OphidiaPhile
Well-Known Member
- Sep 26, 2008
- 2,919
- 188
- 57
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
And what is your definition of a theory? Because in scientific parlance a theory is akin to a fact.
Upvote
0
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.
And what is your definition of a theory? Because in scientific parlance a theory is akin to a fact.Evolution is a theory. It is not fact.
Not proven.
And of course you would be wrong.Not proven.
Then why is it called the "theory of evolution"?
Read the full post.Then why is it called the "theory of evolution"?
Science is not an opinion and yet it proves genesis as incorrect.
Genesis and Science ARE Compatible!
The story in Genesis 1 of the Bible, about the beginning of everything, is fully compatible with modern science. It actually even PROVES that modern science is on the right track! And modern science has CONFIRMED that Genesis presents the proper sequence of events! Science might even help explain some confusing things in the Bible like where Cain went when he left Eden, and whom he married.
In the discussion that follows, one major understanding is seen differently than has previously been done. Genesis 1:26 includes (KJ) "And God said, let US make man in our image, after our likeness". The NIV and other English translations are all very similar. ALL believers seem to accept this as meaning that our PHYSICAL APPEARANCE is like God's. The actual Ancient Hebrew word (tselem) can mean "resemblance" and there is not any actual implication that it is a PHYSICAL resemblance. This discussion makes a different conclusion from that Verse, in that the resemblance referred to is regarding man as HAVING A SOUL. The Bible reads perfectly reasonably and logically with this understanding, but it then also permits "intimate agreement" between Christian beliefs and scientific research.
If a human author had written Genesis 1 without God's help he could have presented/listed the 14 events mentioned in over 87 billion different sequences. How could a human author have selected the sequence, beginning with Light first and Man last, which has now (3300 years later) been shown to match the sequence that modern science accepts?
This demonstrates that you have no understanding of Evolution.Evolution is a theory. It is not fact.
The tarnished golden rule the entire family can love!
Do unto others...before they do unto you.
Keeping Family Values Safe since Time Immemorial.
He is not a scientist and does not even have a possible hypothesis, hence it is irrelevant. If he can find evidence to support his hypothesis, get it published and peer reviewed with a viable model then his opinion will be valid.Here's a guy with an opinion that differs from yours:
http://mb-soft.com/public/genesis5.html
For the rest go to the link.
You can't (or won't) present your own reply based on your link.Here's a guy with an opinion that differs from yours:
http://mb-soft.com/public/genesis5.html
For the rest go to the link.
+1You can't (or won't) present your own reply based on your link.
Therefore I must conclude that you don't actually understand the strengths and weaknesses of the long page you linked to.
Argument by link is NOT and argument PC_F, and you know it.
Yes, by all means, post a link.
But do so AS you propose your OWN argument.
To do otherwise is EPICPHAIL.
Not that I expect any better from you, Mr. "guess what Im talking about" poster.
At least angellica is presenting her own arguments (and kudos to her for doing so)
For the last time, I would not kick out a virgin gay teen if he chose to get help or not to give in to his temptations and realize that it was a sin. IF HE CHOSE TO PARTICIPATE IN GAY ACTS, ROMANTIC OR SEXUAL, HE WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO DO IT IN MY HOUSE, THEREFORE VIOLATING MY HOUSE RULES, THEREFORE KICKED OUT. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REALIZING SOMETHING IS WRONG AND AVOIDING IT OR NOT DOING IT IS DIFFERENT THAN DOING IT PROUDLY AND NOT BEING SORRY OR THINK IT'S WRONG.And unlike your subjective morality that pits a virgin gay teenager (whom you would kick out of your house) and a virgin gay heterosexual child (whom you apparently would not kick out despite the sinful lifestyle he engages in)
Please note (ie please read and understand) that I've placed both of these teenage boys as virgins.
Now, which one do you kick out?
BTW, this very scenario has been pointed out to you before, and all you've done is ignore it and/or change your goalposts.....Now just answer the question, directly, without handwaving.
Be Christlike for a change.
Or at least be emulating your OT deity if you wish.
This demonstrates that you have no understanding of Evolution.
It is both a theory AND (get this) a FACT.
Yes, fact.
Period, end of story.
As a matter of fact, it can be demonstrated objectively and empirically.
Unlike Creationism.
And unlike your subjective morality that pits a virgin gay teenager (whom you would kick out of your house) and a virgin gay heterosexual child (whom you apparently would not kick out despite the sinful lifestyle he engages in)
Please note (ie please read and understand) that I've placed both of these teenage boys as virgins.
Now, which one do you kick out?
BTW, this very scenario has been pointed out to you before, and all you've done is ignore it and/or change your goalposts.....Now just answer the question, directly, without handwaving.
Be Christlike for a change.
Or at least be emulating your OT deity if you wish.
I knew you had absolutely no grasp of what evolution is but I did not know it was this bad.Evolution means something from nothing? A lizard becoming a hawk? How absurd that evolution is used to disprove God. Simply a fact that evolution is nothing but science applied as best the human brain can think about things in the "natural" world.
It is merely the beginning of the story.Period. End of story
0 x 0 = atheism, not fact. Whatever evolution is, it is not mud monkeys to man
Are you talking about the Right/Christian/Republicans?Big difference in Christian culture and the culture that celebrates and protects public bathroom hookups and other forms of ultra promiscuity.
You can't (or won't) present your own reply based on your link.
Therefore I must conclude that you don't actually understand the strengths and weaknesses of the long page you linked to.
Argument by link is NOT and argument PC_F, and you know it.
Yes, by all means, post a link.
But do so AS you propose your OWN argument.
To do otherwise is EPICPHAIL.
Not that I expect any better from you, Mr. "guess what Im talking about" poster.
At least angellica is presenting her own arguments (and kudos to her for doing so)
He is not a scientist and does not even have a possible hypothesis, hence it is irrelevant. If he can find evidence to support his hypothesis, get it published and peer reviewed with a viable model then his opinion will be valid.
So as usual you have no evidence, no science and nothing of substance to back up your assertions.
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?