Dinosaurs and Humans Coexisting! (My Thoughts on the Creation Museum)

[lesliedellow]

You do!?

What's God's name?

God.

 

[AV1611VET]

What's God's name?

God.

Thanks for the QED.

 

[Jimmy D]

No.

Atheism is a religion in the same way:

1. denying soccer exists
2. denying bare feed exists
3. denying balding exists
4. denying "off" exists
5. denying stamps exist
6. denying unemployment exists
7. .....etc......

What? That's illogical even for you.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Right.

And I'm Genghis Khan.

Atheists do it just to have something to do, do they?

Are they that bored that they have to target Christianity in America?

Standing up for constitutional secular values and rights is not, by an means, an exclusive "atheist" thing to do.

If it were, the US for example would not be a secular nation, as the vast majority of its citizens are theists. Clearly that vast majority of theistic citizens think the secular constitution is important enough to uphold it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You do!?

What's God's name?

Which God?

 

[AV1611VET]

Which God?

Thanks for the QED.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Thanks for the QED.

I'm just saying, there are hundreds of Gods that have been claimed and/or currently claimed to exist by mankind. The vast majority of them mutually exclusive as well.

All these Gods have names.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm just saying, there are hundreds of Gods that have been claimed and/or currently claimed to exist by mankind. The vast majority of them mutually exclusive as well.

All these Gods have names.

Do you believe in them?

If not, mind if I don't either?

 

[sfs]

Do you believe in them?

If not, mind if I don't either?

You can believe anything you like. After all, you're Genghis Khan.

 

[sethrak]

A metal Cross was installed off the side of the roadway on Highway 50 where a Child's body had been thrown where a father and son, in this country illegally~had disposed of her after rape and murder when she was no longer needed.

A woman, an Atheist was so offended by the Cross that she and her fellows were able to have the Cross ordered removed by the state```

Atheist are not the only religion that is offended by Christian Symbols, the other insists they are~ these are not passive non believers, they are offended because it is a Symbol of the True Faith that shows their religion to be~ Not according to truth or fact~

Atheists have beliefs that corroborate their faith as was insisted on millions by their church in the Soviet.

Those from that church here on this forum are here to mock and attack God's Church and it's peoples~in favor of their faith~with their very zeal to deny being a religion~ they show themselves to be that very thing```

 

[Tanj]

I had the privilege of spending the day at the Creation Museum recently.

I spent a day at the Creation Museum a few years ago. It was many things, privilege isn't one of them. Seriously, under what circumstances is visiting a for-profit venue a privilege?

 

[Tanj]

A metal Cross was installed off the side of the roadway on Highway 50 where a Child's body had been thrown where a father and son, in this country illegally~had disposed of her after rape and murder when she was no longer needed.

A woman, an Atheist was so offended by the Cross that she and her fellows were able to have the Cross ordered removed by the state```

Evidence please.

 

[lesliedellow]

A metal Cross was installed off the side of the roadway on Highway 50 where a Child's body had been thrown where a father and son, in this country illegally~had disposed of her after rape and murder when she was no longer needed.

A woman, an Atheist was so offended by the Cross that she and her fellows were able to have the Cross ordered removed by the state```

Some atheists dislike the intolerance which is perpetrated in their name just as much as you do:

http://www.mrbauld.com/secular.html

 

[Tree of Life]

I spent a day at the Creation Museum a few years ago. It was many things, privilege isn't one of them. Seriously, under what circumstances is visiting a for-profit venue a privilege?

Every breath is a privilege.

 

[Jimmy D]

metal Cross was installed off the side of the roadway on Highway 50 where a Child's body had been thrown where a father and son, in this country illegally~had disposed of her after rape and murder when she was no longer needed.

Have you got a link to this story?

Atheist are not the only religion that is offended by Christian Symbols, the other insists they are~ these are not passive non believers, they are offended because it is a Symbol of the True Faith that shows their religion to be~ Not according to truth or fact~

LOL, athiesm is not a religion, it's a lack of religion.
I am not "offended" by Christian symbols. I just got back from a holiday to Milan and Genoa where I spent many hours appreciating the beauty of many a rennaisance church and countless sculptures and frescoes. Maybe you should get to know the "atheist" before you make these foolish remarks.

