Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-21-2010, 02:09 PM
 
7,628 posts, read 10,943,473 times
Reputation: 498

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Lets see now....That fossil was found in 95 million year old deposits....Creation supposedly happened when?....Seems to me more like you have disproven at least the time of creationism and exposed yet another biblical error....Great find Campbell.
The fact that the fossil shows us that snakes once had legs, only confirms the Biblical account. Their assumption expressed about the fossil being 95 million years old was not proven by anything. Thus they have only exposed their bias belief, that is not supported by any evidence at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-21-2010, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 12,870,401 times
Reputation: 3767
Default Look! He emergeth yet again from the frothy Sea of Ignorance!

Yah plants the seed of the Tree of Fools, then yah waters it by baiting a few good people, and lo and behold, it bears fruit!

Those ancient Ein Yabrud marine sediments, claimed by YEC'rs to have been laid down all at once in a single flood, yet clearly separated in millions of visibly distinct ANNUAL [oh, and countable...] spring-summer-fall layers (we calls 'em Varves under the Learn a New Real Word Every Day game, Tom...), show far far FAR more than a few thousand years.

A few thousand years per foot is more like it. Perhaps confident YEC "researchers" only have foot-long rulers, or more likely an equally limited mindset.

Fact: 95 million years old. Confirmed by the authors you provided the link to. This remind anyone else of Tom's gallant mis-use and mis-quotes of the supposed Montana find of dino DNA and soft tissue in 1993 [long since refuted by it's own author, BTW]? However what as not in dispute was that whatever sample they did find was also known to be 16M years old, if I recall. Ignored by Tom.

Fact: Evolution allow the genetics of a species to go in any direction, even "in reverse" [remember; evolutionary direction is an arbitrary determination of humans in any case...], not just the way the biblical literalists want it to.

Witness: fish became air breathers and advanced out of the oceans [with the various "transitional fossils to prove that one conclusively]. Then, millions of years later, those fully evolved and walking legged mammals returned to the sea to become later whales, seals, sea lions, and, currently starring, marine iguanas in, of all places, The Galapagos. See, they saw a vacant niche, and lo and behold, they invaded it! And when we investigate their skeletal remains, what do we see? Why, little fingers, toes, and essentially identical physiology and skeletal elements as cats. What DO you know about that, huh?

This ancient marine snake [proven as to age and habitat] saw an opportunity it couldn't ignore, and it's always-testing, always-mutating DNA gave it the opportunity it needed. Simple huh? Simple indeed!

Get a textbook and read it some time, Tom. It'll cure what ails you. [The "Lack of Knowledge & Understanding" Syndrome].

Otherwise, bait on, m'boy; bait on! It only shows your true colors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 02:47 PM
 
7,628 posts, read 10,943,473 times
Reputation: 498
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
Yah plants the seed of the Tree of Fools, then yah waters it by baiting a few good people, and lo and behold, it bears fruit!

Those ancient Ein Yabrud marine sediments, claimed by YEC'rs to have been laid down all at once in a single flood, yet clearly separated in millions of visibly distinct ANNUAL [oh, and countable...] spring-summer-fall layers (we calls 'em Varves under the Learn a New Real Word Every Day game, Tom...), show far far FAR more than a few thousand years.

A few thousand years per foot is more like it. Perhaps confident YEC "researchers" only have foot-long rulers, or more likely an equally limited mindset.

Fact: 95 million years old. Confirmed by the authors you provided the link to. This remind anyone else of Tom's gallant mis-use and mis-quotes of the supposed Montana find of dino DNA and soft tissue in 1993 [long since refuted by it's own author, BTW]? However what as not in dispute was that whatever sample they did find was also known to be 16M years old, if I recall. Ignored by Tom.

Fact: Evolution allow the genetics of a species to go in any direction, even "in reverse" [remember; evolutionary direction is an arbitrary determination of humans in any case...], not just the way the biblical literalists want it to.

Witness: fish became air breathers and advanced out of the oceans [with the various "transitional fossils to prove that one conclusively]. Then, millions of years later, those fully evolved and walking legged mammals returned to the sea to become later whales, seals, sea lions, and, currently starring, marine iguanas in, of all places, The Galapagos. See, they saw a vacant niche, and lo and behold, they invaded it! And when we investigate their skeletal remains, what do we see? Why, little fingers, toes, and essentially identical physiology and skeletal elements as cats. What DO you know about that, huh?

This ancient marine snake [proven as to age and habitat] saw an opportunity it couldn't ignore, and it's always-testing, always-mutating DNA gave it the opportunity it needed. Simple huh? Simple indeed!

Get a textbook and read it some time, Tom. It'll cure what ails you. [The "Lack of Knowledge & Understanding" Syndrome].

Otherwise, bait on, m'boy; bait on! It only shows your true colors.


