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.
An Edmontosaurus annectens?Tell us what that bone above is.
Good for you, you googled similar images. I based my inference on observations of short bones relatively to their ability to be involved in flexion of the associated body part. While wrong in my original hypothesis I was in fact on the right track. You however did your usual and took the entire output of the science that you deny to find your answer.An Edmontosaurus annectens?
I investigated before I communicated.Good for you, you googled similar images.
What science did I deny to find my answer?Ponderous Curmudgeon said:I based my inference on observations of short bones relatively to their ability to be involved in flexion of the associated body part. While wrong in my original hypothesis I was in fact on the right track. You however did your usual and took the entire output of the science that you deny to find your answer.
Except when its wine.I investigated before I communicated.
Something rarely done around here.What science did I deny to find my answer?
Pick one -- (the right one, please):
1. Bible says x, Science says x = go with x
2. Bible says x, Science says y = go with x
3. Bible says x, Science says ø = go with x
4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
5. Bible says ø, Science says ø = free to speculate on your own
Except when its wine.
And who gets to decide what the Bible says? If you are being "bullied" it's because you insist on being the one who gets to decide for everybody, even other people's children.I investigated before I communicated.
Something rarely done around here.What science did I deny to find my answer?
Pick one -- (the right one, please):
1. Bible says x, Science says x = go with x
2. Bible says x, Science says y = go with x
3. Bible says x, Science says ø = go with x
4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
5. Bible says ø, Science says ø = free to speculate on your own
You didn't actually do anything except take advantage of the science you generally deny. I posted my answer as an example of that method you deny. I created a hypothesis based on what I know and the evidence presented. My hypothesis was apparently correct on at least one of the three parts. You on the other hand consider me to be wrong not based on your idea that "the bible says it" but your silly statement because you question my position based on your use of the tacit admission that all of your x phi? is not really what you believe.I investigated before I communicated.
Something rarely done around here.What science did I deny to find my answer?
Pick one -- (the right one, please):
1. Bible says x, Science says x = go with x
2. Bible says x, Science says y = go with x
3. Bible says x, Science says ø = go with x
4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
5. Bible says ø, Science says ø = free to speculate on your own
Either that, or I simply went to Post 2236, clicked the REPLY button, clicked the USE BB CODE EDITOR button, and got the URL of the IMG.You didn't actually do anything except take advantage of the science you generally deny.
None of that is evidence. You are just restating bible tales as fact.
I justify my belief in that you were asked about evidence, yet presented none, then all but declared victory.
Is there any evidence for miraculous events?
I think we understand and I will leave you alone for the most part. I appreciate your stamina even if I find it possibly misguided. go for it Alfred.Either that, or I simply went to Post 2236, clicked the REPLY button, clicked the USE BB CODE EDITOR button, and got the URL of the IMG.
Easy peasy.
And here I though you would have been proud of me!
Well actually I think I owe you an explanation, if not an apology.I think we understand and I will leave you alone for the most part. I appreciate your stamina even if I find it possibly misguided. go for it Alfred.
My impression is that creationists don't really get that scientists understand the subject better than they do. I hear all the time that it's just a matter of interpreting a body of data in reference to presuppositions, without support from related data or related scientific disciplines. Rennick's recent comment on hominid fossils is revealing: He truly believes that paleontologists merely line up fossils in accord with their presupposition of evolution and call it done--without confirming that assumption with information from other scientific disciplines.
I like your analogy.I get the impression that often times they just aren't aware of how much is collectively known in science. Like they just have no idea. It's like someone picking up a basketball for the first time and thinking that maybe they can beat michael jordan, even though they've never seen jordan really play. Only jordan can really see clearly how the match will play itself out.
I guess they are not any of them accountants or lawyersMy impression is that creationists don't really get that scientists understand the subject better than they do. I hear all the time that it's just a matter of interpreting a body of data in reference to presuppositions, without support from related data or related scientific disciplines. Rennick's recent comment on hominid fossils is revealing: He truly believes that paleontologists merely line up fossils in accord with their presupposition of evolution and call it done--without confirming that assumption with information from other scientific disciplines.
WUT?
I never posted any bible 'tales'.
On the contrary, I mentioned flood accounts which are historically documented OUTSIDE the bible. (extra-biblical)
If you wish to waive your hands and simply dismiss something as a mere "fabrication", then (ironically) it is you who are the one making stuff up. You are literally creating a myth of your own. Your mythology is that it never happened.
There is evidence. That you find the evidence unpersuasive doesn't give you the right to re-define the definition of the word "evidence". Or to declare a victory of your own.
Yes.
QV this thread from my buddy Split Rock:but few would get on an airplane whose mechanics had zero education, but did know to say, "paradigm", and, "SEDI".
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?