Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Religious Debates & Threads => Topic started by: columbusdude82 on September 20, 2007, 06:05:56 AM
-
Our very own OneTimeHard appears to be the world's greatest scientist: he has singlehandedly destroyed 200 years of so-called "science" as practiced in such dumps as Harvard, the rest of the Ivy League, Berkeley, Stanford, and other godless dens of the devil.
Here are some of his earth-shattering discoveries (emphasis added):
It is my understanding that before the flood dinosaurs lived with man and almost all were discontinued in the flood. Also this doesn't matter much, but that is only speculation that dinosaurs were meat eaters. They may have been or not but only speculation.
Oh brother your getting sent to school today. Another false assumption; where ,please tell me where and how you know that noah was from the middle east. I have read the Bible so many times and It does not say where he is from, he could be from Australia for all we know.BTW if elephants are found in the north pole then ya kangaroos could have lived there, but we don't know that and its irrelevent. So far you've done nothing to poke a hole in this, but please keep trying because I will be glad to answere all your question, every single one.
First off, your comment about the ark is a common misconception. The boat was so big that not only it could fit all the animals, but possibly 2 or 3 times over. Consider the boats dimensions (300 cubits, 50, and 30. As in length, width and height.) This can be translated into 450 feet by 75 by 45. So the boat ends up being a whopping 1 518 750 cubic feet; a baby elephant will take up 12 cubic feet. Forty thousand baby elephants barley makes a dent in this number (over one and a half million). See what kind of results you can have if you just stop and think. "All the animals can't fit" is just a stupid argument.
This brings me to "ignorant comment number 2" They didn't know about dinosaurs. Thats why you see ancient drawings of dinosaurs and other types of species in caves and on building walls from all regions of the earth China, Mexico, England, and many parts of Africa. Clearly you just like to pick a side without doing your own research.
OneTimeHard, how long have you been sitting on these ground-breaking discoveries, and will you ever share them with all those deluded, foolish scientists at MIT and Harvard?
-
Now before anyone gets mad, I am NOT criticizing OneTimeHard's religious beliefs. He is making scientific claims about the physical world, that are verifiable and falsifiable.
If they are false, they are so ridiculously false as to be laughed at and ridiculed. If they are true, this fellow surely is a great scientific genius on par with Einstein and Newton and Mendel, and deserves medals and honors and distinguished professor positions at the world's most prestigious universities.
Which is it? :)
-
Really Columbusdude, this is V-Board material. You already have the conversation going in the other thread.
What is your purpose for making this thread?
-
I said it already:
Now before anyone gets mad, I am NOT criticizing OneTimeHard's religious beliefs. He is making scientific claims about the physical world, that are verifiable and falsifiable.
If they are false, they are so ridiculously false as to be laughed at and ridiculed. If they are true, this fellow surely is a great scientific genius on par with Einstein and Newton and Mendel, and deserves medals and honors and distinguished professor positions at the world's most prestigious universities.
Which is it? :)
-
I said it already:
Which one do you think it is columbusdude?
-
just saying that noah did exist............ to me, thats enough......
drawing of dinosaur in caves........ damn, could be anything, girafe, elephant, whatever, dinosaur we're on earth loooooooooooooooooooong before man and i don't think cavemans we're pretty good at drawing.
... to be continued.......
-
Which one do you think it is columbusdude?
The basic tenet of the scientific method is that every idea is there to be attacked. If it survives, it lives to fight another day.
If this fellow has proof (as he claims) for any of his propositions, then he should be on a plane to Sweden to receive a Nobel prize!!!
-
I'm absolutely flaterred. The fact that you are writing about me means that I am effecting you emotionally as you are trying to get a rise out of me out of desperation. I had to put up with all the evolutionary fairytale throughout 20 years of school, so now I just do my part to contribute to my side of the argument, if you find what I say misleading or you think that what I say cant be proven then you can choose to ignore me or debate me back instead of taking things personal, I m sure there are people that are interested in what I write. BTW I think that your side of the argument is far fetched, and ridicules, but you don't see me acting like i am in grade 3.
-
Yes, you are "effecting" me emotionally. That's called laughter :)
You claim to have had 20 years of school. That's like kindergarten through masters or PhD? What field do you have your higher degrees in?
