Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 87 (8926 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-21-2019 3:49 PM
34 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,189 Year: 15,225/19,786 Month: 1,948/3,058 Week: 322/404 Day: 40/96 Hour: 7/9


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Scientific vs Creationist Frauds and Hoaxes
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


(1)
Message 114 of 220 (661825)
05-10-2012 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
01-11-2009 9:40 AM


I do not know whats worse a mans belief that he can actually date billions of years,(BTW)if you can date back you could forward as well.Why arent we traveling in the future yet.Or if he thinks any of that crap changes his life any.Or that men-people think they are mutants.Thats what science has broke us down to we are brothers and sisters to every species on earth and not only that but we are not even human being we are mutant human beings.I mean actually a human would be a species originally on this planet but we are not we mutated from our original parent.

Also when the evidence gets out that they have giants bones over 10 to 30 feet tall from the past then that will hurt evoultion.No explanation for it, why its hidden.Then if we last another couple hundred years and see we still arent evolving and neither are other species then it will start putting doubts.Thier are many lies.But you actually think someone will find refutable evidence unless by dumb luck or hardcore research then your right.You love to debate it.No because you like smash creationist but because you want someone to.Cause inside you know it but you cant prove it.thats the reason for this thread.
http://www.6000years.org/frame.php?page=giants
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/giants.htm
http://theunexplainedmysteries.com/giant-bones.html
http://www.stangrist.com/giants.htm

Edited by ScottyDouglas, : No reason given.

Edited by ScottyDouglas, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 01-11-2009 9:40 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by fearandloathing, posted 05-10-2012 4:42 PM ScottyDouglas has responded
 Message 121 by RAZD, posted 05-10-2012 5:55 PM ScottyDouglas has responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 116 of 220 (661827)
05-10-2012 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by fearandloathing
05-10-2012 4:42 PM


Interestingly I dont care about your thoughts are comments.Im here to prove nothing.I do not have to.That your topic-prove it or not!Mine isnt.Everything i said was true.I do not care if you believe it or not it is not my job to do your research.Do it on your own.

Also I do not think I replied on your comment, so what wass your point?I was commenting on the original topic what you did not post!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2092564/posts
http://www.davidpratt.info/ape2.htm
http://overmanwarrior.wordpress.com/...ory-of-the-human-race

Edited by ScottyDouglas, : No reason given.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add blank lines between paragraphs.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by fearandloathing, posted 05-10-2012 4:42 PM fearandloathing has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by fearandloathing, posted 05-10-2012 4:52 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 118 by fearandloathing, posted 05-10-2012 4:55 PM ScottyDouglas has responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 119 of 220 (661836)
05-10-2012 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by fearandloathing
05-10-2012 4:55 PM


I posted it before i got your reply and because you replied i added more and ill more again.
http://medialanephotography.co.uk/ea-giant-human-skeleton/
http://www.stevequayle.com/books/gen6cover.html
http://unexplainedmysteriesoftheworld.com/...iscovered-today
http://forum.davidicke.com/archive/index.php/t-90106.html

Edited by ScottyDouglas, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by fearandloathing, posted 05-10-2012 4:55 PM fearandloathing has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by fearandloathing, posted 05-10-2012 5:19 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 122 of 220 (661860)
05-10-2012 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by RAZD
05-10-2012 5:55 PM


Re: MORE OFF TOPIC DRIFT
Does Giants-put a frown on evolution?It would be signifiant?Im in this thread.This is my last post here.Im new and all that.But answer this honestly.No evidence or facts just the answer.If Giants exist I mean 10 to 30 feet tall is that a signifiant piece of facts for evolution?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by RAZD, posted 05-10-2012 5:55 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by Coyote, posted 05-10-2012 6:15 PM ScottyDouglas has responded
 Message 124 by Rahvin, posted 05-10-2012 7:00 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 125 by RAZD, posted 05-10-2012 7:45 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 126 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-10-2012 7:51 PM ScottyDouglas has responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 127 of 220 (662016)
05-11-2012 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by Dr Adequate
05-10-2012 7:51 PM


Re: MORE OFF TOPIC DRIFT
Atleast admit It would be signifiant.Also fossils you find also agrees with what find which is adnormalities.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-10-2012 7:51 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-11-2012 6:45 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 129 by Admin, posted 05-11-2012 8:44 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 130 of 220 (662075)
05-12-2012 4:10 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by Coyote
05-10-2012 6:15 PM


Re: Giants
The History of Marion County, Ohio (complied from past accounts, published in 1883)

The History of Brown County, Ohio (complied from past accounts, published in 1883)

Now and Long Ago-A History of the Marion County Area
by Glen Lough (1969)
(This citation on West Virginia courtesy Dave Cain.)

