| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"jabriol" |
| Date: |
04 Sep 2003 09:17:04 PM |
| Object: |
TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
Third "Day"
"'Let the waters under the heavens be brought together into one place and
let the dry land appear.' And it came to be so. And God began calling the
dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the waters he called Seas."
(Genesis 1:9, 10) As usual, the account does not describe how this was done.
No doubt, tremendous earth movements would have been involved in the
formation of land areas. Geologists would explain such major upheavals as
catastrophism. But Genesis indicates direction and control by a Creator.
In the Biblical account where God is described as questioning Job about his
knowledge of the earth, a variety of developments concerning earth's history
are described: its measurements, its cloud masses, its seas and how their
waves were limited by dry land-many things in general about the creation,
spanning long periods of time. Among these things, comparing earth to a
building, the Bible says that God asked Job: "Into what have its socket
pedestals been sunk down, or who laid its cornerstone?"-Job 38:6.
Interestingly, like "socket pedestals," earth's crust is much thicker under
continents and even more so under mountain ranges, pushing deep into the
underlying mantle, like tree roots into soil. "The idea that mountains and
continents had roots has been tested over and over again, and shown to be
valid," says Putnam's Geology. Oceanic crust is only about 5 miles thick,
but continental roots go down about 20 miles and mountain roots penetrate
about twice that far. And all earth's layers press inward upon earth's core
from all directions, making it like a great "cornerstone" of support.
Whatever means were used to accomplish the raising up of dry land, the
important point is: Both the Bible and science recognize it as one of the
stages in the forming of the earth.
.
|
|
| User: "Dirk Murcray" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
05 Sep 2003 10:48:16 AM |
|
|
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote in message news:<AmS5b.527233$Bf5.70657@news.easynews.com>...
Third "Day"
"'Let the waters under the heavens be brought together into one place and
let the dry land appear.' And it came to be so.
Not surprisngly, ancient Hebrew folklore (the Bible) got it wrong from
the get-go. Dry land did not "appear" from the waters, rather it was
the other way around. There were no seas, or any substantial
quantities of liquid water on the earth's surface for nearly a billion
years. When the oceans did form, two-thirds of the dry land
disappeared.
And God began calling the
dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the waters he called Seas."
(Genesis 1:9, 10) As usual, the account does not describe how this was done.
No doubt, tremendous earth movements would have been involved in the
formation of land areas.
Wrong again. No crustal movement (beyond localized resurfacing due to
vulcanism) was involved or possible until ocean formation initiated
plate tectonics.
Geologists would explain such major upheavals as
catastrophism.
Catastrophism has been dead since geology was in its infancy.
But Genesis indicates direction and control by a Creator.
No sh*t. No news there.
<snip remainder. Since the premise is wrong, all that follows is
obviously irrelevant)
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
05 Sep 2003 05:25:53 PM |
|
|
"Dirk Murcray" <dmurcray@wwcc.cc.wy.us> wrote in message
news:ceb080d7.0309050748.5a5da769@posting.google.com...
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote in message
news:<AmS5b.527233$Bf5.70657@news.easynews.com>...
Third "Day"
"'Let the waters under the heavens be brought together into one place
and
let the dry land appear.' And it came to be so.
Not surprisngly, ancient Hebrew folklore (the Bible) got it wrong from
the get-go. Dry land did not "appear" from the waters, rather it was
the other way around. There were no seas, or any substantial
quantities of liquid water on the earth's surface for nearly a billion
years. When the oceans did form, two-thirds of the dry land
disappeared.
the scripture does not say at what time did God, commence his "construction"
on the planet. As stated in a previous post.
And God began calling the
dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the waters he called Seas."
(Genesis 1:9, 10) As usual, the account does not describe how this was
done.
No doubt, tremendous earth movements would have been involved in the
formation of land areas.
Wrong again. No crustal movement (beyond localized resurfacing due to
vulcanism) was involved or possible until ocean formation initiated
plate tectonics.