Now please, tell us: how long have you been sitting on these ground-breaking discoveries, and will you ever share them with all those deluded, foolish scientists at MIT and Harvard?
-
i love this thread ;D.
why do creationists think that people in scientific fields are hiding some sinister secret?
like they all planned to create this thing called evolution to fool common man.
god could very well have done it, but i think the fact that god helped with one thing like abiogenesis, but not another, say microevolution(since everyone is on the topic) evidence against god.
why would god need to actively participate in the creation of a species, supernaturally, yet use natural means to allow species to adapt etc?
couldnt he have thought of a natural method like every other thing in the universe?
the way i see it, either god is all or is nothing. thoughts of miracles imply error, and defeat most religious concepts of god.
there is evidence of common ancestry all around us. look at most vertebrates immune systems. the lymphocytes, nk cells, interleukines, enzymatic function etc... are all very similar. this is why we can extrapolate rodent models to humans, hell even equine models among other shit. theres not huge differences between the organs used for life, or the neurotransmitters(serotonin, dopamine etc) used for brain function, dna etc. this is just a very simple example but you can see how as you delve deeper into biochemistry, molecular biology etc these similarities lead to logical conclusions.
evolution being true doesnt mean that god doesnt exist, it just means that the world is rational and coherant without supernatural influence. This would make sense to most beleivers as a material(natural) and immaterial(supernatural) world could not interact.
ps... noah didnt exist.
-
As the mighty Squadfather would say...
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMM MMMM!!!! :D :D :D
How do you figure that? Ten billion trillion micro-evolution does not add up to even one macro-evolution. There are over 3000 variations of spiders, but they will never change into a frog, even if there were a million different spiders they still wouldn't change into a frog. All loco is saying is that micro-e has been observed and no one has ever observed macro-e. So let me see; based on your way of thinking you could say lots of macro-e equals organic-e, and lots of organic-e equals steller-e; and lots of steller-e equals chemical-e; and lots of chemical-e equials cosmic-e, and lots of cosmic-e equal big bang.
see how stupid your post is.
Are you sure you are not a professor of astrophysics or molecular biology at MIT? Coz you sound just like one!!!
-
As the mighty Squadfather would say...
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMM MMMM!!!! :D :D :D
Are you sure you are not a professor of astrophysics or molecular biology at MIT? Coz you sound just like one!!!
I think you are showing signs of fatigue, so I'll ease up for a few days. This will allow you to do some research and come back with something intelligent to say instead of being such a joker. Its seems to me that I know more the you do about your own silly theory of evolution. I am compelled to withdraw from a fiasco because I don't feel your a worthy opponent.
-
OK sure :)
But we were having so much fun...
-
OK sure :)
But we were having so much fun...
Finally we agree on something
-
OK seriously, are you a gimmick? Are you just joking around or are you serious?
-
OK seriously, are you a gimmick? Are you just joking around or are you serious?
just because I have a sense of humour and don't mined putting up with your name calling does not mean I am not serious
-
OK you are serious then. May I ask, how old are you? And what's the highest degree of education you have attained?
Seriously bro, be honest.
-
OK you are serious then. May I ask, how old are you? And what's the highest degree of education you have attained?
Seriously bro, be honest.
When I said twenty years I was exagerating as in I put up with evolution for a long time. No degrees, however I have a year in a half at western university but dropped out due to financial reasons and sense I have a kid, I never got around to finishing it I am late twenties. I spend a lot of time at study and I have been to creation seminars and have witnessed live debates between creation and evolution. I also compete in bodybuilding (believe it or not). will do the Ontario provincials next june and yes I am a Christian.
-
Thank you for being honest. First off, you have to admit that you are not the best informed person on what modern science has to offer, whether physics, biology, economics, or mathematics. You say you have been to "creation seminars." Those are more like indoctrination and education.
Were they hosted by a legitimate university? Were the speakers recognized professors or researchers at real universities?
As for debates between creation and evolution, I have my doubts about those. Perhaps the so-called evolutionists they got were "in on the game," so to speak. I don't know of any single real biologist who debates creationists, because that might create the impression that there might be something to debate. No, there isn't. Science has won, and superstition has lost. One biologist said to a creationist who asked to debate him: "That would look good on your CV. Not so good on mine."
