- Apr 17, 2006
- 6,467
- 4,001
- 47
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- AU-Greens
Evidence of faking on any reasonable scale?
Or are you just happy to bare false witness on your neighbors?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Of course it's not convincing. You can't see the truth and won't believe it even when it's in your face.
Evolutionists have been faking, altering, hiding, dismissing, and ignoring data for years.
Of course it's not convincing. You can't see the truth and won't believe it even when it's in your face.
Evolutionists have been faking, altering, hiding, dismissing, and ignoring data for years.
Why were dinosaurs not allowed on the Ark?
You have such a vivid imagination. Have you ever thought of writing stories for children?I don't think so.
I believe they claim the dinosaurs eventually died out because of the new new [polar] climatology.
Prior to the Flood, the earth was one tropical paradise due to a water canopy.
After the Flood, the sun's rays hit the earth as they do now, creating a polar climatology that the dinosaurs couldn't handle; and they eventually went extinct.*
Two dinosaurs are mentioned in the book of Job, who lived after the Flood,** one having a navel.
That should have Mr. Linnaeus turning over in his grave, eh?
* There are reports of dinosaurs still in existence today: such as the Loch Ness monster & the Thunderbird.
** Job is thought to be Jobab, mentioned in Genesis 10.
Nope, according to the Bible, each pair of animals was sexually mature.YEC's claim that dinosaurs were lost in the flood? Really? Not this one.
Noah had them on the ark, two of each at least. Maybe even eggs, but at least young ones.
And your evidence that the earth had a higher O2 content and higher barometric pressure prior to the Flood (IOW ~4500 years ago) is what, exactly?They perished after the flood due to the change in atmospheric conditions. Lower O2 content and barometric pressure.
Fish nostrils are not part of their breathing apparatus
- they are not connected to the fish's throat.
Nope, according to the Bible, each pair of animals was sexually mature.
"Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female."
That's clearly describing sexually mature animals. If it wasn't, it would say a male and a female.
And your evidence that the earth had a higher O2 content and higher barometric pressure prior to the Flood (IOW ~4500 years ago) is what, exactly?
This, or your beliefs are false? Is this the dichotomy you live with every day?
Let's see:
Ernest Haecke's fake and fraudulent drawings of embryos. In textbooks and taught as truth even today.
Piltdown man,
Nebraska man,
Java man,
Archaeoraptor
The Horse fraud of Huxley and Marsh,
The Peppered moth,
The famous diagram of apes successively turning into man. There are no skeletal remains to back it up
Ota Benga,
Neanderthal man of Neander Valley 1856
The Taung Child found by Raymond Dart in South Africa in 1924
Ramapithecus,
Australopithecines,
The Ardi specimen,
the Fujimura fraud,
Quite a list.
Nope, according to the Bible, each pair of animals was sexually mature.
"Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female."
That's clearly describing sexually mature animals. If it wasn't, it would say a male and a female.
And your evidence that the earth had a higher O2 content and higher barometric pressure prior to the Flood (IOW ~4500 years ago) is what, exactly?
Let's see:
Ernest Haecke's fake and fraudulent drawings of embryos. In textbooks and taught as truth even today.
Piltdown man,
Nebraska man,
Java man,
Archaeoraptor
The Horse fraud of Huxley and Marsh,
The Peppered moth,
The famous diagram of apes successively turning into man. There are no skeletal remains to back it up
Ota Benga,
Neanderthal man of Neander Valley 1856
The Taung Child found by Raymond Dart in South Africa in 1924
Ramapithecus,
Australopithecines,
The Ardi specimen,
the Fujimura fraud,
Quite a list.
Indeed
Are you having trouble reading the verse I quoted? It clearly uses "male and his female" in reference to both clean and unclean animals. I don't understand how you missed it.Sorry, but this is for the "clean" animals. These would be the ones that have a spit hoof, and chew their cud.
Nice try though.
False. You gave information that the earth had a (somewhat) higher O2 count hundreds of millions of years ago. The Flood, according to YECs like yourself, happened less than 5,000 years ago.Please read the forum. I have given this information twice now. Go fish.
You should also never remove words from the Bible, as you have done here by removing the word "his" from the verse. As I already pointed out in the post you quoted, Genesis 7:2 clearly says "male and his female". That is obviously a mated pair. Other translations of the Bible make this even more clear as they specifically state "male and his mate".
Just pointing out my 9 month old daughter is female yet is not close to "mature"
Male and female is just that, male or female, determined in the womb for humans. Dinosaurs idk but it has nothing to do with sexual maturity. Just wanted to clear that up for you. When reading the Bible you should never ad words to the writing, it changes the teachings.
You should also never remove words from the Bible, as you have done here by removing the word "his" from the verse. As I already pointed out in the post you quoted, Genesis 7:2 clearly says "male and his female". That is obviously a mated pair. Other translations of the Bible make this even more clear as they specifically state "male and his mate".
If it wasn't intended to refer to a mated pair, then it would have said simply "a male and a female".
You stated this:I dont know who you are talking about but I didn't quote anything-you did
If that is not an attempt to quote the verse then what is it? And you left out a very important modifier "his".Male and female is just that, male or female,
You stated this:
If that is not an attempt to quote the verse then what is it? And you left out a very important modifier "his".
Have you nothing to say about the fact that the Bible clearly states that the animals are a mated pair?
Let's see:
Ernest Haecke's fake and fraudulent drawings of embryos. In textbooks and taught as truth even today.
Piltdown man,
Nebraska man,
Java man,
Archaeoraptor
The Horse fraud of Huxley and Marsh,
The Peppered moth,
The famous diagram of apes successively turning into man. There are no skeletal remains to back it up
Ota Benga,
Neanderthal man of Neander Valley 1856
The Taung Child found by Raymond Dart in South Africa in 1924
Ramapithecus,
Australopithecines,
The Ardi specimen,
the Fujimura fraud,
Quite a list.
Ernest Haecke's fake and fraudulent drawings of embryos. In textbooks and taught as truth even today.
Archaeoraptor
The Peppered moth,
Neanderthal man of Neander Valley 1856
Nebraska man,
The famous diagram of apes successively turning into man. There are no skeletal remains to back it up
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?