Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story
Mark

United States

#87349 Apr 22, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
Continued--
For Mark
See all of my words above here. A thing to consider is that we know the Bible describes people and some places accurately, but it also describes happenings that we KNOW for a fact are not true.
You write:
“"The reader may rest assured that nothing has been found [by archaeologists] to disturb a reasonable faith, and nothing has been discovered which can disprove a single theological doctrine. The Bible can stand for itself." - Dr. William F. Albright –“
Ah, good ol’ Dr. Albright. He was a kinda’ good archaeologist and a kinda’ good scientist. He had a serious problem though. He did not use the scientific method properly and he thereby contaminated most of his work.
In archaeology, or any other science, you DO NOT make the conclusion first and then try to find evidence to back you up. You DO NOT say,“OK we ‘know’ there was a flood so let’s see if we can find evidence to back it up.” Much of his work is under review. Look him up in Google.

I have seen the Dead Sea Scrolls and have followed the story for years.--end--
Thank you for this thoughtful and volumous reply. In actuality, the findings I mentioned - S&D, Zoar, Jericho, Ebla and (Ai, your mention) are all modern and post-date the quotes listed, so I don't see how the comments are out of date. Your Israeli sources are long recognized secular Jews and no friend of Biblical apologists. Their findings and summary dismissals of the Biblical accounts are based on absence of evidence rather than contrary evidence, pretty shaky and nothing to do with findings in the trenches when you look closely. You mentioned hard evidence? they have none.

They sweep away the Exodus account merely because they have trouble finding of what? a 40 year camping trip with a tent temple thousands of years ago? They discredit Scripture based on the mention of domesticated camels being used too early in the age - why?, if the Bible mentions them as domesticated is this not an authoritative account? No they say, because they can't find collaboration outside the Bible, so based on more non-evidence they claim its falsified! How arrogant! If that's not anti-Biblical bias I dont know what is. Dromedaries are also mentioned in the herds that Job lost,(3000) and that predates the Exodus. An inscription recently unearthed stating "The House of David" has thrown many of these skeptics off balance in recent days.

Gaps in the Egyptian side of history are very suspicious, many feel the fam. of the responsible leaders removed the account because they were embarrassed by it. As for Jericho, the recent findings of bread in the ovens doesn't fair well for the abandoned city story,(with the walls caved in).

There is encouraging and ongoing work going on at Ai. My statements concerning the S&D destruction are based on a film documentary I viewed with shock back in 2003 or so. Short run series.

This is not the place to debate this huge topic, but here again I show there is another side of this story in just a few words.

Mark

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Patagonia

#87350 Apr 22, 2013
“I would challenge anyone here to think of a question upon which we once had a scientific answer, no matter how inadequate, but for which now the best answer is a religious one.”
–Sam Harris

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#87351 Apr 22, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for this thoughtful and volumous reply. In actuality, the findings I mentioned - S&D, Zoar, Jericho, Ebla and (Ai, your mention) are all modern and post-date the quotes listed, so I don't see how the comments are out of date. Your Israeli sources are long recognized secular Jews and no friend of Biblical apologists. Their findings and summary dismissals of the Biblical accounts are based on absence of evidence rather than contrary evidence, pretty shaky and nothing to do with findings in the trenches when you look closely. You mentioned hard evidence? they have none.
They sweep away the Exodus account merely because they have trouble finding of what? a 40 year camping trip with a tent temple thousands of years ago? They discredit Scripture based on the mention of domesticated camels being used too early in the age - why?, if the Bible mentions them as domesticated is this not an authoritative account? No they say, because they can't find collaboration outside the Bible, so based on more non-evidence they claim its falsified! How arrogant! If that's not anti-Biblical bias I dont know what is. Dromedaries are also mentioned in the herds that Job lost,(3000) and that predates the Exodus. An inscription recently unearthed stating "The House of David" has thrown many of these skeptics off balance in recent days.
Gaps in the Egyptian side of history are very suspicious, many feel the fam. of the responsible leaders removed the account because they were embarrassed by it. As for Jericho, the recent findings of bread in the ovens doesn't fair well for the abandoned city story,(with the walls caved in).
There is encouraging and ongoing work going on at Ai. My statements concerning the S&D destruction are based on a film documentary I viewed with shock back in 2003 or so. Short run series.
This is not the place to debate this huge topic, but here again I show there is another side of this story in just a few words.
Mark
Exodus is dismissed as exaggerated because most of the evidence in fact does conflict with the story.
The conquests were too far apart in time, the Egyptians never had hundreds of thousands or even tens of thousands of Jewish slaves.
The Egyptian accounts of Jewish kingdoms do not collaborate, the archeological evidence does not collaborate, the evidence shows Israel was formed by the Canaanites who rebelled against their rulers, not because the Israelite conquered them. The bible is a work of historical exaggeration and fiction mixed with mythology and racial political rhetoric and propaganda , I would call much of it the first use of spin journalism.
bohart

Newport, TN

#87352 Apr 22, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
“I would challenge anyone here to think of a question upon which we once had a scientific answer, no matter how inadequate, but for which now the best answer is a religious one.”
–Sam Harris
Sponatanous generation of life

“That's just MY opinion...”