I don't understand why you have such hatred for evolution, or the rest of science. Please understand that when you say something ridiculous in a pompous manner I WILL point it out.
If you want to have a real scientific argument, then that is based on EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE.
If you are interested in a real intellectual debate, I'd like that. But be prepared to be called out when you utter absurdities :)
-
Thank you for being honest. First off, you have to admit that you are not the best informed person on what modern science has to offer, whether physics, biology, economics, or mathematics. You say you have been to "creation seminars." Those are more like indoctrination and education.
Were they hosted by a legitimate university? Were the speakers recognized professors or researchers at real universities?
As for debates between creation and evolution, I have my doubts about those. Perhaps the so-called evolutionists they got were "in on the game," so to speak. I don't know of any single real biologist who debates creationists, because that might create the impression that there might be something to debate. No, there isn't. Science has won, and superstition has lost. One biologist said to a creationist who asked to debate him: "That would look good on your CV. Not so good on mine."
I don't understand why you have such hatred for evolution, or the rest of science. Please understand that when you say something ridiculous in a pompous manner I WILL point it out.
If you want to have a real scientific argument, then that is based on EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE.
If you are interested in a real intellectual debate, I'd like that. But be prepared to be called out when you utter absurdities :)
Well i've managed to vanquish the grade 3 in you finally. If you are interested in seeing some profesionally run debates at university by actual proffesssor, on evolution and creation then type dr. Hovind debates on youtube and tell me what you think. This is clearly on the rise and you will see a lot more debates on these subjects, and BTW the unversity audiences consider this a scuientific debate. Don't take my word for it check it out yourself. About being honest, well over the next hundred arguments between me and you , you will find that I'll be as honest as possible
-
No. The ridicule and scorn you call "grade 3" is the only appropriate response for the pompous boastfulness with which you made your ridiculously false claims.
As for this Dr. Hovind, I am going to ask you to do a little research.
First, tell me. Is he really a Dr? If so, in what field? And at which university did he get his doctorate?
-
If you are interested in seeing some profesionally run debates at university by actual proffesssor, on evolution and creation then type dr. Hovind debates on youtube and tell me what you think.
I'm very familiar with Kent Hovind. He's a piece of shit who actually hurts creationists more than helps them.
-
I'm very familiar with Kent Hovind. He's a piece of shit who actually hurts creationists more than helps them.
No. No. Let him learn the basics of the scientific method. Let him learn to think critically and do research and look things up. Let him learn to decide intelligently who to believe and who not to believe. Don't ruin the surprise for him.
-
I'm very familiar with Kent Hovind. He's a piece of shit who actually hurts creationists more than helps them.
kent hovind runs your life ;D ;D
him on ali g is the funniest shit ever, he left a floater, very unscientific.
-
I'm very familiar with Kent Hovind. He's a piece of shit who actually hurts creationists more than helps them.
Why is Hovind a piece of shit? Is it because he has the crowd on his side at the end of every debate.
Is it because he speaks publicly 700 times a year.
is it because he has a Phd
Is it because university proffessors recognize him as a threat and a formidable opponent
is it because he comes out on top even though he is out numbered.
is it because no one has been able to stump him/
and what gives you the right to call someone a piece of shit? You didn't have a good mother that taught you any manners?
-
Why is Hovind a piece of shit?
Hovind spits out many lies so rapidly that it's impossible to counter all of them in an oral debate. Here's one example (note: this is just 1 of 6 pages).
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-yea.html
As you can see, the amount of effort and time spent refuting only 15 of his lies is far far greater than the amount of time it takes for him to spread them. Hovind relies on a rapid assault of misconceptions and his fake credentials to impress gullible audiences. However, he avoids written debates where his arguments can be examined in detail like the plague. These sites do a great job of exposing his lies.
