Merged Religous Debate Threads

fitch said:
LOL. Translation: I got PWNED!
Click to expand...
If you change your tone and ask nice maybe I'll respond to your "argument." But mind you, even if you ask politely you would still have to thank me after it is defeated.
 
fitch said:
Yeah besides the fact the abiogensis theory has produced nothing, which incidentally, even if they could synthesize life somehow in a controlled enviroment, would prove nothing. I mean, what would they say, that it didn't take intelligence to produce life?

It's not a case of just extrapolating backwards. Even if somehow miraculously a simple life form spawned for no reason from fundamental chemicals. Natural selection and mutation do not and cannot explain how the information in the genome somehow expanded to greater complexity. Natural selection and mutation only produces recombination, losses, or in events like downs, addition of redundant information. The human genome contains about 3 billion nucleotides. If the earth was 4.5 billion years old that means life would have had to form quickly and then somehow add this information at a rate of about 1/year. Modern science has never observed such an event to happen.

Also, to atheists, what exactly is this "life force" phenomena that causes all these fundamental chemicals in our bodies to keep doing what they do?
Click to expand...

a lack of proof of a rival theory does not equate to proof of another theory. sorry, logic doesnt work like that.
so working on your idea that the likely hood of 1 nucleotide per year has not been observed in science, how does 3 billion in an instant make more sense?

that life force as you are calling it is more appropriately named bio-chemistry. good job trying to make a science sound mysterious. to answer your question, how does it keep working? well it probably has something to do with the constant intake of foods and the biological processes of digestion. but thats just hocus pocus anyways.
again, lack of total knowledge does not imply that you are right, it only implies that the scientific explanation isnt perfect. wow, ground breaking.

just because you do not understand the underlying principles does not mean they are incorrect. if you wanted to learn bio-chemistry, all you have to do is go to school and you will see the proof for yourself. if your willing to commit the time, you can understand.
talk about irony... what if physics and chemistry and all this mumbo jumbo voodoo magic was really how god did his good works in this universe?
do you think atoms are fucking made up? what about cells and bacteria? do you think science just made up some theories that sounded cool and just started looking for proof that they were right? science is based on observation of the natural world. we see with our own eyes what we study.

my problem is that people are basing their view on the world on a book. if you knew the history of that book and what has been done it is name, i doubt you would take the book at face value.
the great deluge was said to cover the entire earth. thats an emotional measurement if ever ive seen one. how would a person in those times know how big the earth was? you know what the earth was to that person? it was the distance his legs could carry him and his imagination. now ive got an imagination too, but ive traveled very long distances. so when i say the world was flooded, you damn well know its a big place that got flooded. when someone whos world is maybe 100 miles at best is flooded, well its probably not that big. its probably 20 miles at best. besides, once that flood happened, how would you know how far you actually traveled in your boat to verify any claims? stars? sorry its raining. compass and speed measurements? sorry that hocus pocus wasnt invented by science for quite a few years later. the biblical accounts of the creation are simply stories to fill in the blanks. if god intended us to be dumb as rocks, do you think al gore would have invented the internet?
 
Matt, on behalf of the angry creationists who are too upset to do so, I thank you for your serious reply.
 
Mens Rea said:
I think fitch is really angry. He uses a lot of smileys but he's not fooling me.
Click to expand...
To be honest, if you really want to know how I feel. I'm sad. I'm sad to see you've been duped like so many into abandoning the truth. Which of course Jesus prophesied:

Matthew 7:
13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
 
big_headed_tiny_dog_chasing_tail_lg_wht.gif

that reference shows nothing! what does it explain? it says that it is easy to walk a path of evil. really? wow, i didn't know that!
but thats not the context you are using it for. i'm going be totally honest with this and it will come off as trolling and maybe inflammatory.
the reference in the context you just used serves no purpose other than social control. plain and simple, its a fear tactic commonly used by bible thumpers to scare people into following the ways of the church and by church i really mean the ways of men, which by the way are corruptible in case you missed my previous posts.

you said this
I'm sad. I'm sad to see you've been duped like so many into abandoning the truth
Click to expand...
the truth of the passage is that you should always walk the path of good. do good things, be a kind and gentle person. follow in the ways of jesus.
what you implied is that even though we are trying to live good lives just as jesus taught, that man has somehow become our judge, rather than god. we live a good life as jesus taught. jesus was not referring to a set of antiquated social customs instilled into the bible for no purpose other than social control. MAN IS CORRUPTABLE! how many times must i say that. GOD DID NOT WRITE THE BIBLE! MAN DID!
i pose a question...
are we straying from the path because we are not living good lives? or because we are not following the letter of the law from the bible?
 
