Another irrefutable proof that God created all things using mathematical induction. And a proof that The Bible is the word of God.

[Mock Turtle]

Obviously you cannot refute it .

Refute what? I'm not a scientist (ex mechanical engineer who worked in the aerospace industry) so I cannot do that kind of refuting. Neither are you however. I can recognise idiotic thinking though, and when so many fields of knowledge tend to confirm the reality we experience, rather than that gleaned from some old text, then I can make a sensible judgement at least.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Refute what? I'm not a scientist (ex mechanical engineer who worked in the aerospace industry) so I cannot do that kind of refuting. Neither are you however. I can recognise idiotic thinking though, and when so many fields of knowledge tend to confirm the reality we experience, rather than that gleaned from some old text, then I can make a sensible judgement at least.

I have actually studied this is great detail. You only have to be sane to see the insanity of AOS.

 

[McBell]

I have actually studied this is great detail. You only have to be sane to see the insanity of AOS.

If this is true it speaks volumes.
You either royally suck at studying or you are being most dishonest.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

If this is true it speaks volumes.
You either royally suck at studying or you are being most dishonest.

wow that was a lot of science

2 proofs,
End Proof
QED

 

[McBell]

wow that was a lot of science

2 proofs,
End Proof
QED

Sadly it has more science than you have been able to muster up

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Sadly it has more science than you have been able to muster up

What was the first living creature?
Did it have DNA, RNA, proteins or some mix?

 

[McBell]

What was the first living creature?
Did it have DNA, RNA, proteins or some mix?

If you throw a cat out a car window does it become kitty liter?
When you choke a smurf, what color does it turn?
Why do they call it a TV set when you only get one?
Why isn't phonetic spelled the way it sounds?
How did a fool and his money get together?

 

[Mock Turtle]

I have actually studied this is great detail. You only have to be sane to see the insanity of AOS.

Studying the Bible is not science. Are you telling me that you have conquered every field of scientific endeavour and can refute the consensus in most of these relevant fields that support the ages of the universe as being approximately 13.8 billion years, and the Earth being about 4.6 billion years old? 6000 years opposed to these is a rather big difference as to likely errors. Just do a turnaround and suppose you are wrong - life is so much simpler then when it all makes better sense. And I bet the people who actually wrote whatever is in the Bible are horrified (if they are somewhere, which they aren't) as to what it has produced in this day and age, and never intentionally meaning to cause such stupidity in so many people.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Studying the Bible is not science. Are you telling me that you have conquered every field of scientific endeavour and can refute the consensus in most of these relevant fields that support the ages of the universe as being approximately 13.8 billion years, and the Earth being about 4.6 billion years old? 6000 years opposed to these is a rather big difference as to likely errors. Just do a turnaround and suppose you are wrong - life is so much simpler then when it all makes better sense. And I bet the people who actually wrote whatever is in the Bible are horrified (if they are somewhere, which they aren't) as to what it has produced in this day and age, and never intentionally meaning to cause such stupidity in so many people.

I know quite a bit and enough to have refuted this garbage that you call science.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I know quite a bit and enough to have refuted this garbage that you call science.

Ten optimistic frubals sent your way. I must admit, apart from the flat-earther recently seen, I believe you are probably one of the most delusional people we have had here, in my shortish stint, apart from the few who thought they were Jesus reincarnated and such. Although a few apparently do support your beliefs as to Adam and Eve, the Ark, and the rest of literal belief in the Bible.

Like to give us your early education as to such things, given that I find it hard to believe any apparently intelligent person would dismiss so much evidence without having had some indoctrination into such a belief system. Fortunately I never had such, so was free to think for myself.

And to think you apparently had a career based on this science garbage.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Ten optimistic frubals sent your way. I must admit, apart from the flat-earther recently seen, I believe you are probably one of the most delusional people we have had here, in my shortish stint, apart from the few who thought they were Jesus reincarnated and such. Although a few apparently do support your beliefs as to Adam and Eve, the Ark, and the rest of literal belief in the Bible.

Like to give us your early education as to such things, given that I find it hard to believe any apparently intelligent person would dismiss so much evidence without having had some indoctrination into such a belief system. Fortunately I never had such, so was free to think for myself.

And to think you apparently had a career based on this science garbage.

