|
Post by kuraikiba on Dec 23, 2010 18:27:10 GMT
... Bump much?
|
|
|
Post by SandmasterOffline on Dec 23, 2010 21:52:33 GMT
Not really.
Torture King, I think that when I look at our place in the universe but exclude my own personal (human) perspective, we were just lucky. The idea of consciousness is kind of getting in the way.
|
|
|
Post by tortureking on Dec 26, 2010 5:15:07 GMT
Well, it doesn't have to be conscious right now; I'm just looking at the laws in my observation, and there's almost definitely a correlation. 'God' could have only acted for a single moment, and if most Deists are correct, that would have been enough to create a system that passively promotes Life. Sort of like a simulator, only "real".
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Dec 28, 2010 21:43:00 GMT
I'm just popping in to say that I now officially refuse to take any arguments in this board seriously. I highly recommend everyone go read The Grand Design, then try and come back and argue for God. We're basically debating whether or not there's a waterfall at the edge of the world.
|
|
|
Post by sandmaster on Dec 29, 2010 3:46:39 GMT
If there is I am totally riding a barrel off that thing.
|
|
|
Post by tortureking on Jan 1, 2011 4:38:47 GMT
Hmm.. Field Research..
What could go wrong?
|
|
|
Post by kuraikiba on Jan 2, 2011 14:15:36 GMT
If there is I am totally riding a barrel off that thing. With a really narrow chance of living.
|
|
|
Post by danballrocks on Jan 2, 2011 18:32:06 GMT
I think the big bang was real and god isn't
|
|
|
Post by kuraikiba on Jan 3, 2011 23:22:36 GMT
I think periods greatly help sentences.
|
|
|
Post by GoldAlchemist on Jan 8, 2011 3:55:08 GMT
Ok, so. I've been doing a lot of thinking while I have been off forum, and well, it can just be simply said that I do believe in God.
But so now, where do I start my reasoning, if I should start reasoning at all?
I'll start with this, just to get things going again:
The planet Earth, the planet we reside on and came into this existence on, can be seen as a map or plan of the current existing universe. ('universe' being used loosely, for 'metaverse', or just simply 'existence', or 'current life', etc.)
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jan 8, 2011 6:54:53 GMT
...Or it can be seen as a hunk of rock that happened to develop conditions that makes it suitable for this specific brand of life.
|
|
|
Post by GoldAlchemist on Jan 8, 2011 15:30:37 GMT
Exactly! The whole 'verse is like that too. It has bunches of rocks and other star-matter just drifting around everywhere - some have conditions suitable for life, some don't. It's random in its layout - and Earth reflects that randomness! Some lands originated in being perfectly suitable for life to spring up (Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, etc.), while others were utter wastelands that - with some human intervention - flowered into good land.
So how does this relate to the question of the existence of God? It doesn't really, directly. But I wanted to lay a foundation for the rest of my reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by sandmaster on Jan 8, 2011 16:41:29 GMT
So God is a pair of dice.
Planet one: distance from sun * precentage of suitable atmospheric whatever * likeliness of water *...
Roll the dice. No life here?
Planet 2...
And so on.
We got lucky planet #1843972.5 (there was an accident)
|
|
|
Post by speedyclock on Jan 8, 2011 21:36:08 GMT
Again, this is Religion No?
You cannot question such a large topic and hope to make progress.
It is impolite to shove your religion down someone's throat.
This is made by a powerful funny saying;
Religion is like an Erection, Please, you have every right to have one! But please don't go waving it around in public...
And for the love of god Please Do Not Shove it down my children's throat!
|
|
|
Post by GoldAlchemist on Jan 8, 2011 23:12:02 GMT
Ok. um. good for you. This may be religion, but this is also Serious Debate. We're debating. If you don't want to have any part in it, then use your own logic to just simply stay away.
Anyhow. Heh, no, not really so much of that, SM.
