Right Divider
Body part
You only believe this because you are a materialist.
Your false premise leads you to a false conclusion.
-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
Evolutionists: How did legs evolve?
- Thread starter Clete
- Start date
Your false premise leads you to a false conclusion.
musterion
Well-known member
No.
The options:
1. Spontaneous generation of life from lifeless matter/abiogenesis. Biologically impossible. Also can't deal with the problems of galactic-to-molecular order arising from utter chaos, what originally blew up, why did it blow up, where did it come from anyway, where'd the space come from which the universe occupies, etc etc etc.
2. Aliens: a lazy attempt to push the question away to arm's length but only raises the obvious second question - where'd the aliens come from?
3. A creative, designing Intelligence that, of necessity, existed before and exists outside of the space/time/matter "box" of our material universe, and Who is in no way limited by the constraints of that box.
No. Only a vacuous half-wit would believe there is another explanation other than God.
musterion
Well-known member
You're being kind.
Silent Hunter
Well-known member
I asked you in several posts to tell me what method I should use to identify and study the immaterial (the supernatural). The only response I received was <crickets chirping>.
"True" or "False":
All natural phenomena have a natural cause.
Silent Hunter
Well-known member
Your answer is, "Goddidit!!!", based on one unassailable "fact", vacuous half-wits don't believe it. Check.
It never fails when creationists have no reasonable answer it's best (and easiest) to draw from "The musterion Book of Insults".
"True or False":
All natural phenomena have a natural cause.
Silent Hunter
Well-known member
There are no other Possible explanations? I wonder why you posted (1) and (2) if not to try to create a strawman :think:.
Only three?
This is basically "The Argument from Personal Incredulity", I can't believe it could happen so I'll believe something even more incredible, (3).
The creationist chooses to push the question even farther away by not answering the obvious question, where did (3) come from?
Well, at least us "materialists" (as Right Divider likes to call us) are capable of saying, "I don't know", when we don't know something instead of asserting we "know" something we don't.
Jose Fly
New member
I see nothing in any of that material that is supportive of them dying from a global flood, let alone a global flood even occurring in the first place.
musterion
Well-known member
Why are you dishonestly asking a question about which your mind is closed to alternatives, dirt boy?
Everything you have is argumentum ex lutum or argumentum ex quod.
Unknowable, but that's pretty much what you'd expect with a Deity who exists completely outside of and independent of our space/time/matter box, and so exists ENTIRELY beyond our comprehension. That you refuse to even consider that possibility is why you're a retard, dirt boy.
Jose Fly
New member
Oh I've asked that sort of question of creationists for years.
If they want God to be an accepted answer to scientific questions, then we need to be able to study and test God. Therefore they need to provide a means by which God can be studied and tested.
Seems pretty obvious, right? But to date, no creationist has ever been able to answer.
musterion
Well-known member
I sometimes wonder if God purposely limited the amount of evidence He made available to us for His existence, kind of as an intelligence test, even though creation itself -- the ordered existence of the whole universe, consistently ordered on all levels we discover as we learn more about it -- is adequate witness to all but the most stupid (and that's literally correct, not an insult). Such as yourselves.
Right Divider
Body part
The same way that real science works: observation.
With observational skills like yours, it's no wonder that you don't see it.
Sure... when you LIMIT the game ....
The only way that you rule out God is by... wait for it.... you rule out God.
Some of us will not play the game by your rules.
Right Divider
Body part
It's funny that you demand that God make Himself testable.... He has clearly demonstrated Himself and yet you ignore Him.
Jose Fly
New member
You inadvertently hit on the key point here, namely that science has rules. And one of its most important rules is that explanations/answers need to be testable.
That's why we keep asking creationists to provide a means by which God can be studied and tested. If you can't provide one, then according to the rules of science God is not an acceptable explanation/answer.
The only other alternative would be to change the rules of science so that untestable explanations/answers are acceptable. But that would make science worthless.
I'm not demanding anything. All I'm saying is that if you're going to insist that God be allowed as an explanation/answer in science, you explain how we can study and test God.
Maybe it's best we take a step back here and clarify something.....what exactly is it you want here? Are you wanting scientists to accept "God did that" as an explanation/answer for their discoveries?
Right Divider
Body part
God is quite testable.... you just don't believe the evidence.
Jose Fly
New member
Ok, now we're getting somewhere. You've made a very specific claim (God is testable). Please explain how we can test and study God.
Right Divider
Body part
I would highly recommend the historical science of the resurrection as one place, but doubt you'll accept that.
The universe declares the glory of God, but you've rejected that too.
The funny part is that God is testing you and you're not doing well at all.
iouae
Well-known member
One strange phenomenon observed with Clovis culture disappearance is that almost no Clovis people fossils have been found. Thousands of beautiful and exquisite spear heads and tons of bones and food items, fireplaces - but no human fossils. Just one child fossil found.
Clovis culture was the pre-flood human culture in the Americas, then it disappeared.
Evolutionists tell good stories, so I want to try my hand at explaining why the Biblical flood left hardly a dent on the geologic column, and very few human fossils. Also the megafauna came to a sudden end, the giant sloths etc.
Suppose there was a flood as described in the Bible. This is a slow flood, a rise in water over 40 days. There was no CNN weather warning, no satellite tracking of storm fronts. One day, for the Clovis people, it just started raining really hard.
I suppose the good folk of Clovis did what the good folks of New Orleans or Houston did when Harvey struck. As the water rose, the folks climbed onto their roofs, up trees, or, if there was a nearby piece of high land, they ran there.
When the water kept on rising and the helicopters did not arrive, the Clovis folks held onto driftwood, till they all drowned. They left behind their exquisite spearheads.
Drowned human corpses from what I remember from crime shows, have a tendency to not sink to the bottom and stay there. They bloat and float. So, the crocodiles and sharks, and bacteria had a party.
The flood was not a fossilising event. Lines of fauna, and nearly all humans were wiped out without a trace. But the flood did not last long enough to stop vegetation regrowing. Trees were killed, but their seeds survived and germinated. Thus no tree today has more than about 5000 rings. Obviously all aquatic organisms did not mind the flood one bit. Sharks, whales, dolphins played around the ark.
The ocean conveyer belt system was disrupted, and the climate changed, so temperature graphs show disruption of the climate due to the flood. They call this disruption of oceans, the Younger Dryas.
The modern, smaller fauna quickly repopulated the earth, so that we have what we see today.
Jose Fly
New member
I'm not sure what you mean by that. Can you be more specific in terms of just how you believe that is a way to scientifically test God?
Those are platitudes, not descriptions of ways to scientifically test God.
Jose Fly
New member
Therefore a global flood occurred? That doesn't follow.
That's just a restatement of your claim.
You're drifting. You claimed that the disappearance of the Clovis culture was due to a global flood, but you have yet to provide supporting evidence for that claim. And I am most certainly not going to assume that a global flood occurred.
So rather than tell stories, how about supporting your claim with evidence?