think they find shells on Everest. cause it moved up with the shells from below.
Cheers
And just how did the Dinosaurs die 4000 yrs ago? Well, dinosaurs have very small nostrils which means that back then (4000-yrs ago), there was a very high oxygen content. Now maybe, just maybe that some time after the flood when dinosaurs populated the Earth again, conditions deteriorated resulting in suffocation. This is all to obvious but Science has to complicate it
The design of Atoms, the heading of this thread implies a creator or designer.. Everything has a designer/creator, that's really blatantly obvious. As for scientific jargon, I don't dispute the use of it but dispute the use of it in relation to really bad science. Macro-Evolution is really bad science in my opinion. Who cares if some or majority of Christians accept Macro-evolution, thats their endeavour not mine, they can believe as they wish but in my view it's either God did it or a process too proposterous to even begin to occur. It's about worldviews, you've been given a choice to believe eiher, you've made your choice but you're wrong. You're all to bloody blinded by the lies as for us IDers we're set free by the truth. God said that in the end times the wicked would become blind to the obvious things, well we must certainly be living in the end times thats for sure.. Oh God, I'm preaching again, just a matter of time..
Sorry, but I was an unbeliever for most of my life and nothing compares to the life I have with the indwelling Holy Spirit. So since one cannot become unborn again of the Holy Spirit, then of course you were never born again of the Holy Spirit to being with. One cannot ever deny that someone he has met exists. So since you deny that Jesus is the Son of God, then you obviously have never met him through the Holy Spirit. So you've been walking in darkness all your life even though you paid Jesus lip-service. So unfortunately, you will know why death should be feared in just a short time from now. So enjoy your last days while you can! :-D
And, here is the problem most Christians have. You will never admit logical defeat, no matter the proof.
Do you understand that the earth's rotation is SLOWING down over time? Do you agree that if we go backwards in time that the earth rotated FASTER. (am i going slow enough for you?)
OK, now this is tricky, and I might not get it correctly because several people here say I am clueless.
When you speed up rotation, gravity has a greater effect, as in you get heavyer. Go back less than one million years and you have a earth that is spinning fast enough that there is no way anything can live with gravity that harsh. Go back a bit farther and soon the earth is spinning so fast that things actually fly off. And you want to go back, how many years? Trillions? hmmm, lets see, i dont think so.
Next, our moon, over time, has been pulling away from the earth. Again, if we go back wards in time then the moon gets CLOSER. Its not very long before it colides with the earth. (now hold on, im not finished so dont go getting on your soap box about it coming from the earth)
The way evolution puts things, dinosoars roamed earth billions of years ago. Besides the fact that the earth would be spinning so fast that they could not of possibly stand up under the pull of that great a gravity, it was stated that the moon splintered off the earth either at about this time or before it.
Well, if you bring the moon back towards the earth at the rate in which it is moving away now (and btw, it would have been a different rate due to the pull of earth gravity because it was closer, but lets just let that go for now) The moon would have collided with the earth way before evolution puts it departing from the earth.
I have given you two LOGICAL reasons why the earth could not be trillions of years old as you state.
In a free and democratic society, citizens have the right to vote for whatever cause they wish. You are an atheist because you don't like people who vote differently than you? You are an atheist because some people beleive that that abortion is the destruction of a new human being, and want to pass laws to protect the innocent?
You are an atheist because Christianity teaches that something is a sin? What does that have to do with the existence of a Creator?
Atheism is not a logical conclusion. It is a psychological condition..
Some have objected to the creationist assertion that "2 miles of sediment could not be laid down by 1 mile of water." Oh really? How about you try a little experiment as I did this morning. Take two glasses and put 1" of water in one and 2" of sand in the other. Now pour the water into the sand, cover the mixture with your hand and shake (simulating the violent conditions of floodwaters), then let the sediment settle. You will now have about 2" of sand and about 1/4" of clear water above the sand. I tried this experiment this morning and it works great.