Geologists would explain such major upheavals as
catastrophism.
Catastrophism has been dead since geology was in its infancy.
But Genesis indicates direction and control by a Creator.
No sh*t. No news there.
<snip remainder. Since the premise is wrong, all that follows is
obviously irrelevant)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Hattan" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
05 Sep 2003 08:31:40 AM |
|
|
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote:
Third "Day"
"'Let the waters under the heavens be brought together into one place and
let the dry land appear.' And it came to be so. And God began calling the
dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the waters he called Seas."
(Genesis 1:9, 10) As usual, the account does not describe how this was done.
No doubt, tremendous earth movements would have been involved in the
formation of land areas. Geologists would explain such major upheavals as
catastrophism. But Genesis indicates direction and control by a Creator.
Problem is, there's no evidence of it happening that way.
---
John Hattan Grand High UberPope - First Church of Shatnerology
john@thecodezone.com http://www.shatnerology.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
05 Sep 2003 05:21:55 PM |
|
|
"John Hattan" <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message
news:uv3hlvkn3vnn7cuh241jrrh3tfdjbfn6s2@4ax.com...
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote:
Third "Day"
"'Let the waters under the heavens be brought together into one place
and
let the dry land appear.' And it came to be so. And God began calling the
dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the waters he called Seas."
(Genesis 1:9, 10) As usual, the account does not describe how this was
done.
No doubt, tremendous earth movements would have been involved in the
formation of land areas. Geologists would explain such major upheavals as
catastrophism. But Genesis indicates direction and control by a Creator.
Problem is, there's no evidence of it happening that way.
sorta like evolution as the origin of man eh?
..com http://www.shatnerology.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Hattan" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
06 Sep 2003 08:55:03 AM |
|
|
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote:
"John Hattan" <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message
news:uv3hlvkn3vnn7cuh241jrrh3tfdjbfn6s2@4ax.com...
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote:
Third "Day"
"'Let the waters under the heavens be brought together into one place
and
let the dry land appear.' And it came to be so. And God began calling the
dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the waters he called Seas."
(Genesis 1:9, 10) As usual, the account does not describe how this was
done.
No doubt, tremendous earth movements would have been involved in the
formation of land areas. Geologists would explain such major upheavals as
catastrophism. But Genesis indicates direction and control by a Creator.
Problem is, there's no evidence of it happening that way.
sorta like evolution as the origin of man eh?
Shall I accept your attempt to change the subject as a concession that
there is indeed no evidence for your position?
---
John Hattan Grand High UberPope - First Church of Shatnerology
john@thecodezone.com http://www.shatnerology.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
06 Sep 2003 11:02:50 AM |
|
|
"John Hattan" <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message
news:gnpjlv03csnlsptqeco56kc9j37vdq0h1a@4ax.com...
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote:
"John Hattan" <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message
news:uv3hlvkn3vnn7cuh241jrrh3tfdjbfn6s2@4ax.com...
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote:
Third "Day"
"'Let the waters under the heavens be brought together into one place
and
let the dry land appear.' And it came to be so. And God began calling
the
dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the waters he called
Seas."
(Genesis 1:9, 10) As usual, the account does not describe how this was
done.
No doubt, tremendous earth movements would have been involved in the
formation of land areas. Geologists would explain such major upheavals
as
catastrophism. But Genesis indicates direction and control by a
Creator.
Problem is, there's no evidence of it happening that way.
sorta like evolution as the origin of man eh?
Shall I accept your attempt to change the subject as a concession that
there is indeed no evidence for your position?
no attempt here..there is no evidence that evolution is the origin of man
neither.
---
John Hattan Grand High UberPope - First Church of Shatnerology
john@thecodezone.com http://www.shatnerology.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
06 Sep 2003 10:25:44 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 08:55:03 -0500, John Hattan wrote:
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote:
"John Hattan" <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message
news:uv3hlvkn3vnn7cuh241jrrh3tfdjbfn6s2@4ax.com...
