more ice in Antarctica

[Subduction Zone]

The same way you support yours. You don't know, you believe. But if you use the word "know" to mean "believe", so can I.

Please. Do not assume that I have your flaws. I do not use your incorrect definition of "know". I do not know as much as the experts do about AGW, but I am sure that I do know more than you do. What I can do is to tell you what I know and how I know it. Not only that if you want to learn I can teach you how I know what I know.

 

[Thera]

Please. Do not assume that I have your flaws. I do not use your incorrect definition of "know". I do not know as much as the experts do about AGW, but I am sure that I do know more than you do. What I can do is to tell you what I know and how I know it. Not only that if you want to learn I can teach you how I know what I know.

You obviously do have flaws. Whether you admit them or not is another question. See below, where you presumed to "know" what you do not know.

But we know that story of the Bible is not literally true.

You believe that story of the Bible is not literally true. You do not know it. So if you can substitute the word "know" for the word "believe", don't complain when others use the same trick.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You obviously do have flaws. Whether you admit them or not is another question. See below, where you presumed to "know" what you do not know.

I never said or implied that I do not have flaws. I said that I did not have that one particular flaw of yours.

You believe that story of the Bible is not literally true. You do not know it. So if you can substitute the word "know" for the word "believe", don't complain when others use the same trick.

Oh my! That was quite the failure on your part. We do know that the Bible is not literally true from start to end. Please note, I did not say that all of it was wrong. But there are events in there that it is possible to know never happened. You may be assuming that because you do not know that no one else can know either. That would be a mistake on your part. For example I could assume that because I do not know how to tune an ignition system of an automobile that no one else can know either. That would be a rather foolish assumption on my part.

I can show and explain to you how we know that Noah's Ark never happened. I can show and explain to you how we know that the birth dates given for Jesus in the Gospels of Luke and Matthew differ by about ten years. When it comes to taking the Bible literally it is easy to show many flaws and explain how we know that it is wrong. Please note, that does not mean that it is all incorrect. Please do not jump to a black and white fallacy. But claiming that the Bible is perfect is making a false idol of it. One tends to worship the Bible when one does so and not God.

 

[essentialsaltes]

You believe that story of the Bible is not literally true. You do not know it.

We know that the standard features of Young Earth Creationism (Earth that is only thousands of years old, global flood, etc.) are not true.

These are testable claims about the natural world. They have been tested. They are false. We know this.

Depending on how you 'literally' read the Bible, this may logically imply that we know the story of the Bible is not literally true.

 

[Thera]

I never said or implied that I do not have flaws. I said that I did not have that one particular flaw of yours.

And I say that you do, as I deliberately copied it as a means of holding up a mirror to the arrogance I spied.

Oh my! That was quite the failure on your part. We do know that the Bible is not literally true from start to end.

Au contraire. Note your statement "But we know that story of the Bible is not literally true."

By "that story", you were referring to the account in Genesis under discussion, where God told Adam to fill the Earth and subdue it. You cannot know that to be untrue, unless you were there at the time God spoke to Adam. Do you claim to be there, at the time, when God was speaking to Adam? If not, how then can you honestly claim that you (but even moreso "we") "know that story of the Bible is not literally true"? You cannot. It is your belief - you believe it to be untrue. But it is exactly that - a belief. And I do not share your belief.

If you cannot be consistent with your definition of words, there is no common ground upon which I, nor anyone else of rational mind, can debate you.