Basically what I was trying to show is that the Earth is kind of like a smaller, more compacted universe. You could descend many levels, and each would still be a whole universe in and of itself with the same physics, logic, and ideals. (like from Earth to Being to Mind to Personality Trait to etc., or like 'Powers of 10' in a more physical sense)
What I'm trying to show is that there does seem to be some pattern to the randomness of universes/levels. And I mean a pattern to the randomness as a whole, not that the randomness has a pattern as then it wouldn't be random anymore. Inside the realms there can be any configuration - the part does not matter so much so long as there will be some being in at least one of the realms to find meaning of some sort within its own or some other realm. But the structure of the realm bodies, that's where the pattern lies. Some realms are undergoing basic creation, some refining what has been created, then some constructing bigger things from the basic creations, and then those bigger creations being realms within themselves as well all the way down infinitely, some begin to decay from lack of meaning, some regain their meaning by being discovered or recreated by sentient beings, and some are just a mixture of all of these as they have reached a stable state where the pattern then falls to all of the realms within that realm.
It's like a spiral that never ends in either direction. The inner direction never actually reaches the true center, whatever that may be, and the other end has no boundaries to stop it from expanding more and more. The curves are all mostly parallel, so while you can still have completely new and original realms in each measureable length of the curve, the pattern of still embodies it all in nthe parallel-ness of the curves, in that the more vague events of the realms as I previously described will always happen to each individual realm in some way shape or form.
So how does this tie to the existence of God? I'm not going to say that God is the true center of the spiral, though one would probably say that he is. I'm not going to say that God is all the spaces in between the spiral, though again, one would probably say that anyways as well. No, God is the leading point in the ever expanding spiral. Always constantly on top, not because he just is or something like that (like the whole 'a wizard did it!' thing), but because he too is a realm in and of itself that is constantly making itself better and better. And when a realm becomes stable and no longer is undergoing any of those other parts of the pattern (but still has inner realms undergoing the same pattern of course), it's in its most perfect state, to continually undergo the pattern over and over again through its inner realms and the realms inside of those and so on. God is simply the head of all these realms, the capstone to the ever growing spiral of realms.
This does not prove the existence of God in any way, of course. I've just been thinking about this a lot. So...yeah. What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by sandmaster on Jan 12, 2011 6:38:23 GMT
I think that your idea that stability is a concrete and absolute concept that is defined by how our life is governed. We defined stability a long time ago based on how we lived, and it should be the other way around. We live stably because those who were too unstable in the dice-throwing fell off the tree of life. We are defined by stability, but we think that something must have defined the universe around us to make this stability perfect for us.
|
|
|
Post by RubiksMaster123 on Jan 12, 2011 13:34:50 GMT
Exactly! The whole 'verse is like that too. It has bunches of rocks and other star-matter just drifting around everywhere - some have conditions suitable for life, some don't. It's random in its layout - and Earth reflects that randomness! Some lands originated in being perfectly suitable for life to spring up (Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, etc.), while others were utter wastelands that - with some human intervention - flowered into good land. So how does this relate to the question of the existence of God? It doesn't really, directly. But I wanted to lay a foundation for the rest of my reasoning. Someone argued with me about this topic and he said that we wouldn't be in the exact location in the solar system if it weren't for god. oh well, screw that, theres no proof that god exists, so there we go.
|
|
|
Post by GoldAlchemist on Jan 12, 2011 14:32:44 GMT
Well then maybe it is more like SM had said before about the dice throwing (sorry for calling it off so soon). It is like a dice throwing effect, as it's supposed to be random inside each realm. This also goes to say that I did not mean to sound that stability is concrete in any way. Because of the randomness, the infinite probabilities (or improbabilities ) of what goes on inside each realm, 'stable' just means that said realm is not undergoing any specific characteristic change as stated before, but undergoing all of them at the same time, "dividing" itself equally amongst its inner realms. Or if it results in entropy, it undergoes none of them at all, and the realm just fades away. It's like I've said a loooong time ago, "All in the 'verse, or Nothing at all, and no in between." EDIT: Er, sorry, I didn't mean that to sound so black-and-white right there, I just remembered saying that and thought it would help to describe what I was saying.
|
|
|
Post by speedyclock on Jan 17, 2011 21:45:49 GMT
Sorry, I read this thread and had to make this...