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote:
Third "Day"
"'Let the waters under the heavens be brought together into one place
and
let the dry land appear.' And it came to be so. And God began calling
the dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the waters he called
Seas." (Genesis 1:9, 10) As usual, the account does not describe how
this was
done.
No doubt, tremendous earth movements would have been involved in the
formation of land areas. Geologists would explain such major upheavals
as catastrophism. But Genesis indicates direction and control by a
Creator.
Problem is, there's no evidence of it happening that way.
sorta like evolution as the origin of man eh?
Shall I accept your attempt to change the subject as a concession that
there is indeed no evidence for your position?
Has there *ever been evidence for a Jabber's position?
--
Mark K. Bilbo
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
05 Sep 2003 11:19:02 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 22:21:55 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
sorta like evolution as the origin of man eh?
No one but a religious fanatic claims that a) man had a distinct
origin or that b) evolution is abiogenesis.
--
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."
- Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Varicose Brain" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
05 Sep 2003 10:57:30 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 22:21:55 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
Problem is, there's no evidence of it happening that way.
sorta like evolution as the origin of man eh?
Jaberiol, somebody ought to ***** you in the ear to give you some
brains.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
05 Sep 2003 07:39:42 PM |
|
|
jabriol wrote:
"John Hattan" <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message
news:uv3hlvkn3vnn7cuh241jrrh3tfdjbfn6s2@4ax.com...
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote:
Third "Day"
"'Let the waters under the heavens be brought together into one place
and
let the dry land appear.' And it came to be so. And God began calling the
dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the waters he called Seas."
(Genesis 1:9, 10) As usual, the account does not describe how this was
done.
No doubt, tremendous earth movements would have been involved in the
formation of land areas. Geologists would explain such major upheavals as
catastrophism. But Genesis indicates direction and control by a Creator.
Problem is, there's no evidence of it happening that way.
sorta like evolution as the origin of man eh?
===>You don't understand evolution, but from what you think of it,
at least you admit there is no evidence for that fable in the Bible.
That is progress! -- L.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
05 Sep 2003 08:10:48 PM |
|
|
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote in message
news:3F592CCE.CD47962B@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
jabriol wrote:
"John Hattan" <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message
news:uv3hlvkn3vnn7cuh241jrrh3tfdjbfn6s2@4ax.com...
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote:
Third "Day"
"'Let the waters under the heavens be brought together into one
place
and
let the dry land appear.' And it came to be so. And God began calling
the
dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the waters he called
Seas."
(Genesis 1:9, 10) As usual, the account does not describe how this
was
done.
No doubt, tremendous earth movements would have been involved in the
formation of land areas. Geologists would explain such major
upheavals as
catastrophism. But Genesis indicates direction and control by a
Creator.
Problem is, there's no evidence of it happening that way.
sorta like evolution as the origin of man eh?
===>You don't understand evolution, but from what you think of it,
at least you admit there is no evidence for that fable in the Bible.
That is progress! -- L.
oh, I understand it well....
I doubt that you do..
here is the question I call the Buddika colosal hole:
Does evolution as the origin of man pass the scientific method...?
everyone evade this as the plague
.
|
|
|
| User: "=^..^= }" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
05 Sep 2003 08:56:56 PM |
|
|
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote in message
news:sua6b.596625$Bf5.81906@news.easynews.com...
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote in message
news:3F592CCE.CD47962B@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
===================
No matter what you answer Jabber's is now claiming most of his posts are
FORGERIES and he's NUKED most off Google. Just to let you all know his new
slimy game here on Usenet.
Larry Keebler
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
06 Sep 2003 08:31:29 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003 20:56:56 -0500, "=^..^= }<\(\(\(0>"
<no-real-love@the-wickedWTs.net> posted in alt.atheism:
No matter what you answer Jabber's is now claiming most of his posts are
FORGERIES and he's NUKED most off Google. Just to let you all know his new
slimy game here on Usenet.
You mean that his new game is his old game?
