Religions > Atheism > Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com?
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jim Spaza" |
| Date: |
10 Jun 2005 04:20:04 PM |
| Object: |
Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
This challenge was issued by GlennGlenn (655321) -- aa#825.
What is wrong with the Christian apologetic website
www.answersingenesis.com ???
Please be courteous and specific.
.
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 07:11:46 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On 13 Jun 2005 15:16:22 -0700, "osprey"
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> let us all know that:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On 13 Jun 2005 13:01:59 -0700, "osprey"
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> let us all know that:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On 13 Jun 2005 06:29:32 -0700, "osprey"
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> let us all know that:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:17:27 -0400, "Johnny"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> let us all know that:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkekb7jagv.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ricky Ticket" <not@given.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BED1F7170007474A2E45AB40@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 9:29:12 -0400, Johnny wrote
(in message <GKWqe.661$zm.440@bignews4.bellsouth.net>):
Do you see a problem with amassing evidence which verifies/supports the
Biblical account?
If it is presented as a "Scientific" study and as "honesty", then yes. I
have a problem with it because it is neither scientific or honest. It is
religious fervor and "belief". :o)
Are you missing the evidence by refusing to accept that which you do not
believe?
She's not the one assuming the conclusion and then trying to find only the
facts that support it. You are.
How so?
You assume that there is a god and twist reality to show it.
Why would someone with any intelligence discount something when proof is
abundant to support it?
But there is no evidence of "god".
How did the first two human beings come into existence?
How did god come into existence?
Good question and I don't have an answer. All I can say is everything
has a beginning and maybe God is that beginning to everything we see
today.
Self-contradictory.
So you have no real explanation.
That's right: you have no explanation for how god came into
existence, yet you demand one for humans. How hypocritical of you.
You do realize, that even Archeology supports many of the stories in
the bible..
You do realize that archaeology supports the Wizard of Oz,
since Kansas exists, and the Illiad, since Troy existed.
You further realize that many of the biblical stories have
been shown to have not happened.
Such as?
The flood. The exodus. The conquest of Canaan.
As far as the exodus or the conquest goes I can't say because I don't
know.
They never happened.
The flood...a major flood was proven, it is believed to have derived
from the black sea.
There are questions as to the time frame, and clearly it
wasn't a world-wide flood.
Other stories, such as Soddom and Gomorrah have been proven to be true.
No, Soddom and Gomorrah were proven FALSE.
. Now,
even science doesn't know if it is the true shroud or a hoax.
Yes it does: HOAX.
The problem with evidence is, you don't want to see it.
Ad hominem fallacy.
The problem with you is that you make up things and call them
evidence.
Ah, you decided to take the childish route.
*laughs*
I just showed you why your insult was fallacious, dipshit. I
turned it around on you, and now you cry about it.
Do you feel like a man now?
You obviously feel like a child.
I didn't throw out an insult.
Yes you did.
Don
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 07:35:43 PM |
|
|
osprey wrote:
<snip>
The flood...a major flood was proven, it is
believed
to have derived from the black sea.
<snip>
osprey:
Actually, a major flood event in the Black Sea basin
was claimed to have derived from the Mediterranean Sea.
Bill Ryan and Walter Pitman aren't supporting their
BSFlood hypothesis anymore.
It was never proven, but it has been disproven.
It is a failed hypothesis.
Allow me to grace you with my standard rant on this
subject:
<ENGAGE RANT MODE>
Sorry, there was no sudden flood in the Black Sea basin.
It was all a publicist's dream.
Parts of the modern Black Sea Flood claim are total
fantasy, like the imaginary dam that supposedly broke
7500 years ago. Somebody wrote that down, and suddenly
it was established as a "fact".
The trouble is, altogether too many people have the
mistaken idea that a catastrophic flood in the Black
Sea was the inspiration for the Noah's Flood story in
the Bible.
The TV programs on that topic are outdated and overly
sensational and can be safely ignored.
Sadly, you, and maybe millions of other people,
have been misled on this subject.
Alas, there was no "Noachian" Black Sea Flood, and
the science in William Ryan's and Walter Pitman's book
"Noah's Flood: the event that changed history" has in
several cases been superceded by better information that
indicates that there was no such event, and was in most
cases preceded by evidence that indicated that there was
no such event.
Ryan and Pitman set out to overturn the orthodox view
of the history of the Black Sea, but they have apparently
abandoned their hypothesis, if more recent articles
co-authored by Ryan are any indication.
