|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Choosing a faith | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Except you never bother to understand your sources. Skim reading a Wikipedia page and getting even that wrong is not my idea of research or caring about the truth. I know that you claim to have done more reading about the selfish gene concept but your actual posting record fits much better with just skimming the Wikipedia page. It’s been more than ten years and you still have problems with the basic concept.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: I go by what you write and the level of understanding you show. Form that, so far as I can tell, skimming a Wikipedia page is all you’ve done on the subject. If the only thing you quote is Wikipedia and you don’t even fully understand the quote - or the most basic facts - then what else am I to conclude? That you know better? That you’re lying ?
quote: Not like everyone else. Most of us regard quote mining as a bad thing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: As you should have known ten years ago “promoting ourselves” is irrelevant. For the other you’ve already forgotten that helping the “us” group would have “promoted our gene pool” when we were living as hunter-gatherers. Indeed, the fourth still will help.
quote: Obviously that is untrue. You don’t even understand Darwin’s principle.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Once again a display of arrogance and hypocrisy. Surely considering other possibilities is the opposite of “God of the gaps” thinking - which only allows one answer and demands that it be accepted as fact.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: You fail to understand the criticism. It’s your misuse of Wikipedia as a source that is the issue. You only used it as a source for out of context quotes to try to prop up your position. You didn’t bother to understand it at all. Not that that stops you quoting people who do have a biased view either. And you abuse them as sources too. The problem - again - is that you don’t care about the truth. Edited by PaulK, .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
You do like dubious old sources:
“There is little reason … to probe further through Macalister’s tortuous discussion of his excavation of the ‘High Place.’ It is impossible to glean any significant information from this mixture of fact (?) and fancy.”
William Dever, quoting himself at Bible Archaeology Society Edited by PaulK, .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Yawn. Really, why do Creationists always think that lying is the answer? There are plenty of transitional fossils and palaeontologists keep finding more. Like this one, published a couple of years ago.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Why bother? We know that Macalister made a complete mess of the excavation and his findings are worthless Message 2458
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: That is a story about a Balaam who might be the same as that written in the Bible Wikipedia. Assuming that it is the same it doesn’t establish anything more than the idea that Balaam was a legendary figure incorporated into the Bible. It does not establish the accuracy of the Biblical story at all.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Oh, look a creationist is telling stupid lies again. What a surprise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Have you noticed that candle2’s sources are either old, or hoaxes or both?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: That’s easy. Look at Message 2478 quote: You claim that this took place between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, but the Bible never says so. Indeed, it’s mentioned in Revelation 12, which implies that it will be part of the End Times (especially v 12).
quote: The Bible never says that, either. Indeed the Bible does not display much understanding of the Universe at all.
quote: Or, more likely it describes the chaos of the Primordial Ocean, before the work of creation has begun.
quote: The Bible does not say any of this.
Message 2482 quote: More likely the Sun is not created until the fourth day - regardless it is not set in the sky until then (Genesis 1 16-18)
quote: This contradicts Genesis 1. As I point out above it does not say that the Sun is in the sky, but obscured by “debris” or “cloud cover” - which is never mentioned. It expressly says that the Sun is not put in the sky until the fourth day, and only then does it rule over the day.
quote: Which implies that the Sun was not created until then. And that demonstrates that the idea is reasonable - although I do not rely on it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
I will start by noting that you do not answer a single point in the post that you are supposedly replying to. I’ll take that as a concession.
quote: No, that’s creationists.,
quote: Says the most gullible among us. Of course it is a fact, you just reject it because you swallow the lies of creationism
quote: I’ve heard a version of this before, spread by creationists who are not bright enough to understand that he keep finding more hominin remains. Want to actually try supporting this claim, for once?
quote: Not true. The first reconstruction of Lucy’s pelvis - not the way it was originaly found - looked ape-like but it was demonstrably incorrect. So they made a more correct reconstruction which is what you are objecting to.
quote: Yes, it never occurred to them to believe creationist lies. And they were right, as fossil evidence has shown Science News quote: Lucy’s hands are no more present than her feet.
quote: Lucy could walk upright. Her knee joints showed that from the very start.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: I don’t believe the story at all, and I certainly don’t believe that it says that the sun was created twice. In so far as it says anything on the matter creation on day 4 fits best.
quote: Because that is the initial state before creation. Genesis 1:1 is a summary of what follows.
quote: You’re confusing what science says with what the story says. The story has a worldview greatly different from the modern view. In the story, the sun is just a light in the - solid - sky. Daylight is the light separated from the darkness, preceding the placement of the sun in the sky.
quote: Isaiah 14 is not about Satan, it’s about the King of Babylon. And the King of Babylon had his throne in Babylon.
quote: Where does it say that in the Bible?
quote: Oh it’s giving me no trouble at all. The fantasies and misreadings of the Bible you are promoting aren’t a problem at all. That’s why I find it so easy to answer. And why you find it so difficult to answer my points - you can’t find anything in Revelation 12 that suggests that it occurs before Adam was created, can you ? Indeed it’s only a “short time” before the Millenium (see Revelation 12:12 and 20) and there are other clues to the contrary right there.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: The first is obviously untrue. The second is laughably untrue. Where - for instance - is the Biblical support for your claim that God’s activities on the fourth day amount to clearing the atmosphere of clouds and “debris” that completely obscured the sky? The Bible doesn’t say that - it doesn’t even mention that the sky was obscured? Or for the Anglo-Israelite nonsense you posted? Are we to believe that the writings of J. H. Allen are the “Word of God”?
quote: So you want people to know that you are ignorant, gullible and dishonest. Good news! I know all of that! As will anyone who “looks deeply” into your claims.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024