<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Pacific Faith  

Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

July 2 2012 at 10:57 AM
No score for this post
Quantum 

It is rare that you see a "proof" of God vouched for in scientific journals. Some can find cryptic meanings in the works of Nostradamus, others see messages in crop circles. Forget those sources! A better one has been around for millennia.

The ancient Hebrew had no vowels and its 22 letters also represented numbers. The words were placed on the page without punctuation. What a perfect setup that would be for implanting a code. A code that humans were really only going to be able to see once technology reached a particular stage.

"By treating the text as an unbroken string of letters, and selecting sequences of equally spaced letters, three mathematicians discovered 300 hidden pairs of Hebrew words with related meanings in close proximity to one another.

Some of the words involved people who lived and events that occurred long after the Torah was written.

"The odds of the words occurring by chance? Less than one in 50 quadrillion, according to an article by Jeffrey Satinover in the October issue of Bible Review."

Satinover is a psychiatrist and lecturer on the relationship between science and religion. He commented: "I guess the bottom line is, if the research holds up and no flaw is found in the methodology, then I think the implication is clear that the authorship of Genesis is not human."

Unsettling though the implications are to mainstream science, the research has made it past the usual critical hurdles into two scientific journals: Statistical Science and Journal of the Royal Statistical Society.

Scientists familiar with the work can only say that, "Something weird seems to be happening." We certainly agree!

(Briggs, David; "Researchers: Word Patterns in Genesis Suggest Divine Writing," Chillicothe Gazette, October 28, 1995. Cr. J. Fry via COUD-I. COUD-I = Collectors of Unusual Data-International. The Gazette item was based on an Associated Press release.)

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
what proof!

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
July 3 2012, 11:56 AM 

You obviously don't know what "proof" is! But then again you aren't a scientist...

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
For the Silver Spooners

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
July 3 2012, 10:26 PM 

@ What Proof, Firstly Look up the meaning of proof before you go splattering everyone with your stupidity
and secondly all you have to do is look up the references given, journals cited etc etc in the article.
ie) Statistical Science and Journal of the Royal Statistical Society.......Deeeerrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!! This was given in the post. No-one is going to spoon feed you so look it up yourself.

The truth must be hard for you to swallow!!!

Proof may refer to:
Proof (truth), sufficient evidence or argument for the truth of a proposition
Formal proof
Mathematical proof, a convincing demonstration that some mathematical statement is necessarily true
Proof theory, a branch of mathematical logic that represents proofs as formal mathematical objects

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
qwe

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
July 28 2012, 2:13 AM 

The articles in the Statistical Science and Journal of the Royal Statistical Society in fact, do not at all deal with this specific issue, and the authors of those articles would certainly never agree to the way in which their work has been applied. It's another trick used to make pseudo-science nonsense appear as if it were truly investigated, tested, countertested, with the resulting buildup of heaps of evidence to support a theory.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
LOL

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
July 28 2012, 6:47 PM 

qwe this is your OPINION??? and it isnt based on the concensus of professional statisticians that admit that something is happening here. If you know better than those Statisticians then its best that you publish your findings on this matter and lets see if your OPINION or REASEARCH stacks up to the scientific peer review process!!! Good Luck!

We are asked to provide scientific evidence then when it is provided we are told that it isnt scientific evidence despite the FACT that this research was published in very established "Scientific" journals. You represent the defenition of Denial. LOL

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
I doubt it

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
July 29 2012, 5:01 AM 

You're the one who hasn't looked at the actual scientific papers.

Better do so because you've already got egg on your face. What they talk about was misrepresented by the Christian taliban.

Since you're telling everyone else to look up the info and not be lazy, may I suggest the same thing to you?

Look up the scientific journal articles you cited in the first place and see for yourself.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Rationale Thinker

Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
August 5 2012, 11:32 AM 

Has anyone noticed that certain Christian Taliban (i.e extremists) on this board embrace science whenever they get any pseudoscientific evidence (the results never published in any reputable scientific journals) to support certain Bible fables, then are quick to denounce science whenever people bring up some scientific evidence that suggests something in the Bible isn't correct? Good Lord, you can't support or denounce science depending on what the process discovers. What a laugh.

This board has turned in recent months into a battle between non-believers and radical extremist believers. The average person is neither one.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
LMAO

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
August 15 2012, 8:06 AM 

Rational Thinker I doubt it? Maybe you could tell us all how the pseudoscience of Climate Change works, and perpetuate the lie of Global Warming which scientists get trillions of dollars for. Hang on what is the latest name for Global warming? its changed so many times that its hard to keep up with the names.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM TASOL

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 1:44 PM 

Silly boy, just like any cutting edge science, the details of the overall theories change constantly as new evidence comes into the picture. The mere fact that the issue of climate change is becoming more refined as more evidence flows in is pretty good evidence that science works through a process of testing and re-testing, science is flexible, and as more evidence comes into the picture, we'll slowly but surely come up with a fuller understanding of climate change.

You're nothing but an EM NAU expat roaming around all these boards with your lunatic ideas hoping to stupify our people with your conspiracies.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 21 2012, 10:49 PM 

Hey Em Tasol, Have you checked the latest on the London Met Office regarding global warming? or what's it now called, climate change? or better still climate normal?

It is out now. The tricksters have no clothes on. Like evolution, there is no fossil to show for all that silliness. And the Climate refuses to go their way. The planet is not warming and there is no sea level rise.

Sample the CUT & PASTE BELOW. Learn to grow your own mind and not blindly follow the scamming doomsday climate bedwetters, scaring people over nothing.

http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/10591-global-climate-warming-stopped-15-years-ago-uk-met-office-admits

"Global Climate Warming Stopped 15 Years Ago, UK Met Office Admits
WRITTEN BY ALEX NEWMAN, NEW AMERICAN | OCTOBER 15 2012


Didn't you hear? Global warming stopped 15 years ago
Despite playing a key role in advancing climate change hysteria, the United Kingdoms National Weather Service, known as the Met Office, quietly released a report last week conceding that so-called global warming actually stopped more than 15 years ago. The startling admission shows once again that United Nations theories and climate models are wildly inaccurate at best, experts say, meaning multi-trillion dollar schemes to deal with alleged human-caused climate change are at the very least severely misguided. "

And may I add, evolution proponents are cast in the same mold, no facts, just toying around with theories to fool the masses, having been themselves deluded.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
em nau!

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 5:49 PM 

Let's see.

You think climate change is a massive conspiracy fraud of thousands of scientists working together secretly.

You think evolution is another vast conspiracy of thousands of scientists making up data.

And you think the second coming of Jesus Christ is just around the corner and believe everything the Bible says should be taken literally.

Em nau! Do have I described your belief system accurately? Should we throw in (just for variety) that Elvis is still alive?



 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 25 2012, 8:48 PM 

1. Climate has always changed, it is and it will. To charge people to change climate is a con, its crap and is intended to corrupt the nations.
2. Macro-evolution is a hoax. Never happened, not happening, wont happen.
3. The Resurrection of Jesus is historic, changed the world forever. I never said his coming is around the corner. You are lying and living up to your deceptive nature for all to see. Truth does not reside with you.
4. Elvis is dead and buried in Graceland. His remains are still there. Can't say that with Jesus. He was and is truly God come in the flesh.

Believe in the saving power of Jesus, quit telling lies, live life to the fullest from now and beyond.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
10Q!

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 26 2012, 10:34 PM 

Thanks for providing this good evidence that you were the one on the other board providing all kinds of idiotic explanations to convince us that climate change was fake.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 25 2012, 9:16 PM 

The Met Office, a reputable climate office is pointing out serious errors in the projections by warmists to keep the scare alive. Climate research is not a secret conspiracy. It is an open free for all money game joined by all and sundry to cash in on the now crumbling trillion dollar climate industry. They created the scam themselves and when it fails to earn, they go off and hide. Have you seen Al Gore lately? I mean you bought that Inconvenient Truth hook line and sink, did you. Where is Al now?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
I pity yu

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 27 2012, 11:13 PM 

If your the fella whos been going on and on about climate change being fake for months now on scape you seem, what shall I say..... OBSESSED!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Common Sense

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 29 2012, 9:42 AM 

Please tell us where to find this "Met Office" ok? Then we can see for ourselves whether it may be reputable or not.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Check it out

No score for this post
November 5 2012, 4:44 PM 


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 25 2012, 2:35 PM 

Reposted. (sorry, didn't mean to assume your ID, EM TASOL)

Seriously Em Tasol, are you still a kindy feeding off that 'we share common ancestors with worms and apes' nonsense coming off Discovery and National Geographic channels or a grown up 'think for yourself' adult. I know its millions who still believe this junk because they have been thoroughly indoctrinated to believe a lie. But you can be helped, if you want out. Example: If you tell a 4 year old that dinosaurs lived 65 million of years ago and that we came from apes, that will remain fixed to the back of his mind for years, thinking he knows science when he's been served junk. It is sad but millions have been deceived.

There's coming a time when bug to man evolution will be declared as the greatest hoax of all time. Many scientists are coming out, rejecting this foolishness and I mean real hard research scientists. Others know its not tenable, but where else will they go? If it pays, what the heck?

There's coming a time when bug to man evolution will be declared the greatest hoax of all time. My fellow travelers and I are made to feel guilty of arriving there a little too early, but hey the feeling is good when you know you're not being deceived. We know it already but slow learners are joining us all the time.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
little dotty

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 25 2012, 6:52 PM 

Uhhh uhhh uhhhhh uhhhhh but SOMEHOW you're expecting us to believe that you know more what the truth is than thousands of scientists who have spent their entire lives working on the topic.

As if you're more of an expert than them? Or more logical than them??

Sorrrrrrrry buster. Dat don't make any sense atall!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

@ little dotty

No score for this post
October 25 2012, 10:30 PM 

Check the Met Office. Scientists know the Met Office more than you know those climate scientists. The Met's rained on their party.

Instead of checking things out, you roll out the tired old...thousands of scientists line. The met office says it has not been warming and the alarmists know that. But they need to maintain their story to get funding or they'll sink - even if the climate became cooler.

They need to create more scares to be paid by a gullible public or they'll be out of a job. It's that simple.

Do you know what happened to Al Gore? Father of the Inconvenient Truth? The guy is lying low after his hockey stick got smashed. What happened to the Truth AL?

FACT: Global temperature has flat-lined over the past 15 years. The seas are in no danger of rising. Al Gore knew that and bought a fine spread on the west coast AFTER the release of his Inconvenient movie.

No, its not funny anymore!!!!!


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
little dottie

Re: @ little dotty

No score for this post
October 27 2012, 8:36 PM 

To repeat: Uhhh uhhh uhhhhh uhhhhh but SOMEHOW you're expecting us to believe that you know more what the truth is than thousands of scientists who have spent their entire lives working on the topic.