The orthodox view has prevailed, subject to some recent
modifications.
There is evidence that there was an _outflow_ southward
from the Black Sea through the Bosphorus into the
Mediterranean from more than 10000 years ago
(well before Ryan and Pitman's initial 5600 BCE flood date),
continuously until the present day, though there may have
been a relatively short interruption.
And evidence from the south shore of the Black sea shows
that the level of the Black Sea was only 18 m below the
present level at the time of the supposed flood.
The more recent claim by Ryan puts the flood date at
8400 BP, or about 9000 years ago, but then the "floodwaters"
through the Bosphorus channel would have been only about
5 metres deep. 9000 years ago is when everybody else
always thought that Mediterranean saltwater first entered
the Black Sea. At about that time, the last phase of
Glacial Lake Agassiz, in central Canada, finally found an
outlet to the sea through or under the remnants of the
Laurentide Ice Sheet, and so out into the North Atlantic,
raising sea level an appreciable amount, and _perhaps_
triggering a sudden inflow of saltwater into the Black Sea
basin.
But probably not sudden or great enough to inspire a
Noachian Flood myth.
Better candidates are widespread inundation of low-lying
parts of the Persian Gulf associated with the final draining
of Glacial Lake Agassiz, and similar flooding of the Tigris-
Euphrates delta, and (most likely) simultaneous flooding of
the Tigris and Euphrates, which would have looked like a
flooding of the entire world from the viewpoint of a person
near present-day Baghdad. These candidates could each or all
have inspired the flood myth in the epic of Gilgamesh, which
predates the first known appearance of the Noachian Flood myth.
Check this out, for a layman-friendly synopsis of the
refutation:
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/bs=AD=AD=ADeaflod.htm
On the draining of Glacial Lake Agassiz:
http://cgrg.geog.uvic.ca/abstr=AD=AD=ADacts/PerkinsOnceDuring.html
Full article:
http://www.highbeam.com/librar=AD=ADy/doc0.asp?DOCID=3D1G1:94334735&=AD=ADr=
efid=3Dip_...
And here's a fairly recent news item on refutation of
Ryan's and Pitman's hypothesis:
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/o=AD=AD=ADbserver/news/4949335.htm
<BEGIN QUOTE>
January 14, 2003
Scientists are seriously challenging a recent, fascinating
proposal that Noah's epic story -- setting sail with an ark
jam-full of animal couples -- was based on an actual
catastrophic flood that suddenly filled the Black Sea 7,500
years ago, forcing people to flee.
In a detailed new look at the rocks, sediments, currents
and seashells in and around the Black Sea, an international
research team pooh-poohs the Noah flood idea, arguing that
all the geologic, hydrologic and biologic signs are wrong.
Little that the earth can tell us seems to fit the Noah story,
they say. The new research takes direct aim at the work of
two Columbia University geologists -- William Ryan and Walter
Pitman -- whose proposal in 1997 ignited much new interest,
and much new research, into Middle East history and geology.
<END QUOTE>
Also, Ballard did not find Noah's House, and he has recently
admitted that he didn't find any evidence of human occupation
of the Black Sea continental shelf, let alone any support for
the BSFlood hypothesis.
Here is another recent news article telling you about that
(please be warned that several statements in the article
are erroneous, e.g.
"Scholars agree the Black Sea flooded when
rising world sea levels caused the Mediterranean to
burst over land and fill the then-freshwater lake."):
"Black Sea Trip Yields No Flood Conclusions"
http://www.puresupply.com/newa=AD=AD=ADp/D8458SGG3.html
There was no actual ruined building found by Ballard, but
rather just a partly rectangular outline of raised bed
on the continental shelf, that might even be
the outline of
the wheelhouse of a modern freighter.
To the northwest the outline continues, and narrows to a point.
To the southeast, the outline continues for a shorter distance,
and ends in a rounded curve.
Just what you'd expect when a sunken ship's hull is covered with
sediment.
The wood didn't necessarily contaminate the site, it might have
been part of the ship, and so accurately dates the site.
The roughly-worked stones could have been the ship's ballast.
If you wish, I can supply links to the writeups on Ballard's finds
in professional journals.
And here are a couple of scientific papers:
"Is the abrupt drowning of the Black Sea shelf at
7150 yr BP a myth?"
http://lava.tamu.edu/courses/g=AD=AD=ADeol101/herbert/docs/BlackSeaF=ADl=AD=
=ADoodCritiq...
