I challenge everybody...now.

[loco]

Onetimehard asked for proof of evolutionary change above the level of species(Macroevolution), while making the point that if the earth is thousands and not millions of years old, Macroevolution could not have happened because it requires millions of years.  In other words, he asked for proof that humans evolved from apelike ancestors.

Instead of the proof that he asked for, he got insults.  But I don't recall him insulting anybody back.

Anyway, this is Onetimehard's debate.  He can defend himself.

[OzmO]

Onetimehard asked for proof of evolutionary change above the level of species(Macroevolution), while making the point that if the earth is thousands and not millions of years old, Macroevolution could not have happened because it requires millions of years.  In other words, he asked for proof that humans evolved from apelike creatures.

Instead of the proof that he asked for, he got insults.  But I don't recall him insulting anybody back.

Anyway, this is Onetimehard's debate.  He can defend himself.

What do you think the point is with the rule about not using evidence dating?

[Decker]

Onetimehard asked for proof of evolutionary change above the level of species(Macroevolution), while making the point that if the earth is thousands and not millions of years old, Macroevolution could not have happened because it requires millions of years.  In other words, he asked for proof that humans evolved from apelike ancestors.

Instead of the proof that he asked for, he got insults.  But I don't recall him insulting anybody back.

Anyway, this is Onetimehard's debate.  He can defend himself.

His original challenge was this:

The challenge is this...You must present evidence that contributes to evolution directly or indirectly, but there is one stipulation. THE RULE IS THAT YOU CAN'T USE EVIDENCE THAT REQUIRE MEASURED DATES.

I showed him evidence/link showing that his challenge was based on a misunderstanding of radioactive dating.

For my trouble, he calls me a 'fool.'

So forgive me if I do not jump on your Onetimehard conciliatory bandwagon.

[The Master]

Nevertheless, it is neither intelligent nor scientific to argue that all of us should accept a theory just because the overwhelming majority of experts accept it.  The overwhelming majority of experts have been wrong before, and they can be and they will be wrong again. 

Science is not human, but scientists and experts are fallible humans.  The scientific method is not perfect, and even if it was perfect, it is conducted by fallible humans.

As for gravity, that is different.  Gravity is observed, tested and accepted by all of us every day.  That is by all of us and not just by the overwhelming majority of experts.

Of course, nothing is perfect.. BUT:

Your arguments does not hold for this discussion. The "experts" does not only agree, but the scientific data confirms the beliefs of the experts (lol).

The scientific method in its theoretical form = practically perfect. Many things can screw it up when applied in the real world, but when there = many many experiments in the natural sciences that leads to the conclusions of the experts, like in this case, then its pretty intelligent to assume that the conclusions = reliable.

[The Master]

I've been busy at work.

My opinions of OneTimeHard is that he is a good person and a good Christian.  He has been made fun of, insulted and ridiculed, yet he has not insulted anybody back and he seems to have kept his cool. 

I don't believe that he is giving us Christians a bad name because he has kept a good attitude.  Christianity is not about how much you know, but about how much you care.

Dude, "onetimehithard" asked for a debate, yet acts like a little child instead of responding to solid, serious arguments from serious posters.

He ain't showing respect for anybody, and he refuses to debate when he asked for it in the first place.

He's either retarded, completely brainwashed or an idiot... And his attitude is horrendous at best.

[columbusdude82]

loco, I asked for your opinion of Mr Hard's scientific breakthroughs, not of his person

[Deicide]

Dude, "onetimehithard" asked for a debate, yet acts like a little child instead of responding to solid, serious arguments from serious posters.

He ain't showing respect for anybody, and he refuses to debate when he asked for it in the first place.

He's either retarded, completely brainwashed or an idiot... And his attitude is horrendous at best.

In particular, he has shown You Master no respect. He shall be taught to fear and serve the Mad Lord; Your loyal servant and priest shall ensure it!

In the name of the Lord of Madness,

[OTHstrong]

What do you think the point is with the rule about not using evidence dating?

