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.
I posted my position with those two links. Either you read them and educate yourself or you remain at your current level of self-imposed ignorance.
Actually, my discussion with you is not about your "position", its merely to provide the readers the answers if they have the same questions. We know that you will never succumb, regardless of the evidence provided, proven by you still trotting out the "world-wide flood" fairy tale, even after your arguments for it were so soundly defeated months ago, before your most recent hiatus.
My response to "Once again you are wrong" was to what you said about me here:
No need for me to go searching for the cherubim and the flaming sword because the garden of Eden was wiped away when the world-wide flood in Noah's day occurred.
If the only thing you could find to deny with any credibility was a a pretty obvious quip, and to that tag on, rather saucily... the claim that this is only one of a string of errors on her part, which of course you don't address, ... Eusebius old chum, you really must not have very much to work with.
We are clearly in to five word snark responses. It is better than just vanishing and popping up a month later, claiming the same claims and proclaiming that nobody has disproved you, but not much.
I am not trying to put you down, but the fact is that this one line -cheap point - scoring is not what I would want to see. I have seen you put up some tough fighting retreats..I believe the ark was the best...but this isn't in that league.
P.s neither is this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
You never provided any scientific proof.
I posted my position with those two links. Either you read them and educate yourself or you remain at your current level of self-imposed ignorance.
You should surely know by now that better is expected than to post a couple of apologetics links and tell us to go and do your work for you.
And then to refuse to elucidate, posting 'take it or leave it', plus a hint that to not fall into your trap of getting US to do your work is somehow our choice to refuse to look at facts and remain in ignorance. You used the term in a very specific way, old son.
I'll just go so far as to say that an attempt is made to fiddle what the Bible actually says by a bit of translation -shopping and the old 'number nine does not contradict number 5 - it clarifies it'. When anyone looking at it must have a hard time seeing how it does.
And of course, as your opponent (amazing John) pointed out, it didn't address the other problems, just tried to fiddle and evade a couple and thus you try to pretend that it answers the lot.
If we were to do so, I can anticipate the rebuttal: 'Well, if you want to believe the fairy tales, bad science and lies in 'Talk Origins'...."
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 12-29-2013 at 12:06 PM..
If the only thing you could find to deny with any credibility was a a pretty obvious quip, and to that tag on, rather saucily... the claim that this is only one of a string of errors on her part, which of course you don't address, ... Eusebius old chum, you really must not have very much to work with.
We are clearly in to five word snark responses. It is better than just vanishing and popping up a month later, claiming the same claims and proclaiming that nobody has disproved you, but not much.
I am not trying to put you down, but the fact is that this one line -cheap point - scoring is not what I would want to see. I have seen you put up some tough fighting retreats..I believe the ark was the best...but this isn't in that league.
Pontificating on your part proves nothing.
She said I was out looking for the cherubim and flaming sword. And she wrote it sarcastically. Why don't you call her on the carpet for that? I'll tell you why: No matter how wrong you folks are, you still succumb to the club mentality. You all have to stick together even when all of you have been defeated.
You folks remind me of the boxer in the ring who got soundly beaten and knocked out, yet who still proclaims himself to be the winner. But everyone is laughing at him.
To squeal to the Mods. let alone me about a quip of Shirina's, is pathetic.
I have probably been harsh enough, (I explain rather than pontificate. It is you, with plonking faith claims and accusation of ignorace for anyone who questions them, who apes the pontiff) so I will just say, that your responses so far have been inadequate for claiming any kind of victory.
We have discussed this Genesis - v - evolution thing ad nauseam, and it isn't even relevant to atheism. Evolution does not mean a god couldn't have done it, and disproving evolution (supposing that was even possible now - but some people apparently think that the clock can be turned back on heliocentricity) would not prove Creation as a default, but of course it would be waved about as the only theory on the table.
