Evolution My ToE

[SkepticThinker]

Such as..?

The ones I keep pointing out.

The main one being your belief that the onus is on everyone else to prove you wrong, when you've provided no evidence to indicate that you are right.

 

[SkepticThinker]

History abounds with spirits actually. That refutes those who claim there are none, not me.


Look up the meaning of 'foretold' or prophesy.

In your head doesn't count.



Don't try to offer family differences in opinion as some excuse for unbelief and blasphemy.

In His word.


More blasphemy based on ignorance and denial.

We do know no man was involved, only God.

You don't seem to understand that non-believers of your specific religion don't recognize "blasphemy" (i.e. questioning as a sin. So pointing it out is a waste of time.

Has the evidence been posted yet?

On and on. Endlessly.

 

[SkepticThinker]

No. The spirit beings of history are offered as reality. Your claim that history is all a joke except for what you declare as valid is laughable.


The time involved here is here. The time involved in any decay seen or deduced from light spectra is experienced/observed here. Only here. Never there. Your desire to equate time in the far universe with here is unsupported.
They show it id from God and His word. If you seriously want to call God in error, well, add that to your long and growing blaspheme list.
Jesus was God's word and He promised that He would pipe down His words to believers. Your baseless doubting has no currency.

Who cares about blasphemy? Only people who follow your specific religion. I will call into error anything I think is in error, whether somebody says it comes from some god, or not.

I care about believing in true things. I care about convincing evidence.
You seem to think we have to believe every single claim any human has ever made in our entire history on this earth. Which of course, is folly.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Nor is there any evidence man came from animals. None at all.

Humans are animals.

One way to test that is for you to post evidence.

You better get on it then.
We've been waiting for months.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I'm sure you are not going to get any response to this. Facts are ignored. They don't mind responding to statements... even if they are facts, but data... No way.

This is completely false. It is creationists that flee before data or twist and manipulate it out of all proportion and explanatory value.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I was thinking of a situation where someone said to a person they were conversing with, "Give me a leaf."
A child in earshot heard, and excitedly exclaimed, "I'll get you one."
Runs into the house, returns and drops this "leaf" in the person's hand.
If the person says to the child, "This is not a leaf." The child will sincerely claim, "But it is a leaf. You asked for a leaf, and I gave you a leaf."
Ceramic

They sincerely believe it is evidence. That is why they believe.

When I was a child, I knew what a leaf was. You did not?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Who cares about blasphemy? Only people who follow your specific religion. I will call into error anything I think is in error, whether somebody says it comes from some god, or not.

I care about believing in true things. I care about convincing evidence.
You seem to think we have to believe every single claim any human has ever made in our entire history on this earth. Which of course, is folly.

He is concluding your actions are blasphemy and compiling a list? And he is judging you unfit based on that? So, he has become God. That is not part of Christianity.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The ones I keep pointing out.

The main one being your belief that the onus is on everyone else to prove you wrong, when you've provided no evidence to indicate that you are right.

And he never will.

 

[SkepticThinker]

He is concluding your actions are blasphemy and compiling a list? And he is judging you unfit based on that? So, he has become God. That is not part of Christianity.

Something like that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm sure you are not going to get any response to this. Facts are ignored. They don't mind responding to statements... even if they are facts, but data... No way.

What facts? dad has never presented any. He did link an article, but he read parts that were clearly not meant to be taken literally as if they were what historians believed. What "facts" do you have? You are describing your behavior and dad's in your attack. Not those on the side of science.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I was thinking of a situation where someone said to a person they were conversing with, "Give me a leaf."
A child in earshot heard, and excitedly exclaimed, "I'll get you one."
Runs into the house, returns and drops this "leaf" in the person's hand.
If the person says to the child, "This is not a leaf." The child will sincerely claim, "But it is a leaf. You asked for a leaf, and I gave you a leaf."
Ceramic

They sincerely believe it is evidence. That is why they believe.

Please, you have no clue as to what and what is not evidence and refuse to even discuss the topic. Once again you are describing your actions here. Not the actions of those that oppose you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

When I was a child, I knew what a leaf was. You did not?

Ironically he is describing his flaws. One of my offers repeated ad nauseum is to discuss the nature of evidence since creationists either have no clue as to what is and what is not evidence or are actively lying. They appear to be afraid to learn what evidence is because then they would not even have plausible deniability to themselves.