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jan 18, 2011 0:56:35 GMT
Had to make what?
|
|
|
Post by speedyclock on Jan 18, 2011 0:57:47 GMT
Strange, the image isn't loading. Is there a resolution limit? If so go to the reply and paste the link into a tab.
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jan 18, 2011 1:13:47 GMT
Ah, I see it. You forgot the g in jpg.
|
|
|
Post by speedyclock on Jan 18, 2011 1:23:16 GMT
Funny eh? xD
|
|
|
Post by GoldAlchemist on Jan 18, 2011 3:24:25 GMT
Lol. 'Budum tink!' Buuuut anyways, back to the debate
|
|
|
Post by Anonymousperson5 on Jan 19, 2011 23:25:16 GMT
Hmmm.... I say as a Christian that there is a God. So. If the Big Bang happened, why are there many things in the Bible, or any other book, about many scientific stuffs that are now known? For example, in the story of the Good Samaritan, the Samaritan helps the man with olive oil and wine, which are now known to be common disinfectants. Another example: In the book of Job, it is said that God "hangs the earth on nothing" which is absolutely true. Third example: In Leviticus, God says not to eat pork (which can be extremely dangerous for your health if not properly prepared) or to drink blood (always dangerous) and also stating that the "life of the flesh is in the blood". Fourth example: There is a massive amount of fossils found in a certain time band. This is most probably the great flood, and the wipe out of nearly all animals. And on the topic of Evolution: No prehistoric variations of human/apes have been found. For example, although Lucy and those other skeletons have been found, the bones have been suspected of being of two different species. For example, the knee bone of Lucy was found 3 miles away and 1/2 miles deeper into the ground. Most other fossils have combined human and ape fossils. Also, any fossils found are also suspected to possibly be altered before examined by other labs to simply make money. The Ica stones near Ica, Peru, are very ancient. They show signs of civilizations who have heating systems, running water, and brain surgery, as well as dinosaurs depicted on these.
So, what does all this show?
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jan 19, 2011 23:42:48 GMT
Hmmm.... I say as a Christian that there is a God. Alright. Let's see your arguments.So. If the Big Bang happened, why are there many things in the Bible, or any other book, about many scientific stuffs that are now known? There's not actually any connection between the Bible knowing things and the Big Bang having happened.For example, in the story of the Good Samaritan, the Samaritan helps the man with olive oil and wine, which are now known to be common disinfectants. How sweet of him. It was probably already well-known back then. Ancient science can do more than we usually give them credit for.Another example: In the book of Job, it is said that God "hangs the earth on nothing" which is absolutely true. Yeah, what's your point? No doubt it also has lines about the moon existing and the universe starting off in a big explosion. Oh, wait... It doesn't.Third example: In Leviticus, God says not to eat pork (which can be extremely dangerous for your health if not properly prepared , as any meat can do, yet I don't see steak mentioned) or to drink blood (always dangerous) Also disgusting and common sense and also stating that the "life of the flesh is in the blood" which is almost entirely worthless as a phrase since it could mean just about anything. Fourth example: There is a massive amount of fossils found in a certain time band. This is most probably the great flood, and the wipe out of nearly all animals. Yes, even though there's more evidence it was a mass extinction, not a flood that took more water than exists on Earth. And don't forget all those transitional fossils created shortly after that mass-extinction.And on the topic of Evolution: No prehistoric variations of human/apes have been found. Yes there have. For example, although Lucy and those other skeletons have been found, the bones have been suspected of being of two different species. Two different very humanoid species that happened to life in the same area. If anything that supports Evolution. For example, the knee bone of Lucy was found 3 miles away and 1/2 miles deeper into the ground. So you're saying life changes over time? Oh, wait...Most other fossils have combined human and ape fossils. You really have no idea how it works, do you? You don't mix random bones from a human and an ape and say that means evolution. There's individual bones that have been found over many, many samples to change over time.Also, any fossils found are also suspected to possibly be altered before examined by other labs to simply make money. Because evolution is a huge conspiracy theory somehow upheld with modified evidence by thousands of scientists every day that somehow make more money that way. Right.The Ica stones near Ica, Peru, are very ancient. They show signs of civilizations who have heating systems, running water, and brain surgery, as well as dinosaurs depicted on these. As I said, ancient cultures can do more than we attribute to them.So, what does all this show? That evolution is more likely than ever and that young-Earth creationists will twist very select pieces of evidence and ignore the rest based entirely on an old book.Green parts are additions. I do wish you had done more research; you're destroying your credibility here.
