IMO...there is a huge ..HUGE...difference between arguing over the possibility of a "creator" "god" "overseer" or whatever AND then going on to say your idea of the definition of a god is the correct one...If I were to concede to a Christian that there does exist a possibility for a creator...would the Christian concede that their version of the Creator is possibly incorrect??
i ran over that guy and killed him buttt im not really a murderer that chocolate cake is the same as that vanilla cake ................................... and you follow up the it takes more faith to be an athiest than a beleiver of god umm faith has nothing to do with religion... religion is earning a right to go to heaven and yes there are true born agains and false born again christians, a true christian stays away from any sinful behavior false ones sin like hell ur logic is flawed
The coke can didn't evolve...you just said said it was created by man...you didn't over come their argument...you just proved it whether you like it or not. Hung by your own words. Your arguments here are as concise as mud.
just an aside on that coke can, cause one thing i never see anyone address on that (it's like the watchmaker analogy & everyone notices one major flaw... everyone who uses these types of analogies forgets they're presenting non-bio examples) is that the process of a can of coke takes so many people i couldn't even count... from the digging up the aluminum (& that takes tools, oops, MORE people) to the inception of the recipe 2 the sale of the product. & whaddaya know, the watchmaker has ancestry
I have a question. I was very intrigued by you comment about the paint bucket. Because it is true, if it were put there and the wind blew, ur right right. No person created it. It was pure accident. But then..who put the bucket there in the first place?
How do you measure things that have a subjective value? Opinions are not necessarily facts, arguments or criticisms. Do all things that defy simplicity have a default of 'unknowable magic' ? Reason gets its' power by applying the reliable facts to expected conclusions. Kirk and Ray take positions where everything is top down; the large and final will always win; that's what I would call Divine conceit. Some people just know truth without any explanations,
With each evolution of the coke can you're conceding there was purpose or design. It was acted upon. Are you willing to give up that much ground?
If the universe has an impersonal beginning how then can man- a particular or separate part of the whole like a drop of water- have meaning, significance, purpose, personhood, consciousness. Morals are no more than situational ethics. How can these be in the particulars when absent from the whole from which they came?
8:25 Hmm.. A Rock. Right, the rock that's filled with remarkable human beings which "evolved" right? The humans that have eyes that cannot be re-made? The rock that is the only planet to have this advanced life on it? The "rock" that is placed in the right spot of the universe, with the right gravity, and the right systems, the perfect amounts of nececcary things to live.That's a pretty sweet rock there. Say that to the creator of the universe when you're kneeling before him, in heavenbeforehim.
@jackat777withgod Take the entire 30 seconds necessary to do a web search for "evolution of the eye." Then I want you to think about whether an ice cube tray just HAPPENS to be the right shape to produce the ice cubes that would come out of it or if the ice cubes form themselves according to the tray....that's how evolution works. There are trillions of stars each with many planets around them...one of them was BOUND to be in the right spot...at LEAST one.
@KingHeathen hey im just coming to apologize to you on the account of my actions some 5 months ago in calling you an idiot, it wasnt right of me and is not how i would like to be viewed... by anyone regardless of a difference in our beliefs...
and in respons to this... who is to say that this MASS-ENERGY wasnt God?
also, i like arguing.. but i cant make you believe what i believe in... regardless of what either one of us says, neither theory of ours can be disproven nor proven to a 100 percent
@waretard "neither theory of ours can be disproven nor proven to a 100 percent"
Can you disprove the tooth fairy exist? You can't nor you can. Does that make the tooth fairy real? Why should you believe until proven worng rather than disbelieve until proven right?
so i want to apologize for being, well ill mannered last time we spoke. i mean i charged into you and tried to force you to believe something.. in a way to force my religion on you and even by my own religion that is wrong... and like i have seen so many times.. it often forces others further away from the goal i am trying to achieve in... so i am just here to if anything apologize for my, lets call it ignorance, in the way i acted before...
@KingHeathen Right, and how do you suppose the reaction of decay can exist out of nothing (matter to energy and energy to matter) when it itself is dependant on its former state. nothing+nothing=somthing? The only thing that could start this reaction is SOMTHING, not nothing, that has existed outside of decay. Also fresh tissue was recently discovered on a t-rex femur showing it was only 20 yrs old. According to Darwin the T-Rex should look much different now, some people even say a chicken? o_O
@waretard According to the bible (assuming you are christian since you seems more likely to be one), in the beginning, "God created the heaven and the earth." Did it mention the stars, Mars, Jupiter? No it did not. How is it that you give credit to your God for shit that he did not make in the beginning?
@hangguy209 take into account when the beginning of the bible was interpreted. At the time we believed the earth to be flat and the planets were just viewed as other starts. The heavens were often called the stars and it says that God created the starts. And therefore by common logic that would also mean the planets from what we knew at the time. Its all an interpretation of a vision that God gave to one of the prophets. Quit weighing so much on old testament terminolgy my friend. As the times
@waretard All you proved was that these bronze age people believed so because of course they didn't research or couldn't understand the universe! To make more sense to humanity, they created this god figure to make everything simple! The ten commandments were in the OT as well as the NT. OT or not, it's the "word of god". Why should your interpretation count as god's? Telling me i make idiotic remark isn't calling me an idiot? Come on guy, don't pull that "love and peace" BS on me.
change, so do most moral values... in some countries even today it is not seen as wrong to kill other human beings, as it is immoral to us, it may not be to others... in the days of the roman empire it was not uncommon for a roman soldier to kill an innocent bystander. And yet it was hardly frowned upon at the time and in all, mostly understood. it wasnt morally incorrect to them as it would be for a cop to in todays terms randomly kill an innocent citizen. You have to take into account how old
the bible is and when it was interpreted to really understand how it was viewed. Dont make an idiotic remark without thinking and first researching... and no im not calling you an idiot. Im saying research something and actually think it through before you say it, otherwise you just seem illogical...
@KingHeathen I was just watching "The Atheist Experience" and it showed them having a discussion with Ray Comfort for close to an hour. It would be really cool if you had a discussion with Ray either in person or over the phone like that they did there. I remember Irategamer had an over the phone interview with a radio station that was close to 10 minutes long.
This ROCK that you say is just placed in the right spot as you say? - You are an idiot. A complete moron.
Any closer its too hot and any further its too cold right?
And so what? There are billions of other planets out there that have no life, ours was good enough for life to start, and this proves.... what? There are possibly millions of planets that are just right for life too!
@jackat777withgod dumbfuck of the month to you. Owls have better eyes then us.. using your logic.. god made.. our eyes.. but he loves owls more.. right
This is..... weak. Yes the "evolution" of the coke can took intel. You talk about how its not fair cuzz the coke can is still the same coke can. You then speak about how it took many cans over years. Then you talk about 1 cave, and seem to say it can evolve and be the same cave but the same can can't. Have you ever seen an accident make a complex work of art that actually looked like a real painting? Nope. I think you should start using you head bro.
1-The Coke can "evolved" in the sense that it changed over time with many small improvements over many different "generations" of cans. But the can IS NOT DNA based. It doesn't self-replicate cells or reproduce sexually. Organisms DO! Small changes happen in the DNA of those organisms and evolution can occur.
2-The cave IS NOT an example of evolution. It was an example of perceived DESIGN.
kirk camerom.was nothing but a teen idol on a tv show and a couple cheezy movies...and shows that he is a empty minded moron,who does not even listen to how stupid he sounds....another silver spoon fed idiot,that would be nowhere in the real world without money...
3:12 was very immature man. You just ruined your entire argument (which wasn't going anywhere and you were just flattering yourself) by being offensive and making it personal. I hope the truth of Jesus is revealed to you. Jesus loves you man!!
John 3:7 You Must Be Born Again, originalwriting.ie Use this book to share the gospel to unbelievers. Contains prophecy related topics concerning Israel and Christ. This book also speaks about spirit mediums and the false teaching of purgatory. Also covered are the scientific facts discovered in the bible long before modern science. This book, God willing, will help you win souls.
I love the argument at 4:30 to 5:55. "Do you really want to give up that much ground?" That is a nice one, because any creationist would argue like that. big fat SUBSCRIBE :) keep it up!
Let's just say that the bible doesn't promote a flat earth... It still proves nothing. And let's go one step futher and say it does prove the bible to be divinely inspired... It doesn't change the fact that your god is a cunt. That much is undeniable. Among all the ambiguous verses that talk of "then unknown" science, the verses describing your genocidal, egomaniacal tyrannical cunt in the sky are pretty clear in what they say.
3. He tries to compare the coke can to evolution, saying that it evolved over the years as we changed it. The problem is that he's basically giving an argument for there being a Creator that caused evolutionary changes. LOL He just contradicted his disbelief in God. Nice move, smart-guy. lol He assumes this makes Ray claim God caused evolution, but Ray never said that, nor would Ray arguing that the coke can example make him a believer in God compelled evolution. Again, what an idiot...
1-I don't believe things came from "nothing." You do...what did you god use to make the universe? Where did that material come from? He had to "poof" it here right? Out of NOTHING!
2-Pot, meet kettle.
3-Evolution says NOTHING to the non-existence of any gods...it merely discredits a literal account of Genesis, which only an idiot would believe.
No, you idiot. God is not "nothing". There was a transfer of energy. Matter is made up of energy at a foundational level. God is the source of all power/energy. There was a transfer from Him to the creation and things came into existence from this transfer of energy.
Yes, you do believe everything came from nothing. You once, irrationally, said that everything is not a creation. If something exists, it has a beginning and that is its creation point. Not an ounce of intelligence in your...
And you call ME an idiot? Find where I said "GOD is nothing"...I said "what did you god use to make the universe?" Are you following me? Should I type slower?
I told you, God can created everything out of His power. Everything comes from Him. Matter is energy at its base molecular make-up. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
Where does your power come from? You are designed to produce approximately 129 volts of energy to power your body. You can warm another person with the heat output your body produces, which is thermal energy. Your energy starts at a molecular level where everything is energy. Everything about how you are made is designed to produce energy. Now, when it comes to God, there must be a source of all energy, and He's it. It has to transfer from Him to this place to create things out of energy.
My power comes from the FOOD I eat. We convert food into energy. This is why your are warmest at your belly. It's the conversion of matter into energy.
Matter is made up of energy, smartguy. Your body produces energy with or without food, dim-wit. Ever head of a fast? If food were required for energy, we would die as soon as we had no food in our system. The body fully functions all on its own, but eventually, without food, it will not continue to function because it will no longer be able to get the components it needs to replentish what is uses. It eventually begins feeding on its fat and muscle tissures. No more stupidity please.