Analysis of Kent Hovind
http://www.kent-hovind.com
A Close Look at Dr. Hovind's List of Young-Earth Arguments and Other Claims
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood.html
Till-Hovind Debate
http://www.skeptictank.org/hovind2.htm
A Response to Kent Hovind's Coast-to-Coast AM Interview
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/hovind_fractured_fairy_tales.htm
Furthermore, the fact you defend Kent Hovind proves that you don't know what the hell you are talking about. Look up his credentials. He's not even a real Dr. like he claims. He recieved a "Ph.D" in Christian education from a diploma mill. Hovind says that he's been teaching science for 15 yrs. However, he neglects to mention that he taught at a christian school he founded b/c no public schools would hire him. ;)
-
There, you saved him the trouble of doing his homework. As for him not knowing what he is talking about, we established that on the previous page.
-
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MMMMM!!!!
If its boring then why do you respond. The big bang theory is mythology
... as opposed to the talking-snake theory...
-
The Bible is a respectable source of information for millions of people. Until you can come up with something solid to disprove it then it will always be respectable. As far as it being a science book, well you can call what you like history, science, religion, I'll call it the Bible.
Yes, why do science or any of that "logic" stuff when we have the Bible...
People already tried having the Bible as a source of information. That was called the Middle Ages.
Only when the Bible and the meddling clerics and religious prudes were told to mind their own business did mankind really begin to understand disease, the universe, the human body, and all those other wonderful things we learned since the Enlightenment.
-
Yes, why do science or any of that "logic" stuff when we have the Bible...
People already tried having the Bible as a source of information. That was called the Middle Ages.
Only when the Bible and the meddling clerics and religious prudes were told to mind their own business did mankind really begin to understand disease, the universe, the human body, and all those other wonderful things we learned since the Enlightenment.
umm actually int he middle ages very few people knew what was written in the Bible becuase:
1. few knew how to read
2. Masses were said in latin
Science had it's uses for clerics in war, no one questioned our origins then becuase anything outside the church doctrine meant a personal barbecue.
People were told what to believe for the purpose of control not for defining the truth.
-
Good point. OzmO, but the Middle Ages were also the period of the supremacy of religion and clerical authority. Never since has the Bible held such sway over public life, and I hope, never again!
-
Good point. OzmO, but the Middle Ages were also the period of the supremacy of religion and clerical authority. Never since has the Bible held such sway over public life, and I hope, never again!
Me too. Religion should forever be a personal thing.
-
Surely Onetimehard is a gimick no?
-
Good point. OzmO, but the Middle Ages were also the period of the supremacy of religion and clerical authority. Never since has the Bible held such sway over public life, and I hope, never again!
The public were allowed to read the bible in the middle ages?Or just told what to do without any room for critical thought?
-
People already tried having the Bible as a source of information. That was called the Middle Ages.
No, columbusdude82, not the Bible. In the Middle Ages, Roman Catholic dogma and traditions were the source of information. The Bible actually contradicts these traditions and dogma. The Catholic church knew this, so they had the Bible translated to Latin and outlawed any other translation of the Bible.
As OzmO said, the general population could not read, let alone read Latin. As OzmO said, mass was in Latin. Any educated person who could read Latin was still not allowed to read the Bible. The Bible could be read only by church leaders.
Many Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek copies of the Bible were collected and hidden from the public, and other copies were destroyed. Translating the Bible to the language of the common man was outlawed.
-
Where did our Nobel laureate go ??? Is he off to Sweden already ???
-
Come back, O Nobel-winning one!
We could use some more of your ground-breaking scientific discoveries!!!
-
Our brilliant scientist is back!
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOMMMMMM!!!!!
Actually that makes more sense then anything. Think about it, The first man and women wrote about themselves. This is the most obvious thing to do considering we (nowadays) store information about everything including things that don't really matter. If this wasn't true why was there no oppisition about this concept in the past, 3000 years ago in the days of the trojens or the days of king David or king Benhadad of syria, or later dates from Assyria and Babylonia. I mean wouldn't it be easy to know that a flood didn't happen 1400 years earlier.
BTW almost everything you've learned in your life has come from a book
Do the planets have a stamp on the that sais "hi, I'm Jupitor and I've been living here for 4.6 billion years''? and do the dinosaure bones have a tag when they get dugged out saying " Im 65 million years old"? and has A Macro-evolution ever been observed? NO NO NO. All you know about a bone buried in the ground is that it was once a life form that died.