You are probably one of the most deceived person in the whole world. You have been indoctrinated into delusion.

Where did the laws of nature come from?

Where did all matter come from? Where did antimatter?

Where did all energy come from?

Where did all the protons come from? neutrons? photons? neutrinos? All the quarks? Gluons? Muons? All the anti-particles?

Where did the gravitation force come from? The strong force? The weak force? The electromagnetic force?

 

[Mock Turtle]

You are probably one of the most deceived person in the whole world. You have been indoctrinated into delusion.

Where did the laws of nature come from?

Where did all matter come from? Where did antimatter?

Where did all energy come from?

Where did all the protons come from? neutrons? photons? neutrinos? All the quarks? Gluons? Muons? All the anti-particles?

Where did the gravitation force come from? The strong force? The weak force? The electromagnetic force?

When are you going to give up on all this fruitless questioning - leading to nowhere? Why not answer some of our questions? Just answer where you got these delusional beliefs from - and don't say you never had a religious education since I doubt any would believe you. It does tend to stick you know - all that Bible bashing as kids (bashed into one, that is).

 

[F1fan]

Evolution is not science at all, just a false religion

See, you can't get science right, so you are wrong yet again. And you offer no alternative to evolution that is science, so you lose.

Stop the constant false accusations.

Yet you accuse scientists of being frauds. And you offer no evidence. Scientists show their work, you don't, so scientists win, you lose.

what was the first living creature? Please give a real answer, the official answer if you want.

Science offers us answers, you don't.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

See, you can't get science right, so you are wrong yet again. And you offer no alternative to evolution that is science, so you lose.


Yet you accuse scientists of being frauds. And you offer no evidence. Scientists show their work, you don't, so scientists win, you lose.

Science offers us answers, you don't.

But evolution is anti-science. It offers suffering fro all the world.

 

[F1fan]

But evolution is anti-science. It offers suffering fro all the world.

Wrong yet again. If you can't get science right then don't make false statements about it. You are dealing with an educated group and your bias is not accepted as valid. The only way to show that evolution is wrong is by using science, but you aren't a scientist, so your belief is irrelevant. We don't care.

If you can't get science right, you've lost the debate.

 

[Mock Turtle]

But evolution is anti-science. It offers suffering fro all the world.

Hardly, since the TOE simply explains how humans and other life got to be where we are now. Suffering is simply an aspect of reality. Ever looked at Buddhism - it's a lot more friendly and reasonable than some Abrahamic beliefs?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Hardly, since the TOE simply explains how humans and other life got to be where we are now. Suffering is simply an aspect of reality. Ever looked at Buddhism - it's a lot more friendly and reasonable that some Abrahamic beliefs?

Ans reincarnation is verifiably false.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please refute if you can.
2 irrefutable proofs and yet you cannot refute either.

All the facts, all logic, all probability, statistics, math, physics, chemistry, biology, logic, everything in existence refutes the false theory of evolution and billions of years.

And no one has met the simple challenge I gave.

I already refuted your "induction" proof. You used a false premise. You have no response to that refutation.

It appears that you still do not understand the burden of proof. When a premise is challenged that alone is enough to refute an argument. I not only challenged your premise. I went beyond that to explain why it was wrong.

Your induction argument relied upon "irreducible complexity" a concept that was only claimed. Just like you only claim things and think that is "proof". There never was evidence for it. And then worse yet the examples that Behe chose were shown to be wrong. They were not irreducibly complex.

So where is your irreducible complexity? Without it your argument is refuted. That is all that it took to refute that weak weak argument.


You also confirmed that I refuted it because I asked you more than once to define in your own words what a premise is. You could not even do that. Running away is a tacit admission that you are wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Obviously you cannot refute it .

Almost anyone can and has refuted your arguments. Your inability to understand the refutation does not change that fact. When you run away from defending those weak weak arguments that does not mean that others have not refuted them.

No one is buying your BS. Does it really make you feel better to keep repeating your claims about an argument that anyone that cared to could and did easily refute?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ans reincarnation is verifiably false.

Really? Now I do not believe in reincarnation, but I have never made that mistake.

How is reincarnation verifiably false? Oh wait, because it says so in the Bibbly? That is not a valid refutation.