It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Well if you were right, how is it that the bible directs me to this conclusion, and without connection Lloyd Pye, and without furthur connection Von Daniken and without further connection Sitchen does as well. I understand you don't accept the bible as truth, and I have to agree there are a lot of unexplained, or non understood things in the bible. That however is not any sort of proof that they didn't happen, much less that they aren't truth.
That's rich coming from the guy claiming aliens "did it all" without having any objective evidence to back up those claims.
Look, you're entitled to believe whatever you want, but so far you haven't posted any credible objective evidence that would support you claims. All you do is repost unproven claims by Pye and quotes from the bible...a book that is FULL of inconsistencies and demonstrably wrong information. And that's ok...like I said, you can believe whatever you want.
But talking down on people because you think they believe in fantasy, while you yourself are believing in stuff that has no foundation in reality...well...that's hypocritical
My ex was above genius IQ, and she was left handed. Did you know that most left handed people are usually very intelligent and that they also face a higher chance of injury or even death as we have a world that is engineered for right handed people.
You're a very special individual toothy
Well if you were right, how is it that the bible directs me to this conclusion
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Prezbo369
My ex was above genius IQ, and she was left handed. Did you know that most left handed people are usually very intelligent and that they also face a higher chance of injury or even death as we have a world that is engineered for right handed people.
You're a very special individual toothy
The bible has never been proven wrong. Imagine that, somone on ATS with a high school back ground using ATS has single handedly disproved the bible. Delusions of grandure for sure. What you have thrown at me is someones excuses for not being able to recreate the events in the bible. The problem is that alien powers were not present to recreate these events in order to rule them out, so it is FALSE.
I have to stop you right there...
Why are you still pretending as if the bible is proof? It's demonstrably FALSE in a lot of cases as has been shown over and over again in this thread. And Pye never backs up his claims with hard objective evidence.
First of all like I have stated many times before, I don't have a belief, I have an understanding. Second, you failed to add correctly, there were four sources in that line, and that's if you only count the bible as one source.
So you base your entire belief on 2 sources, one being demonstrably wrong in a ton of cases, and the other not providing any objective evidence to prove your claims.
This is where your blind. The four sources have nothing to do with each other and all have there own opinions about what they think has happened. They all have different points of view, yet are all pointing in the same direction. It's pretty hard to question this find. It would be one thing if they all got there information from the same sources but in fact they didn't. It would be something entirely different if they they all were saying the same things, which they also aren't. Some things match, and some things don't. One thing is certain, intervention rules in all of there ideas.
You are indeed looking at "it" from a "different angle", but that angle isn't based on any logic or rationality.
I did not ask for a definition of WILD ANIMALS, OR WILDLIFE OR WILD. I asked for your definition of IN THE WILD and you came up with this.
No I think wild animals came pretty close to describing in the wild. Probably a better explanation would be away from modern civilization but there you go.
Did you ask a five year old to write that definition because given your success in providing a definition for the ones you use, even that tripe is above you.
My definition of in the wild.
In the wild: To be anywhere in the outside, away from civilization, or closer to animals of the outdoors.
Thats your last tooth wiki for the month.
You did not give any definitions you plonker. It might be, could be and I think, do not belong within a definition.
The definitions were quite short, clear and concise. I think your just being incredulous again, and had not other complaint options as you obviously don't.
Again you expend effort to lie about supplying defintions when supplying them would be easier. You must enjoy lying. You are that liar
When you have to lie the way you do, and claim that I have offered no definitions, thats truly sad.
Actually I was listed with a borderline genus IQ.
I dont think you should point to anyones punctuation, genius. You have shown to have a very small grasp on the English language if you have any at all.
But you on the other hand, is one that should worry. Not properly assembling questions and to top it all off not using correct punctuation, then turning around and trying to condition people to accept that as ok, tells me you seriously have something wrong with you.
When faced with an ignorant and pathological liar you have to ask the question over and over again becuse all you reply with are lies.
You are obviously the type of person that when they don't get there way, you proceed to do the same thing over and over hoping you will eventually get the green light. Very sad.
I see you are trying to avoid the question again. I wont let you
If you trying to strangle me with words of creativity, you can stop.
