Dawkins makes al kinds of wrong assumptions to what Christian believe and what the Bible states. It does not state the age of the earth. Physicists talk about space-time. When you take the relativity of 4th dimensional physical property of time in relation to the cosmological constant and the expansion rate of the universe then you would come to about 6 days. Perfectly in line with the creation account. Science debunks macro evolution and supports intelligence behind information.
@FreakyShow95 It also states that one day is like a thousand years, indicating time is relative. Please metion the verse where the Bible states it was created within 10,000 years. The so called loopholes are scietific fact, as is degenration and genetic entropy causing things to wind down. Just studying the true facts and real evidence and coming to the right conclusions. We are told what to think, not how to think. We accept authority as truth rather than truth as the authority.
Debating with JungleJargon means debating with aCreationist who genuinely believes the Bible is the only source of historical information available to man, and anything else is a conspiracy theory by God-haters.
Geology, philosophy, history, biology, astronomy and the entire enlightenment tradition are all a conspiracy.
Here before you stands an example of the consequences of an inadequate education system and extremist religion. The modern fundamentalist Christian equivalent of the Taliban.
@zed1207 Save your slander. My education taught me that objects did not make me what I am. Your educaction made you an pagan object credit giver. It is your belief that is irrational and illogical.
You are the one that has issues with actual science, history and geology. The age of the earth is irrelevant to the known age of life on earth. There is no human history any older than 7,750 years. Mayan and Hindu calendars are less than 5150 years.
@JungleJargon You have yet to respond to the logical holes in your Cosmological argument. You have absolutely no idea what I value, we've only talked about your ideas.
It is not just me who disagrees with you, it is every expert in the fields you've tried to explore. The ease with which you dump the opinions of such qualified people is characteristic of religious zealots everywhere.
@JungleJargon This was a complete a sentence, check it out! In every book I read, the C 14 method can prove the age of stuff up to 60.000 years ( +- 5.000). If you say it can't, than you just disaprove with anyboy. Why would you do that?
@aintnopity JJ is happy to disagree with every single expert on every single issue that does not agree with a literal interpretation of a compilation of books written by Bronze Age narcissists with no historical or scientific tradition.
@JungleJargon Haven't you demonstrated your ignorant arrogance enough?
Go to your local university library, get out a few books on the subjects you claim to know so much of, and actually educate yourself.
Until then you're just wasting my time with your nonsense. I've given you lists of things to respond to and you've not responded to any of them. Try going back and responding to those rather than making yourself look stupid with comments like this.
@JungleJargon I've told you before: I'm not interested in your pseudo-philosophy until you've dealt with the criticisms of your Cosmological philosophy.
1. Your argument contradicts itself by creating an exception to infinite regression
2. Palley's Watch, which is your argument, has been demolished for a long time
3. Cosmological arguments are for an Aristotelian demi-urge, not the invasive theology of Christianity
This meaningless expression of yours will have to wait.
@zed1207 What makes you think there should be infinate regression? I did not create anything, it is an observation that there is no evidence of any other maker. There is only the evidence of the Maker of the function of hydrogen, in one set of life forms.
The universe is not a watch, it doesn't have an ordered function, that is not my argument. The function, working parts and mechanisms in life forms are ordered.
The function of hydrogen inside of us proves Christian teaching is true.
@JungleJargon You do not understand the implications of your own Cosmological argument. Your "evidence" for a maker, your second argument, is equivalent to the Palley's Watch argument. It's been dealt with and I've explained how before, so I'm not going back over it.
People have given arguments against your hydrogen theory that you've been unable to respond to.
You are not even arguing for a Christian god. Your arguments are for an Aristotelian demi-urge, a Maker as you call it.
@zed1207 The Universe is not a mechanism. That is not how I know the universe has a Maker. It is the function of hydrogen inside of us that proves the universe has a Maker.
No one has ever proved that there is a function, working part or mechanism that does not have a maker, you are delirious.
The Christian God is the Maker of all things, ...silly.
@JungleJargon You cannot take any current mechanism and extrapolate a Maker, and every biologist and chemist agrees. It is only deluded Creationists like you, with no education at all, who argue otherwise.
Your ignorant rubbish is not supported by a single shred of evidence, and you've repeatedly shown you are incapable of responding to the criticisms of your opinions.
You are basing your rubbish on proving a negative now?
You don't even understand your own Aristotelian argument.
Oh boy. You guys opened pandora's box! Disagreeing with Jungle Jargon! Watch your backs. You will be throw so much illogical rhetoric, it MAY make you actually go a lil crazy, like it did me. Did you the function of hydrogen in humans PROVES a maker? No? Just ask Jungle Jargon. Did you guys know humans are identical to computers, EVERYTHING with a function has a creator, and evolution states "deer become whales?" Oh you didn't? Then prepare to be amazed by Jungle Jargon.....
@TacoBurgher327 Over the last week, I've started to understand the depth of his ideological tenacity. It's a shame, but that seems to be what the internet does to peoples' brains these days.
If he'd go down to a college library for just one day, it might make an actual difference.
@cornflakeclusters Ha ha well I'm glad you consider it a debate. That would imply he reasonable responded to your questions while revising and advancing his side. JJ however spews his garbage ad infinitum, which isn't really debating, while ignoring nearly everyone who tries to combat his "hypothesis." What he's doing is preaching.
Creationists have to be trolls. I find it impossible to believe that anybody can be so ignorant to the evidence that they believe the earth is only 6000 years old. There can not be humans that ignorant. Therefore I believe that creationists are just trying to troll atheists.
@mariosumo lol no you are not are you that much of an imbicile? jeez go look it up. If you slag of Italians are you being racist yes. So just because Ireland is close to Britain you think its not racist to slag of Irish - you utter ignorant idiot.
10000 years of the age of the earth is a LMAO moment. I love Richard Dawkins he is my legend, but he is too polite. Anyone who believes the world is 10000 years old is a dumb fuck. Dumb beyond belief. Americans are the worst, Bunch of dumb fucks.
Actually, there is proof of human remains that is a lot older than 4400 years. Carbon-datings have shown the age of some remains to be tens of thousands year old.
@DahPianoNut Actually, carbon dating does not prove age. Actual history and geneologies prove age.
Whatever is within the layers of micro sediments is from before the flood and whatever is on top of or in disturbed layers of sediments happened after the flood 4400 years ago.
@DahPianoNut Carbon datings contradict themselves and disprove themselves. They are usually about a thousand years older than what the item really is and they are not at all accurate over 5,000 years old.
@JungleJargon So, carbon-datings are usually older than what the item really is, you say? So when carbon dating show that something is tens of thousands years old, it is actually older? Well, that does not support your theory about the age of the Earth to say the least.
@JungleJargon So, carbon datings are usually older than what the item really is, you say? So when carbon dating show that something is tens of thousands years old, it is actually older? Well, that does not support your theory about the age of the Earth to say the least.
@JungleJargon The Bible is not a literal history, and goes as far as contradicting history and archaeology in Genesis and the Gospels. You have been criticised on this issue before, and ignored the criticism. Now we see you simply repeating the same nonsense again.
Genesis is an adaptation of the Epic of Gilgamesh, brought back from Babylon and applied retrospectively. The Gospels are in contradiction of all evidence we have of the Roman empire's bureaucratic machine, AND THEMSELVES.
@JungleJargon This is stupid. Not even creationists argue this date, and you seem to have confused 4400 years ago with 4400 BC. Again your completely inadequate internet education is exposed!
There is verifiable pre-neolithic human activity from at least 10 000 BC in the case of the Nile Valley. This is ONE example among hundreds that contradict your ridiculous statement.
You have been exposed time and time again in this thread as an ideologue who will not respond to devastating criticism.
@JungleJargon There is DNA of a 5000 year-old mummy.
Calendars require quite a bit of astronomical development and mathematics, asserting that Civilization = Calendar is both false and maliciously dishonest.
@JungleJargon No, it's 5000 years old, and it was in the alpines, meaning that humans existed for quite a time before that.
The Hindu calendar is older though, meaning they developed more mathematics and astronomy faster. (Which is correct, seeing as they had a number zero before anyone else on the western hemisphere, beat Pythagoras to the Pythagorean Theorem (which he likely copied, etc).
And to say that they're more 'developed'is pretty oversimplified, the Inca for example had quite the
@Ubernoob85 ability to organize and conquered, without a writing system. Define civilization or culture in terms on a single invention is pretty misleading, if not outright false.
@Ubernoob85 The Hebrew calendar is older than the Hindu calendar by about 670 years. There are older ones but they are only estimates around 7,515 years.
The Mayan calendar is only 5,127 years old which generally agrees with the Hindu calendar at about 5,114 years old.
The Hebrew estimation is 5,772 years old.
Usher's estimation is about 6,016 years.
There is no more actual human history than that. It is not there.
Human history cuts off at just over 6,000 years, not 10,000..
@JungleJargon Your Mayan calculation is of "Ages" in Mayan civilization. The most recent Age began 5127 years ago, but according to them earlier Ages existed, which included men. So much for that one!
The Hebrew calendar relies on a literal interpretation of the Bible. Most Jews do not do this, so please stop calling it their calendar. Literal interpretations of the Bible do not work, as we've discussed before.
Usher? Err, you undermine yourself using such hugely outdated opinions.
@JungleJargon To give you some specific examples of how wrong you are: Lower Paleolithic handaxes dated to 400,000-300,000 BC near Abydos in the Nile Valley.
Upper Paleolithic remains found at Nazlet Khater-4, where evidence of mining and ritual burials date to 30,000-55,000BC.
Upper Egypt has large numbers of Late Paleolithic sites, such as a cemetery at Gebel Sahaba.
I know you'll criticise how these things are dated, I suggest you get on a uni site for info on that first.