As if you're more of an expert than them? Or more logical than them??

Sorrrrrrrry buster. Dat don't make any sense atall!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

@ Little Dottie

No score for this post
November 5 2012, 4:37 PM 

FROM MAURICE NEWMAN, ONE TIME ABC'S FRONT LINE WARMIST A FEW YEARS AGO

Your thousands of scientists are beginning to lose their clothes and dignity. Climate change is not even high on the US presidential elections as it is fast becoming a dying fad. GOOD NIGHT.

CUT & PASTE Herald Sun, Bolt Blog, November 5, 2012, full article repeated in 'The Australian, same date.

'Maurice Newman, former chairman of the warmist ABC, says the great warming faith is slowly crumbling under its contradictions despite attempts to censor debate:

"When Mother Nature decided in 1980 to change gears from cooler to warmer, a new global warming religion was born, replete with its own church (the UN), a papacy, (the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), and a global warming priesthood masquerading as climate scientists. Selfish humans in rich, polluting countries were blamed for the warming and had to pay for past trespasses by providing material compensation to poor nations as penance. Cutting greenhouse gas emissions became the new holy grail. With a warm wind at their backs, these fundamentalists collected hundreds of billions of dollars from naive governments that adopted their faith on behalf of billions of people. No crusader was ever so effective.

The message was stark. If the non-believers didnt convert immediately, our children and grandchildren would face a hell on earth. The priesthood excommunicated and humiliated sceptics and deniers. Alternative views were not tolerated and, where possible, were suppressed. Did someone mention the dark ages?"


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
anon

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 26 2012, 8:14 AM 

Interesting about YOUR theory "here's coming a time when bug to man evolution will be declared the greatest hoax of all time". Who do you think will declare that evolution is the hoax of all time? Yes, you've declared it, just like the rest of the minority of Christians who take the Bible literally. But the great learning institutions of the world keep asking people like you, "where is the evidence that evolution is wrong". In return, people like you provide the same simplistic answers which conveniently ignore the majority evidence that goes against what you say. The great learning institutions of the world shake their head at your illogic, then after throwing the remaining evidence at people like you that favours evolution, continue doing their thing and teaching the truth..... while you minority stone age creatures continue to play in your ignorance.

I think the reason why people like yourselves are so stubborn is because the truth represents such a threat to the very core of your belief system and you can't bear to contemplate what might happen to you when you realise that the crutch of your entire life is based in great part on vivid imaginations and the distortions of time.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 28 2012, 6:37 PM 

@ anon.

There's no stubborness on this side. We've seen the literature and arguments. We've seen right through and and find nothing worth staking our lives on. Like evolving from fish fairy tales.

Stubborness is refusing to see outside of your little indoctrinated box of the evolution religion.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM TASOL

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 22 2012, 12:47 PM 

Seriously Em Tasol, are you still a kindy feeding off that 'we share common ancestors with worms and apes' nonsense coming off Discovery and National Geographic channels or a grown up 'think for yourself' adult. I know its millions who still believe this junk because they have been thoroughly indoctrinated to believe a lie. But you can be helped, if you want out. Example: If you tell a 4 year old that dinosaurs lived 65 million of years ago and that we came from apes, that will remain fixed to the back of his mind for years, thinking he knows science when he's been served junk. It is sad but millions have been deceived.

There's coming a time when bug to man evolution will be declared as the greatest hoax of all time. Many scientists are coming out, rejecting this foolishness and I mean real hard research scientists. Others know its not tenable, but where else will they go? If it pays, what the heck?

There's coming a time when bug to man evolution will be declared the greatest hoax of all time. My fellow travelers and I are made to feel guilty of arriving there a little too early, but hey the feeling is good when you know you're not being deceived. We know it already but slow learners are joining us all the time.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
haha!

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
October 28 2012, 11:03 PM 

The only ones who call climate change a pseudoscience are the conspiracy theorists..... and we know conspiracy theorists are widely perceived as nutters!!!!!!!!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Embracing science on one hand, denouncing it on the other

No score for this post
November 5 2012, 4:52 PM 

No mate. Its not a conspiracy any more. It's an open scam. It's crumbling and like any other fad, its days are numbered. You've been had, buster.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
yu need eyeglasses!

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 1:09 PM 

Again (since you can't read): The articles in the Statistical Science and Journal of the Royal Statistical Society in fact, do not at all deal with this specific issue.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Proof?

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 18 2012, 2:25 AM 

Why is it that the scientists themselves aren't claiming that they have this "proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis"?

I've looked all over the internet and can't find any indication that scientists believe there is scientific proof of divine authorship of genesis in the Bible! I can't see any scientific papers with this claim, nor any true scientists from reputable institutions.

This leads me to ask why are you so confident that you're smarter than an army of professionally trained scientists? If you're so smart, why haven't you published a refereed scientific paper claiming that you have proof of divine authorship of genesis?

Please explain.

Thank you.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
July 4 2012, 9:46 AM 

@ what proof.

"You obviously don't know what "proof" is! But then again you aren't a scientist..."

Typical evolutionist response using the 'shut up' clause, patronising inquiring minds that only evolutionists have the key to knowledge.

Once one reads into macro-evolution with an open mind, the obvious fabrications will jump at you and you'll reject the made-up tales.

You don't need a PhD from Charlie Darwin University to know when you're being misled.

Please stick to science and report on observations and repeatable experiments.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anon

The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
July 5 2012, 4:41 AM 

EM NAU,

Your brain works like that of any conspiracy theorist. You keep accusing everyone else of distorting the truth but the fact is (and will probably always remain) that the great majority of highly educated people don't buy into your little stories and theories.

The collective power of thinking minds to discern the truth will always be far greater than the scattered brains who settle on outlandish theories, then pick and choose only information that seems to back up what they're thinking.

There was a discussion some time back on this board talking about a phenomenon known as 'cherry picking' - people who pick and choose only what information suits their pet ideas.

You, my friend, are the ultimate cherry picker! And lest you use your tired old retort that scientists do the same thing, remember again that science and the secrets it reveals only proceeds through the COLLECTIVE wisdom of heaps of thinking minds from very learned people undoubtedly far more educated than you!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
July 9 2012, 10:47 AM 

"But the fact is, that the great majority of scientists...", thee you go again.

Numbers of people do not make up facts. If 80% of people believed the moon was made of cheese, does that make it a fact? What facts are you talking about? We're not talking about the 'fact' that there are large numbers of people believing in one religion or another.

Do those large numbers have the scientific facts?

All they have are unbelievable fairy tales.

Facts do not necessarily reside with great numbers of believers.

We talk about the lack of fossils linking man to single-celled creatures. That is fact.
There is no link, either living or fossil. THAT IS FACT. You avoid that fact but rush to the number of evolutionary scientists as fact.

Your fact is in numbers of believers. That does not deal with facts at all.

That is why I left evolution as a credible scientific discipline because creation science made more sense.

It's not in numbers.
We deal with facts. And evolution is a lie. Bug to man evolution never happened. That is fact.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
sorry fella!

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 1:15 PM 

You are confusing 2 types of people - general public whose speciality most certainly isn't evolution (!) and scientists who have spent their careers studying evolution, yet are hardly a small group nor always a cooperative group.

Thus, your moon is made of cheese example holds no water!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM TASOL

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 1:38 PM 

How could there possibly be any fossils linking single celled organisms to man when it took literally billions of years, with a megamillion small evolutionary steps in between to go from the simple to the most complex, how could there possibly be an intermediary fossil????? I mean, what you say doesn't even accept the basic premise of evolution which is small step by step changes, taking place over billions of years.

Truly your brain seems to be screwed on backwards. If you're going to present an argument, do us all a favour and first look at the premise you have to argue against.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 21 2012, 10:29 PM 

Didn't anyone tell you that the whole chain of fossils is missing, dead or alive. Am I the one duped into the gratest hoax the world will ever know?

Honestly, where are the missing links? Where are they?

Dont go to the drawings. I mean where are they?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
zzzzzz

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 5:53 PM 

How many times has the weakness in your argument that there are 'no missing links' been explained to you, yet just like a repeating CD you just go on and on as if you didn't hear a thing.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 21 2012, 11:54 PM 

You want a premise. I'll give you one.

You're ASSUMING that it took 'megamillion small evolutionary steps from the simple to the most complex as brainwashed by the evolution religion.' The fact is that it has never been observed, and you admit it, there are no fossils. That's a good start. THERE IS NO FOSSIL EVIDENCE. If there are no fossils to draw ANY CONCLUSION as you declare, how come people say we came from fish or monkey-like beings, etc. How do you make that connection if there are no fossils, living included? That is simple logic. No fossils, don't make things up.

Charles Darwin was hopeful in his day that fossils would be discovered to support his theory. But he admitted that if there were no fossils, he feared the worst. It's still Darwin's Theory to this day.

If small changes took that many megamillion (I don't know how long that is but even if you leave open a void for trillions of years, nothing will ever, even happen by chance) years, surely parts of that evolutionary parade should still run showing those little steps today. We should see at least some 'chains' still intact. But nature bluntly says no. It never happened and it won't happen. We are the product of a master designer who created every animal according to its type. We as humans are special. We have no relatives amongst lower order creatures. If you think otherwise, its your choice. And you'll start to talk and behave like them. As a man thinks, so is he.






 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
oh geez

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 5:55 PM 

A thousand murders a day aren't "observed" by any outside witness either yet ample circumstantial evidence convicts the murderers all the time and sends them to prison.

Think logically!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
again we instruct this stupid white guy

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 6:03 PM 

The word "theory" in science is granted only to those ideas that have the biggest mountains of evidence in their support. Your ignorance shines as bright as the sun!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 25 2012, 9:36 PM 

You claim to have mountains of evidence, but when I ask to see that mountain, its all inference. Inference is words with no substance. Piles and piles of literatuire can be written about nothing. Its filling in the gaps with words peppered with could, may have, probably being their little escape routes. Words no not build a mountain.

You don't have it. And don't call me names. I can read into the literature. In know the study methods. It's all inference and guesswork, paddings and falsehoods with no evidence of bug to man evolution. NONE.

Stop deceiving people as if evolution stands on a mountain of evidence when it falls flat on its face.


I have a question.

Has the bug to man evolutionary chain been established?

Let me guess the answers, First, they'll call me names instead of answering the very genuine question. THEY WILL AVOID ANSWERING THE QUESTION but refer to some millions of scientists, thusands of universities and bla bla bla. That is a typical empty-head evolution response. In all the above answers, that has been the pattern - name calling, generalisation of numbers without facts.

The answer is, there is no link.