The huge excuse for not answering this question does not cover your lie.
You never answered: It does not matter if you were confused or not. YOU CLAIMED ANTS HARVESTING CHEMICALS WAS NATURAL WHEN ANTS DO NOT HARVEST CHEMICALS. AGAIN I ASK
HOW DID YOU REACH THAT CONCLUSION???????
The bible has never been proven wrong.
I don't think your understanding me, I'm not ignoring anything. What your telling me is that there are many things in the bible that have been proven to be wrong, and I'm telling you without the supernatural elements involved in trying to recreate them, you can't make a fair assessment. People on earth do not have supernatural ability's so how are they going to disprove anything?
Tooth, you're getting silly. There is TONS of stuff in the bible that is demonstrably wrong, stuff that has been posted here numerous times. Every single time you simply ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist, it's really quite laughable.
Again I fail to see how they are going to prove anything wrong missing the needed element.
Here are over 430 things that are PROVEN to be wrong in the bible: LINK
Again I don't have a belief, I have an understanding. I also understand that supernatural powers were at work in the bible, which is also why they felt it was so important to document.
Those are FACTS. I know your belief probably prevents you from admitting it, but FACTUALLY, the bible isn't correct. You might not like it, you might ignore it, you might pretend that's not the case...but it doesn't change the FACT that the bible is demonstrably wrong in many cases
Well your going under that notion that we know all, and understand all. and thats just wrong. We don't know everything about science and we no almost nothing about the supernatural. I think its honestly something pretty hard to argue when we know nothing about theses things.
What amazes me is that you keep on repeating that claim even after being proven 100% wrong. It's not even up for debate, you are simply wrong. People have posted tons of links that clearly show that the bible doesn't match history, biology, and physics in a TON of cases. You simply chose to close your eyes to protect that fantasy world you're living in. And you have all the right to doing so, you just look silly pretending it's the "truth" or "factual"
Not making you out to be incredulous, ignorant and dishonest. 300 pages of proof means you are and I am telling you that. Should be clear to a genius.
I think your discomboobalated and thinking that your being incredulous makes me out to be ignorant and dishonest.
Yes I have issues with anyone that is as dishonest and ignorant as you.
I'm sorry you feel this way, but its obvious you have issues with honesty and ignorance.
I am afraid you are the only one here that needs to seek out a counselor.
These are things you will have to once again address with your counselor. I'm sure it was something that happened to you as a child.
Another beaming example of your dishonest approach to this thread and disrespect you have given to those on it.
That depends, if you want to consider domesticated animals as part of the wild life, then that was the incorrect one. On the other hand if you want to consider domesticated animals as not part of wild life then I would have been correct in saying some animals have target food.
OR
Well I never said that all or even most others have target food, especially since it even tells us in the bible that a lot of species were brought here, means they probably won't have target food.
Which one is the lie?
Aside from humans, most things here have target food.
I gave you plenty of chances to list what you wanted to be contained in your non existant 'target food'. I even gave you a choice. It is your construct, you had your chance and you failed. A genius should know better.
Well there is another condition you need to address with your counselor, you have a propensity to assume things. I'm curious to know since it was my fault, at first which I'm admitting to not bringing up domesticated animals. Where did you classify them to start with. Did you assume they are also wild animals?
I am making no assumptions. I asked many times for a definition of unnatural food. You failed to provide one so as far as I am concerned it does not exist. Provide a definition and I will change my mind.
Your also making another assumption of not understanding unnatural food that its rejected.
YOU need to read this. Clown
remember simply because you can't understand something does not mean it doesn't exist
You do know that continuous referances to someone taking drugs is a T&C violation dont you.
Again I'm sure that med management will get you off this stuck train your on.
I don't think your understanding me, I'm not ignoring anything. What your telling me is that there are many things in the bible that have been proven to be wrong, and I'm telling you without the supernatural elements involved in trying to recreate them, you can't make a fair assessment. People on earth do not have supernatural ability's so how are they going to disprove anything?
Again I don't have a belief, I have an understanding. I also understand that supernatural powers were at work in the bible, which is also why they felt it was so important to document.
My son has a pocket bible that makes a comment in the preface that the bible contains supernatural elements.