So you admit you were doing childish insults...I do not. I pointed out that "ONLY an idiot" would believe Genesis "literally"...I don't know that you do that and most likely you don't (not 100%)
PLUS It was in response to you having already called me an "idiot" to suggest to you that the pot shouldn't call the kettle black.
I think I got my point across, didn't I? So, what do you say...can we end your childish little game and act like adults? I'm in if you are.
Sorry, but that just wouldn't be any fun, now would it?
I believe the Genesis account 100%, as so many scientists, because if you actually spent some time and effort on creation science theory, you'd know how even if there were a big bang, the theory of relativity gives the ability for everything to be created in a matter of seconds, yet appear as if it's billions of years old due to the laws of physics constantly changing until everything balanced itself out.
And now, I'm done with you. I can't handle the lack of facts and constant illogical nature of every one of your arguments. I have never met someone so absolutely horrible at debating and trying to prove their case. This is absolutely pointless. You are as thick as they come and would never admit you were wrong even if it were completely obvious, because this isn't about truth. It's about your vendetta against God and religion. Have fun in your lonely little world of "stupid". lol Adios!
Say what you want, pot....but I'm no kettle. If what you say is true, that means you believe in talking snakes that used to have legs and a flat Earth with a sealed dome which CONTAIN the sun, moon, and stars within the atmosphere.
The funniest part is that you claim I lack facts to back up my arguments, yet never actually disagreed with any of them EXCEPT that "there is no god."
So on that....good riddence. Run along and play now.
Oh, good. Like an idiot, you replied. What's awesome is that right before you posted your message, you did a search on creationism and you must've found the most idiotic theory I've ever heard. In fact, you probably got it off an evolution blogger's website. LOL How stupid do you get? No actual Creation scientists believe that absurd theory you just posted. NONE of them thought the earth was flat. There is a passage in the Old Testament that proves they knew the earth was a sphere.
Now a circle isn't a sphere is it? Because if your dragging out that dead horse to beat it a little more your basically asking to be called stupid. I've heard many creationists say that a passage proves the bible right when it says circle not sphere, the bible is wrong if thats the one you want to try to bring up.
Wow, you really know nothing about the Bible nor history, do you? Are you even aware of how the idea that the earth is flat occured?? That idea didn't come around until people OUTSIDE of Israel got ahold of the Bible and misinterpretted certain figurative prophetic passages. This was something an idiot like you would have done back then due to lack of research. The Hebrews wrote all prophecy in a figurative poetic language of chiasm and bifids. (continuing in next post)
In the 5th century, Constantine eliminated Paganism and merged it into Christianity, corrupting all of it. Constantine and his idiot priests took passages that stated "4 courners of the earth" and assumed that meant the earth was flat. They, like you, didn't do their research by asking the Jews about Bifids and Chiasms and figurative prophetic language. "4 corners of the earth" was a saying they had. It meant "all of the earth", not 4 literal corners. All they had to do was ask the Jews.
The Thinking Atheist said pretty much the same thing as you. You should check out his videos, he is awesome too for taking his time to educate the masses.
If you had spent more than 5 minutes googling and reading, you would've found that the theory states that the earth was almost like it is today, but the water was under the crust (like a perfect nuclear reactor) causing the earth to heat itself, and there was some sort of canopy around the atmosphere which blocked the sun's shortwave radiation (we can prove how to make this, too, and plants grow REALLY well in those conditions without ever dying).
There is quite a bit of evidence of the existence of the things I just mentioned. For instance, in the top layer of the atmosphere, there is a heat sink with tons of ice crystals which allow the Aurora Borealis. It's insanely cold on this side of it, but insanely hot on the other side of it if the sun is shining. The ocean fault lines are all connected from a central burst point, and the Bible describs the flood waters like this: "the fountains of the deep broke forth".
Watch my series "Flat Earth according to the Bible" if you somehow think that the writers of the Bible magically thought differently than EVERYONE ELSE in the region at that time period.
As to your "passage" for a spherical Earth...a CIRCLE is NOT a SPHERE! I address that very verse in the series. It is one of the more damning passages for your entire position when you read it in context.
No, I will not be watching your series. I can't stand to watch you, actually. It's painful.
And any idiot knows prophecies are written in Hebrew poetic language, which is all figurative. The four corners of the earth and the circle of the earth are both figurative statements, smart-guy. They do not imply a flat earth. Four corners is an ancient Hebrew saying that means "the entire earth". The "circle" of the earth is a term used for a spherical object. Do some research for once in your life.
Because of the atmosphere, there was more airpressure, which means things can grow bigger, and that's why everything in the fossil record is larger. The large dinosaurs were wiped out during the flood, carried on the ark in baby form and hybernated (scientists say they can make any animal on the planet hybernate, even a hummingbird), after the flood which caused the layering (research it), the dinosaurs couldn't grow very big due to the loss of the added air-pressure.
....Are you joking? Seriously, please tell me your just messing with us. First off, it won't cause layering. Second, dinosaurs are not related to modern lizards very closely at all. Third how would one man get all of the animals to the ark which is too small to fit them?
You're just as bad as HeathenKing, saying something I state is wrong, and giving absolutely no proof. You atheists are suck idiots. You think just because you say something, it's golden, and you assume you know everything. How sad. Do some research, idiot. Reserach Mt. Saint Helens erruption. The ash caused approximately 360,000 years of layering in 2 weeks in standing waters. Standing flood waters do the same if sediments are available to be layered. The stupidity is strong with this one...
OMG - I said STANDING WATER makes layers when sediments are present in it that must settle. If you had ever cared to read the Bible, the flood lasted a year, which means there was standing water EVERYWHERE, and since the water came from below, as the Bible states, it kicked up sediments from underneath the crust... massive layering would occur. DO SOME RESEARCH ON CREATION SCIENCE!
Again, do you atheists do any good, genuine research?? Do some research on standing water and layering. I told you, at Mt. Saint Helens, when it errupted, within 2-3 weeks, the sediments it put into the air had settled into lakes in the area and created approximately 360,000 years worth of layering in the lake bottoms. Why? because that's what standing water does... it layers out sediments floating around in it.
So, during the flood, the Bible says the waters came from underneath, meaning they came through the crust and dragged a bunch of sediments with them as they spewed out at very high pressure due to the weight of the crust pressing down on them. When all the water was out, it was standing water for nearly a year as it very slowly drained into fault lines and sink holes. The currents in the waters ripped dinosaur skeletons apart, which is why you rarely find one whole.
As the dinosaur skeletons settled at the bottom of the ocean, more sediments would get kicked up and the currents would cause them to be covered up in the layers. This is why we absolutely do not find the same dinosaurs in the same layers worldwide, and that's why the geologic column, the way it is presented in textbooks, is different all over the world. The only place we can find a similar geologic column to the textbook model is in North Dakota.
It is also why we find fault lines (sink holes) with TONS of dinosaur bone everywhere, but no full skeletons. The water was draining back into the earth, pulling dinosaur bones with it, but they would settle beforehand and get covered and fossilized in no-time-flat. What scientists don't tell you is that the more moisture there is, the faster fossilization occurs. Why? Because moisture is the mechanism by which sediments replace the living matter to form fossils.
I was reading Yahoo News a couple of years ago and I read that scientists found a fossilized bird just outside their office which they had buried two years prior in the mud. They said it was fossilized exactly like a prehistoric pteradactyl. A few years back, a full T-Rex skeleton was discovered with soft-tissue and blood which had not yet fossilized. Soft-tissue only lasts a few thousand years. No matter how well it's preserved, except if it's frozen, which this was not, proving it was not old.
On top of that, we can track the wobble of the earth back to its origin, and it just happens to be exactly the time at which the flood is said to occur in the Bible. The flood was so massive, it caused the axis of the earth to shift, or some theorize that a meteorite hit the earth, creating the Gulf of Mexico, which caused the flood to start, because it caused the water under the crust to burst forth. There is tons more evidence, but I do not want to sit here for hours listing all of it.
The animals won't fit on the ark? Wow... you really don't do any research at all, do you? You just parrot what the other unresearched atheist idiots say. Every animal on the planet can be put into a hibernation state, according to scientists. Noah most likely took all the animal (dinosaurs included) on the ark in baby form and God put them into a hibernation state. No crap to clean up. No need to fee them. Pleanty of space for a HUGE ship.
Well, if there's a God that caused all of this, obviously, He said He brought them there in pairs. You do read, right? Do you actually research anything before you mouth-off about it? Just curious...
Ignorant much? There is tons of evidence. The layers, the fault lines which have TONS of dinosaur bones torn apart all around them where water was draining back into the earth (they call them dinosaur graveyards). We have larger animals in the fossil record which exist today in smaller forms like some sharks, crocodiles and tons of plants. We find ocean life fossils on the tops of mountains and we have 212 cultures on the planet that claim 8 of their ancestors survived the flood on a huge boat.
Actually, yes, there is proof of a God in a few areas. First of all, we have programming (information) in DNA cells, which means there's a programmer. Information doesn't just spawn out of nowhere. Also, matter cannot be created nor destroyed. Thus, since all things are made out of energy, the energy that created everything had to have come from an eternal source with no beginning. What, was everything just always here? How stupid is that? Makes no sense whatsoever. Multiplicity proves God too.
No, just no, Dna wasn't written down by Jebus. It came from Rna. Now I'm willing to say i don't know where matter and energy came from but i won't invoke a god who came from....? Explain that and I'll coincide this as a victory for you even though I never called it a discussion.
You realize that saying DNA came from RNA doesn't help your case any whatsoever, right? The RNA has programming in it, and thus, must have a programmer... Where did the information come from?? Who programmed it??
As matter goes, scientifically and philosophically, a creator is required. If something exists, it has a point of creation and a creator. Follow that train of logic backward and you must have a creator as the origin whom has no beginning and is powerful enough to transfer energy.
People with multiple personality disorder, having been raised in all parts of the world, all see the same things in a separate world (the spiritual realm). The different personalities actually live and interact with one another there. regardless of whether they've heard of God, Jesus, angels or demons, they see them all in that world. Jesus usually has holes in His hands and shines, the angels all shine and the demons are pretty dark and scary looking. How do ALL of them see the same things?