The point is simple. It is easy for someone to believe in evolution if the dating system is not questioned because they are trained into believing that the earth is billions of years old. When the evolutionist states this happened long ago, he shields himself from proving it because he can't go back in time . If someone doesn't believe in a point  in the evolutionists argument they may still believe the earth is old. The whole foundation of evolution is based on these inaccurate dating methods. if you break that then evolution falls; such a big theory held by such a little string, very weak link. If these methods of dating are so accurate then why do they constantly contradict themselves. I don't state references because there are thousands of cases you can easily find, but if you insist I'll present over a hundred cases. Why do dinosaur bones always show up less then 60 000 years in carbon dating test; It is such an embarrassing problem, that most dating experts won't even date bones from dinosaurs, the same bones that the geologic column shows to be 65 000 000 years. One method shows 65 000 000 and another method shows 60 000 yet you don't see a problem with this.

You guys asked why I think the earth isn't old.....because there are signs all over the place that lead to young earth. The human population was less then a billion during the Amercan revolution and now we are creeping up to 7 billion. Probably less then 200 million during Jesus' day; does the population reach an equilibrium for millions of years and then start again, no. The population is on par with Biblical time not evolution time. Have you heard of leap second every few years. This means the earth is slowing down at a rate of approximately one hour every 6 years; not a problem for us, huge problem for the evolutionist. The sun gives away tremendous amounts of volume every day. You think it can lose weight for over 4 billion years, even if it could this would mean that it was obviously bigger, a bigger sun = a hot planet that wouldn't be capable of sustaining live. Just to name a few.

 You speak that anyone believing in a world wide flood is crazy. You should know that they teach everybody at the elementary school level that if the poler ice in the north pole and in the south pole melted that this would cover the whole surface of the earth. We know that the north pole was liveable in the past because we find tropical animals buried under the ice, hence the ice wasn't there and if it wasn't there then where was it?

I wasn't directing anything to you OzmO.

[OTHstrong]

I meant 1 hour every 6 000 years, sorry.

[tonymctones]

The point is simple. It is easy for someone to believe in evolution if the dating system is not questioned because they are trained into believing that the earth is billions of years old. When the evolutionist states this happened long ago, he shields himself from proving it because he can't go back in time . If someone doesn't believe in a point  in the evolutionists argument they may still believe the earth is old. The whole foundation of evolution is based on these inaccurate dating methods. if you break that then evolution falls; such a big theory held by such a little string, very weak link. If these methods of dating are so accurate then why do they constantly contradict themselves. I don't state references because there are thousands of cases you can easily find, but if you insist I'll present over a hundred cases. Why do dinosaur bones always show up less then 60 000 years in carbon dating test; It is such an embarrassing problem, that most dating experts won't even date bones from dinosaurs, the same bones that the geologic column shows to be 65 000 000 years. One method shows 65 000 000 and another method shows 60 000 yet you don't see a problem with this.

You guys asked why I think the earth isn't old.....because there are signs all over the place that lead to young earth. The human population was less then a billion during the Amercan revolution and now we are creeping up to 7 billion. Probably less then 200 million during Jesus' day; does the population reach an equilibrium for millions of years and then start again, no. The population is on par with Biblical time not evolution time. Have you heard of leap second every few years. This means the earth is slowing down at a rate of approximately one hour every 6 years; not a problem for us, huge problem for the evolutionist. The sun gives away tremendous amounts of volume every day. You think it can lose weight for over 4 billion years, even if it could this would mean that it was obviously bigger, a bigger sun = a hot planet that wouldn't be capable of sustaining live. Just to name a few.

 You speak that anyone believing in a world wide flood is crazy. You should know that they teach everybody at the elementary school level that if the poler ice in the north pole and in the south pole melted that this would cover the whole surface of the earth. We know that the north pole was liveable in the past because we find tropical animals buried under the ice, hence the ice wasn't there and if it wasn't there then where was it?

I wasn't directing anything to you OzmO.

