Aliens and evolution

[thewordofme]

Richardfs wrote:

<quoted text>
A lovely story, now cite it please.

Doesn't need citing my friend...it is WELL know knowledge that has been around for years and is TOTALLY accepted by the world-wide community of scientists...keep up.

Creationists have to cite science evidence because they are well know liars for Jesus...you can't trust them at all.

[thewordofme]

Nuggin wrote:

<quoted text>
This is why it's advisable for you to actually read the other posts before jumping into a discussion.
You've completely missed the point.
This is not "my" God. I'm not defending the bible or Christianity as anything but mythology and a power grab by men who are afraid of women having sex with other men.
However, Skippy has spent 6 months berating everyone, claiming that he can DISPROVE "God" _scientifically_.
This demonstrates a GROSS misunderstanding of science.
Science can not prove nor disprove anything which relates to the "supernatural" because science deals only with the _NATURAL_.
Does the "supernatural" exist? I sincerely doubt it. However, I would never claim to be able to _scientifically_ prove or disprove otherwise.
When you abandon the very rules of science in order to try and advance science over mythology, you are replacing science WITH mythology.
Let the religious have they myths. Keep them away from our science. Stop pretending science does things it doesn't do.
The REASON science has been winning this war for HUNDREDS of years is because it sticks to what it does well and doesn't try and do what it can't.

Very well said nuggin.

[thewordofme]

dr of theology wrote:

<quoted text>UFO's are sumerians from the tenth planet in our solar system.Their writings predate the bible by thousands of years.the bible coppied 99% of its stories from the sumerian writings.FYI.

OH PLEASE,...not this 10th. planet crap again.

[Reason Personified]

Nuggin wrote:

<quoted text>
This is why it's advisable for you to actually read the other posts before jumping into a discussion.
You've completely missed the point.
This is not "my" God. I'm not defending the bible or Christianity as anything but mythology and a power grab by men who are afraid of women having sex with other men.
However, Skippy has spent 6 months berating everyone, claiming that he can DISPROVE "God" _scientifically_.
This demonstrates a GROSS misunderstanding of science.
Science can not prove nor disprove anything which relates to the "supernatural" because science deals only with the _NATURAL_.
Does the "supernatural" exist? I sincerely doubt it. However, I would never claim to be able to _scientifically_ prove or disprove otherwise.
When you abandon the very rules of science in order to try and advance science over mythology, you are replacing science WITH mythology.
Let the religious have they myths. Keep them away from our science. Stop pretending science does things it doesn't do.
The REASON science has been winning this war for HUNDREDS of years is because it sticks to what it does well and doesn't try and do what it can't.

What science does or doesn't do, who sleeps with who ..... who cares? You described a god with the ultimate ability to avoid being detected. So what does that have to do with a god who hides himself, from his much loved children? Nothing at all, much like you yourself ...... the god is a joke

[Reason Personified]

Nuggin wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah, an entire thread you started based on your inability to formulate an argument. AND, if you actually READ that thread, you'll see it's full of people who came to the conclusion that YOU were wrong.

.... and they are all, your socks.

[Reason Personified]

Nuggin wrote:

<quoted text>
Skippy, you DID Deny the moon landings. MULTIPLE times. Page 4 of THIS thread.
You also claimed that Lizards are imaginary.
That Egypt never existed.
And _most recently_ that c-14 dating is fake.
It's ALL on this thread. Continuing to deny it doesn't make your idiocy go away.

We are not alien to our own moon.

[Nuggin]

Richardfs wrote:

<quoted text>
A lovely story, now cite it please.

Now cite what? The tree ring record for the American SW?

Okay:
http://archaeology.about.com/od/dterms/g/dend...

Now you go ahead and provide you evidence that C-14 dating is fake.

[Nuggin]

Aura Mytha wrote:

YES Zeus is an imaginary gawd,

Here we go again. You classify Zeus as imaginary as opposed to WHICH other god?

[Nuggin]

Reason Personified wrote:

<quoted text>.... and they are all, your socks.

Well that's a fun little fantasy. Obviously you haven't read the thread.

Big surprise.

[Nuggin]

Reason Personified wrote:

<quoted text>We are not alien to our own moon.

Mexicans are "alien" to the US.

There has been no human born on the moon. No humans live on the moon. Only a handful of humans have ever stepped foot there.

To claim that we are from the Moon is ridiculous.

[Richardfs]

Let us recount the bidding:-

Richardfs wrote:

<quoted text>
So there is NO misunderstanding C14 dating is accurate, tree rings and ice cores are not.