Dude, we're talkin' about the existence of God. If there is a God, don't you think He could sustain the babies for a year if He wanted to? lol The only other school of thought on this is that the animals would hibernate for a season at a time, wake, eat a TON of vegitation grown on the ark, then hibernate again for a season till the year was up. We know there must have been food on the ark or the animals would not have survived once they left the ship after the flood.
then why bother with the flood to begin with? Why go through the trouble of having to gather all the animals? Why not just poof everyone dead or poof new animals?
Stop making excuses for an obviously bullshit story. I have a series on the flood if you want to see how many other problems there are with it.
Had you done some research, you'd know why the flood was necessary. It completely changed the dynamics of the preflood world so that the world was not such a paradise anymore. That's key. Mankind's sin ran so rampant because they were living in a world where they were using 100% of their brain, they could heal exceptionally quick, they were very strong and intelligent. Their experience of life was awesome. Like many rich people, when you have everything, you don't need God.
Where are the bones of these super people? How is it that they were so much better than us but they were unable to escape something the human race now would have no trouble getting through, although numbers would be lower.
Well, if you'll do your research, you'll find that they have found many mines in the US where the skeletons were around 9 feet tall on average. During the flood, the people must've gotten trapped in certain mines, because there have been a few where the skeletons are quite large. Also, when they untombed the mummies under the Great Pyramid on New Years Eve 1999-2000 on TV, the skeletons were 11 feet tall. They found the equivalent of vegitable powered lightbulbs down there too. Smart people...
To take away their paradise and the world that kept them from getting sick, weak and all the other things in life that make life a bit miserable at times was to take away their crutch. Once you take away those things, mankind falls into depression and sorrow and things of that nature... then they discover they are weak and need God. That is when they seek Him. That's why the flood was necessary.
And you're just hilarious when you say you'll show the many "other" problems there are with the flood. LOL "Other" implies you have just discussed a problem. There is no problem with the animals on the ark nor how they survived. It is possible for them to survive on an ark for a year in hibernation. They lived 10 times longer than us because of the awesome preflood world they grew up and lived in. Their bodies were much more resillient and sustainable than animals today in this environment.
OK, your theology is severely lacking in continuity here. So god changed the world so that it wasn't a paradise any more...and this was for WHO exactly? HE KILLED EVERYONE! He saves Noah and his family only to make them stay on a magic boat for a year then to drop them off on a new crappier world.
And you didn't solve the problem with the animals. You merely invoked "magic" to fix a serious problem yet ignore that God could have simply poofed the planet into its crappier state.
You clearly don't read the Bible. In 1 Peter 3:19 we're told that Jesus went to the people in prison (hell) from the time before the flood to save them. While you may think it was cruel to kill all of these people who were causing horrible sins upon each other, you neglect to realize that Jesus saved those people so they could be in heaven with Him, and when He returns, they will be given new bodies here on earth, on the new earth (similar to the old perfect world) and they will be happy.
Then why put them in hell in the first place? An omnibenevolent god wouldn't want his children to suffer, yet you say he lets us suffer forever for very small crimes. Your god would be the ultimate monster if he exists.
You really haven't a clue about why God has to do things the way He does, do you? God didn't put them there, smartguy. They chose to go there. What you don't realize is that everyone has a choice. God made it easy for us to be saved. He did all the hard work. He came and died for our sins so that our performance doesn't save us, but instead, His sacrifice saves us. All we have to do is sincerely repent and ask forgiveness to be saved. That's it. It is OUR CHOICE, not His. That's love, not hate.
There was nothing magical about the boat. They found it in the Ararat Mountains. It was exactly the length stated in the Bible, and it had iron ribs. Yes, the Bible spoke of iron workers before the flood (these were very smart people). The boat also had a moon pool in the middle so it would not crack in half over waves, and it had what I believe are called dregg stones which lower its center of gravity so it is nearly impossible to capsize. The ship was amazingly built.
And yes, I explained the animal issues in posts to G11. Animals and man lived in a world where men and animals and plants lived 10 times as long as they do today. Their bodies were amazingly well designed. They could hibernate far longer than they do today. There is also the possibility that they woke up from hibernation a few times throughout the year to eat. They could grow food on the ark just fine. It wasn't raining for the entire year.
Show me one god damn bone that shows a man of 600, how would plants survive? Fish survive? How do you do all that on a boat that doesn't fit the animals alone? Where is your proof that this happened?
Wow, you would be quite impressive if you could produce a fossilized bone AND tell the mans age. LOL Fossilzed bones are made up of sediments. None of the original living matter still exists in them... just a sediment replica. You cannot tell how old someone was by a fossilized bone. Did you not know this? And you're just down right stupid if you can't figure out that that boat was the size of an aircraft carrier with many many decks. Go to an aircraft carrier. They're massive.
Besides the fact that the ark could easily hold all of the animals in infant form, the Noah's Ark they found had dregg stones. No boat on the planet has ever needed or wanted dregg stones, because they destroy the purpose of a boat, which is getting from point A to point B. However, Noah's Ark was designed strictly to stay afloat, not to go anywhere. The dregg stones it has are unique to it. No other boat on the planet will have them. As for fish, why the hell would they be on the ark?? lol
@cephyr13 wow just tell me how did Noah say get all of the infents, not just to the areas he lived but to areas that were say the Americas which were not discovered yet
Not enough space to type this in one message... Sorry. Preflood, the land was above the water, and there were only rivers and maybe one ocean at the bottom of the globe. The animals began near the Garden of Eden, most likely, where Noah was, and after the flood, migrated to places like South America. God brought them in pairs according to the story.
@cephyr13 Most animals couldn't survival a migration of thousands and thousands of miles across varying terrain. Flood migration theory debunked. Well, its not a theory. More like, unsubstantiated dribble thought to be a hypothesis.
@DirectInjected - Why would they migrate all at once? Animals would have stayed where they were and grown their populations and very slowly migrated over a long period of time after the terrain had regrown to support them.
Does no one understand that Carbon 14 is gone after 100,000 years due to its short half-life? We find carbon 14 in every layer of the earth. Clearly, those layers can't be over 100,000 years old. That's why carbon dating isn't accurate past 70,000 years.
@cephyr13 Close, but you're missing a chunk of the picture. Carbon-14 does decay, leading to inaccuracies. However, Carbon 14 is CREATED through the radioactive decay of other elements. This is how Carbon-14 is present uniformly. And it would be rather difficult for jaguars to get from Mount Ararat to South America...one hell of a swim?
@DirectInjected You should do some more research on your claim. Carbon 14 can ONLY be formed in the upper atmosphere where cosmic rays can hit the atoms and cause them to break apart. When a neutron collides with a Nitrogen 14 atom, it becomes Carbon 14. This ONLY happens in the upper atmosphere (please, look it up yourself). It never happens in the layers of the earth or even the lower atmosphere due to the absence of cosmic rays needed.
@DirectInjected Also, before you try to debate a theory, you may want to research it first. In flood theory, most water after the flood was frozen in the icecaps and the icecaps came down as far as the middle of the United States. We didn't have water in the oceans for quite so time after the flood, about 400 years according to the Bible. Anything could cross the oceans since the oceans had not yet formed. And it took a long time for the animals to migrate all the way to South America.
@cephyr13 O_O WHAT?! You think the entire planet was devoid of OCEANS for 400 years? Seriously? And you think that this massive amount of water that covers 75% of the Earth's surface somehow all drew together in MASSIVE ice caps that have since melted to the point they are now? I don't even think Kent Hovind said anything that stupid! (OK, maybe he did.)
@KingHeathen Wow, you guys really should research theories before you try to discredit them. You know nothing about creation theory. All the major Young Earth Creationist organizations believe that the flood caused the ice age with a massive climate change, and most of the flood waters were frozen. They also believe nearly all the water came from underneath the crust (the creation story says that as well as the flood account). Please, do some research for a change...
@KingHeathen What I find entertaining is that you conveniently skipped over the fact that I just disproved an old earth conclusively by the presence of carbon 14. lol That's funny. By the way, Directinjected fails to realize that if carbon 14 could be created in objects by any other means than the one I described, it would invalidate all carbon dating, and that would mean scientists are just complete idiots for trying to use it in the first place. Again... please do some research.
@cephyr13 Sorry it took so long to reply, I've been busy. And you're trying to act smart, but it's not working so well. Carbon-14 is also created when carbon is in close contact with uranium, forming ratios of C14 and C12. And since this process does exist, your dating theory is blown out the window. Why? Because the 100k years of decay underwent by the carbon-14 started upon it's creation. What does that mean? We can measure how old it is, you guessed it, through ratios of it's decay products.
@DirectInjected You, sire, are not trying to act smart, and you're succeeding. Again, if something has carbon 14 in it, after 100k yrs, it would all be gone. The only way, by your theory, that the carbon 14 still exists, is by uranium coming in contact with carbon creating more carbon 14. We find carbon 14 everywhere in every layer. So you're saying there's uranium in every layer? lol Sorry... that's not the case, friend.
@cephyr13 Sire? Old english? Don't extrapolate what you don't know. I do not deny the formation of carbon-14 through atmospheric radiation. Uranium coming into contact with carbon is one of many methods. And yes, I'm saying that there's either uranium OR radioactive carbon dioxide in every layer. Radioactive CO2 is created when a carbon-14 becomes carbon dioxide, which can then dissolve in oceans.
@DirectInjected And let's say uranium is everywhere in the layers, as it would have to be by your theory - that would mean that uranium caused the creation of carbon 14 in the objects we carbon date but it would be long after they died because the carbon 14 is being created anew in them after death which would give completely inaccurate dates. If that were all true, no scientists in their right mind would use carbon dating. lol This makes absolutely no sense. I'm being logical, not smart.
@cephyr13 Again, I never said uranium was in every layer. The dates would be off if the dated item were in proximity to uranium. However, for things that are not often exposed to uranium (living things for example), the carbon-14 that is dissolved from the atmosphere allows accurate dating in a relative sense. Otherwise, you'd be claiming that we can't tell time because we didn't know the the time when time itself was created. The dating is relative, considering that the atoms existed prior.
@DirectInjected The whole reason carbon 14 dating is supposedly accurate is because the only way things absorb it is through breathing and it breaks down when they die and no more builds up because they're not breathing anymore. Any new carbon introduced would throw off the numbers. Also, the ratio of carbon 12 to carbon 14 would totally depend on the atmosphere since the atmosphere determines how much carbon one breathes in and that determines the ratio.
@DirectInjected Without knowing the original ratios, we can't properly date things by c12 - c14 ratios. And, even if we could properly date them, the presence of c14 shows that they are definitely less than 100k yrs old because c14 is still present. And by your uranium theory, if there's c14 in the objects (which there is in nearly everything in the layers of the earth) then uranium corrupted them and c14 dating is useless for accuracy. lol Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense...