Im not sure about the carbon dating as my knowledge of that is limited to what i learned in chemisty and biology but on the surface the other three seem fairly weak in arguement but i would like to research them so plz post some links. There is a man by the name of malthus that you should look up he was very interested in the growth of global populations and its causes and reasons for regression as well, the world by the way has regressed in population many times and there are some reasons that might coincide with the earth being as old as scientist believe and the population not being as high as you believe it should be

The finding tropical animals on the ice caps ive never heard of either so plz post links for me, but i think that this is somewhat contradictory in a way because if the ice caps werent there, then like you said the water would cover the entire land surface so how would the creatures have lived.
I always thought of it like this a Global flood in the time of moses could have been a flood of what moses considered the "world" which might not necissarily mean the entire world  after all the world was considered flat not to long ago, do you think moses knew the world was round and just didnt pass it on to anybody.

plz post a few links

[columbusdude82]

You talk as if you knew what you're talking about.

How about getting a couple years' worth of college before you start teaching us science...

[Deicide]

You talk as if you knew what you're talking about.

How about getting a couple years' worth of college before you start teaching us science...

You too shall be made to kneel before the might of the Mad God!

[MMC78]

; It is such an embarrassing problem, that most dating experts won't even date bones from dinosaurs, the same bones that the geologic column shows to be 65 000 000 years. One method shows 65 000 000 and another method shows 60 000 yet you don't see a problem with this.

You gotta be a troll, or one of the misinformed people I've ever known.  The practical limit of carbon dating is 50,000 years.   It is a short range dating mechanism, you can't date the dinosaurs with it.  It is ONLY used for the recent past!  To date older events, scientists use lead-uranium dating.

Have you heard of leap second every few years. This means the earth is slowing down at a rate of approximately one hour every 6 years; not a problem for us, huge problem for the evolutionist.

The leap second has NOTHING to do with the slowdown of the earth.  NOTHING.  It is because the axial rotation of the earth doesn't evenly divide it's orbital period.

The sun gives away tremendous amounts of volume every day. You think it can lose weight for over 4 billion years, even if it could this would mean that it was obviously bigger, a bigger sun = a hot planet that wouldn't be capable of sustaining live. Just to name a few.

I want you to explain to me IN DETAIL the duterium-helium fission cycle and the C-N-O cycle before making ANY CLAIMS as to how fission works.  Please explain the rate of loss of using units in terms of joules per killogram per second.

You are beyond wrong with your scientific claims, you're so wrong, you're not even wrong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

[OTHstrong]

I'm not sure about the carbon dating as my knowledge of that is limited to what i learned in chemistry and biology but on the surface the other three seem fairly weak in argument but i would like to research them so plz post some links. There is a man by the name of malthus that you should look up he was very interested in the growth of global populations and its causes and reasons for regression as well, the world by the way has regressed in population many times and there are some reasons that might coincide with the earth being as old as scientist believe and the population not being as high as you believe it should be

The finding tropical animals on the ice caps ive never heard of either so plz post links for me, but i think that this is somewhat contradictory in a way because if the ice caps werent there, then like you said the water would cover the entire land surface so how would the creatures have lived.
I always thought of it like this a Global flood in the time of moses could have been a flood of what moses considered the "world" which might not necissarily mean the entire world  after all the world was considered flat not to long ago, do you think moses knew the world was round and just didnt pass it on to anybody.

plz post a few links

Thanks for keeping this discussion civilized and yes You did not make fun or call names.
I am assuming you mean Noah not Moses, but don't feel bad this is common.

If Noah was faced with a local flood then it wouldn't have rained on the earth for 40 days and 40 nights and the waters wouldn't have stayed on the earth for 150 days. Plus Noah would have just moved instead of building a big boat. What I am about to explain to you is complicated so feel free to ask questions if something doesn't make sense to you.

Chapter 1 verse 6, 7, 8.,,,,, And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament:and it was so. And god called the firmament heaven.