Moral of the story: 1 mile of water can indeed deposit 2 miles of sediment ... and it most likely did just that in the Great Flood of Noah.
One more thing. There was more than 1 mile of water available. The average ocean depth today is 12,200 feet covering 3/4 of the earth's surface. If the available water was spread over the whole earth, this would equate to over 1.7 miles deep. So we don't just have 1 mile of water ... we've got more than a mile and a half of water to work with.
Jesus was the Son of God and thus he had supernatural abilities as exemplified by the violation of natural laws such as gravity in being able to walk on water. This event was witnessed by many. Reliable eyewitness accounts are sufficient to convict people of murder and rape.
If you are an atheist consider the following paradox.
If you do not believe that God exists, then you dismiss the biblical stories (angels appearing from heaven etc) from 2000 years ago as 'fairy tales'.
OK, so lets take that as an established fact.
Now go back another 1500 years in history and look at the pyramids in Egypt. Built in the Bronze Age they contain 50 tonne granite roof slabs and 5 tonne blocks of limestone all over the constructions. Do you believe that they were built by bronze age man ? (Wikipedia bronze age man if you are unsure of his capabilities).
OK, so now we have 2 possible combinations.
1) You think the stories about what happened 2000 years ago are fantasy but believe those about what happened 3500 years ago
or
2) You think the stories about what happened 2000 years ago are fanstasy and those about what happened 3500 years ago are also fantasy.
Combination 1 means that you are applying your thought patterns selectively and therefore your Atheism has no intelectually sound basis and can safely be ignored.
Combination 2 means that the pyramids were not built by mankind, eluding strongly to the existance of God (as defined as an unknown quantity from outside the planet).
Can anyone solve the paradox ?
[When asked (at the end of a lengthy discussion) if he had ever changed his mind on anything]
Yeah, I was convinced for many years that the crucifixion happened on a Wednesday.
I seem to have been misunderstood.. I don't doubt at all that NASA has built rockets capable of space flights. We've all seen the footage, the Satellites, the space station that's all real and obvious. I don't doubt that NASA has sent vehicles to Mars and the Moon and gathered minerals/photos etc.. What I do doubt is that NASA has sent man to the moon. I'm not going to present evidence because even if it's true you'll debunk it with your scientific jargon, it's what you do with any credible evidence for ID. I've been on this forum long enough to be cautious of this and what I'm really trying to do is get those who have never questioned authority before to check it out for themselves and make up their minds on the matter.. de-brainwash their heavily brainwashed minds so to speak if they want to.
Argumentum Ab Vinum!
***************
I believe in a 6-day creation by God that occurred about 6,000 - 10,000 years ago.
Yet I also appreciate that scientific analysis concludes that the earth seems much more mature than this, around 4bn years.
How on earth can I reconcile all this? Very easily.
To understand the first miracle in the Bible (the creation), one must also understand the first miracle of Jesus in the Gospel of John- Jesus turning water into wine.
Jesus didn't turn the water into a cheap and nasty wine. He turned it into the best wine, the taste was so good. Logically, the best wines are the oldest. This miracle demonstrates that Jesus could in just a few seconds not only create, but create something MATURE.
In the same way, God in a 6-day period could create a MATURE Universe. This took place 10,000 years ago. Yes the earth does look older than 10,000 years but the earth is a MATURE creation just as Jesus's wine was a MATURE creation.
Case closed. Jesus is Lord.
[Yes, it's him again ... you'll all LOVE this one ... and yes, the other forum posters have invited him to put this and other whacked-out suggestions in the same thread to empirical test ;-) ]
Theropod and gang.
your just wrong again about these things.
Animals are all afraid of man in the wilderness. It is not from personal contact. I suggest it needs to be provoked by something like confidence or some impression or something But not defeat by violence. They don't internalize genetically incidents. I repeat excellent nature shows and zillions of acounts of man and beast in Canada all show that all creatures flee the appearance of man. Even bells or waving arms keeps bears away. They flee nothing else but a human noise will save hikers.