@cephyr13 Making strawmen out of my arguments just shows you're desperate. What you just said is nonsensical. Uranium would not corrupt things it isn't in contact with. When I die, assuming I'm not buried in a uranium mine, the isotopes of carbon in my body do allow me to be dated accurately, through atmospheric processes. Presence of c-14 doesn't require a source of uranium, but you'd know that if you weren't retarded.
@cephyr13 Have you ever seen topographical scans of the oceans? You're going to tell me, with a strait face, that a populations of jaguars crossed from Turkey to South America. Through terrain more mountainous than the Rockies, thousands of feet lower than the surrounding continents, and without sources for food. Unless you're going to claim that prey migrated at the same time, and the plants had grown up to feed them? Please, you're just deluding yourself.
@DirectInjected Animals crossed the oceans during the ice age that happened right after the flood. The glaciers were easier to cross than the mountainous terrain. Humans were doing the same thing at the same time I'm sure, killing animals for food on the way, leaving dead carcuses... I'm sure the animals were killing each other on the way over. I'd imagine they crossed during the time the ice had receeded up near Alaska and Russia.
@cephyr13 Finally, the flood crossing fallacy. Mount Ararat is in Turkey, supposedly. You'd like to tell me that a jaguar, for example, crossed from Turkey, through Russia (one of the most hostile, cold environments on Earth), across Alaska, and down through Canada and America to finally reach Mexico and South America? All this without dying out? And in 400 years?! I hardly need to refute your point. Jaguars die in the cold. Therefore, by your theory, jaguars shouldn't exist.
@DirectInjected Basically, if they crossed up around Alaska, they would have plenty of food growing on their way up to the bridge across the ocean, and plenty on the other side, a little south of the bridge. I'm sure many died trying to cross before the time and terrain was optimal.
@cephyr13 I have already told you repeatedly. You don't listen. You are done posting here. I gave you plenty of chances. Go post your novels on your own page now.
volume of the ark versus volume of the animals, the boat would've been unable to carry two of all of the bugs on earth, let alone two of every animal.
Now I know you're full of crap. First of all, you cannot calculate the average volume for each animal, because you don't know what the average volume of each animal would be, nor do you know how many animals were taken on the ark. lol Secondly, you have no clue how many decks there were. If you actually did the math, you could easily post it in here for us to see. So, let's see it! If you don't post it, everyone will know you're a liar and there will be no more need to respond to your posts.
Again... no research on your part... Yes, modern day lizards have quite a bit in common with dinosaurs. They are "reptiles". That should be your first clue, smart-guy. And we have a lizard on the planet today which is the spitting image of a triceratops, but he's just a LOT smaller than the ones we find in the fossil record, but that's not surprise since the plants and animals we find in the fossil record are huge in the past, but smaller today... I hope you never had kids... That would be sad.
No, not even close.. not at all. The lizard you're talking about has three horns but thats the end of the similarities. where are the leg structures? the lizards legs are very different from a triceretops'. Now where is your proof that you can make them bigger with more pressure?
Oh, really? Please, by all means, why don't you tell me the name of the lizard of which I speak. I mean, I'm certain you are smart enough to know the exact lizard I'm talking about, because you seem like such a bright individual. And when you name that lizard, we'll find a picture of him and compare it to a triceratops so we can compare their legs, spines, tales, heads, etc.. Whether you comply or not, you've just put yourself into a very bad situation where you'll come out looking stupid.
Produce the name of the lizard and we'll put them side-by-side and compare skeletons. You're going strictly off a quick picture you've seen on a program and never thought to go look at the skeletons side-by-side?? That's called lazy and a lack of research. Why don't you actually learn the creation model and flood theory fully to see how it all fits together if you actually want to debate it and accuse it of absurdity? Then you won't get pwned so badly in debates like this...
You are more than welcome to comment on my videos and repeat Kent Hovind's already debunked pseudoscience if you like. But I need you to try to limit your responses to 1-2 text boxes at a time. When you post a novel like you did here, it pushes all the other comments down and makes it harder for others to find their conversations. If you feel the need to post this much at once, do it as a PM to the person you are talking to.
I believe I just said I "could" go on for hours, but I won't, meaning I don't care to continue posting tons of comments. And very little of Kent Hovind's evidences have been "debunked" nor is it pseudo-science. All that has been done is other creation scientists have asked him to stop using certain evidences in his seminars because it has been shown that those evidences are not very good arguments anymore and therefore give ammo to people like you to claim it's absurd. Get your facts straight.
And besides, I'm sure you don't care for someone like myself to keep making you look like an idiot as well. And since I don't care to waste my time on people not listening, I'll gladly stop posting here. Have fun.
My facts are plenty straight. And Hovind IS A JOKE! Watch Thunderf00t's "Why do people laugh at creationist" video and see how many times he destroys Hovind with the most basic scientific info that he should have learned IN HIGH SCHOOL!
And do not flatter yourself into thinking that you are making ANYONE (other than yourself) look like an idiot with what you've posted.
Finally, I VERY CLEARLY said you are welcome to post it just not in mass like that.
Heathen, I'm amazed this guy doesn't get under your skin. He's trying to butcher science and send us back to the dark ages and your all calm and everything, wow.
ME butchering science?? OMG. You're the one that said DNA programming came from RNA, not even realizing you didn't explain where the RNA's programming came from! LOL That's like saying one program wrote another program all on its own, but never explaining who wrote the first program! How stupid can you be??
There's nothing "dark ages" about what I've said. I've advocated GOOD science the entire time. You are making absurd arguments about the "dark ages" that make no sense whatsoever.
When it takes me 10 seconds to see that they're so different it's not really much of an argument. Now, when one has legs for tree climbing which bend at the knee to such an angle that it would make a dinosaur break bones along with the fact that one has hoof like feet and the other hand like your argument falls apart.
Then you're looking at the wrong lizard... Post links to the pictures of this lizard, buddy. Shouldn't be a problem to prove you're right if you show pictures, eh?? Bring it on! Do some "research" for a change and get me some pictures. lol
Now that I've seen your sad researching skills, I can see why you never post any actual facts about evolution. You obviously don't know many, and if you post them, you'd be disproven by people like me that actually DO research properly for years and years instead of a few minutes. What's great, though, is that apart from all of those facts, you still cannot come up with a viable theory of what created matter or how it all got here since everything MUST come from something. It's sad, really.
IMO...there is a huge ..HUGE...difference between arguing over the possibility of a "creator" "god" "overseer" or whatever AND then going on to say your idea of the definition of a god is the correct one...If I were to concede to a Christian that there does exist a possibility for a creator...would the Christian concede that their version of the Creator is possibly incorrect??
Metamorphosis33 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
180movie.com
33minute documentary.
watch for free
rom116rom 4 months ago
i ran over that guy and killed him buttt im not really a murderer that chocolate cake is the same as that vanilla cake ................................... and you follow up the it takes more faith to be an athiest than a beleiver of god umm faith has nothing to do with religion... religion is earning a right to go to heaven and yes there are true born agains and false born again christians, a true christian stays away from any sinful behavior false ones sin like hell ur logic is flawed
emporroll134 4 months ago
The coke can didn't evolve...you just said said it was created by man...you didn't over come their argument...you just proved it whether you like it or not. Hung by your own words. Your arguments here are as concise as mud.
jamessremos 6 months ago
i wonder if u realize how dumb u sound.
nicwright09 7 months ago
IGNORANT.
SarahFilipina 7 months ago
man the faiths not about guilt but God's love. people don't know they need it and Ray just trying to show them they do. and why.
flippinburger777 8 months ago
just an aside on that coke can, cause one thing i never see anyone address on that (it's like the watchmaker analogy & everyone notices one major flaw... everyone who uses these types of analogies forgets they're presenting non-bio examples) is that the process of a can of coke takes so many people i couldn't even count... from the digging up the aluminum (& that takes tools, oops, MORE people) to the inception of the recipe 2 the sale of the product. & whaddaya know, the watchmaker has ancestry
GodsArePeopleToo 10 months ago
I have a question. I was very intrigued by you comment about the paint bucket. Because it is true, if it were put there and the wind blew, ur right right. No person created it. It was pure accident. But then..who put the bucket there in the first place?
imaorilyluvr12 10 months ago
You better turn from you'r sins before you end up in HELL!
Blueboy9191 10 months ago
How do you measure things that have a subjective value? Opinions are not necessarily facts, arguments or criticisms. Do all things that defy simplicity have a default of 'unknowable magic' ? Reason gets its' power by applying the reliable facts to expected conclusions. Kirk and Ray take positions where everything is top down; the large and final will always win; that's what I would call Divine conceit. Some people just know truth without any explanations,
granddad2002 11 months ago
Lmao How do you reason with guy who's name tag "king Heathen" He's proud of his ignorance, only God can crack that shell, why waste your time.
iamspid3rman 1 year ago
@KH Hope you had a merry Solstice.
With each evolution of the coke can you're conceding there was purpose or design. It was acted upon. Are you willing to give up that much ground?
If the universe has an impersonal beginning how then can man- a particular or separate part of the whole like a drop of water- have meaning, significance, purpose, personhood, consciousness. Morals are no more than situational ethics. How can these be in the particulars when absent from the whole from which they came?
campowt 1 year ago
this dude is proving he has no idea what he's talking about lol he confuses himself!!! (x
waretard 1 year ago
8:25 Hmm.. A Rock. Right, the rock that's filled with remarkable human beings which "evolved" right? The humans that have eyes that cannot be re-made? The rock that is the only planet to have this advanced life on it? The "rock" that is placed in the right spot of the universe, with the right gravity, and the right systems, the perfect amounts of nececcary things to live.That's a pretty sweet rock there. Say that to the creator of the universe when you're kneeling before him, in heavenbeforehim.
jackat777withgod 1 year ago
@jackat777withgod Take the entire 30 seconds necessary to do a web search for "evolution of the eye." Then I want you to think about whether an ice cube tray just HAPPENS to be the right shape to produce the ice cubes that would come out of it or if the ice cubes form themselves according to the tray....that's how evolution works. There are trillions of stars each with many planets around them...one of them was BOUND to be in the right spot...at LEAST one.
KingHeathen 1 year ago
@KingHeathen Hey smarts,
well then how's the rock get there dork. how'd the stars get there? where'd it all come from (x just wondering... God Bless
waretard 1 year ago
@waretard How did you god get there? (x just wondering...godless.