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-xyjaZpFwfs&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-xyjaZpFwfs&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
 
something else i just thought up to highlight why we should not view the use the bible as the bottom line for right and wrong.
god freed the jews from slavery. this was whole moses speech, let my people go bla bla bla.
so on that precedent, no one person should be subject to another. sort of an all men created equal style of idea. god didnt free the men of israel, he freed everyone; men, woman and child alike. by that logic, men and woman stand on equal ground when it comes to injustice from fellow humans. so why is it that women are the property of men in the bible? why was mary so afraid? why is adultery a sin besides the broken bonds of trust and deceit? the bible clearly shows that slavery, or subjection of one person to anothers will against their own is a sin. so why does the bible also propagate the subjection of woman to men? why is sex before marriage so heinous? because the womans virginity is the prize. it is mans attempt to covet, that which is not his and used the bible to achieve that end.
its another clear contradiction of logic in the bible. another reason why man is corruptible and proof that god did not write the bible.
 
I must really get under fitch's skin. He must be really angry because he responded to a single post of mine twice. Here and http://www.sherdog.net/forums/showpost.php?p=18414542&postcount=6325.

Hello Angry Christians
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/atTSwau9fwM&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/atTSwau9fwM&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
 
let us assume that god is all powerful and benevolent. on that, god would also be a good creature who does good works.
if god wrote the bible, then the bible would contain only good works.
that leaves us with the only versions of the bible we have in our possession in modern times.
the bible is filled with stories of hate and iniquity, it is however also filled with stories of benevolence and kindness.
where does this leave us?

god wrote the bible but man has changed it

god wrote the bible and is not who we believed he was

man wrote the bible, perhaps with a little help from above

and #4, that god wrote the bible in fact and included everything for a reason. to determine who could judge right from wrong for the right reasons... in this case it doesnt matter whether god wrote it himself or allowed man to write it incorrectly in his stead

i refuse to accept #2.
#1,#3 and #4 are the only options left and all involve man. say it with me, man is corruptible. if you believe in a benevolent god, that proves the existence of the devil. when there is hot, there is cold. when there is something, there can be nothing as well. right and wrong, left and right. bla bla bla bla.
we cannot determine what part god had in the bible. that is impossible and would require a direct action from god to tell us. until that happens we must act on our own god given logic.
since i refuse to accept #2, i must believe that god is benevolent and that he wishes us to be in his image (ie benevolent). if that is the case, then the only parts of the bible that i can accept are parts that speak of forgiveness and kindness.
i also believe that we are judged only by god and god only. so for man to tell me what is right and what is wrong must be taken with the utmost care. i cannot accept that if joe schmoe says sex before marriage is a sin just because he said the bible said so. i already know who wrote the bible. i must look deeper. i already pointed in my previous post what the deeper questioning provided.
so if god is the only judge then any passage in the bible that says something is absolutely evil is suspect since god is the only judge. again, when one reads a passage in the bible that says "god says this" you must not confuse man putting words in god's mouth.
if one takes the bible as their reference to living a good life, they must do so with the utmost caution and remove all faith in man from the equation. faith in god and his benevolence is different than faith in the bible.
do you believe in god? or do you believe in the bible?

this is why i am agnostic. for all i know i could entirely wrong and someday i may find myself in the halls of valhalla with a no vacancy sign.

death and the afterlife scare me deeply, but i am not willing to throw my chances of heaven into the hands of corrupt men with bibles, not that easily.
 
RGJJ_matt said:
a lack of proof of a rival theory does not equate to proof of another theory. sorry, logic doesnt work like that.
so working on your idea that the likely hood of 1 nucleotide per year has not been observed in science, how does 3 billion in an instant make more sense?
Click to expand...
Well first off I was not attempting to prove God did it. I was pointing out how ridiculous the general theory of evolution is.

RGJJ_matt said:
that life force as you are calling it is more appropriately named bio-chemistry. good job trying to make a science sound mysterious. to answer your question, how does it keep working? well it probably has something to do with the constant intake of foods and the biological processes of digestion. but thats just hocus pocus anyways.
again, lack of total knowledge does not imply that you are right, it only implies that the scientific explanation isnt perfect. wow, ground breaking.
Click to expand...
Biochemistry is observational science, it deals with the how not the why. We know how it works, I'm saying why are they doing it?

"that's just hocus pocus"? Exactly. The whole basis for atheist/naturalist saying that ID is not scientific is that there is no observable God phenomena. Life is not observable?

RGJJ_matt said:
just because you do not understand the underlying principles does not mean they are incorrect. if you wanted to learn bio-chemistry, all you have to do is go to school and you will see the proof for yourself. if your willing to commit the time, you can understand.
talk about irony... what if physics and chemistry and all this mumbo jumbo voodoo magic was really how god did his good works in this universe?
do you think atoms are fucking made up? what about cells and bacteria? do you think science just made up some theories that sounded cool and just started looking for proof that they were right? science is based on observation of the natural world. we see with our own eyes what we study.
Click to expand...
I don't see your point on this part.

