Creation vs. Evolution II

[Silent Hunter]

The feud is over. I won't let it continue.

YOU won't let it continue? Seriously? You give yourself waaaay too much credit. You pick a fight, someone asks you repeatedly to to leave them alone, you persist until they put you on ignore, and YOU won't let it continue? YOU need to do some intense introspection.

 

[patrick jane]

YOU won't let it continue? Seriously? You give yourself waaaay too much credit. You pick a fight, someone asks you repeatedly to to leave them alone, you persist until they put you on ignore, and YOU won't let it continue? YOU need to do some intense introspection.

you need a big dose of God's love !!!

 

[6days]

you need a big dose of God's love !!!

https://youtu.be/c8gKXu6J2wE

 

[MichaelCadry]

YOU won't let it continue? Seriously? You give yourself waaaay too much credit. You pick a fight, someone asks you repeatedly to to leave them alone, you persist until they put you on ignore, and YOU won't let it continue? YOU need to do some intense introspection.

Dear Silent Hunter,

What you don't know could provide you with some solace. What I do to keep Hedshaker from bothering me is my business. Not yours. It takes at least two to be engaged in a disagreement or 'fight.' I still care for him and love him regardless of any 'fight' we're having. Jesus taught me that if I had ought with one of my brethren, make peace before we go to bed. I'm not a fight-monger. Fighting does not please me, for your info.

Michael

 

[gcthomas]

Who asked you to butt in anyway? Don't start fighting with me and say that I started it, instead of you butting in.

Michael, if you post onto a public thread then the conversation isn't private. If you want a private discussion with someone, use a different method. Expect responses from all and sundry when you post silliness.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Michael, if you post onto a public thread then the conversation isn't private. If you want a private discussion with someone, use a different method. Expect responses from all and sundry when you post silliness.

Dear gcthomas,

I do understand what you are saying, gcthomas. It's an awkward position for me to be in. It's like, if I respond, I'm starting a fight, but Silent Hunter is as sweet as cherry pie? You mean it's not okay with me but it's okay with Silent Hunter, right? I can't imagine me PMing him to chat about it! He just plainly shouldn't butt in. But whatever. Thanks for trying to help, gcthomas. I'm trying to do my best. I think we should get back to a different subject.

Michael

 

[Interplanner]

The 15 min daily radio program Science, Scripture and Salvation is on CPT this week. CPT = catastrophic plate techtonics. Dr. John Baumgartner is probably the foremost spox on this, with a sim video of the event. This event, not 'rain', is regarded as the deluge referred to in Gen 6, although there was rain as a by-product of all forces at work in the event. It deserves to be a separate thread.

 

[Caino]

'Once in a lifetime find': Dinosaur tail discovered trapped in amber


http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/08/health/dinosaur-tail-trapped-in-amber-trnd/index.html

 

[patrick jane]

Have you ever heard of the Hobbit people?

http://humanorigins.si.edu/research/asian-research-projects/hobbits-flores-indonesia

[video]http://humanorigins.si.edu/research/asian-research-projects/hobbits-flores-indonesia[/video]

 

[MichaelCadry]

Thanks for trying, Interplanner and patrick jane! Sounds GOOD to me. I can be rid of this albatross around my neck!! You can't change the mind of an atheist no matter how hard you might try or how much love you have and how much you care for them. I've been trying for over 3 years now. All for nothing. Well, they can die in their sins, can't they?? Isn't it spoken by Jesus in Matt. 10:14, "And whoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when you depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet." And in Matt. 10:15, "Verily I say to you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city." So be wary of those you try to help.

Over and out,

Michael

 

[Sherman]

Folks that come into the thread just to marginalize it will find themselves removed from it. Nuff said.

[FONT=&quot]5.[/FONT] Thou SHALL NOT hijack threads or be a "thread pest" (Hijacking a thread means intentionally changing the subject of a thread to discredit the thread's purpose. And being a "thread pest" means you pop into random threads just to make a mocking comment with no other purpose than to marginalize the discussion). If you are not interested in the topic of a thread, you might just want to stay out of it.....

