Who's lying now?

[deluxe]

What, one of us on the forum? Can you quote an example?

look it up yourself.
He went through the facts I had
1 life comes from life
2 a human comes from humans
3 there is design in the life we see.

It was not that far back , But I might be good for you to reread some of my posts.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

What, one of us on the forum? Can you quote an example?

look it up yourself.
He went through the facts I had
1 life comes from life
2 a human comes from humans
3 there is design in the life we see.

It was not that far back , But I might be good for you to reread some of my posts.

I notice you say, "look it up yourself," whenever a straightforward reading of the post in question will not result the conclusion you say it does.

Curious that.

 

[deluxe]

With regards to the Noah's ark fairy tale;

Are we supposed to believe that Kangaroos, Koalas, and all other native Australian marsupials hopped off the ark and were like 'Cheers for the ride Noah, we're now off to Australia' - without leaving a single trace of their species anywhere else along the way?

The same applies to all land vertebrates that live in specific geographical locations...

God brought the animals to Noah. And he shut the door. God also brought the animals to Adam to name. He created them.
He caused the flood. What part of all of this did God not have a part of. we are not told everything that he did, but he certainty had a lot to do with this. He could move them where he wanted to. He could also have animals breed to produce a variety sooner. Just like man breeds dogs to get a Poodle .

 

[Snufkin]

I notice you say, "look it up yourself," whenever a straightforward reading of the post in question will not result the conclusion you say it does.

Curious that.

I'm pretty sure this is self deception.

I'm going to be a massive jerk here and roleplay as deluxe who mysteriously starts telling the truth:

My understanding of the Bible revolves around a literal interpretation of the genesis story.
If such a fundamental part of the Bible is wrong, it severely challenges my whole world view and I don't want to consider that beacuse I have heavily and emotionally invested myself into Christianity, see cognitive dissonance.

I was probably brought up in a Christian environment and I was taught that Christianity is true long before I understood what critical thinking is.
Actually, I still don't really know what science or critical thinking is (have you noticed that I often show quotes from 'scientists' that don't actually refer to any physical evidence and I still think that it's science).

Can you blame me for ignoring what evolution accepting scientists say?

 

[deluxe]

I notice you say, "look it up yourself," whenever a straightforward reading of the post in question will not result the conclusion you say it does.

Curious that.

I am answering 3 or 4 people at a time, I am getting evidence for the questions asked, it takes work.
I'm asked silly questions that if anyone bothered to read the post would know already. So if you have a problem with someone say that my 3 facts were accurate, but they added their own to it. Go back and reread the posts.

 

[deluxe]

I'm pretty sure this is self deception.

I'm going to be a massive jerk here and roleplay as deluxe who mysteriously starts telling the truth:

Note taken, your massive jerk. ( I just couldn't help it) :shock:
This isn't about role playing this is about the evidence. Getting to the bottom of creation or non creation. And why the sceicntists even though they know they are wrong, still are lying to the people and themselves?
So is it they want to be deceived and just don't want to be accountable to God. Or is it that , they are really that dumb. Personally I don't think they are dumb, I would even say they are probably smarter the the average. So is that they are blinded?

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

I notice you say, "look it up yourself," whenever a straightforward reading of the post in question will not result the conclusion you say it does.

Curious that.

I am answering 3 or 4 people at a time, I am getting evidence for the questions asked, it takes work.
I'm asked silly questions that if anyone bothered to read the post would know already. So if you have a problem with someone say that my 3 facts were accurate, but they added their own to it. Go back and reread the posts.

So when you're asked about the bullshit you're telling us, you need to check for evidence? AFTER you present the bullshit? Good system.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

I notice you say, "look it up yourself," whenever a straightforward reading of the post in question will not result the conclusion you say it does.

Curious that.

I am answering 3 or 4 people at a time, I am getting evidence for the questions asked, it takes work.
I'm asked silly questions that if anyone bothered to read the post would know already. So if you have a problem with someone say that my 3 facts were accurate, but they added their own to it. Go back and reread the posts.

Except that you don't ever actually answer the questions.

For instance,

I read them all.

Nothing about dung.

Nothing about food storage.

Nothing about differing environmental requirements.

Nothing about parasites.

Nothing about wood-destroying animals.

And nothing about how "all subsequent life on the planet has regenerated in only the last 4381 years."

None of these things have been explained, in any detail, at any time, by your person. If you think you have addressed them, you're wrong.

And I'll add to that list how aquatic plant life could have survived being removed from sunlight for a year.

Here's a tip, go through them and answer them one at a time. And don't dodge the question like you did with the water level the first time: it doesn't matter if the water was at sea level+30000 ft or sea level+17000 ft, the effect on light would be indistinguishable and so it doesn't actually address the problem. It wouldn't even matter if it was at sea level+1000ft, all non-microbial plant life would still die.

