Mitochondrial Eve is proven to be wife of Adam

[Subduction Zone]

He wrote "I did" about reading the file EveAdam4.pdf in the thread. But there is "Views: 0". So, nobody has read the file. Is he liar?

Nope, If that is your original pdf that you posted I read it. That indicates that the counter does not work on this site, not that he is a liar.

EDIT: You can check this out yourself. Click on your link and see if it counts that as a "view".

Second Edit: Just in case you do not believe me, even though I do not remember the name of the author I can tell you a couple things about him since I Google searched him after I opened the PDF. He has a masters degree, not a PhD, in physics, not in biology. He is from a Baltic country. I did not click on the link again since it still says "0 views" but once you read this and respond to me I will do so and link the sources on the author that I found.

 

[Valjean]

Your phrasing "have no idea god's existence" is ambiguous at best. There is as much evidence for Allah or the Christian God or Shiva as there is evidence for unicorns or Thor. The evidence is that gods are the creations of man's imaginings.

True. I was quoting, and responding to, Qwestfortruth's post.
True, they appear to be human creations. There is reason for skepticism.

I do.

And you're one of them that does. But, from a strictly logical standpoint, God can't definitively be said not to exist.

 

[ecco]

True. I was quoting, and responding to, Qwestfortruth's post.

Oh, OK.

True, they appear to be human creations.

That's hedging. Why?

And you're one of them that does. But, from a strictly logical standpoint, God can't definitively be said not to exist.

Can you, from a strictly logical standpoint, rule out the existence of psychic snowflakes? I can.

Can you, from a strictly logical standpoint, rule out the existence of an actual Santa Claus? I can.

Can you, from a strictly logical standpoint, rule out the existence of an actual Wicked Witch of the West? A Mad Hatter? Thor? Horton? If so, why do you cling to the possibility of an actual god? The vestiges of cultural indoctrination?

 

[SomeRandom]

Don't be a damn liar. You are not the liar!!!

EveAdam4.pdf
File size:
393.8 KB
Views:
0

Dude did you even read it? I just repeated what it said. Also I'm on my phone, so I don't know how that affects the formatting on this page.
Isn't falsely accusing someone supposed to be a sin?

 

[questfortruth]

Dude did you even read it? I just repeated what it said. Also I'm on my phone, so I don't know how that affects the formatting on this page.
Isn't falsely accusing someone supposed to be a sin?

Many people are damn liars. It is a fact. The suspicion is present, because my ideas were not discussed.

 

[questfortruth]

......
I cannot prove that unicorns or the Flying Spaghetti Monster don't exist, ...

Are you retarded? Not you are not retarded!!! Then are you malicious liar? Perhaps. Because everyone knows, that fictions things are made up by humans, so they do not exist.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Details are in the file. Enjoy!

By the way, the atheists confess, that they have no idea of God's existence, but they say, that He does not exist. Why do they formulate this by "God is dead", and not by "God is probably dead"?

Sorry, where's the "proof" that mitochondrial Eve is the wife of Adam?

 

[Valjean]

Are you retarded? Not you are not retarded!!! Then are you malicious liar? Perhaps. Because everyone knows, that fictions things are made up by humans, so they do not exist.

So why do you exclude God from this list of fictitious characters? If you can dismiss unicorns as fabrications, why not dismiss any other made up entity?
There is no more evidence for God than there is for unicorns. How are they not in the same category?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Are you retarded? Not you are not retarded!!! Then are you malicious liar? Perhaps. Because everyone knows, that fictions things are made up by humans, so they do not exist.

Um... should I try to explain the irony here, or does someone more gentle want to have a go?

edit: ninjaed by @Valjean

 

[ecco]

RE:

questfortruth said: ↑
Because everyone knows, that fictions things are made up by humans, so they do not exist.​

Um... should I try to explain the irony here, or does someone more gentle want to have a go?

edit: ninjaed by @Valjean

It really shouldn't/doesn't need explaining. However, I doubt the author would understand or accept any explanations.

 

[questfortruth]

Sorry, where's the "proof" that mitochondrial Eve is the wife of Adam?

Please open the file. Do not lie, that it is not a proof. A proof can be wrong, but it is still a proof, if author says it. Please demonstrate, that proof is wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please open the file. Do not lie, that it is not a proof. A proof can be wrong, but it is still a proof, if author says it. Please demonstrate, that proof is wrong.

People have opened that file. It is idiotic nonsense. Why do you give that any credibility at all?

 

[questfortruth]

So why do you exclude God from this list of fictitious characters? If you can dismiss unicorns as fabrications, why not dismiss any other made up entity?
There is no more evidence for God than there is for unicorns. How are they not in the same category?

Let us move step by step to consensus. First step is simple: do you agree, that fictitious things (e.g., Flying Spaghetti Monster) do no exist?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let us move step by step to consensus. First step is simple: do you agree, that fictitious things (e.g., Flying Spaghetti Monster) do no exist?

Agreed. In all likelihood fictitious things like the Flying Spaghetti Monster and your God do not exist. What's next?

 

[Valjean]

Let us move step by step to consensus. First step is simple: do you agree, that fictitious things (e.g., Flying Spaghetti Monster) do no exist?

I believe the FSM does not exist (though I enjoy the concept).
1. There is no empirical evidence of him.
2. His "invention" can be traced to a specific article by a specific author.

 

[questfortruth]

I believe the FSM does not exist (though I enjoy the concept).
1. There is no empirical evidence of him.
2. His "invention" can be traced to a specific article by a specific author.

Well, let us make clear: non-fictional things can exist, can't they? The FSM is announced as fiction, so it is fictional. The God of the Bible is not announced fictional, so He is non-fictional. Do you copy?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, let us make clear: non-fictional things can exist, can't they? The FSM is announced as fiction, so it is fictional. The God of the Bible is not announced fictional, so He is non-fictional. Do you copy?

This is extremely poor logic. There are those that will "announce" the FSM as real. Does that make him real? There are many that will announce the God of the Bible as fictional, does that make him fictitious?

By your "logic" I could argue that the FSM is real and that your God is not.

 

[questfortruth]

This is extremely poor logic. There are those that will "announce" the FSM as real. Does that make him real? There are many that will announce the God of the Bible as fictional, does that make him fictitious?

By your "logic" I could argue that the FSM is real and that your God is not.

The FSM was announced fictional by the original author, wasn't it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The FSM was announced fictional by the original author, wasn't it?

No.

 

[Subduction Zone]