Can you prove evolution wrong

reply to post by colin42

Well since you seem to have the answers, maybe you could explain to me how you would go about getting proof of something that happened back in biblical times?

Others have pretty much destroyed all your other baseless opinions and very poor research but you bring up this old cherry again.

You mean like Target food which you couldn't get around so had to pretend to ignore the title alltogether after you tried.

Or how about the bird story where you were suppose to find a species that has a relationship with us and found the house bird that has a relationship with our house.

Or how about the bees, that have a relationship with our crops, and not us.

Or how about how we have more than our fair share of sickness, so someone claimed the sampeling rate is unfair. Even though no one can prove it.

How about the time I suggested that we have disabled powers and proved it by the shotty definition on wiki and the fact that we do have savants that prove our brains can work better and there is obviously more going on, Or how weeks after that Michael Persinger came out with telepathy as a fact, and all anyone could say on here is that my guess on it was silly.

Come on man, you guys need to seriously pull your heads out.

It is not up to science to prove or disprove Jesus or the flood or mosses parting the seas. It actually is not even up to those with faith to do so as they have faith. You on the other hand claim this to be true and that the bible is clear documentation of it. (You lost that debate remember).

If you just posing nothing more than being in denial is winning, then ya I guess your right.

Just as science does not try to prove/disprove Tolkien’s elves, dwarfs and hobbits it has no reason to prove/disprove the bible. You have based your belief system on the bible so you have two choices. Go away happy with your homemade faith or provide the evidence that science will take seriously. Your denial and preaching what you believe does not constitute that evidence. It certainly is no challenge to the Theory of Evolution

Science does not bow to the terms of supernatual abilities, nor are we going to be able to prove something that happened back in biblical times.

If you think that science can prove or disprove the bible, then it just goes to show how your never going to understand anything supernatural as its out of your realm of thinking.

reply to post by colin42

Well since you seem to have the answers, maybe you could explain to me how you would go about getting proof of something that happened back in biblical times?

Others have pretty much destroyed all your other baseless opinions and very poor research but you bring up this old cherry again.

You mean like Target food which you couldn't get around so had to pretend to ignore the title alltogether after you tried.

Or how about the bird story where you were suppose to find a species that has a relationship with us and found the house bird that has a relationship with our house.

Or how about the bees, that have a relationship with our crops, and not us.

Or how about how we have more than our fair share of sickness, so someone claimed the sampeling rate is unfair. Even though no one can prove it.

How about the time I suggested that we have disabled powers and proved it by the shotty definition on wiki and the fact that we do have savants that prove our brains can work better and there is obviously more going on, Or how weeks after that Michael Persinger came out with telepathy as a fact, and all anyone could say on here is that my guess on it was silly.

Come on man, you guys need to seriously pull your heads out.

It is not up to science to prove or disprove Jesus or the flood or mosses parting the seas. It actually is not even up to those with faith to do so as they have faith. You on the other hand claim this to be true and that the bible is clear documentation of it. (You lost that debate remember).

If you just posing nothing more than being in denial is winning, then ya I guess your right.

Just as science does not try to prove/disprove Tolkien’s elves, dwarfs and hobbits it has no reason to prove/disprove the bible. You have based your belief system on the bible so you have two choices. Go away happy with your homemade faith or provide the evidence that science will take seriously. Your denial and preaching what you believe does not constitute that evidence. It certainly is no challenge to the Theory of Evolution

Science does not bow to the terms of supernatual abilities, nor are we going to be able to prove something that happened back in biblical times.

If you think that science can prove or disprove the bible, then it just goes to show how your never going to understand anything supernatural as its out of your realm of thinking.

So bringing up the old target food nonsense again?

Like a broken tape recorder running a comedy tape

reply to post by itsthetooth

Well out of about 20 people that I have asked how they feel about evolution, 2 sided with it. One however knew and admitted to not knowing anything about it, and the other told me she understood that it was an unproven theory. Thats on the straight and honest. The rest of the people I asked are like hell no.

You know what something stinks here. You claim to have made a study of the para normal for over 30 years yet your world view and writing style is more akin to that of a closeted 10 or 12 year old.

20 people is about a class size I assume that would be the case in spokane. If you are not a 10 - 12 year old then you have the mind of a 10 - 12 year old because it does not matter how many people you ask. Whether they are your neighbour or school mates it adds no more authority to your ignorant refusal to consider the evidence you are given or give foundation to your mad fantasy world.

