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.
Hence the hilarious Onyate Man episode that ensnared so many creationists.I figured you were being sarcastic but I wanted to make sure that the creationists here understood that what you were describing was fake crap. They have a tendency think every ridiculous essay, that agrees with their take on the Bible, is accurate.
Or even a "quick" experiment: build a full scale replica of Noah's ark using the provided instructions and materials, tools and ship building techniques from the appropriate time, fill it full of live stock and supplies, along with 8 people, seal it up watertight and let it drift around the North Sea (to simulate the turbulence of a global flood) for 10 months and see what happens. Christianity is a MULTIBILLION dollar business. Someone should be able to come up with the funds to conduct an experiment like this.
I would certainly be opposed. The ark might run into and destroy the windfarm offshore Aberdeen. Construction of the windfarm infuriated Trump because he argued it interfered with the view from his Aberdeenshire golf course. I couldn't rationally support something that might bring such undeserved comfort to Trump.There would probably be ethical objections to such an experiment.
If you want to argue that God directly caused the Big Bang, you also have to agree that the earth formed billions of years later and life evolved to its present form over a period of billions of years.
You’re talking about people who think archaeopteryx and Lucy were fakes . They can’t tell the difference. They don’t even have minimal knowledge about basic anatomy
How does one test the Book of Genesis? What has science perportedly backed up in the Bible?
Furthermore, how does testing the Bible explicitly test the supernatural?
The Kalam cosmological argument doesn't actually support this. It merely presumes a supernatural origin.
The biggest issue with this argument as well is the presumption of classical causality. Yet we know that classical causality may not always apply, just as classical physics does not explicitly apply to ever facet of the universe.
It also makes other assumptions about the nature of our universe that we don't currently know or can otherwise verify at this time. Stating basic premises don't really help if the premises themselves cannot be explicitly demonstrated.
That's just an argument from ignorance. That isn't a scientific test of the supernatural.
Three strikes, yer out.
Except you are just spreading the lies of Kent Hovind. Not presenting anything like an actual presentation of the fossil evidence for human evolution.I still don't appreciate your condescension, so this is my last post to you.
If what you say is true, then there would be more transitional fossils. Also, it would have to happen in a short period of time. One cannot falsify billions of years with experiment. Instead, the creation scientists point out the great fraud committed by the atheist scientists and their followers for the other creatures that were supposed to be transitional such as Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Peking Man, and more.
All your arguments are off topic. Why don't you start your own thread? You haven't answered the question posed by the topic.
what are these supposed to be ? Your misunderstandings of the Hominidae fossil record doesn’t count as a refutation.I still don't appreciate your condescension, so this is my last post to you.
If what you say is true, then there would be more transitional fossils. Also, it would have to happen in a short period of time. One cannot falsify billions of years with experiment. Instead, the creation scientists point out the great fraud committed by the atheist scientists and their followers for the other creatures that were supposed to be transitional such as Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Peking Man, and more.
Posting a Chick Tract.
Yeah, I'm calling it. OP doesn't actually about science in the slightest, and has no actual interest in it either.
No, the Earth isn't that old. It's ridiculous to think it billions of years old. No planet would last that long as we are losing our magnetic field and much of the Earth was formed by catastrophism. We have the evidence of a global flood as our planet is the only one 3/4 covered by surface water. What the Earth has such as plate tectonics and such aren't found anywhere else. It also has a carbon cycle to support carbon based life. What other planets have these things? None that I know of.
Yet another flounce, eh?I still don't appreciate your condescension, so this is my last post to you.
You haven't even recognised the overwhelmingly voluminous, logical and scientifically valid answers given throughout this thread ..All your arguments are off topic. Why don't you start your own thread? You haven't answered the question posed by the topic.
Yet another unjustifiable assumption .. to pile ontop of all the others you've made then, eh?jamesbond007 said:I was nice enough to answer a few of your questions, but your questions and arguments do not address anything for this thread. I'm going to have to assume you don't have anything.
You actually have to look before making bogus claims!jamesbond007 said:What the Earth has such as plate tectonics and such aren't found anywhere else.
On 8 September 2014, NASA reported finding evidence of plate tectonics on Europa, a satellite of Jupiter—the first sign of subduction activity on another world other than Earth.
Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, was reported to show tectonic activity in images taken by the Huygens probe, which landed on Titan on January 14, 2005.
Titan has a carbon cyle (hydrocarbons):jamesbond007 said:It also has a carbon cycle to support carbon based life. What other planets have these things? .
Titan's atmospheric composition is nitrogen (97%), methane (2.7±0.1%), hydrogen (0.1–0.2%) with trace amounts of other gases. There are trace amounts of other hydrocarbons, such as ethane, diacetylene, methylacetylene, acetylene and propane, and of other gases, such as cyanoacetylene, hydrogen cyanide, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, cyanogen, argon and helium. The hydrocarbons are thought to form in Titan's upper atmosphere in reactions resulting from the breakup of methane by the Sun's ultraviolet light, producing a thick orange smog.
I suspect OP may just be a Poe. Their posts have a certain Poe-like quality to them.
In that case, you can't invoke the Big Bang.
Except you are just spreading the lies of Kent Hovind. Not presenting anything like an actual presentation of the fossil evidence for human evolution.
Do you know how Piltdown man was revealed as a fraud? By scientists examining the evidence thoroughly because it was inconsistent with all the other evidence.
(It's the height of irony to smear a whole field of study with the "work" of a Creationist who went to jail for his own fraud and dishonesty.)
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?