"Persistent Holocene Outflow from the Black Sea to the Eastern
Mediterranean Contradicts Noah's Flood Hypothesis"
http://www.geosociety.org/pubs=AD=AD=AD/gsatoday/toc0205.htm
And there's lots more, but you'd need access to scientific journals
to read it, but you could ask me for more details if you want them.
Some of the articles are available on the Web.
<DISENGAGE RANT MODE>
Sorry to splash water in the frying pan.=20
Daryl Krupa
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ricky Ticket" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
16 Jun 2005 12:26:27 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 16:01:59 -0400, osprey wrote
(in message <1118692919.583802.166020@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>):
You further realize that many of the biblical stories have
been shown to have not happened.
Such as?
The catholic church teaches to not take the bibles "STORIES" as a literal
explanation of past events. It is not a historical document.
For example, Original sin...
The catholic church used to teach baptism as a cleansing of original sin
(because of adam and eve's love of fresh fruit) from the sole of newborn
children so that they could enter heaven.
Realizing how that made "a loving god" appear that he would damn an innocent
newborn, in recent times (around 1982 I think), they changed it to "baptism
is a welcoming into the catholic church". I learned this while attending a
class with a friend. He was to become a "godfather" and a 1 hour mandatory
meet with a priest and a quick lesson on his responsibilities as a godfather
It was VERY interesting to say the least. The priest was very forthcoming and
honest with the "changes" that the church was quietly making to move with the
times.
BTW the meeting was more about the customary "donation" after the ceremony
then anything else and lasted about 15 minutes with 10 of them talking about
money. :D
--
"Anytime an inmate escapes, it is justification for deadly force." --Osprey
.
|
|
|
| User: "BOB" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
16 Jun 2005 12:31:56 AM |
|
|
Ricky Ticket <not@given.com> wrote in
news:0001HW.BED685F00007697D2F7105C0@news.east.earthlink.net:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 16:01:59 -0400, osprey wrote
(in message <1118692919.583802.166020@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>):
You further realize that many of the biblical stories have
been shown to have not happened.
Such as?
The catholic church teaches to not take the bibles "STORIES" as a
literal explanation of past events. It is not a historical document.
For example, Original sin...
The catholic church used to teach baptism as a cleansing of original
sin (because of adam and eve's love of fresh fruit) from the sole of
newborn children so that they could enter heaven.
Realizing how that made "a loving god" appear that he would damn an
innocent newborn, in recent times (around 1982 I think), they changed
it to "baptism is a welcoming into the catholic church". I learned
this while attending a class with a friend. He was to become a
"godfather" and a 1 hour mandatory meet with a priest and a quick
lesson on his responsibilities as a godfather
It was VERY interesting to say the least. The priest was very
forthcoming and honest with the "changes" that the church was quietly
making to move with the times.
BTW the meeting was more about the customary "donation" after the
ceremony then anything else and lasted about 15 minutes with 10 of
them talking about money. :D
Of course, money is what churches are really all about.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ricky Ticket" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
16 Jun 2005 12:51:16 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 15:17:36 -0400, Don Kresch wrote
(in message <1smra1pbirv22oe42guqf0u59qktt9v4mg@4ax.com>):
How did god come into existence?
Some Neanderthals fear of the dark? :o)
--
"Anytime an inmate escapes, it is justification for deadly force." --Osprey
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 01:16:52 PM |
|
|
On 13 Jun 2005 06:29:32 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1118669372.232454.221700@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:17:27 -0400, "Johnny"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> let us all know that:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkekb7jagv.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ricky Ticket" <not@given.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BED1F7170007474A2E45AB40@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 9:29:12 -0400, Johnny wrote
(in message <GKWqe.661$zm.440@bignews4.bellsouth.net>):
Do you see a problem with amassing evidence which verifies/supports the
Biblical account?
If it is presented as a "Scientific" study and as "honesty", then yes. I
have a problem with it because it is neither scientific or honest. It is
religious fervor and "belief". :o)
Are you missing the evidence by refusing to accept that which you do not
believe?
She's not the one assuming the conclusion and then trying to find only the
facts that support it. You are.
How so?
You assume that there is a god and twist reality to show it.
Why would someone with any intelligence discount something when proof is
abundant to support it?
But there is no evidence of "god".
How did the first two human beings come into existence?
As the mutated offspring of another species.
How did the
very first sperm and egg come into existence in the Middle Eastern
region that started the human race?
You do realize, that even Archeology supports many of the stories in
the bible..such as where the human race started.
Absolute nonsense.