|
|
|
Post by GoldAlchemist on Jan 20, 2011 0:45:48 GMT
Indeed. I've said before that I believe in God, and while I kind of saw where some of your thoughts were coming from, it was a little painful to read. I don't mean to jump down your throat or anything if this was only the beginning of more to come, but I would do three things in your case: 1) At least read a few pages back to see what's been said and what the current, specific discussion is. 2) Organize your thoughts a little better - instead of trying to find little flaws in what you've seen in your view of the world and describing them separately, try finding how they all fit together and logically make one another work within the grand scheme of things. You'll get a much better foundation for any further discussion points you might make later, which will be key to adding to your idea. 3) Do some more research - I can't stress this enough. I mean no offense to you or anyone's state of mind and current knowledge, but there's always going to be something you have not seen yet. Please do not go prancing around debates thinking like you have all of the answers, because in truth, 90% of the time, you don't. In fact, when you post in a debate, acknowledge that you don't know exactly what it is you're talking about. It makes people substantially less likely to damage your ego when they make a counter argument, as well as makes the ensuing conversation much more intelligent and calm than as it would have been otherwise.
Just some suggestions.
Also, I'd like to stress the first one. Mainly toward my previous posts. I don't mean to draw attention to myself, but I do want to know what others think of my idea (especially if said others have a better understanding of what I was getting at).
And as for commenting on your post specifically, I'll get to it. It'd be easier if you organized what you were saying into a more connected concept so that the idea of what you're getting at was easier to see. Just some requests.
|
|
|
Post by Anonymousperson5 on Jan 20, 2011 0:51:54 GMT
OK... I don't know how to quote. So I'll just read your interesting (and *cough*in*cough*sult*cough*ing*cough*) comments and answer them one by one. First off that first comment is all right. You acted civilized. Your second comment makes no sense. I was simply making a contradictory statement. Your third comment was nonsensical. If so, why did fighters in World War I not use these "Well known science facts" when they had some wine on hand (They drink this stuff, you know) to help them? Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that people in World War I also didn't dig latrines, while these ancients did. And also ignored the separation of contaminated peoples from the main community. While, of course, these ancients did also. Your fourth comment (Yeah, what's your point?) is a direct insult (doesn't bother to cough) and makes no sense. My point was that while millions of peoples at the time were thinking that a giant turtle carried the world or something of the sort, the people of God were correct. Also, the people of God also knew the Earth was round. Knowing that they only traveled about 1/500 of the way around the world, and had no accurate measurers of neither time nor distance, no doubt that they TOTALLY measured the distance at the same time, instantaneously sent a message to another Israelite, and asked them to measure the placement of the sun to achieve the knowledge that the earth was round, especially because they stayed within 50 miles or so of each other. Fifth comment. Pork is the most hard to cure at the time. They only knew things like lambs, or sheep. Besides, pork does the worst damage: tuberculosis, and several other diseases I forgot.... Oh well. Problem solved. Mostly. Sixth comment. Drinking blood was, in fact, a very common ritual at the time. It was not disgusting to them. Comment #7. It can mean anything, yes. So? The ancient Hebrews simply obeyed, needing not to know the science behind it. We all know that it meant the carrying of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide. You don't need to take everything so literally. Comment #8. It's called nuclear fission, it's called space debris, it's called omnipotence. God can do anything. Live with it. And the transitional fossils. Hmm. Well it doesn't prove anything for either side, does it? Perhaps it is bones left from sacrifices of many civilizations around the world. You never know. The ninth comment is short, rash and not worth explaining too much about, just look at explanations 10 and 11. Tenth comment: Yeah. Two existing species of completely different kinds. Apes and Humans. And I meant that bones of two entirely different species are placed together