Man, Monkey or Both?

reply to post by The Blind Eye


Tell me something, what is your opinion on fossil of humans that are 36 feet tall?

Originally posted by 100Grand
Tell me something, what is your opinion on fossil of humans that are 36 feet tall?

Are you referring to this 'evidence' www.worth1000.com... ?

reply to post by The Blind Eye


Somewhat, and also on prophecyinthenews.com... mondays webcast

reply to post by 100Grand


That they don't exist, that the so-called evidence is not scientific in nature? Is that close?

reply to post by davesidious

Last night and tonight the prophecyinthenews.com site is down... but i would image that he claims these photos are authentic and that the Mt. Blanco Fossil Museum www.mtblanco.com... records are also legit.

...but how can anyone confirm these photos are real when they come from a photoshop contest and give the museum any credence when they state that they have a biblical agenda.

Q. Is Mt Blanco Fossil Museum a religious organization?

A. We are a science museum, showing facts and data about the actual fossils in the museum. We believe that evolution is an old-fashioned theory not substantiated by facts, and that what the Bible says is more scientifically accurate. Our museum shows that there was a worldwide flood only a few thousand years ago. We show that most species are not getting more complex or larger. There are also numerous specimens that show most fossils were buried rapidly.

There is also a mix of 'evidence':

Q. Are the fossils seen in the museum real?

A. Some are actual fossils, others are casts.

Hmmm makes you wonder which are real and which are molds, my guess would be that the giant bones are of the later.

Also worth noting, the average T-Rex was about 20 feet tall. So what these 'experts' or 'authorities' are saying, based on their findings, is that human beings were taller?

[edit on 7-2-2010 by The Blind Eye]

reply to post by The Blind Eye


That place is an absolute joke. Their founder wasn't a scientist, and they claim to be scientific without even understanding what the word means.

Not to mention their website looks awful

Originally posted by The Blind Eye
reply to post by davesidious

 

"but how can anyone confirm these photos are real when they come from a photoshop contest and give the museum any credence when they state that they have a biblical agenda]"

ok, what about Dinosaur bones, so called "transitional fossils," is it impossible for these to have been fabricated as well. The Government funds museums all over the World and makes millions. Do you think they care if it's real or not? They are making money. The Bible talks about Giants, it also says that God is our Creator. Of course I'm not dismissing Dinosaurs or Evolution based on these claims, but Dinosaurs and Evolution have been crammed into the heads of kids since elementary school. I've said it before, I definitely believed in them not 3 months ago. Yet these fossils of Giants, city's preserved underwater, remains of Noah's Ark, things that could prove the Bible is not just a fairy tale, are being treated as being fabricated. You know the Devil's greatest skill is deceit, no wonder Christianity has become such a minority. Just wait, there will be millions of converts in the years to come. Starting with 144,000 Jews.

[edit on 7-2-2010 by 100Grand]

reply to post by 100Grand


If a claim or phenomenon has evidence, science will be its biggest supporter. If said claim or phenomenon does not, then science will ignore it. Fossils of dinosaurs, and evolution, are all supported by evidence. Noah's ark, global flooding, giant humans, etc. do not have evidence, and that is why you won't find any scientist saying they exist.

The number of falsehoods in the bible is simply staggering, so that is why scientists don't look for it for scientific knowledge.

You can bang on about how the future will be full of lovely converts to Christianity, but then that's your opinion, something completely different from fact.

reply to post by davesidious

www.veoh.com...

Watch this video and you will see how wrong you are about global flooding.

reply to post by 100Grand


Ha! I don't listen to Zoologists giving lectures on geology any more than I listen to chefs giving lectures on nuclear fusion. The global flood is pseudoscience. No evidence for it has ever, ever been found, no matter what poorly-created videos on Veoh have to say on the matter.

I'll indulge you, for the lulz, anyway. He's not using science to figure out what happened, he's read what the Bible says happened, and then trying to shoe-horn evidence into the story. That's not science. That's not even critical thinking. That's making stuff up.

So please - get actual real bloody evidence, and not this gibberish nonsense. It's insulting my intelligence, and makes ATS look absolutely pathetic. This guy is a joke, and the global flood myth is just that - a myth.

If that's your idea of evidence, no wonder you're lost.

[edit on 9-2-2010 by davesidious]

reply to post by davesidious


Your biased opinion is blinding you. Instead of being stubborn, take a look at the information given from other perspectives. Its hard to gain respect when you don't look at an argument from multiple angles. Like I've said so many times, I was right where you are. Although I decided to try and find out why so many people didn't share my views, and looked at other people's perspective. Don't sit here and bash my views just because your too stubborn to take a look and realize you might be wrong about a few things. It's not like its going to be the end of the world.

So many people bash Christians for force feeding the bible down peoples throats. That's one reason I had a huge disrespect for Christians my self. How are you being any different. I'm here trying to have a discussion, not an argument.

reply to post by 100Grand


The only angle is evidence. Don't you understand that? That's how humanity has developed over the millennia. You stopped believing in science the moment you thought that guesswork and conjecture is the same as evidence.