@zed1207 Usher could be wrong just like everyone else. After all, there are lunar calendars, lunar-solar calendars etc. leap days and years so it is not so easy to keep track of time but 5,100 years since the time of the flood is a happy medium and there was 1,600 years of additional human history before the flood. That makes a total of about 6,700 years of human history with an error rate of about 600 years.
Carbon dating is accurate up to 5,000 years. Everything else is comtaminated.
Err, there is massive evidence of human settlement way before the time you're talking about. You are only arguing it is contaminated because you're desperate to fit all chronologies into a Biblical context.
There is no justification for arbitrarily discarding all evidence because it doesn't support a literal Biblical interpretation. You need to let the evidence tell its own story, not cherry-pick the bits that support you and randomly condemn everything else as "contaminated".
@zed1207 Show me your geneolgies to prove your dates. Which of the three sons of Noah were the humans related to? If the humans were buried in micro sediment layers, they were buried by the flood.
@JungleJargon Geneologies are a terrible way to try to prove dates. They're usually written down by someone trying to prove an association, as in the case of the Gospels, or trying to artificially create an impression of continuity, as in Genesis and Egyptian King Lists.
Ancient history has moved on from relying on such unreliable systems. As I've said before, the Bible is not a literal history and shouldn't be treated as such. And there is no evidence for your flood, ad nauseum!
@zed1207 Geneologies only don't work if you don't have any.
If the Bible is not real history, where did all of the names and geneologies come from?
If the flood is not real history, you have to explain where over 100 million cubic miles of consecuticve layers of micro sediments came from and how they came to cover everything that was living on earth.
@JungleJargon That's so stupid. So because Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion exist, with names, and have geneologies, that makes the beings in those books real? Even for you, this is a new low.
There is no worldwide concurrent flood sediment, in different parts of the world there are sediments deposited at different times. If there was such obvious evidence, why would every geologist argue that your flood layers don't exist? Back to conspiracy theories!
@zed1207 Biblical geneolgies have names of real people that we are all related to.
Geology consists of sediments deposited by the flood with fossils buried in them. It is evidence of the flood staring you in the face.
Why would a geologist dare say that consecutive layered sediments over a mile deep deposited only where there is land all eroded from an unnamed location???
That is illogical irrational and senseless. Pagans are always illogical irrational and senseless.
@JungleJargon "Carbon dating is accurate up to 5,000 years."
Carbon dating is actually accurate up to about 70,000 years, perhaps you should attain information from legitimate sources. Carbon 14 has a half life greater than 5,000 years, your statement was utter nonsense.
@JungleJargon When the carbon dating process is able to date something to around 100,000 years ago, with an error of 10,000 years, it's possible to say that at it's youngest the object is 90,000 years old.
Even with a large range, there can be no doubt that a lot of man-made items and environmental exploitation is very old. Much older than 5000 years.
There are massive problems with the geneology approach you seem to think is infallible, because the Bible does it. That's just naive
@JungleJargon Really? Where is the science that suggests this? Seems you should cite some credible sources at least. AnswersinGenesis is not a credible source, neither is Kent Hovind, Lee Strobel, Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron, Discovery Institue, William Dembski, or any other dishonest creationist source that claims degrees it hasn't earned or knowledge they don't possess. Explain to me why and how all radiometric dating methods must be inaccurate.
@buttface112211 There're way too many variables and external influences to all of the dating methods. You cannot know how much of the element was there to begin with and you cannot know how much contamination there has been since the time you know nothing about. Science cannot disagree with known historical facts.
The global flood buried everything living on earth in the sediments that it deposited. You cannot account for the origin of the over a mile deep of sediments on earth.
@zed1207 BTW, every civilization built on top of the sediments deposited by the flood existed after the flood. Every thing within the micro sediment layers existed before the flood.
@JungleJargon There is not a single study by any geologist that supports your worldwide flood idea. You get it entirely from a single source, the Bible.
This source has been exhaustively researched, Biblical scholars have agreed that the flood myth is based on a Babylonian epic.
Please give me a single peer-reviewed study that contradicts either of these expert findings. If you cannot, please ask yourself: how arrogant do you have to be to blindly discard so much expert study?
@zed1207 No "expert" has ever been able to account for the more than100 million cubic miles of consecutive layers of micro sediments deposited only over land areas.
The sediments are more than a mile deep on every continent.
@JungleJargon They're not. There is not a single instance of a universal flood, no matter how large the deposit, according to geological surveys.
What you are arguing for simply does not exist and has never existed. Your lies are contradicted by archaeology, geology, and biology. Experts in all these fields, and others, disagree entirely with your point of view.
So: How arrogant and misguided are you to ignore the mass of evidence before you in the name of your chosen religion?
@JungleJargon Not people. Geologists who've been published, who run departments, who are at the top of their field. Why would the best qualified human beings in this subject totally disagree with you? Why would not a single study supporting your ridiculous idea be published?
@zed1207 All of the studies are always being proven wrong and we don't need your published papers to prove it. It is your published papers that are in question.
You need to think for yourself and you need to be able to explain in your own words what you believe.
@JungleJargon All of the studies are always proven wrong... Surely even you can see how crazily dogmatic your foolish beliefs have caused you to become now.
You need to face facts and realise that there are people very well qualified to judge these issues, vastly more qualified than you. There is an immense amount of evidence for these concepts, and none whatsoever for yours.
At the moment you have more in common with the Taliban than modern western civilization.
@zed1207 No no one is qualified to change historical events. No one is qualified to make up their "scientifc" beliefs especially for other people to believe.
You are one deluded person ...and you are not addressing any of the issues.
Objects did not make or refine what you are. The genome is the only thing that reorganizes the genome. You have no authority to say otherwise.
@JungleJargon Historical accounts are verified by evidence. Scientists and historians have spent a long time researching the accounts of the Bible, probably more than any other religious text.
It is not internally consistent, like every other religious text does not exist in isolation, and was never meant to be a HISTORICAL account.
I'm ignoring your "objects" nonsense because your pseudo-philosophy has already been criticised heavily enough.
@JungleJargon Why do you think the bible is true, why not the tora, the coran or any other old book? Maybe people in 2000 years will believe every quote from the lord of the rings. maybe they think star wars is a prophecy. Why do you think, your God would spread his word by an old book. ANd you probably only read the translation, not the original. How many times do you think the bible has been translated from its original? I just dont understand why you rely on an illogical text
@JungleJargon Circular argument. You think it's true because you believe it was written/inspired by God. You know that because it says it was written/inspired by God. You believe that because it was written/inspired by God... ad infinitum.
@JungleJargon Right, so you're actually arguing that there are contemporaneous deposits all over the earth more than a mile deep?
Why, if this is the case, would every single geologist and geological paper disagree with this MASSIVE body of evidence?
Your claims are so ludicrous, so massively verifiable if true, that nobody would be able to possibly doubt it. And yet not a single study supports you. Nothing. Why is that?
Why would EVERYONE disagree with you if it's so obvious?
@zed1207 There are consecutive layers of sediments over a mile deep on every continent. They total over 100 million cubic miles of consecutive layered sediments that are deposited only over the land areas also containing the fossil of all life on earth.
It is the claims of geologists that are ludicrous.
You need to wake up to the fact that the evidence supports the biblical account of history.
Science cannot disagree with known historical facts of known human history.
@JungleJargon Even your terminology is wrong. Single event creates a single layers, and a consecutive layer is created by a different event.
What you actually find is areas of local geology, with no contemporaneous worldwide events that support your flood idea. Fossils are spread through billions of years of deposits, far in excess of the volume you're talking about.
There is no support for a literal Biblical history, and Creationists like you produce no evidence for your ideas.
@zed1207 Single event? What event? Where did the sediments come from and why is there no erosion between each of the layers?
Your proposition requires any hundreds of global floods and hundreds of events would not result in uniform consecutive layering. That is evidence of one single event for the entire amount of sediments. Anyone in their right mind can see that.
The volume I am talking about is over 100 million cubic miles of layered sediments.
@JungleJargon There is no single event, that's the bloody point. There is no worldwide layer of flood debris, it simply does not exist. Look at the strata in Australia and the Appalachians, and you'll see completely different sequencing. Look at Iceland and you'll see something utterly different to almost anywhere else, because the geology there is so new. This is such basic stuff!
Your worldwide layered sediments simply don't exist, and cannot be created in 5000 years.
@Ubernoob85 If the Hindu and Mayan calendars started after the flood, That would mean Human history is no older than about 6,750 years according to my estimation.
@JungleJargon They start before your date for the flood, that's the point.
Your date for the "Flood" is based on a geneology that has humans of inhuman age, and entirely rests on a literal interpretation of the Bible.
No evidence supports this superhuman longevity, and there is no evidence to support the geneology of the Bible. You are simply DEMANDING that others accept this geneology, in defiance of geological, historical, anthropological and biological evidence to the contrary.
@zed1207 The calendars begin at a time well within the age of historical records of human beings. The exact year of the flood is still up in the air. We should expect that things were very different before the earth was completely destroyed by water.
You are too proud to consider the fact that we have been judged by our Maker and that our life spans have been shortened.
@JungleJargon "You are too proud to consider the fact that we have been judged by our Maker and that our life spans have been shortened."
There's no evidence to support this ridiculous claim. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. No-one has ever lived into their thousands.
@JungleJargon You are too foolish to realise that your "literal" story is a borrowed myth from another culture incorporated into Jewish culture by zealots enraged by supposed apostasy.
Read the Epic of Gilgamesh. Read a geology textbook. Read a study of Biblical history.
@JungleJargon No, the Epic of Gilgamesh is a description of a local flood. The Biblical Flood story is a derivation of this Epic. We know this because we have earlier examples of the Epic of Gilgamesh, and typically Babylonian imagery in the Flood story.
We also have evidence of a series of localised but devastating floods in the region. The world is full of local flood myths, because floods are common events.
But there is absolutely no evidence of worldwide flooding.
@zed1207 There was a biblical flood and the layers of sediments with fossils buried in them proves there was a biblical flood. You are just brainwashed.
