Fossil Fish

[dad]

Some parts of the world have not been underwater in a very long time - the canadian sheild is one example.
The appalachian mountain chain is another. In fact, the Cheaha Mountain range in Alabama is a 420 million year old orogeny containing marine fossils yes, but marine fossils which existed 420 million years ago.

Yes, but upon a slightly closer look, this means nothing. The canadian rockies, for example has cambrian fossils, which also likely existed long before the flood. They now are found way up a mountain, thousands and thousands of feet above sea level. These creatures I believe lived about the same time as Adam lived. Not as long, of course, the poor little things. So, the question becomes (not denial in any way) how did they end up way up there? You offer old ages and I chose the bible creation, and flood events, and pre split world. The evidence can be looked at either way, and you have no proof of old ages, so get in line, in the belief department.

Of course, this would require you to know a lot about geology, which you don't.

Global End Of Life One Great Year. There's a lot you don't know about G.E.O.L.O.G.Y. also. Then there is you measuring stick you use PRESENT based observations.These can only take you so far back or ahead with any accuracy! What you ate peddling is the belief aspects of old age that riddle like a cancer the field of so called knowledge called geology. Thos faith based items you cannot deffend, despite promoting them!

....try to actually listen for once. You might be surprised how ignorant of the real world you really are.

I have ears to hear. Concentrate on saying something of real value, and it will be heard.

 

[Sarcopt]

Yes, but upon a slightly closer look, this means nothing. The canadian rockies, for example has cambrian fossils, which also likely existed long before the flood. They now are found way up a mountain, thousands and thousands of feet above sea level. These creatures I believe lived about the same time as Adam lived.

Really, they did? Were there fish that lived at the same time as Adam? All 25,000 species of teleost fish? Populations of sharks that lose countless teeth daily? If so, why is there not a hint of bony fish or sharks in the Burgess Shales of which you speak?

 

[dad]

Really, they did? Were there fish that lived at the same time as Adam? All 25,000 species of teleost fish? Populations of sharks that lose countless teeth daily? If so, why is there not a hint of bony fish or sharks in the Burgess Shales of which you speak?

My, such easy questions today. Eden, then, as I surmise, contained most life on earth. Mammals, people, and, in the nearby sea (maybe eden was the sea, and the garden was placed east of it? I could be wrong there). Until some bible whiz corrects me, why not call the sea near the garden, "Eden"!?
OK, so in 'Eden' was the created sea life, you know, whales, fish, etc. Nearby, east of this sea, lets say, of Eden, the lovely garden that contained the creatures. Now why would we here, then travel over to what is now Colorado, or someplace, and expect to find shark teeth there, then!? You would need to be in the sea of Eden for those babies. What was outside the sea and the garde, you ask?? Why, we don't know! But we can look at the fossil record, and see trilobites, and whatnots that dyed all over the place. This leads one to assume that the, well, maybe we could call them "creeping things" or whatever you like to call them, were out and about on planet earth at this time. Need I go on, to complete the picture for you here?

 

[Mikecpking]

My, such easy questions today. Eden, then, as I surmise, contained most life on earth. Mammals, people, and, in the nearby sea (maybe eden was the sea, and the garden was placed east of it? I could be wrong there). Until some bible whiz corrects me, why not call the sea near the garden, "Eden"!?

This is what I mean by your rubbishing of peoples' views, just like you did with my friend who is an astrophysicist. You obviously have no idea about geological processes such as uplift, folding and faulting. How could they have been living at the same time as Adam, unless of course it fits in with your interpretation. Find me one fossiled human in what TEs would call cretaceous rocks or earlier.

OK, so in 'Eden' was the created sea life, you know, whales, fish, etc. Nearby, east of this sea, lets say, of Eden, the lovely garden that contained the creatures. Now why would we here, then travel over to what is now Colorado, or someplace, and expect to find shark teeth there, then!? You would need to be in the sea of Eden for those babies. What was outside the sea and the garde, you ask?? Why, we don't know! But we can look at the fossil record, and see trilobites, and whatnots that dyed all over the place. This leads one to assume that the, well, maybe we could call them "creeping things" or whatever you like to call them, were out and about on planet earth at this time. Need I go on, to complete the picture for you here?

All hypothesis on your part! Just where in the bible is the sea of Eden?

 

[dad]

This is what I mean by your rubbishing of peoples' views, just like you did with my friend who is an astrophysicist.

A lot of cosmology is rubbish, and if you or her hasn't realized that by now, don't blame me.