Today at school go ask your biology teacher his views on evolution and tell me what he says.

reply to post by itsthetooth

I have asked many times to bless me with something of substance. Something that is peer reviewed and passed inspection.

now you want me to bless you. ALL the evidence you have been given has been peer reviewed, tested with repeatable experiments and observation. Once you have passed puberty and emerged from the fog of the terrible teens you will be able to think more clearly.

I understand evolution pretty well, I just don't buy into it.

You asked me to bless you I will go one better. Trust me when I tell you that you demonstrate in every part of every post you do not understand evolution at all. Nobody expects you to 'buy into it' but after 400 pages we do expect you to understand what is says and form a much better argument against it.

Like I just explained in my previous reply, your comparing your understanding with todays standards of catagorys which don't hold up to comparison.

Like I wrote before, 10 - 12 years old. The physics and biology of today is exactly the same as it was in 'biblical times'. A man cannot live in a whale and has never been able to unless you can provide an argument, supported by evidence with links and quotes from those links that proves different or at least shows doubt.

The fact is you don't know dick about the supernatural catagory, which is also why your in disagreement or fail to want to understand.

I know as much as anyone else on the subject of the supernatural because it is all conjecture and opinion. You are meant to be discussing a scientific topic. When will you learn that without any evidence you are just another bible thumping, deluded fundamentalist? You are only too willing to accept nonsense to bolster your obviously fragile belief and reject all that challenges it.

Ok but its the last time Colin. Everything is possible in the bible if the supernatural elements were present to allow them to happen. We no longer have access to those elements, so we cant recreate them.

Not anywhere good enough. You have your bible that you maintain is a clear historical document. So explain how the whale came to be. Why it stores energy in fat. Why it breathes air. Why it is warm blooded. Why it has a big brain which you maintain needs intervention and why it shares a distinct property with the ancient whale fossils that show the path it took. Your explanation of 'there was magic then' explains nothing at all.

Now go on and tell me how you have a god complex and you don't buy it.

You’re the one with a god complex. Your problem is you cannot accept the orthodox religious explanation and so have made up your own demanding the rest of the world hold you up as the new messiah. Trust me, it will never happen

The fact is we don't know everything, and we can't do everything under the sun. We are not gods, and your going to have to get that through your thick skull.

You are the one claiming you know everything. Science is the ongoing quest for answers to the questions posed by the world we live in.

The process of Evolution will show if my thick skull is a better adaption than your denying pea brain and at the moment I have more answers to questions and a willingness to logically investigate and consider new questions than you and in this thread that is all the advantage over you I need

reply to post by itsthetooth

You mean like Target food which you couldn't get around so had to pretend to ignore the title alltogether after you tried.

Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment.

Or how about the bird story where you were suppose to find a species that has a relationship with us and found the house bird that has a relationship with our house.

You demonstrate your profound ignorance even around the word relationship and your denial of any evidence you are given. You lost this debate remember, you again refused to debate it in the proper fashion. Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment.

Or how about the bees, that have a relationship with our crops, and not us.

You missed out the wolf and again demonstrate your ignorant world view. Remember you lost those points as well due to not entering into proper debate. Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment.

Or how about how we have more than our fair share of sickness, so someone claimed the sampeling rate is unfair. Even though no one can prove it.

Struggling to change the subject you are being spanked in I see. FAIL

How about the time I suggested that we have disabled powers and proved it by the shotty definition on wiki and the fact that we do have savants that prove our brains can work better and there is obviously more going on, Or how weeks after that Michael Persinger came out with telepathy as a fact, and all anyone could say on here is that my guess on it was silly.

Yes you lost that as well by refusal to show any evidence or enter into honest debate. Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment.

Come on man, you guys need to seriously pull your heads out.

We seriously need to demand you provide an argument supported with evidence, links and quotes from those links. Ooops, we are. Get over it. Supply the above or get out of dodge.

If you just posing nothing more than being in denial is winning, then ya I guess your right.

So again you dodge the question by giving an unrelated comment. Looks like I won that point as well then.

Science does not bow to the terms of supernatual abilities, nor are we going to be able to prove something that happened back in biblical times.

So why do you keep replying with 'It's done by magic' if in your preachy style you say science will not bow to it? You have your bible that you falsely claim is clear documentation. This should not be a problem to you to prove, biblical times or not.

If you think that science can prove or disprove the bible, then it just goes to show how your never going to understand anything supernatural as its out of your realm of thinking.