 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Sis

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 27 2012, 11:21 PM 

My dear, if we didn't use inference in our lives, we wouldn't know a damn thing about anything! You're actually saying that because scientists have to infer, that what they infer can't be the truth?
I keep shaking my head in puzzlement about the way your brain works. I mean truly you're a real piece of work you know!
The sad thing is that you may influence some of my bros and sistas to thinkn you're actually being logical. I have no idea what you do for a living, but I'd hate to have to live with you day after day and listen to this nonstop nonsense.
What's expecially hilarious is that you go on and on about scientists infering, then you state this (in your own words): "I can read into the literature."
If that don't sound like inference!
Others have stated that you are an expat and I suspect they're right. There would be no wantok that I've ever known or met who would think in such a crazy way then go on and on about it.


Sis

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
November 4 2012, 12:35 AM 

The inference here is the construction of molecules to man chain from your pond to your parliament. That is all inference. No substance at all to back it up. Drawings and guesswork are not evidence.

I shouldn't even say inference which is more generous in the contexts. Fabrications would do.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
man blo ples

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
November 4 2012, 10:07 PM 

I think it's hilarious that you can ignore thousands of scientific papers by simply saying "no substance at all to back it up".

You can live in your own little dream world & retreat back to the caveman days.......... that's your right.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Baruni Dump

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 27 2012, 3:21 PM 

Actually, the evidence that scientists have come up with regard to evolution, including actual lab experiments, indictes that evolution takes place one small mutation at a time. But it takes lots of time for the changes to add up to signficant results.
Read about evolution before you criticise. Most of the anti evolution comments on this board are so ridiculous and obviously come from people who are criticising something they don't even understand.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 29 2012, 6:29 PM 

Why then does it only happen at molecular level? Why has everything stopped evolving above the micro level? What is being observed at molecular level has always happened, mutations within its kind. Mutations never lead to higher level organisms. Mutations in nature randomly interfere with the existing information, only for the creature's discomfort and eventual demise - nothing beneficial. Mutations only rearranges existing information which often leads to defects and loss of information. Mutations will not lead to higher level organisms. Each organisms has its genetic code written into its DNA and it will always reproduce its own kind.

A dog has its unique code written into its DNA. It will always be a dog and it will produce a dog, never a non-dog in a million years.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
wilz

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 29 2012, 10:05 PM 

i agree emnau. Mutations in genes never result in a higher complex better working organism. They only lid to deterioration of the cells resulting in various deformities in the overall organism. And will be passed on to the next generation and will continue killing its hosts. Never is it beneficial as emnau has Stated.

In the case of fertilizers and what scientists falsey assume that insects
Are evolving to resist chemicals like ddt. This is not evolution at all. Its only the bodies natural resistance to foreign compounds etc. For example humans who take antibiotics often will build up resistance to it. Therefore the next time they take antibiotics it may not work.

Thats no way shape or form evolution. Evolution is an animal evolving into another. Nature does not show that at all.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Da Pope

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 21 2012, 2:08 PM 

Honestly, EM NAU, for a white person your illogic is more than amazing-it is a MIRACLE that your illogic takes on such great dimensions! happy.gif

Of course the number of believers don't necessarily confirm whether what they believe is factual. However, facts tend to attract believers amongst thinking humans, and thus when a large number of thinking humans tend to subscribe to a certain viewpoint, it is a reasonable indicator that they're on to something true.

Yu yet skelim na bai yu luksave.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
July 9 2012, 4:46 PM 

Great.

So lets see the evidence of all that COLLECTIVE wisdom.

Is there evidence of man evolving from lower forms of life?
Is man still evolving?

These and many more questions are being asked to which they have no clear answers.

I am reading all that literature and reject them as fabrications because the evidence is simply not there.

Numbers of believers do not make evolution as fact.

There is no evidence to suggest that man evolved from lower forms of life, nor is man still evolving, nor can that be said of any other creature like horses or dogs. Things appear as they always have been on the fossil record and it always will be the case. Macro-evolution never happened.

But you prefer to go with vast numbers of believers and that's your choice. I won't, and many more are waking up to the lies.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
askim tasol

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 1:40 PM 

How did all skin colours and shapes of humans come about from 1 couple Adam and Eve if humans haven't been undergoing evolution?

Of course there's been evolution. And there is clear evidence of evolution occurring using Adam and Eve as a basis.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Believers come in 2 forms....................

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 20 2012, 7:56 PM 

I think you need to share with all of us all that literature you're reading that you're rejecting as fabrications "because the evidence is simply not there."

One scientific paper will do. We can all at least get the abstract of the paper via Google.

But to be truthful, I have a hunch that you're lying. My hunch is based on the evidence that refereed scientific papers don't have a chance in hell of actually being published if "the evidence simply wasn't there" in that paper. Thus, there is something more than a bit odd with your conclusion.

You talk about which group of believers the readers here should join. I think the reason why you're getting everything mixed up is that when you think "believers" you're thinking of faith believers. In fact, scientific believers who are specialists in a particular field wouldn't accept anything based on faith. If they're a believer, it based on evidence.

I would tend to believe evidence-based believers a lot faster than I'd believe faith-based believers...... for obvious reasons!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
evidence

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 28 2012, 10:20 PM 

There is only evidence of progressive evolution: the very lowest forms of life evolving to slightly more complicated forms, etc etc etc leading to the most complex form. If there are a million steps in between a very simple organism and its evolution into a more complex organism, then you're certainly not going to find 1 fossil that connects step 1 with step 1 million. Instead you'll find fossils with all the intermediate steps.

All the humanoid ape like skulls and bones found in Africa indicates where we humans came from as our closest relatives.

I think the question of whether man is still evolving is up in the air however as another posting indicates, we wouldn't all have a range of skin colours if there had not been evolution from the original human beings.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Noxi

"reconstructions"

No score for this post
October 29 2012, 4:36 AM 

The reader needs to understand that none of these "reconstructions" are representative of empirical scientific fact! They are purely products of non-empirical, "subjective" metaphysical beliefs!! This is "imaginary pseudo-science" for the following reasons.

http://www.omniology.com/FROG-EVOLUTION.html There are five, totaly arbitrary and subjective problems with "all" paleoanthropological reconstructions of "extinct" fossil creatures. They are: 1-classifying them as hominid, hominoid, or humanoid. 2-skin color and texture (hairy or not). 3-hair color and type. 4-muscle tone and fat tissue mass. 5-eye color. If you don't believe this is true, I challenge you to go to a library and look through 3 or 4 books, written by different authors (with illustrations) on just one of our supposed Imagolutionary ancestors and you'll see for yourself that it is!

For years these examples, of genetic variation and human manipulation, have been used by the metaphysical scientific community to imply that macro-evolution, an unobserved metaphysical theory, is therefore true.

Some scientists admit the fallacy of this non-empirical assumption. R.B. Goldschmidt, American Scientist 40:84 (1952)
It is true that nobody thus far has produced a new species of genus, etc. by macromutation.
It is equally true that nobody has produced even a species by the selection of micromutations.

Because small changes (micro-evolution) can be observed or produced in roses, dogs,fruit flies and Mickey Mouse cartoons, in no way verifies macro-evolution than the "biogenetic law" of embryological recapitulation, a fraudulant theory, was claimed to do in the past.

W.R. Bird, Origin of the Species Revisited, Vol. 1, pp. 196-197.
"Raup and Stanley call the biogenetic law `largely in error'; Ehrlich and Holm note its `shortcomings' and its place in `biological mythology'; Danson says that it is `intellectually barren'; de Beer refers to the `evidence against the "biogenetic law" of recapitulation in Haeckel's sense'; Encyclopedia Britannica calls it `in error'; and even Mayr of Harvard describes the biogenetic law as `invalid.' In fact, Haeckel, the formulator of the "biogenetic law,' supported it with `faked' drawings."

FOR A SCIENTIST TO "USE PARTS OF SEVERAL INDIVIDUALS" TO RECONSTRUCT A SKULL AND THEN HAVE THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY CANONIZE IT TO THE WORLD AS "PROOF OF HUMAN EVOLUTION" IS NOTHING LESS THAN INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY AND ACADEMIC FRAUD!

THE ONLY "FACT" THAT IS INDISPUTABLE ABOUT THIS SILLORY IS THERE IS NOT ENOUGH INDISPUTABLE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE TO VERIFY IT! ALL OF THESE RECONSTRUCTIONS ARE BASED MAINLY ON THE FRAGMENTARY AND INCOMPLETE FOSSIL REMAINS OF LUCY AND LUCKYS SKULLS.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
mini me

skin color not from evolution

No score for this post
October 29 2012, 9:38 AM 

skin color is merely a lack of or abundance of one pigmant- melanin. If you line up people with diffrent skin color u see that they all are not diffrent colors BUT diffrent shades of the SAME color melanin.
Thus skin color is just a product of lack or more of melanin.Like the height you have. God made us diffrent so it would be intresting. Life would be boring if every1 was the same. Even animals and plants. Along with elements and compounds. All diffrent but work together.

And if evolution was true then we should be.seeing it in everyday animals....but we dont. Its either invisble or only in scientists.imaginations.

Bye

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
July 9 2012, 5:32 PM 

Anon.

I write because the strength and evidence provided by creation science is mounting and firming up, addressing all aspects of science and nature. There's no cherry picking nor half-hearted effort by Creation scientists who publish their works fearlessly. Such is the threat to their religion that evolutionists shun debate and guard their theory ferociously, expelling those who dare challenge groupthink science: "Expelled - No Intelligence Allowed".

Evolutionists cling to their beliefs because it pays to hold their pet theory. It is just that, a theory.

No we will not compromise with falsehoods, neither will we be silenced by the 'know alls' who think
they have the key to knowledge due to sheer numbers. Science is based on facts, not numbers.
Macro-evolution and facts do not belong in the same sentence.

We believe that God created all things and in the manner described in the Bible.
Nature and the fossil records are in perfect harmony with the Genesis record. If anything new is discovered, it falls within the ambit of Scripture because the author of Scripture is the source of all things. Unlike the evolution theory, Scripture will never be revised to accommodate new findings because it is founded on facts as designed and witnessed by the Creator.

Evolution as believed by many is against nature, against Scripture and is against God the Creator.

A few decades back, Christians were silenced, mocked and ridiculed by so-called scientists who 'knew it all'. Not anymore.






 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

@ anon

No score for this post
July 10 2012, 9:26 AM 

The difference.

You choose to gobble up everything because it appears scientific, as they did with the Piltdown Hoax.

We compare the evidence and reject the lies.

