The insect kinds

[thaumaturgy]

No --- we are. They knew their world much better than we know it. That's why people today don't understand such things as ---

[bible]Numbers 31:17[/bible]

Oh, no, there are plenty of people around these days who, upon invading a nation will slaughter the men and take the women.

Attrocities are not a sign of wisdom. It's a sign of brutish power and intimidation. In milder cases it can be merely "spoils of war" or slavery.

This is the kind of "wisdom" that still occurs today. Just check this LINK out.

Or this charming bit from 1998.

Gosh, seems like maybe people today are just as "knowledgable" about their world as Moses' troopers were!

(ETA: I don't want to cast unfounded aspersions against Moses and his troops, because I'm sure they were going to take the Midianite virgins and make them do their laundry and stuff. Certainly not a sexual thing. Maybe they were just going to give them a better life than the one they knew...what with their little brothers, moms and dads all dead now... They probably just wanted to "comfort" these poor orphaned virgins.)

 

[CACTUSJACKmankin]

do i need to bring out the 170,000 lepidoptera (butterflies and moths), 120,000 diptera (flies), and 110,000 Hymenoptera (bees and ants) species that are known with untold millions hiding in the rainforests? Is kind a ridiculous concept yet? All of that variety in a few thousand years is super-ultra-hyper-evolution on steroids. And you think human/chimpanzee kinship is implausible, thats just a few dozen species in 7 million years.

 

[AV1611VET]

do i need to bring out the 170,000 lepidoptera (butterflies and moths), 120,000 diptera (flies), and 110,000 Hymenoptera (bees and ants) species that are known with untold millions hiding in the rainforests?

Go right ahead --- make it look as impossible as you can. Drag out all the science, anecdotes, charts, graphs, lists, websites, and dumpsites you can find that shows an absolute impossibility for the Flood. Make it look as dark as you can, because the darker it is, the brigher the Light shines.

[bible]Romans 3:4[/bible]

 

[CACTUSJACKmankin]

bacterium to human given 4 billion years is implausible but 10 million insects in a few thousand years isnt? you think macroevolution is wrong but ultraevolution is okay. its a contradiction.

 

[AV1611VET]

bacterium to human given 4 billion years is implausible but 10 million insects in a few thousand years isnt?

Don't know --- I wasn't there.

 

[CACTUSJACKmankin]

Go right ahead --- make it look as impossible as you can. Drag out all the science, anecdotes, charts, graphs, lists, websites, and dumpsites you can find that shows an absolute impossibility for the Flood. Make it look as dark as you can, because the darker it is, the brigher the Light shines.

[bible]Romans 3:4[/bible]

it's not about the flood or the ark, it's about evolution. you are a creationist, you attack or reject out of hand every piece of science we've presented you about genetics and molecular biology and fossils that points to macroevolution but in order for this divergence in such a short time to be true requires mega-hyper-evolution. You are so adamant about defending your beliefs against evolution that you end up with a position that necessitates a suped up version of it.

 

[Herman Hedning]

Go right ahead --- make it look as impossible as you can. Drag out all the science, anecdotes, charts, graphs, lists, websites, and dumpsites you can find that shows an absolute impossibility for the Flood. Make it look as dark as you can, because the darker it is, the brigher the Light shines.

[bible]Romans 3:4[/bible]

You know, AV, in some ways I envy you. You are always right, you can fend off any questions with a blow by good ol' KJV. Everything is answered by that single book. It must be easy never having to question anything, never doubting, never thinking.

Perhaps I should try it myself. Where do I sign up?

 

[AV1611VET]

Perhaps I should try it myself. Where do I sign up?

Right here:



​

 

[RedAndy]

it's not about the flood or the ark, it's about evolution. you are a creationist, you attack or reject out of hand every piece of science we've presented you about genetics and molecular biology and fossils that points to macroevolution but in order for this divergence in such a short time to be true requires mega-hyper-evolution. You are so adamant about defending your beliefs against evolution that you end up with a position that necessitates a suped up version of it.