Your very poor reading abilities come into play again. I just explained to you science has no need or interest in proving/disproving the bible. you chose to give some preachy random answer to it instead of a reasoned reply.

Just as science does not try to prove/disprove Tolkien’s elves, dwarfs and hobbits it has no reason to prove/disprove the bible.

You say your belief in the bible in not based on faith then you are the one that needs to provide evidence that shows it correct or just continue with your blind faith. Come back when you can do that.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
This is where your understanding is seriously lacking and making you look foolish at the same time. Harry potter is listed as a fantasy book. This means that the author didn't want there to be confusion like you seem to be having at this moment. You might want to educate yourself on this different options there are for catagorys.

I knew this was coming. Do you know for a fact that the bible (or any of the individual stories in the compilation) was not "listed" as a fictional book tens of thousands of years ago? We don't know the origins of the stories and the accuracy cannot be verified. If a natural disaster occurs and most of humanity gets wiped out, the survivors will eventually rebuild. What happens if the only book they manage to find from our history is various chapters of Harry Potter? It very well could become the new bible and people might think it really happened.

Now your comparing this to the bible, which of course explains why you choose to not believe in it, and if I did the same thing I would agree with you. You obviously failed at reading the preface of the book. And don't feel bad I did this for half my life as well. Your just so anxious to get to the good stuff that you skip right over the preface. The ESV which stands for english standard version, as its probably best to stay in your language.

In the preface the book is catagorized in the supernatural section. Now we don't typically have that catagory with what we currently read so this means your going to have to do something almost impossible, that is to have an open mind. Because when it comes to this catagory you don't know dick.

The preface isn't part of the original bible, it is put in by various modern publishers. And yes, I've read the entire bible cover to cover more than once. I agree that the god(s) being described in it seem way more like aliens than actual deities, but there's no proof any of it happened. That's the issue with calling it a credible source of information. You need to prove that it's credible if you want to use it as an argument.

Again your making an assumption that all of this life is from here to begin with while we have documentation that its not. It really throws everything up in the air and makes a mess but that is what we are dealing with.

What does that have to do with whale evolution? We've found millions of fossils going 3 billion years back in earth's history. Life has been here for a long time, whether it formed here via abiogenesis or elsewhere and then was delivered to earth via comet or asteroid.

reply to post by MrXYZ

So bringing up the old target food nonsense again?

Like a broken tape recorder running a comedy tape

Thats because I'm STILL WAITING for someone to prove it wrong.

reply to post by colin42

You know what something stinks here. You claim to have made a study of the para normal for over 30 years yet your world view and writing style is more akin to that of a closeted 10 or 12 year old.

No, what stinks here is the the repeated abuse through assuming. Your doing it again, assuming I'm Ten or Twelve years old.

20 people is about a class size I assume that would be the case in spokane. If you are not a 10 - 12 year old then you have the mind of a 10 - 12 year old because it does not matter how many people you ask. Whether they are your neighbour or school mates it adds no more authority to your ignorant refusal to consider the evidence you are given or give foundation to your mad fantasy world.

Just to show you how blind you have been all of this time, for the umteenth time, I told you I accepted evolution as a theory just like it was stated to be.

Today at school go ask your biology teacher his views on evolution and tell me what he says.

I allready told you that I have been through college, so I have no idea why your making these odd statements. It must just be poor memory on your part. And why would I ask a biology teacher when I could ask a science teacher and more of an unbiased view.

I have asked many times to bless me with something of substance. Something that is peer reviewed and passed inspection.

now you want me to bless you. ALL the evidence you have been given has been peer reviewed, tested with repeatable experiments and observation. Once you have passed puberty and emerged from the fog of the terrible teens you will be able to think more clearly

Your so full of it, evolution has never been recreated, its not possible. How can you expect me to take ANYTHING you say seriously when your making such false claims.

Evolution can't be proven anymore than living in a whale can.

I understand evolution pretty well, I just don't buy into it.

You asked me to bless you I will go one better. Trust me when I tell you that you demonstrate in every part of every post you do not understand evolution at all. Nobody expects you to 'buy into it' but after 400 pages we do expect you to understand what is says and form a much better argument against it.

Well some of my comments might lead you to believe that but I'm just changing things to fit my argument is why.

Like I just explained in my previous reply, your comparing your understanding with todays standards of catagorys which don't hold up to comparison.

Like I wrote before, 10 - 12 years old. The physics and biology of today is exactly the same as it was in 'biblical times'.