The problem with evidence is, you don't want to see it. And no one can
do a thing about that, except you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 02:58:39 PM |
|
|
Attila wrote:
On 13 Jun 2005 06:29:32 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1118669372.232454.221700@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:17:27 -0400, "Johnny"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> let us all know that:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkekb7jagv.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ricky Ticket" <not@given.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BED1F7170007474A2E45AB40@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 9:29:12 -0400, Johnny wrote
(in message <GKWqe.661$zm.440@bignews4.bellsouth.net>):
Do you see a problem with amassing evidence which verifies/supports the
Biblical account?
If it is presented as a "Scientific" study and as "honesty", then yes. I
have a problem with it because it is neither scientific or honest. It is
religious fervor and "belief". :o)
Are you missing the evidence by refusing to accept that which you do not
believe?
She's not the one assuming the conclusion and then trying to find only the
facts that support it. You are.
How so?
You assume that there is a god and twist reality to show it.
Why would someone with any intelligence discount something when proof is
abundant to support it?
But there is no evidence of "god".
How did the first two human beings come into existence?
As the mutated offspring of another species.
Explain it in detail, come on let's see what you know and how you can
actually prove it. You go on proof right? Well? Let get ready to dig
deep.
How did the
very first sperm and egg come into existence in the Middle Eastern
region that started the human race?
You do realize, that even Archeology supports many of the stories in
the bible..such as where the human race started.
Absolute nonsense.
Wow, what a rebuttal
The problem with evidence is, you don't want to see it. And no one can
do a thing about that, except you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 04:04:03 PM |
|
|
On 13 Jun 2005 12:58:39 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1118692719.331220.49160@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> wrote:
Attila wrote:
On 13 Jun 2005 06:29:32 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id
<1118669372.232454.221700@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:17:27 -0400, "Johnny"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> let us all know that:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkekb7jagv.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ricky Ticket" <not@given.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BED1F7170007474A2E45AB40@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 9:29:12 -0400, Johnny wrote
(in message <GKWqe.661$zm.440@bignews4.bellsouth.net>):
Do you see a problem with amassing evidence which verifies/supports the
Biblical account?
If it is presented as a "Scientific" study and as "honesty", then yes. I
have a problem with it because it is neither scientific or honest. It is
religious fervor and "belief". :o)
Are you missing the evidence by refusing to accept that which you do not
believe?
She's not the one assuming the conclusion and then trying to find only the
facts that support it. You are.
How so?
You assume that there is a god and twist reality to show it.
Why would someone with any intelligence discount something when proof is
abundant to support it?
But there is no evidence of "god".
How did the first two human beings come into existence?
As the mutated offspring of another species.
Explain it in detail, come on let's see what you know and how you can
actually prove it. You go on proof right? Well? Let get ready to dig
deep.
Since the details you demand are not known (and that fact is well
known to you) they cannot be currently provided. The proof is yet to
be developed but as a working hypothesis it fits the known facts
better than any other scenario.
How did the
very first sperm and egg come into existence in the Middle Eastern
region that started the human race?
You do realize, that even Archeology supports many of the stories in
the bible..such as where the human race started.
Absolute nonsense.
Wow, what a rebuttal
When idiocy such as your posts are presented nothing else is needed.
The problem with evidence is, you don't want to see it. And no one can
do a thing about that, except you.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "655321" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 12:46:08 PM |
|
|
On 2005-06-13 06:29:32 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> said:
How did the first two human beings come into existence? How did the
very first sperm and egg come into existence in the Middle Eastern
region that started the human race?
Another goof who thinks that questions are evidence.
--
GlennGlenn (655321) -- aa#825 --
"Genocide is used sparingly by God in only extreme circumstances." -Jim Spaza
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 02:57:18 PM |
|
|
655321 wrote:
On 2005-06-13 06:29:32 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> said:
How did the first two human beings come into existence? How did the
very first sperm and egg come into existence in the Middle Eastern
region that started the human race?
Another goof who thinks that questions are evidence.
Is that your admission that you can't answer the questions? Or are you
just looking to act like a child and throw insults?
.
|
|
|
| User: "655321" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
14 Jun 2005 02:26:37 PM |
|
|
On 2005-06-13 12:57:18 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> said:
655321 wrote:
On 2005-06-13 06:29:32 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> said:
How did the first two human beings come into existence? How did the
very first sperm and egg come into existence in the Middle Eastern
region that started the human race?
Another goof who thinks that questions are evidence.
Is that your admission that you can't answer the questions?