RGJJ_matt said:
my problem is that people are basing their view on the world on a book. if you knew the history of that book and what has been done it is name, i doubt you would take the book at face value.
Click to expand...
Oh sure the moronic Richard Dawkins arguement, Religion is responsible for killing people. No, wacko's kill people. Blaming religion is how they try to avoid taking responsibility for their actions.

RGJJ_matt said:
the great deluge was said to cover the entire earth. thats an emotional measurement if ever ive seen one. how would a person in those times know how big the earth was? you know what the earth was to that person? it was the distance his legs could carry him and his imagination. now ive got an imagination too, but ive traveled very long distances. so when i say the world was flooded, you damn well know its a big place that got flooded. when someone whos world is maybe 100 miles at best is flooded, well its probably not that big. its probably 20 miles at best. besides, once that flood happened, how would you know how far you actually traveled in your boat to verify any claims? stars? sorry its raining. compass and speed measurements? sorry that hocus pocus wasnt invented by science for quite a few years later. the biblical accounts of the creation are simply stories to fill in the blanks. if god intended us to be dumb as rocks, do you think al gore would have invented the internet?
Click to expand...
Well if there was a catastrophic global flood what would we find? Billions of dead things, buried in rock layers all over the world. And what do we find in the fossil record? Billions of dead things, buried in rock layers all over the world. It's funny reading fossil finds in the news from that perspective and seeing how many times they conclude that the animal "drowned", or was "buried in a mud pit", or they only find a few parts of the animal. Why? Because they were ripped to shreads and rapidly buried in a catastrophic flood!!
 
icepick said:
Did I say anything about carbon dating?

Continental drift rates are enough to debunk the 6,000 year ago theory. You are really reaching.
Click to expand...
It is commonly assumed the average rate is 5.7 cm per year. Which would date the earth @ 250 million years since the continents seperated. The problem with that theory is it assumes that rate was constant thoughout time. There is no source of information that confirms this assumption.
 
fitch said:
It is commonly assumed the average rate is 5.7 cm per year. Which would date the earth @ 250 million years since the continents seperated. The problem with that theory is it assumes that rate was constant thoughout time. There is no source of information that confirms this assumption.
Click to expand...
You moron. Check out the Hawaiian-Emperor Island chain. It is at least 75 million years old. A study of the formation of the Islands confirms a uniform continental drift rate. I'll explain.

Simply put, as the Pacific Plate slowly drifts over a hot spot, the Islands are formed.

PlumeModel.jpg




The continental drift rates correlate to 98% with the radio metric dating of the volcanic rocks.

volcano-age-hawaii.gif




This also correlates with the growth rates of the coral reefs, erosion of the reefs, radiometric dating of the reefs, erosion of the islands themselves, dispersal of species, and size of the islands. All these things fit together and point to an age of teh Island Chain of over 70 million years.

volcanicstages.gif




To top it all off, evidence of regular reversals of the Earth's magnetic field can be seen in the volcanic rocks, on different Islands. These reversals are typically thousands of years apart. According to your gay friends at AIG and ICR, all the reversals would have to happen on the same day. The evidence in the rocks on these islands proves that is impossible, as the reversals are in different layers, spread across thousands of miles.

Saying any one of these fields of study is off is one thing. But saying that a half dozens different fields of science, including about a dozen different areas of study with thousands of experiments and truckloads of research, which is all in nearly perfect accord with each other, are all incorrect (and incorrect together at the exact same rate), is absurd.


Here are some sources which confirm what I've just told you:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/313/5791/1281
http://www.mantleplumes.org/Hawaii.html
http://www.mantleplumes.org/Hawaii2.html
http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/hawaii/page07.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_Hawaiian_volcanoes
http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/acolvil/plates.html
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Sci...240.1737G
http://www.evcforum.net/RefLib/RadiometricDatingEvo.html
http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/volcano.html
http://www.geocities.com/earthhistory/reef.htm
http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/~kenhon/GEOL205/Chain/default.htm
http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/HCV/haw_formation.html
http://www.lermanet.com/exit/volcanos.html#2.1.6
http://mahi.ucsd.edu/Gabi/plume.html


Now if you're a normal, rational human being you will immediately abandon any theory that the earth is less than 75 million years old. Of course, the earth is much older than that. But this is just one easily understood example.
 
fitch said:
Biochemistry is observational science, it deals with the how not the why. We know how it works, I'm saying why are they doing it?
Click to expand...

No you said this:

fitch said:
Also, to atheists, what exactly is this "life force" phenomena that causes all these fundamental chemicals in our bodies to keep doing what they do?
Click to expand...

Fitch, do you know what an electron is?
 
Thanks for another great video!! This guy is awesome, did you see this video yet? priceless.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WPAC_cGVnUg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WPAC_cGVnUg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LeonardoBjj
Law California law banning most firearms in public is taking effect as the legal fight over it continues
2 3
Replies
55
Views
2K
oldshadow
oldshadow

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,091
Messages
55,467,181
Members
174,786
Latest member
plasterby

Share this page

Back
Top