I'm thinking your more like the Ten year old because I have explained to you several times that the events in question in the bible had nothing to do with physics and biology, you just don't get it.

A man cannot live in a whale and has never been able to unless you can provide an argument, supported by evidence with links and quotes from those links that proves different or at least shows doubt.

It's questionable just like how the gears and sprockets evolved in the flagellum. Which I don't buy.

The fact is you don't know dick about the supernatural catagory, which is also why your in disagreement or fail to want to understand.

I know as much as anyone else on the subject of the supernatural because it is all conjecture and opinion. You are meant to be discussing a scientific topic. When will you learn that without any evidence you are just another bible thumping, deluded fundamentalist? You are only too willing to accept nonsense to bolster your obviously fragile belief and reject all that challenges it.

I seriously doubt that you know as much as I do on the subject. Even less by the way you quickly dismiss the bible. It's only called a belief becasue YOU choose to not agree with it. Yet I see no evidence on your part that debunks it, ever wonder why that is?

Ok but its the last time Colin. Everything is possible in the bible if the supernatural elements were present to allow them to happen. We no longer have access to those elements, so we cant recreate them.

Not anywhere good enough.

Sure Colin, you expect me to believe that your simply not being biased on this becasue it shuns your evolution belief when I have told you several times that you can't recreate the events without the supernatural elements present. Any scientist knows you have to do things right, but according to you, its ok to dismiss.

reply to post by colin42

You have your bible that you maintain is a clear historical document. So explain how the whale came to be. Why it stores energy in fat. Why it breathes air. Why it is warm blooded. Why it has a big brain which you maintain needs intervention and why it shares a distinct property with the ancient whale fossils that show the path it took. Your explanation of 'there was magic then' explains nothing at all.

For no particular reason, the whale is not a section I have looked into, so I have no comment about it. All I can say is that you can't dismiss something so easily when your not doing a fair recreation of the events.

Now go on and tell me how you have a god complex and you don't buy it.

You’re the one with a god complex. Your problem is you cannot accept the orthodox religious explanation and so have made up your own demanding the rest of the world hold you up as the new messiah. Trust me, it will never happen

No YOU have the god complex, your making assumptions that we know all and can do all when it comes to recreating events. As far as no accepting the orthodox views, I was not able to even find them when I read into it, which is why I'm saying its not a belief, its an understanding.

The fact is we don't know everything, and we can't do everything under the sun. We are not gods, and your going to have to get that through your thick skull.

You are the one claiming you know everything. Science is the ongoing quest for answers to the questions posed by the world we live in.

The process of Evolution will show if my thick skull is a better adaption than your denying pea brain and at the moment I have more answers to questions and a willingness to logically investigate and consider new questions than you and in this thread that is all the advantage over you I need

Actually by me claiming that we can't recreate those events, its all based on the fact that we dont know everything. Now if you want to agree that I'm claiming to know it all based on us not knowing everything, that is false as well. I have investigate so much into evolution, and always find myself satisfied to learn what I had always thought from the begining, evolution is just a theory, an idea, thats all.

You mean like Target food which you couldn't get around so had to pretend to ignore the title alltogether after you tried.

Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment.

In other words I won that debate.

Or how about the bird story where you were suppose to find a species that has a relationship with us and found the house bird that has a relationship with our house.

You demonstrate your profound ignorance even around the word relationship and your denial of any evidence you are given. You lost this debate remember, you again refused to debate it in the proper fashion. Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment.

If I lost the bird one than please explain what the relationship is between man and bird, and the relationship between bird and house does not count as being between bird and man.

Or how about the bees, that have a relationship with our crops, and not us.

You missed out the wolf and again demonstrate your ignorant world view. Remember you lost those points as well due to not entering into proper debate. Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment.

Well I don't know what bees have to do with wolves but now that you brought it up, it was one I forgot for the moment, and yes you lost that one as well. Did you forget the site that was telling us that we havent had a relationship with wolves for quite a long time? You lost that one too. Just because you have a domesticated wolf in your back yard does not change it for the world.

Or how about how we have more than our fair share of sickness, so someone claimed the sampeling rate is unfair. Even though no one can prove it.

Struggling to change the subject you are being spanked in I see. FAIL

I have no idea what your talking about.

How about the time I suggested that we have disabled powers and proved it by the shotty definition on wiki and the fact that we do have savants that prove our brains can work better and there is obviously more going on, Or how weeks after that Michael Persinger came out with telepathy as a fact, and all anyone could say on here is that my guess on it was silly.

