Where are all the bones?

[HitchSlap]

Then there's good ole begging the question of proof. Not as popular as ad hominem but not as fatal either

Do you actually ever provide any evidence for your claims?

 

[mark kennedy]

Do you actually ever provide any evidence for your claims?

Three ad hominem, one begging the question and still not a single word about fossils. BTW you don't need evidence to be substantive, you do need rationality and a cursory knowledge of the subject matter. You have offered neither.

 

[HitchSlap]

Three ad hominem, one begging the question and still not a single word about fossils. BTW you don't need evidence to be substantive, you do need rationality and a cursory knowledge of the subject matter. You have offered neither.

Aren't you the one who said humans have only been around for 6K years? Lol

 

[mark kennedy]

Aren't you the one who said humans have only been around for 6K years? Lol

And we know exactly what my source material for that one is, the best preserved historical narratives from antiquity. Not clay tablets or fragmentary artifacts but a living witness. The Scriptures have been in the custody of living people their entire history, the Hebrew and Christian communities respectively. You may put your confidence in a bunch of old bones and dirt but I've always preferred comparative genomics and anatomy. Congratulations, you finally managed an almost substantive statement.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[Speedwell]

And we know exactly what my source material for that one is, the best preserved historical narratives from antiquity. Not clay tablets or fragmentary artifacts but a living witness. The Scriptures have been in the custody of living people their entire history, the Hebrew and Christian communities respectively. You may put your confidence in a bunch of old bones and dirt but I've always preferred comparative genomics and anatomy. Congratulations, you finally managed an almost substantive statement.

Have a nice day
Mark

Right. A book probably composed in the 5th century BC and attributed to an author who was supposed to have written it in the 15th century--about events which happened 2500 years before that.

 

[mark kennedy]

Right. A book probably composed in the 5th century BC and attributed to an author who was supposed to have written it in the 15th century.

That is your opinion, the fact of the matter is the Scriptures get to tell the story and the burden of proof is on the skeptic. Much of the Old Testament was compiled during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah but they found the scrolls of the Law while rebuilding the Temple. Danial had the scroll of Jeremiah in Babylon so it's a safe guess that many of the scrolls of the prophets were taken with the Jews into exile. There is nothing in the history of Israel to suggest that they compiled the 39 books of the Old Testament in the fifth century, that's a clear statement of personal opinion based on nothing but you saying it.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[Gene2memE]

The earth probably is billions of years old but life was created 6000 years ago.

What confidence intervals would you assign to:
The earth being "probably" billions of years old
Life being created
Life being 600 years old

Most of the fossils are concentrated in certain areas

Really? And here was me thinking fossils are found almost anywhere there is sedimentary rock.

but what you should realize is they are sifting through nature's trash can to deny God as Creator.

So that's what they're doing. Not collecting evidence to seek to understand the past, but digging up bones and impressions to invalidate the assumptions of a particular group of religions believers.

Got it.

 

[Speedwell]

That is your opinion, the fact of the matter is the Scriptures get to tell the story and the burden of proof is on the skeptic. Much of the Old Testament was compiled during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah but they found the scrolls of the Law while rebuilding the Temple. Danial had the scroll of Jeremiah in Babylon so it's a safe guess that many of the scrolls of the prophets were taken with the Jews into exile. There is nothing in the history of Israel to suggest that they compiled the 39 books of the Old Testament in the fifth century, that's a clear statement of personal opinion based on nothing but you saying it.

Grace and peace,
Mark

LOL! You think I'm smart enough to have worked that out all by myself?

 

[HitchSlap]

And we know exactly what my source material for that one is, the best preserved historical narratives from antiquity. Not clay tablets or fragmentary artifacts but a living witness. The Scriptures have been in the custody of living people their entire history, the Hebrew and Christian communities respectively. You may put your confidence in a bunch of old bones and dirt but I've always preferred comparative genomics and anatomy. Congratulations, you finally managed an almost substantive statement.

Have a nice day
Mark

Anonymous fiction is your source? Really?
C'mon Mark, you can do better than this. You're not even trying. Did some hijack your account?!

 

[Gene2memE]

Anonymous fiction is your source?

Some of the biblical account, OT and NT, are either completely fictional or at the very least significant embellishments of actual events. Other parts are indeed fictional or totally unverifiable - which when dealing with the history of the Middle East before about 600 AD are almost the same thin.

However, there is quite a lot of the OT that passes muster as historical narrative, if not actual history as we'd understand it - ie a literal recording of the events of the past.

There are lots of touchstones in the OT accounts that are historically verifiable - kings, wars, deaths of notables, migrations of peoples, ect - that provide a good degree of actual history within the Bible, although without coming close to verifying the actual narrative.

An assessment of the historicity of the Bible can never be more than partially removed from the supernatural claims, but the work of maximalists like Kenneth Kitchen do bear reading, if only for a better understanding of the period. I'm in between the minimallist and maximallist camps on most topics.

 

[mark kennedy]

What confidence intervals would you assign to:
The earth being "probably" billions of years old
Life being created
Life being 600 years old

That's not even a question. The heavens and the earth were created in the beginning, life was created 6000 years ago.

Really? And here was me thinking fossils are found almost anywhere there is sedimentary rock.

You got a real thing for generalities that go nowhere.

So that's what they're doing. Not collecting evidence to seek to understand the past, but digging up bones and impressions to invalidate the assumptions of a particular group of religions believers.

Got it.

Ad hominem four, one begging the question of proof and one almost substantive argument. Typical.

 

[mark kennedy]

Anonymous fiction is your source? Really?

