Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 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:   Not only Intelligent Design - but DIVINE DESIGN!
hotjer
Member (Idle past 4545 days)
Posts: 113
From: Denmark
Joined: 04-02-2010


Message 38 of 139 (560707)
05-17-2010 6:58 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Anita Meyer
05-16-2010 10:11 PM


w00t
Mathematic patterns in letters does not prove divine design. Weird nonsense. I guess you have very low thoughts about nature itself.
I have not study the history of alphebet but I am pretty sure hieroglpyhs came before Semitic languages (including hebrew) and also it is very debated whether there was any written language before hieroglyphs.
but one of the thing I wonder mostly about (beside from your very extreme claims); tell us what's your academic background and please, for god sake, give us some sources of your claims - that is not of the bible. Probably, we cannot use the bible as reference since it has been awfully manipulated (ref. J, E, P, RJE, D, and R authors of the five first books in the bible).
And to be clear;
Your academic background:
Kind of sources (maybe the list in your book would be helpful):

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Anita Meyer, posted 05-16-2010 10:11 PM Anita Meyer has not replied

hotjer
Member (Idle past 4545 days)
Posts: 113
From: Denmark
Joined: 04-02-2010


Message 59 of 139 (560798)
05-17-2010 5:26 PM


Academic background
Since she did not want to tell what her academic background is herself I write it myself instead:
Graduated from Maine East High School in Park Ridge Illinois
Attending Hebrew school and latter living in Israel for a year.
Attended college for two years in the field of Criminology. Though she did not follow through in this field.
source: Anita B Meyer (author) on AuthorsDen

hotjer
Member (Idle past 4545 days)
Posts: 113
From: Denmark
Joined: 04-02-2010


Message 74 of 139 (561033)
05-18-2010 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Anita Meyer
05-18-2010 1:49 PM


You are saying science is unreliable, but you try to use science to prove your point. By your (low) academic standards your argument is unreliably.
You still need to provide sources.
If the tree is 5000 years old the great flood could not have happen since the great flood destroyed everything around 4350 years ago or something like that.
What about this?
250-Million-Year-Old Bacillus permians Halobacteria Revived - Bioinformatics.org
Fits perfectly with the bible.... or maybe not.
And at last, you are a dishonest person. "I am not here to sell my book" - then why do you talk about your book? And what the heck is going on with the price if you just try to spread the word. You are viewing Jesus as a salesman rather as the son of God. Your way of believing in God is disgusting even by Christian standards. You do not live for God but of God - abusing his authority.
You have poor academic background and lie. I can accept stupidity most of the time, but this kind of attitude is horrible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Anita Meyer, posted 05-18-2010 1:49 PM Anita Meyer has not replied

hotjer
Member (Idle past 4545 days)
Posts: 113
From: Denmark
Joined: 04-02-2010


Message 89 of 139 (561308)
05-19-2010 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Anita Meyer
05-19-2010 7:03 PM


Facepalm-like-oh-my-gosh-style
You are joking now, right? You talk like as if you were a clone of Kent Hovind or Venomfangx (Shawn)..........
You started off by talking about mathematic nonsense which have no ground; your book failed, and now you try to defend it by saying stuff like holocaust, nazism, serial killers, misrepresenting the first few sources you ever did use in this thread. You claim to be a very smart person despite your low academic background; a good thing now would either be to acknowledge you are wrong or come with som really awesome arguments, that grants you the nobel prize, with both source and method for analyzing the stuff you talk about. A reason to why you are qualified to lecture a person about dating method whom uses it as an essential part of his field would be appropriated too..

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Anita Meyer, posted 05-19-2010 7:03 PM Anita Meyer has not replied

hotjer
Member (Idle past 4545 days)
Posts: 113
From: Denmark
Joined: 04-02-2010


Message 107 of 139 (561401)
05-20-2010 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by Anita Meyer
05-20-2010 10:35 AM


sigh
Sources
Sources
Sources
Sources
You are addressing a mio. subjects and as coyote says, you avoid to answer his post to you because of.... you claim scientists do not think rationally because of "all your data".
Is it not a bit arrogant to say that 99,99% of all scientists are close-minded and irrational? Why is it you supposely know more about science than scientists when you only took a few classes in criminology and read the hebrew bible :S?
You come up with the same claims as all other creationists (sites).
Furthermore, how come you try to prove god with logic (but you fail though) when the paradox of God is not to understood through logic but faith?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Anita Meyer, posted 05-20-2010 10:35 AM Anita Meyer 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