Halleluja, I have seen the light

[pianistimo]

i don't doubt that ancient people believed in a god named Athena.  what is so bizarre about that?  i don't doubt they made up a reason that she was there for victories.  but, what about defeats.  a pretty dead god if she couldn't compete with the true God and allowed the athenians to be flooded out, too.

[prometheus]

But you should believe that Athena exists because there are histical facts in the Illiad.


Because by your reasoning all in the bible is true because it contains historical facts.

Same reasoning.

[cmg]

But, BEWARE, pianistimo, BEWARE!!

REMEMBER THIS:  Resting in regal splendor Down Under is "ada," who, like the divine Erda of Wagner's "Siegfried," will not think kindly on those who disturb her slumbers with raucous "rabbiting about" and incessant floundering within logic loops -- lost somewhere between Revelations II:4(c) and Ruminations IV:2(d).

AS IT IS WRITTEN:

"I shall smite those who annoy me with excessive rabbitting about!"

BEWARE!!

[ahinton]

But, BEWARE, pianistimo, BEWARE!!

REMEMBER THIS:  Resting in regal splendor Down Under is "ada," who, like the divine Erda of Wagner's "Siegfried," will not think kindly on those who disturb her slumbers with raucous "rabbiting about" and incessant floundering within logic loops -- lost somewhere between Revelations II:4(c) and Ruminations IV:2(d).

AS IT IS WRITTEN:

"I shall smite those who annoy me with excessive rabbitting about!"

BEWARE!!

That's right! Five loaves (sliced - and vegemite spread thickly on each slice) and two box jellyfishes. Ashes to ashes...

Best,

Alistair

[pianowelsh]

there is more proof for santa claus than evolution - I dont know what your talking about!! at least with sanat claus we can see connection st nichlolas and he at least was a real person who was a philanthropist.
Try reading some of the stuff here: www.answersingenesis.org They are not alone in defending the authenitcity of scripture and the 'science' of creation. Although true science is a loose term...really we dont know so much about the workings of almighty God.
Happy Christmas - or if that offends you - winter solistice!

[pianowelsh]

By the way a tag like that to spark debate is a bit cheap.. brush your act up a bit. Oh and its Halleluja'h' in common useage.just incase english isnt your first language.

[maul]

You cannot break through the thick evergrowing sludge-like substance which coats Pianistimo's every thought. Why do you even try.

[prometheus]

No it isn't. But I wasn't aware of the fact that 'hallelujah' was an english word.


You are talking about 'a bit cheap' while you claim that there is more evidence for santa claus then there is for evolution?

There is even more evidence for evolution than for Saint Nicholas.

The site you mention is a creationist propaganda site with lies and retarded arguments. Like equalling evolution with racism.

If you don't want to accept racism because of your religious delusion then fine. But don't go claiming that there is no evidence. I mean, it's one of the strongest theories in all of science. Don't deny reality. Just be honest. Jesus teaches you to do so.

Of course saying 'merry christmas' doesn't offend anyone.


True science isn't a loose term. There is no creation science. If creation is science then so is astrology. Is that what you believe?

A christian professor of cellular biology on Intelligent Design/Creationism:

[pianowelsh]

You clearly havent taken the time to read any of the arguments outlined on the website. Its far from a propoganda website. I know some of the professors who are amongst the researchers - they are respected even by scientists who dont share their convictions. Exactly its one of the strongest 'theories' in science. However Creation in the bible isnt put forward as a theory - it is expressed as fact. Thes scientists have merely researched and found the bible to be ture on this specific subject. Clearly those who deny God are not going to believe them. But frankly to rubbish them isnt fair.  I didnt say evolutution had no evidence I said there was more for father Christmas. As with all theories there is generally some truth and some error. Deciding what is true and what isnt isnt always easy.  Let God be true and the world a liar.  I think we have to agree to disagree on evolution prometheus. Im sure the guys at answers in genesis would be happy to discuss any academic questions you have regarding creation v evolution. They are much more knowledgeable on it than I am and are always speaking to people on the subject via letters. e-mail etc.

Happy Christmas!!!