 

[dad]

The offer is always out there to discuss the nature of evidence. Once you learn what is and what is not evidence then you can demand it.

Please do not mention the word evidence when you provide none.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please do not mention the word evidence when you provide none.

dad, I have provided evidence. You even discussed it. You simply do not understand the concept. So once more we need to invoke dad rule number one.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I've been thinking about this post for a while, now....I've accomplished much of what I needed to get done.
There's a lot here to reply to; I appreciate your thoughtful points.

You know, however, that I presented more Flood evidence, than just a Chinese character. Much more....

If archaeologists recently unearthed an ancient document that spoke of a man, who survived a cataclysmic flood by building a boat that was basically a huge box.... '120 cubits by 120 cubits square, 90 cubits high,' as described in the Gilgamesh myth... there'd be no doubt that it was a fable.

But, if they found the story described a boat with modern ratios, they would think the story was fact.
Now, you and I and everyone else knows the story has a supernatural quality to it, events that reveal Divine intervention, in many aspects.

Let's consider one: the reason behind Jehovah God bringing it on. Genesis 6:1-4 gives a few details...sons of God taking women, "all whom they chose". (And the common thread between the ancient Greek, Roman, Norse, Hindu, etc., myths actually highlight it. Common threads in stories, is where truth is found.)

If you will please bear with me, I'm going to go off-topic twice, somewhat... but it's all related....

Is there evidence for the supernatural? Talk to the numerous posters on here (RF), like the Ragin Pagan, or others, who regularly converse with their spirit guides or gods, whatever they call them. I've spoken with Jose Fly, It Aint Necessarily So, & a few others....they stop short of calling these ones, 'delusional'.

Have you ever read the link I've posted before, on Lincoln's ghost - Wikipedia ...

Here's an excerpt:
"Perhaps the most famous incident was in 1942 when Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands allegedly heard footsteps outside her White House bedroom and answered a knock on the door, only to see Lincoln in frock coat and top hat standing in front of her (she promptly fainted).[13]

British Prime Minister Winston Churchill loved to retire late, take a long, hot bath while drinking a Scotch, and smoke a cigar and relax. There is an account that on this occasion, he climbed out of the bath and naked, but for his cigar, walked into the adjoining bedroom. He was startled to see Lincoln standing by the fireplace in the room, leaning on the mantle. Churchill, always quick on the uptake, simply took his cigar out of his mouth, tapped the ash off the end of his cigar and said "Good evening, Mr. President. You seem to have me at a disadvantage." Lincoln smiled softly, as if laughing and disappeared. Churchill smiled in embarrassment.[14]

President Lyndon Johnson supposedly encountered Lincoln's apparition, during a moment of great distress. President Johnson reportedly spoke to Lincoln, asking him how he handled an unpopular war (Lincoln was President during the American Civil War, which was extremely unpopular and Johnson was dealing with massive backlash over the Vietnam War). Lincoln reportedly replied "don't go to the theater."

Lincoln's ghost was reportedly seen outside of the White House as well. In Loudonville, New York, Lincoln's ghost was said to haunt a house that was owned by a woman who was present at Ford's Theatre when Lincoln was shot by John Wilkes Booth. Other Lincoln hauntings included his grave in Springfield, Illinois, a portrait of Mary Todd Lincoln and a phantom train on nights in April along the same path his funeral train followed from Washington, D.C. to Springfield.[15]

The last sighting of Lincoln's ghost was in the early 1980s, when Tony Savoy, White House operations foreman, came into the White House and saw Lincoln sitting in a chair at the top of some stairs.[13]"

Were these people, "delusional"?

Now Earthwide, multiply these experiences, by a million!

Yes, granted, many (most, even) are faked. But all? No way.

Why do incidents like this happen? I've heard the explanation, "people want to believe their dead loved ones are living (in another realm) ." Was Abraham Lincoln, a "loved one" of Queen Wilhelmina? Or Winston Churchill?

And if these dead loved ones are genuine, and it's what people "want to believe"... why is there so much fear involved in cultures that promote ancestor worship? (It touches so many cultures, in some way or another!) I mean, wouldn't your dead G-parents, if they were really living, still love you? Why be afraid of them?

Because here's the kicker: the dead are dead, they "know nothing", according to the Bible. Ecclesiastes 9:5; Psalms 146:3-4

The Resurrection is the future hope for the dead, nothing else.

