Prove there's a god.

Since: May 11

Ashford, UK

#638018 Jul 8, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
The Taliban are Pashtuns. So is a lot of Pakistan.
Pashtuns will not let anyone they disagree with occupy their territory.
As I posted before, Mullah Omar and the Taliban's mistake was not turning over a non-tribal radical Islamist that had engineered the killing of 3000 innocent people thousands of miles away.
You are trying to excuse bad behavior.
The whole crew of those radicals can be pacified in fairly short order if the political will is exerted. If an IED is exploded, the nearest village or block in a city has 2 hours to evacuate if they don't turn the perps over within that time. Then it gets flattened suddenly. They will be free to stay there afterwards. They will soon start policing themselves.
Oh a scorched earth policy backed up by collective punishment...that's not going to radicalise anyone now is it?

Thanks for those words of wisdom Lieutenant-General Armchair

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#638019 Jul 8, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
If you have lived among them, and know them well, I will accept your declarations of their character.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun_people

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#638020 Jul 8, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, first off, you got that from a creationist site, so clearly they aren't a scientific source. Second, they get the science wrong - probably on purpose.
<quoted text>
It's a bit misleading to write it that way. They concluded that the women can trace their mitochondria back to one woman. So, yes, that bit of non-nuclear genetics ties them back. However, their other genes are not from "mitochondrial eve," but from all the sexual reproduction along the way.
You're 50% each parent,(up to) 25% each grandparent (plus your own mutations). Great grandparents get reduced even more - each generation decreases that percentage by half. And this is all b/c of sexual reproduction. So the percentage of your genes that you can trace directly back to your distant relatives is quite small - another way of saying this is that in the distant past, a lot of people are your ancestors.
Mitochondrial Eve certainly existed, but she lived with a group of other people. It was not just one women, but a whole bunch.
<quoted text>
It's nice that they admit they've moved into mythology here.
<quoted text>
This bit is grossly simplified. There are multiple language families that are not related to each other.
<quoted text>
The article is close to correct here - the research was flawed for a no. of scientific reasons, one of which was that their estimation of the mutation rates in mtDNA was wrong. It was based on a separation from Pan at 5 mya. That's false; our best estimates place that at at ~6.3 mya.
However, the research was also flawed b/c the half-life of mtDNA information is 125000 years. So anything over 125kya is not estimable using mtDNA.
The study was heavily critiqued in science.
<quoted text>
AUS was populated about 40kya. The above info is incorrect.
<quoted text>
False. The research was heavily critiqued for its weak points.
<quoted text>
The above is quote-mining. Not surprisingly, the creation site you went to ignored all information in that paper and only took what they wanted. The following sentence is "No one thinks that's the case."
http://www.dnai.org/teacherguide/pdf/referenc...
I ran out of room - the Adam stuff they wrote about was likewise pure nonsense; they just made up the data to support their religious beliefs.
That's the danger of dogma - it corrupts science to fit mythology. In science, we critique our work, find the problems, and move forward.
How do we know Australia was populated about 40,000 years ago?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#638021 Jul 8, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Well worth it. An easy read, and a first-rate intro to all manner of subjects...
YAY!

*claps hands*

I'm gunna lurn sumpin!

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#638022 Jul 8, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
A pleasure!
Wow, I've never once had someone present a creationist position and thank me for my response - much respect to you, ma'am!
Nobody ever believes me when I say I'm open-minded and I don't accept all apologists sites as the gospel. I really don't. Particularly regarding science. I mean anyone claiming to believe in God has to remember The People's Temple...If both Christians and atheists aren't willing to look at both sides...and review all the evidence and/or argument regrding both sides, there is always room for error and misguidance. Again, I do appreciate your knowledge.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#638023 Jul 8, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:

And how is this speculation?
Because we don't know, we assume.

“Listen to the sounds”

Since: Feb 09

of your own extinction......

#638024 Jul 8, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't assume that at all...which is why We have remained in the Middle East...to try and help the governments over there become strong enough to deal with the radicals...EXCUSE US FOR TRYING TO HELP!
<quoted text>
But we drove them into Pakistan...right? Because we knew they were expert Moutaineers and would flee to Pakistan...<rolls eyes> Not quite!
<quoted text>
Ya don't say! They were fighting before we arrived??? Nah...couldn't be!
I didn't say you assume. That was addressed to Dave.

In any case, do you actually believe your troops are in the middle east to protect and help those governments? Perhaps in Afghanistan and Iraq, which you destroyed. But overwhelmingly throughout the middle east, your troops are there to protect American and Israeli interests, not to help against the radicals.

It is naive to think of your government as some noble legion keeping the peace and upholding local government. There are plenty countries with shittier problems in Africa, yet the U.S. army is not there, because there is none of their interest there.

It's standard. Our government also does that. Why do you insist on believing in your government to be some noble light in the world?