What you're saying is just accept it. Stop asking questions. That isn't science. It is religion.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Jim

Re: @ anon

No score for this post
October 20 2012, 3:00 AM 

Unfortunately for your argument, it was scientists themselves who rejected the Piltdown man hoax. That's what science does - keeps building and building evidence, discarding what doesn't hold up and keeping what does. Over 150 years of research on evolution and scientists have a much clearer picture of how things came to be. Of course, since it doesn't suit your viewpoint, you'll twist and turn information as best you can - the Piltdown man being a wonderful example. Unfortunately, that example also speaks in favour of the ability of the scientific process to discard evidence that can't be replicated OR which doesn't have parallel, substantiating evidence.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: @ anon

No score for this post
October 23 2012, 9:27 AM 

They keep rejecting fabrications because their foundation is already wrong to begin with.

Their very first premise of life emerging from non-life shoots down the first law of thermodynamics, that only life produces life. Everything built upon that is bound to crumble after a short shelf life as science keeps retracting the lies, frauds and paddings to prop up a nonsensical pet theory.

The Bible on the other hand will not be revised.

When you reach the top of the mountain of all knowledge and truth, you'll be greeted by a group of Bible believing theologians waiting all along.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Unlike you, I didn't fail my physics class

Re: @ anon

No score for this post
October 23 2012, 10:06 PM 

The first law of thermodynamics says nothing of the kind. Instead it states that energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed. The total amount of energy and matter in the Universe remains constant, merely changing forms. It is always conserved.

Please tell us all where you got your creative interpretation of the 1st law of thermodynamics.

Waiting for your reply.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Indeed

No score for this post
October 25 2012, 10:06 PM 

I did not fail anything. You are correct in the explanation.

My interpretation was wrong with some haste on my part. Its not about life. It's all about matter which cannot be created or destroyed. Which raises the obvious question. How did matter get here if matter cannot be created. We must agree that if you leave a vacuum for a trilion years, nothing except an intelligently directed miracle will bring out matter, with life and order as we see it.

To say that matter created itself is in violation of that fundamental. And to claim that matter never had a beginning is a leap in the other direction, equally flawed - because all things have a beginning and there is a cause.

Hence, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth...It makes a lot of sense, and unless a more superior force claims credit for the real estate, I'll go with this one.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
stewart

Re: Indeed

No score for this post
October 29 2012, 1:07 AM 

Q: How did matter get here if matter cannot be created?

A: The same way God could get here if God cannot be created!

I'm a believer in all the science as well as there being a supreme being. I don't have to believe everything in the Bible to believe in a supreme being that came out of nothing just like matter did.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
very true

Re: @ anon

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 12:53 PM 

amen to that emnau !

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Pfffffftttttt

Re: @ anon

No score for this post
October 23 2012, 6:03 PM 

Unfortunately all those so called scientists that earned their qualifications around a lie never handed back their degrees/masters/thesis after Pitdown was exposed as a hoax. Accountability in the scientific community Pffffffftttttttt!!!!!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Yes?

Re: The Phenomenon of the "EM NAUS" of this world

No score for this post
October 20 2012, 8:02 AM 

Where are all these Christian scientists (of which there are many) publishing refereed scientific articles in respected journals in favour of creationism?

Please give us some more info on this because I have a feeling that you're lying. Reason being that on this board your so called evidence for creationism repeatedly gets refuted fairly effectively by basic arguments.

So where are these respected scientists with their respected refereed papers giving the evidence that supports creationism?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
interesting.....

The Debate Strategy of EM NAU

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 10:02 AM 

It's amazing to me that as a committed Christian, you see nothing wrong about putting out the various lies contained in your posting!
Your posting is a telling us "what the truth is" piece of rhetoric, full of generalities.
You express a hatred for "know it alls", a common defensive response that chronically ignorant people develop over time when they're constantly outargued with evidence. My evidence that you're chronically ignorant is your rather conspicuous ignoring of pointed debate points. When you do debate, you never allow yourself to be pushed in discussion but always fall back on your original points (based on faith not evidence).
All this has become very clear to me reading your postings. My only puzzle about you is whether you lie purposely or you lie out of your blind faith determination to promote the Bible's messages at all costs, whether right or wrong. Either way, you don't look very smart nor very honest.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: The Debate Strategy of EM NAU

No score for this post
October 26 2012, 5:41 PM 

@ interesting....
You accuse me of lying. Please put that quote out. Do not just generalise here. Please tell me where I lied. The 'know it all charge' is obvious to us all by the way you guys stomp your feet around here, ON THE FAITH, not an atheist or evolution board, but on a faith page as if you know it all. You claim to know it all and belittle and mock Christians who believe in Creation.

When we ask for the evidence of bug to man evolution, you avoid the question and attack the Christians. You generalise and wheel out the tired old line of 'thousands of scientists' and years or research rubbish.

What creature preceeded the apelike ancestor of man? A fish, a dog? a what? Please just put up a simple structural link because it should be available in all that research.

Dont just give me the 'you just don't know how evolotion happenned. It's so slow, you dont see it happen.' Tell you what? Its soooo slow, slower than slow, it never happened. There is no evidence.
Molecule to man evolution is a massive hoax.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Addition

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
August 16 2012, 1:10 PM 

Observations and repeatable experiments, collectively is what has advanced evolution to the level of a scientific theory. As you know, as scientific theory is generally the highest level of scientific truth, apart from the few math and physics laws that are based on quite simple, observable or provable phenomena.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
moo

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
August 17 2012, 5:27 PM 

"Observations and repeatable experiment" . Unfortunately Evolution cannot be observed and experimented upon. Its does not exist. No creature today proves it , they all follow the bibles account of creation .

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Grace

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 8 2012, 2:33 PM 

Just Out of interest you say evolution doesn't exist
so what do you hypothesis is the reason why dinosaurs died out
eventually replaced by organisms that were better suited for the change in environmental conditions.See I believe God in his infinite wisdom designed organisms to adapt to their environment.

also what are your thoughts on God creating the universe in 7 days being more a symbolic explanation of creation rather than a literal one?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
o dahhh

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 8 2012, 8:49 PM 

Grace if your smart enough you would know that humans are known for hunting animals to extintion it does not matter if your a huge animal the size of a whale humans will still take you down.

And that is the very explanation y dinosaurs dont exist anymore but there pictures and paintings are preserved as memory in ancient caves and where ancient tribes that ones hunted them lived.

Evolution does not even explain there extintion.

Durr

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
don't you read anything?

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 1:46 PM 

Unfortunately, science doesn't explain how all the fossils of the big dinosaurs stopped around 65 millions years ago and the first fossils that even look remotely likely humans don't go back any further than 5 million years.

Don't argue superficialities because someone will always have factual details to underscore your stupidity.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
wilz

To grace

No score for this post
October 8 2012, 9:08 PM 

Grace the story of creation in 7 days is not symbolic. If it were than there would be a clear explanation of its meaning to that "parable" of 7 days of creation somewhere in genisis. But we dont find an explanation to the story or any mention that its even symolic or a parable.

If you read how jesus told parables that symbolised something, streight after he told the parable he would explain its sybolic meaning.

But we dont see that in the 7 day creation story so it is not symbolic in anyway but literal 7 days.

And if u think about it, 7 days is waaay to long for God to make the universe. He could have called it to existance in the blink of an eye. But he chose 7 days as an example to us humans for a daily pattern of life. By working 6 days and resting on the 7th day.

Cheers.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Brethren

Re: To grace

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 1:49 PM 

Wilz, there are literally hundreds of millions of Christians who don't agree with what you say. We reconcile evolution with Christianity taking the Bible as a sacred spiritual guide that often teaches through parables, not black and white details facts.

You may disagree, but in the end, it is simply your opinion. You certainly have no basis to argue that you're correct and everyone else is wrong, just as I have no basis to argue that the hundreds of millions of Christians are correct and you are wrong.

So let's make it clear that Christians themselves are deeply split on evolution, a majority of Christians in developed countries believe in evolution, and whether or not evolution is true, the scientific evidence continues to be on the side of evolution.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
carry on but we know better!

Re: To grace

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 5:57 PM 

Wilz, the main Christian churches accept that the 7 day creation story is symbolic. Your viewpoint is shared by a minority of Christians, especially in the developed countries. You huff and you puff like your opinion is the majority one and it definitely is not, even amongst Christians.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
11 rack

humans killed the dinosaurs/dragons

No score for this post
October 9 2012, 3:07 AM 

yes good question there Grace. Well dinosaurs are seen on ancient paintings all over the world. But there is a big give away to how they could have become extinct . Most of the ancient paintings depict humans holding spears and in the resemblance of hunting this big lizards.

In history dragons did exist. And i would also add that dragons and dinosaurs are the same thing accept the word dinosaur was just recently used thus replacing the word dragon which was the original ancient name for this creatures.

Well to cut it short ancient paintings and actual history states that this dinosaurs or dragons were hunted and killed by warriors in order to protect there people .

For instance ,In history like i sated, St George was a english christian soldier who hunted dragons/dinosaurs and killed many .

But thats just 1 example i gave from so many around the globe. The point is humans hunted and wiped them to extinction because of protective reasons and maybe food ?.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Try endlessly to enlighten ignorant people!

Re: humans killed the dinosaurs/dragons

No score for this post
October 29 2012, 1:55 PM 

The fossils show dinosaurs and lizards (which is what dragons most look like) to be completely different things. Superficial looks hide major differences in structure, especially internal structure which has on rare occasion been preserved in dinosaur fossils.

The quite different internal structures mean that lizards (and other reptiles) have never been classified as dinosaurs by anyone who is an expert on these things.

There is not a single cave painting or other painting anywhere in the world that shows a true dinosaur. It's all lizard like stuff that is pictured.

There is not a single bone dated within the last 50 million years that looks like it came from any lizard like or dragon looking dinosaur. However, during the period of time when human bones or fossils have been found, plenty of lizard like bones or fossils have also been found with the same dates. But again, no dinosaur fossils in that period.

I think the person here who is so quick to generalise that all dinosaurs looked like dragons or lizards needs to go on the internet or maybe find a book on dinosaurs and look very carefully at the pictures. They aren't lizards, reptiles or dragons! They're a completely different life form group!

Only in a PNG forum group would such well established facts be so distorted! The writer is either ignorant or hopes to make us in PNG look to the world like ignorants.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 9 2012, 9:29 AM 

Grace, you are trying to force God to say what he is not saying in Scripture. Read Exodus 20. God made it all in 6 days and rested on the seventh. If it is symbolic, God, not you are entitled to say that. Let Scripture be itself and your opinion be that, just your opinion.

Dinosaurs were big lizards that lived in the garden of Eden and perished in the flood with all other organisms in plants and animals which their remains supply us with fossil fuel today.