@JungleJargon Oh please, now you're just resorting to ad hominem.
There was a Biblical flood, it took place in Mesopotamia and was recounted in the form of myth in the Epic of Gilgamesh. It was incorporated into Jewish theology by Jews returning from Babylon who were angry at supposed apostasy in their absence.
But you don't have to believe me, just go and read one of the many books written by respected Biblical historians from the last 50 years.
@zed1207 You are brainwashed because the biblical record has the names and geneologies of all the people directly involved with more information and Genesis has records and geneologies from before the flood.
The exile was many years later. You believe whatever you want to believe whether it is supported or not. You don't care.
Thousands of specific things that the Bible says have been individually verified. No record has been proven and verified as much as the Bible.
@JungleJargon The Silmarillion has geneologies, that does not make it literal history. The King Lists in Egypt is a much more extensive geneology than found in Genesis, and reaches further back without resorting to superhumans with incredible ages.
So by your warped logic, Egyptian religion is more valid than Jewish, because it has better lists!
There are older accounts of the Epic than the Flood, and the Flood uses Babylonian imagery.
@zed1207 Secular records only go back to about 5,130 years because the civilizations were all built on top of the layers of sediments deposited by the flood. Everything else was buried in the layers of sediments.
When Jacob went to Egypt, they wanted to know how old he was. He told them he had a hard life, not like his fathers.
It does not matter which account is supposedly "older" because they are describing the same event.
Look at all the responses to the criticisms of the Gospels.
@JungleJargon This is nonsense. There are Sanskrit texts date, using exactly the same methods as you are dating Biblical events, much further back than Jewish history. This is also the case with Egyptian history.
There are no worldwide flood deposits, as I pointed out to you before. Stop repeating nonsense.
You are wrong, according to every expert in Biblical history, Mediterranean history, geology, astronomy, biology. These are the people best able to decide facts, not you!
@JungleJargon Dude the *bible* was collated in 480ish bc by emporer constantinea pagen till his death (he was baptised at death) he left out many books that we never hear of now. Verifiable evidence is plentiful in science for human history prior to the creationist view - you just choose not to believe it even tho it is fact. You believe in ghosts and spirits and ignore cold hard facts like fossils (aye put there by the imaginary god to test you) stop being so uninteligent.
@JungleJargon Dude I really really feel sorry for u, In my Life all I want to do is seek the truth and find out as much as I can before I die. You are living in a static Lie created by some guy who wanted to control people. Wake up I beg you for you sake, its no skin off my nose if u die ignorant.,
@Kaldhore The truth is that the maker of working mechanisms is equal to or greater than the mechanisms made. There is no such thing as lower life making higher life, in real life.
This is where we are at. Objects did not make or refine what we are. You are believing the lie. That is reason for you to fear.
All function, working parts and mechanisms always have a maker and life forms are not exempt from the rules of science. They have a preexisting word that makes them.
@JungleJargon Your heirarchy of organisms is arbitrary, and there is a huge amout of evidence for simplistic organisms evolving, eventually, into more complicated ones.
Your "word" concept is pseudo-Platonic, do you realise that? You are unwittingly borrowing half-understood concepts from classical philosophy.
This approach has all the hallmarks of someone who reads fundamentalist Christian websites, instead of actual studies in these areas.
@JungleJargon There is massive evidence for evolution. Only religious extremists like you attack these facts, because you are too arrogant and stupid to realise that the world is understood through more than a single book.
You do not understand how DNA is replicated, and how evolution occurs.
Your pseudo-philosophical statement is simply a repetition of your discredited Creationist nonsense. You are a fool with no education, lose your arrogance and get to a library.
@JungleJargon Example, from Nature magazine and Berkeley University: the evolution of whales, mammals, to their environment while keeping vestigial structures. This has millions of years of fossils and genetic evidence.
Your Creationist stance has no evidence and is not argued by a single expert, but you arrogantly insist that every one of them is part of a conspiracy theory, despite most of them being theists.
Show me a single study from a university in support of Creationism.
@zed1207 Your "studies" are total nonsense. Having more or less of something proves nothing. It just serves to confuse the weak minded and those that don't have all of the information. Over 50,000 morphological changes are needed for a land mamal to become a whale. Think about it! Everything about the animal has to change and there is no evidence that any morphological changes in the genome ever happen!
A Christian is defined as someone who says that a Savior (God) was born of a woman.
@JungleJargon So a study by one of the best universities in the US and an acclaimed journal are "total nonsense". This is stupid, you are an individual with no education in the field calling the most respected and superlative minds in the world "total nonsense" based on your fundamentalist religion that has more to do with the Taliban than western society.
These changes are well-documented and accepted. You are delusional to think you know better.
@JungleJargon The Gospel writers were not there, not one of them. Not a single Biblical historian would argue that any of them were, so your inherently foolish argument contains a false assumption.
It is not every expert who has a problem. It is simpletons like you with your delusions of grandeur and no intellect to back it up who have a problem. Face the fact that the Bible is not a simplistic literalist book and then educate yourself.
@zed1207 You only thing you have is doubt and you cannot know for sure because you were not there. They all were there at the time the things happened so they know more about what happened than you know.
@JungleJargon Nonsense. You asked for evidence of evolution, I gave you the study and you ignored it.
There is massive amounts of archaeology, genetics, geology, biology and historical documents which argue against the Bible being literal. You will not find a single expert to support you.
Not a single Biblical historian thinks the Gospel writers were there at the time!
Your only argument is that we are all victims of a conspiracy theory. Give a single study supporting your ideas.
@JungleJargon Read the study, I'm not going to give it to you AND summarise it for you. Make the tiniest little bit of effort to enlarge your horizons.
What you're saying about the Bible is said by adherents of all religions, with equal fervour. Your faith is no different to Muslim, Jewish, Sikh, or whatever other religion you care to mention.
Only your arrogance can possibly say otherwise. What you are now talking about is FAITH, not historical or scientific facts.
@JungleJargon You are, literally, the Taliban of the West. Your anti-intellectualism is exactly the same. Your refusal to admit that knowledge can be found from anything more than a single source is the same.
Rational, reasonable and enlightened people realise the parity between the world's major religions. People like you and the Taliban, stuck in Medieval paranoia and zealotry, continually try to fight against reality.
The world has moved on from such destructive simplicity.
@JungleJargon Again, you are spouting a conclusion without any argument. A conclusion is rational or irrational based on the argument used to arrive at that conclusion. Since you've provided a conclusion without any argument, your statement is simply meaningless.
You need to provide a study that supports your Creationism, like the study I provided supporting evolution. You need to provide some evidence, not this appeal to ignorance argument based around the existence of hydrogen.
@zed1207 Again, you are spouting a conclusion without any argument. A conclusion is rational or irrational based on the argument used to arrive at that conclusion. Since you've provided a conclusion without any argument, your statement is simply meaningless.
Study the function of hydrogen working inside of you as ordered. All function, working parts and mechanisms always have a maker that is equal to or greater than the mechanism that is ordered.
@JungleJargon I've given an argument that deals with this, you have not responded. You've reduced yourself to simply repeating the same nonsense.
For the last time, you are repeating Palley's Watch analogy. This is a flawed argument, substitute hydrogen for a watch and it is exactly your argument, with the same flaws. You cannot verify a statement without a point of comparison, and your statement is universal.
Oh, and our bodies go wrong constantly, so "as ordered" is wrong too.
@JungleJargon Biology is not based on machines and makers. How about a lion stronger than it's parents? They exist, and they succeed, that's the point.
@TheYesDave Biology consists *entirely* of mechanisms whether mechanical, chemical, electrical or otherwise. It is *all* ordered by a preexisting word.
Some are "stronger" and some are not. The stronger ones often die. All have essentially the same information and all are organized only by the genome so it does not matter which ones survive, in the real world.
@JungleJargon And still no study supporting your Creationism. It's been a week since I first asked.
Therefore we can reasonably conclude that you are completely incapable of producing a single study subjected to unrestricted peer-review that supports your arguments. Instead of drawing the obvious conclusion, you have chosen to blame a conspiracy and reduce yourself to perjorative statements.
Whenever Creationism is subjected to questioning it falls apart. You are evidence of that.
@JungleJargon Again, you are spouting a conclusion without any argument. A conclusion is rational or irrational based on the argument used to arrive at that conclusion. Since you've provided a conclusion without any argument, your statement is simply meaningless.
You need to provide a study that supports your Creationism, like the study I provided supporting evolution. You need to provide some evidence, not this appeal to ignorance argument based around the existence of hydrogen.
@JungleJargon I've given you criticism of your philosophy of a Maker, and you just ignored it.
I've listed you problems with the Census, you just repeated your position.
I've given you a genuine study supporting evolution, you've given nothing back.
I've given you problems with your wider philosophy and you just ignored it.
This is ludicrous. Why are you so terrified of widening your understanding? Science works WITH Christianity, just not fundamentalist rubbish! Just look at it!
@zed1207 You have no point that makes any sense because you were not there at the time they were there. You did not live their lives. They know more about what they experienced than you do so there is nothing you can say.
@JungleJargon Repeating this argument does not make it any more valid. I've already pointed out that you were not their either, and neither were the Gospel writers.
You have not answered a single one of the NINE points in my last two posts.
I am not interested in repeating myself further, except to say this: The Bible is not literal, not being literal is not an attack on the Bible or Christianity. Reasonable, moderate, true Christians live happily alongside science. You can too.
@JungleJargon Science disagrees with a LITERAL interpretation of the Bible. It should be read as an exploration of man's relationship with the divine, while science and history are attempts to measure and understand our existence. Science and history say nothing transcendental, the Bible says nothing temporal.
Science and history can't be made to fit into the Bible, it was written by Bronze-Age men with no concept of historical or scientific theory.
@JungleJargon Science is interested with nothing transcendental. Asking what caused the universe is, according to science, a meaningless question. You're just charicaturing your opponents and ignoring their arguments, like you've done all along.