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#87353 Apr 22, 2013
bohart wrote:
Sponatanous generation of life
The assembly of nonliving material into something that might be considered as living would hardly be considered spontaneous and could certainly not be explained by Magic.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Patagonia

#87354 Apr 22, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Sponatanous generation of life
So you really believe in magic bohart?

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Patagonia

#87355 Apr 22, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Exodus is dismissed as exaggerated because most of the evidence in fact does conflict with the story.
The conquests were too far apart in time, the Egyptians never had hundreds of thousands or even tens of thousands of Jewish slaves.
The Egyptian accounts of Jewish kingdoms do not collaborate, the archeological evidence does not collaborate, the evidence shows Israel was formed by the Canaanites who rebelled against their rulers, not because the Israelite conquered them. The bible is a work of historical exaggeration and fiction mixed with mythology and racial political rhetoric and propaganda , I would call much of it the first use of spin journalism.
I agree with you of course. My understanding is that the first 5 chapters of the Bible are almost purely myth, and Mark will never know because of fundamentalist brainwashing.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#87356 Apr 22, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes and stupidity belongs to you. I guess the French own all french kisses and french fries. Only Dutch people can go Dutch, Mexico owns all Mexican restaurants. The Spanish own a flu and a fly. Morse owns a code and the Scot's own free. Duck's own tape unless it's cheap tape then it belongs to Scotch. You don't have to guess who owns Brandy. I can only guess you used to live under London bridge, and when it fell , it hit you on your big ole doofus head.
What part of the world are you, Lulu.
We are talking about English language origin and ownership. Stay on track and stop beating around the bush, Lulu.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#87357 Apr 22, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes. Lets DO face reality.
I provided evidence that the US in fact DOES export oil.
No twisting of the facts. We DO EXPORT OIL.
Deal with it.
Then you are not a sincere responder.
You have oils in abundance but its marketability status is in( not)- comparable to that of Africa and Middle East Asia.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#87358 Apr 22, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>what does that have to do with the fact that you were absolutely, 100% wrong about the US using mostly african resources to develop our nation...
and yes, our oil is as marketable. check into the lawsuits oil companies are bringing against nigeria as their political and social turmoil is preventing the completion of contracted oil production...
what does the Near east have to do with African resources?
Nigeria?
Why are you doing business in Nigeria, if you are not interested in their oils?
Those companies are exploiting from Nigeria and Nigerians to develop the US and Europe, no arguments about that.

“Just the facts maam”

Level 2

Since: Mar 09

Earth

#87359 Apr 23, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Then you are not a sincere responder.
You have oils in abundance but its marketability status is in( not)- comparable to that of Africa and Middle East Asia.
I am afraid you are misinformed old boy. Since Obama took office, we have reversed a decades long decline in production, but we have always exported oil. In fact, US oil exports have nearly doubled since 2004, going from 1 million barrels/day to nearly 2 million barrels/day. Other countries like Canada and Mexico have also increased production and export.

Not very clear what you mean when you say it isn't marketable. It is oil. There has been a market for it for 100 years and the US does fine on that. I hear China has now stolen our crown as biggest importer of oil. Good luck to them.

Increased US production and export is going to be hard on OPEC. It will be a challenge for Saudi Arabia to balance internal and external checks on member countries.

What was your point anyway?

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#87360 Apr 23, 2013
Shavin Marvin wrote:
<quoted text>I am afraid you are misinformed old boy. Since Obama took office, we have reversed a decades long decline in production, but we have always exported oil. In fact, US oil exports have nearly doubled since 2004, going from 1 million barrels/day to nearly 2 million barrels/day. Other countries like Canada and Mexico have also increased production and export.
Not very clear what you mean when you say it isn't marketable. It is oil. There has been a market for it for 100 years and the US does fine on that. I hear China has now stolen our crown as biggest importer of oil. Good luck to them.
Increased US production and export is going to be hard on OPEC. It will be a challenge for Saudi Arabia to balance internal and external checks on member countries.
What was your point anyway?
Chuckles HAS no point.

He makes an unsupported declaration, and when challenged with evidence that proves him wrong, repeats his position ad nausium.

Which is why nobody takes him (or his positions) seriously.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Zhengzhou, China

#87361 Apr 23, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote, "Christianity as we all know, started from a small Jewish sect to become the official religion of the entire Roman empire, is that not awesome?"