In case your unsure what supernatural means, it means aliens.
Are you for real genius?
It would be like be getting on here and arguing about evolution while I know nothing about evolution. I wouldn't get anywhere.
The only thing we have established in 300 pages is that your ignorant to the fact that evolution has never been witnessed in humans, that it's only been seen in some aquatic life, some bacteria and viruses and some insects. You have been ignorant to the fact that after 150 years of searching and finding 2.5 million bones and fossils we have never been able to confirm an ancestor through evolution.
Not making you out to be incredulous, ignorant and dishonest. 300 pages of proof means you are and I am telling you that. Should be clear to a genius.
And thats easy to say, but what exactly have I been dishonest about, how about some details.
Yes I have issues with anyone that is as dishonest and ignorant as you.
I have already seen a counselor and they dismissed me as nothing was needed.
I am afraid you are the only one here that needs to seek out a counselor.
I'm not sure if your just outright lying or hiding here, by not answering.
Another beaming example of your dishonest approach to this thread and disrespect you have given to those on it.
It's neither you moron, the word most doesn't mean all, OMG your dense.
Which one is the lie?
I didn't fail, you simply ignored me, which is not the same thing, and you need to address this with a counselor.
I gave you plenty of chances to list what you wanted to be contained in your non existant 'target food'. I even gave you a choice. It is your construct, you had your chance and you failed. A genius should know better.
Why would I want to change it?
If you now want to change your definition of target food then provide it.
I explained it many different ways for you colin, if your having a problem retaining it, then you need to also let your counselor know your have memory issues, as I have repeated it a multitude of times.
I am making no assumptions. I asked many times for a definition of unnatural food. You failed to provide one so as far as I am concerned it does not exist. Provide a definition and I will change my mind.
If your referring to me not understanding evolution, I understand it perfectly. As listed its a hypothetical theory, and the link has been provided to me explaining this. If your having comprehansion issues, maybe that is another issue you need to address with your counselor.
YOU need to read this. Clown
Which is exactly why I didn't say anything about drugs you moron. Did you make another assumption?
You do know that continuous referances to someone taking drugs is a T&C violation dont you.
The rest of your post is just an attack. A poor one at that. Just provide the definitions and answer the chemical harvesting ant issue if you want this thread to move on.
I have studied the supernatural or at least the reports of such for over 30 years of my life. At times I can understand things in the reports that others including those involved often miss. I'm proud of my success in understanding these things. Does that mean I'm an eye witness, yes and no. I have only ever seen one thing in my life that was unexplained, and surly supernatural. On the other hand I don't accept that as proof. The stories I have reviewed are different. They speak for them self and are pretty hard to ignore.
What's your evidence that this "supernatural" even exists? Objective evidence??
So basically what you're saying is: I understand that the objective historic, biological, and physical evidence is totally against the claims in the bible, but don't worry, magic makes everything possible!!
ARE YOU SERIOUS???
Again I don't have a single shred of evidence that indicates so. Evolution certainly doesn't disprove intervention seeing how its a hypothetical theory.
Well then, your understanding is simply wrong then, and not based on any rationality and logic...and it IS a belief since you believe in it
In case you missed the understanding, we were intentionally left without the presence of these powers as part of our punishment. Just because we don't have them doesn't mean they don't exist. After all they are documented. Now hairy Potter is intentionally listed as a sci fi book, the bible is not.
Again, prove the supernatural! Because if you can't, you must also believe in Harry Potter, because after all, everything's possible due to the power of magic. You also believe in the Hindu elephant-head god, right? Because you know, magic makes EVERYTHING possible, even if there's zero evidence, or evidence against it
Like I keep explaining, its impossible to prove without the supernatural intervention that existed back in that time. The bible claims to be a book about truth. I understand this might be hard for some to accept but hairy potter doesn't claim to be truth, so there is a big difference.
And that proves it how exactly??
You can't prove the bible by using the bible
Well here is where things get interesting. If I'm understanding that my view on this is not only correct and original, and meant to be, then even if you want to claim it to be a belief, you can't say I'm starting it when we have been misunderstanding it all this time to begin with.
And here you're stating a BELIEF because you believe in it and haven't presented the slightest bit of credible objective evidence to prove your claim.