KingHeathen 1 year ago
@KingHeathen God is infinite, therefore always there, no beginning no end. Unlike everything else lol obviously. God Bless
waretard 1 year ago
@waretard I figured you would say as much...now let's look at what science has proven:
MASS-ENERGY can not be destroyed nor created. In other words, it's always there, no beginning no end.
Godless.
KingHeathen 1 year ago 5
@KingHeathen hey im just coming to apologize to you on the account of my actions some 5 months ago in calling you an idiot, it wasnt right of me and is not how i would like to be viewed... by anyone regardless of a difference in our beliefs...
and in respons to this... who is to say that this MASS-ENERGY wasnt God?
also, i like arguing.. but i cant make you believe what i believe in... regardless of what either one of us says, neither theory of ours can be disproven nor proven to a 100 percent
waretard 8 months ago
Comment removed
hangguy209 8 months ago
Comment removed
hangguy209 8 months ago
@waretard "neither theory of ours can be disproven nor proven to a 100 percent"
Can you disprove the tooth fairy exist? You can't nor you can. Does that make the tooth fairy real? Why should you believe until proven worng rather than disbelieve until proven right?
hangguy209 8 months ago
so i want to apologize for being, well ill mannered last time we spoke. i mean i charged into you and tried to force you to believe something.. in a way to force my religion on you and even by my own religion that is wrong... and like i have seen so many times.. it often forces others further away from the goal i am trying to achieve in... so i am just here to if anything apologize for my, lets call it ignorance, in the way i acted before...
waretard 8 months ago
i also apologize for any bad grammer or spelling mistakes, it is very late and so, much harder for me to concentrate on my writing...
waretard 8 months ago
@KingHeathen Right, and how do you suppose the reaction of decay can exist out of nothing (matter to energy and energy to matter) when it itself is dependant on its former state. nothing+nothing=somthing? The only thing that could start this reaction is SOMTHING, not nothing, that has existed outside of decay. Also fresh tissue was recently discovered on a t-rex femur showing it was only 20 yrs old. According to Darwin the T-Rex should look much different now, some people even say a chicken? o_O
truth2350 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@waretard According to the bible (assuming you are christian since you seems more likely to be one), in the beginning, "God created the heaven and the earth." Did it mention the stars, Mars, Jupiter? No it did not. How is it that you give credit to your God for shit that he did not make in the beginning?
hangguy209 8 months ago
Comment removed
hangguy209 8 months ago
@hangguy209 take into account when the beginning of the bible was interpreted. At the time we believed the earth to be flat and the planets were just viewed as other starts. The heavens were often called the stars and it says that God created the starts. And therefore by common logic that would also mean the planets from what we knew at the time. Its all an interpretation of a vision that God gave to one of the prophets. Quit weighing so much on old testament terminolgy my friend. As the times
waretard 8 months ago
@waretard All you proved was that these bronze age people believed so because of course they didn't research or couldn't understand the universe! To make more sense to humanity, they created this god figure to make everything simple! The ten commandments were in the OT as well as the NT. OT or not, it's the "word of god". Why should your interpretation count as god's? Telling me i make idiotic remark isn't calling me an idiot? Come on guy, don't pull that "love and peace" BS on me.
hangguy209 8 months ago
@hangguy209 hey man i was talking to the dude who posted the vid. not you man but iight w/e..
waretard 7 months ago
change, so do most moral values... in some countries even today it is not seen as wrong to kill other human beings, as it is immoral to us, it may not be to others... in the days of the roman empire it was not uncommon for a roman soldier to kill an innocent bystander. And yet it was hardly frowned upon at the time and in all, mostly understood. it wasnt morally incorrect to them as it would be for a cop to in todays terms randomly kill an innocent citizen. You have to take into account how old
waretard 8 months ago
the bible is and when it was interpreted to really understand how it was viewed. Dont make an idiotic remark without thinking and first researching... and no im not calling you an idiot. Im saying research something and actually think it through before you say it, otherwise you just seem illogical...
waretard 8 months ago
@KingHeathen
So why don't the other planets, like Jupiter, have aliens living on them? Wouldn't some creatures have "Evolved" to fit that "Ice tray" so to speak?
Tuth9 4 months ago
@KingHeathen I was just watching "The Atheist Experience" and it showed them having a discussion with Ray Comfort for close to an hour. It would be really cool if you had a discussion with Ray either in person or over the phone like that they did there. I remember Irategamer had an over the phone interview with a radio station that was close to 10 minutes long.
Steveman27 2 months ago
@jackat777withgod
What an ignorant git you are.
This ROCK that you say is just placed in the right spot as you say? - You are an idiot. A complete moron.
Any closer its too hot and any further its too cold right?
And so what? There are billions of other planets out there that have no life, ours was good enough for life to start, and this proves.... what? There are possibly millions of planets that are just right for life too!
You are so ignorant, its painful
FatRakoon 1 year ago
@jackat777withgod dumbfuck of the month to you. Owls have better eyes then us.. using your logic.. god made.. our eyes.. but he loves owls more.. right
RayRai8262 1 year ago
@jackat777withgod how can you say the only planet with advanced life on it? we havent even seen more than 2% of the universe.
usmcmoss0321 1 year ago
This is..... weak. Yes the "evolution" of the coke can took intel. You talk about how its not fair cuzz the coke can is still the same coke can. You then speak about how it took many cans over years. Then you talk about 1 cave, and seem to say it can evolve and be the same cave but the same can can't. Have you ever seen an accident make a complex work of art that actually looked like a real painting? Nope. I think you should start using you head bro.
jajajajajake 1 year ago
@jajajajajake Wow....you missed the entire point.
1-The Coke can "evolved" in the sense that it changed over time with many small improvements over many different "generations" of cans. But the can IS NOT DNA based. It doesn't self-replicate cells or reproduce sexually. Organisms DO! Small changes happen in the DNA of those organisms and evolution can occur.
2-The cave IS NOT an example of evolution. It was an example of perceived DESIGN.
You clearly didn't follow the discussion at all.
KingHeathen 1 year ago
kirk camerom.was nothing but a teen idol on a tv show and a couple cheezy movies...and shows that he is a empty minded moron,who does not even listen to how stupid he sounds....another silver spoon fed idiot,that would be nowhere in the real world without money...
chucka59 1 year ago
3:12 was very immature man. You just ruined your entire argument (which wasn't going anywhere and you were just flattering yourself) by being offensive and making it personal. I hope the truth of Jesus is revealed to you. Jesus loves you man!!
Drumr4Jesus 1 year ago
Your interpretation of being "owned" is in you own mind. From an outside prospective you are only impressing yourself.
drjackflash 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
John 3:7 You Must Be Born Again, originalwriting.ie Use this book to share the gospel to unbelievers. Contains prophecy related topics concerning Israel and Christ. This book also speaks about spirit mediums and the false teaching of purgatory. Also covered are the scientific facts discovered in the bible long before modern science. This book, God willing, will help you win souls.
YouMustBeBornAgain1 1 year ago
"Blather, blather...blah...blah...and, oh yeah - BLATHER!"
You're funny!
defendingthegospel1 1 year ago
the way of the master is awesome!
iamsupertoad 1 year ago
You confuse evolution with adaptation. Know the difference.
zigfoyd40 1 year ago
I love the argument at 4:30 to 5:55. "Do you really want to give up that much ground?" That is a nice one, because any creationist would argue like that. big fat SUBSCRIBE :) keep it up!
Holgmeister 2 years ago
Oh, and Heathen, Einsten was a deist (you were right that he certainly was no christian).
And I think your videos have been votebotted D=
infectingthecrypts 2 years ago
Cephyr: you suck.
Let's just say that the bible doesn't promote a flat earth... It still proves nothing. And let's go one step futher and say it does prove the bible to be divinely inspired... It doesn't change the fact that your god is a cunt. That much is undeniable. Among all the ambiguous verses that talk of "then unknown" science, the verses describing your genocidal, egomaniacal tyrannical cunt in the sky are pretty clear in what they say.
infectingthecrypts 2 years ago
3. He tries to compare the coke can to evolution, saying that it evolved over the years as we changed it. The problem is that he's basically giving an argument for there being a Creator that caused evolutionary changes. LOL He just contradicted his disbelief in God. Nice move, smart-guy. lol He assumes this makes Ray claim God caused evolution, but Ray never said that, nor would Ray arguing that the coke can example make him a believer in God compelled evolution. Again, what an idiot...
cephyr13 2 years ago
1-I don't believe things came from "nothing." You do...what did you god use to make the universe? Where did that material come from? He had to "poof" it here right? Out of NOTHING!
2-Pot, meet kettle.
3-Evolution says NOTHING to the non-existence of any gods...it merely discredits a literal account of Genesis, which only an idiot would believe.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
No, you idiot. God is not "nothing". There was a transfer of energy. Matter is made up of energy at a foundational level. God is the source of all power/energy. There was a transfer from Him to the creation and things came into existence from this transfer of energy.
Yes, you do believe everything came from nothing. You once, irrationally, said that everything is not a creation. If something exists, it has a beginning and that is its creation point. Not an ounce of intelligence in your...
cephyr13 2 years ago
And you call ME an idiot? Find where I said "GOD is nothing"...I said "what did you god use to make the universe?" Are you following me? Should I type slower?
KingHeathen 2 years ago
I told you, God can created everything out of His power. Everything comes from Him. Matter is energy at its base molecular make-up. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
cephyr13 2 years ago
And where does his "power" come from? If he uses it to make matter, is he then less powerful?
And please stop with the childish insults...it only serves to make you look worse.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
Where does your power come from? You are designed to produce approximately 129 volts of energy to power your body. You can warm another person with the heat output your body produces, which is thermal energy. Your energy starts at a molecular level where everything is energy. Everything about how you are made is designed to produce energy. Now, when it comes to God, there must be a source of all energy, and He's it. It has to transfer from Him to this place to create things out of energy.
cephyr13 2 years ago
My power comes from the FOOD I eat. We convert food into energy. This is why your are warmest at your belly. It's the conversion of matter into energy.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
Matter is made up of energy, smartguy. Your body produces energy with or without food, dim-wit. Ever head of a fast? If food were required for energy, we would die as soon as we had no food in our system. The body fully functions all on its own, but eventually, without food, it will not continue to function because it will no longer be able to get the components it needs to replentish what is uses. It eventually begins feeding on its fat and muscle tissures. No more stupidity please.
cephyr13 2 years ago
You ask me to stop childish insults when you are doing the same thing? Hmmm... double standard, eh?
cephyr13 2 years ago
So you admit you were doing childish insults...I do not. I pointed out that "ONLY an idiot" would believe Genesis "literally"...I don't know that you do that and most likely you don't (not 100%)
PLUS It was in response to you having already called me an "idiot" to suggest to you that the pot shouldn't call the kettle black.