Is this your defense for your proposal that questions amount to evidence?
Or are you just looking to act like a child and throw insults?
When they are deserved...
--
GlennGlenn (655321) -- aa#825 --
"Genocide is used sparingly by God in only extreme circumstances." -Jim Spaza
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ricky Ticket" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
16 Jun 2005 12:41:51 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 13:46:08 -0400, 655321 wrote
(in message <2005061310460350073%DipthotDipthot@YahooYahooComCom>):
On 2005-06-13 06:29:32 -0700, "osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> said:
How did the first two human beings come into existence? How did the
very first sperm and egg come into existence in the Middle Eastern
region that started the human race?
Another goof who thinks that questions are evidence.
Spud doesn't rise to "goof". ;o)
--
"Anytime an inmate escapes, it is justification for deadly force." --Osprey
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Hayes" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 02:55:25 PM |
|
|
osprey wrote:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:17:27 -0400, "Johnny"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> let us all know that:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkekb7jagv.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ricky Ticket" <not@given.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BED1F7170007474A2E45AB40@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 9:29:12 -0400, Johnny wrote
(in message <GKWqe.661$zm.440@bignews4.bellsouth.net>):
Do you see a problem with amassing evidence which verifies/supports the
Biblical account?
If it is presented as a "Scientific" study and as "honesty", then yes. I
have a problem with it because it is neither scientific or honest. It is
religious fervor and "belief". :o)
Are you missing the evidence by refusing to accept that which you do not
believe?
She's not the one assuming the conclusion and then trying to find only the
facts that support it. You are.
How so?
You assume that there is a god and twist reality to show it.
Why would someone with any intelligence discount something when proof is
abundant to support it?
But there is no evidence of "god".
How did the first two human beings come into existence?
Evolution.
How did the
very first sperm and egg come into existence in the Middle Eastern
region that started the human race?
You do realize, that even Archeology supports many of the stories in
the bible..such as where the human race started.
Wrong. The first humans came from Africa, not the Middle East.
The problem with evidence is, you don't want to see it. And no one can
do a thing about that, except you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 03:03:56 PM |
|
|
Chris Hayes wrote:
osprey wrote:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:17:27 -0400, "Johnny"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> let us all know that:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkekb7jagv.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ricky Ticket" <not@given.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BED1F7170007474A2E45AB40@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 9:29:12 -0400, Johnny wrote
(in message <GKWqe.661$zm.440@bignews4.bellsouth.net>):
Do you see a problem with amassing evidence which verifies/supports the
Biblical account?
If it is presented as a "Scientific" study and as "honesty", then yes. I
have a problem with it because it is neither scientific or honest. It is
religious fervor and "belief". :o)
Are you missing the evidence by refusing to accept that which you do not
believe?
She's not the one assuming the conclusion and then trying to find only the
facts that support it. You are.
How so?
You assume that there is a god and twist reality to show it.
Why would someone with any intelligence discount something when proof is
abundant to support it?
But there is no evidence of "god".
How did the first two human beings come into existence?
Evolution.
Sorry but we have to do better than this. Explain it, if evolution has
the answer then I want to know the answer.
How did the
very first sperm and egg come into existence in the Middle Eastern
region that started the human race?
You do realize, that even Archeology supports many of the stories in
the bible..such as where the human race started.
Wrong. The first humans came from Africa, not the Middle East.
If you believe in evolution and what Geology says, and how the plates
shifted...then the biblical account and what science is saying is
pretty close.
The problem with evidence is, you don't want to see it. And no one can
do a thing about that, except you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 10:47:12 PM |
|
|
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> writes:
Chris Hayes wrote:
osprey wrote:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:17:27 -0400, "Johnny"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> let us all know that:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkekb7jagv.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ricky Ticket" <not@given.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BED1F7170007474A2E45AB40@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 9:29:12 -0400, Johnny wrote
(in message <GKWqe.661$zm.440@bignews4.bellsouth.net>):
Do you see a problem with amassing evidence which
verifies/supports the Biblical account?
If it is presented as a "Scientific" study and as "honesty", then
yes. I have a problem with it because it is neither scientific or
honest. It is religious fervor and "belief". :o)
Are you missing the evidence by refusing to accept that which you do
not believe?
She's not the one assuming the conclusion and then trying to find
only the facts that support it. You are.
How so?
You assume that there is a god and twist reality to show it.
Why would someone with any intelligence discount something when proof
is abundant to support it?
But there is no evidence of "god".