in one fossil of an "intermediate stage". Think a bit more than just reading. Eleventh comment: No. I am saying that the "Knee bone" was probably fake. Being such a long distance away a such a long distance deeper, it was very likely to be entirely different species, while many others were likely assorted human bones and chimpanzee/ape bones. Twelfth (I like spelling twelfth) comment: Yes. I do know that. However, certain fossil-finders don't know that. They combine these random things and call it evolution. Which I know is entirely crazy. And that is what I meant. Not me being a crazy person who does this. Thirteenth comment: I never meant that all fossils are. Some people are greedy idiots. And it is known that Lucy's hip appears to be filed, unknown by who. Fourteenth comment: You just directly contradicted yourself. If evolution is true, things must be getting more and more advanced. However, while people very long ago SHOULD have been idiotic people with no capability for thinking, those people were known to do such advanced things. So, if ancient civilizations are so "stupid" by the theory of evolution, why are they so advanced? Fifteenth comment: You. Are. Absolutely. Crazy. ("cough*dir*cough*ect*cough*in*cough*sult*cough*) GoldAlchemist1) Pretty much all I see is people saying this board is pointless. 2) Meh. I was never good at organizing. I will try though. I just go in any order that comes to mind. And stick to order. 3) Ehh...Yeah. I think I have quite a library in my head. But research is always fun. But, again, too much information can get to be inaccurate.
|
|
|
Post by GoldAlchemist on Jan 20, 2011 2:30:26 GMT
OK... I don't know how to quote. So I'll just read your interesting (and *cough*in*cough*sult*cough*ing*cough*) comments and answer them one by one. First off that first comment is all right. You acted civilized. Your second comment makes no sense. I was simply making a contradictory statement. Your third comment was nonsensical. If so, why did fighters in World War I not use these "Well known science facts" when they had some wine on hand (They drink this stuff, you know) to help them? Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that people in World War I also didn't dig latrines, while these ancients did. And also ignored the separation of contaminated peoples from the main community. While, of course, these ancients did also. Your fourth comment (Yeah, what's your point?) is a direct insult (doesn't bother to cough) and makes no sense. My point was that while millions of peoples at the time were thinking that a giant turtle carried the world or something of the sort, the people of God were correct. Also, the people of God also knew the Earth was round. Knowing that they only traveled about 1/500 of the way around the world, and had no accurate measurers of neither time nor distance, no doubt that they TOTALLY measured the distance at the same time, instantaneously sent a message to another Israelite, and asked them to measure the placement of the sun to achieve the knowledge that the earth was round, especially because they stayed within 50 miles or so of each other. Fifth comment. Pork is the most hard to cure at the time. They only knew things like lambs, or sheep. Besides, pork does the worst damage: tuberculosis, and several other diseases I forgot.... Oh well. Problem solved. Mostly. Sixth comment. Drinking blood was, in fact, a very common ritual at the time. It was not disgusting to them. Comment #7. It can mean anything, yes. So? The ancient Hebrews simply obeyed, needing not to know the science behind it. We all know that it meant the carrying of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide. You don't need to take everything so literally. Comment #8. It's called nuclear fission, it's called space debris, it's called omnipotence. God can do anything. Live with it. And the transitional fossils. Hmm. Well it doesn't prove anything for either side, does it? Perhaps it is bones left from sacrifices of many civilizations around the world. You never know. The ninth comment is short, rash and not worth explaining too much about, just look at explanations 10 and 11. Tenth comment: Yeah. Two existing species of completely different kinds. Apes and Humans. And I meant that bones of two entirely different species are placed together in one fossil of an "intermediate stage". Think a bit more than just reading. Eleventh comment: No. I am saying that the "Knee bone" was probably fake. Being such a long distance away a such a long distance deeper, it was very likely to be entirely different species, while many others were likely assorted human bones and chimpanzee/ape bones. Twelfth (I like spelling twelfth) comment: Yes. I