The Big Bang Theory is dead.

[SavedByTheLord]

Indeed I do understand Matt 7 .. and the rest of the Sermon on the Mount Matt 5-7 .. clearly you missed the boat though .. har har.. Where is your response to the words of our lord .. clearly it is you who has no answer .. to your own salvation .. on which you stand on a foundation of Sand .. no assumptions Tells us friend on what your salvation is based .. calling out "Jesus Jesus" that old Free pass ideology of Idol Martin not going to cut it friend .. a false assumption .. in the land of no assumptions.

I told you the 30,000 yr Dinosaur link was a fraud .. You would never use Carbon Dating for such a thing to begin with .. but if you did .. would need to be in conjunction with other dating methods .. as every dinosaur bone measured that is over 75,000 years in age will register as 75,000 years in age .. as that is the limit of the test.

For this reason most labs will only do 50,000 years back as when you get to this end of the scale the test if very wonky due how the test works.

So the lab giving a result of 50,000 years .. for every bone .. is what we would expect from a 100 million year old bone.
When you see a result like 30,000 .. this means there was some small contaminant - as is commonly the case. So wrong test method .. wrong application ... and pure lack of understanding of how this dating method works ..

why you making assumptions about the first living creature .. you are supposed to know defacto what this creature was for your Propability of Humans existing calculation .. a calculation you have never given us, a different hill on which your position was crucified as was based on a plethora of false assumption .. yet you keep returning to the same vomit .. asking same question over and over .. as if you didn't already know the answer .. in some really moronic circular fallacy of deception and deflection.

Tell us what was the first living creature Teacher .. show us how that fits into your calculation of how we got here

As I said you do not understand the word of God or the gospel of Christ. You have fallen for the works-based false gospels of the unsaved.

Well how do they know that they are C-14 dead if they ASSUME that they are without testing.
Do the testing.

This too is impossible with evolution but nit with God.

Figure 6-58, The genetic code is translated by means of two adaptors that act one after another - Molecular Biology of the Cell - NCBI Bookshelf

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[McBell]

As I said you do not understand the word of God or the gospel of Christ. You have fallen for the works-based false gospels of the unsaved.

Says the person who does not even know what version of the Bible they use

 

[Sargonski]

As I said you do not understand the word of God or the gospel of Christ. You have fallen for the works-based false gospels of the unsaved.

Well how do they know that they are C-14 dead if they ASSUME that they are without testing.
Do the testing.

This too is impossible with evolution but nit with God.

Figure 6-58, The genetic code is translated by means of two adaptors that act one after another - Molecular Biology of the Cell - NCBI Bookshelf

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

What words of our lord from the Sermon on the Mount did you figure were misunderstood .. going on about how those who believe in the works based salvation formulation of Jesus are "unsaved" ? Your claim that the majority of Christianity .. and all of Christianity prior to Luther are "Unsaved" is quite the claim .. vastly unsupported as usual .. and vastly understudied in C-14 .. what on earth is C-14 dead .. what is this loon bird you are throwing out ? You don't know when the thing died with C-14 .. because it only goes back 70,000 years .. so if the animal died 100 million years ago or 500,000 years ago .. the C-14 test is going to read 70,000 years. .. your conclusions on the basis of the C-14 data you presented were vastly flawed due to this lack of understanding C-14 date telling you 30,000 years .. is not the age of the dinosaur bone .. thats all you need to understand other than if your claim was actually true .. and Dino was 30,000 years ago this would crucify your "Earth is 6000 years old" so you are crucified on both fronts.

You havn't the faintest idea what is possible with evolution or with God .. you are making all kinds of claims you can't back up friend.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

What words of our lord from the Sermon on the Mount did you figure were misunderstood .. going on about how those who believe in the works based salvation formulation of Jesus are "unsaved" ? Your claim that the majority of Christianity .. and all of Christianity prior to Luther are "Unsaved" is quite the claim .. vastly unsupported as usual .. and vastly understudied in C-14 .. what on earth is C-14 dead .. what is this loon bird you are throwing out ? You don't know when the thing died with C-14 .. because it only goes back 70,000 years .. so if the animal died 100 million years ago or 500,000 years ago .. the C-14 test is going to read 70,000 years. .. your conclusions on the basis of the C-14 data you presented were vastly flawed due to this lack of understanding C-14 date telling you 30,000 years .. is not the age of the dinosaur bone .. thats all you need to understand other than if your claim was actually true .. and Dino was 30,000 years ago this would crucify your "Earth is 6000 years old" so you are crucified on both fronts.

You havn't the faintest idea what is possible with evolution or with God .. you are making all kinds of claims you can't back up friend.

But many of these fossils are not C-14 dead.
Date all things supposedly over 5000 years old and look that the results. It would be easy.
What are they hiding?
It is circular reasoning to say that since we assume them to be very old, the they are C-14 dead.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But many of these fossils are not C-14 dead.
Date all things supposedly over 5000 years old and look that the results. It would be easy.
What are they hiding?
It is circular reasoning to say that since we assume them to be very old, the they are C-14 dead.