[pianistimo]

so many sciences are available to us today - and so much research on the internet.  so, even amateurs (such as myself) can come up with decent questions based on the large amount of information given.  and, as pianowelsh said - we also have christian scientists which help us understand dna and mtdna.

now here's two conflicting sites:

www.ccg.org/english/s/P265.html

and

www.ramsdale.org/dna10.htm

now, i read through both as thoroughly as i could and saw evidence for possible flaws in both at certain places (although, me not being a geneticist - could pose a problem). 

ok.  here's my question for the second site - which doesn't seem to follow any sort of biblical trail.  it says that in mitochondrial dna - only ONE mutation would happen every 10,000 years.  obviously THIS ISN'T the CASE!  from all of our testing and dna research - many things have happened mitochondrially - at least from the other article perhaps over 211 or something - mt dna things have happened.

now somebody is lying!  also, the dating to millions of years (hominids) makes me very skeptical because of many sites that claim to have discovered quite advanced people - with stone dwellings - as with the marawah island site (70km west of abu dhabi in iraq) with a skeleton intact that indicates that these people were not stupid and had similar dna and also EXACT skeleton bodies as modern man.  no anomolies like the supposed 3.2 million year old daughter of 'lucy' who btw, had a HYOID bone (common for chimps to have under the tongue).  hmmm.  maybe the dating is off and we are dating chimps? 

DID YOU  ALL KNOW THAT... 20 year old lava from mt. st. helen's was radio-dated by scientific labs, who were unaware of the source, and dated it in the range of 300,000 to 1,300,000 years old?!

[pianistimo]

instead of hominoids - how about we call them what they are :  homosapiens.  humans.  genetically humans.  cain's descendants totally died out!  if i understand the bible correctly.  that would account for bones that are discovered that are not closely related tot he Ydna today.  noah's family was of the seth line. 

the table of nations in genesis 10 provides more science for dna research than 100,000 long winded papers from scientists that are imagining what happened.  genesis gives ACTUAL NAMES.  now who could do that?  but, someone who wrote down this history as transcribed from the mouth of God and humans who kept the information!  i am assuming noah wrote a lot down --and of course, moses.  who is thought to have written (transcribed the first five books of the bible). 

now, if the geneologies of the bible are correct - which i think they are - they will be proven correct not just by scientific carbon dating -but by archeological finds on the same levels of strata that indicate age - by language development - by migration - by mt and ydna - all these things are intricately interconnected.

now, for someone who says positively, dinosaurs existed before man.  i say - prove it by what is found in strata at the same levels!  preexisting huts and dwellings under the DEAD SEA.  at what levels?  hmm.  kinda sounds fishy.  and, why would the poles have any sort of warm weather creatures that are buried (upright) i might add - in some instances - as though they were buried in a sudden catastrophe and that the polar regions might have been suddenly shifted ONCE slightly at the time of noah - causing a different type of atmosphere than was previously over the entire earth. 

this corroborates with genesis  - where it says 'a mist used to rise over all the earth' - implying that it wasn't freezing and snowing much at the polar regions yet.  noah was not that far removed from the original creation (900 or 1000 years?)  i can't remember.  anyways.  the type of living environment from creation was probably different than after the flood.  this would account for the exact things that we find about 'palm trees' buried in ice in the antarctic.  what is so strange to me, is to thing that anyone would have a better idea of what happened in earth's history than God.  i mean, He was THERE.

[pianistimo]

now, if there was a dramatic polar shift - even - that would have taken place when the earth was entirely covered in water.  but, it would not account for why noah was found so close to mesopotamia (mt. ararat - as the bible says) if the poles shifted entirely.

[pianistimo]

imo, the polar regions will soon expose the truth.  evolutionists are going to have to try REALLy hard to hide it when a man's skeleton is found (as many have already - fossilized remains of early alaskans) alongside a mammoth.  o wooptie doo.  now, i may be wrong - but it is my estimation that God did pretty much with mankind as he did the animals.  www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/303/5654/52  making two of each at creation.  they both probably migrated about the same time to various parts of the earth - being that there was more land masses (supported by the existing LAND BRIDGES that connect various continents - totally overruling, btw, the idea that the continents were somehow at one time all connected - and that suddenly a bunch of mass became what is now the soil under the sea).

this is what really bothered me in textbooks.  the irreality of the reasoning.

now, according to the bible, the SAME thing happened AGAIN!  two of each - seven of each clean animal (VERY FEW) entered the ark.  so how many animals are we talking here?  ok.  - now we are at today.  what we should see in strata is a continual increase of population (unless we have disease and famine) from the early periods of mankind.  this would prove ONE SOURCE.  very simple.  even i can think of that!  the ONE SOURCE IS GOD.

[counterpoint]

This a ways of trying to explain the world around us as we see it today, (red-shift in stars and the complexity of life) through slow progression.  We may not be very accurate, but know that most of it is more than just a reasonable theory and gives us some clue to what is happening around us.

In contrast to creation, which is, everything was magiked into existence the way things are not so long ago. 

Ermmm.... yes sure. Not much difference.
 

I was talking about the time before the BIG BANG or the Creation as told in the bible.