do know that. However, certain fossil-finders don't know that. They combine these random things and call it evolution. Which I know is entirely crazy. And that is what I meant. Not me being a crazy person who does this. Thirteenth comment: I never meant that all fossils are. Some people are greedy idiots. And it is known that Lucy's hip appears to be filed, unknown by who. Fourteenth comment: You just directly contradicted yourself. If evolution is true, things must be getting more and more advanced. However, while people very long ago SHOULD have been idiotic people with no capability for thinking, those people were known to do such advanced things. So, if ancient civilizations are so "stupid" by the theory of evolution, why are they so advanced? Fifteenth comment: You. Are. Absolutely. Crazy. ("cough*dir*cough*ect*cough*in*cough*sult*cough*) GoldAlchemist1) Pretty much all I see is people saying this board is pointless. 2) Meh. I was never good at organizing. I will try though. I just go in any order that comes to mind. And stick to order. 3) Ehh...Yeah. I think I have quite a library in my head. But research is always fun. But, again, too much information can get to be inaccurate. Ok, first the parts directed at me. 1) True, but I meant the parts where actual debating was occurring, not where people where being up-tight about their beliefs and being difficult to talk to. 2) Going in an order of what comes to mind shows that you have connected these different topics to each other. I'm just suggesting you post the connections as well as many people cannot simply stair-step from one subject to another, but really need some kind of metaphorical ramp to the next topic. 3) Also true, but while information by itself can get inaccurate, its meaning can be refreshed through the connections of other findings you've made. Now for the messier part... First, the contradiction was not all too clear, but I think I understand you. You mean to say that if the Big Bang did happen, that would mean all of the things people have said of how it may disprove the Bible and God and etc. would be true. This, to you, does not correlate, though, as there are things in the Bible and other neighboring works that have help out man's current knowledge of how the universe works. This is what I got out of it, at least... Sorry if I am incorrect. Second, to answer your questions about WWI - the reasons are because they were almost non-stop in the middle of trench warfare. For the wine thing, people in old times barely did things out of understanding, but because things simply worked, or a great being told them, etc., so in more modern times, when we've practically sold ourselves to the idea of absolute knowledge and not on just what comes natural, people would be more reliant on "real" medical works than simply the alcohol in their bottles. For the latrine thing, a somewhat secluded corner of the trench was the latrine. And as for keeping the wounded and sick apart from the rest of the troops, they honestly did not have the time, room, or focus to help those soldiers in a civilized, clean manor. And if they ever did try to, it would only be for the majorly wounded. Anyone else, be they sick or "somewhat" hurt, as long as they could hold a gun and stand on their feet, they were expected to fight. Third, I don't mean to take away from your point as I agree with that part, but I do want to clarify that it was the Greeks who had figured out that the world was round. The beliefs that it was flat came quickly after those records and calculations were destroyed in the burning of the great libraries. However, this only goes to show that science did have a good hold on the people of the era. Otherwise, yes, people were given information of the surrounding universe upon inquiring (not to say that many people were still put off by these findings from great wise people...*cough*heliocentric-ism*cough*). Fourth, lambs and sheep are pretty much the same thing, although you may have just been clarifying yourself. Else, I agree. Fifth, well, common amongst the idol worshipers of the time. The whole "eat of my flesh and drink of my blood" thing is symbolic and I will knock [kindly put] some sense into those that don't see it. ( ) Sixth, it means that, yes, but I think it also means greater things as well...like, I don't know, describing that a great powerful flowing force that connects one thing to another like veins to clusters of cells runs throughout the whole universe, and (not like I was saying this before or anything...) our bodies can be seen as parallel to how the 'verse functions...maybe..... >.