 

[deluxe]

With regards to the Noah's ark fairy tale;

Another assumption.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

With regards to the Noah's ark fairy tale;

Another assumption.

It's not an assumption, we can prove it. We have proved it. You only have to read what the effect of 17000 ft of water would have on the earth's crust, to realize that this has never in earth's history occurred.

Not to mention that we know, that's right know, that Egyptian, Indus, and Chinese civilization is older than this supposed event.

 

[deluxe]

None of these things have been explained, in any detail, at any time, by your person. If you think you have addressed them, you're wrong.

And I'll add to that list how aquatic plant life could have survived being removed from sunlight for a year.

Here's a tip, go through them and answer them one at a time. And don't dodge the question like you did with the water level the first time: it doesn't matter if the water was at sea level+30000 ft or sea level+17000 ft, the effect on light would be indistinguishable and so it doesn't actually address the problem. It wouldn't even matter if it was at sea level+1000ft, all non-microbial plant life would still die.

Not so with seeds, and some plants would survive. And because all of this was God intervention, so what did he do and didn't?
And after all because there is a lot of evidence for the flood, how can you even question what he did do or didn't? Because of the flood , all those other questions are answered. God intervened.

 

[australopithecus]

Take that up with Daniel Criswell, Ph.D.
You already know i have no confidence in a scientists that believes in 'evoluiton'. Their theories are biased, and full of assumptions and conjecture. Which I have already shown and some have agreed with that.

How about I take it up with you? Answer the question, if you can.

We know you can't but try anyway.

Actually I know quite a bit out the science.

 

[Laurens]

With regards to the Noah's ark fairy tale;

Are we supposed to believe that Kangaroos, Koalas, and all other native Australian marsupials hopped off the ark and were like 'Cheers for the ride Noah, we're now off to Australia' - without leaving a single trace of their species anywhere else along the way?

The same applies to all land vertebrates that live in specific geographical locations...

God brought the animals to Noah. And he shut the door. God also brought the animals to Adam to name. He created them.
He caused the flood. What part of all of this did God not have a part of. we are not told everything that he did, but he certainty had a lot to do with this. He could move them where he wanted to. He could also have animals breed to produce a variety sooner. Just like man breeds dogs to get a Poodle .

You mean Adam named all the millions and millions of animals himself? Current estimates of the total number of species on Earth range from 5 to 30 million (http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/58.html)

If we go somewhere in between these two figures and say that there are 17 million species it would have taken Adam around half a year to name them - and that is if he named one every second... But considering he would probably have to take time to eat, sleep and think about each name, it would have taken him a lot longer no doubt...

The Bible gives no indication that Adam spent such a long time carrying out the task...

So any tough question we throw at you, you can answer 'God did that by magic'... Nice...

And you wonder why people are laughing at you...

 

[Prolescum]

I wonder what was on Adam's mind when he named the great tit.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

It's not an assumption, we can prove it. We have proved it. You only have to read what the effect of 17000 ft of water would have on the earth's crust, to realize that this has never in earth's history occurred.

Not to mention that we know, that's right know, that Egyptian, Indus, and Chinese civilization is older than this supposed event.

We had this conversation just yesterday, didn't we? A basic knowledge of history and science lets you in on the little secret that the whole flood story didn't never happen. Notice that deluxe basically ignored all of the criticism besides some copypasta that we KNOW she doesn't even understand and probably barely skimmed over.

I keep noticing that deluxe keeps posting the copypasta, but her own contributions are written on a very low education level and lack any complexity or signs that she actually understands anything she's saying. It is like if you ask me about a movie a saw and I responded by posting the Wikipedia plot synopsis. Then when you ask me if I liked it, I posted a couple of positive reviews and then said "It was a good moive, I lieked it a whole lott." Based that conversation, you couldn't really tell if I had even seen the movie in the first place, let alone if I understood it or had formed a real opinion about it. That's mostly what deluxe is doing in this thread.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

None of these things have been explained, in any detail, at any time, by your person. If you think you have addressed them, you're wrong.

And I'll add to that list how aquatic plant life could have survived being removed from sunlight for a year.

Here's a tip, go through them and answer them one at a time. And don't dodge the question like you did with the water level the first time: it doesn't matter if the water was at sea level+30000 ft or sea level+17000 ft, the effect on light would be indistinguishable and so it doesn't actually address the problem. It wouldn't even matter if it was at sea level+1000ft, all non-microbial plant life would still die.

Not so with seeds, and some plants would survive.

Not at those pressures they wouldn't. And most marine plant-life does not produce seeds, so your non rebuttal fails twice.

And because all of this was God intervention, so what did he do and didn't?

Evidence for this statement.

And after all because there is a lot of evidence for the flood,

Provide even one shred of evidence. Evidence, by the way, and since you're probably not familiar with its definition, is a fact which points exclusively to one conclusion, to the exclusion of all other possible conclusions.

how can you even question what he did do or didn't? Because of the flood , all those other questions are answered. God intervened.