How am I being different? Because I'm refusing to sully my brain with creationist bollocks. That's why. Evidence, or nothing. That's how the real world works, outside of churches and bible study groups.

reply to post by davesidious


I did not stop believing in Science. I started thinking critically, and questioning evidence. Theories and evidence don't prove anything. If something is known as FACT then yes I will believe it. However, I'm not going to become victim to allowing scientist's to make me believe what they want me to believe for money. I will question everything I feel I need to, in order to get the truth, or as much of the truth that is possible. Anything else, I'm not going to put 100% of my faith in it.

Scientist's once thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. They thought the Sun orbited the Earth, they were wrong. They thought electrons flowed from positive to negative, they were wrong. They thought heavier objects fell faster than lighter objects, they were wrong. Scientists thought flying was impossible, they were wrong. Do you want me to give you more examples? Theories change.

reply to post by 100Grand


Oh here we go again.

No, scientists didn't think the world was flat. The circumference of the Earth was measured by Eratosthenes in 240BC, long before what we know as 'science' even existed.

It was the Christians who claimed the Earth orbited the Sun, and it took a scientist, Nicolaus Copernicus, to show them wrong. The church denounced his work.

Electrons were discovered by Johann Wilhelm Hittorf, in 1869, after he observed them flowing from the cathode, not the anode.

The Father of science, Galileo Galilei, demonstrated that the speed of objects falling is not related to their mass. It was Aristotle, a philosopher (not a scientist) who said heavier objects fell faster. The church convicted Galileo of heresy.

Leonardo Da Vinci, a scientist, claimed that heavier-than-air flight was possible. Indeed, Daniel Bernoulli, a mathematician, in 1738, devised the theory that is used in all forms of heaver-than-air flight.

Theories change by getting more accurate. They don't take 180 degree turns. To say that them changing is somehow something onerous or indicative of faulty thinking, is blatantly untrue, and a complete perversion of the scientific method.

You probably didn't do it on purpose, but please stop lying to the board. It is not helping your argument if you say you are only interested in truth, then proceed to vomit lie after lie about science, its practitioners, and its methodology.

You clearly are not thinking critically if your head is full of so much incorrect knowledge and assumptions.

You've really shown yourself up today. I'm sorry I have to be the one to tell you, I really am.

[edit on 10-2-2010 by davesidious]

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by 100Grand

 

It was the Christians who claimed the Earth orbited the Sun, and it took a scientist, Nicolaus Copernicus, to show them wrong. The church denounced his work.

[edit on 10-2-2010 by davesidious]

Was this really what you meant? read it carefully...

i saw the title and assumed it was a mike tyson thread.

terribly sorry, my mistake.

Not to mention I didn't lie about anything. I guarantee at some point, when these theories were going around, there was at least one scientist who agreed with them. Just because there was a scientist who later proved it wrong or changed the theory means nothing to my argument.

reply to post by 100Grand


Yep, good catch. I meant to say they said the Sun orbited the Earth.

reply to post by 100Grand


No. Anyone agreeing on anything without evidence is not participating in science. They might be called a scientist, but without evidence, there is no science. The default position of science, until evidence demonstrates a principle, is "we don't know". Which is exactly the polar opposite to religious "insight".

So yeah, you did lie, by making bogus claim after bogus claim.

reply to post by davesidious


Oh, well I guess in that case you win! Sorry for not being specific enough. I remember you saying that the science behind computers are no different than the science behind evolution.

"Of course the science behind the theory of evolution has everything to do with the science behind the internet. The very same methodology was used to create both - observations, hypotheses, experimentation, documentation"

Yet I visibly have proof of the internet, I have proof of gravity, I have proof of calculus, I have proof that the earth is round, the earth orbits the sun, all objects fall at the same rate, all these things are proven as fact. Evolution is still a theory. There is more evidence of a global flood, which obviously your too stubborn to watch that video to see that there is tons of evidence, and doesn't help the case for evolution at all.

Carbon dating along with various other methods of dating have an uncertainty value that sky rockets after 4000 B.C. Scientists claim that it's possible for objects being submersed in water or what have you, to become jeopardized (couldn't think of the word I was looking for).

Why is it so hard to instead study everything that helps prove evolution, to study things that don't help the case. If you believe in Evolution so much, do some studying, and prove the theories that disprove evolution wrong.
If I gave a description of an object such as: its brown, rough, solid..someone could say, okay to me that sounds like a tree branch. However, as soon as I say that this object can bend into a circle without breaking, tree branch is out of the picture. No matter how many truths you give about something, as soon as their is one false truth, the theory is WRONG. Sorry try again.

I have not found a single non-truth in the Bible, I have not found a prophecy in the Bible that was WRONG.

reply to post by 100Grand


No, evolution is proven. The theory of evolution, is not, as it is a scientific theory, and relies on totally-corroborating evidence to demonstrate it exists.

We have proven evolution exists not only in the laboratory, where new species have been created, but we have observed it in the real world, in such examples as when a new species of mosquito was discovered in the London Underground (and only in the London Underground). Clearly unless God is still creating, that had to occur through members of one species becoming a different species.

There are no scientific theories that show evolution is incorrect. The opponents of the theory of evolution have yet to construct a testable, scientific theory that shows the ToE is bunk. They've yet to find any evidence that shows the ToE is not the correct explanation for the evolution witnessed in nature.

You've not found a single non-truth in the bible? Then you are not reading enough. The inaccuracies have been recorded and discussed for centuries.

Your bias is showing.