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#638025 Jul 8, 2013
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
Logically, what would they eat?
Do we have evidence of refrigerators and microwaves dating back to 160,000 years? No, we do not. So they did not live off TV dinners. Do we have evidence of grocery stores 160,000 years ago? No, we do not.
Okay, those are silly. But do we hve agricultural evidence dating back to then? I may be corrected, but as far as I know, no. No evidence of agriculture.
What do we have? Weapons. Weapons that were most likely used for hunting.
If you walk into my house and find a 30.06, would you assume I do hunt once in a while? Yes, most likely.
Geddit?
It would not take long for nomadic hunter-gatherers to notice how plants are replenished in the areas they traverse. They would very quickly make the connection between seeds and plant growth. Primitive farming would start real soon. Just throw some seeds around and come back later. It is really stupid to think it took thousands of years to do that, especially since they had appendixes and kind of came down out of the trees.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#638026 Jul 8, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Here. Teach me how to be skeptical of this:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v423/n69...
"Clarifying the geographic, environmental and behavioural contexts in which the emergence of anatomically modern Homo sapiens occurred has proved difficult, particularly because Africa lacked adequate geochronological, palaeontological and archaeological evidence. The discovery of anatomically modern Homo sapiens fossils at Herto, Ethiopia1, changes this. Here we report on stratigraphically associated Late Middle Pleistocene artefacts and fossils from fluvial and lake margin sandstones of the Upper Herto Member of the Bouri Formation, Middle Awash, Afar Rift, Ethiopia. The fossils and artefacts are dated between 160,000 and 154,000 years ago by precise age determinations using the 40Ar/39Ar method. The archaeological assemblages contain elements of both Acheulean and Middle Stone Age technocomplexes. Associated faunal remains indicate repeated, systematic butchery of hippopotamus carcasses. Contemporary adult and juvenile Homo sapiens fossil crania manifest bone modifications indicative of deliberate mortuary practices."
Find a scratch on a fossilized bone and X must've caused it.

I know they're performing very difficult research, but they HAVE to employ some sort of assumption and speculation to get their 'answers'.

“Listen to the sounds”

Since: Feb 09

of your own extinction......

#638027 Jul 8, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not judging, that's just talking shit.
Since Islam is a stolen, plagiarized and bastardized version of Christianity, I know that most of that stuff you stole from us.
Well, not 'you'. Muhammad did.
Well in our point of view, it was Judaism and Christianity that was bastardized. The evidence of fabrication in the Bible are a great many. Islam is a religion that seeks to correct the bastardization. Science proves this as well. Your Bible's fake science is not present in the Quran.

Big bang, evolution, life emerging from water. The Quran is not the book contesting that. It supports all of that. It's your Bible, with its part divinity and part fabrication that contests it.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#638028 Jul 8, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Because you made the claim.
"Adam is a myth."
Go.
Well, firstly, let us define 'Adam'. Adam, in context, is the Adam as mentioned in Christian mythology, and named in the Bible. So, we investigate the Bible to find claims about him and then decide if he was fact or fib.

Biblical Claim 1: Adam was the first human being
Refutation: Incorrect. As explained, there are no real 'firsts'. We weren't apes one day and humans the next.

Biblical Claim 2: Adam lived to become 930 years old
Refutation: No human gets that old. Now, you may counter and say that 'back then', a year wasn't a year, that the people had different methods of timekeeping. Consider this. Let us be wild and say their year was ten times shorter (no ancient people had annums even nearly this short), Adam still lived to 93 years old, by midern times. That is far older than any ancient human can ever hope to get.

Biblical Myth 3: When taming the literal dates from the Bible and subtracting the ages given, we get roughly 6000 years since Adam was created.
Refutation: No need to refute. We have civilisations older than that. We have written works okder than that. We have cities older than that.

This way, it is proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that the Biblical acclunt of Adam is wrong.

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Jacksonville, FL

#638029 Jul 8, 2013
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
1) The Genesis story is 'metaphorical'? Tell that to the others on here that defend Creationism.
2) We await any new finding that disproves any of our hypothesis.
3) What do expect her to do? She is a scholar, up against soneone with only knowledge of Genesis 1? Do you not understand that she comes with a plethora more facts than anyone else on the topix?
4) Why do you hate academics so much?
Education envy.

“Listen to the sounds”

Since: Feb 09

of your own extinction......

#638030 Jul 8, 2013
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
Logically, what would they eat?
Do we have evidence of refrigerators and microwaves dating back to 160,000 years? No, we do not. So they did not live off TV dinners. Do we have evidence of grocery stores 160,000 years ago? No, we do not.
Okay, those are silly. But do we hve agricultural evidence dating back to then? I may be corrected, but as far as I know, no. No evidence of agriculture.
What do we have? Weapons. Weapons that were most likely used for hunting.
If you walk into my house and find a 30.06, would you assume I do hunt once in a while? Yes, most likely.
Geddit?
Nah I'll assume you go shooting black people and trying to form your own country.

