Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Snakes with legs? E or C?
Origen
Member (Idle past 6292 days)
Posts: 52
Joined: 12-29-2006


Message 31 of 41 (373321)
01-01-2007 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by arachnophilia
01-01-2007 12:26 AM


This is where you need to break through the evolution mold of thought and have an IQ higher than a monkey. The vast majority of all living people on earth know what this means. You need to think and release your mind from the chains of humanistic reasoning. In other words, just read the passage and place it together with the common sense God gave you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by arachnophilia, posted 01-01-2007 12:26 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by arachnophilia, posted 01-01-2007 12:55 AM Origen has replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 32 of 41 (373325)
01-01-2007 12:55 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Origen
01-01-2007 12:44 AM


The vast majority of all living people on earth know what this means.
the vast majority of living people in the western world will tell you a wonderful story about adam eating an apple, which gets stuck in his throat, and thus a man's "adam's apple." a fair percentage of people you ask will tell you this story is in the bible, or at the very least that the fruit the bible says adam eats is an apple.
neither is true.
You need to think and release your mind from the chains of humanistic reasoning.
i think you need to release your mind from cultural assumptions and "common knowledge." instead, when we talk about the bible, let's start with the words that are actually on the page, before we go off half-cocked about whether something in the fossil records confirms something that the bible doesn't actually say.
In other words, just read the passage and place it together with the common sense God gave you.
common sense does not say that snakes once had legs, according to genesis. there is no biological change indicated in the passage. simply a change in posture. that this implies that the snake's legs fell off is your particular assumption or interpretation. the text says nothing on the matter.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Origen, posted 01-01-2007 12:44 AM Origen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Origen, posted 01-01-2007 1:03 AM arachnophilia has not replied

Origen
Member (Idle past 6292 days)
Posts: 52
Joined: 12-29-2006


Message 33 of 41 (373326)
01-01-2007 1:03 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by arachnophilia
01-01-2007 12:55 AM


You need to take 10-years of philosophy and learn how to compute data and then we can talk. Its 2007 right now, I'll hopefully see you in 2017 when you learned who to calculate the baby steps of pratical analysis. I'm not good with young people who don't know who to analysis data and find it hard to also help somebody under the influence of the priori-commitment to evolution. I guess our conversation has ended because there is a major problem in analytical methodology. I assumed this website was all masters and scholars already trained in analysis. Sorry I can't help you understand. My mind has problems thinking in terms of confusion that comes from manipulative methodolgy of the humanist manifesto.
To break free from the humanistic way of thought you need to pray to Jesus for forgiveness and He will run after you and save you from the depression that humanistic thought has done to you all. Receiving Christ will regenerate your mind and free your soul from the chains of sin that has degenerated all of us.
Edited by Origen, : No reason given.

Everything was nothing before there was something.
Everything is something even if its nothing at all.
For nothingness came from Something, and that
Something has always been there.
Without an Infinite Designer, nothing,
could not have ever been.
For even Nothing is Something;
And from Something...came everything.
~ Jason Fessenden

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by arachnophilia, posted 01-01-2007 12:55 AM arachnophilia has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by nator, posted 01-01-2007 8:46 AM Origen has not replied
 Message 41 by AdminTL, posted 01-01-2007 9:38 AM Origen has not replied

Origen
Member (Idle past 6292 days)
Posts: 52
Joined: 12-29-2006


Message 34 of 41 (373328)
01-01-2007 1:18 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by iceage
12-31-2006 4:06 PM


Professional Analysis
There are three stubling blocks for evolutionists and the way they think. For starts, they see no difference between the methodolgy of history, science, and philosophy. However, even though they all need to flow in harmony together, there is the Historical method, Scientific method, and the Philosopher's method that molds alot of modern scientific approach. The problem is, evos misuse all these methods and assume they history is subject to philosophy or scientific slander. Scientific method can seldom be used to analyze history because a single error in an historical event will be ruled out through scientific method. Thats why there are historians! These people have thousands of years in the method of historical analysis. So to be very honest, the greatest people in the academic world today are historians and librarians. Even journalism is useful to find that evolution is all a political lie. So understand that evolution is a view on natural history that isn't historical!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by iceage, posted 12-31-2006 4:06 PM iceage has not replied

Jon
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 41 (373341)
01-01-2007 4:07 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Origen
12-31-2006 11:04 PM


Re: My Snake Has Legs...
...legs that scientist have proven they have lost through this curse first written in the Bible.
No... you have shown that the serpents had legs at one time (a point not refuted) and that they no longer do (for the most part--a point not refuted). However, you have yet to prove scientifically that it was through the same method mentioned in the Bible that the serpents lost their legs.
We all agree that there was a time when the serpents had legs, however we have used scientific data to show that their legs disapeared through the happy-go-lucky process of evolution, and not via some wicked, instant curse by the all powerful I AM.
You need to show us in the fossil record evidence that supports a sudden disapearance of legs. The Bible doesn't count as a scientific resource for a couple of reasons:
a) it was written by people who knew NOTHING about science, except that the Sun was yellow, and the water was blue.
b) the people who wrote it lived LONG after the legs dissapeared from the snakes.
c) the curse of the snakes is used as a way of explaining why these strange creatures don't have legs, and why women fear them.
Point C brings up something else. If these curses are all true, then why aren't all the women of the world deathly afraid of snakes? Are women also cursed to obey their husbands?
J0N