You call that reason? I call that faith.
I must say some of the things you say sound intelligent, but some of the things you say are plain stuped.
Oh, the irony right there... but I'm afraid it is lost on him!!!
World not being perfect....huh. If you shrunk the earth to the size of a pool ball, it would be just as round and just as smooth. If the earth was 1 querter of an astronamical mile closer to the sun we would roast, and 1 q further we would freeze.
Beachbum was obviously saying the earth was perfect in comparising to other heavenly body's not your fantasy of a planet that evolved from an object the size of a grain of sand that exploded 20 billion years ago.
bombarded...lol. I 100% agree with you on the bacteria and yes Micro-evolution exist, but it should be called something else because the name implies that it is proof that evelution is real. But there are limits to mutations; in the case of the bacteria, it can change over and over , but it will always be bacteria. A monkey cannot turn into a human and nothing of this sort has ever been observed.
A lot of people on earth believe in evolution and God, nobody's perfect. This could be because they hold there faith without going into direct detail about either subject. Personally I believe its foolish to believe in both, afterall they are direct oppisites. If cristians believe in evolution does this mean they won't be saved? Absolutely not. Of the few that have studied creation and evolution and still belive in both, more then likely its because in the Bible it states that 1 day for God is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like one day, hence they make the false assumption that the six day creation plus one day rest is not a litteral term.
hope this helps.
At first I thought you were just kidding around, but now I see that you are at the very least interested and approaching this subject with an open mind. I too believe that it was possible that Adam and Eve looked different then the way humans do now. Possibly taller and bigger bone structures maybe a different pigment in the skin, maybe less hair maybe more hair, possibly different tones in their voices, maybe they could here better, possibly bigger and stronger tendons and ligaments and of course they lived over 900 years. This all changed after the flood because pre-flood created things more impressively due to a richer atmospheric preasure. Evidence of this all over the world; example, elephant- willy mammoth, tiger- sabertooth. Clearly this is the oppisite of evolution. Miner changes occur within the species but there are bounderies and laws that will not be broken.
The Bible is perfectly clear on the following;( quick outline for you so you get a better understanding)
4000 bc- Adam and Eve, lived past 900
2400 bc- Noah and the flood, everybody came from Noah
1800 bc- Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the 12 tribes of Isreal
1350 bc- Moses and the ten commanments, the exodus and the crossing of the red sea
1010 bc- King Saul, King David, and King Solomon.
930 bc- Divided Kingdom
700 bc- Assyria conquers Samaria
550 bc- Babylonian Exile
450 bc- Persian rule
320 bc- Alexander the great, Greek rule
year 0 - Jesus, during Roman rule
As you can see there is no room for Cosmic evolution, Steller evolution, Chemical evelution, Organic evolution, or Macro evolution.
This is like having a German sheppard and a putol, although different they are both still dogs if a dog changed into cat then that would be evidance, but the only change is in size, means nothing we even havw human midgets.
Better yet, The size of the matter that exploded was smaller the this period.
Isn't that like saying 1 + 1 = 656353537374335755356453 753737345356337655653444 553453
IS THIS GUY FOR REAL???
Please, please, loco, tell me this is your gimmick account that you amuse yourself with...
-
Our brilliant scientist is back!
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOMMMMMM!!!!!
Oh, the irony right there... but I'm afraid it is lost on him!!!
IS THIS GUY FOR REAL???
Please, please, loco, tell me this is your gimmick account that you amuse yourself with...
I think he is real and he lives in trailer in Kentucky, right near the creationist museum. :-\
-
Look up his credentials. He's not even a real Dr. like he claims. He recieved a "Ph.D" in Christian education from a diploma mill. Hovind says that he's been teaching science for 15 yrs. However, he neglects to mention that he taught at a christian school he founded b/c no public schools would hire him. ;)
ouch.
-
i love this thread ;D.
why do creationists think that people in scientific fields are hiding some sinister secret?
...
That's the creationists' main line of argumentation against evolution: it's a device constructed by Satan to draw mankind from godliness into secularism. The Bible is true and god created all. Evolution is at odds with the bible therefore it is a tool of Satan.
Makes sense to me.