The fact that you didn't ask me to repeat this proves to me that your just being incredulous though this thread.
Are you for real genius?
Again I don't have a single shred of evidence that indicates so. Evolution certainly doesn't disprove intervention seeing how its a hypothetical theory.
In case you missed the understanding, we were intentionally left without the presence of these powers as part of our punishment. Just because we don't have them doesn't mean they don't exist. After all they are documented. Now hairy Potter is intentionally listed as a sci fi book, the bible is not.
Like I keep explaining, its impossible to prove without the supernatural intervention that existed back in that time. The bible claims to be a book about truth. I understand this might be hard for some to accept but hairy potter doesn't claim to be truth, so there is a big difference.
No your correct, its a hypothesis. It's a bad habit I have as I was taught wrong about this title many years ago.
You're trolling, right? Because you know just well that a "hypothetical theory" doesn't exist, you are inventing words again
And no, intervention doesn't disprove intervention...life could have originally started out by aliens (or meteorites) dumping life on earth before evolution took over.
The evidence is here, we have vestigial organs, the bible does indicate we have ability's pulled, and just as an example look at how DR Michael Persinger just came out with Telepathy is a fact article.
And your objective evidence for all those claims are??? What's your proof that we had "powers" taken from us as a punishment? Don't say "because it says so in the bible"...because the bible isn't objective evidence.
Aside from your own definition, or I should say from others definitions about the bible, did you ever find anything that clearly states it to be sci fi?
And since you don't consider the bible scifi, I take it you also believe scriptures of all the other religions are factual, right?
You might want to go back many pages and see the plethora of reasons the provide support for us having disabled ability's.
Because those folks have just as "much" proof as you, none.
Well based on the fact that Sitchen, Pye, Von daniken and The bible all include these, I would hardly say that I created a belief. There is a difference between people being blind or freshly new to the idea.
Either you provide OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE for the supernatural (and no, eyewitness accounts aren't objective) or you have to live with the FACT that you are stating a belief...you are speculating
Well I'm not making the claims, I'm simply revealing them.
You make a ton of claims you aren't even able to back up with objective evidence.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
If you never read the preface you would miss the understanding of the rest of the book, and thats a fact. In case your unsure what supernatural means, it means aliens.
No it doesnt.
In fact, if aliens exist in this uneverse (and they probably do) they will be purely within nature, i.e. natural.
For want of a better definition, supernatural means "magic".
No your correct, its a hypothesis. It's a bad habit I have as I was taught wrong about this title many years ago.
Well I'm not making the claims, I'm simply revealing them.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
No your correct, its a hypothesis. It's a bad habit I have as I was taught wrong about this title many years ago.
You're trolling, right? Because you know just well that a "hypothetical theory" doesn't exist, you are inventing words again
And no, intervention doesn't disprove intervention...life could have originally started out by aliens (or meteorites) dumping life on earth before evolution took over.
And your objective evidence for all those claims are??? What's your proof that we had "powers" taken from us as a punishment? Don't say "because it says so in the bible"...because the bible isn't objective evidence.
The evidence is here, we have vestigial organs, the bible does indicate we have ability's pulled, and just as an example look at how DR Michael Persinger just came out with Telepathy is a fact article.
And since you don't consider the bible scifi, I take it you also believe scriptures of all the other religions are factual, right?
Aside from your own definition, or I should say from others definitions about the bible, did you ever find anything that clearly states it to be sci fi?
Because those folks have just as "much" proof as you, none.
You might want to go back many pages and see the plethora of reasons the provide support for us having disabled ability's.DR Michael
Either you provide OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE for the supernatural (and no, eyewitness accounts aren't objective) or you have to live with the FACT that you are stating a belief...you are speculating
Well based on the fact that Sitchen, Pye, Von daniken and The bible all include these, I would hardly say that I created a belief. There is a difference between people being blind or freshly new to the idea.
You make a ton of claims you aren't even able to back up with objective evidence.
Well I'm not making the claims, I'm simply revealing them.
It's a scientific theory...which is why it's called THEORY of evolution, and not "hypothesis of evolution". For someone claiming to be a genius you seem to know very little about the thing you criticize