Unless God's word says something, we will not interpret it our way to fit into Satan's anti-God evolution theory.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
><((*->

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 12 2012, 7:59 PM 

So how come Noah disobeyed G-d and didn't save male and female of all the dinosaur varieties. So they were too big for the ark, but...maybe Noah had trouble determining their gender, he couldn't tell the females from the males...hehe...

fish-eestory

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
here

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 12 2012, 11:38 PM 

Fish heres the deal. The dinosaurs were also in the ark. Noah wouldnt have a problem with it since he would just get a small dinosaur male and female. Then after the flood he would let them mate and produce the whole population of dinosaurs.

Its nothing new. Zoos and animal institutes today do it in order to save endangered species. So why wouldnt it be possible for noah to do the same? ?

Dinosaurs servived the flood in noahs ark. But through out the ages humans hunted them to extintion. Its found in history.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
====((((( 0 0 ))))))) ======

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 21 2012, 2:28 PM 

There is absolutely no evidence at all EVER obtained by scientists that humans have occurred on earth at the same time as dinosaurs.

Please also tell us how Noah found and collected all the plants, fungi and microorganisms on earth, much less put them into the ark. How big does an ark have to be to hold tens of millions of species on it?

How did all these tens of millions of species eat during the long period of the flood, when a lot of them eat each other!

Where did all the water go to when the flood receded? No, it didn't all go into the air as water vapor because the atmosphere wouldn't be able to hold that water. And no, the water didn't just shift from one place to another (which is how all the floods we know of occur), because we're told that it is a world wide flood!

There are so many glaring holes in the Noah's ark study but that won't bother the illogical uneducated ignorant people one little bit!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 13 2012, 1:40 AM 

Who said all dinosaurs perished in the flood? The dimensions of the ark allows room for all TYPES, not species of creatures with room to spare. And I suppose Noah under God's direction was wise enough to bring in babies, male and female into the ark. Job writes about these creatures still existing post Flood. They were known as dragons or behemoth. Men hunted down the remaining creatures until they became part of folklore as dragons centuries after they went into extinction. The word dinosaur came into use in the 1800s when their fossils began to surface, hence fossil fuels, etc. Paintings and artefacts of dinosaurs abound as crafted by those who hunted and saw them. How would 'stone age' men create perfect images of dinosaurs (as drawn even on Roman swords and Inca pottery) they hadn't seen without even the benefit of skeletons? You'll never upstage the Bible's record based on eyewitness accounts. Like I always say, the Bible record stands for all time.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
buncha silliness

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 13 2012, 8:25 AM 

The God squad says the dinosaurs were all lizards. They overlook all the dinosaurs (from the fossil record) that don't look like lizards.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 13 2012, 2:07 PM 

Hey silliness,

Please explain how dinosaur images were captured in ancient art if the critters died off 65 million years ago according to the evolution religion?

And how did they come up with 65 million years?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 13 2012, 2:20 PM 

What is Behemoth.


Lets turn to the Book of Job in the Old Testament and examine this passage where the writer is describing the anatomy of a fantastic creature. When Job complains to God about his sufferings and fiery trial, God tells Job to observe this great creature he made TOGETHER WITH MAN.
Job 40:15. Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox
Explained: Look at behemoth, which I created together with man, says God. Man and dinosaurs walked the earth together.
Job 40:17: He moveth his tail like a cedar:
Explained: Behemoth has a tail like a cedar tree? Many translators say behemoth could be an elephant. But notice an elephants tail, or a hippos tail or that of a wooly mammoth. Their tails are nothing close to the trunk of a cedar tree which measures in metres, not in inches as elephants. Elephants are ruled out. This is a massive tail.
Job 40:18. His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.
Example: Observe the huge dinosaur skeleton.
Job 40: 19. He is the chief of the ways of God:
Explained: Of all of Gods creatures, behemoth is chief in its greatness, a sight to behold! Of all creatures that walked the face of the earth, behemoth was huge.
Job 40:20. Surely the mountains bring him forth food
Explained: Behemoth feeds on a mountain of plants and leaves.
Job 40:23. Behold he drinketh up a river
Explained: You should watch when he drinks. He takes up a river when thirsty.
No other creature fits this description but a dinosaur.
Behemoth, dragons or leviathans, the Bible has dinosaurs well covered.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
pop

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 13 2012, 2:31 PM 

"buncha silliness" --- of coarse dinosaurs were giant lizards thats what there name means .Dont you understand? Just like pussy cats are the tiny version of lions and tigers which are the giant versions of cats.

And whales are the giant versions of fish. Along with Jelly fish and other sea creatures which have there giant versions. Like in history there was a giant squid found On November 2, 1878, the largest giant squid ever measured was discovered at Timble Tickle.

And today there are giant octopus species that are found deep in the oceans .

There are giant species of small ordinary creatures that we see everyday. What part dont you understand ??

And that shows the majestic greatness of God. From the small tine lizard to the great dragon that St george ones staid.

You dont really study much history do ya ?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Hey buncha

No score for this post
October 14 2012, 2:44 PM 

He buncha.

Do you know what dinosaurs means?

If not,check things out before posting them. Dinosaur means 'terrible lizard.'

Check out this cut and paste below before posting nonsense.

CUT & PASTE

What does "dinosaur" mean and how are dinosaurs given their names?
Darrin, 10, Brookline, Massachusetts

Dr. dig responds:
In 1841, Sir Richard Owen coined the word "dinosaur" to identify the fossils of extinct reptiles. It traces its origins to the Greek words deinos, meaning "terrible" or "fearfully great," and sauros, meaning "lizard." Newly discovered dinosaurs are named by the discoverer or by the palaeontologist who determines that it represents a new genus (or species). There are many different ways to choose a dinosaur name. Sometimes the name describes something special about its body, head, or feet, such as the triceratops, which means "three-horned head." Some dinosaurs are named after their size or behavior, such as the gigantosaurus, meaning "gigantic lizard," and the velociraptor, meaning "speedy robber." Others are named after the place where they were found, such as the Utahraptor and the Denversaurus, or they are named in honor of a person, such as the Chassternbergia (after Charles Sternberg, the discoverer). Giving names to dinosaurs is serious business and all new names must be reviewed by a panel of scientists and approved by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
uni graduate

Experimentation & observation for evolution

No score for this post
October 21 2012, 9:21 AM 

Evolution most certainly can be observed and experimented upon. How on earth did you come up with your conclusion-Don't you read or investigate an issue before you mauswara? Evolution is just like any scientific theory (remember, in science nothing reaches the level of 'theory' unless it has a huge amount of evidence, coming from many different angles to support it) - it reached the level of theory because there has so much experimentation and observation evidence that supports evolution. Your idea that evolution does not exist flies directly in the face of the mountain of evidence that it does. It is almost like you're given an ice block and you look at it and tell everyone around you that it you are eating aibika!

Here are 2 illustrations (out of many many many) that show how wrong you are:

Evolutionary biolgists and creationists all agree that modern humans throughout the world came from a common source. Without evolution, everyone on earth would pretty much look like Adam and Eve. The fact we are so diverse can only be explained by mutation, selection for beneficial mutations, and their spread. Different parts of the world have environments that favour different skin colours, and thus what we see today cannot be an expression simply of 1 couple of humans mating and reproducing and so on and so forth. Mutations and their selection obviously somehow got into the mix.

Since simple creatures have very short generation times, they can be experimented on and manipulated to duplicate what goes on in natural environments. There have been many species created in the lab which no longer look exactly like, or can reproduce with the species that they originally came from. For example:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
This is a very full examination of observed instances of speciation.
Skip to Section 5 to get to the actual recorded events of species starting to evolve or evolving right before the eyes of scientists.

Then go find the scientific papers that actually describe each of those many many many examples to check their experimental design, etc.



It seems you are closing your eyes to the reality of human knowledge that now exists on evolution. Closing your eyes, holding your ears, shaking your head violently and screaming at the top of your lungs "no evolution, no evolution, no evolution." Meanwhile society and progress march right on past you in the continued search for the truth. Sit in your cave and keep closing your eyes and ears if you want.



 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
adia

Re: Experimentation & observation for evolution

No score for this post
October 21 2012, 10:51 PM 

Uni grad i dont see half man half horse walking around? i dont see animals evolving into other animals.

Stop dreaming and wake up.to yourself.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU is going bezerk!

Re: Experimentation & observation for evolution

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 6:06 PM 

I see - a horse evolving into a human would still keep half of the horse form absolutely intact, while only half of the body would evolve.

Yeah, right.

Incidentally, no scientist has ever said that humans came from horses. You need to google "evolutionary trees" to straighten out your ignorance on that one. You're stupidly saying something that scientists have never even said, plus come up with a stupid half horse half man idea.... which again, scientists have never predicted because the fossil evidence never indicated that.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Experimentation & observation for evolution

No score for this post
October 22 2012, 11:12 PM 

Evolution observed? You mean micro-evolution? Changes within a species? That happens. But macro-evolution, like rat types turning into horse types? That has not been observed. It never happened, its not i the fossil record, and it will not happen, and that is fact. It only happens in textbooks and TV programs but in nature, zilch, nada, not a chance.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
><{{*->

Re: Experimentation & observation for evolution

No score for this post
October 23 2012, 6:53 PM 

EM NAU,

Yu are asking to "...see and feel the nail marks..." with that evolution theory thing before your are convinced, i preseume? any other shred of evidence from intelliegent inquiry and investigations i suppose is to you inadequate?

fish-finger

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
[sigh]

Re: Experimentation & observation for evolution

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 6:16 PM 

Obviously macro evolution is simply the sum of all the microevolutionary steps. That's not hard to figure out is it?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
bull

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 6:00 PM 

Evolution has been observed and documented under laboratory conditions many times. Only stubborns like you (with your own belief agenda) would ignore all that. Evolution can proceed very rapidly amongst organisms with short generation times. You really know absolutely nothing about biology, do you?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
funny!

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 1:11 PM 

Ahhh, but I'd trust someone with a PhD any day more than I'd trust an expat who posts his conspiracy nonsense on the internet. Wouldn't most people?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
man ya husat mi bekim emi no man blo ples png

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 21 2012, 4:34 PM 

Funny that all the top scientists in top universities of the world seem to come to a different conclusion that you do, EM NAU. I suspect you're some dirt poor white pastor who is disgruntled that the world is shifting away from your viewpoint and that's why you put on this big spectacle that you're the inquiring mind around here, when in fact, you closed your mind years ago in the name of blind faith.

Sorry mate, I'll continue attending a university where evolution is taught as fact because that university has been a groundbreaker in all kinds of science and technology fields.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Details needed

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
July 3 2012, 5:26 PM 

you cited a newspaper article, not a scientific journal article. Newspaper articles are pretty close to worthless as far as scientific credibility.

1. Please give us the names of the 3 mathmaticians who are mentioned and their institutional affiliations.

2. Please give us the mathematical journal where this proof was published. Journal name, volume, page numbers of the article please.

