About fossils -- would you say this is true?

[exchemist]

And he will not buy this record, it is scratched.

No, he vill not buy zees tobacconist, eet is scratched.

 

[Jose Fly]

You'll never go wrong quoting Monty Python.

 

[Apostle John]

No, he vill not buy zees tobacconist, eet is scratched.

No I was quite happy to walk passed Satan rolling a cigarette. I do wonder if you’d have submitted though. Thank God for the edit feature. I’m sure I typed that right initiall. Lol

 

[SkepticThinker]

It says in the Bible God is light. Will He not therefore be a supernatural energy, the likes an atheist has to disprove the existence of. If you follow NASA etc they say the world is made up of 5% atoms with the rest, they say, being made up of dark energy/matter. You and they cannot explain or demonstrate that nor tell us how atoms are made or where they come from.

I only have anecdotal and personal experience of the power of the supernatural, better than theories but difficult to prove to the doubters so I won’t bother.

This is a deflection that doesn't address the content of my post.

I guess what you're telling me is that you don't have any evidence for your claims?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

God can manipulate electronics in my experience. The illusion of atoms existing would be a cinch manipulating light measured by spectrophotometry or any other electronic gadgetry.

No but neither do you for real, there’s no touchable evidence only optical which we know can be illusory.

You might not even be responding to this forum. After all, this forum could be illusory. There's no touchable evidence of this forum, only optical.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It says in the Bible God is light. Will He not therefore be a supernatural energy, the likes an atheist has to disprove the existence of.

I will disprove your god as soon as you disprove the undetectable dragon that lives in my garage.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The burden of proof is always on the atheist.

No.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So yet another creationist shows up, makes a bunch of unsubstantiated assertions and bizarre claims, ignores questions, ignores information, and mostly just preaches about "it's in the Bible".

Same thing we've seen....what....about a million times before?

Seeing their bizarre and unethical behaviors in defending their beliefs, I always wonder if they think they're being effective and/or persuasive. Is their internal dialog that they're doing great? Given their other delusions, I'm betting it is.

I'm not even certain if he's serious tbh.
Might as well be a Poe.

I'm telling myself he is. I feel like it would be insulting to my fellow humans to think otherwise.

 

[Jose Fly]

I'm not even certain if he's serious tbh.
Might as well be a Poe.

I'm telling myself he is. I feel like it would be insulting to my fellow humans to think otherwise.

Well, if he's being truthful about hearing voices and such, that's a reason to just step away. I have a personal policy against debating people with mental health issues.

Of course if he's a Poe, then stepping away is also justified.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Well, if he's being truthful about hearing voices and such, that's a reason to just step away. I have a personal policy against debating people with mental health issues.

Of course if he's a Poe, then stepping away is also justified.

True.

I must admit, the hearing voices part is somewhat worrisome. And it might explain a few things.

 

[exchemist]

No I was quite happy to walk passed Satan rolling a cigarette. I do wonder if you’d have submitted though. Thank God for the edit feature. I’m sure I typed that right initiall. Lol

Touché!

Subtext seems to be: "Don't you try to outweird me! I get weirder things than you in my breakfast cereal."

 

[nPeace]

Have you just been for a power nap? My external voice usually tells me to ignore you when on your other forum. Last Saturday the angel gave me that hymn title to give you but I haven’t heard anything since. I think the voice is tired of telling me to ignore you. I will get tired soon.

Why ignore the voice? I'm no angel, but hey, I'd have company. Lol.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

We have already discussed that the 'days' of creation do not mean 24-hour literal days, yet some might say each day was 24 hours and insist on that.

But nobody has made a compelling argument that the days of creation were not understood and taught as literal days, and there is good reason to believe they were. I don't suppose it's worth making that case again, but if you'd like me to, I can and will.

Also the 7th 'day' is not described as having a close.

So God is still resting? That explains a lot.

More I've been looking seems they say humans are genetically closer to chimpanzees than neanderthals.

That's incorrect.

How about one scientist saying that the universe came from nothing while another says it came from something?

Those are not assumptions. Those are competing hypotheses, and members of all camps understand that. None assume or claim that they have the answer. They are expressing a preference or intuition.

It’s all assumption and guesswork.

No, it's not, but why would that be a problem for you? Your creationist worldview is that. You believe by faith. Faith is guessing.

Just by looking at certain rock formations, the layers suggest they were formed during a worldwide flood.

That would be impossible, even if one had occurred.

No one can say how uniform the conditions were if there was a cataclysmic worldwide flood between 4500-5000 years ago. In fact no one can prove there wasn’t.

The possibility of a global flood has been ruled out. Not for you, perhaps, but you haven't done the homework necessary to understand the arguments, and you are burdened with a faith-based confirmation bias that decides what you will and will not see.

Genesis provides the only information.

Genesis provides no information except what its authors seemed to believe.

The evolution theory about us coming from mud then monkeys involves so much change it’s difficult to believe.