That comes to four ad hominems, two begging the question of proofs and one almost substantive argument. Still nothing about fossils.

C'mon Mark, you can do better than this. You're not even trying. Did some hijack your account?!

It saves time to dismiss the fallacious reasoning and wait for the actual argument trollers are incapable of.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[mark kennedy]

LOL! You think I'm smart enough to have worked that out all by myself?

I'm here for you buddy, we can work this out together. I know the Scriptures, I've spent a lot of time on these subjects. Don't worry, this is actually a lot of fun when you get into it.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[Gene2memE]

Ad hominem four, one begging the question of proof and one almost substantive argument. Typical.

Non sequitur. I can use Latin phrases too. I'd like you to point out the particular ad hominem (speaking against the person, rather than the subject) I used in the sentence you quoted. Failing that, I'd like you to retract the accusation.

I'd also like you to answer the questions I asked, so I'll repeat them.

What confidence intervals would you assign to:
The earth being "probably" billions of years old?
Life being created?
Life being 6000 years old?

Assigning each of these a value between 0% (no confidence) and 100% (complete confidence).

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

BTW
Your tagging the scriptures as worthless comes as no surprise since you appear to tag anything that smacks of a creator as worthless right off the bat.

BTW
If your claim that your ID stuff isn't a religious belief, then "the scriptures" should be irrelevant by definition.

Explain THIS with something more substantial than the usual inability to see declarations::

They are basically fallacious arguments from incredulity / ignorance.

 

[mark kennedy]

Non sequitur. I can use Latin phrases too. I'd like you to point out the particular ad hominem (speaking against the person, rather than the subject) I used in the sentence you quoted. Failing that, I'd like you to retract the accusation.

Nothing substantive and a half a dozen fallacious rants. Still nothing about fossils.

I'd also like you to answer the questions I asked, so I'll repeat them.

What confidence intervals would you assign to:
The earth being "probably" billions of years old?

A simple statement of fact, in the beginning is ambiquise with regards to a time line.

Life being created?

The Genesis narrative.

Life being 6000 years old?

The genealogies.

Assigning each of these a value between 0% (no confidence) and 100% (complete confidence).

Nonsensical rhetoric. Nice try, you actually broke even on this one but nothing substantive.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

STRAWMAN. As I said, I am making the leap to ID not to any specific being.

Everybody here know what the "D" stands for, really.
So do you. You just need to obfuscate that part. The entire model is based on this obfuscation.

It isn't just the DNA you also have to glibly explain away the Fibonacci.

In your own words, what is there to "explain away"?

How do I make the leap? Easy. In the same way you make the leap with any other thing which you tag as evidence of mental activity towards a purpose.

And how is that, exactly?

BTW
If you have to ask that question then you are asking us to believe that for all practical purposes you are virtually brain dead.

Can you try and just answer the questions, without obfuscation and without ending with unconstructive and meaningless character attacks?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Three ad hominem, one begging the question

You suck at identifying logical fallacies.

and still not a single word about fossils

What about fossils?
It is simply demonstrably, factually, verifiably incorrect to state that all fossils are less then 6000 years old. The factor of error here is comparable to saying that the US is only 3 miles from coast to coast.

In reality, we have fossils that are hundreds of millions years old.
In reality, not a single fossil has ever been found that doesn't fit neatly into the model of an evolutionary history.

BTW you don't need evidence to be substantive

LOL!
If that is what you believe, then it comes as no surprise that you are able to believe the nonsense you are trying to sell here.

, you do need rationality and a cursory knowledge of the subject matter

Which clearly you do not have either.... Otherwise you'ld be aware that just about every fossil at our disposal is FAR older then 6000 years.

You have offered neither.

Please. You wouldn't recognise either of them if they came up an hit you upside the head - that much is clear.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And we know exactly what my source material for that one is

Yes. The words of men. Stories from the bronze age.

, the best preserved historical narratives from antiquity.

That's debatable, considering that what you read today are copies of copies of translations of copies of translations,... and none of the originals are accessible.

But it doesn't matter anyway. Preserved or not - they remain just stories.
Stories which are completely contradicted by the actual data.

When stories don't match the facts, you don't throw out the facts and stick to the stories. Well, at least not if you care about being rational.

Not clay tablets or fragmentary artifacts but a living witness. The Scriptures have been in the custody of living people their entire history, the Hebrew and Christian communities respectively

That's true for all scriptures and all stories that any human has ever come up with.

You may put your confidence in a bunch of old bones and dirt

Ow yes. I'll be confident in facts over stories, every day of the week.

but I've always preferred comparative genomics and anatomy

You mean, the sciences that show that common ancestry of life is a nothing short of a FACT?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That is your opinion, the fact of the matter is the Scriptures get to tell the story and the burden of proof is on the skeptic

The burden of proof is never on the one not making the claims.

Didn't you just say something about how it is important to be rational?
Then why are you here, shifting the burden of proof?

Much of the Old Testament was compiled during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah but they found the scrolls of the Law while rebuilding the Temple. Danial had the scroll of Jeremiah in Babylon so it's a safe guess that many of the scrolls of the prophets were taken with the Jews into exile. There is nothing in the history of Israel to suggest that they compiled the 39 books of the Old Testament in the fifth century, that's a clear statement of personal opinion based on nothing but you saying it.

Everything about belief in bronze age stories, which can't be validated and verified outside of those stories, is about opinion and "faith".

None of it is about evidence. In fact, actual evidence flat out contradicts the stories.
And again, when you have actual data on the one hand and a mutually exclusive story on the other hand..... the rational thing to do is to go with the data - not with the story.