Yes you lost that as well by refusal to show any evidence or enter into honest debate. Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment.

A doctor came out and admitted we have telepathy as a fact, are you high?

Science does not bow to the term

reply to post by colin42

Science does not bow to the terms of supernatual abilities, nor are we going to be able to prove something that happened back in biblical times.

So why do you keep replying with 'It's done by magic' if in your preachy style you say science will not bow to it? You have your bible that you falsely claim is clear documentation. This should not be a problem to you to prove, biblical times or not

How do you expect me to address you seriously when you refer to the supernatural as magic. While at the same time you claim to know as much about the supernatural as anyone else. Maybe I should point out something you obviously are not knowing. The word supernatural is made up of two words, "super" and "natural" notice in the second word that its a very common word, and its one that keeps coming up in conversation. Its also explaining NON MAGIC as that would not be natural. So when you tell me you get it, I don't think you do.

If you think that science can prove or disprove the bible, then it just goes to show how your never going to understand anything supernatural as its out of your realm of thinking.

Your very poor reading abilities come into play again. I just explained to you science has no need or interest in proving/disproving the bible. you chose to give some preachy random answer to it instead of a reasoned reply.

Then why would you keep telling me that you want proof?

Just as science does not try to prove/disprove Tolkien’s elves, dwarfs and hobbits it has no reason to prove/disprove the bible.

Again if your placing those in the same catagory, I can totally see why you don't and don't want to understand supernatural.

You say your belief in the bible in not based on faith then you are the one that needs to provide evidence that shows it correct or just continue with your blind faith. Come back when you can do that.

I have been doing it for over 400 pages, but now I realize that everytime I bring it up your thinking of hobbits and unicorns.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

So bringing up the old target food nonsense again?

Like a broken tape recorder running a comedy tape

Thats because I'm STILL WAITING for someone to prove it wrong.

You will have a long wait then. Due to your refusal to define its meaning your term 'target food' is not accepted. I thought that was clear.

Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment.

reply to post by Barcs

Originally posted by itsthetooth
This is where your understanding is seriously lacking and making you look foolish at the same time. Harry potter is listed as a fantasy book. This means that the author didn't want there to be confusion like you seem to be having at this moment. You might want to educate yourself on this different options there are for catagorys.


I knew this was coming. Do you know for a fact that the bible (or any of the individual stories in the compilation) was not "listed" as a fictional book tens of thousands of years ago? We don't know the origins of the stories and the accuracy cannot be verified. If a natural disaster occurs and most of humanity gets wiped out, the survivors will eventually rebuild. What happens if the only book they manage to find from our history is various chapters of Harry Potter? It very well could become the new bible and people might think it really happened.

Well they would first of all know that Harry Potter is listed as a fantasy book as it says so. Just like how the bible is listed as a supernatural read. Seriously unless you know what that means, you may not be qualified to read it based on the fact that you will not understand it, which seems to be the case here.

Now your comparing this to the bible, which of course explains why you choose to not believe in it, and if I did the same thing I would agree with you. You obviously failed at reading the preface of the book. And don't feel bad I did this for half my life as well. Your just so anxious to get to the good stuff that you skip right over the preface. The ESV which stands for english standard version, as its probably best to stay in your language.

In the preface the book is catagorized in the supernatural section. Now we don't typically have that catagory with what we currently read so this means your going to have to do something almost impossible, that is to have an open mind. Because when it comes to this catagory you don't know dick.

The preface isn't part of the original bible, it is put in by various modern publishers. And yes, I've read the entire bible cover to cover more than once. I agree that the god(s) being described in it seem way more like aliens than actual deities, but there's no proof any of it happened. That's the issue with calling it a credible source of information. You need to prove that it's credible if you want to use it as an argument.

Well sure, but only if you don't know what the word supernatural means.

Again your making an assumption that all of this life is from here to begin with while we have documentation that its not. It really throws everything up in the air and makes a mess but that is what we are dealing with.

What does that have to do with whale evolution? We've found millions of fossils going 3 billion years back in earth's history. Life has been here for a long time, whether it formed here via abiogenesis or elsewhere and then was delivered to earth via comet or asteroid.