The scientists don't tell us anything about the time before the BIG BANG
and the bible doesn't tell us anything about God before he has created the EARTH (+1 moon and 1 sun and many stars)

[pianistimo]

true.  good one, counterpoint.  btw, your name has taken on new meaning to me.  but, i like it.  just as science says that it can prove nothing unless it has caused a debate -  and God - who is unseen - but felt by Christians to be as real as matter has to be proved by faith.  the source of their healing, the source of their inspiration, the source of their joy, and the source of their physical and spiritual  journeys.  i truly feel - looking back on my life that it was somehow - preplanned to be 'for good.'  i think every person's life on this earth is preplanned 'for good.'  it is satan who takes away the seed planted (the Word) and replants something false.  false ideas.  false hopes.  they lead to desperation. and finally, death.

i would prove this by the lack of numbers of depression and suicide by professing christians as compared to non-christians.  www.adherents.com/misc/religion_suicide.html they are on the whole - much happier on the LONG term.  now, the short term they might get flighty or mad temporarily - but long term - their lives are blessed.  how do you explain this phenomenon of blessing.  it is truth!  the truth sets you free.  free from anger.  free from stress (when you pray).  free from worry (if someone does you wrong).  free from trying to compete.  free from thinking that you are not 'good enough.'  God covers our sins and even throws them as far as east is from west.  who is so kind as that to forget our sins (from our own family/brother/mankind)?

the fact our lives carry worth should cause any who should wish to carry out physician assisted suicide (unless this is what a patient keeps requesting due to severe pain or whatever?)  to think twice.  it is murder.  killing.  for us to reflect to others that their lives have no worth because they are mentally incapable or old - is starting down the path of 'let's play God.' ps sorry about this last paragraph because i know that not everyone belongs in a category and i certainly don't think that only athiests or agnostics believe this.

as i see it- there is hope in the ressurrection - but we don't try to assist our own deaths to gain it faster.  although i have seen articles where believers, trying to avoid severe persecution, committed mass - suicide.  to me, these are 'forced' issues.  choosing between someone heartlessly torturing and then murdering - or a quick death.  but, normally - in a normal life - you have the up's and downs of health at the end and then a natural death - just like with birth. it's as if God helps you when you get to the end, imo.  for instance, one of my husband's aunt's lived to be 101.  she was kind of 'out of it' the last year - but her family kept rallying around her and encouraging her.  even though possibly she couldn't hear, speak, see, or feel much - she would give small indications of awareness at times and yet - through the darkness was coming closer to death without much pain or awareness of the totality of it.  i think allowing a person to be older at death - causes this 'phenomenon.' 

[thalbergmad]

Switch your computer off for a couple of days please.

[pianistimo]

i did not start this thread.  it was a taunt to christian believers to accept blindly what psudoscience there is to study.  now, when it comes down to it - you just want me to shut up because you have nothing to say to counter it.  that is not a debate.  that is basically telling me that i win.  i already know i won - but i want to hear it from your lips. 

if you compete in weighlifting - are you satisfied to have an arbiter say - 'you both won.'  that is boring.  why bother lifting weights.  obviously someone has some muscles.  well, i happen to think that my muscular brains have outweighed yours in this instance.

[mad_max2024]

Is anyone here up for mass suicide?

[thalbergmad]

i did not start this thread.  it was a taunt to christian believers to accept blindly what psudoscience there is to study.  now, when it comes down to it - you just want me to shut up because you have nothing to say to counter it.  that is not a debate.  that is basically telling me that i win.  i already know i won - but i want to hear it from your lips. 

if you compete in weighlifting - are you satisfied to have an arbiter say - 'you both won.'  that is boring.  why bother lifting weights.  obviously someone has some muscles.  well, i happen to think that my muscular brains have outweighed yours in this instance.

It is true, you have got a muscular brain.

You have defeated me by boring me to death. I admit i simply no longer have the patience to read through the pages of drivel you post here on a daily basis.

I admit that i would actually like you to shut up.

Satisfied?

[preludium]

The scientists don't tell us anything about the time before the BIG BANG
and the bible doesn't tell us anything about God before he has created the EARTH (+1 moon and 1 sun and many stars)

There is neither time nor space without a brain that creates them. This was taught by Immanuel Kant more than two centuries ago in his book "Critique of pure reason". As far as I know this has not been proven wrong yet, and it's hard to imagine it ever will be, because it's a negative statement (hence "critique"). But it is constantly ignored in foolish discussions. How many centuries does it take for one of the most brilliant theories to sink in? I doubt it ever will.

By the way, the big bang theory says that time and space were created in this first event, so even from that point of view there cannot be any "before". The fact that this is beyond imagination is exactly one part of Kant's proof that time and space are functions of the brain.