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Origen, posted 12-31-2006 11:04 PM Origen has not replied

Jon
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 41 (373342)
01-01-2007 4:07 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Buzsaw
12-31-2006 10:56 PM


Re: My Snake Has Legs...
No. That doesn't follow. Check out the Komodo Dragon below. Notice how this fella stands on his legs like a dog on steroids?
Wikipedia - Komodo Dragon
So your claim still falls flat. The Biblical curse doesn't apply to all reptiles like you say it does. Your claim:
All reptiles are belly-crawlers.
I show you even one that's not.
Your claim is shown to be false.
Thank you, have a nice day, and Happy New Year
J0N

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Buzsaw, posted 12-31-2006 10:56 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Jaderis
Member (Idle past 3425 days)
Posts: 622
From: NY,NY
Joined: 06-16-2006


Message 37 of 41 (373343)
01-01-2007 4:14 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Origen
12-31-2006 8:00 PM


Well, Origen, congratulations on not answering my question by any stretch of reasoning. I asked how your assertion that gaining the ability to locomote in many different and quite efficient ways sans legs does not equal a gain of "information" and you respond by defending the Bible as history and multiple slights against Marxists and punk rockers (I am having enormous difficulty understanding how punk music has anything at all to do with evolution vs creationism/ID...perhaps you could enlighten me?. Maybe your bout with the flu caused you to misinterpret my question so horribly?
I eagerly await your full attention to this matter.
Yours,
A neo-marxist/punkrocker/liberal/atheist/lesbian

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Origen, posted 12-31-2006 8:00 PM Origen has not replied

Vacate
Member (Idle past 4601 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 38 of 41 (373344)
01-01-2007 4:37 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Origen
01-01-2007 12:40 AM


I am sorry for supplying a link that contains a photograph from a site that may contain content that is "refuted". Here is the image on its own .
quote:
evolution can interpretate whale fins has hands if they want to
Actually the area that I expected you to consider was more to the rear of the embryo (as seen marked with an H), the front fins scientists merely conclude to be fins. I am curious why it is so difficult to imagine that a whale cannot have once had legs while you so easily conclude that snakes once did? There are photographs.
quote:
you can see the evidence in Boas and Pythons that they used to have legs in the ancient past
Please show me the evidence that Boas and Pythons did have legs while whales did not. Perhaps your friend has done the research that shows how snakes and whales differ in this regard?
This is not philosophy, science, marxism, satanism, or whatever you want to call it - this is simply observation of a photograph. You state one thing as fact, how does it differ from what I present as fact?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Origen, posted 01-01-2007 12:40 AM Origen has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 39 of 41 (373347)
01-01-2007 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Origen
12-31-2006 10:41 PM


Re: My Snake Has Legs...
quote:
First of all we have to go on knowable facts. This is hard for evolutionists because they are so used to accepting the assumptions from their evolutionary Professors, who trusted the assumtpions of their evolutionary Professors and so on.
See, you are suffering under a major misconception regarding how science works.
Science progresses through a process of replication of results and critical peer-review, not through simply taking past scientist's word for things.
Every single new experiment or finding is a test of previous conclusions.
Your description above is more like the unquestioned and unchallenged passing on of dogma that religions engage in, and let me assure you that this is not the case within science.
Science is very contentious and competitive; the way for a scientist to become very well-known is to make some dramatic finding that, after withstanding replication and critical peer review, shows how wrong his or her predecessors were.
Science progresses and carreers in science are made when previous paradigms are overturned.
That is the complete opposite of your claim.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Origen, posted 12-31-2006 10:41 PM Origen has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 40 of 41 (373348)
01-01-2007 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Origen
01-01-2007 1:03 AM


quote:
You need to take 10-years of philosophy and learn how to compute data and then we can talk. Its 2007 right now, I'll hopefully see you in 2017 when you learned who to calculate the baby steps of pratical analysis. I'm not good with young people who don't know who to analysis data and find it hard to also help somebody under the influence of the priori-commitment to evolution. I guess our conversation has ended because there is a major problem in analytical methodology. I assumed this website was all masters and scholars already trained in analysis. Sorry I can't help you understand. My mind has problems thinking in terms of confusion that comes from manipulative methodolgy of the humanist manifesto.
LOL!
So, I guess this means that you can't answer arach's question, even though you are so smart and educated?
You can't explain how he is mistaken so we understand?
One would think that someone with the wisdom, intellectual power, and education levels you say you have would be able to do that.
But you'll just say we are all punk rockers in bed with the KGB, I suppose, right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Origen, posted 01-01-2007 1:03 AM Origen has not replied

AdminTL
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 41 (373357)
01-01-2007 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Origen
01-01-2007 1:03 AM


Well, I tried. Origen, when I promoted this, I was hoping that you would get a chance to discuss the actual scientific evidence you brought up. I was hoping that you would be willing to talk about snakes that used to have legs and whales that used to have legs, both of which are backed up by the exact same sort of scientific evidence.
Instead, you have avoided all scientific questions and the evidences and reasoning presented to you and opted for insults (like "I'll hopefully see you in 2017 when you learned who to calculate the baby steps of pratical analysis.")
I guess our conversation has ended.
It has. I'm closing this thread since there's no actual debate going on. (Buzsaw did try to take up your side of the argument, but he only had one post that didn't go anywhere.)
It has.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Origen, posted 01-01-2007 1:03 AM Origen has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024