Heaven in this particular verse is referring to the sky and it clearly states that there was water above the sky where the ozone layer is.  This canopy of water not only created more oxygen, but protected us from the chemicals of the sun(radiation) and made the whole earth tropical. With this canopy humans were able to live longer (900 years) and reptiles such as dinosaurs where able to grow to maga proportions, You see Dino skulls with tiny noses. Since it rained for forty days and forty nights then the canopies duties are no longer required, hence less oxygen less life expectancy and now we have seasons, which is why the northpole is practically inhabitable now. So no contradiction there. Since the world had the same environment throughout because of the canopy then everysingle species can pertain to the same continent, unlike today where kangaroos have to live in Australia. which means that it was easy for Noah to find all the animals. The Bible also states that the fountains of the deep were opened and water gushed out, we see signs of this under the waters( the fault lines). To sum this up...The Poler caps were once the flood waters and the flood waters were once water the was in the earth and also part of the canopy.

[Deicide]

You gotta be a troll, or one of the misinformed people I've ever known.  The practical limit of carbon dating is 50,000 years.   It is a short range dating mechanism, you can't date the dinosaurs with it.  It is ONLY used for the recent past!  To date older events, scientists use lead-uranium dating.


The leap second has NOTHING to do with the slowdown of the earth.  NOTHING.  It is because the axial rotation of the earth doesn't evenly divide it's orbital period.

I want you to explain to me IN DETAIL the duterium-helium fission cycle and the C-N-O cycle before making ANY CLAIMS as to how fission works.  Please explain the rate of loss of using units in terms of joules per killogram per second.

You are beyond wrong with your scientific claims, you're so wrong, you're not even wrong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

The sad thing is that because Onetimehard has read a few pages on Answers in Genesis, he can competently argue with people with real knowledge or even professors whose specialty it is to study things such a fission. It's so funny, it's not even funny. Pathetic and sad.

[OTHstrong]

The sad thing is that because Onetimehard has read a few pages on Answers in Genesis, he can competently argue with people with real knowledge or even professors whose specialty it is to study things such a fission. It's so funny, it's not even funny. Pathetic and sad.

I see you guys have taken a new approach on insults

[Deicide]

Thanks for keeping this discussion civilized and yes You did not make fun or call names.
I am assuming you mean Noah not Moses, but don't feel bad this is common.

If Noah was faced with a local flood then it wouldn't have rained on the earth for 40 days and 40 nights and the waters wouldn't have stayed on the earth for 150 days. Plus Noah would have just moved instead of building a big boat. What I am about to explain to you is complicated so feel free to ask questions if something doesn't make sense to you.

Chapter 1 verse 6, 7, 8.,,,,, And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament:and it was so. And god called the firmament heaven.

Heaven in this particular verse is referring to the sky and it clearly states that there was water above the sky where the ozone layer is.  This canopy of water not only created more oxygen, but protected us from the chemicals of the sun(radiation) and made the whole earth tropical. With this canopy humans were able to live longer (900 years) and reptiles such as dinosaurs where able to grow to maga proportions, You see Dino skulls with tiny noses. Since it rained for forty days and forty nights then the canopies duties are no longer required, hence less oxygen less life expectancy and now we have seasons, which is why the northpole is practically inhabitable now. So no contradiction there. Since the world had the same environment throughout because of the canopy then everysingle species can pertain to the same continent, unlike today where kangaroos have to live in Australia. which means that it was easy for Noah to find all the animals. The Bible also states that the fountains of the deep were opened and water gushed out, we see signs of this under the waters( the fault lines). To sum this up...The Poler caps were once the flood waters and the flood waters were once water the was in the earth and also part of the canopy.

Your argument on everything:

A) The Bible is the inerrant word of god
B) Everything in the Bible is infallible
C) Everything that contradicts the Bible is wrong because of B)
D) B) is correct because of A)
E) A) is correct because I say it is.

 

[beatmaster]

wow, listen there was no flood (not global), yes there was one (after finding evidences/archeology = science) but it was local (like any other disaster), damn, they didn't know the earth was round, if the poler ice in the north pole and in the south pole melted, it won't cover the planet, you said it did, please explain how would the creatures and humans have lived/survived (Noah doesn't count)

I also wanna have more info's about The finding of tropical animals on the ice caps, link please!

[Deicide]

wow, listen there was no flood (not global), yes there was one (after finding evidences/archeology = science) but it was local (like any other disaster), damn, they didn't know the earth was round, if the poler ice in the north pole and in the south pole melted, it won't cover the planet, you said it did, please explain how would the creatures and humans have lived/survived (Noah doesn't count)

I also wanna have more info's about The finding of tropical animals on the ice caps, link please!