[pianistimo]

i will prove that wrong right now.  what if there is simply a room with a clock in it.  will the room and clock cease to exist because noone goes in with a brain?  on the other hand, what if a person goes into a room with no clock.  for several days.  maybe weeks.  only fed a little food.  sort of like solitary confinement.  time does not exist in the same way.  delusions probably set in. 

or, what about plant life.  they start from seedlings, move to a stalk, then plant, then wilt and die.  they had no brain.  but they had a time-life.

the only way to get around time/space is to be warped.  what i mean - is to be outside of it.  thereby not needing a physical brain at all.  maybe being spirit?  i mean - HOW does God do so many things at once.  this is obviously outside of time and space - and yet enters our realm every day that the sun comes up.  even lord byron made a poem about the amazingness of the sun - 'what causes it to be booted o're hills, plains...'  we know the earth goes around the sun - but the orbits of all the planets, the constancy of the universe.  it is not in such a state of chaos as we imagine - i believe.  otherwise - we would not have life on our own planet.  too much chaos in the universe would cause great collisions with the earth.  the fact that meteroids and asteroids have not destroyed the earth yet - is a MIRACLE.  what has caused our own moon to continue within this gravitational pull and others to not be allowed into it?  why don't we have two or three moons?  pluto has three!

[preludium]

i will prove that wrong right now.

Ok, the world has been waiting for you for a long time. Let's see...

what if there is simply a room with a clock in it.  will the room and clock cease to exist because noone goes in with a brain?

Oops, you try to prove Kant wrong with the same criticism he directed to George Berkeley? I think that's the perfect way to embarrass yourself. These things always come up in such a discussion. There simply is no such thing as an object without a subject, because, however you want to set up such a scenery, there is already a subject involved - that's you. What has a clock to do with the concept of time anyway? Who would claim that time stands still if the clock goes broken or that there was no time at all before clocks were invented? And you're fighting the wrong opponent, too. Kant was a christian and put an end to the attempts to prove scientifically the nonexistence of a god. The same holds for the existence, by the way. Well, he could have done so, if anyone would read his books today.

[pianowelsh]

While as far as im aware the Big Bang doesnt  really try to explain before the big bang the bible very clearly teaches about the unchangeable characteristics of God - ie pre creation.  We also know that Chirst was slain (at least in the intention of God) before the foundation of the world. So really we know quite a bit about God precreation. Im sure there is more too.  Im not the greatest scholar in these matters but im sure there are those who could point you to other references.

[asyncopated]

I was talking about the time before the BIG BANG or the Creation as told in the bible.

Ok, point taken. pianowelsh seems to disagree about creation though.

While as far as im aware the Big Bang doesnt  really try to explain before the big bang the bible very clearly teaches about the unchangeable characteristics of God - ie pre creation.

This is a statement of truth.  I agree.  You have not made any conclusive statements yet about god's precreation abilities. 

I'm not about to launch in a discussion about kant.  Not unless we agree on wittgenstein first. 

it was a taunt to christian believers to accept blindly what psudoscience there is to study.

I was also partly to show me how dangerous religion can be, when placed in the wrong hands. It can be used as a weapon against humanity.

You cannot break through the thick evergrowing sludge-like substance which coats Pianistimo's every thought. Why do you even try.

Masochism.  Why else?

We know from scripture that God is the same yesterday today and forever. Therefore the powers/abilities displayed in creation and in sustaining creation were his in eternity passed. He is without beginning or end. We also know from scripture that He will bring this world to nothing and create a new heavens and a new earth - so we knwo God is in no way dependant on his creation - he is in terms of his powers totally self sufficient. We also can take form that that He has lost none of the abilities

What has that to do with us?  Can you tell me how to measure god?  or his eternalness?
I'm not asking as a prod, but for god to work, i need to know how to find him first.  Oh and i should say I have tried praying.  still no answer.  I even tried a knock knock joke.

He tells us in his word that he has always had.  I think that makes sense. Ask if it dosent

He has not told us anything.  Ostensibly only through the bible, which is essentally a book by man in the name of god.  Not by god.