Why would they throw away their money that way? You really have no clue. Even the creationist attempts show that the Earth is very old. Much too old for C14 to be of any use.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

But many of these fossils are not C-14 dead.

What does C-14 dead even mean?

 

[Subduction Zone]

What does C-14 dead even mean?

I think that I know. After about 50,000 years there is so little C14 left that the only dates that one will get will be within the margin of error for infinitely old. It is effectively dead. That is not totally accurate, but it is close enough for the layman.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

I think that I know. After about 50,000 years there is so little C14 left that the only dates that one will get will be within the margin of error for infinitely old. It is effectively dead. That is not totally accurate, but it is close enough for the layman.

But that is circular reasoning in a nutshell. They assume that they are C-14 dead when maybe they are not.
It might yield some astounding results if all things supposedly older than 5000 years old be C-14 dated.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But that is circular reasoning in a nutshell. They assume that they are C-14 dead when maybe they are not.
It might yield some astounding results if all things supposedly older than 5000 years old be C-14 dated.

Nope. It is not an assumption. Why would you think that? If you explain why you think that then I will explain how we know that after 50,000 years C14 is pretty much worthless. There is no "circular reasoning" used by my side. By you, probably. Almost certainly.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Nope. It is not an assumption. Why would you think that? If you explain why you think that then I will explain how we know that after 50,000 years C14 is pretty much worthless. There is no "circular reasoning" used by my side. By you, probably. Almost certainly.

It is pure circular reasoning.
It would overturn all origin science if a lot of things supposedly over 5000 years old are not C-14 dead.
It would not even cost much or take that much time.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is pure circular reasoning.
It would overturn all origin science if a lot of things supposedly over 5000 years old are not C-14 dead.
It would not even cost much or take that much time.

Nope. You do not even know what circular reasoning is. Please quit bearing false witness. If you want answers you have to get serious and be honest.

Can you be honest?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Nope. You do not even know what circular reasoning is. Please quit bearing false witness. If you want answers you have to get serious and be honest.

Can you be honest?

So, evolution and billions of years cannot stand up against the evidence, so it must avoid it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So, evolution and billions of years cannot stand up against the evidence, so it must avoid it.

I asked if you could be honest and you demonstrated that you cannot be. That was not what was said or what was implied.

If you want answers you have to be honest.

Why are you so afraid if you really believe the nonsense that you spew? A person without fear could easily be honest.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

I asked if you could be honest and you demonstrated that you cannot be. That was not what was said or what was implied.

If you want answers you have to be honest.

Why are you so afraid if you really believe the nonsense that you spew? A person without fear could easily be honest.

Debate 101 technique by you do to your circular reasoning.

What was the first living creature and what features did it have?
How was it able to produce an offspring?
What caused the Big Bang and where did the fine tuned orderly laws of nature come from?
What existed before it?

 

[gnostic]

What was the first living creature and what features did it have?
How was it able to produce an offspring?

you still don’t understand that the word ”creature” only pertained to animals, not to other organisms, such as plants, algae, fungi, or not to any microorganisms such protists, bacteria and archaea.

But creature is not well-defined word, as it could mean extraterrestrial aliens or mythological monsters.

The earliest animals flourished as early as the Ediacaran (635 - 539 May), the last period of Neoproterozoic Era, so before the Cambrian period (so before the Cambrian Explosion). They were sessile invertebrate animals, similar to the today’s marine sponges.

Older than the Ediacaran animals were orders, classes, families & species of the domain Bacteria and of the domain Archaea.

There are primitive species of Bacteria that existed in microfossils In microbial mats of fossilised stromatolites, dating ss far back as 3.5 billion years ago.

bacteria and archaea can thrived in extreme environments, such as hydrothermal vents, bottom of deepest oceans, acidic springs, etc. Early primitive bacteria and archaea also have to thrive in atmosphere with no molecular oxygen (O2).

you won’t find any fossilised creatures or animals before 800 Mya.

 

[Sargonski]

But many of these fossils are not C-14 dead.
Date all things supposedly over 5000 years old and look that the results. It would be easy.
What are they hiding?
It is circular reasoning to say that since we assume them to be very old, the they are C-14 dead.

There is no such thing as C-14 dead .. no idea what "Not C-14 dead" ? is supposed to mean ? The only thing hiding here is understanding of the subject matter .. and fraud on the part of the fellow trying to claim a Dino bone 30,000 years old on the basis of a contaminated C-14 test.

and last .. explaining to you that the test does not go back further than 70,000 years - 50,000 years for practical purposes .. is not circular reasoning. It is lack of logic and reason to suggest that it would be.

Here is a video debunking a previous - more famous claim- of Dino's walking with humans 30,000 years ago -- explaining the science.

 

[Sargonski]

Debate 101 technique by you do to your circular reasoning.

What was the first living creature and what features did it have?
How was it able to produce an offspring?
What caused the Big Bang and where did the fine tuned orderly laws of nature come from?
What existed before it?

why do you keep asking the same stupid question over and over - as if you have not been told a bunch of times already that it is You that has claimed to know the first living creature .. how it reproduced .. such that you can calculate a propability (X) of humans existing.

you circle back to this same irrational fallacious vomit over and over again .. then cry out others are engaging in circular reasoning.

you still don’t understand t

I asked if you could be honest and you demonstrated that you cannot be. That was not what was said or what was implied.