It's a waste of time. The guy believes in magic, self-resurrecting godmen in loincloths...what else can you expect?

[beatmaster]

It's a waste of time. The guy believes in magic, self-resurrecting godmen in loincloths...what else can you expect?

we can't use anything from millions (not even 10,000) of years ago, but him, he keeps digging in his fairytale book for answers.

gimme a fucking break with Noah already, it's a fairytale, even my son know that!!!

[Necrosis]

we can't use anything from millions (not even 10,000) of years ago, but him, he keeps digging in his fairytale book for answers.

gimme a fucking break with Noah already, it's a fairytale, even my son know that!!!

its fucking incredible that someone would beleive this shit.

[Necrosis]

what i find funny is that particular animals are only find on certain continents thus they couldnt make it to the ark, they would have to cross oceans etc..


LOL... people are so desperate for something more then themselves they will actually beleive childrens stories.

[OTHstrong]

what i find funny is that particular animals are only find on certain continents thus they couldnt make it to the ark, they would have to cross oceans etc..


LOL... people are so desperate for something more then themselves they will actually beleive childrens stories.

I already gave you an answere to that in an above post.

wow, listen there was no flood (not global), yes there was one (after finding evidences/archeology = science) but it was local (like any other disaster), damn, they didn't know the earth was round, if the poler ice in the north pole and in the south pole melted, it won't cover the planet, you said it did, please explain how would the creatures and humans have lived/survived (Noah doesn't count)

I also wanna have more info's about The finding of tropical animals on the ice caps, link please!

It is easy to find sines millions of scientist agree to this. Google anything that has to do with northpole and tropical or animals frozen in northpole or anything along those lines, the most famous one was the willy-mammoth found frozen in a block of ice with algae still in its teeth. I won't give you a any links because most websites or studies showing the Northpole being once tropical refer to 55 million years ago which I obviously don't agree to. Trust me, easy to find. And yes there is enough volume in the glaciers to cover the planet.

[beatmaster]

what i find funny is that particular animals are only find on certain continents thus they couldnt make it to the ark, they would have to cross oceans etc..


LOL... people are so desperate for something more then themselves they will actually beleive childrens stories.

and how did he fit the dinosaurs in there, and every animals in perfect harmony, all the insects...... lolllll

Insects (Class Insecta) are a major group of arthropods and the most diverse group of animals on the Earth, with over a million described species—more than half of all known living organisms with published estimates of undescribed species as high as 30 million, thus potentially representing over 90% of the life forms on the planet. Insects may be found in nearly all environments on the planet, although only a small number of species occur in the oceans where crustaceans tend to predominate instead. There are approximately 5,000 dragonfly species, 2,000 praying mantis, 20,000 grasshopper, 170,000 butterfly and moth, 120,000 fly, 82,000 true bug, 360,000 beetle, and 110,000 bee, wasp and ant species described to date. Estimates of the total number of current species, including those not yet known to science, range from two million to fifty million, with newer studies favouring a lower figure of about six to ten million.

The study of insects (from Latin insectus, meaning "cut into sections") is called entomology, from the Greek εντομος, also meaning "cut into sections"

Insects were among the earliest terrestrial herbivores and they acted as major selection agents on plants. Plants evolved chemical defenses against this herbivory and the insects in turn evolved mechanisms to deal with plant toxins. Many insects make use of these toxins to protect themselves from their predators. And such insects advertise their toxicity using warning colours. This successful evolutionary pattern has also been utilized by mimics. Over time, this has led to complex groups of co-evolved species. Conversely, some interactions between plants and insects are beneficial (see pollination), and coevolution has led to the development of very specific mutualisms in such systems


wow, noah was good  

[beatmaster]

I won't give you a any links because most websites or studies showing the Northpole being once tropical refer to 55 million years ago which I obviously don't agree to. Trust me, easy to find. And yes there is enough volume in the glaciers to cover the planet.

they all agree about 55 million year ago you are right about that.

i know it's easy to find.

nope won't cover the highest mountains