I think I got my point across, didn't I? So, what do you say...can we end your childish little game and act like adults? I'm in if you are.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
Sorry, but that just wouldn't be any fun, now would it?
I believe the Genesis account 100%, as so many scientists, because if you actually spent some time and effort on creation science theory, you'd know how even if there were a big bang, the theory of relativity gives the ability for everything to be created in a matter of seconds, yet appear as if it's billions of years old due to the laws of physics constantly changing until everything balanced itself out.
cephyr13 2 years ago
Name me 10 biologists. If your going to use propaganda atleast make it worthwhile.
G11EM2 2 years ago
And now, I'm done with you. I can't handle the lack of facts and constant illogical nature of every one of your arguments. I have never met someone so absolutely horrible at debating and trying to prove their case. This is absolutely pointless. You are as thick as they come and would never admit you were wrong even if it were completely obvious, because this isn't about truth. It's about your vendetta against God and religion. Have fun in your lonely little world of "stupid". lol Adios!
cephyr13 2 years ago
LMAO!!!!!
Say what you want, pot....but I'm no kettle. If what you say is true, that means you believe in talking snakes that used to have legs and a flat Earth with a sealed dome which CONTAIN the sun, moon, and stars within the atmosphere.
The funniest part is that you claim I lack facts to back up my arguments, yet never actually disagreed with any of them EXCEPT that "there is no god."
So on that....good riddence. Run along and play now.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
Oh, good. Like an idiot, you replied. What's awesome is that right before you posted your message, you did a search on creationism and you must've found the most idiotic theory I've ever heard. In fact, you probably got it off an evolution blogger's website. LOL How stupid do you get? No actual Creation scientists believe that absurd theory you just posted. NONE of them thought the earth was flat. There is a passage in the Old Testament that proves they knew the earth was a sphere.
cephyr13 2 years ago
Now a circle isn't a sphere is it? Because if your dragging out that dead horse to beat it a little more your basically asking to be called stupid. I've heard many creationists say that a passage proves the bible right when it says circle not sphere, the bible is wrong if thats the one you want to try to bring up.
G11EM2 2 years ago
Wow, you really know nothing about the Bible nor history, do you? Are you even aware of how the idea that the earth is flat occured?? That idea didn't come around until people OUTSIDE of Israel got ahold of the Bible and misinterpretted certain figurative prophetic passages. This was something an idiot like you would have done back then due to lack of research. The Hebrews wrote all prophecy in a figurative poetic language of chiasm and bifids. (continuing in next post)
cephyr13 2 years ago
In the 5th century, Constantine eliminated Paganism and merged it into Christianity, corrupting all of it. Constantine and his idiot priests took passages that stated "4 courners of the earth" and assumed that meant the earth was flat. They, like you, didn't do their research by asking the Jews about Bifids and Chiasms and figurative prophetic language. "4 corners of the earth" was a saying they had. It meant "all of the earth", not 4 literal corners. All they had to do was ask the Jews.
cephyr13 2 years ago
CEPHYR!!!
Last warning!!!!!
Condense your posts or go to PM or go away. Why is this concept so difficult for you to understand?
I'd hate to have to block you just to have such a simple request honored.
KNOCK IT OFF!
KingHeathen 2 years ago
@KingHeathen
The Thinking Atheist said pretty much the same thing as you. You should check out his videos, he is awesome too for taking his time to educate the masses.
sylvanha 1 year ago
If you had spent more than 5 minutes googling and reading, you would've found that the theory states that the earth was almost like it is today, but the water was under the crust (like a perfect nuclear reactor) causing the earth to heat itself, and there was some sort of canopy around the atmosphere which blocked the sun's shortwave radiation (we can prove how to make this, too, and plants grow REALLY well in those conditions without ever dying).
cephyr13 2 years ago
There is quite a bit of evidence of the existence of the things I just mentioned. For instance, in the top layer of the atmosphere, there is a heat sink with tons of ice crystals which allow the Aurora Borealis. It's insanely cold on this side of it, but insanely hot on the other side of it if the sun is shining. The ocean fault lines are all connected from a central burst point, and the Bible describs the flood waters like this: "the fountains of the deep broke forth".
cephyr13 2 years ago
Oh good, like a liar, YOU replied...lol!
Watch my series "Flat Earth according to the Bible" if you somehow think that the writers of the Bible magically thought differently than EVERYONE ELSE in the region at that time period.
As to your "passage" for a spherical Earth...a CIRCLE is NOT a SPHERE! I address that very verse in the series. It is one of the more damning passages for your entire position when you read it in context.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
No, I will not be watching your series. I can't stand to watch you, actually. It's painful.
And any idiot knows prophecies are written in Hebrew poetic language, which is all figurative. The four corners of the earth and the circle of the earth are both figurative statements, smart-guy. They do not imply a flat earth. Four corners is an ancient Hebrew saying that means "the entire earth". The "circle" of the earth is a term used for a spherical object. Do some research for once in your life.
cephyr13 2 years ago
"No, I will not be watching your series."
Enough said, no point in reading anything else you wrote. Willful ignorance is not fixable and inexcusable. We are done. Run along and play.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
Because of the atmosphere, there was more airpressure, which means things can grow bigger, and that's why everything in the fossil record is larger. The large dinosaurs were wiped out during the flood, carried on the ark in baby form and hybernated (scientists say they can make any animal on the planet hybernate, even a hummingbird), after the flood which caused the layering (research it), the dinosaurs couldn't grow very big due to the loss of the added air-pressure.
cephyr13 2 years ago
....Are you joking? Seriously, please tell me your just messing with us. First off, it won't cause layering. Second, dinosaurs are not related to modern lizards very closely at all. Third how would one man get all of the animals to the ark which is too small to fit them?
G11EM2 2 years ago
Comment removed
cephyr13 2 years ago
Comment removed
cephyr13 2 years ago
You're just as bad as HeathenKing, saying something I state is wrong, and giving absolutely no proof. You atheists are suck idiots. You think just because you say something, it's golden, and you assume you know everything. How sad. Do some research, idiot. Reserach Mt. Saint Helens erruption. The ash caused approximately 360,000 years of layering in 2 weeks in standing waters. Standing flood waters do the same if sediments are available to be layered. The stupidity is strong with this one...
cephyr13 2 years ago
Yes, it made layers floods don't.
G11EM2 2 years ago
OMG - I said STANDING WATER makes layers when sediments are present in it that must settle. If you had ever cared to read the Bible, the flood lasted a year, which means there was standing water EVERYWHERE, and since the water came from below, as the Bible states, it kicked up sediments from underneath the crust... massive layering would occur. DO SOME RESEARCH ON CREATION SCIENCE!
cephyr13 2 years ago
Water does not make layers from earth itself. An explosion can create several layers which are obvious lava layers but that's it.
G11EM2 2 years ago
Again, do you atheists do any good, genuine research?? Do some research on standing water and layering. I told you, at Mt. Saint Helens, when it errupted, within 2-3 weeks, the sediments it put into the air had settled into lakes in the area and created approximately 360,000 years worth of layering in the lake bottoms. Why? because that's what standing water does... it layers out sediments floating around in it.
cephyr13 2 years ago
So, during the flood, the Bible says the waters came from underneath, meaning they came through the crust and dragged a bunch of sediments with them as they spewed out at very high pressure due to the weight of the crust pressing down on them. When all the water was out, it was standing water for nearly a year as it very slowly drained into fault lines and sink holes. The currents in the waters ripped dinosaur skeletons apart, which is why you rarely find one whole.
cephyr13 2 years ago
As the dinosaur skeletons settled at the bottom of the ocean, more sediments would get kicked up and the currents would cause them to be covered up in the layers. This is why we absolutely do not find the same dinosaurs in the same layers worldwide, and that's why the geologic column, the way it is presented in textbooks, is different all over the world. The only place we can find a similar geologic column to the textbook model is in North Dakota.
cephyr13 2 years ago
It is also why we find fault lines (sink holes) with TONS of dinosaur bone everywhere, but no full skeletons. The water was draining back into the earth, pulling dinosaur bones with it, but they would settle beforehand and get covered and fossilized in no-time-flat. What scientists don't tell you is that the more moisture there is, the faster fossilization occurs. Why? Because moisture is the mechanism by which sediments replace the living matter to form fossils.
cephyr13 2 years ago
I was reading Yahoo News a couple of years ago and I read that scientists found a fossilized bird just outside their office which they had buried two years prior in the mud. They said it was fossilized exactly like a prehistoric pteradactyl. A few years back, a full T-Rex skeleton was discovered with soft-tissue and blood which had not yet fossilized. Soft-tissue only lasts a few thousand years. No matter how well it's preserved, except if it's frozen, which this was not, proving it was not old.
cephyr13 2 years ago
On top of that, we can track the wobble of the earth back to its origin, and it just happens to be exactly the time at which the flood is said to occur in the Bible. The flood was so massive, it caused the axis of the earth to shift, or some theorize that a meteorite hit the earth, creating the Gulf of Mexico, which caused the flood to start, because it caused the water under the crust to burst forth. There is tons more evidence, but I do not want to sit here for hours listing all of it.
cephyr13 2 years ago
The animals won't fit on the ark? Wow... you really don't do any research at all, do you? You just parrot what the other unresearched atheist idiots say. Every animal on the planet can be put into a hibernation state, according to scientists. Noah most likely took all the animal (dinosaurs included) on the ark in baby form and God put them into a hibernation state. No crap to clean up. No need to fee them. Pleanty of space for a HUGE ship.
cephyr13 2 years ago
How did he get them there?
G11EM2 2 years ago
Well, if there's a God that caused all of this, obviously, He said He brought them there in pairs. You do read, right? Do you actually research anything before you mouth-off about it? Just curious...
cephyr13 2 years ago
Because magic sky daddy can solve everything when evidence for it doesn't exist. right?
G11EM2 2 years ago
Ignorant much? There is tons of evidence. The layers, the fault lines which have TONS of dinosaur bones torn apart all around them where water was draining back into the earth (they call them dinosaur graveyards). We have larger animals in the fossil record which exist today in smaller forms like some sharks, crocodiles and tons of plants. We find ocean life fossils on the tops of mountains and we have 212 cultures on the planet that claim 8 of their ancestors survived the flood on a huge boat.
cephyr13 2 years ago
Yes, a god can do everything for you. Do you have proof, no. Can you find proof, no.
