• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

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

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Please use science to answer the following questions. One, you will use assumptions. Two, you will not be using science.
Why? Because you do not even have a valid answer to the origin of anything. Just circular reasoning.
You need to define "assumptions" properly. I can't play your silly game if you refuse to properly define the terms that you are using. You may be using the word in an irrational manner, that would justify tossing that demand of yours.

And I need to remind you that you have no understanding of what science is. You run away from offers of a discussion about the topic. That only tells everyone that you know that you are wrong.

So define "assumption" as you are using the term. I will gladly define "science" since that is the term that I am using. But since I have made my demand many many times you need to go first.
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
You need to define "assumptions" properly. I can't play your silly game if you refuse to properly define the terms that you are using. You may be using the word in an irrational manner, that would justify tossing that demand of yours.

And I need to remind you that you have no understanding of what science is. You run away from offers of a discussion about the topic. That only tells everyone that you know that you are wrong.

So define "assumption" as you are using the term. I will gladly define "science" since that is the term that I am using. But since I have made my demand many many times you need to go first.
Look in a dictionary.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Look in a dictionary.
No, you used the term you need to define it properly. I doubt if you can. You need to explain what you mean by that term. You appear to be just copying parts of arguments that you did not understand.

If someone demanded that I define a term that I used in a debate I would have no problem doing so. You need to do that same.
 

Dan From Smithville

For the World Is Hollow and I Have Touched the Sky
Staff member
Premium Member
Nothing but strange speculations against the facts.
There should be millions of chains of missing links. All are missing. Why?
They should be finding missing links every day. Why not?
There should be partially developed organs and systems in all individual creations that exist today and have eve existed. There are none. Why?
The odds against the above 2 facts are so vast that it is more than the odds against a very large specific amino acid sequence coming into being by natural processes.
This is nonsense. You don't understand what a transitional form means.

Transitional forms are found. Regularly.

Again with the partially developed organs nonsense and what other systems? If nothing else tells us that you don't understand, this one post of yours would do it.
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
This is nonsense. You don't understand what a transitional form means.

Transitional forms are found. Regularly.

Again with the partially developed organs nonsense and what other systems? If nothing else tells us that you don't understand, this one post of yours would do it.
Please show one chain of missing links.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Please show one chain of missing links.
When you use improper terminology people do not need to answer you.

The concept of "missing links" is inaccurate. The proper term is "transitional species" or "transitional fossils" and almost all of them can be shown to be transitional. You really have no clue as to what you are arguing about.

And that is a pity. Anyone here would help you with your understanding if you demonstrated a genuine desire to learn.
 

Dan From Smithville

For the World Is Hollow and I Have Touched the Sky
Staff member
Premium Member
When you use improper terminology people do not need to answer you.

The concept of "missing links" is inaccurate. The proper term is "transitional species" or "transitional fossils" and almost all of them can be shown to be transitional. You really have no clue as to what you are arguing about.

And that is a pity. Anyone here would help you with your understanding if you demonstrated a genuine desire to learn.
People don't know what to answer, because they do not know what is being asked or why it is relevant?

That and scientific theories are not refuted by challenging random people on the internet.

That is a creationist golden oldie.
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
When you use improper terminology people do not need to answer you.

The concept of "missing links" is inaccurate. The proper term is "transitional species" or "transitional fossils" and almost all of them can be shown to be transitional. You really have no clue as to what you are arguing about.

And that is a pity. Anyone here would help you with your understanding if you demonstrated a genuine desire to learn.
And where all of the millions of missing chains of many missing links in the fossil record.
The odds against evolution based on just this fact is a very large number.
I estimate it to be greater than 10^5 million to 1.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
And where all of the millions of missing chains of many missing links in the fossil record.
The odds against evolution based on just this fact is a very large number.
I estimate it to be greater than 10^5 million to 1.
Why on Earth does that affect evolution at all.

By the way, the missing postal addresses of ancient Hebrews is in the millions. That odds against the Christian God based on just this fact is a very large number. I estimate it to be greater than 10^bazillion to 1.
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Show your math
Christ fulfilled over 400 prophecies from the OT about the Messiah.
And amazingly the Israelites are back in Israel just in time for the last days.
Not only that but the Jewish people have in general kept their religious and ethnic identity throughout all these centuries.
 

McBell

Admiral Obvious
Christ fulfilled over 400 prophecies from the OT about the Messiah.
And amazingly the Israelites are back in Israel just in time for the last days.
Not only that but the Jewish people have in general kept their religious and ethnic identity throughout all these centuries.
So you got no math to show?
Then how did you make estimates?
You do know that estimates is math, right?

Now since you are trying to change the subject, we shall write off your math claim as a big steaming pile of bovine feces.
 

McBell

Admiral Obvious
Christ fulfilled over 400 prophecies from the OT about the Messiah.
Sweet.
List them

And amazingly the Israelites are back in Israel just in time for the last days.
You got a date for the end day?
come on, you being a math whiz and all, what is your predicted end day?

Not only that but the Jewish people have in general kept their religious and ethnic identity throughout all these centuries.
What does this have to do with the price of beans in New Delhi?
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Sweet.
List them


You got a date for the end day?
come on, you being a math whiz and all, what is your predicted end day?


What does this have to do with the price of beans in New Delhi?
The time for the last days is circa our time.
That comes from the fact that there is about 6000 years since the creation of the world.
And of course, the delusion for those that believe evolution is an exact prediction with exact details and timing.
 
Top