Collected by James Mooney (1861-1921), tells of the visit of very tall people from the west:

James Wafford, of the western Cherokee, who was born in Georgia in 1806, says that his grandmother, who must have been born about the middle of the last century, told him that she had heard from the old people that long before her time a party of giants had once come to visit the Cherokee. They were nearly twice as tall as common men, and had their eyes set slanting in their heads, so that the Cherokee called them Tsunil´ kalu´, "the Slant-eyed people," because they looked like the giant hunter Tsul´ kalu´. They said that these giants lived far away in the direction in which the sun goes down. The Cherokee received them as friends, and they stayed some time, and then returned to their home in the west...

Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois and History of Lake County
Edited by Newton Bateman, LL.D. and Paul Selby, A.M. (1902)

Historical Collections of Ohio in Two Volumes
by Henry Howe, LL.D. (1888)

The Firelands Pioneer (1858)

Henry Schoolcraft (1793-1864):The Indian has a low, bushy brow, beneath which a dull, sleepy, half-closed eye seems to mark the ferocious passions that are dormant within. The acute angles of the eyes seldom present the obliquity so common in the Malays and the Mongolians. The color of the eye is almost uniformly a tint between black and grey; but even in young persons it seldom has the brightness, or expresses the vivacity, so common in the more civilized races.

Bureau of Indian Affairs (1852)

Reports of Smithsonians Power and Thomas

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891 (published in
1894)
(Cyrus Thomas' investigations of Etowah)

Plat of the Etowah Group, Bartow County, Georgia.
Grave A (found in the largest mound of the group) contained a seven-foot skeleton having a heavy frame.

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891 (published in 1894)
(explorations in the Tennessee District)

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891 (published in 1894)
(explorations in Roane County, Tennessee)

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891 (published in 1894)
(mounds at Dunleith, Illinois)

Mound Group, Dunleith, Illinois.

"Near the original surface, 10 or 12 feet from the center, on the lower side, lying at full length on its back, was one of the largest skeletons discovered by the Bureau agents, the length as proved by actual measurement being between 7 and 8 feet."

The Adair County News
January 5, 1897
(Kentucky)

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891 (published in 1894)
(Pike County, Illinois)

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891 (published in 1894)
(Kanawha County, West Virginia)

Spring Hill Inclosure, Kanawha County, West Virginia.

In the bottom of Mound 11 (upper left) was found a skeleton "fully seven feet long."

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891 (published in
1894)
(Kanawha County, West Virginia)

A Section of the Great Smith Mound, Kanawha County, West Virginia.

This cone-shaped mound rose 35 feet high and measured 175 feet in diameter at its base. The interior of the mound contained a vault made of timber measuring 12 feet by 13 feet. It was positioned within the mound 20 feet above surface level.

12th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-1891 (published in 1894)
(Union County, Mississippi)

Group of mounds in Union County, Mississippi.

A large Indian mound near the town of Gastersville, [Gastonville?—Ed.] Pa., has recently been opened and examined by a committee of scientists sent out from the Smithsonian Institute. At some depth from the surface a kind of vault was found in which was discovered the skeleton of a giant measuring seven feet two inches. His hair was coarse and jet black, and hung to the waist, the brow being ornamented with a copper crown. The skeleton was remarkably well preserved...On the stones which covered the vault were carved inscriptions, and these when deciphered, will doubtless lift the veil that now shrouds the history of the race of people that at one time inhabited this part of the American continent. The relics have been carefully packed and forwarded to the Smithsonian Institute, and they are said to be the most interesting collection ever found in the United States.