G11EM2 2 years ago
Actually, yes, there is proof of a God in a few areas. First of all, we have programming (information) in DNA cells, which means there's a programmer. Information doesn't just spawn out of nowhere. Also, matter cannot be created nor destroyed. Thus, since all things are made out of energy, the energy that created everything had to have come from an eternal source with no beginning. What, was everything just always here? How stupid is that? Makes no sense whatsoever. Multiplicity proves God too.
cephyr13 2 years ago
No, just no, Dna wasn't written down by Jebus. It came from Rna. Now I'm willing to say i don't know where matter and energy came from but i won't invoke a god who came from....? Explain that and I'll coincide this as a victory for you even though I never called it a discussion.
G11EM2 2 years ago
You realize that saying DNA came from RNA doesn't help your case any whatsoever, right? The RNA has programming in it, and thus, must have a programmer... Where did the information come from?? Who programmed it??
As matter goes, scientifically and philosophically, a creator is required. If something exists, it has a point of creation and a creator. Follow that train of logic backward and you must have a creator as the origin whom has no beginning and is powerful enough to transfer energy.
cephyr13 2 years ago
People with multiple personality disorder, having been raised in all parts of the world, all see the same things in a separate world (the spiritual realm). The different personalities actually live and interact with one another there. regardless of whether they've heard of God, Jesus, angels or demons, they see them all in that world. Jesus usually has holes in His hands and shines, the angels all shine and the demons are pretty dark and scary looking. How do ALL of them see the same things?
cephyr13 2 years ago
lol...
ok, so all the animals went into a hibernation state FOR A YEAR and didn't eat ANYTHING or drink ANYTHING for that entire time AS BABIES...
right.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
Dude, we're talkin' about the existence of God. If there is a God, don't you think He could sustain the babies for a year if He wanted to? lol The only other school of thought on this is that the animals would hibernate for a season at a time, wake, eat a TON of vegitation grown on the ark, then hibernate again for a season till the year was up. We know there must have been food on the ark or the animals would not have survived once they left the ship after the flood.
cephyr13 2 years ago
then why bother with the flood to begin with? Why go through the trouble of having to gather all the animals? Why not just poof everyone dead or poof new animals?
Stop making excuses for an obviously bullshit story. I have a series on the flood if you want to see how many other problems there are with it.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
Had you done some research, you'd know why the flood was necessary. It completely changed the dynamics of the preflood world so that the world was not such a paradise anymore. That's key. Mankind's sin ran so rampant because they were living in a world where they were using 100% of their brain, they could heal exceptionally quick, they were very strong and intelligent. Their experience of life was awesome. Like many rich people, when you have everything, you don't need God.
cephyr13 2 years ago
Where are the bones of these super people? How is it that they were so much better than us but they were unable to escape something the human race now would have no trouble getting through, although numbers would be lower.
G11EM2 2 years ago
Comment removed
cephyr13 2 years ago
Well, if you'll do your research, you'll find that they have found many mines in the US where the skeletons were around 9 feet tall on average. During the flood, the people must've gotten trapped in certain mines, because there have been a few where the skeletons are quite large. Also, when they untombed the mummies under the Great Pyramid on New Years Eve 1999-2000 on TV, the skeletons were 11 feet tall. They found the equivalent of vegitable powered lightbulbs down there too. Smart people...
cephyr13 2 years ago
To take away their paradise and the world that kept them from getting sick, weak and all the other things in life that make life a bit miserable at times was to take away their crutch. Once you take away those things, mankind falls into depression and sorrow and things of that nature... then they discover they are weak and need God. That is when they seek Him. That's why the flood was necessary.
cephyr13 2 years ago
And you're just hilarious when you say you'll show the many "other" problems there are with the flood. LOL "Other" implies you have just discussed a problem. There is no problem with the animals on the ark nor how they survived. It is possible for them to survive on an ark for a year in hibernation. They lived 10 times longer than us because of the awesome preflood world they grew up and lived in. Their bodies were much more resillient and sustainable than animals today in this environment.
cephyr13 2 years ago
OK, your theology is severely lacking in continuity here. So god changed the world so that it wasn't a paradise any more...and this was for WHO exactly? HE KILLED EVERYONE! He saves Noah and his family only to make them stay on a magic boat for a year then to drop them off on a new crappier world.
And you didn't solve the problem with the animals. You merely invoked "magic" to fix a serious problem yet ignore that God could have simply poofed the planet into its crappier state.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
You clearly don't read the Bible. In 1 Peter 3:19 we're told that Jesus went to the people in prison (hell) from the time before the flood to save them. While you may think it was cruel to kill all of these people who were causing horrible sins upon each other, you neglect to realize that Jesus saved those people so they could be in heaven with Him, and when He returns, they will be given new bodies here on earth, on the new earth (similar to the old perfect world) and they will be happy.
cephyr13 2 years ago
Then why put them in hell in the first place? An omnibenevolent god wouldn't want his children to suffer, yet you say he lets us suffer forever for very small crimes. Your god would be the ultimate monster if he exists.
G11EM2 2 years ago
You really haven't a clue about why God has to do things the way He does, do you? God didn't put them there, smartguy. They chose to go there. What you don't realize is that everyone has a choice. God made it easy for us to be saved. He did all the hard work. He came and died for our sins so that our performance doesn't save us, but instead, His sacrifice saves us. All we have to do is sincerely repent and ask forgiveness to be saved. That's it. It is OUR CHOICE, not His. That's love, not hate.
cephyr13 2 years ago
There was nothing magical about the boat. They found it in the Ararat Mountains. It was exactly the length stated in the Bible, and it had iron ribs. Yes, the Bible spoke of iron workers before the flood (these were very smart people). The boat also had a moon pool in the middle so it would not crack in half over waves, and it had what I believe are called dregg stones which lower its center of gravity so it is nearly impossible to capsize. The ship was amazingly built.
cephyr13 2 years ago
And yes, I explained the animal issues in posts to G11. Animals and man lived in a world where men and animals and plants lived 10 times as long as they do today. Their bodies were amazingly well designed. They could hibernate far longer than they do today. There is also the possibility that they woke up from hibernation a few times throughout the year to eat. They could grow food on the ark just fine. It wasn't raining for the entire year.
cephyr13 2 years ago
Show me one god damn bone that shows a man of 600, how would plants survive? Fish survive? How do you do all that on a boat that doesn't fit the animals alone? Where is your proof that this happened?
G11EM2 2 years ago
Wow, you would be quite impressive if you could produce a fossilized bone AND tell the mans age. LOL Fossilzed bones are made up of sediments. None of the original living matter still exists in them... just a sediment replica. You cannot tell how old someone was by a fossilized bone. Did you not know this? And you're just down right stupid if you can't figure out that that boat was the size of an aircraft carrier with many many decks. Go to an aircraft carrier. They're massive.
cephyr13 2 years ago
Besides the fact that the ark could easily hold all of the animals in infant form, the Noah's Ark they found had dregg stones. No boat on the planet has ever needed or wanted dregg stones, because they destroy the purpose of a boat, which is getting from point A to point B. However, Noah's Ark was designed strictly to stay afloat, not to go anywhere. The dregg stones it has are unique to it. No other boat on the planet will have them. As for fish, why the hell would they be on the ark?? lol
cephyr13 2 years ago
@cephyr13 wow just tell me how did Noah say get all of the infents, not just to the areas he lived but to areas that were say the Americas which were not discovered yet
animeclubmemberblack 1 year ago
Not enough space to type this in one message... Sorry. Preflood, the land was above the water, and there were only rivers and maybe one ocean at the bottom of the globe. The animals began near the Garden of Eden, most likely, where Noah was, and after the flood, migrated to places like South America. God brought them in pairs according to the story.
cephyr13 1 year ago
@cephyr13 Most animals couldn't survival a migration of thousands and thousands of miles across varying terrain. Flood migration theory debunked. Well, its not a theory. More like, unsubstantiated dribble thought to be a hypothesis.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected - Why would they migrate all at once? Animals would have stayed where they were and grown their populations and very slowly migrated over a long period of time after the terrain had regrown to support them.
Does no one understand that Carbon 14 is gone after 100,000 years due to its short half-life? We find carbon 14 in every layer of the earth. Clearly, those layers can't be over 100,000 years old. That's why carbon dating isn't accurate past 70,000 years.
cephyr13 1 year ago
@cephyr13 Close, but you're missing a chunk of the picture. Carbon-14 does decay, leading to inaccuracies. However, Carbon 14 is CREATED through the radioactive decay of other elements. This is how Carbon-14 is present uniformly. And it would be rather difficult for jaguars to get from Mount Ararat to South America...one hell of a swim?
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected You should do some more research on your claim. Carbon 14 can ONLY be formed in the upper atmosphere where cosmic rays can hit the atoms and cause them to break apart. When a neutron collides with a Nitrogen 14 atom, it becomes Carbon 14. This ONLY happens in the upper atmosphere (please, look it up yourself). It never happens in the layers of the earth or even the lower atmosphere due to the absence of cosmic rays needed.
cephyr13 1 year ago
@DirectInjected Also, before you try to debate a theory, you may want to research it first. In flood theory, most water after the flood was frozen in the icecaps and the icecaps came down as far as the middle of the United States. We didn't have water in the oceans for quite so time after the flood, about 400 years according to the Bible. Anything could cross the oceans since the oceans had not yet formed. And it took a long time for the animals to migrate all the way to South America.
cephyr13 1 year ago
@cephyr13 O_O WHAT?! You think the entire planet was devoid of OCEANS for 400 years? Seriously? And you think that this massive amount of water that covers 75% of the Earth's surface somehow all drew together in MASSIVE ice caps that have since melted to the point they are now? I don't even think Kent Hovind said anything that stupid! (OK, maybe he did.)
