The Creationist Myth - 500,000-Year-Old Stone Tools, Butchered Elephant Bones Found in Israel

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: nenothtu

2 minutes vs how many times have I asked, already? Just post up some specific examples, including source text. Come on, it's not that hard, is it?

What part of "we're done here, buttercup" is escaping your intellectual grasp? You've yet to comment (or likely even read) on the links I've already posted, preferring to only argue and ignore it instead - you get no more.

Again, have a nice day now - we're still done here.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: undo

You mean this?

And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.

Nice try.

no, the verse before the two i quoted. it's about a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon beneath her feet and 12 stars around her head. lol its about the "sun" in a constellation of the ecliptic, who from antiquity is depicted as a woman. she's part of the ecliptic and the sun is in her midcenter (she's clothed with it).

gads, i feel like i'm being trolled lol

a reply to: nenothtu

Ok, so after all this back and forth, you're finally taking your ball and going home. Can't you just admit you are wrong? Or would you like to at least take a stab at backing up your statements? "Read this book" is not a response. A simple, unambiguous example that doesn't requires you to only notice in retrospect and do a mind boggling amount of linguistic and logical fudging would suffice.

a reply to: undo

Again:

If it requires you to only notice in retrospect and do a mind boggling amount of linguistic and logical fudging, that should be enough of a red flag.

a reply to: GetHyped

okay, so what about those red socks.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: nenothtu

Ok, so after all this back and forth, you're finally taking your ball and going home. Can't you just admit you are wrong? Or would you like to at least take a stab at backing up your statements? "Read this book" is not a response. A simple, unambiguous example that doesn't requires you to only notice in retrospect and do a mind boggling amount of linguistic and logical fudging would suffice.

It appears that not all minds are as easily boggled as yours.

When I'm wrong, I DO admit it. Publicly. I've done so at ATS, more than once... but when I'm not, I don't, and therefore won't now.

Nor is it my problem if the evidence I gave you was too overwhelming for you to process in one sitting. You asked for it - don't run away from it now that you have it.

originally posted by: undo
gads, i feel like i'm being trolled lol

Don't worry, the feeling is shared lol

anybody ever hear this guy before?

a reply to: undo

Lloyd Anthony Pye Jr. was an American author and paranormal researcher best known for his promotion of the Starchild skull. He claimed it was the relic of a human-alien hybrid, although DNA testing showed it to be from a human male.
He also promoted the ideas that cryptozoological creatures such as Bigfoot are real and that aliens intervened in human development.

OK, another "Alien specialist" fraud making money selling books and seminar seats to gullible people. I wonder if he's friend with Steven Greer.


Look Undo! An alien-human hybrid like the one from the starchild skull!




FFS

a reply to: Develo

aww poor baby

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: Develo

aww poor baby

Yeah poor baby. It never occurred to Pye that the skull he's making money with is from a similar poor baby. Or maybe it did but he did not care because he was a fraud like all his kind.

a reply to: Develo

i dunno, i am just listening to him for the first time. that's why i asked about him.

technically speaking, btw, god is an extra-terrestrial. in fact, anything not born on the earth, is EXTRA-terrestrial. regardless of whether they are other dimensional or other planet

oh i take that back. i have listened to him before, but it's been so long, i forgot what it was about.

here's another one who thinks they know the history of humankind. has anyone heard this before? and if so, who / what is it?

a reply to: eisegesis

You know, there is such a thing as 'old Earth creationism,' which has no problem with these findings whatsoever. [sarcasm]But thanks for lumping everyone together like that.[/sarcasm]

What I found most interesting about this post was the elephant part. I had no idea the Middle East had elephants back in the day. Pretty cool.

a reply to: nenothtu

You gave no evidence. Saying "read this book" is a fob off answer. SURELY you must have one specific example at hand, no?

a reply to: GetHyped

I posted this a few pages ago:

I'm not posting this as 'proof' that the bible is the Hitchhiker's guid by any means... but I do love it none the less. There is lot's of good discussion regarding the hebrew words used in this passage, it's an enjoyable study

"He stretches out the north over the void and hangs the earth on nothing"

Job 26:7

-Lederman

a reply to: lederman

If it requires you to only notice in retrospect and do a mind boggling amount of linguistic and logical fudging, that should be enough of a red flag.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: lederman

If it requires you to only notice in retrospect and do a mind boggling amount of linguistic and logical fudging, that should be enough of a red flag.

And there you have it, lederman. GetHyped does not have to accept anything that he isn't prepared to, and clearly isn't prepared to accept anything at all. He even has a stock phrase so that he doesn't have to even consider whatever is brought up to him.

For what it's worth, the astronomical reference is pretty clear - the astrological reference, apparently not so much.

------------------------------------------------

GetHyped:

So lederman brings you a single reference, and it's not enough, and I give you an entire book, and well, that's just too much for you. Either way, you're not prepared to actually consider what you demand, so why bother giving it?

So I don't. It's like dealing with a kid who has just learned the use of the word "why?" - I've already raised all of my kids.

So you can claim that your poor little mind is "boggled" all you want - the plain facts of the matter are that there are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

I forget where I read that.

a reply to: nenothtu

If you think that vaguely worded statements that require serious retconning or patently obvious statements deduced from simply looking up at the sky with the naked eye constitutes deep insight into modern astronomy then keep believing what you want to believe, logic and reason will remain impervious to you.

"Oh look it said something about darkness so they're clearly talking about black holes".

Flawless logic.