Comments
101 - 120 of 138 Comments Last updated Nov 12, 2013

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#101
Oct 26, 2013
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> Not according to my wild axiom, which has been corroborated by the intensely irrational hostilities of many incredulous scientists.
Just not in this reality.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#102
Oct 26, 2013
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
Certainly, no cells, skin or DNA, fossilized or otherwise, was found as was claimed by numerous creationists.
Here are some facts that you can discuss with your fellow atheists at your next emergency meeting on truth subversion tactics: Dinosaur Soft Tissue Sequenced; Similar to Chicken Proteins: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/...

You should also mention it to your therapist.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103
Oct 26, 2013
 
llDayo wrote:
<quoted text>
And you haven't considered how plants would have survived the deluge being completely immersed in water and without sunlight for a year.
http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-02...
When did Noah live again?
That depends upon the calendar you use and various schools of thought.
So we took give or take 2250 years ago (bit of a water-issue in Iraq. Some Merchants apologizing to the client and explaining why they ended up in the wrong direction and hundreds of miles away, and had to paddle back all the way. Well i guess they had too.
That letter is the story.)
First we had different dates but had to keep changing the number so as to keep the discussion going....yes but what if...bovine bottleneck etc.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104
Oct 26, 2013
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Don't you think it is so humble of Shubee to refer to his bullshit opinion as an axiom. As if it were some established mathematical principle.
Don't forget the kids, teens by now, need home-teaching.
So we are at The Axiom Phase and The Use Thereof In Christian Apologist Conversation stage.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105
Oct 26, 2013
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> As if you know anything about genetics, biology, geology and physics.
One thing we do have unlike 'the creatards'is the ability to learn added with willingness and an open mind.
So if we did not, we most certainly do now, ad nauseam.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106
Oct 26, 2013
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> Here are some facts that you can discuss with your fellow atheists at your next emergency meeting on truth subversion tactics: Dinosaur Soft Tissue Sequenced; Similar to Chicken Proteins: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/...
You should also mention it to your therapist.
I have several papers on collagen being sequenced from intact bones of large dinosaurs. Collagen is not DNA, cells or skin as reported by creationists. The fact that it is similar to bird protein is just more evidence to support the relationship between dinosaurs and birds and that birds evolved from dinosaurs.

What you want this to mean is that dinosaurs are not as old as all the evidence says. What it says is that some soft tissue and structures associated with them can be preserved despite what we previously thought. In all the cases the tissues came from large bones of large dinosaurs and were found intact. Perhaps those are some of the conditions required for this phenomenon to occur. More research is needed. Nothing about this discovery changes the age of the fossils.

In any case, it definitely is another straw passing by for the creationist to grasp at.

By the way, I don't know many Methodist atheists, but if I run across one, I will let you know. Just because I am not a creationist, does not mean that I don't believe in God.

I guess my snide remarks to you have paid off. Don't think I missed that comment of yours about my therapist. Keep clicking those ruby slippers together Dorothy.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#107
Oct 26, 2013
 
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't forget the kids, teens by now, need home-teaching.
So we are at The Axiom Phase and The Use Thereof In Christian Apologist Conversation stage.
Shubee is great at declaring his every thought to be some award winning wisdom. I guess because no one else ever has or ever will.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108
Oct 27, 2013
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> I imagine that there was only one kind of cat before the flood. Remember, the flood story is talking about the ancient past, not long after the creation of life on this planet. And according to Genesis 1:30, the animals that God created only ate plants. If you believe in the mythological stories of transitions from fish to philosophers, then certainly the Biblical account where carnivores descended from herbivores should be regarded as far more believable. Brown bears today still eat berries and the diet of Panda bears is 99% bamboo.
Can't recall the name of the greek myth of transitions.
But about trying to take over god's job of feeding animals there is a Swahili legend:
http://www.worldtrans.org/creators/whale/myth...
King Sulemani
In one East African legend a whale teaches a king a lesson in humility.
"One day, when all the people, spirits and animals in his kingdom had eaten their fill, Sulemani prayed to God that He might permit him to feed allthe created beings on earth ... But God wished to show him that all human enterprise must have an end in the very size of the encounter it has sought so fervently to face. It pleased God to raise to the surface of the sea a fish such as fishermen had never seen. In the learned books it is described as a whale, but it was much bigger. It rose up from the water like an island, like a mountain. It ate and ate, until there was not a single bag of corn left. The whale raised its voice and roared:'Oh king, I am still hungry, Feed me!' Sulemani asked the big fish if there were more fishes of its size in the sea, to which the sea-monster replied:'Of my tribe there are seventy thousand.' At these words, King Sulemani prostrated himself upon the ground and prayed to God:'Forgive me, Lord, for my foolish desire to feed Thy creation.' King Sulemani thanked the creature for teaching him a lesson. From then on, he no longer tried to take over God's job of feeding all His creatures." (translated from the Swahili by Jan Knapper)

Also:
The biblical whale par excellence is the stupendous Leviathan - symbol of evil, focal point of all human fears, embodiment of unmitigated power - that the Lord created on the fifth day of Creation as a warning to mankind. >From then on "Leviathan maketh a path to shine after him," whenever pride and the temptation to sin well up in the sons of Adam. Its gaping mouth is terrible to behold; nothing can equal its strength; its heart harder than stone.