This is a well known fact and usually the case is made that animals learned to fear man and it somehow sticks like the way they fear poisoness coloured snakes etc.
Polar bears are not shot away but are scared away by flares, or druming garbage cans up there. They simply get used to people like any animal but a little agression sends them flying. They would never fly from a animals.
Polar bears are scared to the point of white hair.
The author of Genesis knew his audience , which lived with lions and bears, would know a child could scare them off.
you guys are not analysising properly common data.
The timeframes must be short enough to fit biblical chronology. Creationists differ but this one sees the "ice age' starting some 4 centuries or so after the flood, by tree ring count, and lasting a few hundred years and over with a sudden melt.
Now there are issues about glacial covering of earth. i believe one creationist has suggested the "glaciers" were not ice but frozen water. that is they were not created by weight of snow but massive frozen water from rain and snow.
Yet their movement would need explanation and other details. The source of the megameltwater events, a famous topic in geomorphology here, would be explained better if the "ice" was just frozen water mostly. However I'm just suggesting this.
Philosophical (the relativist pitfall)
The evolutionist hypothesis is fatally impaired by the well-known contradiction of relativism, often demonstrated by means of the statement “All men are liars.” (If they are, then this statement, also made by a man, is false.) Specifically, in the present case: man, who is said to be evolving (and is therefore relative), cannot all of a sudden step out of the evolutionary process, take up a stationary position, and dare to make absolute statements regarding the continuing process. It is this that is absurd.
Dawkins, you and your atheist friends cannot win. America WILL become a Christian Republic even if we have to write a whole new constitution. Millions of us are dedicated to this righteous cause. We will suceed. And then we will invade godless countries like "Great" Britain and kill all of your heathens. First we need to take care of things at home and in the Middle East but we will get around to Europe. You Godless freaks will die but then you will roast in hell for infinite time. Goodbye you loser
[0.2% of the US prison population is atheist. Thats around 150 people.]
I'm afraid you are not understanding the reality of what atheism essentially is. Atheism is non-belief, you can primarily tell what someone believes by what they practice. There is a large percentage of people who call themselves Christians, Muslims and Jews and yet they are equivalent to being atheist by what they practice. The prison population is full of Atheist by way of hypocrisy. Hypocrites and Atheist are spiritual equivalents.
I hope you die slowly and you fucking burn in hell! You dammed blasfemy!!! Right now you are rotting on the inside... But you must now (sic) that there is indeed a God! A great god! And he will forgive you if you regret from your fucking behavior. And you should realise thatyour entire life has been a delusion...and that right now your destiny is all fucked up! Fucking atheist!!!!!!!!!!!
If there is no God, then there can be no Atheism. There is Atheism. Therefore, there is a God. To put the argument in symbolic form it looks like this: ~G --> ~A/ A/ .: G. Or, to put it another way: the necessary preconditions for the inteligibility/possibility of Atheism is Theism. Metaphors abound: theism is the lap the atheist must sit on in order to slap God in the face. Triune theism is the soil the atheist must till in order to plant weeds of unbelief. Holy Ghost oxygen is the air the atheist must breath in order to exhale insults against Christ. Et cetera.
This is just your everyday run-of-the-mill Modus Tollens argument. Pretty basic form of argumentation. Something anyone would learn in a Logic 101 class. It is valid- i.e, the conclusion follows from the premises. But is it sound?- i.e., can you hear the sound of approaching hoofbeats Wink
To put the argument in more practical terms: can one be an atheist in a world that has not already been influenced (to a greater extent than not) by Christendom? To be quite frank, how many atheists are there who are not baptized apostate Christians? In other words, if no Christendom then no atheists. There are atheists. Therefore, there must have been Christendom.