You have offered no studies that support your flood idea in over a week, despite claiming there are OBVIOUS signs. This idea is contradicted by every relevant branch of knowledge.
I've given you evidence and studies. You've given nothing.
@zed1207 Oh, so science does not want to know there's a Maker of all the matter that works as ordered inside of us. That's not my problem. It is their problem for not wanting to face the reality. They would die to know if there was a physical cause. That shows bias.
You cannot say anything about the flood until you tell me where the sediments over a mile deep came from and how they came to cover everything living on earth. Study that!
You have given me nothing. I have given you truth.
@JungleJargon You've given nothing to support your idea of a Maker, except a circular argument utilising a book that relies on a Maker to argue for a Maker.
I've given you studies, you've given nothing but this mindless repetition of your original position. If your position is reality, why does every study of reality disagree with you? You cannot provide a single study that even suggests there are "sediments over a mile deep".
@JungleJargon The Grand Canyon is an argument for the immense age of the Earth. It has taken millions of years for the Colorado River to carve the canyon, here is a study by the US National Park Service for you to read:
@zed1207 Did it take millions of years to deposit the sediments or did it take millions of years to erode the sediments? That would throw off your "estimates" by millions of years. Your "estimates" are round about inaccurate figures anyway.
You have everyone looking at the same clock and the one who sets that clock is looking at everyone else. You are pathetic.
@JungleJargon Err, it's the same thing. Sediments are eroded in one area and deposited in another. Seriously, have you ever read a book on geology?
Even if the estimates are wrong by millions of years they are still relatively accurate on a scale that spans BILLIONS of years. The timespan of these events is of a magnitude that makes Creationism simply impossible.
You obviously don't understand how these things are dated. You have nothing to back up your vitriol. Educate yourself!
@JungleJargon Where is your study that supports this? Where is your evidence? I've asked you to show something for days!
If this evidence is as obvious as you claim there should be thousands of studies that have gone through unrestricted peer-review and been published in geology journals for you to use supporting your theory.
Find just one article that has been through that process! Until then, like your inability to respond to the problems in your Cosmological argument, you have nothing.
@JungleJargon No study, still. I've given you study after study in these discussions and you've given absolutely nothing. Not once. The only time you alluded to studies outside of your own mind, it was a Bible Study!
It is a shame that arrogance increases in correlation with ignorance, but it is an adequate explanation for your hilariously narcissistic arguments.
Be quiet and learn from your betters. Get to a library and actually educate yourself.
@JungleJargon You talk about CALENDARS? the catholic pope changed the calendar to his liking 4 times !!!!!!!!! jesus was born in the summer ffs !!! LMAO at your stupidity
Calendars are very hard to get accurate although they do arrive at a general consensus of about 5,000 years since the time of the flood. There was an additional 1600 years of human history and that is all the actual verifiable history we have.
@JungleJargon Shepherds were not brought into the hills of Galilee until the summer. Galilee was not part of the Empire at the time, therefore not subject to any census. No Empire- wide census ever occured, and no census ever required people to return to their towns of birth.
Which is why this ludicrous idea only features in a single Gospel, which is concerned entirely with placing Jesus within Jewish prophetic tradition. Unfortunately, this writer had no idea of Roman bureaucracy.
@zed1207 Shepherds were in the fields in the spring when the lambs were being born.
Don't try to argue history with the Bible because you will lose.
Miriam and Yoseph were both Jews descended from King David who was from Bethlechem. It is what happened. Those decrees took place over several years. There are other factors of who was doing what, when and in what capacity.
The actual text is more reliable than anything you can say because you were not there.
@JungleJargon Umm, the Bible doesn't even agree with itself. Look at Gospel accounts of the crucifixion.
The story of the Census is completely wrong, and we know because Romans held the damn things all the time, in a consistent way, in Roman provinces. They never demanded people return to their places of birth (the disruption would have been incredible) and they never once held a census in a client kingdom, which Galilee was then.
@JungleJargon Really? That's all you can say in response?
Please tell me why I should believe a census that happened in an impossible way, in a client kingdom when no census was ever held in a client kingdom, during a very well-documented time that talks about local census-taking in detail... instead of that *only* Luke fabricates an event to place Jesus in the right place to fit with OT prophecies, in line with the Judeo-centric slant of the rest of that particular Gospel?
Dawkins makes al kinds of wrong assumptions to what Christian believe and what the Bible states. It does not state the age of the earth. Physicists talk about space-time. When you take the relativity of 4th dimensional physical property of time in relation to the cosmological constant and the expansion rate of the universe then you would come to about 6 days. Perfectly in line with the creation account. Science debunks macro evolution and supports intelligence behind information.
Ramohog 16 hours ago
@Ramohog the bible says the world was created within 10,000 years! dont go through some bad loopholes that arent even true, deluted sir...
FreakyShow95 15 hours ago
@FreakyShow95 It also states that one day is like a thousand years, indicating time is relative. Please metion the verse where the Bible states it was created within 10,000 years. The so called loopholes are scietific fact, as is degenration and genetic entropy causing things to wind down. Just studying the true facts and real evidence and coming to the right conclusions. We are told what to think, not how to think. We accept authority as truth rather than truth as the authority.
Ramohog 14 hours ago
Looks at comments on a religious video. Every single one is a reply to someone else. Not this one.
thebubba12100 1 week ago
@thebubba12100 Congratulations.
FunkyKrakje 1 week ago
@FunkyKrakje Thanks :D, this is a reply. HOW IRONIC HAHA.
thebubba12100 1 week ago
@thebubba12100 Well, yeah, heheh, but anyways, I think it's a good thing there's a lot of debating/discussion on religion going on.
FunkyKrakje 1 week ago
Debating with JungleJargon means debating with aCreationist who genuinely believes the Bible is the only source of historical information available to man, and anything else is a conspiracy theory by God-haters.
Geology, philosophy, history, biology, astronomy and the entire enlightenment tradition are all a conspiracy.
Here before you stands an example of the consequences of an inadequate education system and extremist religion. The modern fundamentalist Christian equivalent of the Taliban.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 Save your slander. My education taught me that objects did not make me what I am. Your educaction made you an pagan object credit giver. It is your belief that is irrational and illogical.
You are the one that has issues with actual science, history and geology. The age of the earth is irrelevant to the known age of life on earth. There is no human history any older than 7,750 years. Mayan and Hindu calendars are less than 5150 years.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon You have yet to respond to the logical holes in your Cosmological argument. You have absolutely no idea what I value, we've only talked about your ideas.
It is not just me who disagrees with you, it is every expert in the fields you've tried to explore. The ease with which you dump the opinions of such qualified people is characteristic of religious zealots everywhere.
As I said, you're simply the western Taliban.
I've already given you examples of older history.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Thats just not true
aintnopity 3 weeks ago
@aintnopity What is not true? Speak in complete sentences.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon This was a complete a sentence, check it out! In every book I read, the C 14 method can prove the age of stuff up to 60.000 years ( +- 5.000). If you say it can't, than you just disaprove with anyboy. Why would you do that?
aintnopity 2 weeks ago
@aintnopity JJ is happy to disagree with every single expert on every single issue that does not agree with a literal interpretation of a compilation of books written by Bronze Age narcissists with no historical or scientific tradition.
zed1207 2 weeks ago
@zed1207 It is your "experts" that disagree with the facts and they have all been proven wrong countless times.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Haven't you demonstrated your ignorant arrogance enough?
Go to your local university library, get out a few books on the subjects you claim to know so much of, and actually educate yourself.
Until then you're just wasting my time with your nonsense. I've given you lists of things to respond to and you've not responded to any of them. Try going back and responding to those rather than making yourself look stupid with comments like this.
zed1207 2 weeks ago
@zed1207 Untill you address the issues, you are wasting your time.
Objects did not make or refine what you are.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
@JungleJargon I've told you before: I'm not interested in your pseudo-philosophy until you've dealt with the criticisms of your Cosmological philosophy.
1. Your argument contradicts itself by creating an exception to infinite regression
2. Palley's Watch, which is your argument, has been demolished for a long time
3. Cosmological arguments are for an Aristotelian demi-urge, not the invasive theology of Christianity
This meaningless expression of yours will have to wait.
zed1207 2 weeks ago
@zed1207 What makes you think there should be infinate regression? I did not create anything, it is an observation that there is no evidence of any other maker. There is only the evidence of the Maker of the function of hydrogen, in one set of life forms.
The universe is not a watch, it doesn't have an ordered function, that is not my argument. The function, working parts and mechanisms in life forms are ordered.
The function of hydrogen inside of us proves Christian teaching is true.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon You do not understand the implications of your own Cosmological argument. Your "evidence" for a maker, your second argument, is equivalent to the Palley's Watch argument. It's been dealt with and I've explained how before, so I'm not going back over it.
People have given arguments against your hydrogen theory that you've been unable to respond to.
You are not even arguing for a Christian god. Your arguments are for an Aristotelian demi-urge, a Maker as you call it.
zed1207 1 week ago
@zed1207 The Universe is not a mechanism. That is not how I know the universe has a Maker. It is the function of hydrogen inside of us that proves the universe has a Maker.
No one has ever proved that there is a function, working part or mechanism that does not have a maker, you are delirious.
The Christian God is the Maker of all things, ...silly.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon You cannot take any current mechanism and extrapolate a Maker, and every biologist and chemist agrees. It is only deluded Creationists like you, with no education at all, who argue otherwise.
Your ignorant rubbish is not supported by a single shred of evidence, and you've repeatedly shown you are incapable of responding to the criticisms of your opinions.
You are basing your rubbish on proving a negative now?
