Arkansas inflicts child abuse on its school children

[ecco]

Doesn’t matter what you think of yourself in social construct, if you have male anatomy you will always be a male, female anatomy you are a female. This won’t change, science confirms this. When a person dies no matter what they’ve done to their body when an autopsy is done they can tell if you were a male or female.

Perhaps it's time you learned a few things.

Ambiguous genitalia | Children's Wisconsin

Ambiguous genitalia
When a child's gender is in question at birth, because genitals may not appear clearly male or female, the child is said to have ambiguous genitalia. Ambiguous genitalia can be a traumatizing experience for parents.​

Everything is not black/white good/evil yes/no. That kind of thinking only works when blindly accepting scripture. The real world is far more complex.

I suppose that's one of the things that leads people to religion: Simplicity.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Perhaps it's time you learned a few things.

Ambiguous genitalia | Children's Wisconsin

Ambiguous genitalia
When a child's gender is in question at birth, because genitals may not appear clearly male or female, the child is said to have ambiguous genitalia. Ambiguous genitalia can be a traumatizing experience for parents.​

Everything is not black/white good/evil yes/no. That kind of thinking only works when blindly accepting scripture. The real world is far more complex.

I suppose that's one of the things that leads people to religion: Simplicity.

Not only that but some people are born without limbs. Next and get real bro, not even close

 

[ElishaElijah]

Okay. Then all you have to do is demonstrate that a creator exists and exactly what relationship that creator prefers.

Also, the fact that I write these lengthy explanations and responses to you and you can only manage to respond to the odd paragraph just demonstrates to me that you are noy debating in good faith, and not considering opposing views. If your views were accurate and well substantiated, I would expect more effort from you.

I already demonstrated the Creator exists and the problem is really that simple in terms of image and relationship. You already agreed on the image part.

 

[ecco]

Typical preprogrammed blind acceptance apologetics:
Good: GodDidIt
Bad: Adam's fault

You, of course, ignore that your God knew A&E would disobey Him long before He ever created them. More preprogrammed blind acceptance.

The problem is your view of God, your own blindness and ignoring what lengths God went to redeem us.

You failed to address the fact that your omniscient God knew A&E would disobey Him long before He ever created them. Your God intentionally caused sin and then, according to your beliefs, wants to redeem us.

Did the Great Flood redeem anyone? Or did it just kill off all the men, women, children, and fetuses of all but seven humans. Oh, yeah, He also killed off all the lions and tigers and puppies and kittens. That's not redemption, that's a fumbling attempt to try to rectify the problem He caused.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I already demonstrated the Creator exists and the problem is really that simple in terms of image and relationship. You already agreed on the image part.

Woww!! You did?!?! That is some amazing news. Considering that no one has done that in the history of the Earth that is ground breaking.

When and where did you do this? Could you please post a link?

 

[ecco]

Perhaps it's time you learned a few things.

Ambiguous genitalia | Children's Wisconsin
Ambiguous genitalia
When a child's gender is in question at birth, because genitals may not appear clearly male or female, the child is said to have ambiguous genitalia. Ambiguous genitalia can be a traumatizing experience for parents.

Everything is not black/white good/evil yes/no. That kind of thinking only works when blindly accepting scripture. The real world is far more complex.

I suppose that's one of the things that leads people to religion: Simplicity.

Not only that but some people are born without limbs. Next and get real bro, not even close

I do understand the real world. You are the one living in an oversimplified fantasy world. You wrote...

...if you have male anatomy you will always be a male, female anatomy you are a female.

Why do you now try to evade what you wrote? If you want to stick by that assertion, then please tell us what "sex" a person is who is born with Ambiguous genitalia.

I would ask why your God makes children with Ambiguous genitalia, but you would duck by saying it isn't God's doing, it is all because Adam sinned.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I already demonstrated the Creator exists

I must have missed it. Care to post it again?

and the problem is really that simple in terms of image and relationship. You already agreed on the image part.

Did I? I must have missed that, too.

 

[ElishaElijah]

You failed to address the fact that your omniscient God knew A&E would disobey Him long before He ever created them. Your God intentionally caused sin and then, according to your beliefs, wants to redeem us.

Did the Great Flood redeem anyone? Or did it just kill off all the men, women, children, and fetuses of all but seven humans. Oh, yeah, He also killed off all the lions and tigers and puppies and kittens. That's not redemption, that's a fumbling attempt to try to rectify the problem He caused.

Trying to discredit God without knowing Him and lacking wisdom or understanding is causing you to make ignorant comments about God.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Woww!! You did?!?! That is some amazing news. Considering that no one has done that in the history of the Earth that is ground breaking.

When and where did you do this? Could you please post a link?

Summary of Scientific Evidence for Creation (Part I & II)

 

[Subduction Zone]

Summary of Scientific Evidence for Creation (Part I & II)

LOL! A lying source where people that work there have to swear that they will not follow the scientific method. Meaning that none of their work qualifies as being scientific.

Now I can understand how they fooled you. You do not even know what scientific evidence is.

Scientific evidence is evidence that serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis. Such evidence is expected to be empirical evidence and interpretable in accordance with scientific method.