Nuggin wrote:

<quoted text>
That is an OUTLANDISH claim.
C-14 has an error bar. A +/-
You find a structure in New Mexico and it has wooden beams in it, you can date those beams to 3,250 years ago +/- 25 years.
However, if you take a core out of that beam, you can have a dendrochronologist tell you EXACTLY what year that tree stopped growing.
Now, you can argue that the support beam may have been reused or taken from a tree that died years earlier etc. However, those arguments apply equally to the C-14 date of that same support beam.
So, given a choice between C-14 and dendrochronology in New Mexico. DC is gonna win every time.
C-14's main advantage is that you can date a bone or a lump of charcoal etc. DC only works for trees and only in areas where the ring timeline has been well established.
However, ALL of this is irrelevant because you jumped in to defend Skippy's position that C-14 dating is fake.
So, let's see your evidence.
OR - how about you apologize for f#(king up and go away.

Richardfs wrote:

<quoted text>
A lovely story, now cite it please.

Nuggin wrote:

<quoted text>
Now cite what? The tree ring record for the American SW?
Okay:
http://archaeology.about.com/od/dterms/g/dend...
Now you go ahead and provide you evidence that C-14 dating is fake.

Now will you please cite your original story.

[Nuggin]

Richardfs wrote:

Let us recount the bidding:-

Now will you please cite your original story.

Funny that you cut off the front part of the conversation where you jumped in saying I was wrong about C-14.

How about you go back 3-4 more posts and THEN we'll talk about citations.

[thewordofme]

Nuggin wrote:

<quoted text>
Funny that you cut off the front part of the conversation where you jumped in saying I was wrong about C-14.
How about you go back 3-4 more posts and THEN we'll talk about citations.

Are the creotards still trying to lie about C-14? What a bunch of fools and idiots

[Richardfs]

Nuggin wrote:

<quoted text>
Funny that you cut off the front part of the conversation where you jumped in saying I was wrong about C-14.
How about you go back 3-4 more posts and THEN we'll talk about citations.

Just as I thought, you are just another lying godbot. You can't cite the story because you made it up.

[Richardfs]

thewordofme wrote:

<quoted text>
Are the creotards still trying to lie about C-14? What a bunch of fools and idiots

What else, lying is their stock in trade.

[Reason Personified]

Nuggin wrote:

<quoted text>
Mexicans are "alien" to the US.
There has been no human born on the moon. No humans live on the moon. Only a handful of humans have ever stepped foot there.
To claim that we are from the Moon is ridiculous.

Obviously, you are having trouble reading what I wrote, so I will post it again for you. Let's see if you can limit yourself to reading only to what I have written, in both postings.

Re-posted. >>> "We are not alien to our own moon."

And I agree, that to claim to be from the moon is ridiculous, so why would you imply that I said any such thing?
Come to think of it, we've seen you do this same thing before.

So maybe I'd best respond like this >>>

Nuggin wrote: Mexicans are "alien" to the US.
R.P. wrote: So, it has nothing to do with this post.

Nuggin wrote: There has been no human born on the moon.
R.P. wrote: So, it has nothing to do with this post.

Nuggin wrote: No humans live on the moon.
R.P. wrote: So it has nothing to do with this post.

Nuggin wrote: Only a handful of humans have ever stepped foot there.
R.P. wrote: So, it has nothing to do with this post.

Nuggin wrote: To claim that we are from the Moon is ridiculous.
R.P. wrote: So, don't claim it.

[-Skeptic-]

Nuggin wrote:

<quoted text>
SKIPPY CAN'T USE SCIENCE TO EVALUATE THE SUPERNATURAL.

I really pity this nuggin godbot fellow.

[Nuggin]

Richardfs wrote:

<quoted text>
Just as I thought, you are just another lying godbot. You can't cite the story because you made it up.

Go back and read the posts.

And stop using words you don't understand. You're here arguing that C-14 dating is fake, you don't get to call OTHER people "godbot"

[Nuggin]

Richardfs wrote:

<quoted text>
What else, lying is their stock in trade.

Dipshit, he's talking about YOU

[Nuggin]

Reason Personified wrote:

<quoted text>Obviously, you are having trouble reading what I wrote, so I will post it again for you. Let's see if you can limit yourself to reading only to what I have written, in both postings.
Re-posted. >>> "We are not alien to our own moon."
And I agree, that to claim to be from the moon is ridiculous, so why would you imply that I said any such thing?
Come to think of it, we've seen you do this same thing before.
So maybe I'd best respond like this >>>
Nuggin wrote: Mexicans are "alien" to the US.
R.P. wrote: So, it has nothing to do with this post.
Nuggin wrote: There has been no human born on the moon.
R.P. wrote: So, it has nothing to do with this post.
Nuggin wrote: No humans live on the moon.
R.P. wrote: So it has nothing to do with this post.
Nuggin wrote: Only a handful of humans have ever stepped foot there.
R.P. wrote: So, it has nothing to do with this post.
Nuggin wrote: To claim that we are from the Moon is ridiculous.
R.P. wrote: So, don't claim it.

Okay, since you have disallowed ALL evidence against your argument as being "nothing to do with" it, let's flip the tables here.

Go on, PROVE your contention without referencing ANYTHING else.