Because he doesn't exist, and the flood did not happen. And we can prove that it did not happen. Your time-line isn't even out of recorded history. This was during the second Egyptian dynasty. Jericho was already a thriving metropolis. The Rigveda had already be composed. The Chinese made this:

 

[Thomas Doubting]

@Rex

I think it is rather obvious that it all boils down to the default answer.

God brought the animals to Noah. And he shut the door. God also brought the animals to Adam to name. He created them.
He caused the flood. What part of all of this did God not have a part of. we are not told everything that he did, but he certainty had a lot to do with this. He could move them where he wanted to. He could also have animals breed to produce a variety sooner. Just like man breeds dogs to get a Poodle .

To save deluxe some time i will simply apply it to your questions.

Nothing about dung.

Ok that's a rather tough one if i really have to think about it.. but in the end i am sure that "GODDIDIT".

Nothing about food storage.

Well since the bible says nothing about that, it is obvious that "GODDIDIT".

Nothing about differing environmental requirements.

C'mon man, don't bother me with the irrelevant nonsense, If lions can live of straw, it is not so surprising that "GODDIDIT".

Nothing about parasites.

There were enough animals to take care of them properly, because "GODDIDIT" that they all can survive and remain fertile and healthy, even though stuffed into the little ship like into a Japanese metro.

Nothing about wood-destroying animals.

I guess you mean wood eating animals as well as woodpeckers and beavers and co.. "GODDIDIT" that they eat "magically replenishing" straw for that one year and don't touch the arc, no biggie, i mean we're talking about the guy who poofed the entire universe into existence out of nothing.

And nothing about how "all subsequent life on the planet has regenerated in only the last 4381 years."

Now you're just being silly, of course "GODDIDIT".

None of these things have been explained, in any detail, at any time, by your person. If you think you have addressed them, you're wrong.

Of course he did, he said that we don't know so "GODDIDIT".

And I'll add to that list how aquatic plant life could have survived being removed from sunlight for a year.

D'oh, God created the plants before the Sun, of course "GODDIDIT" that they stay alive during "that bit" of flood.

Here's a tip, go through them and answer them one at a time. And don't dodge the question like you did with the water level the first time: it doesn't matter if the water was at sea level+30000 ft or sea level+17000 ft, the effect on light would be indistinguishable and so it doesn't actually address the problem. It wouldn't even matter if it was at sea level+1000ft, all non-microbial plant life would still die.

Seriously mate, you don't really expect him to explain anything better than the horse crappola that he takes from the creationist shites?

With regards to the Noah's ark fairy tale;

Are we supposed to believe that Kangaroos, Koalas, and all other native Australian marsupials hopped off the ark and were like 'Cheers for the ride Noah, we're now off to Australia' - without leaving a single trace of their species anywhere else along the way?

The same applies to all land vertebrates that live in specific geographical locations...

you gotta have faith man.. :lol:

 

[Anachronous Rex]

Seriously mate, you don't really expect him to explain anything better than the horse crappola that he takes from the creationist shites?

Naw, at this point I'm just gunning for a tacit admission that none of this is logical.

I actually have no problem with religious people if they agree to:
A) Admit that it is irrational, and
B) Don't spread it around.

 

[deluxe]

Not to mention that we know, that's right know, that Egyptian, Indus, and Chinese civilization is older than this supposed event.

Hundreds of tribal legends and ancient accounts from Egypt, Babylon, and the Indus confirm the account of Noah's Flood from the book of Genesis. These tribes and ancient cultures obviously had no interest in copying a Hebrew account about a global Flood, therefore, all of these accounts must have been independently derived by the various people-groups' ancestors from the eight who were on the vessel that endured the global Flood. When the eight reproduced and spread out across the Middle East, and soon thereafter, much of the world (as some were demonstrably excellent mariners), the memory of the worldwide Flood was retained, and to a not-surprisingly great degree.
http://www.nwcreation.net/articles/ancientsknew.html

 

[Thomas Doubting]

Not to mention that we know, that's right know, that Egyptian, Indus, and Chinese civilization is older than this supposed event.

Hundreds of tribal legends and ancient accounts from Egypt, Babylon, and the Indus confirm the account of Noah's Flood from the book of Genesis. These tribes and ancient cultures obviously had no interest in copying a Hebrew account about a global Flood, therefore, all of these accounts must have been independently derived by the various people-groups' ancestors from the eight who were on the vessel that endured the global Flood. When the eight reproduced and spread out across the Middle East, and soon thereafter, much of the world (as some were demonstrably excellent mariners), the memory of the worldwide Flood was retained, and to a not-surprisingly great degree.
http://www.nwcreation.net/articles/ancientsknew.html

Show More Hide

{TEXT}

Whoever wrote that should go on a lengthy vacation.. in some good mental house.