Those from that church here on this forum are here to mock and attack God's Church and it's peoples~in favor of their faith~with their very zeal to deny being a religion~ they show themselves to be that very thing``

What a strange way of defining a religion.

 

[dmmesdale]

I'm sorry I don't see a huge difference between this and my option (2).

Creationist is in the category of the N word with those who believe they have a commonm ancestor with a rutabaga. If they believe that then i don't see what their problem is with a 6 day creation. Moses was not exacting in his description and i don't know why secular fundie literalists would expect that. There is negative evidence against an old Earth. Population stats for one. Does not jibe with humans in existence for 200,000 years. No ancient precedent for any of their suppositions.

Old Earth is counter to all written history and they were big on genealogies. They go back to a stop point. The assumptions of the moderns govern the interpretation of the data. I will go with Jesus and the ancients, not moderns who are stuck with old Earth.

How bout putting them on the defensive. Prove common ancestry, for one. Prove step by step evolution via blind chance for another.

The earth is young and God created it in 6 literal days. Modern scientific consensus is profoundly wrong.

Who cares if it is a literal or non literal six days? Isn't that like an anachronistic evaluation of the data? Modern science consensus has a long history of being wrong. Read Bad Medicine by David Wooton.
Where they used leeches placed on the anus as treatments for things like Smallpox.

 

[Jimmy D]

Creationist is in the category of the N word with those who believe they have a commonm ancestor with a rutabaga. If they believe that then i don't see what their problem is with a 6 day creation. Moses was not exacting in his description and i don't know why secular fundie literalists would expect that. There is negative evidence against an old Earth. Population stats for one. Does not jibe with humans in existence for 200,000 years. No ancient precedent for any of their suppositions.

This makes very little sense.

Old Earth is counter to all written history and they were big on genealogies. They go back to a stop point. The assumptions of the moderns govern the interpretation of the data. I will go with Jesus and the ancients, not moderns who are stuck with old Earth.

Jesus told you the earth is 6000 years old did he?

How bout putting them on the defensive. Prove common ancestry, for one. Prove step by step evolution via blind chance for another.

Common ancestry is well evidenced, no one has to prove anything to YECs any more than we feel compelled to convince flat earthers that the Earth is a globe. It's entertaining to debate with them but at the end of the day their ideas are demonstrably wrong and quite clearly ridiculous.

 

[Jimmy D]

Creationist is in the category of the N word with those who believe they have a commonm ancestor with a rutabaga. If they believe that then i don't see what their problem is with a 6 day creation. Moses was not exacting in his description and i don't know why secular fundie literalists would expect that. There is negative evidence against an old Earth. Population stats for one. Does not jibe with humans in existence for 200,000 years. No ancient precedent for any of their suppositions.

Old Earth is counter to all written history and they were big on genealogies. They go back to a stop point. The assumptions of the moderns govern the interpretation of the data. I will go with Jesus and the ancients, not moderns who are stuck with old Earth.

How bout putting them on the defensive. Prove common ancestry, for one. Prove step by step evolution via blind chance for another.

Who cares if it is a literal or non literal six days? Isn't that like an anachronistic evaluation of the data? Modern science consensus has a long history of being wrong. Read Bad Medicine by David Wooton.
Where they used leeches placed on the anus as treatments for things like Smallpox.

Back to the OP.

Do you think that dinosaurs and men co-existed?

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you think that dinosaurs and men co-existed?

Affirmative.

And according to evolution, they still do.

 

[dmmesdale]

Back to the OP.

Do you think that dinosaurs and men co-existed?

Yup. Before the flood. Now, do you think you have a common ancestor with a rutabaga and can you make your case for step by step unguided prebiotic evolution? There is plenty of evidence for Dinos not that old. Soft tissue in Dino bones for one. Now come back with the ad hoc rationalizations and rescues.

Jesus told you the earth is 6000 years old did he?

He did not tell us humans, and modern apes had a common ancestor with an imaginary non-human creature. So why don't you make your case for that since that is what you believe via faith.

''5. Universal common descent: the idea that all organisms have descended from a single common ancestor.
6. “Blind watchmaker” thesis: the idea that all organisms have descended from common ancestors solely through unguided, unintelligent, purposeless, material processes such as natural selection acting on random variations or mutations; that the mechanisms of natural selection, random variation and mutation, and perhaps other similarly naturalistic mechanisms, are completely sufficient to account for the appearance of design in living organisms.''