Yes, no doubt they got their 95 million year number from the same group that said the Coelacahnths were extinct for 65 million years. That was until they found one at a fish market in Madagascar. I wonder what a 65 million year old Coelacahnth taste like? LOL Numbers are easy to pull out of the air. Are they not rifleman?
The Fish Thought to be Extinct for 65 Million Years
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 02:52 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,624 posts, read 19,032,834 times
Reputation: 21728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
According to Genesis 3:14 when God saw that the serpent had deceived Eve in the garden. God stated that the serpent from then on would travel on his belly. I use to tell people that snakes once had legs, and according to the Scriptures walked upright. Of course every non believer thought that was simply a foolish myth from the Bible.
It is a foolish myth.

The Hebrew version is a convoluted version of the original Sumerian story.

In that version, Lord Enlil (played by the gods -- elohim -- in the Hebrew version) does not want Lord Enki to give humans knowledge. Enki's symbol (like his son Ningishzida) was two serpents entwined around a double helix representing the "Tree of life."

Enki gives knowledge to humans anyway.







Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 03:48 PM
 
7,628 posts, read 10,943,473 times
Reputation: 498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
It is a foolish myth.

The Hebrew version is a convoluted version of the original Sumerian story.

In that version, Lord Enlil (played by the gods -- elohim -- in the Hebrew version) does not want Lord Enki to give humans knowledge. Enki's symbol (like his son Ningishzida) was two serpents entwined around a double helix representing the "Tree of life."

Enki gives knowledge to humans anyway.






The sinking of a great passanger ship which was moving to fast and hit an iceburg was written about long ago. Many of the details match those of the Titanic. That account however was written years before the sinking of the Titanic. Yet because of this, would you say the real story of the Titanic was untrue, and borrowed from that orginal story? Are you suggesting that because there are similarities between the stories in the Bible and another account. The Bible account cannot be true. Because if you are, there are other accounts with similarities that are far more detailed. And if you follow your own standard, you would be forced to accept the belief that the story of the Titanic was untrue and faked as well.

RMS Titanic and Fictional Titan Comparisons: Similarities Between the Ships Coincidence or Synchronicity?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 05:31 PM
 
5,463 posts, read 9,591,123 times
Reputation: 3555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
What the Bible actually states is found in Genesis.

Genesis 3:14 So the LORD God said to the serpent. "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all live stock and all wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.

However the serpent actually walked. It would now move on it's belly. Which was obviously a step down from it's previous position.
Okay, so snakes had feet in the distant past. Interestingly, the Genesis passage you cite here says nothing about them walking upright, which is what you stated earlier.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 07:11 PM
 
Location: Not.here
2,828 posts, read 4,317,622 times
Reputation: 2377
Quote:
Cursed are you above all live stock and all wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.
Snakes don't eat dust. They are carnivorous and eat almost any creature that they are capable of overpowering...... rodents, lizards, birds, fish, frogs, toads, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 07:22 PM
 
1,743 posts, read 2,151,381 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
Old Covenant, now is the day of grace. You need to read your Bible.

Old
covenant? From the "unchanging" perfect source of objective morality?

Oh my.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 07:25 PM
 
1,743 posts, read 2,151,381 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
The fact that the fossil shows us that snakes once had legs, only confirms the Biblical account. Their assumption expressed about the fossil being 95 million years old was not proven by anything. Thus they have only exposed their bias belief, that is not supported by any evidence at all.
Funny, I thought the "serpent" in the Bible was supposed to be the devil. Are you saying that your god removed the legs of every species of snake just because the devil tricked A&E into eating a fruit?

And you worship this insane madman?

Did the fossil also show any evidence of vocal cords?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 07:34 PM
 
1,743 posts, read 2,151,381 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
The sinking of a great passanger ship which was moving to fast and hit an iceburg was written about long ago. Many of the details match those of the Titanic. That account however was written years before the sinking of the Titanic. Yet because of this, would you say the real story of the Titanic was untrue, and borrowed from that orginal story? Are you suggesting that because there are similarities between the stories in the Bible and another account. The Bible account cannot be true. Because if you are, there are other accounts with similarities that are far more detailed. And if you follow your own standard, you would be forced to accept the belief that the story of the Titanic was untrue and faked as well.

RMS Titanic and Fictional Titan Comparisons: Similarities Between the Ships Coincidence or Synchronicity?
And hundreds more stories, movies and other retelling have been made AFTER the sinking of the Titanic. So by your standard the original historical sinking of the Titanic is fake and the fictional retelling are fact.
Not to mention that you're basically saying that your god, the creator of the universe couldn't come up with a better method to destroy the world than some storytellers from ancient Mesopotamia..

Sorry, but the Bible has been proven to be a plagiarized work many times over. Even your god is based on earlier regional polytheistic gods. Time to accept reality and get over it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top