You don't even understand your own Aristotelian argument.
zed1207 1 week ago
Oh boy. You guys opened pandora's box! Disagreeing with Jungle Jargon! Watch your backs. You will be throw so much illogical rhetoric, it MAY make you actually go a lil crazy, like it did me. Did you the function of hydrogen in humans PROVES a maker? No? Just ask Jungle Jargon. Did you guys know humans are identical to computers, EVERYTHING with a function has a creator, and evolution states "deer become whales?" Oh you didn't? Then prepare to be amazed by Jungle Jargon.....
TacoBurgher327 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TacoBurgher327
Hey god pretender
Care ot provide EVIDENCE
Your god exists?
ItT did it?
LOL no!
gorilla199uncensored 3 weeks ago
@TacoBurgher327 Over the last week, I've started to understand the depth of his ideological tenacity. It's a shame, but that seems to be what the internet does to peoples' brains these days.
If he'd go down to a college library for just one day, it might make an actual difference.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@TacoBurgher327 Yeah, I've had the misfortune of debating Jungle Jargon a few times.
cornflakeclusters 3 weeks ago
@cornflakeclusters Ha ha well I'm glad you consider it a debate. That would imply he reasonable responded to your questions while revising and advancing his side. JJ however spews his garbage ad infinitum, which isn't really debating, while ignoring nearly everyone who tries to combat his "hypothesis." What he's doing is preaching.
TacoBurgher327 3 weeks ago
@TacoBurgher327 That's right, he doesn't debate, he preaches.
cornflakeclusters 3 weeks ago
Creationists have to be trolls. I find it impossible to believe that anybody can be so ignorant to the evidence that they believe the earth is only 6000 years old. There can not be humans that ignorant. Therefore I believe that creationists are just trying to troll atheists.
danagan123 3 weeks ago
Another fine example of Irish journalism?
mariosumo 3 weeks ago
@mariosumo That is racist, i dont care how it is meant.
Kaldhore 3 weeks ago
@Kaldhore Im british she's Irish we are the same race idiot
mariosumo 3 weeks ago
@mariosumo lol no you are not are you that much of an imbicile? jeez go look it up. If you slag of Italians are you being racist yes. So just because Ireland is close to Britain you think its not racist to slag of Irish - you utter ignorant idiot.
Kaldhore 2 weeks ago
@Kaldhore learn to write
thats nationalism not racism
mariosumo 2 weeks ago
@mariosumo Otherwise he/she made a couple good points and English is obviously not his/her primary language.
TheAnubisDrake 1 week ago
@TheAnubisDrake but the video displays the worst form of journalism cock sucking journalism found primarily in Ireland
mariosumo 1 week ago
10000 years of the age of the earth is a LMAO moment. I love Richard Dawkins he is my legend, but he is too polite. Anyone who believes the world is 10000 years old is a dumb fuck. Dumb beyond belief. Americans are the worst, Bunch of dumb fucks.
Kaldhore 3 weeks ago
@Kaldhore There is no actual verifiable human history any older than 4400 years ago except for the Bible. The same is true with the calendars.
You have to know something before you can say something.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
Actually, there is proof of human remains that is a lot older than 4400 years. Carbon-datings have shown the age of some remains to be tens of thousands year old.
DahPianoNut 3 weeks ago
@DahPianoNut Actually, carbon dating does not prove age. Actual history and geneologies prove age.
Whatever is within the layers of micro sediments is from before the flood and whatever is on top of or in disturbed layers of sediments happened after the flood 4400 years ago.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Denying proof do not strengthen your theory.
Carbon datings do prove age.
DahPianoNut 3 weeks ago
@DahPianoNut Carbon datings contradict themselves and disprove themselves. They are usually about a thousand years older than what the item really is and they are not at all accurate over 5,000 years old.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon So, carbon-datings are usually older than what the item really is, you say? So when carbon dating show that something is tens of thousands years old, it is actually older? Well, that does not support your theory about the age of the Earth to say the least.
DahPianoNut 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JungleJargon So, carbon datings are usually older than what the item really is, you say? So when carbon dating show that something is tens of thousands years old, it is actually older? Well, that does not support your theory about the age of the Earth to say the least.
DahPianoNut 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon The Bible is not a literal history, and goes as far as contradicting history and archaeology in Genesis and the Gospels. You have been criticised on this issue before, and ignored the criticism. Now we see you simply repeating the same nonsense again.
Genesis is an adaptation of the Epic of Gilgamesh, brought back from Babylon and applied retrospectively. The Gospels are in contradiction of all evidence we have of the Roman empire's bureaucratic machine, AND THEMSELVES.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 How do you know the Jews did not bring the historical accounts to Babylon?
Jewish history started long before the Babylonian exile.
Are you sure you are not just another God hater?
That would make nothing you say as valid because of your bias.
You are a pagan object credit giver. You say objects made you what you are.
That means you are irrational and illogical. You cannot be trusted with the truth.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Because the accounts in Babylon pre-date the exile of Jews to that city.
Labeling critics as "God haters" is a cheap mechanism for avoiding the actual issues.
If being a God hater makes me biased, then you're also biased since you're a God lover!
Christianity is not separate from other religions. Respond to the Gospels criticism.
Try responding to the logical issues with your Cosmological argument, before labeling others as illogical and a priori wrong.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon This is stupid. Not even creationists argue this date, and you seem to have confused 4400 years ago with 4400 BC. Again your completely inadequate internet education is exposed!
There is verifiable pre-neolithic human activity from at least 10 000 BC in the case of the Nile Valley. This is ONE example among hundreds that contradict your ridiculous statement.
You have been exposed time and time again in this thread as an ideologue who will not respond to devastating criticism.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 All the calendars of the world only date back to the flood with the exception of the Jewish calendar.
If the civilization was built on top of the layers of sediment deposited by the flood, it is no older than 4400 years old.
If I am right, it doesn't matter what anyone says or thinks. No one can change what the facts are.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon There is DNA of a 5000 year-old mummy.
Calendars require quite a bit of astronomical development and mathematics, asserting that Civilization = Calendar is both false and maliciously dishonest.
Ubernoob85 3 weeks ago
@Ubernoob85 It is more like a 4,000 year old mummy.
The Jewish calendar is over 5,000 years so that must mean they were more developed than the makers of other calendars, according to your estimation.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon No, it's 5000 years old, and it was in the alpines, meaning that humans existed for quite a time before that.
The Hindu calendar is older though, meaning they developed more mathematics and astronomy faster. (Which is correct, seeing as they had a number zero before anyone else on the western hemisphere, beat Pythagoras to the Pythagorean Theorem (which he likely copied, etc).
And to say that they're more 'developed'is pretty oversimplified, the Inca for example had quite the
Ubernoob85 3 weeks ago
@Ubernoob85 ability to organize and conquered, without a writing system. Define civilization or culture in terms on a single invention is pretty misleading, if not outright false.
Ubernoob85 3 weeks ago
@Ubernoob85 The Hebrew calendar is older than the Hindu calendar by about 670 years. There are older ones but they are only estimates around 7,515 years.
The Mayan calendar is only 5,127 years old which generally agrees with the Hindu calendar at about 5,114 years old.
The Hebrew estimation is 5,772 years old.
Usher's estimation is about 6,016 years.
There is no more actual human history than that. It is not there.
Human history cuts off at just over 6,000 years, not 10,000..
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Your Mayan calculation is of "Ages" in Mayan civilization. The most recent Age began 5127 years ago, but according to them earlier Ages existed, which included men. So much for that one!
The Hebrew calendar relies on a literal interpretation of the Bible. Most Jews do not do this, so please stop calling it their calendar. Literal interpretations of the Bible do not work, as we've discussed before.
Usher? Err, you undermine yourself using such hugely outdated opinions.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon To give you some specific examples of how wrong you are: Lower Paleolithic handaxes dated to 400,000-300,000 BC near Abydos in the Nile Valley.
Upper Paleolithic remains found at Nazlet Khater-4, where evidence of mining and ritual burials date to 30,000-55,000BC.
Upper Egypt has large numbers of Late Paleolithic sites, such as a cemetery at Gebel Sahaba.
I know you'll criticise how these things are dated, I suggest you get on a uni site for info on that first.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 Usher could be wrong just like everyone else. After all, there are lunar calendars, lunar-solar calendars etc. leap days and years so it is not so easy to keep track of time but 5,100 years since the time of the flood is a happy medium and there was 1,600 years of additional human history before the flood. That makes a total of about 6,700 years of human history with an error rate of about 600 years.
Carbon dating is accurate up to 5,000 years. Everything else is comtaminated.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
Err, there is massive evidence of human settlement way before the time you're talking about. You are only arguing it is contaminated because you're desperate to fit all chronologies into a Biblical context.
There is no justification for arbitrarily discarding all evidence because it doesn't support a literal Biblical interpretation. You need to let the evidence tell its own story, not cherry-pick the bits that support you and randomly condemn everything else as "contaminated".
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 Show me your geneolgies to prove your dates. Which of the three sons of Noah were the humans related to? If the humans were buried in micro sediment layers, they were buried by the flood.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Geneologies are a terrible way to try to prove dates. They're usually written down by someone trying to prove an association, as in the case of the Gospels, or trying to artificially create an impression of continuity, as in Genesis and Egyptian King Lists.
Ancient history has moved on from relying on such unreliable systems. As I've said before, the Bible is not a literal history and shouldn't be treated as such. And there is no evidence for your flood, ad nauseum!
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 Geneologies only don't work if you don't have any.
If the Bible is not real history, where did all of the names and geneologies come from?
If the flood is not real history, you have to explain where over 100 million cubic miles of consecuticve layers of micro sediments came from and how they came to cover everything that was living on earth.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon That's so stupid. So because Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion exist, with names, and have geneologies, that makes the beings in those books real? Even for you, this is a new low.
There is no worldwide concurrent flood sediment, in different parts of the world there are sediments deposited at different times. If there was such obvious evidence, why would every geologist argue that your flood layers don't exist? Back to conspiracy theories!
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 Biblical geneolgies have names of real people that we are all related to.
Geology consists of sediments deposited by the flood with fossils buried in them. It is evidence of the flood staring you in the face.