--
"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education and social
ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he
had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."
-Albert Einstein
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
06 Sep 2003 10:26:34 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 01:31:29 +0000, Al Klein wrote:
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003 20:56:56 -0500, "=^..^= }<\(\(\(0>"
<no-real-love@the-wickedWTs.net> posted in alt.atheism:
No matter what you answer Jabber's is now claiming most of his posts are
FORGERIES and he's NUKED most off Google. Just to let you all know his
new slimy game here on Usenet.
You mean that his new game is his old game?
The posting on the left has become the posting on the right...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
06 Sep 2003 08:30:57 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 01:10:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
Does evolution as the origin of man pass the scientific method...?
There is no "origin of man". Man evolved, he didn't pop out of an
"evolution".
everyone evade this as the plague
Is your yellow loud? Will you evade this question?
Of course everyone "evades" your question - it's meaningless.
--
"I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the
type of which we are conscious in ourselves. An individual who should survive his
physical death is also beyond my comprehension,...; such notions are for the fears or
absurd egoism of feeble souls."
- Albert Einstein
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 06:16:58 AM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:2g2llvslc2cc1f3paq63a0rp1hatu40f2i@Pern.rk...
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 01:10:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
Does evolution as the origin of man pass the scientific method...?
There is no "origin of man". Man evolved, he didn't pop out of an
"evolution".
still no evidence of "man evolved" ... just speculation.
"man evolved"does not pass the scientific method.
everyone evade this as the plague
Is your yellow loud? Will you evade this question?
Of course everyone "evades" your question - it's meaningless.
--
the scientific method is meaningless?
I see... so evolution is based on faith.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 07:45:41 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 11:16:58 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:2g2llvslc2cc1f3paq63a0rp1hatu40f2i@Pern.rk...
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 01:10:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
Does evolution as the origin of man pass the scientific method...?
There is no "origin of man". Man evolved, he didn't pop out of an
"evolution".
still no evidence of "man evolved"
Except for all the evidence.
"man evolved"does not pass the scientific method.
Except for all the evidence.
everyone evade this as the plague
Is your yellow loud? Will you evade this question?
Of course everyone "evades" your question - it's meaningless.
the scientific method is meaningless?
No, your posts are.
I see
No, you've never seen.
... so evolution is based on faith.
Yes, the faith that reality is real. And the tons of evidence that
back up that faith.
--
"I can't activate two neurons simultaneously, and I vote"
- The theistic majority
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
08 Sep 2003 04:50:25 AM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:h6knlvk2ffitf0jkol2s6jhgveuhvvdave@Pern.rk...
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 11:16:58 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:2g2llvslc2cc1f3paq63a0rp1hatu40f2i@Pern.rk...
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 01:10:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
Does evolution as the origin of man pass the scientific method...?
There is no "origin of man". Man evolved, he didn't pop out of an
"evolution".
still no evidence of "man evolved"
Except for all the evidence.
what evidence?
"man evolved"does not pass the scientific method.
Except for all the evidence.
what evidence?
everyone evade this as the plague
Is your yellow loud? Will you evade this question?
Of course everyone "evades" your question - it's meaningless.
the scientific method is meaningless?
No, your posts are.
well then dont reply to them..
but you still nor anyone else has explained why evolution does not pass the
scientific method.. we know nyou cant explain it.
I see
No, you've never seen.
... so evolution is based on faith.
Yes, the faith that reality is real. And the tons of evidence that
back up that faith.
what evidence?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Varicose Brain" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 10:58:29 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 11:16:58 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:2g2llvslc2cc1f3paq63a0rp1hatu40f2i@Pern.rk...
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 01:10:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
Does evolution as the origin of man pass the scientific method...?
There is no "origin of man". Man evolved, he didn't pop out of an
"evolution".
still no evidence of "man evolved" ... just speculation.
"man evolved"does not pass the scientific method.
Is your yellow loud? Will you evade this question?
Of course everyone "evades" your question - it's meaningless.