BTW, for all you atheists. The book I recommend you read is Against Christianity, by Peter Leithart. Here is a short excerpt from the opening page,
"The Bible never mentions Christianity. It does not preach Christianity, nor does it encourage us to preach Christianity. Paul did not preach Christianity, nor did any of the other apostles. During centuries when the Church was strong and vibrant, she did not preach Christianity either. Christianity, like Judaism and "Yahwism," is an invention of biblical scholars, theologians, and politicians, and one of its chief effects is to keep Christians and the Church in their proper marginal place. The Bible speaks of Christians and of the Church, but Christianity is gnostic, and the Church firmly rejected gnosticism from her earliest days."
And in the following paragraph, he says, "Christianity is the heresy of heresies."
Atheists love Christianity. Christians should love the Church and Christendom.
Sound too good to be true? That's because truth is always stranger than fiction.
_________________
"The necessary precondition for the inteligibility/possibility of atheism, is theism. The necessary cultural precondition for the making of an atheist, is apostate Christendom." -Oecolampadius Van Till
What's in your cells is light and love, not weasels, plants, bugs, and monkeys. Cells are vibration and vibrating.
As advances in science continue to disprove Darwinism, people are returning to the pre-Darwinian world view of Biblical Creationism and Catastrophism in droves!
I'm having fun here at the Dawkins Forum helping people understand this.
Atheism is not a logical conclusion, it's a psychological condition and the reason why it always leads to depression. The good news is that in reality, you are more than a meaningless bag of chemicals. Your existence is more incredible and beyond anything you could possibly imagine. Even what we know is incredible if it were not the fact that we have pictures of it. Right now a giant Ocean Cruise Liner with 3,000 passengers is upside down navigating through the ocean which covers this giant globe we call "Earth" which happens to "float" in a nothingness we call "space".
300 years from now when you are a pile of dust and bones, you will either be in union with the Creator of this incredible existence we all share, or separated from Him in eternity. To miss the purpose of our existence is the biggest tragedy that could befall a human being..
[Behold, Byers Mega Tard Special ... the follow up to his "mathematics is for kids" post, with some nice sexist and racist observations on non-WASP mathematicians, and more tard about Mount Everest. Enjoy the sensation of your neurons dying as you read this ...]
Hit a nerve with the math thing.
On another forum we discussed why women fail relative to men in math and I said its not because of inferior intelligence but because of motivation. Women do not seek ambition and rewards pound for pound with men. So I said math is not a more intelligent study but simply seen as more intelligent. So men/ethnic groups (in north America) who are seeking prestige in academic subjects prevail because they think its a smarter thing. Yet in fact its a simplier subject that rewards simple processes of thought. In fac examples of kids or retarded people who do great feats in math are the evidence it is simple processes of reasoning in close boundaries with instant confirmations which entrench the thought processes.
Unlike subjects that require higher intelligence due to orbits of thought and not simple lines.
I added chess, classical music etc as examples of how motivation brings results in simnple but seeming more intellectual pursuits. Its easy to do well in math if you are simply studious. Its not about intellect. Therefore men/ethnics just want the prestige of intellectual success and wrongly conclude math is one of them. Women don't have this desire but do intellectualy compete equally with men in subjects they care about. Though only studious ones also. Not real life.
So women are doctors, lawyers equally in the schools. Not math class or others. Motives not genetics.
Whew Off thread.But you complained.
Anyways back to everest.
Yes it was created during the the flood by the continents being moved from a central mass to the present lines.
Said before and complaints about heat brought up.
All mt ranges are seen as from the smash/splitt during the flood. They were shot higher then anything before. The mts before the flood are presumed to have been as small as one can get and be called mts.
So less water needed to cover.
Less deep oceans replaced by deep oceans, from moving continents, is one place to store excess water after. Your looking at the flood water.
Anyways just a point that the earth before the flood was different then after. We can use data of continental drift for our models. Except we would call it continental redeye
God's definition of "flat" is wholly different from ours. The world is flat in His eyes, but spherical in ours. This is simply because our eyes are tainted with sin and doubt. We see what we want to see, not what is. I really don't see why this is so hard to understand.