Naming the 2 journals Statistical Science and Journal of the Royal Statistical Society is meaningless without giving the articles that supposedly address this issue. Could you provide authors, year of publication, titles of papers, and the volumes/page numbers related to these 2 journals?

What are the names of the "scientists familiar with the work" who supposedly said "Something weird seems to be happening." That does NOT sound like they actually accept the explanation that is proposed but let's first see who they are, maybe that will help clarify things.



Only gullible people would accept anything like this on face value without at least finding out the sources of information. All I am asking for are the specific sources of information, not vague descriptions that mean nothing. Until I can read for myself the actual material, I would not be so dumb as to make any judgement on whether this information is true or false.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
big mama

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
July 3 2012, 9:06 PM 

i agree , there's lots of proof that there's a God who exists. If you ask people who deny that theres a God what proof they have that there's no God? all they can come up with is they cant "see" him anywhere thus there is no evidence he exists. Thats the weakest evidence anyone can have !

And all that incredible design in our world like birds and fish and even us humans our bodies are far far beyond any man made technology ! how did these things come about ??? by accident ?? if it was accident then why cant even man create living beings or creatures ? why cant he create life ??? the only thing he can create is a robot and things that have no life of themselves !!! see how foolish people who deny God look ? They dont have evidence all they have is a stubborn ,arrogant mind.

why cant man create life from dead matter ??? you and i know its impossible ! but yet we see new life coming from living matter itself . This shows that some greater power is at work causing this to happen. Life brings forth life. Theres a source of life . But scientists who deny God are looking to aliens (as if they have seen one) . Even though theres no sight of accual aliens , scientists refute the idea of a God create all life and seek there own man made ideas of aliens and other life out in space. This even has no evidence what so ever !

So you see how stubborn atheists are ? they refuse to believe and so by making up there own god(aliens) , they are trying to force it on to the public to belive what they have created so they to can "believe" in atleast something , even though its blind faith!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
CW

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
July 7 2012, 10:49 PM 

I see no evidence that the sky is red. Is that "the weakest evidence there is"?

I'm merely repeating your distorted form of logic!

You were born with a brain that has very interesting hard wiring. I strongly believe that your brain is simply incapable of logical thinking and that's why you'll always believe what you will.

Good luck, buddy. Live in your dream world and have a happy life.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Wim2012

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
July 12 2012, 5:28 PM 

Yet in the morning the sky is red, and at night, just before the sun finally sets. Oops!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Don't be whimsical on us, WIM2012! :-)

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 1:59 PM 

Yep! You won that battle but don't seem to realise that you are still losing the war! happy.gif

What amazes me is that an educated person like you would fall for this "literal translation of the Bible" silliness. As you know, most Christians in developed countries figured out long ago that the Bible is a sacred book of guidance that is strongly rooted in historical fact but goes completely off the mark on many things. It teaches through parables where every detail is not meant to be taken literally.

To believe otherwise would be to discard the entire process of science. Yet, we see with our own eyes the many technological achievements that's pretty strong evidence that the scientific process does work to find the truth.

One can hardly argue that the same process led to a completely wrong result (evolution) and completely accurate results (civil engineering, electronics, etc.).


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
wilz

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 9:24 PM 

i agree that science is making big leaps and bounds in the fieald of medicine and others. Yes science is helping us cure dieases that were once uncurable. But i think thats what science can only do- enhance life. But heres where i am going to rain on your parade, buddy.

Science only deals with the physical. Science cannot prove whats beyond death. Thats where i reckon christian faith totaly blows science out of the water on this one! .

Another aspect to consider is science can only deal with the immediate surroundings. Therefore to find out the truth about how life was created, science will only create theories becouse non of the scientists were prestent to view how the universe was formed.

Christian faith on the other Goes miles! from explaining where we came from, why were here and where we go when we die? .

Science is like a guitar effect pedal. Its only an enhanser. But does not give correct answers to the question that really counts - whats the purpose of life? .




 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
eka

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 6:14 PM 

Well let's see - is a scientist really limited to their surroundings in advancing knowledge- What if a scientist documents that all the stars visible with the aid of telescopes are all moving away from in the same direction away from a centerpoint, isn't it logical to theorise that maybe at one time, all that mass may have once been right there in the center in one place? And if they're moving at a given speed, isn't it logical to extrapolate how long ago all that mass might have been at a central spot?

Of course, if any scientists went a bit wrong in their interpretation, there would always be heaps of scientists eager to make their reputation to show that the idea is wrong. Scientists hardly cooperate or agree as a whole.

Circumstantial evidence is used to convict actual criminals, it has been used to develop theories which then were applied to develop new technologies. Scientists use circumstantial evidence in the same way. Again, there are plenty of scientists ready to leap on another scientists' idea if there are weaknesses in that idea or the evidence doesn't clearly support it.

Yes, scientists have their limits but creative minds (which generally do not exist on a Faith board) figure out ways to figure out what might have happened, then go searching for the kinds of evidence that might actually confirm the idea.

You people really have no clue whatsoever how scientists work. Maybe you never took a science class, or the science class got into the process too superficially for you to really understand it. Reading these threads is almost like putting myself back into the time of my tumbuna and thinking about what idiocy I would think up to explain airplanes when the first one landed.

Ignorance is the breeding ground of religion and this board gives evidence in abundance to support that idea!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
wilz

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 10:03 PM 

Just to add. Anything man made has a limit it can only go. Science, a man made concept thus has limits that cannot pass. Like bringing a year old dead cat back to life. Science has limits becouse it is conducted by humans.

Faith in the bible does not have limits. Why? becouse the very one who that concept revolves around is God, who infinite.

Science cant explain the supernatural which is another limit for science.

Why not Join christian faith and remove your account limits. .(joke)

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
[sigh]

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 6:17 PM 

Faith in totally idiotic ideas also has no limits. That's the problem with faith-too easy to go off in a crazy direction that has no basis in reality.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Proud Christian

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 20 2012, 2:54 PM 

As you note, Christians themselves are divided on this issue.

But then again, we Christians have never been able to agree on what the Bible actually is telling us.

Look at all the split offs of churches over the centuries.

No one can say that Christians are wanbel on this and certainly no one can possibly say that 'they know how the Bible should be interpreted' with a straight face. This argument has been going on since Jesus died for our sins and will continue until the Second Coming.

Each Christian should be free to believe whatever they want to believe without imposing their views on other Christians as being 'the truth'. Because the fact is, we don't know what 'the truth' is - none of us.

Proud Christian


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
ct

life a miracle - God is a loving God

No score for this post
July 12 2012, 9:47 PM 

if you read the bible it clearly states that God assigned all things to there rightful place and rightful pattern of existing. A good example is : "why does water stay only in our world ,recycles itself without bieng lost to the outer space, living us with NO water on earth ? have u thought of this ? And why do we have constant supply of oxygen to keep us alive ? and why is there a relationship of sharing what we have with other living things : we take in oxygen that plants release and they take in carbon dioxide that we release . Then we release waste in the form of nitrates which go to the soil to keep plants growing of from the soil healthy ! creation shows the character of God (with out death and killing).

this is something that ignorant athiests try not to look at and ignore. If you try to analyze life just by thinking only of the bad things then you have distorted your way of thinking . Everyone knows that life on earth is a miracle .

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Christian & Believer in Evolution

Re: life a miracle - God is a loving God

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 1:55 PM 

What obviously escapes you is that if you talk to Christians in developed countries, you'll find that most (not all) believe completely in evolution and see no contradiction with the Bible.

One might argue that only ignorant, primitive Christians still believe that what science clearly has found through evidence is not compatible with Christian beliefs.

Think about it. You've been fooled by a bunch of ignorant loooooser Christians who come to PNG to spread their opinions as if they were facts, making all Papua New Guineans look as stupid and ignorant as those few oddballs are.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
the test

to atheists

No score for this post
July 12 2012, 10:00 PM 

So far christians have provided full evidence of there arguments . I would like to see the atheists side of the coin.

where is your evidence showing your belief that there is no God , demons and that people like satanists and ,christians and Buddhist are worshiping something from there own imagination ?

Please provide the references to the websites also.




 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Please, gentlemen, gentlemen!

Re: to atheists

No score for this post
July 23 2012, 8:35 AM 

Unfortunately, the only evidence that Christians ever produce that isn't quickly shot down is that "the Bible said".

But there is plenty of scientific evidence that many things the Bible said are out and out wrong unless you bend over backwards, real, real far, and say, "well, that's what the Bible meant."

Not a very credible source of information on what countless scientists have observed with their own senses.

Whether there is a God or not, scientists cannot say because the only thing science can investigate is what can be observed. But even considering that limited scope, the Bible has fallen short.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
lord of the land

Leave the mark of the best to PNG Christians

No score for this post
October 29 2012, 2:07 PM 

what you have written is absolutely the scariest thing some Christians confront, especially those in PNG.

Most Christians overseas are comfortable in the fact that the Bible isn't all correct but is a bloody useful and insightful guide into how we should conduct our lives.

Too many of us in PNG unfortunately overlook all that beauty of the Bible and instead get all worked up over 666 and other such folk stories and insanity thinking!!!!!!!!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Hamon

Re: to atheists

No score for this post
August 17 2012, 5:44 AM 

Athiests can speak for themselves.

As far as science goes, that activity can only pursue what can be verified using the 5 senses, directly or indirectly.

Many scientists are Christians. Like the 'average' Christian in the world today, they don't consider the Bible to be taken literally, but as a moral guide for us all. The postings here on Faith board seems to be mostly dominated by pentacostal or fundamentalist type Christians, who are not in the majority overall in the world. Maybe some day they will be but right now they are not.

I would also guess that Christian scientists also reckon that God gave us a brain and such powers of intellect and curiosity to seek out the truth, no matter where it leads us, and where it takes us, even if the truth contradicts what is written in the Bible.

The Bible, after all, was written by human hands. Not only that, but the paper evidence is very clear that over the ages it was written and rewritten, copied and recopied, with changes made all along the way.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
yes ya

something very fascinating about Jesus

No score for this post
July 13 2012, 11:53 AM 

he is more famous than any other person in history ! you ask someone in the village who is John Lennon and they go "ah ? em husait ? em mahn blo where ??

but you ask them if they heard about Jesus and they say yes ya ! em God ya !

Jesus is more famous and almost all people on earth heard or accepts him as bieng Lord. Even though he was not a rich man ! he was not a boastful arrogant person ! he was not some one who lied and did the opposite or a hypocrite !

The bible says that when the roman soldiers nailed him to the cross and when the earth suddenly turned dark, they realized that he was who he said he was ! and they realized he was all this time an innocent man and how wrong they were . Yet he did not scream out for help or defend himself when they led him to the cross to be nailed.