That is from Wikipedia, but I can find many other scientific sites that use the same definition. It is the definition that scientists themselves.

And you can prove that ICR has no scientific evidence yourself:

What reasonable test could possibly refute creationism, based upon the claims and merits of creationism? And it cannot be based upon a false depiction of other ideas

If you cannot name the reasonable test that they have you have admitted that they do not have any scientific evidence.
EDIT: I went to the article and all that I could find were claims. Oh and a terribly wrong version of the laws of thermodynamics. In other words pure fail. Why did I expect anything else?

 

[Jose Fly]

@ImmortalFlame just dropping you a note to say.....well done! While you're certainly not likely to have any effect on the views of the fundamentalist you're interacting with, you are still doing a great job fighting the good fight.

 

[ElishaElijah]

LOL! A lying source where people that work there have to swear that they will not follow the scientific method. Meaning that none of their work qualifies as being scientific.

Now I can understand how they fooled you. You do not even know what scientific evidence is.

Scientific evidence is evidence that serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis. Such evidence is expected to be empirical evidence and interpretable in accordance with scientific method.

That is from Wikipedia, but I can find many other scientific sites that use the same definition. It is the definition that scientists themselves.

And you can prove that ICR has no scientific evidence yourself:

What reasonable test could possibly refute creationism, based upon the claims and merits of creationism? And it cannot be based upon a false depiction of other ideas

If you cannot name the reasonable test that they have you have admitted that they do not have any scientific evidence.
EDIT: I went to the article and all that I could find were claims. Oh and a terribly wrong version of the laws of thermodynamics. In other words pure fail. Why did I expect anything else?

You will have to list the “lies” and the things that you disagree with in the article and your alternate facts. You haven’t done that, all you’ve done is share formulas and procedures which don’t amount to anything.

 

[ElishaElijah]

I must have missed it. Care to post it again?


Did I? I must have missed that, too.

I thought the problem is an identity crisis

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I thought the problem is an identity crisis

That's... not really a response to anything I asked.

 

[ElishaElijah]

I do understand the real world. You are the one living in an oversimplified fantasy world. You wrote...

Why do you now try to evade what you wrote? If you want to stick by that assertion, then please tell us what "sex" a person is who is born with Ambiguous genitalia.

I would ask why your God makes children with Ambiguous genitalia, but you would duck by saying it isn't God's doing, it is all because Adam sinned.

We weren’t talking about that and hilarious you brought it up, start your own discussion on that and haven’t even looked into it. Ambiguous genitalia is an anomaly and it’s the go to nowadays in discussions. That’s you can go talk to someone else, not interested.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You will have to list the “lies” and the things that you disagree with in the article and your alternate facts. You haven’t done that, all you’ve done is share formulas and procedures which don’t amount to anything.

No, sorry, anyone at all familiar with your source knows that it is a lying source. You were lazy. You did not even quote anything from it. Pointing out that it is a known lying source is enough to refute it.

And you refuted it as a source of scientific evidence. I provided you with the definition of scientific evidence. You could not come up with a test to refute your myth. That means that by definition there is no scientific evidence for creationism. All that I could see is that they demonstrated that they did not understand the laws of thermodynamics.

Bring up specific claims and I will tell you how they are wrong. But remember, they are a lying source. There is no doubt about that. It is written for the scientifically illiterate. They are the only people ignorant enough to swallow their lies. It will only be embarrassing for you if you do quote and link specific claims of theirs.

By the way, why didn't you ask how we know that they require their workers to shun the scientific method?

 

[ElishaElijah]

No, sorry, anyone at all familiar with your source knows that it is a lying source. You were lazy. You did not even quote anything from it. Pointing out that it is a known lying source is enough to refute it.

And you refuted it as a source of scientific evidence. I provided you with the definition of scientific evidence. You could not come up with a test to refute your myth. That means that by definition there is no scientific evidence for creationism. All that I could see is that they demonstrated that they did not understand the laws of thermodynamics.

Bring up specific claims and I will tell you how they are wrong. But remember, they are a lying source. There is no doubt about that. It is written for the scientifically illiterate. They are the only people ignorant enough to swallow their lies. It will only be embarrassing for you if you do quote and link specific claims of theirs.

By the way, why didn't you ask how we know that they require their workers to shun the scientific method?

I will assume you couldn’t find anything.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Don’t feel like having a discussion with you, you don’t understand Scripture and continue to talk ignorantly about God and His Creation. Catch you
later

What do you think I have said about God? I've not even mentioned scripture.

 

[ElishaElijah]

What do you think I have said about God? I've not even mentioned scripture.

Wrong person sorry

 

[ElishaElijah]

I do understand the real world. You are the one living in an oversimplified fantasy world. You wrote...

Why do you now try to evade what you wrote? If you want to stick by that assertion, then please tell us what "sex" a person is who is born with Ambiguous genitalia.

I would ask why your God makes children with Ambiguous genitalia, but you would duck by saying it isn't God's doing, it is all because Adam sinned.

Don’t feel like having a discussion with you, you don’t understand Scripture and continue to talk ignorantly about God and His Creation. Catch you
later.