Why would a geologist dare say that consecutive layered sediments over a mile deep deposited only where there is land all eroded from an unnamed location???
That is illogical irrational and senseless. Pagans are always illogical irrational and senseless.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon "Carbon dating is accurate up to 5,000 years."
Carbon dating is actually accurate up to about 70,000 years, perhaps you should attain information from legitimate sources. Carbon 14 has a half life greater than 5,000 years, your statement was utter nonsense.
buttface112211 3 weeks ago
@buttface112211 You don't know what the meaning of accurate is. Carbon dating is not even accurate up to 5,000 years.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon When the carbon dating process is able to date something to around 100,000 years ago, with an error of 10,000 years, it's possible to say that at it's youngest the object is 90,000 years old.
Even with a large range, there can be no doubt that a lot of man-made items and environmental exploitation is very old. Much older than 5000 years.
There are massive problems with the geneology approach you seem to think is infallible, because the Bible does it. That's just naive
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Really? Where is the science that suggests this? Seems you should cite some credible sources at least. AnswersinGenesis is not a credible source, neither is Kent Hovind, Lee Strobel, Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron, Discovery Institue, William Dembski, or any other dishonest creationist source that claims degrees it hasn't earned or knowledge they don't possess. Explain to me why and how all radiometric dating methods must be inaccurate.
buttface112211 3 weeks ago
@buttface112211 There're way too many variables and external influences to all of the dating methods. You cannot know how much of the element was there to begin with and you cannot know how much contamination there has been since the time you know nothing about. Science cannot disagree with known historical facts.
The global flood buried everything living on earth in the sediments that it deposited. You cannot account for the origin of the over a mile deep of sediments on earth.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon "You cannot know how much of the element was there to begin with"
Yes you can.
"you cannot know how much contamination there has been since the time you know nothing about"
Provide an example of a factor that will contaminate the item and this providing inaccurate dates.
"You cannot account for the origin of the over a mile deep of sediments on earth."
If you don't know how sedimentary layers form, you are ignorant of basic geology.
buttface112211 3 weeks ago
@buttface112211 Oh look, no response from JJ. Funny that.
It's almost like his total lack of response to the blatant flaws in his Cosmological argument.
It'a almost like his total lack of response to the lack of evidence for his "sediment" theory.
It's almost like his total lack of response to developed evolutionary theory.
It's almost like his total lack of response to geological, historical, physical and biological opinion.
Oh wait, it's all a conspiracy theory, according to JJ
zed1207 2 weeks ago
@zed1207 Its typical, creationists can never honestly answer questions becuase then the discussion might actually go somewhere.
buttface112211 2 weeks ago
@zed1207 You wish that your baseless beliefs were all true.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
@zed1207 BTW, every civilization built on top of the sediments deposited by the flood existed after the flood. Every thing within the micro sediment layers existed before the flood.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon There is not a single study by any geologist that supports your worldwide flood idea. You get it entirely from a single source, the Bible.
This source has been exhaustively researched, Biblical scholars have agreed that the flood myth is based on a Babylonian epic.
Please give me a single peer-reviewed study that contradicts either of these expert findings. If you cannot, please ask yourself: how arrogant do you have to be to blindly discard so much expert study?
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 No "expert" has ever been able to account for the more than100 million cubic miles of consecutive layers of micro sediments deposited only over land areas.
The sediments are more than a mile deep on every continent.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon They're not. There is not a single instance of a universal flood, no matter how large the deposit, according to geological surveys.
What you are arguing for simply does not exist and has never existed. Your lies are contradicted by archaeology, geology, and biology. Experts in all these fields, and others, disagree entirely with your point of view.
So: How arrogant and misguided are you to ignore the mass of evidence before you in the name of your chosen religion?
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 What people think is usually not even true so you cannot use that as a standard.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Not people. Geologists who've been published, who run departments, who are at the top of their field. Why would the best qualified human beings in this subject totally disagree with you? Why would not a single study supporting your ridiculous idea be published?
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 All of the studies are always being proven wrong and we don't need your published papers to prove it. It is your published papers that are in question.
You need to think for yourself and you need to be able to explain in your own words what you believe.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon All of the studies are always proven wrong... Surely even you can see how crazily dogmatic your foolish beliefs have caused you to become now.
You need to face facts and realise that there are people very well qualified to judge these issues, vastly more qualified than you. There is an immense amount of evidence for these concepts, and none whatsoever for yours.
At the moment you have more in common with the Taliban than modern western civilization.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 No no one is qualified to change historical events. No one is qualified to make up their "scientifc" beliefs especially for other people to believe.
You are one deluded person ...and you are not addressing any of the issues.
Objects did not make or refine what you are. The genome is the only thing that reorganizes the genome. You have no authority to say otherwise.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Historical accounts are verified by evidence. Scientists and historians have spent a long time researching the accounts of the Bible, probably more than any other religious text.
It is not internally consistent, like every other religious text does not exist in isolation, and was never meant to be a HISTORICAL account.
I'm ignoring your "objects" nonsense because your pseudo-philosophy has already been criticised heavily enough.
I've responded to your genome idea.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon But your bible is? Some stories written by some guys back in the days. Sounds reliable to me
aintnopity 3 weeks ago
@aintnopity The record of truth is very true.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Why do you think the bible is true, why not the tora, the coran or any other old book? Maybe people in 2000 years will believe every quote from the lord of the rings. maybe they think star wars is a prophecy. Why do you think, your God would spread his word by an old book. ANd you probably only read the translation, not the original. How many times do you think the bible has been translated from its original? I just dont understand why you rely on an illogical text
aintnopity 2 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Circular argument. You think it's true because you believe it was written/inspired by God. You know that because it says it was written/inspired by God. You believe that because it was written/inspired by God... ad infinitum.
This is the argument of a dull mind.
zed1207 2 weeks ago
@zed1207 It is actual history and there is nothing you can do to change what happened.
Let me see you get rid of the over 100 million cubic miles of consecutive layers of micro sediments that prove there was a global flood.
You are the one who is not thinking.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Right, so you're actually arguing that there are contemporaneous deposits all over the earth more than a mile deep?
Why, if this is the case, would every single geologist and geological paper disagree with this MASSIVE body of evidence?
Your claims are so ludicrous, so massively verifiable if true, that nobody would be able to possibly doubt it. And yet not a single study supports you. Nothing. Why is that?
Why would EVERYONE disagree with you if it's so obvious?
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 There are consecutive layers of sediments over a mile deep on every continent. They total over 100 million cubic miles of consecutive layered sediments that are deposited only over the land areas also containing the fossil of all life on earth.
It is the claims of geologists that are ludicrous.
You need to wake up to the fact that the evidence supports the biblical account of history.
Science cannot disagree with known historical facts of known human history.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Even your terminology is wrong. Single event creates a single layers, and a consecutive layer is created by a different event.
What you actually find is areas of local geology, with no contemporaneous worldwide events that support your flood idea. Fossils are spread through billions of years of deposits, far in excess of the volume you're talking about.
There is no support for a literal Biblical history, and Creationists like you produce no evidence for your ideas.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 Single event? What event? Where did the sediments come from and why is there no erosion between each of the layers?
Your proposition requires any hundreds of global floods and hundreds of events would not result in uniform consecutive layering. That is evidence of one single event for the entire amount of sediments. Anyone in their right mind can see that.
The volume I am talking about is over 100 million cubic miles of layered sediments.
That is the evidence!
You lose.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon There is no single event, that's the bloody point. There is no worldwide layer of flood debris, it simply does not exist. Look at the strata in Australia and the Appalachians, and you'll see completely different sequencing. Look at Iceland and you'll see something utterly different to almost anywhere else, because the geology there is so new. This is such basic stuff!
Your worldwide layered sediments simply don't exist, and cannot be created in 5000 years.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@Ubernoob85 If the Hindu and Mayan calendars started after the flood, That would mean Human history is no older than about 6,750 years according to my estimation.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon They start before your date for the flood, that's the point.
Your date for the "Flood" is based on a geneology that has humans of inhuman age, and entirely rests on a literal interpretation of the Bible.
No evidence supports this superhuman longevity, and there is no evidence to support the geneology of the Bible. You are simply DEMANDING that others accept this geneology, in defiance of geological, historical, anthropological and biological evidence to the contrary.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 The calendars begin at a time well within the age of historical records of human beings. The exact year of the flood is still up in the air. We should expect that things were very different before the earth was completely destroyed by water.
You are too proud to consider the fact that we have been judged by our Maker and that our life spans have been shortened.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JungleJargon "You are too proud to consider the fact that we have been judged by our Maker and that our life spans have been shortened."
There's no evidence to support this ridiculous claim. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. No-one has ever lived into their thousands.
cornflakeclusters 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon You are too foolish to realise that your "literal" story is a borrowed myth from another culture incorporated into Jewish culture by zealots enraged by supposed apostasy.
Read the Epic of Gilgamesh. Read a geology textbook. Read a study of Biblical history.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 Both accounts are each separate accounts of the same events of history.
How can you not understand that? You are so dead set against the truth that you are not even thinking logically or rationally.
Gigamesh is only one of hundreds of other accounts that say the same thing.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon No, the Epic of Gilgamesh is a description of a local flood. The Biblical Flood story is a derivation of this Epic. We know this because we have earlier examples of the Epic of Gilgamesh, and typically Babylonian imagery in the Flood story.
We also have evidence of a series of localised but devastating floods in the region. The world is full of local flood myths, because floods are common events.
But there is absolutely no evidence of worldwide flooding.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 There was a biblical flood and the layers of sediments with fossils buried in them proves there was a biblical flood. You are just brainwashed.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Oh please, now you're just resorting to ad hominem.
There was a Biblical flood, it took place in Mesopotamia and was recounted in the form of myth in the Epic of Gilgamesh. It was incorporated into Jewish theology by Jews returning from Babylon who were angry at supposed apostasy in their absence.