And I agree there has been life here probably from the begining, but at the same time there appears to be events that took place that changed the order of some of that, and all of what used to be here, is now in part no longer here. In addition to that there also seems to be other life that was brought here as well. What a coincidence, it also claims this in the bible.

reply to post by itsthetooth

No, what stinks here is the the repeated abuse through assuming. Your doing it again, assuming I'm Ten or Twelve years old.

Well are you?

Just to show you how blind you have been all of this time, for the umteenth time, I told you I accepted evolution as a theory just like it was stated to be.

Now all you have to do is understand the difference between a theory and a scientific theory. That is how blind you have been.

I allready told you that I have been through college, so I have no idea why your making these odd statements. It must just be poor memory on your part. And why would I ask a biology teacher when I could ask a science teacher and more of an unbiased view.

And your above statement is what leads me to think you are around 10 - 12.

Your so full of it, evolution has never been recreated, its not possible. How can you expect me to take ANYTHING you say seriously when your making such false claims.

Evolution can't be proven anymore than living in a whale can.

And here you prove your statement above about accepting evolution was false. It was obvious that you were playing with semantics. Which is dishonest.

Ah but evolution has been proven just like living in a whale has been shown to be impossible.

Well some of my comments might lead you to believe that but I'm just changing things to fit my argument is why.

You even blatantly admit to dishonest behaviour

FYI Changing things to fit your argument is DISHONEST

I'm thinking your more like the Ten year old because I have explained to you several times that the events in question in the bible had nothing to do with physics and biology, you just don't get it.

Yes and if you wish hard enough you will get a new bike for Xmas.

It's questionable just like how the gears and sprockets evolved in the flagellum. Which I don't buy.

Nope. Its not questionable I am afraid. You again refuse to answer the point. Again offer some random unconnected answer and deserve to receive: Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment to every reply you make.

I seriously doubt that you know as much as I do on the subject. Even less by the way you quickly dismiss the bible. It's only called a belief becasue YOU choose to not agree with it.

Nope. It’s called belief because you have no proof or evidence. Just faith that it is true.

Yet I see no evidence on your part that debunks it, ever wonder why that is?

I already explained that, twice. I refer you back to these replies.

Sure Colin, you expect me to believe that your simply not being biased on this becasue it shuns your evolution belief when I have told you several times that you can't recreate the events without the supernatural elements present.

Again don’t tell me what you believe. Show me the proof. You know how, I have explained it many times.

Any scientist knows you have to do things right, but according to you, its ok to dismiss.

And you claim you are not 10 - 12? Shocking

reply to post by itsthetooth

For no particular reason, the whale is not a section I have looked into, so I have no comment about it. All I can say is that you can't dismiss something so easily when your not doing a fair recreation of the events.

Oh so you and you bible cannot explain the whale yet both of you maintain a man can live inside one. According to you I cannot dismiss something that you say cannot be recreated because these are not 'biblical times' yet you can dismiss ALL the laws of science because you believe in the bible. I dismiss your dismissals.

No YOU have the god complex, your making assumptions that we know all and can do all when it comes to recreating events. As far as no accepting the orthodox views, I was not able to even find them when I read into it, which is why I'm saying its not a belief, its an understanding.

I refer you back to my reply which as per normal you have ignored. As for not being able to find orthodox religious views in the bible it is a great example of how poor your research is. Shame on you.

Actually by me claiming that we can't recreate those events, its all based on the fact that we dont know everything

Nope. It is you avoiding facing reality. Denying what is in front of your very eyes to maintain a home-grown religion that is just plainly nonsense.

Now if you want to agree that I'm claiming to know it all based on us not knowing everything, that is false as well.

You claim the bible knows it all. You claim to understand the bible better than the religious scholars. Ergo you claim to know it all.

I have investigate so much into evolution, and always find myself satisfied to learn what I had always thought from the begining, evolution is just a theory, an idea, thats all.

Good. Now you can go back to your corner of spokane and feel proud you know the truth. Again I ask. Why are you here on this thread with that ignorant attitude?

In other words I won that debate.

Try using the term and we will see

If I lost the bird one than please explain what the relationship is between man and bird, and the relationship between bird and house does not count as being between bird and man.

I refer you back to where you lost the debate.

Well I don't know what bees have to do with wolves but now that you brought it up, it was one I forgot for the moment, and yes you lost that one as well. Did you forget the site that was telling us that we havent had a relationship with wolves for quite a long time?

Not only did you look like a fool denying the relationship when supplying the sentence containing ‘we have not had a relationship with wolves for a long time’, confirming we had a relationship you lost this debate due to your refusal to honestly enter into debate. Anyhow, I refer you back to that debate. It’s been done and you clearly lost. In fact you was slaughtered.

