none of what you have written above is anything more than sour grapes and timewasting. It proves that you are incapable of even reading other views to ensure that your own world view is actually valid.
All of the references cited in the book are from published authors, many of whom are not even...
this is a question from a lack of concentration on whats going on around an individual. I already done that...you havent been reading or studying anything that has been said on this topic...you just keep spitting out recorded answers that are ignorant of dilemmas those recorded answers do not...
i dont think you appreciate the point...Piltown man, Java man, acheulean axe, homo erectus is not an ancestor of neandertals nor modern man but a contemporary of both, the "dingo took my baby" case...
these arent about a specific fraud...they show what you guys claim secularists do not...
i dont think you appreciate the point...Piltown man, Java man, acheulean axe, homo erectus is not an ancestor of neandertals nor modern man, the "dingo took my baby" case...this isnt about a specific fraud...its about exactly what you guys claim secularists do not do...enter into scientific...
that is a ridiculous argument...criminals have proven that crime pays despite the legal system aiming to sanction crime, it continues today nevertheless. It does not matter whether or not you see that as scientific or mathematical odds, your argument is mute. Some of the richest and most...
I do not agree with that last statement...there is no such thing as bad science. Science isnt good or bad, it is simply a tool for learning. It does not matter whether or not what is learned is right or wrong...that is merely a matter of opinion based on numbers.
If one intends to state...
I dont think that the aim is to use it against science...my personal view is that these kinds of revelations highlight that it is not the science that is the problem, its the way in which it is used and interpreted.
I recall the Lindy Chamberlain "dingo took my baby case" a lot of the legal...
Subduction honestly...grow some brains. I cited references from authoritative sources...the dates are scholarly accepted dates even from publications such as wikipedia and britannica.
You need to actually read references provided to you...it is very clear from quite a number of responses from...
no, we are not talking about two different things...you are the one who went down that pathway not me. I have not once wavered from my original statement...the writings of Isaiah (the prophet) whilst dated to a century or so before Christ, clearly represent the writings of a man who lived prior...
That is true, however, in the case of the Piltown Man it wasnt honest was it?
Nor was it honest that Dubois withheld the Java man from close examination for almost 30 years so that he could ensure that his earlier "missing link" fossil claim would not be challenged under scrutiny of the latter...
First 5 books of the bible are the oldest - Torah(Hebrew)/Pentateuch(Greek) recorded by Moses more than 1000 years B.C
Second oldest - Nevi'im which would have been collated sometime during the Maccabean period of 400 years to Christ as we know that Christ read from the Isaiah scrolls in the...
The Piltdown Man was a paleoanthropological fraud in which bone fragments were presented as the fossilised remains of a previously unknown early human. Although there were doubts about its authenticity virtually from the beginning (in 1912), the remains were still broadly accepted for many...
oh turn it up...
Encylopedia Britannica
Isaiah (Hebrew prophet)
Isaiah prophet after whom the biblical Book of Isaiah is named (only some of the first 39 chapters are attributed to him), a significant contributor to Jewish and Christian traditions. His call to prophecy about 742 bce coincided...
Really,
then please explain how it is that the Apostle Peter, a far greater authority on the bible than St Agustine, stated the following regarding the casting of Satan and his angels out of heaven, the world wide flood, destruction of Sodom and Gomorah:
2 Peter 2
4For if God did not spare...
dog barking up trees...there is nothing more ridiculous than an individual with almost no theological knowledge trying to refute biblical history! Your claim about creationism being modern was utter nonesense...i moved on from that because its just plain stupid!
If you cannot conceptualise how...
you know its funny how individuals who have terrible biblical history and really havent studied theology at all think that they are on a winning ticket with the above...not realising that they have dog barked up an empty tree!
Read my post again...carefully! Ill give you a hint...is the king...
sorry but im going to call you out on that one!
I dont care what some redneck nutters in the US might believe, the fact is, such a belief isnt supported biblically, by early church fathers 2 millenia ago...or the ancient Greeks!
We can easily prove that the Isaiah scrolls for example have...
are you attempting to agree with me, becaused that is exactly what my point was...that it is modern attempts at refuting YEC because of the rise of naturalism that resulted in the spread of flat earthism rumours as a reason why the traditional biblical view must be wrong!
The ancient Greeks for...
you really believe that claim given that it has already been shown by scholars that flat earthism is a modern 19th and 20th century claim?
We have proof that neither ancient greek nor early christian scholars beleived in flat earthism. How is it you dont know these facts? Atheism is so easily...