But you don't have to believe me, just go and read one of the many books written by respected Biblical historians from the last 50 years.
Or are we ALL brainwashed?
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 You are brainwashed because the biblical record has the names and geneologies of all the people directly involved with more information and Genesis has records and geneologies from before the flood.
The exile was many years later. You believe whatever you want to believe whether it is supported or not. You don't care.
Thousands of specific things that the Bible says have been individually verified. No record has been proven and verified as much as the Bible.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon The Silmarillion has geneologies, that does not make it literal history. The King Lists in Egypt is a much more extensive geneology than found in Genesis, and reaches further back without resorting to superhumans with incredible ages.
So by your warped logic, Egyptian religion is more valid than Jewish, because it has better lists!
There are older accounts of the Epic than the Flood, and the Flood uses Babylonian imagery.
Rubbish! Look at the Gospel criticisms.
zed1207 2 weeks ago
@zed1207 Secular records only go back to about 5,130 years because the civilizations were all built on top of the layers of sediments deposited by the flood. Everything else was buried in the layers of sediments.
When Jacob went to Egypt, they wanted to know how old he was. He told them he had a hard life, not like his fathers.
It does not matter which account is supposedly "older" because they are describing the same event.
Look at all the responses to the criticisms of the Gospels.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
@JungleJargon This is nonsense. There are Sanskrit texts date, using exactly the same methods as you are dating Biblical events, much further back than Jewish history. This is also the case with Egyptian history.
There are no worldwide flood deposits, as I pointed out to you before. Stop repeating nonsense.
You are wrong, according to every expert in Biblical history, Mediterranean history, geology, astronomy, biology. These are the people best able to decide facts, not you!
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Dude the *bible* was collated in 480ish bc by emporer constantinea pagen till his death (he was baptised at death) he left out many books that we never hear of now. Verifiable evidence is plentiful in science for human history prior to the creationist view - you just choose not to believe it even tho it is fact. You believe in ghosts and spirits and ignore cold hard facts like fossils (aye put there by the imaginary god to test you) stop being so uninteligent.
Kaldhore 3 weeks ago
@Kaldhore Sorry my typo I meant AD not BC
Kaldhore 3 weeks ago
@Kaldhore Fossils are evidence of the flood that buried them.
We still have all of the books that were not included in the Bible. The ones I read basically say all of the same things.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Dude I really really feel sorry for u, In my Life all I want to do is seek the truth and find out as much as I can before I die. You are living in a static Lie created by some guy who wanted to control people. Wake up I beg you for you sake, its no skin off my nose if u die ignorant.,
Kaldhore 2 weeks ago
@Kaldhore The truth is that the maker of working mechanisms is equal to or greater than the mechanisms made. There is no such thing as lower life making higher life, in real life.
This is where we are at. Objects did not make or refine what we are. You are believing the lie. That is reason for you to fear.
All function, working parts and mechanisms always have a maker and life forms are not exempt from the rules of science. They have a preexisting word that makes them.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon Your heirarchy of organisms is arbitrary, and there is a huge amout of evidence for simplistic organisms evolving, eventually, into more complicated ones.
Your "word" concept is pseudo-Platonic, do you realise that? You are unwittingly borrowing half-understood concepts from classical philosophy.
This approach has all the hallmarks of someone who reads fundamentalist Christian websites, instead of actual studies in these areas.
It's funny, but meaningless.
zed1207 1 week ago
@zed1207 There is no evidence of anything evolving, everything is as individual as can possibly be.
The directives in DNA are very specific, you are wrong again.
You have failed to address any of the issues, objects did not make or refine what you are.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon There is massive evidence for evolution. Only religious extremists like you attack these facts, because you are too arrogant and stupid to realise that the world is understood through more than a single book.
You do not understand how DNA is replicated, and how evolution occurs.
Your pseudo-philosophical statement is simply a repetition of your discredited Creationist nonsense. You are a fool with no education, lose your arrogance and get to a library.
zed1207 1 week ago
@zed1207 If there was *any* evidence of evolution, you would have presented it.
I know that if the genome did not reorganize itself, no species would be viable today.
Nothing else ever reorganizes the genome other than the genome, if not show me what objects or force or anything is causing your alleged "evolution".
It is evolution that has *always* been in question, wake up!
Show me something, you have *nothing* to show me.
Explain it to me in your own words.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon Example, from Nature magazine and Berkeley University: the evolution of whales, mammals, to their environment while keeping vestigial structures. This has millions of years of fossils and genetic evidence.
Your Creationist stance has no evidence and is not argued by a single expert, but you arrogantly insist that every one of them is part of a conspiracy theory, despite most of them being theists.
Show me a single study from a university in support of Creationism.
zed1207 1 week ago
@zed1207 Your "studies" are total nonsense. Having more or less of something proves nothing. It just serves to confuse the weak minded and those that don't have all of the information. Over 50,000 morphological changes are needed for a land mamal to become a whale. Think about it! Everything about the animal has to change and there is no evidence that any morphological changes in the genome ever happen!
A Christian is defined as someone who says that a Savior (God) was born of a woman.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon So a study by one of the best universities in the US and an acclaimed journal are "total nonsense". This is stupid, you are an individual with no education in the field calling the most respected and superlative minds in the world "total nonsense" based on your fundamentalist religion that has more to do with the Taliban than western society.
These changes are well-documented and accepted. You are delusional to think you know better.
Where is your contrary study?
zed1207 1 week ago
@zed1207 No one can refute the accounts of people that were actually there at the time. It is not my fault your sources have issues with reality.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon The Gospel writers were not there, not one of them. Not a single Biblical historian would argue that any of them were, so your inherently foolish argument contains a false assumption.
It is not every expert who has a problem. It is simpletons like you with your delusions of grandeur and no intellect to back it up who have a problem. Face the fact that the Bible is not a simplistic literalist book and then educate yourself.
'Til then you're just wasting your time.
zed1207 1 week ago
@zed1207 You only thing you have is doubt and you cannot know for sure because you were not there. They all were there at the time the things happened so they know more about what happened than you know.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon Nonsense. You asked for evidence of evolution, I gave you the study and you ignored it.
There is massive amounts of archaeology, genetics, geology, biology and historical documents which argue against the Bible being literal. You will not find a single expert to support you.
Not a single Biblical historian thinks the Gospel writers were there at the time!
Your only argument is that we are all victims of a conspiracy theory. Give a single study supporting your ideas.
zed1207 1 week ago
@zed1207 What did the "study" say???
Oh, so the Bible has opposition, I wonder why?
I never once doubted the authenticity of the Bible because I know what it says.
I know the Bible deals with our sinful condition like no other literature does.
I know the Bible has the answer and solution to our problems from the very beginning and there is no other teaching that does.
You don't think Yaakov grew up with his brother Yeshua and yet you have no good reason to believe such a thing.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon Read the study, I'm not going to give it to you AND summarise it for you. Make the tiniest little bit of effort to enlarge your horizons.
What you're saying about the Bible is said by adherents of all religions, with equal fervour. Your faith is no different to Muslim, Jewish, Sikh, or whatever other religion you care to mention.
Only your arrogance can possibly say otherwise. What you are now talking about is FAITH, not historical or scientific facts.
zed1207 6 days ago
@zed1207 You are wrong, there is no comparison to Christian teaching.
No other teaching has been around from the beginning.
No other teaching says that only our Maker, Himself, in person is able to remake us again because there is no one else who can.
I cannot address anything you are not willing or able to express. It must not be worth it anyway.
JungleJargon 6 days ago
@JungleJargon You are, literally, the Taliban of the West. Your anti-intellectualism is exactly the same. Your refusal to admit that knowledge can be found from anything more than a single source is the same.
Rational, reasonable and enlightened people realise the parity between the world's major religions. People like you and the Taliban, stuck in Medieval paranoia and zealotry, continually try to fight against reality.
The world has moved on from such destructive simplicity.
zed1207 5 days ago
@zed1207 It is much more rational and logical to say that we have a Maker than to say that objects made or refined us.
JungleJargon 4 days ago
@JungleJargon Again, you are spouting a conclusion without any argument. A conclusion is rational or irrational based on the argument used to arrive at that conclusion. Since you've provided a conclusion without any argument, your statement is simply meaningless.
You need to provide a study that supports your Creationism, like the study I provided supporting evolution. You need to provide some evidence, not this appeal to ignorance argument based around the existence of hydrogen.
zed1207 4 days ago
@zed1207 Again, you are spouting a conclusion without any argument. A conclusion is rational or irrational based on the argument used to arrive at that conclusion. Since you've provided a conclusion without any argument, your statement is simply meaningless.
Study the function of hydrogen working inside of you as ordered. All function, working parts and mechanisms always have a maker that is equal to or greater than the mechanism that is ordered.
It is not existence, it is function.
JungleJargon 3 days ago
@JungleJargon I've given an argument that deals with this, you have not responded. You've reduced yourself to simply repeating the same nonsense.
For the last time, you are repeating Palley's Watch analogy. This is a flawed argument, substitute hydrogen for a watch and it is exactly your argument, with the same flaws. You cannot verify a statement without a point of comparison, and your statement is universal.
Oh, and our bodies go wrong constantly, so "as ordered" is wrong too.
zed1207 3 days ago
@zed1207 You cannot disprove that all function working parts and mechanisms require a maker equal to or greater than the function that is ordered.
It is not about hydrogen, it is about the simple ordered function of hydrogen when ordered that requires a Maker.
You cannot show me a mechanism that does not have a maker and you cannot prove that objects made or refined what you are so we have a Maker.
Whatever function you do have is ordered by a preexisting word.
JungleJargon 2 days ago
@JungleJargon Biology is not based on machines and makers. How about a lion stronger than it's parents? They exist, and they succeed, that's the point.
TheYesDave 2 days ago
@TheYesDave Biology consists *entirely* of mechanisms whether mechanical, chemical, electrical or otherwise. It is *all* ordered by a preexisting word.