Let's remember that AV is no ordinary Creationist. Many Creationists argue against evolution using "evidence" and argument, no matter how irrational, illogical or plain stupid their arguments tend to be. AV simply looks at the theory of evolution, looks at his interpretation of the Bible, and says, "No way." It simply doesn't fit, and there is no need to go any further than that. He is impervious to evidence, logic and reason simply because no amount of evidence, logic and reason can contradict the Bible. Expecting to convince AV that evolutionary science is accurate is like dropping a ball and expecting it to fall up to the ceiling, or putting sugar in your coffee and expecting it to coalesce into a cube.

 

[pgp_protector]

AV, what hypothetical evidence would make you admit that you were wrong?

The question suddenly occured to me and I'm curious now.

Nothing could.
They could have God come down and tell them there wrong, and they wouldn't believe it.
(IMHO)

 

[CACTUSJACKmankin]

Either admit that macro-evolution occurs or explain how all of those varieties of insect diverged from orders of magnitude fewer "kinds" in such a short amount of time and how this isnt steroid-evolution.

 

[Baggins]

Wrong about what?

You're just going to ignore the fact that you called me a racist aren't you?

Way to go with the Christian attitude buddy

/AV

 

[AV1611VET]

You're just going to ignore the fact that you called me a racist aren't you?

Way to go with the Christian attitude buddy

/AV

QV Post 74 please --- I hate to see you put me on IGNORE, but if that's your attitude --- go for it. I'm fed up with you guys calling the Jewish authors derogatory names, and since the Jews on here won't stand up to you guys - believe me - I will.

 

[ranmaonehalf]

I...
As it happens, whenever I've discussed the point with atheists as to whether there is or isn't a God, most of them concede that they don't know for definite, but a lot of evidence points towards there not being. This technically makes all atheists agnostic.

on the same point it makes christians agnostic too. they dont know.

likewise im a leperchaun agnostic, a floating celestial teapot agnostic ect... ect....

heck im a reality agnostic and a knowlege agnostic.....

 

[ranmaonehalf]

..
That'll be the day when our beliefs are disproven. We've been around for, oh, 2000 years, and still going strong.

granted avet is a Poe..

current beliefs that have been disproven as well as anything can .

flat earth.
pi=3
cyrstal sky
young earth
just to name a few

 

[ranmaonehalf]

You can dispute (or not dispute) me all you want. That's not why I call Agnostics cowards. It's because they don't dispute Atheists --- and I'm not an Atheist.

avet we know your a poe/troll. while you may not be an atheists
you certainly dont believe what you post here.

 

[pgp_protector]

avet we know your a poe/troll. while you may not be an atheists
you certainly dont believe what you post here.

scary thing is I think they really do.

 

[ranmaonehalf]

scary thing is I think they really do.

nah, hes slipped acouple times in the past. hes 100% undercover POE.

 

[Patashu]

Go right ahead --- make it look as impossible as you can. Drag out all the science, anecdotes, charts, graphs, lists, websites, and dumpsites you can find that shows an absolute impossibility for the Flood. Make it look as dark as you can, because the darker it is, the brigher the Light shines.

[bible]Romans 3:4[/bible]

I won't take your challenge until you give an example of an observation that is not reconcilable with a God-directed global flood model.

 

[milkyway]

Nothing, huh? Does, "We hold science up to a higher Standard," mean anything to you guys? After all, if I was a [an atheistic] scientist, I would be impressed that someone would hold "my" standards up to their particular deity; even if I didn't believe in their particular deity. But instead it's water off a duck's back to you guys - and that's a shame.



That'll be the day when our beliefs are disproven. We've been around for, oh, 2000 years, and still going strong.

I think this quote explains how science works. How can a standard be higher than this?

"We have found it of paramount importance that in order to progress, we must recognize our ignorance and leave room for doubt. Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty — some most unsure, some nearly sure, but none absolutely certain.
Our freedom to doubt was born out of a struggle against authority in the early days of science. It was a very deep and strong struggle: permit us to question — to doubt — to not be sure. I think that it is important that we do not forget this struggle and thus perhaps lose what we have gained." Richard Feynman

So...you gonna become like the best scientists and trust yourself to doubt what you've been taught to believe about the bible..?