Leviathan is mentioned again in Fourth Esdras, a Jewish apocalyptic work usually included in the Apocrypha. "On the fifth day thou didst command the seventh part, where the water had been gathered together, to bring forth living creatures, birds, and fishes ... Then thou didst keep in existance two living creatures; the name of one thou didst call Behemoth and the name of the other Leviathan ... But to Leviathan thou didst give the seventh part, the watery part."
------
Why would the warning to mankind also die, we do not read of Behemoth nor Leviathan taken on the ark.
Why would they be part of the sterilisation of the whole world but for those on it.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109
Oct 27, 2013
 
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>There is nothing too hard for God. The scripture also says "...all the fountains of the great deep (were) broken up..." Genesis 7:11. I also believe it was a vast but localized flood and the waters from the earth were salinated.(sp?) The Dead sea or Salt sea also contributed to this.
We find that for this time the dead sea was almost dry, as in the entire plateau. Or a vastly lowered level not to the extend of it even having been overflown.

If science tells you different , YHVH tells you not to be stupid.

I do not know about the christian trinity, maybe they are still arguing the point. Man is also devided in three parts so the human part of jesus might cause 6 persona to argue.
(I'm in another ghastly discussion)

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#110
Oct 27, 2013
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>It doesn't invalidate my interpretation or the evidence. Fossils with meals in them seem to invalidate your interpretation though.
Yes, a lot of poetic verses really allude to evolution. You have supplied the case cracker. You surely have.
Tangled bank presented many verses that promote evolution.

And it's not done to quote the stolen scriptures with the same vile book that kills god.

To Shubee, the greek version about god and reading not GOD in the second part but HE.
Otherwise verse 31 the verb legein saying is without anyone or them stating /saying it.
So the way it is stated in the New Testament versions is very different from the early greek. iesous was not even mentioned.

God deciding to off himself is also rather weird.
Slight oversight when the flood came?
Enormous remorse, shame for being who he was?
Anasthasius churhfather and inventor of the trinity revoked it on his deathbed.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#111
Oct 27, 2013
 
Anasthasius also known as athanasian creed later, as in the 5th century.
MOD SOD TOPIX. it's as if it is not registering.
---
Legontos matt 22:31 with a capital letter because it's orphaned in the christian translation. If we look at the greek and use the cut-off point we have legontos a verb without a subject.
Matt 22;31-32
Legontos
Ego emein o theos Abraam kai o theos isaak kai o theos iakb: ouk estin theos [o] nekron alla ztn.
he/they were saying
I I BE god of Abram and of Isaak and of jacob:
not being god [of] death but alive.

Christians translate it thus:
The saying
I AM the god of Abraham and the god of Isaak and the god of Jacob?[God]is not of [the] dead but [god] of the living.

The other options takes Jesus resurection and salvation away, they argue who's HE?:
The saying
I AM the god of (forefathers)? HE is not of death but god of life.

The questionmark leading to the idea that yhvh 's funeral was planned in either christian version.
But the version with HE is better if go with the christian use of reading Jesus as Jahweh is salvation.
And various verses alluding or outright stating this concept.
Even though life can also be read as be more rebellious, don't take this roman by proxy occupation lying down.
But he had a parsha discussed just before about dead jewish women being resurrected when they arrive in heaven -ouranos.

Ouranos our archetypical raingod
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#112
Oct 27, 2013
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
What you want this to mean is that dinosaurs are not as old as all the evidence says.
The evidence clearly contradicts established thought.
DanFromSmithville wrote:
What it says is that some soft tissue and structures associated with them can be preserved despite what we previously thought.
That was one person's hopeful conjecture. Arm-waving doesn't make it science.

I quote:

In that report the researchers described the seemingly inexplicable preservation of soft tissuesincluding branching blood vessels and bone matrixin a T. rex fossil from Wyoming.

Some experts were immediately skeptical, saying that preservation of organic material over such a vast period of time should not be possible.

"The accepted viewpoint is that collagen, like other organic molecules, will degrade relatively rapidly, so that after a maximum of about a hundred thousand years nothing will remain," Schweitzer acknowledged.

But when conditions for preservation are just right, she said, "degradation rates may differ from predictions."

And here is the doubtful line:

"Data from both [new] papers suggest that original protein may be preserved."

But continue reading:

Hendrik Poinar is an expert in fossil proteins and DNA at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada.

Like others in the field, he had questioned whether Schweitzer's 2005 report made a sufficiently strong case that the preserved tissues came from a T. rex and were not the result of more recent contamination.

The new studies have him more convinced.

"I'd have to say, I'm more optimistic about it than I was previously," Poinar said. "Now the burden of proof is on the skeptics."