KingHeathen 1 year ago
@KingHeathen Wow, you guys really should research theories before you try to discredit them. You know nothing about creation theory. All the major Young Earth Creationist organizations believe that the flood caused the ice age with a massive climate change, and most of the flood waters were frozen. They also believe nearly all the water came from underneath the crust (the creation story says that as well as the flood account). Please, do some research for a change...
cephyr13 1 year ago
@KingHeathen What I find entertaining is that you conveniently skipped over the fact that I just disproved an old earth conclusively by the presence of carbon 14. lol That's funny. By the way, Directinjected fails to realize that if carbon 14 could be created in objects by any other means than the one I described, it would invalidate all carbon dating, and that would mean scientists are just complete idiots for trying to use it in the first place. Again... please do some research.
cephyr13 1 year ago
@cephyr13 Sorry it took so long to reply, I've been busy. And you're trying to act smart, but it's not working so well. Carbon-14 is also created when carbon is in close contact with uranium, forming ratios of C14 and C12. And since this process does exist, your dating theory is blown out the window. Why? Because the 100k years of decay underwent by the carbon-14 started upon it's creation. What does that mean? We can measure how old it is, you guessed it, through ratios of it's decay products.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected You, sire, are not trying to act smart, and you're succeeding. Again, if something has carbon 14 in it, after 100k yrs, it would all be gone. The only way, by your theory, that the carbon 14 still exists, is by uranium coming in contact with carbon creating more carbon 14. We find carbon 14 everywhere in every layer. So you're saying there's uranium in every layer? lol Sorry... that's not the case, friend.
cephyr13 1 year ago
@cephyr13 Sire? Old english? Don't extrapolate what you don't know. I do not deny the formation of carbon-14 through atmospheric radiation. Uranium coming into contact with carbon is one of many methods. And yes, I'm saying that there's either uranium OR radioactive carbon dioxide in every layer. Radioactive CO2 is created when a carbon-14 becomes carbon dioxide, which can then dissolve in oceans.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected And let's say uranium is everywhere in the layers, as it would have to be by your theory - that would mean that uranium caused the creation of carbon 14 in the objects we carbon date but it would be long after they died because the carbon 14 is being created anew in them after death which would give completely inaccurate dates. If that were all true, no scientists in their right mind would use carbon dating. lol This makes absolutely no sense. I'm being logical, not smart.
cephyr13 1 year ago
@cephyr13 Again, I never said uranium was in every layer. The dates would be off if the dated item were in proximity to uranium. However, for things that are not often exposed to uranium (living things for example), the carbon-14 that is dissolved from the atmosphere allows accurate dating in a relative sense. Otherwise, you'd be claiming that we can't tell time because we didn't know the the time when time itself was created. The dating is relative, considering that the atoms existed prior.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected The whole reason carbon 14 dating is supposedly accurate is because the only way things absorb it is through breathing and it breaks down when they die and no more builds up because they're not breathing anymore. Any new carbon introduced would throw off the numbers. Also, the ratio of carbon 12 to carbon 14 would totally depend on the atmosphere since the atmosphere determines how much carbon one breathes in and that determines the ratio.
cephyr13 1 year ago
@DirectInjected Without knowing the original ratios, we can't properly date things by c12 - c14 ratios. And, even if we could properly date them, the presence of c14 shows that they are definitely less than 100k yrs old because c14 is still present. And by your uranium theory, if there's c14 in the objects (which there is in nearly everything in the layers of the earth) then uranium corrupted them and c14 dating is useless for accuracy. lol Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense...
cephyr13 1 year ago
@cephyr13 Making strawmen out of my arguments just shows you're desperate. What you just said is nonsensical. Uranium would not corrupt things it isn't in contact with. When I die, assuming I'm not buried in a uranium mine, the isotopes of carbon in my body do allow me to be dated accurately, through atmospheric processes. Presence of c-14 doesn't require a source of uranium, but you'd know that if you weren't retarded.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@cephyr13
"Without knowing the original ratios, we can't properly date things by c12 - c14 ratios. "
But we do know the ratios to a high degree of certainty. We also know when C14 dating gives unreliable results So, what's the problem?
MomoTheBellyDancer 1 year ago
@cephyr13 Have you ever seen topographical scans of the oceans? You're going to tell me, with a strait face, that a populations of jaguars crossed from Turkey to South America. Through terrain more mountainous than the Rockies, thousands of feet lower than the surrounding continents, and without sources for food. Unless you're going to claim that prey migrated at the same time, and the plants had grown up to feed them? Please, you're just deluding yourself.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected Animals crossed the oceans during the ice age that happened right after the flood. The glaciers were easier to cross than the mountainous terrain. Humans were doing the same thing at the same time I'm sure, killing animals for food on the way, leaving dead carcuses... I'm sure the animals were killing each other on the way over. I'd imagine they crossed during the time the ice had receeded up near Alaska and Russia.
cephyr13 1 year ago
@cephyr13 Finally, the flood crossing fallacy. Mount Ararat is in Turkey, supposedly. You'd like to tell me that a jaguar, for example, crossed from Turkey, through Russia (one of the most hostile, cold environments on Earth), across Alaska, and down through Canada and America to finally reach Mexico and South America? All this without dying out? And in 400 years?! I hardly need to refute your point. Jaguars die in the cold. Therefore, by your theory, jaguars shouldn't exist.
DirectInjected 1 year ago
@DirectInjected Basically, if they crossed up around Alaska, they would have plenty of food growing on their way up to the bridge across the ocean, and plenty on the other side, a little south of the bridge. I'm sure many died trying to cross before the time and terrain was optimal.
cephyr13 1 year ago
@cephyr13 I have already told you repeatedly. You don't listen. You are done posting here. I gave you plenty of chances. Go post your novels on your own page now.
KingHeathen 1 year ago
Well, maybe I can type it in one post...
cephyr13 1 year ago
And I did a math problem on it myself, i know mathematically that it doesn't work.
G11EM2 2 years ago
math problem on what?
cephyr13 2 years ago
volume of the ark versus volume of the animals, the boat would've been unable to carry two of all of the bugs on earth, let alone two of every animal.
G11EM2 2 years ago
Now I know you're full of crap. First of all, you cannot calculate the average volume for each animal, because you don't know what the average volume of each animal would be, nor do you know how many animals were taken on the ark. lol Secondly, you have no clue how many decks there were. If you actually did the math, you could easily post it in here for us to see. So, let's see it! If you don't post it, everyone will know you're a liar and there will be no more need to respond to your posts.
cephyr13 2 years ago
Again... no research on your part... Yes, modern day lizards have quite a bit in common with dinosaurs. They are "reptiles". That should be your first clue, smart-guy. And we have a lizard on the planet today which is the spitting image of a triceratops, but he's just a LOT smaller than the ones we find in the fossil record, but that's not surprise since the plants and animals we find in the fossil record are huge in the past, but smaller today... I hope you never had kids... That would be sad.
cephyr13 2 years ago
No, not even close.. not at all. The lizard you're talking about has three horns but thats the end of the similarities. where are the leg structures? the lizards legs are very different from a triceretops'. Now where is your proof that you can make them bigger with more pressure?
G11EM2 2 years ago
Oh, really? Please, by all means, why don't you tell me the name of the lizard of which I speak. I mean, I'm certain you are smart enough to know the exact lizard I'm talking about, because you seem like such a bright individual. And when you name that lizard, we'll find a picture of him and compare it to a triceratops so we can compare their legs, spines, tales, heads, etc.. Whether you comply or not, you've just put yourself into a very bad situation where you'll come out looking stupid.
cephyr13 2 years ago
It was on a way of the master video or a kent hovind video, i don't recall which.
G11EM2 2 years ago
Produce the name of the lizard and we'll put them side-by-side and compare skeletons. You're going strictly off a quick picture you've seen on a program and never thought to go look at the skeletons side-by-side?? That's called lazy and a lack of research. Why don't you actually learn the creation model and flood theory fully to see how it all fits together if you actually want to debate it and accuse it of absurdity? Then you won't get pwned so badly in debates like this...
cephyr13 2 years ago
ok, cephyr...
take a deep breath for me here.
You are more than welcome to comment on my videos and repeat Kent Hovind's already debunked pseudoscience if you like. But I need you to try to limit your responses to 1-2 text boxes at a time. When you post a novel like you did here, it pushes all the other comments down and makes it harder for others to find their conversations. If you feel the need to post this much at once, do it as a PM to the person you are talking to.
Fair enough?
KingHeathen 2 years ago
I believe I just said I "could" go on for hours, but I won't, meaning I don't care to continue posting tons of comments. And very little of Kent Hovind's evidences have been "debunked" nor is it pseudo-science. All that has been done is other creation scientists have asked him to stop using certain evidences in his seminars because it has been shown that those evidences are not very good arguments anymore and therefore give ammo to people like you to claim it's absurd. Get your facts straight.
cephyr13 2 years ago
And besides, I'm sure you don't care for someone like myself to keep making you look like an idiot as well. And since I don't care to waste my time on people not listening, I'll gladly stop posting here. Have fun.
cephyr13 2 years ago
My facts are plenty straight. And Hovind IS A JOKE! Watch Thunderf00t's "Why do people laugh at creationist" video and see how many times he destroys Hovind with the most basic scientific info that he should have learned IN HIGH SCHOOL!
And do not flatter yourself into thinking that you are making ANYONE (other than yourself) look like an idiot with what you've posted.
Finally, I VERY CLEARLY said you are welcome to post it just not in mass like that.
It's a simple request.
KingHeathen 2 years ago
Heathen, I'm amazed this guy doesn't get under your skin. He's trying to butcher science and send us back to the dark ages and your all calm and everything, wow.
G11EM2 2 years ago
ME butchering science?? OMG. You're the one that said DNA programming came from RNA, not even realizing you didn't explain where the RNA's programming came from! LOL That's like saying one program wrote another program all on its own, but never explaining who wrote the first program! How stupid can you be??
There's nothing "dark ages" about what I've said. I've advocated GOOD science the entire time. You are making absurd arguments about the "dark ages" that make no sense whatsoever.
cephyr13 2 years ago
When it takes me 10 seconds to see that they're so different it's not really much of an argument. Now, when one has legs for tree climbing which bend at the knee to such an angle that it would make a dinosaur break bones along with the fact that one has hoof like feet and the other hand like your argument falls apart.
G11EM2 2 years ago
Then you're looking at the wrong lizard... Post links to the pictures of this lizard, buddy. Shouldn't be a problem to prove you're right if you show pictures, eh?? Bring it on! Do some "research" for a change and get me some pictures. lol
cephyr13 2 years ago
Now that I've seen your sad researching skills, I can see why you never post any actual facts about evolution. You obviously don't know many, and if you post them, you'd be disproven by people like me that actually DO research properly for years and years instead of a few minutes. What's great, though, is that apart from all of those facts, you still cannot come up with a viable theory of what created matter or how it all got here since everything MUST come from something. It's sad, really.
cephyr13 2 years ago