I have no idea what your talking about.

News for you: You have no idea what anyone here is talking about

A doctor came out and admitted we have telepathy as a fact, are you high?

You do this a lot. Do you know it is against the T&C's to accuse others on this site of taking illegal substances?

reply to post by colin42

No, what stinks here is the the repeated abuse through assuming. Your doing it again, assuming I'm Ten or Twelve years old.

Well are you?

How could I be Ten when I have been through college.

Just to show you how blind you have been all of this time, for the umteenth time, I told you I accepted evolution as a theory just like it was stated to be.

Now all you have to do is understand the difference between a theory and a scientific theory. That is how blind you have been

I understand both of them just fine, but what you seem to keep missing is that I'm not just goin to take your word for it that evolution is a scientific theory, I have yet to see that myself.

And here you prove your statement above about accepting evolution was false. It was obvious that you were playing with semantics. Which is dishonest.

There are none, it was either proven or not.

Ah but evolution has been proven just like living in a whale has been shown to be impossible.

I'm assum;ing it was recreated at some point, or are you assuming it was, and did they have the supernatural elements as well, or were they giving it an unfair try.

You even blatantly admit to dishonest behaviour


FYI Changing things to fit your argument is DISHONEST

Depends on what you mean, for example I life to refer to evolution has a bug or a creator, its my opinion which you haven't been able to disprove so how do you know its being dishonest?

It's questionable just like how the gears and sprockets evolved in the flagellum. Which I don't buy.

Nope. Its not questionable I am afraid. You again refuse to answer the point. Again offer some random unconnected answer and deserve to receive: Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment to every reply you make.

Not at all, I was giving a fair comparison.

I seriously doubt that you know as much as I do on the subject. Even less by the way you quickly dismiss the bible. It's only called a belief becasue YOU choose to not agree with it.

Nope. It’s called belief because you have no proof or evidence. Just faith that it is true.

And as I'm learning from you, documentation obviously means nothing in your world.

Sure Colin, you expect me to believe that your simply not being biased on this becasue it shuns your evolution belief when I have told you several times that you can't recreate the events without the supernatural elements present.

Again don’t tell me what you believe. Show me the proof. You know how, I have explained it many times.

Supernatural things are impossible to recreate or prove, did it not ever occur to you that this is probably why they documented these things?

Any scientist knows you have to do things right, but according to you, its ok to dismiss.

And you claim you are not 10 - 12? Shocking

Don't offer your opinion in place of it, its not valid here. Everyone has an opinion and you know what they say about them.

For no particular reason, the whale is not a section I have looked into, so I have no comment about it. All I can say is that you can't dismiss something so easily when your not doing a fair recreation of the events.

Oh so you and you bible cannot explain the whale yet both of you maintain a man can live inside one. According to you I cannot dismiss something that you say cannot be recreated because these are not 'biblical times' yet you can dismiss ALL the laws of science because you believe in the bible. I dismiss your dismissals

If you used the same logic in dismissing evolution, you surly woudln't be believing in it.

I refer you back to my reply which as per normal you have ignored. As for not being able to find orthodox religious views in the bible it is a great example of how poor your research is. Shame on you.

While it apears they were present as a control method, they were the furthest from my mind when I was reading.

Nope. It is you avoiding facing reality. Denying what is in front of your very eyes to maintain a home-grown religion that is just plainly nonsense.

But I don't have a religion, I don't have a belief, I have an understanding, or rather a correction to current understandings.

You claim the bible knows it all. You claim to understand the bible better than the religious scholars. Ergo you claim to know it all.

Depends on what you mean by it all. I don't claim to know everything there is to know about the events that took place. What I am claiming is that some things were obviously missed.

Good. Now you can go back to your corner of spokane and feel proud you know the truth. Again I ask. Why are

reply to post by itsthetooth

How do you expect me to address you seriously when you refer to the supernatural as magic.

Magic

Magic is the art of producing a desired effect or result through the use of incantation or various other techniques that presumably assure human control of supernatural agencies or the forces of nature

Would look like I know at least that much more than you

Then why would you keep telling me that you want proof?

Jeeze you are hard work. Again: You say your belief in the bible is not based on faith then you are the one that needs to provide evidence that shows it correct or just continue with your blind faith. Come back when you can do that or admit that.

Again if your placing those in the same catagory, I can totally see why you don't and don't want to understand supernatural.

Ah the trap is sprung. Tolkien based many of his characters on the myths of many ancient peoples including the bible so some believers would have it. Those that lived before and during 'biblical times' So why do you believe you can dismiss his writing but we have to accept the bible that also talks of mythical beings such as giants, imps and devils?

I have been doing it for over 400 pages, but now I realize that everytime I bring it up your thinking of hobbits and unicorns.

Nope. You have not supplied one logical argument based on evidence supported by links and quotes from those links. The bible talks about unicorns as well, what a shock You were saying?

Thick skull 10, Pea brain 0

reply to post by colin42

Good. Now you can go back to your corner of spokane and feel proud you know the truth. Again I ask. Why are you here on this thread with that ignorant attitude?

You know a common ancestor was identified in our DNA about 200,000 years ago, how does that jive with us evolving? And what happened to this other species. I'm am here becasue evolution CANT be an option if we aren't from here to begin with.

I refer you back to where you lost the debate.

Then you lost it Colin because you never did prove a relationship between birds and humans.

Not only did you look like a fool denying the relationship when supplying the sentence containing ‘we have not had a relationship with wolves for a long time’, confirming we had a relationship you lost this debate due to your refusal to honestly enter into debate. Anyhow, I refer you back to that debate. It’s been done and you clearly lost. In fact you was slaughtered.

We don't now, so you still lost.

A doctor came out and admitted we have telepathy as a fact, are you high?

You do this a lot. Do you know it is against the T&C's to accuse others on this site of taking illegal substances?

Who said anything about ilegal ones? But then again you are the grand daddy master oh puba of assumptions.

reply to post by itsthetooth

How could I be Ten when I have been through college.

Two answers spring to mind. #1 You have not been to college. Plenty of evidence to show that or #2 You are a borderline genius. Very little supporting evidence.

I understand both of them just fine, but what you seem to keep missing is that I'm not just goin to take your word for it that evolution is a scientific theory, I have yet to see that myself.

You seem unable to see anything that challenges you delusion so again I ask: Why are you on this thread?

I'm assum;ing it was recreated at some point, or are you assuming it was, and did they have the supernatural elements as well, or were they giving it an unfair try.

How do you think anyone can answer that babble? Is it in code?

Depends on what you mean, for example I life to refer to evolution has a bug or a creator, its my opinion which you haven't been able to disprove so how do you know its being dishonest?

Nope. Changing things to suit your argument is dishonest, plain and simple. Evolution is a word not a bug and does not create. More proof if any were needed that you have no clue what evolution is. You are changing evolution to suit your argument. Which is dishonest. See above

And as I'm learning from you, documentation obviously means nothing in your world.

Documentation is very important. Trouble is the bible does not constitute documentation in science and you failed to debate that very point: Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread.

But you are meant to be answering: 'Nope. It’s called belief because you have no proof or evidence. Just faith that it is true.' answer that as you should have instead of the nonsense above.

Supernatural things are impossible to recreate or prove, did it not ever occur to you that this is probably why they documented these things?

Who are they? If you can’t prove 'things' occurred your in big trouble because this is not the thread to preach your homemade faith in.

Don't offer your opinion in place of it, its not valid here. Everyone has an opinion and you know what they say about them.

I know what we say about yours

If you used the same logic in dismissing evolution, you surly woudln't be believing in it.

Mr Science major indeed. Your own words. 'You have no proof'. You cannot use logic if you have nothing to base that logic on.

While it apears they were present as a control method, they were the furthest from my mind when I was reading.

Yeah right. We all know how you read things.

But I don't have a religion, I don't have a belief, I have an understanding, or rather a correction to current understandings.

Lie to yourself by all means but don’t try it on me. You believe in something that has no evidence. Based on a book that has no evidence. All you have is your faith. Your constant struggle to get recognition on this thread confirms your faith is very fragile and so it should be.

Depends on what you mean by it all. I don't claim to know everything there is to know about the events that took place. What I am claiming is that some things were obviously missed.

Yeah right. You know more than scholars that spend a lifetime studying the bible. That debate with other scholars and only you know the truth. You know better than 150 years of accumulated knowledge, peer reviewed and tested with supporting evidence. That looks pretty much like you claim to know it all to me.

reply to post by itsthetooth
I see you have again provided no reasoned argument, supported by evidence with links and quotes from those links.

Time for you to put up or shut up.