"evolution" is simply changes emerging from within the individual to adapt himself to a changing enviornment. Darwin was wrong, dawkins was wrong, gould was wrong -- I am right.
We don't believe in God because we need a moral standard. We beleive in God because He exists. And we follow Him because He knows the moral standard better than any of us. And we love Him, because He loves us, despite the fact that He hates us.
Once Our Lord approves you, and I receive an e-mail from my bank stating a deposit has been made your original message will go into my Inbox automatically!
You do not need to resend your message. I apologize for this one-time inconvenience and may the Lord answer all your prayers. He does mine! But I am one of His chosen favorites just gushing with juicy love for His recognition of me and my loyalty and unqualified submission and obedience.
Science will never find the answer to all those difficult questions. They will continue to work on various theories as long as God is left out of the equation and this is all to easy to do as God cannot be tested or demonstrated in a lab. This is, incidentally, why Evolution should be banished from Science and taught as a religion. If this were the case nobody would follow it as it Godless for one reason and has totally bogus claims. The problem is that the majority of people out there will believe these so called Scientists is due to the fact that they are in an authorotative position. I cannot accept that 3 billion years ago life emerged and I cannot accept that we progressed to eventually become beautiful us, it is all to vague and unfamilliar with no valid proof. I have requested countless times that somebody explain MACRO-Evolution to me but alas, nobody can do it, I keep hearing about micro-evolution which I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH!! Thank you to all those who've tried in convincing me once again that Macro -evolution is an absolute hoax.
Evolution much have been taking a long break from work when all these miraculous chemistry processes were going on. To just leave behind dogs and cats and chickens, where they did not also "evolve" like minkeys. And why minkeys, couldn't evolution have just left minkeys alone? I mean, wasn't life better swinging from trees and eating bananas? Now we got to put up with traffic and Christmas shopping and bills and liberals and all kinds of annoying things. Why minkeys? Couldn't have bears evolved into big hairy Chewbaccas and subjugated the animal kingdom.
I can't quite get how man could be so arrogant to think that he would be so special that evolution would single him out for higher intelligence, leaving behind alllllll other animals and mammals and reptiles and doggies and kitties and all that. It makes no sense really. Evolution makes no sense. The big picture of evolution cannot be reconciled with statistics, or science for that matter. It is all quite murky and we are asked to simply take it all on faith.....because it takes a lot of faith to believe it all. And God help you if you disagree with the science community. You have to stand back and let them refute their own theories, which they do regularly.
[Yes, it's the Byers soap opera again. This is what he wrote AFTER being told how creationist Kurt Wise had *explicitly* made a decision to reject reality and embrace mythology instead ...]
I have read some of Kurt wise stuff. He is a great creationist thinker and a important threat to evolution as being noted by opponents in their books.
In fact he had the most noted evolutionists before him in school and still not impressed.
Now and in the future he will have a great influence in teachings and excellent science credentials for adults and kids.
He is a agent of influence and change in the origin subjects and because he is right he is a important contributor to the advancement of knowledge in origin subjects in the modern world today.
He is a solid mind to back the truths of christianity by way of these subjects.
Evolution thumpers here should give serious reading and thought to his ideas. Then criticize him on any point or motivation or character.
[Hate mail to Richard Dawkins]
From John Doe:
Dawkins, you and your atheist friends cannot win. America WILL become a Christian Republic even if we have to write a whole new constitution. Millions of us are dedicated to this righteous cause. We will suceed. And then we will invade godless countries like "Great" Britain and kill all of your heathens. First we need to take care of things at home and in the Middle East but we will get around to Europe. You Godless freaks will die but then you will roast in hell for infinite time. Goodbye you loser.
What is the difference between atheism and Stalin?
Stalin killed innocent people and Atheism is TRYING ITS BEST TO KILL INNOCENT MINDS. So far it failed and it will be failing since it is not based on logic and reason but just an assumption jungle.