Please do not marginalize TOL threads or TOL members, the topics and threads that interest some TOL members might not interest you. Just ignore threads and TOL members that do not interest you.​

 

[6days]

Have you ever heard of the Hobbit people?

Evolutionists think they were a different species of humans. However, if they are human, then they are descendants of Adam and Eve. These would be people that Christ went to Calvary for.

 

[redfern]

Folks that come into the thread just to marginalize it will find themselves removed from it. Nuff said.

Since this thread has been unusually quiet for the past week or more, I wonder – is this mention of board rules just a courtesy reminder, or is it prompted by specific recent actions by posters in the thread?

 

[redfern]

Evolutionists think they were a different species of humans. However, if they are human, then they are descendants of Adam and Eve. These would be people that Christ went to Calvary for.

As you agreed a short time ago, science should “do its thing” free of pre-conceived religious motives, and then religion can see if what science has found supports specific religious beliefs. The dates I see in PJ’s linked article don’t look like a good fit for a recent Adam and Eve.

 

[6days]

As you agreed a short time ago, science should “do its thing” free of pre-conceived religious motives

Hmmmmm..... Do you have a quote? Was I saying that science itself is outside the realm if pre-conceived religious ideas including atheism?*

*The dates I see in PJ’s linked*article don’t look like a good fit for a recent Adam and Eve.

You are confusing science with scientists opinions. Some scientists suggest the evidence is that these were human descendants of Adam and Eve.

IOW... science itself says nothing. Scientists say things and interpret evidence from various biased world views.

 

[steko]

Hmmmmmmmm!

 

[Sherman]

Since this thread has been unusually quiet for the past week or more, I wonder – is this mention of board rules just a courtesy reminder, or is it prompted by specific recent actions by posters in the thread?

There were certain people coming into the thread just to mock. That is discouraged especially in a thread like this. So I removed the hecklers.

 

[redfern]

There were certain people coming into the thread just to mock. That is discouraged especially in a thread like this. So I removed the hecklers.

Thanks much, I would like to see the posters focus more on presenting ideas than denigrating others.

 

[redfern]

Some scientists suggest the evidence is that these were human descendants of Adam and Eve.

The only specific scientific item I mentioned from the article was the dates. In the article, when discussion the dates it mentions dating volcanic ash, calcite, stone tools, paleomagnetism, anthropology, zircon fission-track analysis, geochronology (whatever that is), and faunal identification (??). No date I saw in the article was even remotely compatible with your religious beliefs.

Do the scientists you mention have scientific (not religious) evidence that would show that Homo florsiensis are descendants of Adam and Eve?

You are confusing science with scientists opinions. … IOW... science itself says nothing.

If you want me to avoid very common ways of expressing ideas, such as anthropomorphizing science (“science says”), then it would probably be best if you just put me on ignore, since I would prefer to have a discussion with someone who focuses on substance rather than semantic minutiae.

Scientists say things and interpret evidence from various biased world views.

So? Do scientists have the option of altering their beliefs when they are shown to be wrong? Can you discard core elements of the Biblical account if you were to find it was not factual?

 

[6days]

*The only specific scientific item I mentioned from the article was the dates....

Yes. . A date they are now apparently assigning to be "tens of thousands of years earlier". *Instead of 12,000 years, the date suddenly jumps to 50,000.*

Unfortunately we don't know what exact results of the various tests were and the assumptions made in assigning the dates.*

Do the scientists you mention have scientific (not religious) evidence that would show that Homo florsiensis are descendants of Adam and Eve?

Yes, as in some evidence of their humanity. Then, there is the evidence of the historical manuscripts and their trust worthiness... as divinely inspired and inerrant.

What I had said is that some scientists*suggest the evidence is that these were human descendants of Adam and Eve.

*

If you want me to avoid very common ways of expressing ideas, such as anthropomorphizing science (“science says”)....

I give my permission... I do anthropomorphize sometimes also. But, I object to it when the term is used to imply all scientists agree...case closed.*

Scientists say things and interpret evidence from various biased world views.

So? Do scientists have the option of altering their beliefs when they are shown to be wrong?*

Yes, of course. Scientists are as human as you and I. We all have that option of changing our beliefs.*