If i had to pick someone from history who was awesome in every way until death ,its him ,Jesus.


yes ya .

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Get Real

Re: something very fascinating about Jesus

No score for this post
July 15 2012, 12:11 AM 

That's because the white people spread the word about Jesus and the white people dominate the earth.

One needs to look no further than that to understand why Jesus is known by more people.

You're making a mountain out of an anthill!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
happy go lucky

Re: something very fascinating about Jesus

No score for this post
July 15 2012, 9:41 PM 

to get real. That still does not explain why white people would want to spread the story about Jesus since he was a middle eastern man (Israelite)! Why would they spread his name if they were not of same racial group ?? If Jesus was an American/white man than you would be right . But your not.

The basic reason why they spread his news is found in 1)Mark 16:15 -"And then he told them, "Go into all the world and preach the Good News to everyone"

2) Matthew 28:19 -"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,"

Thats why his news is heard worldwide !and this will continue to reach and pull in every person who turns and hears what Jesus has promised for him/her.

Jesus gave that as an order for his disciples to do. And may i add they have done a marvelous job at it , Jesus is still famous than John Lennon ! happy.gif


happy.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Pasin

Are you sure Jesus is know by everyone???

No score for this post
July 25 2012, 5:59 PM 

Well, you guys are debating on the exsistance of GOD. Am deviating from that topic and interestingly someone is implying Jesus is known right across the globe. That notion may be challenged. 3/4 of the earth's population aren't christians,have you ever gone to places in the middle east, some call the 4-40 window or some where in Asia and posed that same questions whether they know Jesus. You'll be suprised by the differnt answers,few may answer Jesus is a Christain GOD, or some may say HE was a Christain Prophet. Majority will say they have not heard of the name.
Just a bit of I guess misinformation on that -seeing you views on the subject matter about GOD's exsistance. Continue guys with the subject.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
true

science can testify and give evidence to spiritual biengs and a God !

No score for this post
July 26 2012, 5:07 PM 

People say that the bible doesnt show evidence that can be tested . Like angels and invisible biengs etc. But they have no idea that there is a scientific branch called "paranormal studies" and the scientists who study this are called "parapsychologist" ! you can study that in Uni overseas !!!!

This people who refute the idea of angels and demons clearly need to come out of there turtle shells.

There are spiritual beings that we cant see but feel there presence. Therefore there has to be angels , demons and a GOD ! God is real. And only a fool denys it.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
kido

Re: science can testify and give evidence to spiritual biengs and a God !

No score for this post
July 30 2012, 8:38 AM 

Please give me the name of just one reputable university in the world that continues to support paranormal studies or parapsychology.

I'll await your reply.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

Axioms

No score for this post
August 1 2012, 4:12 AM 

The question is; Can I prove God does not exist?

This is only a matter of interest to Christians. To both Atheists and Nihilists like myself, it is of no concern whatsoever.

Let me deal with axioms. Axioms are taken to be truths which can not be proven.ie. An object remains at rest until acted upon by a force. Can I prove the absense of movement. NO! Even if I observe the object a thousand times an hour, I have not proven it does not move. Maybe if I had observed it 10001 times I would have observed some movement. Same with Loch Ness Monster, or the Yeti, I can in no way prove they do not exist. I may not have been searching hard enough, nor in the right places. So. If you have "faith" they exist I cannnot prove their non-existance. Thus = if you can prove the object does move without a force acting upon it, all the universally accepted theories of mechanics fall apart. The theories of inertia fall out the window, and no machines from Airrcraft to Zylophones,work any more.

So the Christian axiom: "There is a God". Can anyone prove his non-existence? In a word. NO!

Now. Why do Christians ask this question, if they don't have doubts themselves? Out of all the world religions, I cannot prove the non-existence of any of their Gods.

What say I "could" prove the existance of a God. Say for instance, I had a one on one interview with Krishna. I then know he exists. To prove this to the world, he will arange a manifestation. At exactly 1159hrs on the eighth of of August 2012, he will cause a message to appear in the sky. "RALPH IS CORRECT ABOUT MY EXISTENCE - KRISHNA." You would then claim that I had unearthed som hitherto unknown knowledge os Metorlogy, Astronomy, or even Astrology, to enable me to predict that phenomonen.

Now. Even proving the existence of a God would not placate you Christians. For by proving the existence of Krishna, or indeed, a thousand other Gods, I had not proven the non-existence of your particular Christian God.

So if your particular unprovable axiom is: "THERE IS A 'CHRISTIAN' GOD!" You will note I use the adjective Christian to differentiate him/her, from all the other Gods, of all the world's other religions. No one can prove his non-existence.

All these discussions are fatuous. If you "faith" in something, no amount of discussion will disprove that unshakeable faith.

Now, your proof of a God is a circular argument. The complexity of life is the proof of a God, and only a God could make something so complex. This is a ludicrous argument, which in no way proves your Christian God exists.

Let me postulate, that Ink Jet Printers were made by God. They have thousands of moving parts, and only God could make something so complex, that everyone down the supply chain can make a profit, and then sell them for $50.00. The corollary of this is, that ink-cartridges are made by the Devil. They are fiendishly expensive, inasmuch as replacement cartridges ($75.00 or so) cost more than the original printer, which comes with two Ink-cartridges. These original Ink-cartridges, were of course made by God, when he made the printer. The proof of this, is that they lasted much longer than the diabolical replacements, which were made by the Devil (They were much cheaper too, remember, the whole original ganz megillah, cost only $50.00)

I think that this is my last word on this matter. The subject bores me. I will however save this article, and periodically re-post it, whenever you argue this matter over and over, ad ifinitum and ad nauseum.

Regards......Ralph.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Axioms

No score for this post
October 18 2012, 11:06 AM 

Ralph.

I was drifting off into a siesta until your ink jet printer analogy brought me back to actually thinking about it.

You see I am a thinking being, observing your post and conceptualising the ink jet printers invented by God. And thank you for placing more emphasis on the Christian God, as he seems to keep atheists and nihilists restless and awake at times.

But my mind is expanding your story line a little further, taking your analogy to a different area.

What if I am tired of buying a new printer every time it broke down. I want a special printer, or a pair that would come together in some physical union and create small printers, having a mind of their own, being able to mend themselves when broken, even to educate younger ones to be good printers, otherwise the landlord 'inventor' would crush them and throw them in the city dump.

Now if a God created computers that thought for themselves and created young ones, and through time these computers invented more crude working computers, we'd say, that God must be a genius... and the Question is, did that ever happen at all?






 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Axiom siesta

Re: Axioms

No score for this post
October 18 2012, 12:34 PM 

EM NAU, you're definitely an expat. May I please ask you to go off in a corner with other expats and have your discussions instead of trying to spread propaganda to PNGeans in your devious way?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Re: Axioms

No score for this post
October 20 2012, 7:05 PM 

Thank you Axiom Siesta, and I really mean it. These discussions make people think, and thinking is what I want us to do. Don't let others think for you. Think for yourself.

No I wont go away. If I make people think, I am only too happy to do that. Thinking should lead us to our Creator, and that is my goal. Don't fight Him. He loves and cares for you. Have a nice day.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
don't go away let us grow very tired of you

Re: Axioms

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 6:19 PM 

At least some people I know of are thinking your an expat and a fool at that.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
easy!

Re: Axioms

No score for this post
October 19 2012, 5:29 AM 

If you mean, did God invent computers, then the answer is no.
If you mean, did God invent human beings, then the answer is also no.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
EM NAU

Human brain vs computer

No score for this post
October 20 2012, 6:01 PM 

The human brain is more complex, millions of times more complex than a computer.

Start from there, and do some thinking, instead of toeing the party line.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
true

Re: science can testify and give evidence to spiritual biengs and a God !

No score for this post
August 1 2012, 2:41 PM 

hi there kido ! XP

-Duke University in North carolina
- Pennsylvania -Cabrini College
- Princeton University (US),
Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research;
-University of Arizona,
-Center for Consciousness Studies.
-oxford university -Ohio
-University of Colorado at Boulder


Plenty in the states , you can go study it now. Try applying in one of them.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
pop

Its takes way more faith just to be an athiest

No score for this post
October 13 2012, 8:46 PM 

we had to get here somehow. i honestly think that a big bang just randomly happening and our extremely complex bodies and universe just showing up isnt possible without an intelligent dasigner.
i also dont believe in evolution because if it were true then there should be thousands of fossils supporting it. they havent found any fossils that are half one animal and half another.
this is a quote from darwin(the guy who started evolution)"to suppose the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different differences, for admitting different amouts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, i freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."

i believe God exists because a scientific law says that everything that has a beginning has a cause. the universe has a beginning so it must have a cause. God didnt need a cause because he is eternal.
so pretty much:

1.atheists dont have a logical reason as to how we got here

2.atheists who believe in evolution have absolutely no scientific support(its not like there were thousands of fossil evidence supporting it and it just dissappeared)


it takes way more faith to be an athiest than to be a theist

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
it takes faith to be ignorant

Re: Its takes way more faith just to be an athiest

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 6:23 PM 

there are actually millions of fossils supporting evolution. You have no idea of the size of collections that have built up over the years.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
rasta mahn

evolution not happening Atal!

No score for this post
October 27 2012, 10:29 AM 

"it takes faith to he ignorant"...... If evolution is happening then shoudlnt u and i be in transitional phases right about now? ? We should be seeing half man half animals everywhere.

Fossils dont show evolution atal! animals in the fossils are the same as those today. U have been fooled.

From the looks of things, humans have always been humans eversince adam and eve! !!!

I agree it takes more faith to be an athiest than a christian!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
sss

Re: evolution not happening Atal!

No score for this post
October 29 2012, 1:58 PM 

You haven't been fooled about the fossil record. You've closed your eyes rather than read the books. Maybe some day you'll have a chance to go overseas and can go to a big city museum. Then you can see the fossils for yourself.

In the meantime you will remain purposely ignorant. Let's just hope your sickness doesn't spread to Papua New Guineans in general because if it does, our whole nation will look like it's made up of a bunch of ignorants!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
just asking

Re: Its takes way more faith just to be an athiest

No score for this post
October 29 2012, 2:04 PM 

are you the silly guy on this board who is so ignorant about what scientists say that you keep thinking that the big bang refers to the appearance of life on earth????????

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
????

Re: science can testify and give evidence to spiritual biengs and a God !

No score for this post
October 24 2012, 6:21 PM 

study what? I dont get it

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
wanna

Re: something very fascinating about Jesus

No score for this post
October 29 2012, 2:02 PM 

The main reason why white people spread the word about Jesus (notice that they never told us he was dark skinned, they ALWAYS make him look white skinned) was so the white people could dominate us. Simple as that. It looks like they have all the power and we have nothing so we start worshipping the white God hoping we'll get some cargo too.