Its not the math but the presumptions that the problem.
Creationism today would not say the waters of the flood would cover Everest.
First because Everest like almost all or all mountains on earth today are the result of the continents splitting/crashing during the flood year.
These mts poped up only then creationism says.
Whatever mts existed before the flood would of been small most likely. so a lesser depth of water would be needed to cover the earth. We can presume this. I would add also the oceans would not need to be deep but rather were carved deeper during the commotion of the flood year.
Creationism teaches a different looking planet before the flood so you can't just prove us wrong by ignoring our claims.
Math is for kids but research and analysis is for thinking men.
In fact i think they find shells on Everest. cause it moved up with the shells from below.
Cheers
[Not even Atheism is free from "fundies"...]
There quite allot of atheists who do everything in their power to shield religion from criticism. They don't subscribe to religion and don't believe in religion for very much the same reasons most atheist do, but they've got an added interest:
They're snobs.
In the land of the blind, one-eye is king. Unlike the 'millitant atheists' or the 'antitheists' They want the majority of this world remain blinded by religion so they can relish at the these inferior sheep. These are the people that try to halt the enlightenement, preferably rewind it by the banner of 'respect' so they can be the scarce 'special' people to hold the truth.
These folks even try to convince other atheists by stating that criticising religion is not the way forward. Trying to push everyone back in the shackles of respecting silence and shutting up about it so the non-believers can smoothly be assimilated into the religious society.
It's all about ego. The viewer free-thinkers, the less people that are like them and the more extra-ordinary they can pretend to be.
The picture you sent is not a transitional animal. It is a complete animal. With evolution it is ones with partial heads bits of bones here and there the head in the wrong place. etc. These are the transitional ones. it is these that evolution doesn't have as evidence.
(Picture was posted two posts above the comment)
[This was Byers' summary dismissal of evidence for African hominid ancestry based upon nothing more than the refusal of said evidence to genuflect before his worthless mythology based doctrine ... oh, and enjoy the part where he claims, Supersport style, that DNA isn't responsible for morphological change, but somehow changes after the fact to reflect it ... all in his usual inimitable style, namely that of sub-crayon literacy]
Ok I listened to most of it and its old info to me. I think I've seen this guy everywhere with this genetic stuff. In fact I think he did one about connecting Australians natives with India. Another story.
Africa again. Nonsense. It was from Babel down the road from the mts of Ararat.
All these conclusions are based on the dna trail.
Well I dismiss the trail because I insist sudden changes in the body bring atomic alignment changes that change dna.
I insist marsupials are just minor adaptations from placentals. Different dna from the change incident and not a dna heritage of the marsupial creatures. just the change revamped everything.
So likewise in human black Africa. At least two peoples went to Africa, according to the bible, and they would of instantly had to change to the new envirorment. Instant black and other details and later details. so different people groups had to radically change and this would include dna change. Other peoples in the world only changed their dna to a lesser degree from the original from babel. The black African body is the most different from everyone else. many details.
These genetic ideas are based on presumptions of long slow process drift. If change is instant and flexible then the trail is false.
The best way to track mankinds movements is by language. The african langiages can probably be brought down to just a few original ones. The centre for diversity in languages is in Asia just about old babel. Thats the origin of mankinds migrations.
How is an amputee in need of healing? nothing is wrong with anything they have. They are simply missing a limb. If they had a limb that was crushed (such as the guy's leg that was healed in front of me) thats a different story.
[Hate mail to Richard Dawkins.]
It's sad that individuals have to push themselves up by bringing others down.Your take on Jews,the old testament and their relationship to God is a little troubling.Are you " Jealous" that Jews were the chosen people of God and not the " Gentiles" that you belong to.Are you upset that the Preists and Clergy of your sick faith or lack of , in your case have abused more children than any other faith.Does it bother you that more gays belong to your group than to mine! Atheism in your case is a disease.I hope they find you a cure soon.