But, if it done yet again, with the claims intended to show that Genesis does not conflict with the finding of science (let me point out that the sites you posted did not disprove evolution, rather, by fiddling the terms and intentions of genesis, it tried to get the Creation story to fit in with evolution -theory, though as I said, only by overlooking some real problems) then I am sure we would examine each one and respond.
But your method of winning a fight by giving us the address of two bods who you claim would knock us for six, if we could be bothered to go and pick a fight with them, does not actually gain you anything, other than a reputation for unrestrained craftiness.
Actually, my discussion with you is not about your "position", its merely to provide the readers the answers if they have the same questions. We know that you will never succumb, regardless of the evidence provided, proven by you still trotting out the "world-wide flood" fairy tale, even after your arguments for it were so soundly defeated months ago, before your most recent hiatus.
All you have provided is a question. I have provided proof. If those readers you mention go to the two links I provided they will no longer have questions.
The score for the world-wide flood was actually me 100 and you folks 0 [zero].
Really? I thought everything that came from intelligence had a thought process and purpose behind it. Thus the title "Intelligent Designer."
I think I went over this in a different thread. Even an intelligent designer had to create the very first molecule somehow - and the only way to do that (at least according to your paradigm) is to "poof" it into existence using magic. So yeah, "poof" is just as relevant to your side as it is to mine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylux
You wouldn't say a building poofed itself into existence. You'd say it had an architect who had a purpose in mind for that creation, and thought critically to put the creation together.
I would say a building poofted itself into existence if there were no building materials in the universe. If something cannot come from nothing, then the building materials to make the building would have to be magically poofed into existence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylux
The poof theory rests on nonbelievers. No critical thought, no purpose. Just nothing, then magically something.
Your argument has been thoroughly debunked. Re-read my post to find out why.
All you have provided is a question. I have provided proof. If those readers you mention go to the two links I provided they will no longer have questions.
The score for the world-wide flood was actually me 100 and you folks 0 [zero].
Here's an example of one of your arguments. We'll let the readers make up their own minds.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Can you prove it was impossible for Noah, wife, three women and three sons to rid the ark of the poop?
Please give me exact scientific amounts of poop that had to be made on a daily basis. It must be based on peer reviewed papers of other scientists. Then give me scientific accounts of how it would be impossible for these 8 people to take care of the poop. This also must be peer reviewed by scientists. Thank you.
And the response: Once you can scientifically prove that there was even a NEED for an ark, that enough water existed to cover the Earth and that it was capable of falling within 40 days to do so, then I'll provide the scientific evidence to prove that it was impossible to rid the ark of the feces.
The score for the world-wide flood was actually me 100 and you folks 0 [zero].
Heh, you're like a judge presiding over his own murder trial.
*gavel bang* I'm innocent. Case closed!
There are few things worse in any discussion than someone who tries to end the debate with a series of self-declared victories. The only person who is keeping score is you, and who knows what your criteria is for your scoring system.
If the poster is an atheist, -100 points
If the poster disagrees with me, -1000 points
If the poster disagrees with the Bible, -500 points
If the poster accepts evolution, -550,126 points
... or some such. I dunnnae. I doubt you know either since you're just making stuff up.
But if you're in the lead by only 100 points regarding the Great Flood, well, this ought to tie it up ... at the very least:
(Warning: The following link contains science and may be difficult for sensitive audiences. Viewer discretion is advised) The Math of the Great Flood
Can you prove it was impossible for Noah, wife, three women and three sons to rid the ark of the poop?
If the Noah story didn't have a religious context, even Eusebius would be laughing at the story's fanciful stupidity.
But because it's in the Bible, by George, we all better straighten up and start believing in nonsense that, in any other venue, would be recognized instantly even by children as a balony factory the size of a small city.
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.
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.
the claim that this is only one of a string of errors on her part, which of course you don't address, 
... Eusebius old chum, you really must not have very much to work with.
apparently think that the clock can be turned back on heliocentricity) would not prove Creation as a default, but of course it would be waved about as the only theory on the table.