You obviously have no idea about geological processes such as uplift, folding and faulting.

Of course the pre split stuff going on was in a time when the fabric of the universe was different, so all you do is show how limited you are to the present only based take on everything, and it's brother.

How could they have been living at the same time as Adam, unless of course it fits in with your interpretation.

Very easily. I thought I just took a little time to explain that? Remember, Most life sea and land, including man being created in or near the garden?

Find me one fossiled human in what TEs would call cretaceous rocks or earlier.

That is possible. Find me Eden! Unless some custom in the more spiritual affected world had it that bodies were taken somewhere else, the body of Able, for example would be in the lower layers, I think likely the cambrian!

All hypothesis on your part! Just where in the bible is the sea of Eden?

Now don't be rubbishing my views, my good man. Ha. Well, Do you think there was no sea near the garden? Can you prove here and now that sea was NOT where God put His created sea life? Or is all you have to grasp at the name I picked for that sea? Hec, didn't I say call it what you want? If not, then, go ahead, be my guest, play name that sea here. But, if you got something that says it wasn't the sea of Eden, let's see it. Show and tell here.

 

[Caphi]

Unless some custom in the more spiritual affected world had it that bodies were taken somewhere else, the body of Able, for example would be in the lower layers, I think likely the cambrian!

Oh look, dad just made up another spirit property on the spot to counter evidence. Nothing new here, people.

 

[Valkhorn]

and you have no proof of old ages

which is followed by

Global End Of Life One Great Year. There's a lot you don't know about G.E.O.L.O.G.Y. also. Then there is you measuring stick you use PRESENT based observations.These can only take you so far back or ahead with any accuracy! What you ate peddling is the belief aspects of old age that riddle like a cancer the field of so called knowledge called geology. Thos faith based items you cannot deffend, despite promoting them!

Which means you don't know anything about Geology.

If Geology is some cancer field, quit driving your car, quit using plastic, quit using electricity.

Guess why?

Geology brought all of those items to you. Geology brought you crude oil, which brings you plastic and electricity and fuel to drive your car. And, since BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars are spent on the fruits of Geology, I think I'm going to stick with that.

It would seem kind of odd that they would know how to find oil to within a few hundred yards miles beneath the surface and be dependable enough and fruitful enough that companies are willing to build billion dollar oil platforms based on their research and knowledge that they would get ages of rocks wrong.

And of course, ages of rock, which are based on known physical laws of radiometric decay are the same laws that hold the entire universe together and provide nuclear energy, not to mention the other countless physical laws based on quantum mechanics and newtonian physics which tie geology and physics together, really show once again that you have no idea what you are talking about, and aren't even willing to learn about any of it.

So checkmate. I wonder when you'll have a clue to how badly you are defeated on every single one of your points.

I guess it is true, it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt - and so far you've removed many people's doubts on these forums 3100+ times.

Of course you'll also think this is a personal attack and will probably go even deeper into your religious dogma - but it won't change reality, and it won't change mainstream science and the facts that they uncover.

And, it is funny you mention cancer. In the days before science, cancer was called demons I believe. Some world you want to believe in. I, and probably 99.999% of this world wouldn't even want to live in your delusional paradise.

 

[dad]

Oh look, dad just made up another spirit property on the spot to counter evidence. Nothing new here, people.

I didn't write it in the constitution here, just raised a flighting possiblity, never even beginning to indicate it was even my favored opinion. I think your ratting out attempts are a bit premature.

 

[dad]

Which means you don't know anything about Geology.

No, it means you do not know as much as you were taught to think you do. The flood is a part of it, as is the pre flood world, a huge huge part.

If Geology is some cancer field, quit driving your car, quit using plastic, quit using electricity.

? I think what was said was the field of study with that name is riddled with old age belief. Get a grip.

Guess why?

Geology brought all of those items to you. Geology brought you crude oil, which brings you plastic and electricity and fuel to drive your car. And, since BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars are spent on the fruits of Geology, I think I'm going to stick with that.

Ha. And only because the oil was put there, not by geologists, but by creation, and subsequent events. There is some good to geology, even the limited bits taught in the education system. Even some grains of truth. Using seismic waves etc. to 'look' under the ground for old seas, or areas where we know oil may be found does not mean that the old age bits of geology have any merit. It just means they can help us know where to dig, despite the old age stuff!