> Seventh, I don't really understand what either of you two mean by "transitional fossils" - please elaborate. Also, just so we're not confused, the idea that God snaps his fingers and things just appear (the idea that he can "do anything") is extremely misunderstood - there is a science about it. Eighth, I agree - Qwerty is finding flaws from the separated phrases of the paragraph, not what the paragraph itself was saying. He may be being a little hypocritical about people who "...twist very select pieces of evidence and ignore the rest...." Ninth, I agree, as this is the cause of many "theories" of which evolutionary tree is the "real" tree. But also I suggest you don't insult the person who will make serious judgment calls about your retort. I know Qwerty will not come back flaming, but in general, it's not a wise thing to do... Tenth, I don't know enough about the subject to really say anything here... Eleventh, Ok, I think that's settled enough. Twelfth (wow, you're right, that is a funny word to spell), Qwerty, just because someone says the known facts may be a little off does not make what a person was saying conspiratorial in any way. Anonymous, while some people may (and that's big 'may') do this purely for social credit and gain, most people do geology and evolutionary findings purely for the love of their field - they like digging up ancient items from the earth and trying to decipher the past through these, and many other, means. This is not to say that whatever they come up with may be completely accurate at all, but they still get points in my book for at least trying to figure things out. Thirteenth, like I said before, the people only seemed advanced because they were either doing what comes natural (which to an unknowing on looker may look smart), or they were only doing what a higher authority was telling them to do (ex: God, or priests, or scientists of the era, or kings, etc.) without questioning it. Fourteenth, Qwerty, you are not crazy, but you may be a bit hypocritical here. Anonymous, this all shows that evolution is not wrong, only just another piece of the puzzle which is only wrong when it is in its wrong place. If anything, this is probably the very tool God used when creating things that could choose for themselves (this thought attributed to the fact that I do not believe in creationism). Now then, shake hands. Cool your jets if they ever got steamed up at all. Good debatin'! EDIT: Almost forgot - Anonymous, you can quote other posts by clicking on the button at the top right corner of a post that looks like (,,"). Or you can just say "[ quote ] 'quoted text goes here' [ /quote ]", only without the spaces between the brackets. Happy quoting!
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jan 20, 2011 2:36:08 GMT
OK... I don't know how to quote. So I'll just read your interesting (and *cough*in*cough*sult*cough*ing*cough*) comments and answer them one by one. First off that first comment is all right. You acted civilized. It became too hard to stay so, I'm afraid.Your second comment makes no sense. I was simply making a contradictory statement. My reply was that it was not contradictory. The Big Bang and the fact that the ancients knew stuff do not connect.Your third comment was nonsensical. If so, why did fighters in World War I not use these "Well known science facts" when they had some wine on hand (They drink this stuff, you know) to help them? Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that people in World War I also didn't dig latrines, while these ancients did. And also ignored the separation of contaminated peoples from the main community. While, of course, these ancients did also. The ancients didn't know EVERYTHING, but obviously the ones that wrote the bible knew the examples referenced.Your fourth comment (Yeah, what's your point?) is a direct insult (doesn't bother to cough) and makes no sense. My point was that while millions of peoples at the time were thinking that a giant turtle carried the world or something of the sort, the people of God were correct. Also, the people of God also knew the Earth was round. Knowing that they only traveled about 1/500 of the way around the world, and had no accurate measurers of neither time nor distance, no doubt that they TOTALLY measured the distance at the same time, instantaneously sent a message to another Israelite, and asked them to measure the placement of the sun to achieve the knowledge that the earth was round, especially because they stayed within 50 miles or so of each other. Lots of ancients had far better than what we think they had. They did have measurement tools and they could use them. The ancient Greeks, not knowing much more than the ancients we are speaking of, managed to calculate the radius of the Earth. It wouldn't take that much to find it was not flat.
