Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
They are what the Bible calls 'fallen angels' or 'sons of God', and their offspring, called 'Nephilim'.
They became men (and women) of 'reknown' --- as in 'reknown scientist' probably.
Originally Posted by VirOptimus
And what scientific work did they do?
This is an ad-lib question, so I'll have to give an ad-lib answer here, but I'll do my best.
They probably did research in eugenics, but another good theory would be that they may have been trying to deplete the earth of its natural resources (mainly anthracite).
I believe God put some of these resources in the ground to be used during the Millennial Reign, when we are going to rebuild the earth after the catastrophes associated with the events of the Tribulation Period, and will need those resources.
They are what the Bible calls 'fallen angels' or 'sons of God', or what those who prefer Hebrew to English (for some odd reason) call 'Nephilim'.
They became men (and women) of 'reknown' --- as in 'reknown scientist' probably.This is an ad-lib question, so I'll have to give an ad-lib answer here, but I'll do my best.
They probably did research in eugenics, but another good theory would be that they may have been trying to deplete the earth of its natural resources (mainly anthracite).
I believe God put some of these resources in the ground to be used during the Millennial Reign, when we are going to rebuild the earth after the catastrophes associated with the events of the Tribulation Period, and will need those resources.
Heh, well, thanks for the answer. Where is the proof for any of this?
Well, as I'm sure you have been told again and again, there is quite a lot of proof for evolution and nothing in that support what you just wrote so no, that is incorrect.
Well, as I'm sure you have been told again and again, there is quite a lot of proof for evolution and nothing in that support what you just wrote so no, that is incorrect.
I must have missed class that day.
I wasn't aware there's 'proof' of anything beyond math and alcohol?
(I'm sure someone "more qualified" will be glad to back me on this --- right, guys?)
Well, as I'm sure you have been told again and again, there is quite a lot of proof for evolution and nothing in that support what you just wrote so no, that is incorrect.
Originally Posted by AV1611VET
With the 'proof' for evolution?
Evidence for evolution, would be a better turn of phrase.
That said, AV, your adlibbing isn't a scientific theory.
So, proof please!
And btw, don't forget this:
Originally Posted by Cabal
Off the top of my head:
Svante Arrhenius
Paul Drude
Both made initial forays into the theory behind acids and conduction respectively. They were considerably wrong, but their work is still lauded for the good points they made and the fact that their work was a step forward in the right direction.
shortened from "theocreologist". As best I can figure; a person who freely conflates religion, biological origins, Biblical poetry, astronomical origins, science, and pseudo-science, via whatever means of logical fallacies, quote-mining, revisionist history, personal alteration of language, and other miscellaneous ad-hocery is readily at hand.
Linear Mode