Some are "stronger" and some are not. The stronger ones often die. All have essentially the same information and all are organized only by the genome so it does not matter which ones survive, in the real world.
JungleJargon 2 days ago
@JungleJargon And still no study supporting your Creationism. It's been a week since I first asked.
Therefore we can reasonably conclude that you are completely incapable of producing a single study subjected to unrestricted peer-review that supports your arguments. Instead of drawing the obvious conclusion, you have chosen to blame a conspiracy and reduce yourself to perjorative statements.
Whenever Creationism is subjected to questioning it falls apart. You are evidence of that.
zed1207 3 days ago
@zed1207 It is the "studies" that are in question. They have all failed to prove that objects make or refine what we are.
You have chosen to believe that objects made or refined what you are.
Evolution has failed to show itself so that science can observe it.
That is not my fault.
Your belief is baseless illogical, and irrational.
JungleJargon 2 days ago
@JungleJargon Again, you are spouting a conclusion without any argument. A conclusion is rational or irrational based on the argument used to arrive at that conclusion. Since you've provided a conclusion without any argument, your statement is simply meaningless.
You need to provide a study that supports your Creationism, like the study I provided supporting evolution. You need to provide some evidence, not this appeal to ignorance argument based around the existence of hydrogen.
zed1207 4 days ago
@JungleJargon I've given you criticism of your philosophy of a Maker, and you just ignored it.
I've listed you problems with the Census, you just repeated your position.
I've given you a genuine study supporting evolution, you've given nothing back.
I've given you problems with your wider philosophy and you just ignored it.
This is ludicrous. Why are you so terrified of widening your understanding? Science works WITH Christianity, just not fundamentalist rubbish! Just look at it!
zed1207 1 week ago
@zed1207 You did not show me a function, working part or mechanism that does not have a maker.
You don't think the census was held yet I have a record saying it was held.
You think that objects made or refined what you are so you are not qualified to give me anything.
Science works just fine along side the Bible. I don't have a problem with it.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@zed1207 You have no point that makes any sense because you were not there at the time they were there. You did not live their lives. They know more about what they experienced than you do so there is nothing you can say.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon Repeating this argument does not make it any more valid. I've already pointed out that you were not their either, and neither were the Gospel writers.
You have not answered a single one of the NINE points in my last two posts.
I am not interested in repeating myself further, except to say this: The Bible is not literal, not being literal is not an attack on the Bible or Christianity. Reasonable, moderate, true Christians live happily alongside science. You can too.
zed1207 1 week ago
@zed1207 Science does not disagree with the Bible.
You cannot say the Jews were not literal people. You cannot say Yeshua was not actually born.
You don't even know what you are trying to say.
The people that lived with Yeshua were there and they did tell us about Him.
What is your problem?
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon Science disagrees with a LITERAL interpretation of the Bible. It should be read as an exploration of man's relationship with the divine, while science and history are attempts to measure and understand our existence. Science and history say nothing transcendental, the Bible says nothing temporal.
Science and history can't be made to fit into the Bible, it was written by Bronze-Age men with no concept of historical or scientific theory.
zed1207 6 days ago
@zed1207 Science wishes it could define the transcendental cause of the universe.
The Bible is the only thing that defines everything.
We would not even have history without the Bible, they were the only ones from before the flood with a mind to write things down.
We would not even have today's science because all of the pioneers with vision were believers in God.
Why is it that nothing you say is true?
JungleJargon 6 days ago
@JungleJargon Science is interested with nothing transcendental. Asking what caused the universe is, according to science, a meaningless question. You're just charicaturing your opponents and ignoring their arguments, like you've done all along.
You have offered no studies that support your flood idea in over a week, despite claiming there are OBVIOUS signs. This idea is contradicted by every relevant branch of knowledge.
I've given you evidence and studies. You've given nothing.
zed1207 6 days ago
@zed1207 Oh, so science does not want to know there's a Maker of all the matter that works as ordered inside of us. That's not my problem. It is their problem for not wanting to face the reality. They would die to know if there was a physical cause. That shows bias.
You cannot say anything about the flood until you tell me where the sediments over a mile deep came from and how they came to cover everything living on earth. Study that!
You have given me nothing. I have given you truth.
JungleJargon 5 days ago
@JungleJargon You've given nothing to support your idea of a Maker, except a circular argument utilising a book that relies on a Maker to argue for a Maker.
I've given you studies, you've given nothing but this mindless repetition of your original position. If your position is reality, why does every study of reality disagree with you? You cannot provide a single study that even suggests there are "sediments over a mile deep".
Because reality is not how you see it.
zed1207 5 days ago
@zed1207 You must have never seen the Grand Canyon.
JungleJargon 4 days ago
@JungleJargon The Grand Canyon is an argument for the immense age of the Earth. It has taken millions of years for the Colorado River to carve the canyon, here is a study by the US National Park Service for you to read:
nps.gov/grca/naturescience/geologicformations.htm
As you can see, the park's geology is more than a billion years old and of course there is no mention of your mythical Flood stratum.
So we have yet another study supporting evolution and arguing against Creationism.
zed1207 4 days ago
@zed1207 Did it take millions of years to deposit the sediments or did it take millions of years to erode the sediments? That would throw off your "estimates" by millions of years. Your "estimates" are round about inaccurate figures anyway.
You have everyone looking at the same clock and the one who sets that clock is looking at everyone else. You are pathetic.
JungleJargon 3 days ago
@JungleJargon Err, it's the same thing. Sediments are eroded in one area and deposited in another. Seriously, have you ever read a book on geology?
Even if the estimates are wrong by millions of years they are still relatively accurate on a scale that spans BILLIONS of years. The timespan of these events is of a magnitude that makes Creationism simply impossible.
You obviously don't understand how these things are dated. You have nothing to back up your vitriol. Educate yourself!
zed1207 3 days ago
@zed1207 You never showed me the great ignious mountain where the sediments are supposed to have come from. Science demands observable evidence.
Billions of years would have washed all of the sediments into the oceans long ago.
I have actual history to back up the dates I have. Science is not science if it disagrees with actual known facts.
JungleJargon 2 days ago
@JungleJargon Give us a peer-reviewed study that supports your Creationist rubbish.
Give us a single one.
Until then, be quiet and learn from your betters. Get to a library and actually educate yourself.
zed1207 5 days ago
@zed1207 You are the one who needs an education, you don't even know that the sediments are over a mile deep.
JungleJargon 4 days ago
@JungleJargon Where is your study that supports this? Where is your evidence? I've asked you to show something for days!
If this evidence is as obvious as you claim there should be thousands of studies that have gone through unrestricted peer-review and been published in geology journals for you to use supporting your theory.
Find just one article that has been through that process! Until then, like your inability to respond to the problems in your Cosmological argument, you have nothing.
zed1207 4 days ago
@zed1207 No, you have nothing. I have all of the evidence proving we have a Maker and proving there was a global flood. You have nothing!
You have baseless assumption, speculation, imagination, conjecture, fantasy and lies.
All you have is lies.
JungleJargon 3 days ago
@JungleJargon Share this evidence. If it is so widespread it should be all over academic journals, so it'll be easy to find on the internet.
zed1207 3 days ago
@zed1207 You should be able to see by now that they are blind to the evidence of a global flood that is over a mile deep.
JungleJargon 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JungleJargon No study, still. I've given you study after study in these discussions and you've given absolutely nothing. Not once. The only time you alluded to studies outside of your own mind, it was a Bible Study!
It is a shame that arrogance increases in correlation with ignorance, but it is an adequate explanation for your hilariously narcissistic arguments.
Be quiet and learn from your betters. Get to a library and actually educate yourself.
zed1207 3 days ago
@JungleJargon You talk about CALENDARS? the catholic pope changed the calendar to his liking 4 times !!!!!!!!! jesus was born in the summer ffs !!! LMAO at your stupidity
Kaldhore 3 weeks ago
@Kaldhore ...and the Calendar is still wrong.
Yeshua was likely born in the Spring.
Calendars are very hard to get accurate although they do arrive at a general consensus of about 5,000 years since the time of the flood. There was an additional 1600 years of human history and that is all the actual verifiable history we have.
It is the only history that we have.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon do you actually believe the earth is 6000 years old(give or take)?
Flash13Magic 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Shepherds were not brought into the hills of Galilee until the summer. Galilee was not part of the Empire at the time, therefore not subject to any census. No Empire- wide census ever occured, and no census ever required people to return to their towns of birth.
Which is why this ludicrous idea only features in a single Gospel, which is concerned entirely with placing Jesus within Jewish prophetic tradition. Unfortunately, this writer had no idea of Roman bureaucracy.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 Shepherds were in the fields in the spring when the lambs were being born.
Don't try to argue history with the Bible because you will lose.
Miriam and Yoseph were both Jews descended from King David who was from Bethlechem. It is what happened. Those decrees took place over several years. There are other factors of who was doing what, when and in what capacity.
The actual text is more reliable than anything you can say because you were not there.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Umm, the Bible doesn't even agree with itself. Look at Gospel accounts of the crucifixion.
The story of the Census is completely wrong, and we know because Romans held the damn things all the time, in a consistent way, in Roman provinces. They never demanded people return to their places of birth (the disruption would have been incredible) and they never once held a census in a client kingdom, which Galilee was then.
The development of the Bible is well understood.
zed1207 3 weeks ago
@zed1207 You are wrong, the did hold the census.
JungleJargon 3 weeks ago
@JungleJargon Really? That's all you can say in response?
Please tell me why I should believe a census that happened in an impossible way, in a client kingdom when no census was ever held in a client kingdom, during a very well-documented time that talks about local census-taking in detail... instead of that *only* Luke fabricates an event to place Jesus in the right place to fit with OT prophecies, in line with the Judeo-centric slant of the rest of that particular Gospel?
zed1207 3 weeks ago