That bible quote can only say the world is round through extrapolation, and severe extrapolation at that. I mean, the church used to use a different line to say it was flat, using about the same amount.Fifth comment. Pork is the most hard to cure at the time. They only knew things like lambs, or sheep. Besides, pork does the worst damage: tuberculosis, and several other diseases I forgot.... Oh well. Problem solved. Mostly. Give me a reliable medical link, then maybe I'll trust that argument.Sixth comment. Drinking blood was, in fact, a very common ritual at the time. It was not disgusting to them. Again, links.Comment #7. It can mean anything, yes. So? The ancient Hebrews simply obeyed, needing not to know the science behind it. We all know that it meant the carrying of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide. You don't need to take everything so literally. How the heck did you get "The blood carries vital gasses around the body" out of "the life of the flesh is in the blood"? They probably just associated bleeding too much with death, which is no great logical leap.Comment #8. It's called nuclear fission, it's called space debris, it's called omnipotence. God can do anything. Live with it. And the transitional fossils. Hmm. Well it doesn't prove anything for either side, does it? Perhaps it is bones left from sacrifices of many civilizations around the world. You never know. ...You really do have no idea what fossils are, do you? No, seriously. I'm pretty certain you don't. I'm also starting to doubt you know what space debris is or what nuclear fission is, and what God's omnipotence has to do with transitional fossils. Nice to know people always made sure to warp the bones just the right amount in just the right ways, and then buried them in the order in which they would have died as they warped, and then spent several million years fossilizing the bones. Oh, wait...The ninth comment is short, rash and not worth explaining too much about, just look at explanations 10 and 11. It's also true.Tenth comment: Yeah. Two existing species of completely different kinds. Apes and Humans. And I meant that bones of two entirely different species are placed together in one fossil of an "intermediate stage". Think a bit more than just reading. ...Wow. You seriously do not know what fossils are. No, really. You don't. We're talking single bones here slowly changing over time, not just the full skeleton.Eleventh comment: No. I am saying that the "Knee bone" was probably fake. Being such a long distance away a such a long distance deeper, it was very likely to be entirely different species, while many others were likely assorted human bones and chimpanzee/ape bones. One fake bone = all of evolution disproved. Faking a fossil is nearly impossible, and it would have to take a whole lot of effort to fake a knee bone in just the right way so as to be between species.Twelfth (I like spelling twelfth) comment: Yes. I do know that. However, certain fossil-finders don't know that. They combine these random things and call it evolution. Which I know is entirely crazy. And that is what I meant. Not me being a crazy person who does this. Now I'm sure you don't know what evolution is, either. You don't mix bones from different species together at random and get evolution. Take the skull, for instance:
There are actual fossils to back this up.Thirteenth comment: I never meant that all fossils are. Some people are greedy idiots. And it is known that Lucy's hip appears to be filed, unknown by who. Okay, so some people faked evidence. That doesn't disprove all of evolution.Fourteenth comment: You just directly contradicted yourself. If evolution is true, things must be getting more and more advanced. However, while people very long ago SHOULD have been idiotic people with no capability for thinking, those people were known to do such advanced things. So, if ancient civilizations are so "stupid" by the theory of evolution, why are they so advanced? Now I'm CERTAIN you don't know what evolution is. Evolution =/= advanced, and it DEFINITELY doesn't happen in that short a time scale. Evolution takes millions and millions of years for the slightest changes, and it favors those more likely to breed, not the smarter ones. Ever seen "Idiocracy"? I'm filing this argument between "Monkeys don't live that long" and "Satan did it".Fifteenth comment: You. Are. Absolutely. Crazy. ("cough*dir*cough*ect*cough*in*cough*sult*cough*) And that wasn't? Quite frankly, after that ignorant mess, I'm about ready to ignore all further arguments from you and quite possibly block my vision of all your posts in this thread. If you want to state your opinion, you have to learn the facts behind it first, and I refuse to accept the beliefs of someone that honestly believes evolution is about intelligence, takes place over just a couple thousand years, and only affects the sum of the bones, rather than the parts.
I tried to be polite. I really tried. I just couldn't hold it up; not after that nonsense. I mean, evolution over just a few thousand years? Seriously? Sorry, GA, but you were wrong: I did end up coming out sounding like I'm flaming. Gah, I just wish YEC's would learn what fossils are and the basics (at least the very BASICS) about how evolution works.
|
|
|