If you want answers you have to be honest.

Why are you so afraid if you really believe the nonsense that you spew? A person without fear could easily be honest.

Making a claim as was done "Probability of Humans existing is (X) - and that is impossible" .. without giving the calculation or assumptions make in the calculation - is a naked claim.

When asked to support claim - at least clarify -- show the calculation -- how came up with (X) and what assumptions .. the deceiver tells the audience to give him the assumptions in his calculation .. prove/Clarify his claim for him .. show the calculation that he has yet to provide .. in a mindless circular mess .. answering a question with a question fallacy .. in some gratuitous attempt to deflect from the fact that he has no support for claim.

This is not the True path of light by which one is saved my Brothers .. but one of self deception down the dark path .. a repetitive circle banging head against same post every time go round once again .. the only way to stop the bad news from getting in .. running around in circle .. hands over ears eyes mouth, and any other orifice that might let bad news in .. then banging head over and over .. as go round and round the circle ..

Won't listen to the words of Truth from the Prophet .. a foundation based on sand instead of Rock .. for as we read in Scripture .. "Not all those who cry out Jesus Jesus make it through the pearly gates .. but "ONLY" those who do the will of the Father" Sayeth the Lord

And so it is for those who build foundation in the Sands of Self deception and circular head banging fallacy -- The closing paragraph of the Sermon on the Mount .. most famous Sermon ever given .. so listen when the Prophet Speaks .. and put those words into practice veer off the dark path of deception towards the path of enlightenment and salvation ..

Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26 But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.”

 

[SavedByTheLord]

why do you keep asking the same stupid question over and over - as if you have not been told a bunch of times already that it is You that has claimed to know the first living creature .. how it reproduced .. such that you can calculate a propability (X) of humans existing.

you circle back to this same irrational fallacious vomit over and over again .. then cry out others are engaging in circular reasoning.



Making a claim as was done "Probability of Humans existing is (X) - and that is impossible" .. without giving the calculation or assumptions make in the calculation - is a naked claim.

When asked to support claim - at least clarify -- show the calculation -- how came up with (X) and what assumptions .. the deceiver tells the audience to give him the assumptions in his calculation .. prove/Clarify his claim for him .. show the calculation that he has yet to provide .. in a mindless circular mess .. answering a question with a question fallacy .. in some gratuitous attempt to deflect from the fact that he has no support for claim.

This is not the True path of light by which one is saved my Brothers .. but one of self deception down the dark path .. a repetitive circle banging head against same post every time go round once again .. the only way to stop the bad news from getting in .. running around in circle .. hands over ears eyes mouth, and any other orifice that might let bad news in .. then banging head over and over .. as go round and round the circle ..

Won't listen to the words of Truth from the Prophet .. a foundation based on sand instead of Rock .. for as we read in Scripture .. "Not all those who cry out Jesus Jesus make it through the pearly gates .. but "ONLY" those who do the will of the Father" Sayeth the Lord

And so it is for those who build foundation in the Sands of Self deception and circular head banging fallacy -- The closing paragraph of the Sermon on the Mount .. most famous Sermon ever given .. so listen when the Prophet Speaks .. and put those words into practice veer off the dark path of deception towards the path of enlightenment and salvation ..

So you do not understand the gospel of Christ, that is, the gospel of salvation, nor the word of God.

And you do not have an answer to these simple questions. Doesn't that bother you?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you do not understand the gospel of Christ, that is, the gospel of salvation, nor the word of God.

And you do not have an answer to these simple questions. Doesn't that bother you?

Here is a hint. Just because someone has a different interpretation of the Gospel than you do does not make them wrong. If I had the ability to put money on it I would put my money on him being right. Not because I want him to be right, but because we have all seen your failed reasoning.

 

[Sargonski]

So you do not understand the gospel of Christ, that is, the gospel of salvation, nor the word of God.

And you do not have an answer to these simple questions. Doesn't that bother you?

Look friend .. running around crying "You don't understand" - is meaningless dribble unless you tell us what is not understood. Which passage of those mentioned from the Sermon on the Mount is not understood?

Who doesn't have an answer friend ? You were asked to support your claim .. why would it bother me that I don't have an answer for your lack of ability to support your claim .. supposing that were the case .. but it is not the case .. I gave you the answer -- and showed you your circular fallacy .. how your claim "no assumptions" contradicts all of your claims and now asking others to come up with the assumptions in your argument for you .. is fallacious circular nonsense .. which in no way does anything to show that your claim is true.

Is you who does not have the answer friend .. can't answer to gospel of Christ in relation to your on salvation.. a foudation on a pile of fallacy -Sand. Tell us on what basis you believe you are saved -- and how you figure you are not part of those crying "Jesus Jesus" but who fall short of the grace of God ... and who are not saved .. but thrown into the fiery pit. The one's who put the teachings of Christ into practice - is the Will of the Father. Tell us what teachings are those my young apprentice .. Does it not bother you that you do not have the answer to these simple questions related to your own salvation ?