It would seem kind of odd that they would know how to find oil to within a few hundred yards miles beneath the surface and be dependable enough and fruitful enough that companies are willing to build billion dollar oil platforms based on their research and knowledge that they would get ages of rocks wrong.

But this is the case, totally wrong.

And of course, ages of rock, which are based on known physical laws of radiometric decay are the same laws that hold the entire universe together and provide nuclear energy, not to mention the other countless physical laws based on quantum mechanics and newtonian physics which tie geology and physics together, really show once again that you have no idea what you are talking about, and aren't even willing to learn about any of it.

No, they don't show that at all. They show we know a bit about how it now works, and like to presume we are little gods that can project this present into the past and future. A bogus concept from the getgo.

So checkmate. I wonder when you'll have a clue to how badly you are defeated on every single one of your points.

Never, cause your present, physical only baseless beliefs are laughably wrong to the nth degree! Even God will laugh!!! (Psalm 1)

I guess it is true, it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt - and so far you've removed many people's doubts on these forums 3100+ times.

So you say, but you are a speck and granny and present in the past and future believer. I would have it no other way, than you violently oppose my views.
Ps 18:25 With the merciful thou wilt shew thyself merciful; with an upright man thou wilt shew thyself upright; 26 With the pure thou wilt shew thyself pure; and with the froward thou wilt shew thyself froward.

Of course you'll also think this is a personal attack and will probably go even deeper into your religious dogma - but it won't change reality, and it won't change mainstream science and the facts that they uncover.

Make all the bogus claims you like, you are belief based in the old age claims, and can't hide behind science. It can't support you there.

And, it is funny you mention cancer. In the days before science, cancer was called demons I believe. Some world you want to believe in. I, and probably 99.999% of this world wouldn't even want to live in your delusional paradise.

So now I want a world where we can't cure cancer? Hey, there is no cancer or sickness or even death or sorrow in the world I want, and know is on the way! If you don't believe in God or demons, you'll have to work that one out yourself.

 

[Valkhorn]

Looking at the above post, it is easy to see how desparate dad was to cling to his dogma. So, I dont even need to quote for a reply. I've already won the 'debate' (I use quotes because the term implies a balanced opposing side of which there wasn't one from dad).

If he'd only take the step himself to listen and learn something, things would be different. I'm convinced he knows so very little of science and math that he doesn't even know what he's arguing against.

 

[Beastt]

Looking at the above post, it is easy to see how desparate dad was to cling to his dogma. So, I dont even need to quote for a reply. I've already won the 'debate' (I use quotes because the term implies a balanced opposing side of which there wasn't one from dad).

If he'd only take the step himself to listen and learn something, things would be different. I'm convinced he knows so very little of science and math that he doesn't even know what he's arguing against.

Dad seems very content believing in his version of the world. I certainly disagree with most of what he claims, says and imagines but I think he's a wonderful example to have around. He continually demonstrates just exactly how far removed from reality one's views must be in order to retain the idea that a literal translation of the Bible represents any kind of accuracy. Despite that, I admire is conviction to read what it says rather than bending and distorting it into compliance with reality.

 

[dad]

Looking at the above post, it is easy to see how desparate dad was to cling to his dogma. So, I dont even need to quote for a reply. I've already won the 'debate' (I use quotes because the term implies a balanced opposing side of which there wasn't one from dad).

If he'd only take the step himself to listen and learn something, things would be different. I'm convinced he knows so very little of science and math that he doesn't even know what he's arguing against.

To win the day with me, you need to prove the present was all we ever need to go by and that there is no spiritual world coming. You cannot do this, all you can do is retreat into a corner, and whimper how you 'won'. The future and past were not physical only, and you have no power to refute this, no matter how you might wish you did, nor will you or anyone else on earth ever be able to do so! The only question left, is how long it will take you to realize you have totally lost.

 

[Caphi]

To win the day with me, you need to prove the present was all we ever need to go by and that there is no spiritual world coming. You cannot do this, all you can do is retreat into a corner, and whimper how you 'won'. The future and past were not physical only, and you have no power to refute this, no matter how you might wish you did, nor will you or anyone else on earth ever be able to do so! The only question left, is how long it will take you to realize you have totally lost.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... there goes another irony meter. And all twenty spares.

dad, the same argument applies to you. You have no power to prove that the spiritual is coming, so by your own logic, you have "totally" lost. Carry on whimpering, why don't you.