Yet it happened.

You and anyone can only assume and guess what it was like back then. That is an irrefutable fact the sane minded can agree on.

No, it's not a fact. It's another error.

The Bible hasn’t been disproved by anyone anywhere.

Much if not most of Genesis and Exodus have been falsified.

Life from mud that has consciousness.

It's inspiring to think: "We're made of star-stuff. We are a way for the cosmos to know itself." - Carl Sagan

no one has witnessed the whole life span of a star. It’s total guesswork.

Just for people who don't understand the science.

God made the planets and orbits.

Gods were not involved in the formation of the solar system.

Stars and ‘planets’ outside of our solar system are just light not atoms.

Another error.

That’s not theory but Biblical fact.

There is no such thing as biblical fact. Nothing is known to be true because it is written in the Bible except that several somebody's wrote it.

What can you understand by looking through a lens when it’s a known fact human eyes can experience optical illusions.

It seems like your religious beliefs have had a significant impact on your ability to learn, know, and understand. Half the posts you write are about what is unknown to you, all of which you assume is unknowable or unknown to others.

It says in the Bible God is light. Will He not therefore be a supernatural energy, the likes an atheist has to disprove the existence of.

I've done all of the refutation that claim needs or deserves. Here it is:

You and they cannot explain or demonstrate that nor tell us how atoms are made or where they come from.

Yes, I can, all the way back to T=0. YOU can't.

 

[YoursTrue]

Until now we have discussed mostly geology and I don't know of good YouTube geology 101 courses that would answer your questions.
But if your interest is in human evolution, I know just the source you are looking for:
https://www.youtube.com/c/GutsickGibbon

Erica is an evolutionary anthropologist and I think she is good at explaining. Look for the shorter videos first in which she explains why certain YEC arguments don't hold water.

I was just looking at this explanation of water under the earth. It does not have to be hot, it can be cold. How does the temperature of ocean water vary? : Ocean Exploration Facts: NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research
@Subduction Zone might take issue with this. Or perhaps tell me I don't understand it.

 

[YoursTrue]

Also, you ask a student to explain what they learned in class, and they tell you, go take the class.
You're like "What. Why should I take a class, when I won't be able to teach anyone what I learned in class!!!"

Right. If someone claims to know something, or understand it, surely he should be able to explain something about it including the background of the terms he's using.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I was just looking at this explanation of water under the earth. It does not have to be hot, it can be cold. How does the temperature of ocean water vary? : Ocean Exploration Facts: NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research
@Subduction Zone might take issue with this. Or perhaps tell me I don't understand it.

LMAPO! The ocean? Really? The ocean is just a skin of water on the Earth. The "water" that you mentioned is in the mantle.

Please when you have no clue ask questions politely. Do not pretend that you have the answer.

And yes, it is laughably clear that you did not understand the article that you tried to use. It does not help you in any way at all.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Right. If someone claims to know something, or understand it, surely he should be able to explain something about it including the background of the terms he's using.

That is very true. But some knowledge comes with cost. I need a sign that I am dealing with an honest interlocutor. When someone appears not to be they lose the right to make demands of others. Do you understand this? A proper debate relies upon honesty from both sides.

Learning what qualifies as evidence and why would be a very good start on your part. It would also make you a better debater.

 

[YoursTrue]

That is very true. But some knowledge comes with cost. I need a sign that I am dealing with an honest interlocutor. When someone appears not to be they lose the right to make demands of others. Do you understand this? A proper debate relies upon honesty from both sides.

Learning what qualifies as evidence and why would be a very good start on your part. It would also make you a better debater.

So many of the things you have said have been demeaning and nasty, I don't believe that's indicative of a good debate. I know this is a debate board and some people will debate things even against their own interests or reasoning, but that's the way it is. So have a good one.

 

[YoursTrue]

That is very true. But some knowledge comes with cost. I need a sign that I am dealing with an honest interlocutor. When someone appears not to be they lose the right to make demands of others. Do you understand this? A proper debate relies upon honesty from both sides.

Learning what qualifies as evidence and why would be a very good start on your part. It would also make you a better debater.

I have told you many times that I understand what is considered as evidence. I actually understand the theory. I say this in general, I do not knowall the terms and specifics. But I understand it.
I no longer believe anything and everything that scholars and/or scientists say. That does not mean though that I will not take a vaccination because science devised it. I know some will argue against the validity of vaccinations. I do not. The theory of evolultion, however, is not the same as figuring a vaccine for certain diseases.

 

[YoursTrue]

LMAPO! The ocean? Really? The ocean is just a skin of water on the Earth. The "water" that you mentioned is in the mantle.

Please when you have no clue ask questions politely. Do not pretend that you have the answer.

And yes, it is laughably clear that you did not understand the article that you tried to use. It does not help you in any way at all.

Didn't you say that if the waters during the Flood came from underground the persons or boar etc. would sizzle up?