Saying "the dead don't really die; they go to live somewhere else," is simply reinforcing the first lie, when the serpent told Eve, "You positively will not die"! And this idea is seen worldwide, promoted by almost every religion!

Aided by these "Ghost" stories. But these ghosts can't really be our dead loved ones, because they "know nothing"; they're dead!

Who are these imposters, trying to mislead everyone?
They are "the angels that sinned" (2 Peter 2:4), who "did not stay in their own domain, but abandoned their proper dwelling place" (Jude 1:6)....those "sons of God" of Genesis 6.

More on this later, I've got to go.
I hope you're willing to reason on this. It explains why God had to destroy the animals, too. (Please read Matthew 8:28-34.)

I read the Scriptures about these things, and I see the hurting and confusion that people are experiencing worldwide...I understand who is behind all this mess! (Just a little while longer.)

The Bible explains a lot, if people would be open minded & try to understand it.

I appreciate the time you took in responding to my post and the thought you employed in your response here. Unfortunately, all up have rendered here only serves to support my claim of the anti-intellectual position of creationism. Examples of failed support of belief with, weak and poor evidence, contrived analogies, legends, beliefs and meaningless speculation in place of methodical observation, considered and logical review of evidence followed by rational conclusions is not support of intellectual pursuit.

The evidence you offered in support of the flood in Genesis was soundly refuted and in no way approached addressing existing evidence that demonstrates there was no flood.

Stories of Gilgamesh have been discovered. They have been determined to be older than Genesis. That some later authors adopted that tale as the basis of the story of Noah is obvious. That there are changes in details of the boat reflect on the knowledge of a writer and do not elevate the claims of the story to fact. This was previously explained to you, but I see you have chosen to disregard that.s

Ghost stories? The only thing that can be said is that people claim to have seen things. People claim to have witnessed many things that remain unexplained. That some want this to be explained in a specific way reflects on their belief and not on any evidence that what they believe is correct. Maybe they are not spirits of the dead or demons, but images from other dimensions. It is no less an explanation and with equal evidence to support it. The most intellectual thing that can be said is that the stories are interesting, but there is nothing available to determine anything about what they are or what they mean.

I am not sure why you think this supports an intellectual position for believers, when it is the opposite.

What you have succeeded in doing here is to reaffirm my position that literalist deny intelligent evaluation of evidence based on established principles and prior work in favor of dogma, belief and the unsupported declarations of religious doctrines.

It would be no issue if you were simply stating this is what you believe and leave it at that. But believers are not happy with their belief and demand everyone believe it too. Coming out and claiming that what you believe is really the facts of life and what has been determined in science and successfully applied is all lies, requires more than repetition and buttercups.

 

[dad]

Genetic similarities and differences.

Modern genetics likely started post flood. Obviously that has little to do with origins.

Comparative anatomy The succession of fossils.

If man and MOST animals on earth, and most plants also, by the way, could not leave remains such as fossil remains, then any succession in the few creatures that could leave remains in that record is anything BUT a record of life on earth as a whole!

Biogeography - e.g. the presence of marsupials and the absence of indigenous placental mammals in Australia; the presence of lemurs exclusively in Madagascar; the presence of australopithecines exclusively in Africa combined with our anatomical and genetic similarities to the African apes

The continents likely separated after the time of Babel, and the nature change. It is expected that they were all on the same supercontinent, including man. This is just a misreading of the evidence on your part.

. Embryology. Observed examples of speciation. Observed examples of differential reproductive success between genetic variants.

NOTHING to do with you being relatives to bananas and flatworms! Yes, God gave us the ability to adapt/evolve. Yes, in this nature that exists still, albeit the processes are now very slow. Nothing to do with TOE!

 

[dad]

dad, I have provided evidence. .

Link? Hint: Offering observations of anything seen in the solar system and area only tell us what time is like here.

 

[dad]

I knew I could get you to see the point. Now if we could only get you to take your own advice.

I do know the difference between modern commercial fiction and Scripture.

 

[dad]

You don't seem to understand that non-believers of your specific religion don't recognize "blasphemy" (i.e. questioning as a sin. So pointing it out is a waste of time.

There should be some respect for major world beliefs on a religious forum.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Link? Hint: Offering observations of anything seen in the solar system and area only tell us what time is like here.

No, that is your claim and it was refuted by the evidence that I presented. You had no answer to that evidence besides hand waving. You need a valid explanation.