Pyramids

[Elduran]

Exactly, new facts constantly prove evolution to be wrong. That is why they call it neo-darwinism, because darwinism has been falsifed.

Errr, no.

You know you're wrong, the lurkers know you're wrong, and your opponents know you're wrong.

Facts do not show evolution to be wrong. At all.

 

[Upisoft]

The point is that the traditional belief is that hundreds of thousands of people were involved in building the pyramids. Now that archeology has done some research on the "workers village", they are finding that really only 20,000 workers were involved in building the pyramids.

Science is science and this is the exact same problem that science has with evolution. Research time and again shows that what they believed is not true.

Yes, you're right. As we are only humans we make mistakes. We believe in things that are not true.

Scientists are no exception. They make mistakes also. However, science is always in pursuit of truth and willing to change in the light of new evidence. That is its best characteristic. It has goal to constantly improve itself.

Religons based on an ancient books, however are in stasis. They don't easily change their believes. Even when the evidence is overwhelming.

 

[JohnR7]

science is always in pursuit of truth and willing to change in the light of new evidence.

Many a conversation on here ends with just that note. The idea that science (ie evolution) does not have it all right YET. But they are working toward getting it right and we have every hope that in time they will manage to straighten it all out. So we just need to show a little patience.

That is its best characteristic. It has goal to constantly improve itself.

Religons based on an ancient books, however are in stasis. They don't easily change their believes. Even when the evidence is overwhelming.

That IS the issue I am trying to address here. There are things that science claims to be 99.9 percent sure of and paternity is one of them. Population genetics tells us that only 20% of the people alive today are decended from Abraham.

If my wife and son would leave me along I could finish where I was going with this. But they keep asking me question.

Anyways, science tells us that 80% of the people alive today are not decended from Adam and Eve and were around long before Adam and Eve. Now, maybe science is wrong, but that is currently what the evidence is pointing to. Of course when more is known and new evidence comes along, things can easily change.

 

[xXThePrimeDirectiveXx]

I have heard stories that were mostly speculation about how the pyramids were built. Now they have done some archeology on the town were the pyramid builders lived, so they have a little bit better idea of what life was like for them. First of all, there was only about 20,000 of them, not hundreds of thousands as some people would suggest. Also most of them were skilled craftsman who were somewhat well paid, not slaves at all. The people who were labors were actually seasonal. They worked when they were not busy growing food which might have been only three months out of the year.

We see this a lot when people come up with all sorts of wild stories but the facts turn out to be different. That is what is happening with evolution. They had lots of stuff they made up out of their imagination, but the truth is turning out to be quite a bit different from the things they made up about it.

Why is that many Fundamentals jump on science when they think it bolsters their argument, but when the same scientific methods contradict their belief system, it's not applicable?

 

[Molal]

John you could not be more wrong.

These facts do not show evolution to be wrong. They have nothing to do with evolution.

 

[Molal]

Because they are clutching at straws. They will use anything to try to bolster their argument.

 

[aerophagicbricolage]

Well, Wiccan, I think you will agree that scientists are in the market of just making stuff up. Most scientists do it because they hate God more than anything else.

Perhaps you haven't seen into the dark black hearts of scientists as JohnR7 has.

Frankly, I am scared of the scientists. They made robots and robots are good for only one thing: systematically hunting down and annihilating Christians using "Christian-Scan" Technology (c)

But for "Christian Scan Technology (c)" to work it requires that we innoculate all children with "Evolutionism" so that when they do accept Christ and abandon Evolution the Robots can find them.

Sure this is a bit off topic of Pyramids and their inextricable link to Evolutionism, but it's all part of the plan.

First the start by making up "Ancient Egyptian History", and once people buy that, they will more readily accept Evolutionism and ultimately will end up in hell.

Why do the scientists want everyone in hell?

Good question!

Well all scientists know that thermodynamically if heat is needed to maintain the GEOTHERMAL GRADIENT it requires that hell be hotter than the surrounding rocks of the outer core and the mantle.

In order to maintain the GEOTHERMAL GRADIENT the scientists are responsible for keeping hell stocked with fresh souls.

I hope I'm not explaining this too fast for you. Let me know if I need to slow down or explain anything in more detail.

The robots find Christians, eliminate them so they can't teach Christianity which allows the scientists to indoctrinate more innocent children and when the children grow up to adults, grow old and die, they go to hell to keep the heat going to maintain the geothermal gradient which helps cook up more petroleum and change the abiogenic oil into what looks like biogenic oil which helps maintain the lie of evolution and provide a constant stream of petro-dollars for research. Into Robots.

Hope that helps!

John, you got served!!

 

[aerophagicbricolage]

Exactly, new facts constantly prove evolution to be wrong. That is why they call it neo-darwinism, because darwinism has been falsifed.

Absolutely NO ONE in science calls it neo-Darwinism. Darwinism is, a philosophy not evolution, but you mean it to mean evolution. However, it's just evolution. I don't call myself neo-Newtonian or Einstienist just because I accept gravity to be true, or call myself a neo-Rutherfordist because I accept the existence of atoms. "Neo-Darwinism" is just the old theory of evolution + DNA and genes (which, btw, Darwin and pretty much wasn't accepted at that point.) Science changes to accomodate new information, and that is one of it's strengths. Your inablitity to accomodate information is a weakness.

 

[Upisoft]

Many a conversation on here ends with just that note. The idea that science (ie evolution) does not have it all right YET. But they are working toward getting it right and we have every hope that in time they will manage to straighten it all out. So we just need to show a little patience.

That's not what I said. We don't know if the theory of evolution is right. All we know is that the evidence we have confirms it and there is no strong evidence against.
It could be totally wrong and it could be as good as it can get or something in between...Just the chance that it is wrong is incredibly small.

That IS the issue I am trying to address here. There are things that science claims to be 99.9 percent sure of and paternity is one of them. Population genetics tells us that only 20% of the people alive today are decended from Abraham.

Is there any scientific evidence that Abraham existed? I'll gladly fill the gaps in my knowledge... Can you give me a link?

Anyways, science tells us that 80% of the people alive today are not decended from Adam and Eve and were around long before Adam and Eve. Now, maybe science is wrong, but that is currently what the evidence is pointing to. Of course when more is known and new evidence comes along, things can easily change.

That's surprise... How could they possibly decide that without having genetic profile of Adam and Eve?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Exactly, new facts constantly prove evolution to be wrong. That is why they call it neo-darwinism, because darwinism has been falsifed.

Except that Darwinism isn't evolution -- the former is a philosophy, the latter is a science.

Why do you keep getting these confused?

 

[Sleeker]

John, you have not followed through logically. Science was not "wrong" as you put it. You try to say that since science was "wrong" about the pyramids, evolution can easily be wrong. Scientists weren't wrong about the pyramids. How many people built it matters little compared to the fact that humans certainly did build the pyramids. Now, if you apply this logically, some of the smaller things involved in evolution may (have) be(en) wrong, but evolution certainly did happen.

Let's look at the progression of science in both cases. Science is a self-correcting system. Therefore, as more time goes on, you can assume that science is a little more right than before. In the case of the
pyramids, the number of workers thought to be needed started out in the hundreds of thousands. However, this number slowly decreased as more and more time went by, and now science says it's most likely between 20,000 to 50,000 workers. In the case of evolution, the same thing happened. It has been tweaked to greater or lesser degrees since it has been made. Therefore, the theory of evolution as it stands now can logically be assumed to be just as right as the current estimate of the number of workers needed for the pyramids.

 

[ChemicalKali]

John's a Neo-Christianist.

 

[billwald]

A line of a half million slowly walking people should leave a trail of nitrogen fertilizer in the soil.

 

[Molal]

A line of a half million slowly walking people should leave a trail of nitrogen fertilizer in the soil.

I assume you mean urea nitrogen? This would be quickly leached out of the soil.

Do you mean something else?

 

[flatworm]

What would you expect to find-----footprints? According to the Bible, their shoes and clothes didn't wear out.

Garbage. Latrines. Hearths. There were supposed to be millions of these people. Encampments that size leave evidence.

The point is that the traditional belief is that hundreds of thousands of people were involved in building the pyramids. Now that archeology has done some research on the "workers village", they are finding that really only 20,000 workers were involved in building the pyramids.

So the old modelor pyramid building, shaped in no small part by a literal belief in the exodus story, was found to be wrong... therefore evolution is false but the Bible is 100% true?

Science is science and this is the exact same problem that science has with evolution. Research time and again shows that what they believed is not true.

This is tiresome. Stop making these sweeping claims about the mounds of evidence you have and just show it.

I know you won't, of course, because experience has shown you base these claims on pure faith, not on having seen the evidence.

There are things that science claims to be 99.9 percent sure of and paternity is one of them. Population genetics tells us that only 20% of the people alive today are decended from Abraham.

Anyways, science tells us that 80% of the people alive today are not decended from Adam and Eve and were around long before Adam and Eve. Now, maybe science is wrong, but that is currently what the evidence is pointing to. Of course when more is known and new evidence comes along, things can easily change.

Stop repeating this lie. The study you cited for this shows a relatively recent common male ancestor for the semitic peoples. The time frame demonstrated, though, puts this ancestor too far back in time to be the Biblical Abraham. I have also shown you how the mtDNA evidence shows the Jewish people do not have a recent common female ancestor.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Garbage. Latrines. Hearths. There were supposed to be millions of these people. Encampments that size leave evidence.

Unless of course, God miraculously picked up their trash.

This could give rise to the "Divine Janitor" theology.

So the old modelor pyramid building, shaped in no small part by a literal belief in the exodus story, was found to be wrong... therefore evolution is false but the Bible is 100% true?

John's mistake (one of many) is to apply the same standards to science as to literalist dogma: if one part, no matter how trivial, is proven factually inaccurate, the entire work must be rejected.

Just becuase some people's religion is modeled after a house of cards, doesn't mean scientific inquiry is.

This is tiresome. Stop making these sweeping claims about the mounds of evidence you have and just show it.

I know you won't, of course, because experience has shown you base these claims on pure faith, not on having seen the evidence.

By now, we all know this as well. Had he any "evidence," he'd present it, and stop trying to convince the lurkers that he already had.

 

[Prince Lucianus]

Exactly, new facts constantly prove evolution to be wrong. That is why they call it neo-darwinism, because darwinism has been falsifed.

Markus has Jesus walk through Nain's citygate.
Nain has been excavated.
Nain never had a citywall (not even a pallisade).
So, Jesus couldn't have walked through Nain's city gate.

Using your logic:
Bible falsified

Lucy

 

[JohnR7]

Therefore, the theory of evolution as it stands now can logically be assumed to be just as right as the current estimate of the number of workers needed for the pyramids.

Ah, but that is the problem.
It is pretty safe to assume that there were workers that built the pyramids.
The problem with the theory of evolution is that it's basic premise is wrong.

We are now going though what they call a third wave or a third revolution in the theory of evolution. For you and a lot of people your attitude is that science is correcting its errors. But for christians the errors are so blatant that we just can not overlook them. Esp the idea of random mutations that is so crucial to the theory right now. As far as I am concerned as a scientific theory evolution has already been falsified. But they do not have anything any better to replace it, so they have to go with what they got, even if it is false, while they wait for something better to come along. We do not have this problem with the Bible. It has remained consistant and true for 3500 years now, ever sense Moses wrote the origional four books of the Bible. Nothing has changed in 3500 years.

 

[flatworm]

Ah, but that is the problem.
It is pretty safe to assume that there were workers that built the pyramids.
The problem with the theory of evolution is that it's basic premise is wrong.

Can you actually show this, or is this another statement of faith?

We are now going though what they call a third wave or a third revolution in the theory of evolution.

So far, the core idea- that existing species are a result of descent from common ancestors with modification caused by natural forces- has been confirmed in the strongest possible way.

For you and a lot of people your attitude is that science is correcting its errors. But for christians the errors are so blatant that we just can not overlook them. Esp the idea of random mutations that is so crucial to the theory right now.

They are observed to happen. How is this an error?

As far as I am concerned as a scientific theory evolution has already been falsified.

Because of one "error" you completely fabricated?

We do not have this problem with the Bible.

No, it's been known to be inaccurate and self-contradictory for a very long time. Refusing to admit these errors won't make them go away.

 

[JohnR7]

Nain never had a citywall (not even a pallisade).
So, Jesus couldn't have walked through Nain's city gate.

The gate is the entrance to the city. There was no wall because the houses were built in a way that you would have to go though the gate or though a house to get in and out of the city.

This was the case with Rahab. They had closed the gates to the city and so the spys that Joshua had sent were traped in the city. But Rehab allowed them to excape through her window.

Joshua 2:15
Then she let them down by a cord through the window: for her house was upon the town wall, and she dwelt upon the wall.