--
the scientific method is meaningless?
I see... so evolution is based on faith.
....as if you know what the scientic method is.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 12:19:02 PM |
|
|
"Varicose Brain" <lacruiser@aol.com> wrote in message
news:qukmlv4ajiu6dq7b5ql71ve0cif9oulddd@4ax.com...
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 11:16:58 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:2g2llvslc2cc1f3paq63a0rp1hatu40f2i@Pern.rk...
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 01:10:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
Does evolution as the origin of man pass the scientific method...?
There is no "origin of man". Man evolved, he didn't pop out of an
"evolution".
still no evidence of "man evolved" ... just speculation.
"man evolved"does not pass the scientific method.
Is your yellow loud? Will you evade this question?
Of course everyone "evades" your question - it's meaningless.
--
the scientific method is meaningless?
I see... so evolution is based on faith.
...as if you know what the scientic method is.
Well then please tell us how does the evolution of man pass the scientific
method.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 07:47:14 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 17:19:02 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
Well then please tell us how does the evolution of man pass the scientific
method.
Evolution is observed every day. (You're not a clone of your parent.)
Science doesn't look for evidence to prove that what is observed is
what is observed.
That you don't have any idea of what "evolution" means is your
problem, not ours.
--
"I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the
type of which we are conscious in ourselves. An individual who should survive his
physical death is also beyond my comprehension,...; such notions are for the fears or
absurd egoism of feeble souls."
- Albert Einstein
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Varicose Brain" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 02:40:51 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 17:19:02 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:2g2llvslc2cc1f3paq63a0rp1hatu40f2i@Pern.rk...
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 01:10:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
Does evolution as the origin of man pass the scientific method...?
There is no "origin of man". Man evolved, he didn't pop out of an
"evolution".
still no evidence of "man evolved" ... just speculation.
"man evolved"does not pass the scientific method.
Is your yellow loud? Will you evade this question?
Of course everyone "evades" your question - it's meaningless.
--
the scientific method is meaningless?
I see... so evolution is based on faith.
...as if you know what the scientic method is.
Well then please tell us how does the evolution of man pass the scientific
method.
Oink, oink...
That means that I don't throw pearls before swine...
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 03:31:07 PM |
|
|
"Varicose Brain" <lacruiser@aol.com> wrote in message
news:642nlvo0ed2sru7sm57mrrqnhdb4v8urip@4ax.com...
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 17:19:02 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:2g2llvslc2cc1f3paq63a0rp1hatu40f2i@Pern.rk...
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 01:10:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
posted in alt.atheism:
Does evolution as the origin of man pass the scientific method...?
There is no "origin of man". Man evolved, he didn't pop out of an
"evolution".
still no evidence of "man evolved" ... just speculation.
"man evolved"does not pass the scientific method.
Is your yellow loud? Will you evade this question?
Of course everyone "evades" your question - it's meaningless.
--
the scientific method is meaningless?
I see... so evolution is based on faith.
...as if you know what the scientic method is.
Well then please tell us how does the evolution of man pass the
scientific
method.
Oink, oink...
That means that I don't throw pearls before swine...
Well then, once again.. we see that no one, can't use the scientific method
to justify evolution as the origin of man..
therfore we must rely on faith..
evolution another god for the pantheon of science.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Varicose Brain" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 04:29:59 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 20:31:07 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
Oink, oink...
That means that I don't throw pearls before swine...
Well then, once again.. we see that no one, can't use the scientific method
to justify evolution as the origin of man..
therfore we must rely on faith..
evolution another god for the pantheon of science.
Just who is in included "we" that you are talking about?
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 04:55:38 PM |
|
|
"Varicose Brain" <lacruiser@aol.com> wrote in message
news:dk8nlvk30gulja6r5avcn2r64qomt7dmkn@4ax.com...
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 20:31:07 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
Oink, oink...
That means that I don't throw pearls before swine...
Well then, once again.. we see that no one, can't use the scientific
method
to justify evolution as the origin of man..
therfore we must rely on faith..
evolution another god for the pantheon of science.