[pianowelsh]

We know from scripture that God is the same yesterday today and forever. Therefore the powers/abilities displayed in creation and in sustaining creation were his in eternity passed. He is without beginning or end. We also know from scripture that He will bring this world to nothing and create a new heavens and a new earth - so we knwo God is in no way dependant on his creation - he is in terms of his powers totally self sufficient. We also can take form that that He has lost none of the abilities He tells us in his word that he has always had.  I think that makes sense. Ask if it dosent

[pianistimo]

dear preludium,

i happen to think that God doesn't need philosophy.  or Kant.  kant answered his own question by proving that a brain does not constrain time.  the earth would still revolve around the sun - (smaller universe with room and clock) - and our galaxy would operate just the same with or without us.  that shows how really small we are. 

time is a function of the sun and darkness.  as in genesis - when God said 'let there be light.'  He could have said 'let there be time'  - but as a clockmaker - he waited until he had also made the moon, the stars, - to have a complete calendar.  one which people can 'read' to the second and also to the yearly pattern of 365 plus or minus days.  now, if our brains didn't exist - the atomic clock still would.  it was started on the day of creation.  it wasn't louis essen that created it - because the atomic clock works by the radiation emitted or absorbed by atoms.  who really created that first.  not 1950's technology - but DISCOVERED in 1950.  and a part of the quality of quartz.  interesting that God was probably waiting around - wondering who would be the first to discover it.

perhaps what kant meant was that animals do not keep appointments.  although my cat seems to like to be fed at certain times.  of course, animals have brains -but they are not as aware of time, per se.

one last question.  if evolution were so - how come there are not a lot more people with longer forearms and bigger canine teeth?  how come we do not, occasionally, just for fun - jump from tree limb to tree limb.  it does look kind of freeing.  what happened to that part of our brains. the instinct side?  why don't we occasionally just chatter or pick nats out of our friends and neighbors hair?  i want to know where these characteristics were completely lost.

[asyncopated]

one last question.  if evolution were so - how come there are not a lot more people with longer forearms and bigger canine teeth?  how come we do not, occasionally, just for fun - jump from tree limb to tree limb.  it does look kind of freeing.  what happened to that part of our brains. the instinct side?  why don't we occasionally just chatter or pick nats out of our friends and neighbors hair?  i want to know where these characteristics were completely lost.

Because after acouple of million of years of not using things like your tail for balance, you will start losing it.  Things like your tail bone and appendix are reminants of previous physiology rendered useless.  Well you could jump from tree to tree if you want, or building to building -- although not everybody might want to. i'm no free runner, i'll break my neck if i tried.

Some of it is still there.  Instinct to survive, for reproducing etc.  We are still governed by some primal urges.  If you read richard dawkins book 'the selfish gene'  -- he does not talk about (criticise) god in this book.  It's really just a science book.  Basically he thinks that we have taken the ultimate step in evolution -- breaking free from our primative instincts, and being able to set goals and plan for things other than how to put food on the plate tomorrow. 

He claims that of all the steps this is the most crucial and sets us apart from animals (chimps for example).  He also claims that we have because of this essentially broken the trend in darwin's evolution where genetic selection is primarily based on the priciple that 'the fittest survive'.  We now have the luxury to not to be 'the fittest' -- in a survival sense -- and still be able to propogate our genes.

[cmg]

There is neither time nor space without a brain that creates them. This was taught by Immanuel Kant more than two centuries ago in his book "Critique of pure reason". As far as I know this has not been proven wrong yet

Indeed, and I can't thank you enough for your post . . . I just didn't have the energy to bring this up. 

Are you people ABSORBING this???  "There is neither time nor space without a brain that creates them." 

Do you grasp this?  Try, please.  Even Thal is losing his patience . . .

[cmg]

dear preludium,


time is a function of the sun and darkness. 

NO.  Time is an artificial construction of the human brain.  Just as self-identity or "ego" is.    The very definition of eternity, by the way, is NO TIME -- not, as you Christians believe, "unlimited or endless time."  You fail to see how limited your thinking is by conditioned intelligence.  "Eternity" is the end of conditioned intelligence (or, "received intelligence," OR that which you believe to be true, not based on reason, but on faith or religion.)  You better check into this fallacy before you drive yourself (and us) mad.

Earlier, I referred you to Frijof Capra's book, "The Tao of Physics," which you chose to ignore.  You do so at your own intellectual peril.  If you don't understand the concept of conditioned intelligence, you will not be taken seriously.  And you deserve to be taken seriously.   

[ahinton]

i happen to think that God doesn't need philosophy.  or Kant.

God doesn't need Kant? But surely God created Kant! Which others of us humans does God not need? Has Kant been denied eternal life because God doesn't need him? Does the same fate apply to all other philosophers? If so, why only philosophers? Or are there other professions of whose entire membership God has no need?

God said 'let there be light.'  He could have said 'let there be time'  - but as a clockmaker - he waited until he had also made the moon, the stars, - to have a complete calendar.

I'd occasionally wondered what His profession might be. I wonder what might have happened differently were He a composer instead.  And - speaking of composers - may I draw attention yet again to the creation being down to HAYDN? The reason I do so for the third time here is that you've just offered evidence, albeit unwittingly, to support this fact. Remember the "Clock" Symphony?...

the atomic clock works by the radiation emitted or absorbed by atoms.  who really created that first.  not 1950's technology - but DISCOVERED in 1950.  and a part of the quality of quartz.  interesting that God was probably waiting around - wondering who would be the first to discover it.