That is our history, PNG, like it or not, and that's why people in PNG ruxhed to become Christian on the surface, but we still have our anti-Christian beliefs down deep in almost every one of us.

Our young people don't even go to rhurch anymore much, even in the towns. Christianity is collapsging in PNG not getting more strong.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
sampla ol autsait man trai na paulim ting2

Re: Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible

No score for this post
October 26 2012, 11:15 AM 

It's not rare that proof of God is vouched for in scientific journals. In fact, I no of no case that it has EVER happened, in the modern history of science, all disciplines included!

The "scientific publications" that supposedly all offer proof of God don't come from refereed scientific journals nor from reputable established scientists. Instead, these are papers commonly referred to as pseudo science that have the outward appearances of science but violate fundamental scientific principles of logic, inductive/deductive reasoning, and other processes that have evolved to be at the core of scientific research because they have been so effective at making verifiable discoveries. They belong in the rubbish bin!






 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

The New Ice age.

No score for this post
November 6 2012, 6:43 AM 

This has happened before,
I don't know why I bother posting logical good sense on this forum because no one ever reads it or takes notice of it.

The decade 1950 - 60 was a cold decade, Therefore the newspapers were screaming "climate change" then, too. However the headlines were "The New Ice Age". the journos were predicting that we were going to hell in a handcart into the next Ice-age.

Why do humans continue to think, that something that happens during a decade is a trend. Geological/climate changes happen over millions of years. The reason for "Global Warming" getting such momentum was because of the media. We have thee TV channels screaming any popular/ist fad in your ear night and day. We have so called "credible" talking heads touring the world screeching the message. For huge fees, I might add.

"It is the all pervasive media what done it".happy.gif Anything that happens anywhere in the world is immediately conveyed via the TV into your lounge room. You havve computers spreading the word too. Dispel the idea that journalists meke the news. Thjey are merely there to report it. Anytime you see a journalist staing categorically that something is true, trun off the TV and clear your brain of such nonsense. Journalists are not oracles, they are merely low order functionaries, whose job it is to report events, not to hypothesize theories.

Use your brain first......Ralph.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
TO RALPH H

Re: The New Ice age.

No score for this post
November 6 2012, 11:00 AM 

Since you know all the relevant info, could you please explain to us first of all where the 1950's-1960's cold trend fits into the overall trend that has occurred since the late 1890's.

After that, could you give us the correlation statistics to show us what the chances are of the current warming trend being a natural artifact (recurring natural trend) versus the strength of its correlation with fossil fuel burning.

Those statistics are of course essential for you to have reached your conclusion that the current warming trend has only occurred recently (3 decades) as well as your conclusion that the trend is part of a natural oscillation.

Thank you for providing this additional information.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Ralph Hamilton

Climatic Osscilations

No score for this post
November 9 2012, 11:15 PM 

Mate,
do you know what you are asking? Let me give some background info.

On one side of the world we have the AMO. (Atlantic Multidecadonal Oscillation) This appears to have, from all available evidence, to go in 50 - 70 year cycles. On this side we have El Nino and La Nina. (the boy child & the girl child) {ie. Los ninos = the children} Heaven knows what its Ocillation Period is. This would be the PDO I assume. (Pacific Multidecadonal Oscillation)

From what data I have gleaned over the years it does not appear that "MAN" is influencing Climate Change all that much. Natural forces have a much greater effect. For instance, when Mt Galunggung in Indonesia erupted a few years ago, the ash and pumice clouds, caused the southern Hemisphere temperatures to drop by 2 degrees for a year or two. It gave us - around the Rockhampton area - beautiful ruby-red sunsets.

How all this fits together, I have no idea. There is not a lot of mixing of the atmosphere, between the two halves of the world. It happpens, but it takes a long time.

Humans are causing terrible pollution of our oceans. Of that, there is no doubt. But man made climate change? I doubt that we are that all-powerful. All I know, is that the world has been getting warmer since the last Ice-Age. The oceans have been steadily rising too. During some past milennia, there have been swome rapid increases in ocean levels, others very little.

I will se what else I can find.

Regards......Ralph.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

Hope this helps.

No score for this post
November 9 2012, 11:30 PM 

This corroboates my claim about the "cold decate". Sori tumas nokim cut n paste piksa.

The "Pacific Decadal Oscillation" (PDO) is a long-lived El Niño-like pattern of Pacific climate variability. While the two climate oscillations have similar spatial climate fingerprints, they have very different behavior in time. Fisheries scientist Steven Hare coined the term "Pacific Decadal Oscillation" (PDO) in 1996 while researching connections between Alaska salmon production cycles and Pacific climate (his dissertation topic with advisor Robert Francis). Two main characteristics distinguish PDO from El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO): first, 20th century PDO "events" persisted for 20-to-30 years, while typical ENSO events persisted for 6 to 18 months; second, the climatic fingerprints of the PDO are most visible in the North Pacific/North American sector, while secondary signatures exist in the tropics - the opposite is true for ENSO. Several independent studies find evidence for just two full PDO cycles in the past century: "cool" PDO regimes prevailed from 1890-1924 and again from 1947-1976, while "warm" PDO regimes dominated from 1925-1946 and from 1977 through (at least) the mid-1990's. Shoshiro Minobe has shown that 20th century PDO fluctuations were most energetic in two general periodicities, one from 15-to-25 years, and the other from 50-to-70 years.
http://ingrid.ldeo.columbia.edu/%28/home/alexeyk/mydata/TSsvd.in%29readfile/.SST/.PDO/

Regards......Ralph.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

EDIT

No score for this post
November 10 2012, 8:46 AM 

PDO & ADO Decadal not Multiecadonal.

My hypothesis, is that these forces are of such magnitude, that man's input would make little difference. Differences in angle and orbit,(the Earth's around the Sun) would have catastrophic consequenses, by comparison.

Regards......Ralph.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
laughing

Re: EDIT

No score for this post
November 13 2012, 11:06 AM 

My God, Ralph. You think you're smarter than all the scientists who mathematically model, then gather evidence to test whether man made factors, in fact, could have significant influence on CO2 accumulation rises in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution (confirmed) which, in turn, leads to global warming?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

Brief synopsis/conclusion.

No score for this post
November 10 2012, 12:10 PM 

So.
We get back to my assertions about Climate Change, or no.

My claim (for what it is worth) is that the forces are so great and so variable. Plus the fact, that we ony have reliable data for the last 100 years or so. We have nothing, on which to base our assertions of "Man Made Climate Change". Also, the climate can change considerably for a while, due to a minor seisomological event such as a large volcano erupting.

The Mt Gulanggang eruption, changed the climate of the Southern Hemisphere, for a couple of years. In less than a year, it changed the climate more than that which had happened in the previous century.

As I have already stated, small changes in angle and distance in our orbit, could precipitate the next Ice-Age. This would have disasterous consequences for the human race. If we had an Ice-Age as huge as the last one, human numbers would fall to no more than a quarter of its present population. Why? Because there would not be enough arable land, on which to grow enough food to sustain our present population.

As for providing figures. When they start interpreting the Climatic Graphs for the last century, and then applying the Born Oppenheimer Aggregaton to the various graphs of the PDO, El Nino, and several others, my brain went into free-fall. If you like I will post the links to the various sites.

I could write a thesis on this....But I won't.I have more good manners, than to send you comatose.


ZZZZZZZzzzzzz......Ralph.



 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
frankly speaking, Ralph

Re: Hope this helps.

No score for this post
November 10 2012, 1:45 PM 

Ralph you're as nutty as the Christian taliban nutters. Do you honestly think those researching climate change aren't aware that there are cycles and there are cycles? Do you think El Nino oscillations have somehow slipped their memory?

Have you ever seen the long term trends of the share market? There are ups and downs all the time, but there are also longer term trends.

I'm amazed that you think you've somehow come up with something new here.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

No I don't

No score for this post
November 11 2012, 4:26 AM 

Mate,
can't you read.

I was merely answering the bloke who made the enquiry, who signed himself as "To Ralph".

Please get your eyes tested. Or maybe your brain. Yu gat wia lus oa wanem?

Regards......Ralph.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
tasol

Re: No I don't

No score for this post
November 12 2012, 2:06 AM 

The global warming trend has been going on for much longer than a decade. It goes beyond any of the usual back and forth fluctuations.

Thanks for being on the side of climate change. We see it in some of our coastal villages and it is time that the developed world starts paying to keep our tropical forests as carbon sinks to slow down global warming.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

Re: No I don't

No score for this post
January 5 2013, 7:00 AM 

@Tasol.

When my ancestors (on one side of my family) came to Australia some 40,000 years ago the land bridge to Tassie still existed. (Now bass Strait)

So you can see how much the oceans have risen in that time. (About 300 feet or 9M) So all coastal communities are doomed to be flooded within the next 1,000 or so years. That is,if the trend continues unabated. Who knows for sure? One can only draw a graph, projecteing "KNOWN" data into the future. As for variables....Who knows?

As for the Bible stating that the world is only 4,000 or so years old. This contradicts Carbon Dating, and also the legends of other tribes. Seeing that the Christians set such store by their book of Legends, one would expect them to show more respect to the legends of other peoples.

The fact that thay don't, appears to be the "Christian Way". Show utter contempt for anybody else's beliefs or stories. Why you PNG people allow this nonsense to dominate your lives, has be dumbfounded. You have a rich spiritual history, without the Whiteman's Religion keeping you in servitude.

Prey for your God......Ralph.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

Stretim Tok. (EDIT?)

No score for this post
January 6 2013, 2:33 AM 

9M = 90M Em tasol.

Sori......Ralph.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Not so

Re: No I don't

No score for this post
January 6 2013, 4:30 PM 

Christianity is exclusive. It refuses to be identifies with the false idols.
If you don't like it, move on. It is not a politically correct all inclusive party, No. No one is forcing Christianity upon you.

The way you seem to attack Christianity without relent shows it is s thorn in your flesh.

You cannot ignore Christ because He is the Way, the Truth and Life and He alone rises above the rest.

It's one of choice.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
I don't either

Re: No I don't

No score for this post
January 7 2013, 2:49 AM 

Not all of us PNGs are so dumb and stupid as to accept christian propaganda and bullcraps!!!!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

Rescinding the Malediction

No score for this post
January 7 2013, 10:00 AM 

As you can see,
the Trolls have vanished, and the religious ones have retreated to their Faith Forum.

Therefore, in accordance with my promise, I rescind my curse upon you all.

May your God smile upon you......Ralph.

PS. I said SMILE. Not laugh uproariously.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Current Topic - Scientific Proof of Divine Authorship of Genesis..of the Bible
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Pacific Faith