Just who is in included "we" that you are talking about?
readers of the thread...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Varicose Brain" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 05:11:30 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 21:55:38 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
Oink, oink...
That means that I don't throw pearls before swine...
Well then, once again.. we see that no one, can't use the scientific
method
to justify evolution as the origin of man..
therfore we must rely on faith..
evolution another god for the pantheon of science.
Just who is in included "we" that you are talking about?
readers of the thread...
How do you know this? Did you take a poll? Did the readers vote for
you to be their spokesperson?
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 05:55:24 PM |
|
|
"Varicose Brain" <lacruiser@aol.com> wrote in message
news:d5bnlvocnalt2ckscef8bhhsu2tarjb89n@4ax.com...
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 21:55:38 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
Oink, oink...
That means that I don't throw pearls before swine...
Well then, once again.. we see that no one, can't use the scientific
method
to justify evolution as the origin of man..
therfore we must rely on faith..
evolution another god for the pantheon of science.
Just who is in included "we" that you are talking about?
readers of the thread...
How do you know this? Did you take a poll? Did the readers vote for
you to be their spokesperson?
uh.. please read how usenet work...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Varicose Brain" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 07:29:29 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:55:24 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
Oink, oink...
That means that I don't throw pearls before swine...
Well then, once again.. we see that no one, can't use the scientific
method
to justify evolution as the origin of man..
therfore we must rely on faith..
evolution another god for the pantheon of science.
Just who is in included "we" that you are talking about?
readers of the thread...
How do you know this? Did you take a poll? Did the readers vote for
you to be their spokesperson?
uh.. please read how usenet work...
OK, apparently I, too, can be a self-proclaimed spokesperson for the
masses of readers in a newsgroup.
Therefore, "we" see that if the story of the creation is true as it is
presented in the bible, then all human beings are descendants of Adam
and Eve. (or more appropriately, Noah and his clan after the flood)
However, "we" know that this is NOT true, because if it were so, all
men throughout the world would share the same "Y" chromosome, and "we"
know that this is not the case.
Wow! This spokesperson stuff is fun!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ron B." |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 08:08:23 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 20:29:29 -0400, Varicose Brain wrote:
Therefore, "we" see that if the story of the creation is true as it is
presented in the bible, then all human beings are descendants of Adam
and Eve. (or more appropriately, Noah and his clan after the flood)
However, "we" know that this is NOT true, because if it were so, all men
throughout the world would share the same "Y" chromosome, and "we" know
that this is not the case.
Well maybe all humans would have the same mitochondrial DNA. The Y
chromosome is different for each sperm produced by _one_ male. If this
were not true, then dominant traits carried on the Y would be passed to
all male children.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Hattan" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS-Genesis: Creative day III |
07 Sep 2003 08:16:04 PM |
|
|
Varicose Brain <lacruiser@aol.com> wrote:
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:55:24 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
Oink, oink...
That means that I don't throw pearls before swine...
Well then, once again.. we see that no one, can't use the scientific
method
to justify evolution as the origin of man..
therfore we must rely on faith..
evolution another god for the pantheon of science.
Just who is in included "we" that you are talking about?
readers of the thread...
How do you know this? Did you take a poll? Did the readers vote for
you to be their spokesperson?
uh.. please read how usenet work...
OK, apparently I, too, can be a self-proclaimed spokesperson for the
masses of readers in a newsgroup.
Therefore, "we" see that if the story of the creation is true as it is
presented in the bible, then all human beings are descendants of Adam
and Eve. (or more appropriately, Noah and his clan after the flood)
However, "we" know that this is NOT true, because if it were so, all
men throughout the world would share the same "Y" chromosome, and "we"
know that this is not the case.
Well, that's all the proof I need. After all, it states very clearly
that "we" agree that it's true!
---
John Hattan Grand High UberPope - First Church of Shatnerology
john@thecodezone.com http://www.shatnerology.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
