- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,635
- 52,516
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Then it's the other way around.And if it's the other way around?
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.
Then it's the other way around.And if it's the other way around?
Have you seen my raisin bread challenge?The problem is that AV1611VET believes in an inherently deceptive universe. At which point all bets are off.
A tare is a weed that looks very much like wheat.You do realize that tare is an old fashioned word for weeds and the official definition of a weed is a plant growing where you don’t want it.
Of course it can be tested. You don't like the tests because they demonstrate that it is a failed idea. This is why others point out that creationists have to believe in a god that lies since their excuses for what we can observe eventually amount to that. If God can't lie then then Genesis cannot be read literally.If you think creationism can be tested, I have a wheat farm in Antarctica I'd like to sell you.
Yes, we have all seen your failed challenges. Your challenges merely underline an inability to reason rationally. They are monuments to your failures.Have you seen my raisin bread challenge?
Of course it can be tested.
Good, then he should know why I think he's wrong.Yes,
Why do you think that it can't be tested? Are you simply going to change your claims every time that you are shown to be wrong? That is the typical creationist two step. I have seen many creationists make the mistake of thinking that just because they can't test an idea that no one can test an idea. That is usually an incorrect assumption to make.Here we go with the he-sad/she-said again.
Forgive me if I don't respond to this.
Then why did you read it?I have no interest in your 'challenge' threads.
What was it you tested? ion trail? plasma cloud? time crystals? microwave background? what exactly?Why do you think that it can't be tested?
Good, then he should know why I think he's wrong.
That's right!Which means you would be the one sowing tares.
I'll pass.I would suggest that you drop your challenges.
Make a clear claim and I will tell you how it can be tested. Vague claims are in the realm of "not even wrong". In other words they are worthless and only tend to shown that an idea is wrong.What was it you tested? ion trail? plasma cloud? time crystals? microwave background? what exactly?
Then why did you read it?
Sure:Make a clear claim and I will tell you how it can be tested.
If I read Subduction Zone's post correctly, he said you did.Did I?
Sure:
Creationism isn't science ... it's history.
And it didn't generate any evidence.