 

[Sarcopt]

Dad seems very content believing in his version of the world. I certainly disagree with most of what he claims, says and imagines but I think he's a wonderful example to have around. He continually demonstrates just exactly how far removed from reality one's views must be in order to retain the idea that a literal translation of the Bible represents any kind of accuracy. Despite that, I admire is conviction to read what it says rather than bending and distorting it into compliance with reality.

Actually, he does bend and distort scripture for his own purposes. He invents "merges" and "splits" and other wild historical phenomena that have no basis in reality or scripture. He confuses his ad hoc defenses of scripture with the actual content of scripture (and with the content of reality as well).

 

[dad]

dad, the same argument applies to you. You have no power to prove that the spiritual is coming, ....

I already covered that, you see you are in the same boat, and have beliefs, as I do, and many others. You just have gotten away with calling them a part of science for awhile now, but I have called you out, and shown you cannot support the very foundational belief af all old age doctrine, that the future and past will be just as the present! Of course the present, is as the present, but no one contests that obvious fact, so don't pretend that is evidence it was the same or will be. One last time, show us if you can prove it, right now. I say your beliefs cannot be proven, of course there, and are fraudulently boasted.

 

[dad]

Actually, he does bend and distort scripture for his own purposes. He invents "merges" and "splits" and other wild historical phenomena that have no basis in reality or scripture. He confuses his ad hoc defenses of scripture with the actual content of scripture (and with the content of reality as well).

Funny you have never been able to make a case of these stange little claims. Guess why? You can't. The bible does indicate that the future is both physical and spiritual, and a good case can be made things like Jesus new body also was, and the past. What other wild historical phenomena ? Shame shame.

 

[Caphi]

...I say your beliefs cannot be proven...

And I say the same of yours.

 

[dad]

And I say the same of yours.

Mine are not taught in public education as science.

 

[Valkhorn]

To win the day with me, you need to prove the present was all we ever need to go by and that there is no spiritual world coming. You cannot do this, all you can do is retreat into a corner, and whimper how you 'won'. The future and past were not physical only, and you have no power to refute this, no matter how you might wish you did, nor will you or anyone else on earth ever be able to do so!

You demand me to prove something that is technically unprovable yet expect me to believe something you can't even hope to prove?

Whatever.

Mine are not taught in public education as science.

I dont think you even know what science is. You never show us an inkling that you know anything about science or can even define it. In fact your arrogance is so bad that you could probably fart and you would think it was divine influence because it came out of your holy butt.

And of course I'm not going to elaborate further on that because I dont wish to get warned.

At any rate, I know for a fact you won't listen and learn because you refuse to, and since you refuse to do that, any 'debate' or 'argument' with you is pointless. Of course you may think you have won but, again, I don't frankly care what you think since it doesn't change reality.

Reality isn't a bad thing, just because it goes against your narrow worldview that lies in the margins of pseudoscience doesn't mean you can't listen and at least try to learn something.

I'd probably type more, but apathy leads me to stop at this point. It's just not even worth wasting my breath on you since you do not listen. Period.

 

[dad]

You demand me to prove something that is technically unprovable yet expect me to believe something you can't even hope to prove?

The problem is what you do expect is only a belief, and since it is not supportable it may not be called science, and used against other beliefs.

I dont think you even know what science is. You never show us an inkling that you know anything about science or can even define it.

Since you think it is belief based, I might say the same to you. Some science is fine, other stuff only falsely so called.

In fact your arrogance is so bad that you could probably fart and you would think it was divine influence because it came out of your holy butt.

A better source than the nothing your universe in a speck supposedly came from.

And of course I'm not going to elaborate further on that because I dont wish to get warned.

Good, I have better things to think about than your crassness.

At any rate, I know for a fact you won't listen and learn because you refuse to, and since you refuse to do that, any 'debate' or 'argument' with you is pointless.

Not if you have sopmething other than religious speckulations.

Of course you may think you have won but, again, I don't frankly care what you think since it doesn't change reality.

I don't plan to change the reality of the box, just define it, so folks don't think you can lock us in there till it becomes a coffin.

Reality isn't a bad thing, just because it goes against your narrow worldview that lies in the margins of pseudoscience doesn't mean you can't listen and at least try to learn something.

I eat reality for breakfast, and breathe it in while looking at the glorious creation, and breathe it out when sighing over your imaginary past, and specks!

I'd probably type more, but apathy leads me to stop at this point. It's just not even worth wasting my breath on you since you do not listen. Period.

No problem, I never expected you to say anything but negative nothings anyhow, have a well deserved rest!