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.
How about the Wall Street Journal? Are you the only person in America NOT TO KNOW about the fraud?
How about the New York Times?
Typical liberal response- ignore the facts, attack the messenger. Sorry. The whole world knows about the fraud recorded in the hacked e-mails.
If you want to believe that cow flatulance and people exhaling are destructive to the environment, go ahead. Just don't expect the rest of us to give credibility to the LIE of global warming.Typical Fundie- Right Wing response- cherry pick from dated material and pretend that the scientific consensus is in question. And the whole world, except you, knows this was investigated and No one was found guilty of any wrong-doing.
I see this thread going way off topic, unless global warming caused the Biblical flood!
Hey why not? Your guess is as good as Dieselman's! He knows all about "cow flatulance" afterall!
You are right about going off-track, however... so I will be done will global warming here... in fact, I will be done with Dieselman, period. He has no interest in anything but flamming, so I am adding him to my Ignore list.
"Typical Fundie- Right Wing response-"Hey why not? Your guess is as good as Dieselman's! He knows all about "cow flatulance" afterall!
You are right about going off-track, however... so I will be done will global warming here... in fact, I will be done with Dieselman, period. He has no interest in anything but flamming, so I am adding him to my Ignore list.
"Typical Fundie- Right Wing response-"
Fundie is a term used by FSTD trolls, by the way..
It's not surprising that one of "them" would still believe in Global warming despite a wealth of scientific evidence to the contrary, but like evidence that is in conflict with evolution or evidence that conflicts with the presumption that the Great Flood was a local event, nothing that casts shadows on their pre-conceived believes has validity.
Perhaps he didn't know that cow flatulance (methane) has been called a source of greenhouse gasses or that carbon dioxide is a natural byproduct of respiration.
Regardless, it's amazing how many people believe that science and natural law are the ultimate ruling forces in the world. The fact is that God's law trumps natural law every time.
Every society has a record of a global flood, and yet it's all supposed to be copied stories from whoever made it up first.
Most of us would take that as a pretty good indication that the flood happened, but since evolution couldn't possibly happen in a few thousand years it MUST be false.
Very true -- so would you kindly direct me to the storyteller who emphasized Mary's childhood in Jerusalem? Because I can already assure you, it's not in the Bible.
It does tend to establish a pattern --
The dates in the Bible are very easy to follow from Adam to Abraham. Clearly Adam lived with Eve in the Garden of Eden around 6,000 years ago.
Right -- because we already know that life has existed for a lot more than a few thousand years, with no such genetic bottleneck that one would have to see if such a catastrophe occurred.
Second, we can look at the Genesis story itself to see not a single flood narrative, but two separate versions of the same story woven together
Of course, just because it says all life was wiped out doesn't mean all life was wiped out...
"Such an event would be expected to leave a significant mark across numerous genetic loci and observable anatomical traits. "
As I stated, when you assume something about past events or how God works, you're not always correct.
Each moment that passes reduces the odds of being correct
and increases the illusion that one is correct. The older the
data, the greater the deception.
Perhaps your "bottleneck" math is off.
"Such an event would be expected to leave a significant mark across numerous genetic loci and observable anatomical traits. "
As I stated, when you assume something about past events or how God works, you're not always correct.
Each moment that passes reduces the odds of being correct
and increases the illusion that one is correct. The older the
data, the greater the deception.
Problem is, Literalists ASSUME that Genesis is scientifically sound,trying to tell us how God works.
..it isn't because it does not delve into the processes involved.
Your statement is a double edged sword.
Right, because God actually didn't kill every living thing except for two ...of every animal, reducing the genetic loci to nearly nil...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?