One self-proclaimed skeptic is Christina Nielsen-Marsh, an expert on ancient bone proteins at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany.

"Based on what we presently understand, these T. rex sequences make no sense at all," Nielsen-Marsh said.

"That doesn't mean they are wrong. But if they are right, then we all need to rethink how molecules survive in the geological environment."
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#113
Oct 27, 2013
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
Just because I am not a creationist, does not mean that I don't believe in God.
No. It means that you don't believe in the creationist by the name of Jesus. You must know, in the gospels, Jesus clearly affirms His belief in the historicity of Adam and Eve.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114
Oct 27, 2013
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> No. It means that you don't believe in the creationist by the name of Jesus. You must know, in the gospels, Jesus clearly affirms His belief in the historicity of Adam and Eve.
jesus was just the Occupy Wall Streeter of his time. the people who used his life after his death for their political gains were just the spin doctors of their day, turning his life into a media soundbyte and lying and exaggerating about it like all spin doctors do. this is why the gospels differ on the story of jesus, they were ads to the people of the time and place they were written to, thus they had to sell to that crowd...

nothing magical about jesus, or his life at all. just the same crap that goes on today.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#115
Oct 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> The evidence clearly contradicts established thought.
<quoted text> That was one person's hopeful conjecture. Arm-waving doesn't make it science.
I quote:
In that report the researchers described the seemingly inexplicable preservation of soft tissuesincluding branching blood vessels and bone matrixin a T. rex fossil from Wyoming.
Some experts were immediately skeptical, saying that preservation of organic material over such a vast period of time should not be possible.
"The accepted viewpoint is that collagen, like other organic molecules, will degrade relatively rapidly, so that after a maximum of about a hundred thousand years nothing will remain," Schweitzer acknowledged.
But when conditions for preservation are just right, she said, "degradation rates may differ from predictions."
And here is the doubtful line:
"Data from both [new] papers suggest that original protein may be preserved."
But continue reading:
Hendrik Poinar is an expert in fossil proteins and DNA at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada.
Like others in the field, he had questioned whether Schweitzer's 2005 report made a sufficiently strong case that the preserved tissues came from a T. rex and were not the result of more recent contamination.
The new studies have him more convinced.
"I'd have to say, I'm more optimistic about it than I was previously," Poinar said. "Now the burden of proof is on the skeptics."
One self-proclaimed skeptic is Christina Nielsen-Marsh, an expert on ancient bone proteins at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany.
"Based on what we presently understand, these T. rex sequences make no sense at all," Nielsen-Marsh said.
"That doesn't mean they are wrong. But if they are right, then we all need to rethink how molecules survive in the geological environment."
Seriously desperate to grasp at whatever straws you can. This new information will change how we understand fossilization, but it won't change how we date the fossils. You can keep adding to your posts, but that fact remains.

Sorry.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116
Oct 27, 2013
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> No. It means that you don't believe in the creationist by the name of Jesus. You must know, in the gospels, Jesus clearly affirms His belief in the historicity of Adam and Eve.
It means I am not an atheist. Another mistake you have made. The list just keeps growing Shubee.

If I am not a creationist, then it isn't likely that I am a biblical literalist either. I am not. For all I know that affirmation on Adam and Eve is an error of the author and had nothing to do with what Christ may have said.

I do know is that failing to follow your belief system doesn't mean that I am always wrong by default. Don't you just hate that Shube.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#117
Oct 27, 2013
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
It means I am not an atheist.
Yes, in the same sense that the Sadducees weren't atheists. It's interesting that the New Testament doesn't mention even one Sadducee believing in Jesus while many Pharisees got converted and believed.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118
Oct 27, 2013
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> Yes, in the same sense that the Sadducees weren't atheists. It's interesting that the New Testament doesn't mention even one Sadducee believing in Jesus while many Pharisees got converted and believed.
Since it is clear your stand against science has once again been eviscerated, you are going into a religious ramble. Good luck with that. I am not interested. You can believe how you like about God, Jesus, me or anyone else. I don't care.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

G'dansk

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#119
Oct 27, 2013
 
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> No. It means that you don't believe in the creationist by the name of Jesus. You must know, in the gospels, Jesus clearly affirms His belief in the historicity of Adam and Eve.
Jesus had full access to the Torah, and got his knowledge of Adam and Eve from that

Adam and Eve as written in the Bible did not exist...too many science discoveries that disprove the Biblical myth.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#120
Oct 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> No. It means that you don't believe in the creationist by the name of Jesus. You must know, in the gospels, Jesus clearly affirms His belief in the historicity of Adam and Eve.
He does not necessarily not "believe in" the creationist named Jesus. He may believe that there was a real person named Jesus.

Your claim that he was a creationist is very strong evidence that he was not the son of God or a deity of any sort. A deity would know the history of the Earth.

Most Christians know that Jesus used allegories all of the time so his references to Adam and Eve, Noah, and other myths of the Bible were simply allegory. They were not references to a fact.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••