:P

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#638031 Jul 8, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I do. I believe Adam is a mythological figure of the Abrahamic religions, just like I believe Ra is a mythological figure of the Egyptian religion(s).
Given that both the Egyptian religion and Abrahamic religions produce precisely the same evidence to support that their apical ancestors actually existed, how is it that you are able to differentiate between them, and choose one to believe as fact?
Here's another one: the Japanese royal family yet lives. They're descended from Heaven, and are the direct ancestors of gods in Shinto. Since they are actually alive, and Adam is not, how can you tell that Adam existed? I mean...we know the Japanese emperor's family exists. So isn't the Shinto claim better?
Please keep in mind, I don't believe in any of these mythologies, but I see no reason to favor one over the other, given the equal paucity of evidence and the equal fervor of belief in the believers.
I know you're not a believer in any religion.

But how do you, as a scientist, make a claim without any supporting evidence?

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#638032 Jul 8, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
YAY!
*claps hands*
I'm gunna lurn sumpin!
You very well may. I certainly did.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#638033 Jul 8, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That it's a manmade object appr 120K years old.
A manmade object? Was it made just for fun? Would you rather believe they sharpened rocks for fun all day?

Questions you should ask:

Why did they make this? What did they use to make it with? How did they make it?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#638034 Jul 8, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:

No archaeologist ever made a claim like that - without getting laughed at by other arkys.
No one would claim we can determine someone's entire existence.
You're mistaken. Some do.

Neanderthals were cave dwellers, although they occasionally built camps out in the open. They wore clothing, used fire, hunted small and medium-sized animals (like goats and small deer), and they scavenged from the kills of large carnivores. They made and used a variety of stone tools and wooden spears. Neanderthals intentionally buried their dead, both individually and in groups, and they also cared for sick or injured individuals. Evidence of ritualistic treatment of animals, which is sometimes found with their skeletons, may indicate that they practiced a primitive form of religion. Evidence from a few sites indicate that Neanderthals coexisted for several thousand years with Modern Humans; who arrived in Europe at about 45,000 B.C, and Cro-Magnons, who arrived in Europe by 35,000 B.C.

http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancien...

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Jacksonville, FL

#638035 Jul 8, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Professional contractor, plumber, electrician, framer, window & door installer, finish carpentry & trim and flooring expert.
You stand corrected.
Do you have a state licence?

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#638036 Jul 8, 2013
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
Logically, what would they eat?
Do we have evidence of refrigerators and microwaves dating back to 160,000 years? No, we do not. So they did not live off TV dinners. Do we have evidence of grocery stores 160,000 years ago? No, we do not.
Okay, those are silly. But do we hve agricultural evidence dating back to then? I may be corrected, but as far as I know, no. No evidence of agriculture.
What do we have? Weapons. Weapons that were most likely used for hunting.
If you walk into my house and find a 30.06, would you assume I do hunt once in a while? Yes, most likely.
Geddit?
The trash and waste is what tells us that.
A hunter gatherer community will have left bones and the waste parts of the plants they ate behind, burned bones tells us they cooked. It's not that hard because hunter gatherers did not have glad bags and dumpsters to discard waste to.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#638037 Jul 8, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh a scorched earth policy backed up by collective punishment...that's not going to radicalise anyone now is it?
Thanks for those words of wisdom Lieutenant-General Armchair
Hard for destitute and hungry people to get real riled up about world events and social issues. It is a tried and true method going back a very long ways.

Such was employed by US troops after the Mexican=American war and the Taos rebellion. Mexicans in the area got some Indians and the locals all fired up against Anglos after the U.S. took control. They started murdering Anglos they caught in the area, and even got drunk and murdered the first Anglo governor, much to their later regret. But there was an area in the mountains with a village called Mora that was a particular problem with the murders of Anglo trappers and traders. An expedition was sent to bring order that met with no success. They continued with their "resistance" to the new order of things. Another expedition was sent later before winter. The village was burned, along with the fields and crops. The people were forced to flee into the mountains in the winter with no food. The troops returned to their garrison. They never presented another problem, and New Mexico became a member of the United States, and has contributed more than its share of soldiers, Hispanic and Anglo, to the wars fought since. The town still survives to this day, a favorite destination of bikers. Lovely area.

A little pain can lead to a lot of gain. You don't put up with bullshit.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 3 hr MKULTRA 59,649
Why did O.J. criminal trial jurors IGNORE cuts ... 3 hr Doctor REALITY 4
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 5 hr Crazy Horse 619,877
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 5 hr Crazy Horse 446,253
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 5 hr Crazy Horse 695,512
Last Post Wins !!! [ game time :) ] (Jan '11) 7 hr Hatti_Hollerand 2,497
Marco Rubio Could Beat Trump in 2020 8 hr razz58 7
wierd situation with my mom. (Jul '14) Mon Pimpy 23
More from around the web