God was "wondering"? I thought that He was omniscient; why, therefore, would He need to "wonder" about this or anything else?

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Because after acouple of million of years...you will start losing it.

This you addressed to pianistimo; I refrain from the obvious comment, except to say that it seems not to have taken that long...

Best,

Alistair

[counterpoint]

We know from scripture that God is the same yesterday today and forever. Therefore the powers/abilities displayed in creation and in sustaining creation were his in eternity passed. He is without beginning or end. We also know from scripture that He will bring this world to nothing and create a new heavens and a new earth - so we knwo God is in no way dependant on his creation - he is in terms of his powers totally self sufficient. We also can take form that that He has lost none of the abilities He tells us in his word that he has always had.  I think that makes sense. Ask if it dosent

We know from scripture that Bill Gates is the same yesterday today and forever. Therefore the powers/abilities displayed in creation and in sustaining Windows were his in eternity passed. He is without beginning or end. We also know from scripture that He will bring this world to nothing and create a new heavens and a new earth - so we knwo Bill Gates is in no way dependant on his creation - he is in terms of his powers totally self sufficient. We also can take form that that He has lost none of the abilities He tells us in his word that he has always had.  I think that makes sense. Ask if it dosent

[ahinton]

We know from scripture that Bill Gates is the same yesterday today and forever. Therefore the powers/abilities displayed in creation and in sustaining Windows were his in eternity passed. He is without beginning or end. We also know from scripture that He will bring this world to nothing and create a new heavens and a new earth - so we knwo Bill Gates is in no way dependant on his creation - he is in terms of his powers totally self sufficient. We also can take form that that He has lost none of the abilities He tells us in his word that he has always had.  I think that makes sense. Ask if it dosent

Shouldn't "word" in the antepenultimate sentence read "Word"? This is the Word of the Lord Bill - and He is Excel-lent.

Best,

Alistair

[counterpoint]

Shouldn't "word" in the antepenultimate sentence read "Word"? This is the Word of the Lord Bill - and He is Excel-lent.

Best,

Alistair

"antepenultimate" - wow, what's the meaning of this   


Btw. alternately you can exchange Bill Gates by George W. Bush  and Windows by War on Terror

[ahinton]

"antepenultimate" - wow, what's the meaning of this   

The one before the penultimate.

Btw. alternately you can exchange Bill Gates by George W. Bush  and Windows by War on Terror

I daresay that many Americans might prefer Bill to George as President but I imagine that very few of them would be able to tell the difference between Microshaft Windows and the War on Terror, especially as you simply can't win with either...

Best,

Alistair

[counterpoint]

especially as you simply can't win with either...

Better to loose your data than to loose your life, health or freedom as consequence of a "system error"

[ahinton]

Better to loose your data than to loose your life, health or freedom as consequence of a "system error"

Yes, that's certainly true - although no doubt some Americans might ascribe "system error" to both - as in
"The War on Terrr
Is a System Errr..."

Best,

Alistair

[timothy42b]

  did you know that the EXACT rivers are still there today as found in the beginning books of genesis.  WHY?  i want to know how someone could make up a story many years later and have it be exact names of rivers? 

I will bet anyone a dollar pianistimo will not respond to this post.  However, it's pile on pianistimo period, so I must say it anyway.

Let's parse the logic.  If there is a river named in the Bible that still exists today, then the rest of the Bible must be true and inerrant. 

I'm not sure that really makes sense.  But the converse should be true.  If there is NOT a river, then at least part of the Bible is proven contradictory and we can know for sure that it isn't true and inerrant, though it may still have something to offer.

Okay, now let's check the facts.

Pianistimo, what rivers?  You didn't name them.  Never mind, I will.  Tigris and Euphrates.  Now check Genesis.  Whoops, that's not what it says.  The Bible claims these are 2 of the 4 rivers that flow out of the Garden of Eden, splitting off from one source. 

Now check a map.  Sorry, no rivers.  Only 2 of the 4 river names from Genesis actually exist, and there is nowhere that 4 rivers split off.  Too bad, if it were true we could nail down the location of Eden, and disprove the LDS claim that it is in Missouri. 

[mad_max2024]

how come we do not, occasionally, just for fun - jump from tree limb to tree limb. 

we don't?

[pianistimo]

dear cmg,

i never said 'eternity is endless time.'  where did i say that?  you assume a lot, too.  you assume you know more than God.  if He says 'in the beginning - then you and mr. richard dawkins are full of ***.

i did not have a tail.  i didn't lose it either.  and if we are not continuing to have this 'suvival of the fittest' then that was a tall tale.  how can a trend suddenly reverse itself.  i mean - first you say - evolution is for sure.  now, mr. dawkins can't prove it at the point where we are evolved.  that sounds FISHY.  that is because there are no MACRO-evolutions going on.  there is no evidence.  he is boxed in ...by time and space.  and, btw, will die - just like you and me. 

oh. and btw, i don't fear any kind of intellectual 'peril.'  do you know why - the smart and the dumb die together.  did you know that all the intellect you have is given to you.  and solomon happened to have the brains to ask for more.  God gives to those who ask.  and, not in little bits, either.  you can be the stupidest person on the planet - but if you believe God and have faith - you will be granted access into the eternal realm without time and space and without the problems that we have in living a physical life.  namely pain and death.  where did those enter the evolutionary process.  noone talks about either.  it's as though they don't exist.  but, they do. they are real as life.  life is limited now- as the bible says - to the amount of years that God lets us live. 

say - you are really intellectual and do nothing for your neighbor as yourself (not saying that anyone does this - because i know a lot of smart people here and elsewhere that are very generous).  but, i'm saying - how does God judge people?  by their intellect?  no.  it's  much fairer way.  sometimes when people talk science on here - it's almost like a value of worth as to how much you know.  what if people's value and worth is tied up in the fact that we are 'in God's image?'

[thalbergmad]

then you and mr. richard dawkins are full of ***.

 

Can we please add this into a recent thread about how pianistimo always responds pleasantly.

Thanks

Thal

[pianistimo]

and dear timothy42b,

you did not even take time to read my message carefully.  i said that nasa has flown over and taken satellite images of the other two rivers.  but, my question was HOW COME THE NAMES ARE THE SAME?  you didn't answer my question.  and i bet you fifty dollars you don't know how we have the same names - as written in the book (the bible) - today of rivers, places, peoples (rulers), as much of history and archeology has proven.  people have doubted that Jesus Christ even existed - but a recent archological find has proven that his name was mentioned by a ruler and put next to the god's name that they worshipped.  www.archaeologynews.org/link.asp?ID=53969&Title=ARCHAEOLOGICAL%20find%20stir%20scholars'%20interest

[pianistimo]

i challenge all of you to:
#1 prove carbon-14 dating accurate past 3000 years or so being that half-lifes have to judge when the first half life occurred and what conditions it was under.  what if the conditions were far different.  (such as pre-noah conditions of the earth).
#2 prove that evolution and genetics can be compatible - in terms of SCIENCE.  mtdna screws everything up.
#3 prove that man did not live in the age of dinosaurs (being that footprints/tools/stone and wood dwellings) as things continue to be discovered UNDER THE SEA.
#4 that God is not omnipotent in creation of the heavens and that possibly the earth was created separately - being that it has so much WATER.  He did say He created 'the heavens and the earth....'

and, thal - i'm not perfect.  excuse the ***. 

[thalbergmad]

and dear timothy42b,

you did not even take time to read my message carefully.  i said that nasa has flown over and taken satellite images of the other two rivers.  but, my question was HOW COME THE NAMES ARE THE SAME?  you didn't answer my question.  and i bet you fifty dollars you don't know how we have the same names - as written in the book (the bible) - today of rivers, places, peoples (rulers), as much of history and archeology has proven.  people have doubted that Jesus Christ even existed - but a recent archological find has proven that his name was mentioned by a ruler and put next to the god's name that they worshipped.  www.archaeologynews.org/link.asp?ID=53969&Title=ARCHAEOLOGICAL%20find%20stir%20scholars'%20interest

So what, the names are the same, what does that prove?

Jesus existed, wow,  you have an ancient document, congratulations.

So what if he did exist, that does not prove what the Bible said he did and surely that is what is most important to people like yourself.

There is more evidence for the yeti than the crucifixtion.

I did say yesterday that i was not going to answer any more of your posts and you were stupid enough to claim some kind of victory. Well, you almost bored me to death with your pointless ramblings, but today is another day.

Yours not respectfully,

Thal

[thalbergmad]

i challenge all of you to:
#1 prove carbon-14 dating accurate past 3000 years or so being that half-lifes have to judge when the first half life occurred and what conditions it was under.  what if the conditions were far different.  (such as pre-noah conditions of the earth).
#2 prove that evolution and genetics can be compatible - in terms of SCIENCE.  mtdna screws everything up.
#3 prove that man did not live in the age of dinosaurs (being that footprints/tools/stone and wood dwellings) as things continue to be discovered UNDER THE SEA.
#4 that God is not omnipotent in creation of the heavens and that possibly the earth was created separately - being that it has so much WATER.  He did say He created 'the heavens and the earth....'

and, thal - i'm not perfect.  excuse the ***. 

Proof to you does not exist.

You will not believe anything that contradicts your little book.

If you want some answers, do some searching on the internet instead of wasting other peoples time.

Thal

[pianistimo]

NOT TRUE.  are you for lies or truth.  do you really want to know.  then ask questions and get involved.  don't sit on the sidelines and wave flags this way and that.

i have a bachelors degree and am half-way through a grad degree.  does this mean that i got there by no science classes and no math classes.  i don't think school is an end-all - but i do not believe every textbook.  that's all i'm telling people.  read the books - but read the bible, too.  everyone thinks their thoughts are better than God's.

[asyncopated]

i challenge all of you to:
#1 prove carbon-14 dating accurate past 3000 years or so being that half-lifes have to judge when the first half life occurred and what conditions it was under.  what if the conditions were far different.  (such as pre-noah conditions of the earth).
#2 prove that evolution and genetics can be compatible - in terms of SCIENCE.  mtdna screws everything up.
#3 prove that man did not live in the age of dinosaurs (being that footprints/tools/stone and wood dwellings) as things continue to be discovered UNDER THE SEA.
#4 that God is not omnipotent in creation of the heavens and that possibly the earth was created separately - being that it has so much WATER.  He did say He created 'the heavens and the earth....'

and, thal - i'm not perfect.  excuse the ***. 

#5 prove that everything stated in the bible did or will happen.

#6 prove that the bible was written by god (or at least is the unadulterated word of god)

#7 prove that you are not dumb

[prometheus]

i challenge all of you to:
#1 prove carbon-14 dating accurate past 3000 years or so being that half-lifes have to judge when the first half life occurred and what conditions it was under.  what if the conditions were far different.  (such as pre-noah conditions of the earth).

https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/radiometric.html

Also:
-Bard, Edouard, Bruno Hamelin, Richard G. Fairbanks and Alan Zindler, 1990. Calibration of the 14C timescale over the past 30,000 years using mass spectrometric U-Th ages from Barbados corals. Nature 345: 405-410.
-Faure, Gunter, 1998. Principles and Applications of Geochemistry, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
-MNSU, n.d. Radio-carbon dating. https://emuseum.mnsu.edu/archaeology/dating/radio_carbon.html
 

#2 prove that evolution and genetics can be compatible - in terms of SCIENCE.  mtdna screws everything up.

Evolution predicted DNA. It is silly to claim DNA screws evolution up. Evolution is the whole thing that started the search for DNA because if evolution is to be true something like DNA needs to exist.

#3 prove that man did not live in the age of dinosaurs (being that footprints/tools/stone and wood dwellings) as things continue to be discovered UNDER THE SEA.

Since the dinosaurs lived 65 million years ago it is silly to even consider this idea. In the age of the dinosaur all mammals were small little nocturnal rodents.

If we lived before 65 million years ago we would have died out together with the dinosaurs.

#4 that God is not omnipotent in creation of the heavens and that possibly the earth was created separately - being that it has so much WATER.  He did say He created 'the heavens and the earth....'

We can't prove or disprove god. Talking about god is silly. Just like talking about fairies is silly.

[pianistimo]

if the bible mentions the 'leviathin' - and 'behemouth' - isnt' it possible they existed together pre-flood-  and that dating of their bones is inaccurate?  and people DID die out - at the SAME TIME - at the flood.

dear prometheus,

i know how much you like your theories - but you never answered me about mitochodrial dna and why one site said one change happens every 10,000 years and another site says 211 happened within a shorter time frame.

dear asyncopated,

faith is what separates believers of God (and His Word).  faith comes by hearing , and hearing by the Word of God.  if you do not listen to it - how can i teach you - as you teach me?  if i don't read a science book and debate issues with the language that you use - then i cannot have a conversation.  likewise - if you read a few of the psalms (which, imo, is a good starting point) - then we can discuss likewise.

the bible IS God's word by the fact that it cannot be proven false by history, science and/or archeology, geology, zoology, all the ology's.  the more you study the creation - the more it is apparent that it is divinely designed.  explaining an ant - is just as difficult or harder than a planet.  that's what some scientists say.

proving that i am not dumb is relative.  say i have  a rabbit over here and he muches lettuce and types on the internet excessively.  at least i am competing with likeminded pianoforum addicts - and have a role to play in encouraging people to not 'do as i do' - but more 'as i say.'  i mean - right now i should be transposing this stupid song by sister sledge for a kindergarten group - because they can't sing the really high version.

[prometheus]

Pianistomo, is this about your question?
https://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB621_1.html