Yes, that is totally awesome.
What's your point?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#87362 Apr 23, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with you of course. My understanding is that the first 5 chapters of the Bible are almost purely myth, and Mark will never know because of fundamentalist brainwashing.
I agree as well. On both points.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#87363 Apr 23, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for this thoughtful and volumous reply. In actuality, the findings I mentioned - S&D, Zoar, Jericho, Ebla and (Ai, your mention) are all modern and post-date the quotes listed, so I don't see how the comments are out of date. Your Israeli sources are long recognized secular Jews and no friend of Biblical apologists. Their findings and summary dismissals of the Biblical accounts are based on absence of evidence rather than contrary evidence, pretty shaky and nothing to do with findings in the trenches when you look closely. You mentioned hard evidence? they have none.
They sweep away the Exodus account merely because they have trouble finding of what? a 40 year camping trip with a tent temple thousands of years ago? They discredit Scripture based on the mention of domesticated camels being used too early in the age - why?, if the Bible mentions them as domesticated is this not an authoritative account? No they say, because they can't find collaboration outside the Bible, so based on more non-evidence they claim its falsified! How arrogant! If that's not anti-Biblical bias I dont know what is. Dromedaries are also mentioned in the herds that Job lost,(3000) and that predates the Exodus. An inscription recently unearthed stating "The House of David" has thrown many of these skeptics off balance in recent days.
Gaps in the Egyptian side of history are very suspicious, many feel the fam. of the responsible leaders removed the account because they were embarrassed by it. As for Jericho, the recent findings of bread in the ovens doesn't fair well for the abandoned city story,(with the walls caved in).
There is encouraging and ongoing work going on at Ai. My statements concerning the S&D destruction are based on a film documentary I viewed with shock back in 2003 or so. Short run series.
This is not the place to debate this huge topic, but here again I show there is another side of this story in just a few words.
Mark
I would be nice if you included some references for all these assertions.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#87364 Apr 23, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Nigeria?
Why are you doing business in Nigeria, if you are not interested in their oils?
Those companies are exploiting from Nigeria and Nigerians to develop the US and Europe, no arguments about that.
they are int'l companies and sell that oil on the world market.

back to the point you attempted to make to get away from your original wrong point, no the African oil isn't as marketable, for the reasons i gave.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#87365 Apr 23, 2013
straa wrote:
USA will be the worlds biggest producer and exporter of oil and gas within ten years, USA has huge shale oil and gas reserves and they are being extracted in very large amounts, the price of oil in USA is two thirds lower than Europe, this shale oil revolution is a geopolitical game changer, America are now to be a massive exporter again, and will have energy independence, no more reliance on middle east, now countries will be reliant on cheap American oil and gas, shale oil and gas has changed everything, USA are now in a great position, and only they have the technology to extract it at marketable prices, thankfully they have sent engineers to Britain to help us get at our huge shale reserves too, as we have the fourth biggest on earth, much of all England is sitting on massive reserves, and its in England, not Scotland like the north sea oil LOL, or our crude oil in the falklands
Are you sure oil is two thirds the cost in Europe? isn't oil a world market?

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#87366 Apr 23, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> From your premise, there is nothing like origin but development.
You are fouled for ignorance.
Both words goes together, all languages are one way or the other, connected together.
But where it originated and developed, remain intact.
Why are you assuming to know what I think, I take that as extreme ignorance on your part. Of course there is origin, I even showed you a dictionary citation of the meaning of the word. However the origin of the English language is not what you assume it to be. Just because I know what the words means and you don’t does not mean that I deny the word, it simply means that you are ignorant.

I have offered you links to the history of the English language and the the definitions of the words origin and developed. Why have you got such an aversion to actually looking up the meaning of words?

The English language mostly developed in the UK but it originated for the most part in Europe

LEARN THE MEANING OF THE WORDS

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#87367 Apr 23, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> You are indeed a MORON.
The whole nation that takes English as lingua franca, native or official language, does so because of their influences with England.
How can the English adopt their own language?
The US, Canada, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, etc, adopted the English language.
Why are you so stupid, do you take tablets for it?

It’s a little thing called HISTORY. The English language developed over a couple of thousand years with roots in several languages. As the history of the English language links told you if you had bothered to read them rather than making up dogmatic BS

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#87368 Apr 23, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Are you sure oil is two thirds the cost in Europe? isn't oil a world market?
erm...should be, is US oil two thirds the cost of European oil...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Bobby Jindal: "I'm Not an Evolutionary Biologist" 1 hr The Dude 359
Darwin on the rocks 2 hr The Dude 350
It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 3 hr Dogen 138,169
Monkey VS Man 15 hr Bluenose 14
The Satanic Character of Social Darwinism Sun Chimney1 692
Charles Darwin's credentials and Evolution Sun TurkanaBoy 204
There is no scientific evidence whatsoever for ... Oct 17 Discord 431

Evolution Debate People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE