Truth is what matters website

Whitefox
Theist
Whitefox's picture
Posts: 78
Joined: 2006-12-12
User is offlineOffline
Truth is what matters website

I'd like to invite folks to check out a blog I have started that will include youtube video discussions. I invite you to make your comments at the site and I invite you to discuss here your views about subjects we raise there from week to week. I will gladly try to defend my views with you here at Rational Responders.

The site is http://www.truthiswhatmatters.com

Please respect our site in that I am not expecting the comments there to be rude or an attempt to bring our site to its knees. It's like inviting you to my house to invite you there. However feel free here to ask me to debate you in full about any topic I raise at my site. And feel free to put links back to this forum in your comments you make at my site.

I also invite Rook to give a review of this site as he did likewise in the past for my previous site which went down a year ago. www.bibledoor.com That site is up again but will eventually serve mostly as a site to sell books that I have authored.

God says "Come let us reason together, though your sins be as scarlet you shall be white as snow."
www.truthiswhatmatters.com & www.bibledoor.com


Whitefox
Theist
Whitefox's picture
Posts: 78
Joined: 2006-12-12
User is offlineOffline
cj wrote:Whitefox

cj wrote:

Whitefox wrote:

Please bring back some comments from my website postings.  I had hoped this thread would discuss those postings. ie The three reasons to reject Evolution. Someone should comment on that.

1. Obviously you have never had a geology course.  The land is not stable - it moves - up, down, sideways and it folds over.  So what was on the bottom of the ocean is now on top of the mountains.  My local example is the Cascade Mountains.  They are being pushed up by the subduction zone just off the coast of Washington/Oregon. If you had a geology course you could learn about fun things like plate tectonics.  If you took a paleontology class, you would better understand how fossils around the world are compared and dated.  Have you read about Glenn Morton?  http://home.entouch.net/dmd/gstory.htm

It was a geologist Sir Charles Lyell that described the geoplogic column. Darwing had his book and was influenced by it in the writing of his book. Yet it is a fact that no one knows a single place in the world where the column perfectly exists. Charles never identified the place where his charts were provable. Nor has any geologist since him.

Quote:

2. Punctuated equilibrium theory does not replace gradualism.  They are complementary.  Sometimes, species don't change for millions of years - hermit crabs, sharks, e.g.  Sometimes, they change in less than a million years.  In geologic terms, a million years is very fast. 

Also, we know the mechanisms for evolution - you yourself, right now, likely have over 200 mutations in your cells.  Most not in your reproductive cells, so you won't pass them on to your children.  But some are, and your children may have them.  For famous examples of mutations from a single instance, see Queen Victoria of England who did not have hemophilia, but many of her children and grandchildren did.  They have analyzed the family and determined she passed the mutation on to her children.  Elizabeth Taylor and her violet eyes?  A mutation.  Achondroplasia dwarfism?  It is a very common mutation - about 1 out of every 25,000 births.  All of these people could/can reproduce with people who do not have the mutation.  The mutation for dwarfism is dominant - that is, you only need one copy of the mutation to be a dwarf.  Any mutation will persist in the population if it is neutral or positive.  Therefore, if the environment changes, and it is always changing, the value of a particular mutation may change from neutral to positive.  In which case the population will drift towards the new mutation as those organisms with the mutation will reproduce better than those without the mutation.  And - a new species evolves.

And for transitional fossils, there are too many to list.  Start with Evolution: What the Fossils say and why it matters by Donald R Prothero.  Available from Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-What-Fossils-Say-Matters/dp/0231139624/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341900968&sr=8-1&keywords=donald+r+...) and from your library.  Dr. Prothero is a paleontologist who has studied ungulates (cows, hippos, etc) in North America for many years.  His book has many pictures of many different transitional sequences of fossils for a number of species.  And it is only a sample.

Punctuated ebrilibrium is a recent attempt to explain the fact that there are no intermediate lifeforms in the fossil record. Your timeframe is very great for the punctuation.  Describe to me how punctuated equilibrium explains the findings of the scientist who discusses which came first the chicken or the egg?

http://truthiswhatmatters.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/rethinking-evolution-chicken-or-the-egg.pdf

Quote:

3. "Hominids are a hoax."  Yes, there were a few hoaxes but the people who discovered that they were hoaxes were the scientists.  Also, there hasn't been an attempt at a hoax in years.  Scientific measurement and archaeological and paleontological methods have improved dramatically since Piltdown Man.  Any one foolish enough to try that now would be drawn and quartered at the next conference.  Why don't you look up some more recent research?

http://humanorigins.si.edu/research

The main complaint is that the chart showing changes of ape to man still persists in text book. Invariably the feet are flat and the intermediate forms are upright even though no such intermediary forms exist now that the three were proven falicious, Piltdown, Nebrasca, Neandrythal

Quote:

4.  "Radiometric dating is riddled with errors."  Really?  And you have a physics degree?  Some college level physics?  Can you explain how radiometric dating is performed, how the instruments are calibrated, which isotope is preferred for which era?  No?  I'm tired of doing research for you, so you will have to look this one up yourself.

 I don't have any hope you will actually attempt to get some education.  You won't look at the book or the websites I mentioned.  You will come back and spew more nonsense about science you don't understand and have no desire to learn.  Prove me wrong - I double dog dare you.

 

I am not currently up on this topic. But I understnad that if you use the same method of dating on "Terrible lizards" the meaning of DINASAUR in latin as is used to date things that have occured in the past millenium  (First terrble one was the one called IGUANADON because it is identical to todays IGUANA only much bigger) you will find that they date about 5000 years old. This might explain why they have found DNA in the bones of unfossilized Dinasaur bones from the Arctic in recent years.

God says "Come let us reason together, though your sins be as scarlet you shall be white as snow."
www.truthiswhatmatters.com & www.bibledoor.com


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1540
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Deliver such a one up . . .

Deliver such a one up . . .

 

WhiteFox wrote:
.. they [whoever they are] want to ignore the commands of the Bible to perform capital punishment of those that violate this commandment. It is precisely this same commandment of God that reminds us that the murderer has violated Gods commandment when he has taken the life of the murderee that he murdered and he must pay a consequece for this. The Bible teaches Capital punishment so that "JUSTICE" can be served.  Justice is another missing word in the vocabulary of those that wish to protect murderers.

  Justice might be perfect in Heaven but is sometimes rare in this world, you are forgetting this and yourself. Not perfect..  In this, you might end up w/ the blood of the innocent (on your hands).


 I was searching a bit noticed a document on Discipline Meeting Eight Meetings THE EIGHT MEETINGS Of THE EARLY CHURCH ( by WhiteFox) -- {Plymouth Brethren} on church discipline .. Cited and included are the direct passage found in the .pdf file  See: Included Pic ..


 

Plymouth Brethren wrote:
Scriptural passage referenced .. Ch. 5 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the Gentiles  that a man has his father’s wife! And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who has done this deed might be taken away from among you ..deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? I [Saint Paul] wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world .. then you would need to go out of the world. But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner not even to eat with such a person.

 

 *** Misc Darbyite distinctive -- unrelated ***

     [img=http://img224.imagevenue.com/loc636/th_903959434_Capture_funkyDarbyite_B___122_636lo.JPG]
        
 
    


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13607
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Whitefox wrote:danatemporary

Whitefox wrote:

danatemporary wrote:

 T0 : The OP :

    Ray your are a very gracious fellow, I would like to apologize for some of my remarks.  We have been experiencing a lack of participation, missed opportunities, for anti-evolutionists and YEC to field questions. I personally am finding it hard to recognize a Theist may simply not be gifted or motivated to do so.  Wrong of me clearly. I am so very sorry. 

I used to debate at the Atheist Network and at Infidel Guy intensely. My posts here have been few but I have been just as intense in my activities while not posting here often. I realized I had to go away and do some homework while I was away. You will find some of the stuff I have authored and am promoting under STORE / FREEBIES at www.bibledoor.com  One of the things I went off to study was the issues relating to the correctness of the Bible. It prompted me to examine the KJV bible and produce a revision called the Simplified King James Version.

There are uncaring and unloving examples of Theists who come to your site and others. I recognized this in the past when my posts challenging other Theists to debate were moderated to a section called Theist vs Theist becuase I honestly believed these people needed to be taken on relentlessly to get them to stop misrepresenting the Christian faith by their attitudes.  I don't know if you have a Theist vs. Theist thread here at rational responders.

I was originally invited by Reginald Finely to his site because of the same lack of participation you experience here.

God says "Come let us reason together" but He knows that He will win the argument because He goes on to say "Though your sins be as scarlet you shall be white as snow". God connects refusal to honestly debate Him with sin in a persons life. If you are wiling to debate Him knowing that you must turn from your sin if He wins the debate, He is up to the challenge.

Your fellow life travelor, No better than anyone here,

Ray,

www.truthiswhatmatters.com

Quote:
God says "Come let us reason together" but He knows that He will win the argument

See if you can spot the pattern.

Allah says "Come let us reason together" but he knows he will win the argument.

Yahweh says "Come let us reason together" but he knows he will win the argument.

Ganish says "Come let us reason together" but he knows he will win the argument.

Apollo says, "Come let us reason together" but he knows he will win the argument.

 

If someone used your same argument to argue for another god claim you would not buy it, so do not expect us to buy the same self serving circular reasoning you reject from others but hypocritically are using yourself and are too blind to fucking see it.

"My god says" is what everyone says to make the argument for their god claim. It is about as impressive to us as taking a shit.

Before you get to word one of your convoluted ancient comic book or what your fictional super hero "says' you start off with the naked assertion that a magical non material super brain with no cerebellum or neurons and no location, exists.

An invisible friend claim by ANY NAME is bullshit, yours and every one claimed in human history. Humans make up gods, gods are not real. Not yours, not any prior polytheist gods, and not any of the monotheist ones claimed today.

I can quote Star Wars but that doesn't make "The Force" or "Obe Wan" real.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3311
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Whitefox wrote: I find it

Whitefox wrote:

 

I find it amuzing that people who lament the capital punishment of murderers don't have much to say about the murderees.  This argument is always raised when you want to put to death a murderer. Immediately Secular humanists want to protect the Murderer by missusing this snippet from the Scriptures. But they want to ignore the commands of the Bible to perform capital punishment of those that violate this commandment. It is precisely this same commandment of God that reminds us that the murderer has violated Gods commandment when he has taken the life of the murderee that he murdered and he must pay a consequece for this. The Bible teaches Capital punishment so that "JUSTICE" can be served.  Justice is another missing word in the vocabulary of those that wish to protect murderers. It is the lack of a sense of Justice that drives familees of murderees to attend parole hearings to keep murderers restrained from reentering society. It is a hardship for the Murderees familly when JUSTICE is not fully satisfied as it would be if the Bible solution was adhered to.

Au contraire. 

You made a giant assumption about my post regarding murderers and failed again. 

I'm all for the death penalty and the punishment fitting the crime. 

Don't make the mistake of trying to lump all " secular humanists" into the same category. 

When I said murderers, I was referring to those that go about killing people in the names of their silly religions and people that rob and murder innocent people. 

As for said murderers, I have no sympathy for them. 

See what happens you assume ? 

As for the rest of your preaching, I am not going to take the time to respond to that because that is just YOUR interpretation. 

Don't tell me there is more to the Bible than the 10 Commandments. I have read it from front to back. I was raised in a very devoutly religious home. 

I find it to be a book of superstitious nonsense and very immoral. 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13607
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Whitefox wrote:Vastet

Whitefox wrote:

Vastet wrote:
I have not the time nor inclination to watch the videos (the claims alone are sufficient to know that I know everything they are going to say and why they are absolutely wrong). 1: There are no flaws in the fossil record. 2: Pre-homo-sapiens hominids are not frauds. At least, none discussed by scientists in the last 50 odd years are. There were a few frauds a good hundred years ago, but then everyone knows they are frauds today, and said frauds have nothing to do with the study of evolution. 3: Radiometric dating is not riddled with errors. To close, despite the claims of that article, evolution has been directly observed on more than one occasion. The first I recall was a bacteria that evolved to consume plastic, a substance that did not in any way exist in the entire solar system until it was invented in the 20th century.

I thought plastic is made of oil?

Yea plastic is the result oil products. What the fuck does that have to do with any god existing? Plastics as an invention prove that humans in the end DO NOT depend on the fictional gods they claim to make new things, otherwise they could have merely prayed for God to hand plastic to them directly.

I find it funny that you claim a caring god exists, but for 99.99999999999999% of the last half million years of human evolution, your deadbeat invisible friend waited most of that time to even say shit to us as humans, but when he did, instead of writing the book himself, took fallible humans and over 1,000 years, and 40 books, with books left out, only to have us fight over those books, allow spinoffs that the big three fight over and for what? So he can watch his toys stab each other so he can say "Last one standing gets to hang out with me".

 

No, the reason we have plastics isn't because of a fictional friend in the sky. The reason we have any modern invention is because HUMANS dared to question and dared to think and test. And even though plastics have a downside as far as pollution, they also make up the medical technology such as IV bags, heart implants, lung tubes, that save lives.

And the computer you are reading this on is also a result of plastics and was not the result of Allah or Vishnu or Jesus. Humans are the reason you don't have to hunt your food, why you can see a doctor when you get sick, and why you have cell phones and air travel and how we put humans on the moon. All your comic book provides is a social club, no more useful than a Star Wars fan club.

 

God/s will not save humanity, only the human ability to face reality and find common solutions to the human condition of reality. Evolution was never dependent on being a Christian or Jew or Hindu or Buddhist.

 

I am glad I don't have to hunt my food. I am glad I don't have to use a horse or walk for transportation. I am glad I can connect globally on the internet. If a god existed he is a fucking asshole for holding out on us. But since the reality is that humans have always made up gods, then our species ignorance that we have only in the past century, have slowly overcome, makes sense. But it is fucking absurd to postulate an asshole who waits and watches and does nothing.

HUMANS made the progress and only humans can save each other. There is no Allah or Jesus or Yahweh or Thor doing a damned thing to help or harm us, there are only humans who have always had the capability of helping or harming each other.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
Whitefox wrote:I am not

Whitefox wrote:

I am not currently up on this topic. But I understnad that if you use the same method of dating on "Terrible lizards" the meaning of DINASAUR in latin as is used to date things that have occured in the past millenium  (First terrble one was the one called IGUANADON because it is identical to todays IGUANA only much bigger) you will find that they date about 5000 years old. This might explain why they have found DNA in the bones of unfossilized Dinasaur bones from the Arctic in recent years.

ok ok I searched your dna of dinosaur bones.....umm nothing came up except in creationist websites, and the dates vary from site to site, from 1961 to 1990 and 1994. Unless of course you are talking about Buddy Davis, Mike Liston, and John Whitmore (none who are antropologists, or field geologists, to which to date they have never sent their bones in for actual extensive testing to prove that a: its an actual dinosaur bone, b: that there is DNA in it. It's just more creationist lies and made up stories.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10612
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Since they have the

Quote:
Since they have the only book proven by prophecy to be a revelation of God.  Check this episode

No prophecy has ever been worth paying attention to. They are always so generalised and vague that they could refer to practically anything. If that's all it takes for someone to believe in a religion, no wonder there are so many cults throughout history and today. I can easily make prophecies that are guaranteed to come true, and I can't directly see the future, to my knowledge.

Quote:
This argument is always raised when you want to put to death a murderer. Immediately Secular humanists want to protect the Murderer by missusing this snippet from the Scriptures.

You haven't spent enough time on this subject. The most significant reason to argue against the death penalty has nothing to do with any religion.

The biggest reason has to do with the fact that approximately 1/3 of all capitol punishments dealt out were to people innocent of the crime.

The next biggest reason is that capitol..

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10612
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
..punishment, in an advanced

..punishment, in an advanced society, utilising a justice system such as the one Napoleon gave to France; like Canada, the US, etc., is a bigger drain on a nations economy than lifetime imprisonment.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
Whitefox wrote:blah, blah,

Whitefox wrote:

blah, blah, blah.....

 

My point - you didn't read anything, you didn't even look at the pretty pictures on the Smithsonian web site.  You can't spell DINOSAUR.  Blah.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3311
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Quote:Since

Vastet wrote:
No prophecy has ever been worth paying attention to. They are always so generalised and vague that they could refer to practically anything. If that's all it takes for someone to believe in a religion, no wonder there are so many cults throughout history and today. I can easily make prophecies that are guaranteed to come true, and I can't directly see the future, to my knowledge.
 

This reminds me of those people on the history channel that are forever going on and on about Nostradomus. All of the stuff could be interpreted any way that you wish it to be. 

Just like someone trying to tell me that the Bible predicted 9/11. When I asked where and asked for "specifics" not something vague that could be interpreted. I never got an answer. 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3311
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Quote:. Quote:

 

Quote:
This argument is always raised when you want to put to death a murderer. Immediately Secular humanists want to protect the Murderer by missusing this snippet from the Scriptures.

I love it how these theists toss about terms like secular humanists, like it applies to anyone that doesn't fall in line with their blind dogmas. 

Got news for you Whitefox : 

You can be an Atheist and a Republican. You can be an Atheist and a Democrat. You can be an Atheist and a Libertarian. You can be an Atheist and a Nazi. You can be an Atheist and a Communist. You can be an Atheist and a Fascist. 

You can be an Atheist and be pro/anti abortion, pro/anti death penalty, pro/anti gun control or any other issue. 

Atheist : lack of belief in god. That is all that means. That's it. 

Stop throwing around the words like "secular humanists" and thinking that applies to everyone that does not believe in god. 

"Secular humanists" seems to be a popular term among theists, as a derogatory reference to atheists. 

Can you give me the definition of secular ? The definition of Humanist ? The definition of Atheist ? And can you demonstrate how all three mean three different things ? 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4494
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 Isn't it cute when

 Isn't it cute when creationists attempt to talk science? Kind of reminds me of when my niece was four and she would quite seriously explain how to bake the best cake in the world in her disney princess toy kitchen. Did you know it only takes three ingredients and thirty seconds to bake a cake?

I just usually go with my own taste. If I like something, and it happens to be against the law, well, then I might have a problem.- Hunter S. Thompson


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13607
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: Isn't

Beyond Saving wrote:

 Isn't it cute when creationists attempt to talk science? Kind of reminds me of when my niece was four and she would quite seriously explain how to bake the best cake in the world in her disney princess toy kitchen. Did you know it only takes three ingredients and thirty seconds to bake a cake?

Like when you treat an entire complex economy as if it were simplistic as Cinderella ending up in a palace because she scrubbed floors? OUCH! 

Look, to be fair, we all have our predilections and that is why although I give you so much shit, I know I have them too.

If our species were as simple formula as far as all of us always getting what we want, utopias would exist, but the reality is that they never will.

We both know that evolution has occurred regardless of religious labels. What makes you think that if you or I win either way on economic issues, that our species will die out? If anything kills us by our own hand, it will be because of our focus on labels in far as politics and religion and economics, when we should be focused on common condition.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
I am still waiting on his

I am still waiting on his response to the so called truths that he has stated which I have already pointed out as false. In the end here the reality is he can claim that he is speaking his version of the truth, but reality it is merely ignorance, misinformation and straight out lies. That isn't truth and if truth really matters then he would correct those so called claims on his website when they are found to be false....I am not going to hold my breath on that one.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5810
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
You really need to keep up

You really need to keep up with the progress of science - Lyell died over 100 years ago; things have moved on since then.

The 'Geological Column' is an idealised description of what we should see in a situation where rock layers were deposited in an unbroken sequence at some location which was virtually undisturbed over almost the entire history of the Earth.

Since it is extremely unlikely that there is such a site in reality, we only find incomplete versions of it. In any case, it is very naive to use the word 'perfect' when referring to something one expects to actually observe.

 

'Punctuated Equilibrium' had NOTHING to do with 'explaining' any 'gaps' in the fossil record - just the observation that the  evidence seemed to show that evolution proceeds at very different rates at different times and places, for different species. 

 

Neanderthals are well established 'cousins' of homo sapiens, it even seems that there was some inter-breeding, and we may share a few percent of our genes with them.

 

Radiometric dating requires careful and precise techniques, so it is easy to get it wrong if not enough care is taken, or if the materials have been contaminated, but there have been many, many cross-checkswith alternative dating techniques, so the suggestion that it is 'riddled with errors' is very ignorant of the real situation.

 

In this real and inevitably imperfect world it is unlikely that we could come to know any non-trivial fact about Reality, apart from basic logic and math, and 'cogito ergo sum', with anything like Absolute Certainty. Real world knowledge can only be held with some finite degree of confidence. You make a false dichotomy between absolute certainty and relativism. Lack of absolute certainty does not imply relativism, just that the best we can aim for is what seems the best fit to reality, what seems to work best.

 

There is no logical necessity that a creator being must be the standard of what is good or moral, unless you subscribe to 'might makes right', the morals of a dictator. Even if we could demonstrate that a Creator being actually existed, we have no way to establish with any certainty what its attributes or motives must be.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Whitefox
Theist
Whitefox's picture
Posts: 78
Joined: 2006-12-12
User is offlineOffline
latincanuck wrote:Whitefox

latincanuck wrote:

Whitefox wrote:

I am not currently up on this topic. But I understnad that if you use the same method of dating on "Terrible lizards" the meaning of DINASAUR in latin as is used to date things that have occured in the past millenium  (First terrble one was the one called IGUANADON because it is identical to todays IGUANA only much bigger) you will find that they date about 5000 years old. This might explain why they have found DNA in the bones of unfossilized Dinasaur bones from the Arctic in recent years.

ok ok I searched your dna of dinosaur bones.....umm nothing came up except in creationist websites, and the dates vary from site to site, from 1961 to 1990 and 1994. Unless of course you are talking about Buddy Davis, Mike Liston, and John Whitmore (none who are antropologists, or field geologists, to which to date they have never sent their bones in for actual extensive testing to prove that a: its an actual dinosaur bone, b: that there is DNA in it. It's just more creationist lies and made up stories.

I found very many links to dinosaur DNA. This is one example.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/scientists-recover-t-rex-soft-tissue/

God says "Come let us reason together, though your sins be as scarlet you shall be white as snow."
www.truthiswhatmatters.com & www.bibledoor.com


Whitefox
Theist
Whitefox's picture
Posts: 78
Joined: 2006-12-12
User is offlineOffline
latincanuck wrote:Whitefox

latincanuck wrote:

Whitefox wrote:

I am not currently up on this topic. But I understnad that if you use the same method of dating on "Terrible lizards" the meaning of DINASAUR in latin as is used to date things that have occured in the past millenium  (First terrble one was the one called IGUANADON because it is identical to todays IGUANA only much bigger) you will find that they date about 5000 years old. This might explain why they have found DNA in the bones of unfossilized Dinasaur bones from the Arctic in recent years.

ok ok I searched your dna of dinosaur bones.....umm nothing came up except in creationist websites, and the dates vary from site to site, from 1961 to 1990 and 1994. Unless of course you are talking about Buddy Davis, Mike Liston, and John Whitmore (none who are antropologists, or field geologists, to which to date they have never sent their bones in for actual extensive testing to prove that a: its an actual dinosaur bone, b: that there is DNA in it. It's just more creationist lies and made up stories.

I found very many links to dinosaur DNA. This is one example.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/scientists-recover-t-rex-soft-tissue/

God says "Come let us reason together, though your sins be as scarlet you shall be white as snow."
www.truthiswhatmatters.com & www.bibledoor.com


Whitefox
Theist
Whitefox's picture
Posts: 78
Joined: 2006-12-12
User is offlineOffline
latincanuck wrote:Whitefox

latincanuck wrote:

Whitefox wrote:

I am not currently up on this topic. But I understnad that if you use the same method of dating on "Terrible lizards" the meaning of DINASAUR in latin as is used to date things that have occured in the past millenium  (First terrble one was the one called IGUANADON because it is identical to todays IGUANA only much bigger) you will find that they date about 5000 years old. This might explain why they have found DNA in the bones of unfossilized Dinasaur bones from the Arctic in recent years.

ok ok I searched your dna of dinosaur bones.....umm nothing came up except in creationist websites, and the dates vary from site to site, from 1961 to 1990 and 1994. Unless of course you are talking about Buddy Davis, Mike Liston, and John Whitmore (none who are antropologists, or field geologists, to which to date they have never sent their bones in for actual extensive testing to prove that a: its an actual dinosaur bone, b: that there is DNA in it. It's just more creationist lies and made up stories.

I found very many links to dinosaur DNA. This is one example.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/scientists-recover-t-rex-soft-tissue/

God says "Come let us reason together, though your sins be as scarlet you shall be white as snow."
www.truthiswhatmatters.com & www.bibledoor.com


Whitefox
Theist
Whitefox's picture
Posts: 78
Joined: 2006-12-12
User is offlineOffline
latincanuck wrote:Whitefox

latincanuck wrote:

Whitefox wrote:

I am not currently up on this topic. But I understnad that if you use the same method of dating on "Terrible lizards" the meaning of DINASAUR in latin as is used to date things that have occured in the past millenium  (First terrble one was the one called IGUANADON because it is identical to todays IGUANA only much bigger) you will find that they date about 5000 years old. This might explain why they have found DNA in the bones of unfossilized Dinasaur bones from the Arctic in recent years.

ok ok I searched your dna of dinosaur bones.....umm nothing came up except in creationist websites, and the dates vary from site to site, from 1961 to 1990 and 1994. Unless of course you are talking about Buddy Davis, Mike Liston, and John Whitmore (none who are antropologists, or field geologists, to which to date they have never sent their bones in for actual extensive testing to prove that a: its an actual dinosaur bone, b: that there is DNA in it. It's just more creationist lies and made up stories.

I found very many links to dinosaur DNA. This is one example.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/scientists-recover-t-rex-soft-tissue/

God says "Come let us reason together, though your sins be as scarlet you shall be white as snow."
www.truthiswhatmatters.com & www.bibledoor.com


Whitefox
Theist
Whitefox's picture
Posts: 78
Joined: 2006-12-12
User is offlineOffline
latincanuck wrote:Whitefox

latincanuck wrote:

Whitefox wrote:

I am not currently up on this topic. But I understnad that if you use the same method of dating on "Terrible lizards" the meaning of DINASAUR in latin as is used to date things that have occured in the past millenium  (First terrble one was the one called IGUANADON because it is identical to todays IGUANA only much bigger) you will find that they date about 5000 years old. This might explain why they have found DNA in the bones of unfossilized Dinasaur bones from the Arctic in recent years.

ok ok I searched your dna of dinosaur bones.....umm nothing came up except in creationist websites, and the dates vary from site to site, from 1961 to 1990 and 1994. Unless of course you are talking about Buddy Davis, Mike Liston, and John Whitmore (none who are antropologists, or field geologists, to which to date they have never sent their bones in for actual extensive testing to prove that a: its an actual dinosaur bone, b: that there is DNA in it. It's just more creationist lies and made up stories.

I found very many links to dinosaur DNA. This is one example.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/scientists-recover-t-rex-soft-tissue/

God says "Come let us reason together, though your sins be as scarlet you shall be white as snow."
www.truthiswhatmatters.com & www.bibledoor.com


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
Whitefox wrote:latincanuck

Whitefox wrote:

latincanuck wrote:

Whitefox wrote:

I am not currently up on this topic. But I understnad that if you use the same method of dating on "Terrible lizards" the meaning of DINASAUR in latin as is used to date things that have occured in the past millenium  (First terrble one was the one called IGUANADON because it is identical to todays IGUANA only much bigger) you will find that they date about 5000 years old. This might explain why they have found DNA in the bones of unfossilized Dinasaur bones from the Arctic in recent years.

ok ok I searched your dna of dinosaur bones.....umm nothing came up except in creationist websites, and the dates vary from site to site, from 1961 to 1990 and 1994. Unless of course you are talking about Buddy Davis, Mike Liston, and John Whitmore (none who are antropologists, or field geologists, to which to date they have never sent their bones in for actual extensive testing to prove that a: its an actual dinosaur bone, b: that there is DNA in it. It's just more creationist lies and made up stories.

I found very many links to dinosaur DNA. This is one example.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/scientists-recover-t-rex-soft-tissue/

Yet again, you do what all creationist and theists do, change the topic when someone points out your lies, I am talking specifically about the claims on your website and the claim that you made about it be found in the froze north, as such the article you just point out is talking about a 70 million year old t-rex not a 5000 year old unfossilized dinosaur bone that you have made  claim of. Truth is not found by dodging topics. No offense whitefox, actually I take that back, your a liar, a straight out liar. I have point out the problem for your so called 5000 year old dinosaur you have not even bothered with it. Whatever it's nothing new and I should expect as much for someone using not truth, but their view of the truth. Not someone that uses evidence but lies, misinformation and ignorance.


Whitefox
Theist
Whitefox's picture
Posts: 78
Joined: 2006-12-12
User is offlineOffline
I stand corrected.

I stand corrected. Apparently they found 1000's of unfossilized bones and predicted they would find DNA. However I see no followup that they actually found it.  I think the significant thing was that these bones have not fossilized.

LOL. I did not say that scientists say it is a 5000 years old Dinosaur.  I am saying it is a 5000 year old Dinosaur.

Why just because so many scientists repeat a fairy tale must I also repeat it.

At the time of Noah men lived almost 1000 years.  Any lizard living that long would be a terrible one as it would be very large. (They never stop growing)  Today we have lots of little lizards back then we had terrible ones. In fact the first discovered lizard was called Iganadon because it was a terrible lizard (the Latin meaning of the word DINOSAUR).

These terrible lizards were most commonly called Dragons. You find record of them all around the world in ancient literature. That is because they were in fairly recent history of the world ending at the flood about 4,500 years ago.

God says "Come let us reason together, though your sins be as scarlet you shall be white as snow."
www.truthiswhatmatters.com & www.bibledoor.com


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5810
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Whitefox wrote:latincanuck

Whitefox wrote:

latincanuck wrote:

Whitefox wrote:

I am not currently up on this topic. But I understnad that if you use the same method of dating on "Terrible lizards" the meaning of DINASAUR in latin as is used to date things that have occured in the past millenium  (First terrble one was the one called IGUANADON because it is identical to todays IGUANA only much bigger) you will find that they date about 5000 years old. This might explain why they have found DNA in the bones of unfossilized Dinasaur bones from the Arctic in recent years.

ok ok I searched your dna of dinosaur bones.....umm nothing came up except in creationist websites, and the dates vary from site to site, from 1961 to 1990 and 1994. Unless of course you are talking about Buddy Davis, Mike Liston, and John Whitmore (none who are antropologists, or field geologists, to which to date they have never sent their bones in for actual extensive testing to prove that a: its an actual dinosaur bone, b: that there is DNA in it. It's just more creationist lies and made up stories.

I found very many links to dinosaur DNA. This is one example.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/scientists-recover-t-rex-soft-tissue/

That mentions DNA:

Quote:

But, she said, she does not know yet if scientists will be able to isolate dinosaur DNA from the materials.

So it does not say they found it.  Not a good link to 'Dinosaur DNA'.

Here is a much better link:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/04/070412-dino-tissues.html is a link to actual isolation and  sequencing of ancient DNA. Note, it had already been established that it the fossil was 68-million years old.  It came up in my first search.

Radio-carbon dating is usable for dating things up to about 50000 years, so different methods would be needed for dating dinosaur fossils. It would rapidly become apparent that there was a problem if they tried to use it on much more ancient remains.

You base your position on the fairy-tales/myths of the Bible. 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


GodsUseForAMosquito
ModeratorBronze Member
GodsUseForAMosquito's picture
Posts: 404
Joined: 2008-08-27
User is offlineOffline
Whitefox wrote:I stand

Whitefox wrote:

I stand corrected. Apparently they found 1000's of unfossilized bones and predicted they would find DNA. However I see no followup that they actually found it.  I think the significant thing was that these bones have not fossilized.

LOL. I did not say that scientists say it is a 5000 years old Dinosaur.  I am saying it is a 5000 year old Dinosaur.

Why just because so many scientists repeat a fairy tale must I also repeat it.

At the time of Noah men lived almost 1000 years.  Any lizard living that long would be a terrible one as it would be very large. (They never stop growing)  Today we have lots of little lizards back then we had terrible ones. In fact the first discovered lizard was called Iganadon because it was a terrible lizard (the Latin meaning of the word DINOSAUR).

These terrible lizards were most commonly called Dragons. You find record of them all around the world in ancient literature. That is because they were in fairly recent history of the world ending at the flood about 4,500 years ago.

 

Give us one single piece of evidence (not related to the bible - obviously) that dinosaurs were alive 5000 years ago.

You state some scientific methods are flawed - but what techniques do you use to make better claims?

Oh that's right - only what the bible seems to say. You have nothing else - please, prove us wrong by positively identifying proof that dinosaurs were alive and roaming around with humans 5,000 years ago. Use whatever you want except the bible, because you know what our response will be to that. 

Very interested to hear this... I'll get the Nobel guys on hold..

 

 

 


GodsUseForAMosquito
ModeratorBronze Member
GodsUseForAMosquito's picture
Posts: 404
Joined: 2008-08-27
User is offlineOffline
 Ray, I've just looked at

 Ray, I've just looked at your "three reasons to reject evolution". The quote you have at the end, 

 

"Evolution is not accepted by all scientists and much less by all scholars; it is admittedly an unproven theory; it is by its own principles unscientific, unphilosophical..." etc

Was taken from a book published in 1917! Is this really the best you can do? That's weak man, very weak. and as others have stated, this is willful propaganda deliberately espousing old and obsolete information whilst knowingly ignoring a wealth of other information. If you are prepared to stoop to this level, very few people here will have any respect for you.

If you truly consider evolution a myth, but also believe that truth is what matters, you need to take this outdated misinformation down from your site and at the very least put up something contemporary, although I should warn you now that every attempt to do this by creationist scientists has failed.. eg The Paluxy Dinosaur/"Man Track" Controversy.

 

Edit: also just read your link: http://truthiswhatmatters.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/gracetoyou-faithandsciencefalselysocalled.pdf - which is laughable garbage written by someone without the intellect to even understand the basic tenants of biology, geology, physics or astronomy yet is disparaging about them all. Perhaps we should move discussion on this to a separate thread where the points in this paper can be discussed in detail to avoid hijacking this thread? Happy to if you want.

 

 

 


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
Whitefox wrote:I stand

Whitefox wrote:

I stand corrected. Apparently they found 1000's of unfossilized bones and predicted they would find DNA. However I see no followup that they actually found it.  I think the significant thing was that these bones have not fossilized.

LOL. I did not say that scientists say it is a 5000 years old Dinosaur.  I am saying it is a 5000 year old Dinosaur.

Why just because so many scientists repeat a fairy tale must I also repeat it.

At the time of Noah men lived almost 1000 years.  Any lizard living that long would be a terrible one as it would be very large. (They never stop growing)  Today we have lots of little lizards back then we had terrible ones. In fact the first discovered lizard was called Iganadon because it was a terrible lizard (the Latin meaning of the word DINOSAUR).

These terrible lizards were most commonly called Dragons. You find record of them all around the world in ancient literature. That is because they were in fairly recent history of the world ending at the flood about 4,500 years ago.

first and foremost there is no evidence that humans as of 5000 years ago lived to 1000 of years old.....none, not even a bit outside of the bible. The most probably reasoning for these long ages is a mistranslation or misunderstanding of the texts from lunar cycle to solar cycle, for 950 lunar cycles would be around 76 - 77 years old. which in those days would be very old when the average lifespan with around mid 30's to early 40's (of course if you are reading this properly I did say average, meaning there are some that live longer and those that lived shorter) as for the lizards......ummm no they did not live for 1000's of years either, the oldest tortoise is about 176 years (a claim of 250 has been put forth but not scientific evidence has been shown to back up the claim or testing done to prove that) that tortoise was only about 3.5 feet in height maybe 5 feet long. The oldest animal is the black coral at 4265 years old.....but thats not a lizard nor a human, beyond sponges and corals...which live very very long lives compared to humans, Koi fish would be next in line at 226 years old for the oldest known koi fish.

So what is more believable and more reasonable, that the bible used lunar cycle but later a was changed to solar cycle or that someone lived to be almost 1000 years old with no evidence to back up that any human has ever lived that long beyond the claims of your bible and other mythological stories? As I have said before, show me the evidence.


GodsUseForAMosquito
ModeratorBronze Member
GodsUseForAMosquito's picture
Posts: 404
Joined: 2008-08-27
User is offlineOffline
 ... Have you run away

 ... Have you run away Ray?

 

Still very interested in your responses to the recent posts on this thread...

 


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10612
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Most everything has been

Most everything has been addressed, but one little tidbit somehow slipped by.

Quote:
Today we have lots of little lizards back then we had terrible ones. In fact the first discovered lizard was called Iganadon because it was a terrible lizard (the Latin meaning of the word DINOSAUR).

Dinosaurs were NOT lizards. They had warm blood, not cold. You are operating with information that was disproved decades ago. To know current scientific knowledge, you don't study ancient history. Science revises itself as new things are discovered. Using 1970's scientific knowledge in a debate is equivalent to attacking christianity based on the old testament (to put it in terms you should be able to understand).

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


GodsUseForAMosquito
ModeratorBronze Member
GodsUseForAMosquito's picture
Posts: 404
Joined: 2008-08-27
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Dinosaurs were

Vastet wrote:
Dinosaurs were NOT lizards. They had warm blood, not cold.

 

 

...probably


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3078
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Personal truth is an

Personal truth is an opinion. The only thing which is absolute when it comes to truth is math.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1540
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
.. all along they are no where near current . . .

  When carefully read, you'll find this within the comments of five different people a call to work on becoming current. You dont want to stay in the camp where they are basing this all on Creationist's arguments from decades back, now do you ? when all along they are no where near current .

Quote:
"Evolution is not accepted by all scientists and much less by all scholars; it is admittedly an unproven theory; it is by its own principles unscientific, unphilosophical..." etc

Was taken from a book published in 1917! Is this really the best you can do? That's weak man

  However the reception it should serve to indicate, you'll have to at least make it worth people's while.

  It reminds me of something recent, where exact replicas of earliest dinosaurs representations are found on the road side.  A reference to the British Museum of Natural History's exhibit, from a particularly famous example.  Of a pair of models, of a early bad  Dimetrodon sail-back, based on an exhibition of dinosaur skeletons of the time, standing along side what was a bit of a monstrosity; I forget the name, looking like a over-sized Iguana. With one-third of the front-end from one Dinosaur species and a quarter of the back end from a third species.


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
Alas it is what I expected,

Alas it is what I expected, no real arguments, no real discussion and in the end, just half truths, misinformation and lies from Whitefox. typical theist that wants to present their version of truth....that cannot stand up to the evidence of reality.


GodsUseForAMosquito
ModeratorBronze Member
GodsUseForAMosquito's picture
Posts: 404
Joined: 2008-08-27
User is offlineOffline
Too bad, for all that at

Too bad, for all that at least he was quite polite.