How did the first two human beings come into existence?
Evolution.
Sorry but we have to do better than this. Explain it, if evolution has
the answer then I want to know the answer.
Wait until it's better understood. There are data that have yet to be
discovered.
How did the
very first sperm and egg come into existence in the Middle Eastern
region that started the human race?
You do realize, that even Archeology supports many of the stories in
the bible..such as where the human race started.
Wrong. The first humans came from Africa, not the Middle East.
If you believe in evolution and what Geology says, and how the plates
shifted...then the biblical account and what science is saying is
pretty close.
....except that your understanding of plate tectonics is weak, at best. Plates
don't move that fast. One typical example: the sites where Los Angeles and
San Francisco currently stand will be next-door neighbors to each other as the
Pacific plate slides north and west...ten to fifteen million years from now.
You're trying to insinuate that Africa and the Mideast split apart less than
six thousand years ago, and there is *no* geological evidence to support that.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (soon to be TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Chicago 5, Houston 3 (April 26)
NEXT GAME: Date/opponent/site TBA in August 2005
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 11:44:14 PM |
|
|
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Chris Hayes wrote:
osprey wrote:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:17:27 -0400, "Johnny"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> let us all know that:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkekb7jagv.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ricky Ticket" <not@given.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BED1F7170007474A2E45AB40@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 9:29:12 -0400, Johnny wrote
(in message <GKWqe.661$zm.440@bignews4.bellsouth.net>):
Do you see a problem with amassing evidence which verifies/supports the
Biblical account?
If it is presented as a "Scientific" study and as "honesty", then yes. I
have a problem with it because it is neither scientific or honest. It is
religious fervor and "belief". :o)
Are you missing the evidence by refusing to accept that which you do not
believe?
She's not the one assuming the conclusion and then trying to find only the
facts that support it. You are.
How so?
You assume that there is a god and twist reality to show it.
Why would someone with any intelligence discount something when proof is
abundant to support it?
But there is no evidence of "god".
How did the first two human beings come into existence?
Evolution.
Sorry but we have to do better than this.
Like you can explain God?
Hypocrite.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Hayes" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 03:16:54 PM |
|
|
osprey wrote:
Chris Hayes wrote:
osprey wrote:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:17:27 -0400, "Johnny"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> let us all know that:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkekb7jagv.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ricky Ticket" <not@given.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BED1F7170007474A2E45AB40@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 9:29:12 -0400, Johnny wrote
(in message <GKWqe.661$zm.440@bignews4.bellsouth.net>):
Do you see a problem with amassing evidence which verifies/supports the
Biblical account?
If it is presented as a "Scientific" study and as "honesty", then yes. I
have a problem with it because it is neither scientific or honest. It is
religious fervor and "belief". :o)
Are you missing the evidence by refusing to accept that which you do not
believe?
She's not the one assuming the conclusion and then trying to find only the
facts that support it. You are.
How so?
You assume that there is a god and twist reality to show it.
Why would someone with any intelligence discount something when proof is
abundant to support it?
But there is no evidence of "god".
How did the first two human beings come into existence?
Evolution.
Sorry but we have to do better than this. Explain it, if evolution has
the answer then I want to know the answer.
There's a lot to look at:
http://www.talkorigins.org/
Lots of big words. You might need an adult to explain it to you,
though.
How did the
very first sperm and egg come into existence in the Middle Eastern
region that started the human race?
You do realize, that even Archeology supports many of the stories in
the bible..such as where the human race started.
Wrong. The first humans came from Africa, not the Middle East.
If you believe in evolution and what Geology says, and how the plates
shifted...then the biblical account and what science is saying is
pretty close.
Take your thorazine.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jon." |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 12:57:43 PM |
|
|
osprey wrote:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:17:27 -0400, "Johnny"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> let us all know that:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkekb7jagv.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ricky Ticket" <not@given.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BED1F7170007474A2E45AB40@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 9:29:12 -0400, Johnny wrote
(in message <GKWqe.661$zm.440@bignews4.bellsouth.net>):
Do you see a problem with amassing evidence which verifies/supports the
Biblical account?
If it is presented as a "Scientific" study and as "honesty", then yes. I
have a problem with it because it is neither scientific or honest. It is
religious fervor and "belief". :o)
Are you missing the evidence by refusing to accept that which you do not
believe?
She's not the one assuming the conclusion and then trying to find only the
facts that support it. You are.
How so?
You assume that there is a god and twist reality to show it.
Why would someone with any i | |