American Antiquarian, 7:52, 1885

The question has been raised asking whether there was giant stature among the Native American people in earlier historic times. From Hardesty's History of Monroe County, Ohio, we discovered this:

He further told me of the killing of a big Indian at Buckchitawa, about the time of the settlement at Marietta. The Indians had a white prisoner whom they forced to decoy boats to the shore. A small boat was descending the river containing white people, when this prisoner was placed under the bank to tell those in the boat that he had escaped captivity, and to come to the shore and take him in. The Indians were concealed, but the big Indian stuck his head out from behind a large tree, when it was pierced by a bullet from the gun of the steersman of the boat. The Indians cried out Wetzel, Wetzel, and fled. This was the last ever seen of the prisoner. The Indians returned next day and buried the big Indian, who, he said, was twenty inches taller than he was, and he was a tall man. When Chester Bishop was digging a cellar for Asahel Booth, at Clarington, many years ago, he came across a skeleton, the bones of which were removed carefully by Dr. Richard Kirkpatrick, and from his measurement the height of the man when living would have been 8 feet and 5 inches. It is probable that these were the bones of the big Indian of whom the Indian at Jackson's told me.

The Mound at Marietta Drawn by Henry Howe in 1846.

Howe stated this mound was "of a magnitude and height which strike the beholder with astonishment." It's base had a diameter of 115 feet; it's height reached up 30 feet. It was surrounded by a ditch four feet deep and fifteen feet wide.

And again this:

A large quantity of human bones was discovered in a fissure in the limestone near the United States Coast Guard lighthouse. A crude tomb of black stone slabs, of a formation not known on the island, was found many years ago beneath the roots of a huge stump. Eight skeletons were found, one measuring over seven feet in height.

Sketches and Stories of the Lake Erie Islands
by Theresa Thorndale, Sandusky (1898)

American Indian Myths and Mysteries
Vincent H. Gaddis (1977)

Another grotesque twist is the Army Medical Museum's collection. According to the ABC News special "Skeletons in the Closet," the United States government acquired a real interest in Indian corpses. The Surgeon General, in post-Civil War 1868, requested that the army collect the skulls, utensils, and weaponry of Native Americans "as far as you are able to procure them." According to the report, these were to be sent to Washington, D.C. as part of a program that studied the effects of modern bullets and other weaponry on human bodies. The collection of such remains, estimated at 4,000, was taken mostly from grave and battle sites. What was left over became part of the Smithsonian collection estimated at 18,000 individuals, and this by way of the Army Medical Museum.

"The Army Medical Museum in Washington" by Louis Bagger Appletons' Journal: A Magazine Of General LiteratureVolume 9, Issue 206 (1873)

The Journal of Christopher Columbus, by C.R. Markham(London, 1893)

By M.Innes (London, 1955) The terrible bodies of the giants lay crushed beneath thier own massive structures.

Edited by Admin, : Remove extraneous carriage-returns.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Coyote, posted 05-10-2012 6:15 PM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Admin, posted 05-12-2012 8:00 AM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 132 by Coyote, posted 05-12-2012 10:25 AM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 133 by RAZD, posted 05-12-2012 6:47 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 135 by frako, posted 05-12-2012 7:12 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 136 by jar, posted 05-12-2012 7:21 PM ScottyDouglas has responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 137 of 220 (662150)
05-12-2012 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by jar
05-12-2012 7:21 PM


Re: Giants
http://jmilor.startlogic.com/...he%20Giant%20Conspiracy.html
This one site!

http://www.layevangelism.com/...sections/sect-10/sec10-5.htm
another

http://www.burlingtonnews.net/dann.html
and another

So people today namely science can determine and say that these old recounts are false and untrue. That the people recording them are in fantasy land.Not to mention that the smithsonian have enormous amounts of giants and some one display.

I have been to several mounds and know what I did not find bones because I looked and not touched as applied when I was there.

Even the smithsonian keeps paper trials and alot of trials lead to claims that they found and have giants. Just a simple detailed look at thier paper work show something abnormal.

How can you date fossils anyway but a previous estimate of one you think is that old and then tests will run off that example to then run test on other things by the age of the previous sample. Saying the very first sample has to be a figment estimate.

How do have fossils anyway by sudden death and burial.Only a catastphe brings.

Evolutionist stick to thier gunns that no flood within the last 4000 years but the evidence is the opposite. Whale fossils found deep inland only something that can happen if the land was once submerged. Ocean life on top of mountain? That can only happen if the mountain was once submerged.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add blank lines after paragraphs.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by jar, posted 05-12-2012 7:21 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by jar, posted 05-12-2012 8:39 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 139 by RAZD, posted 05-12-2012 10:18 PM ScottyDouglas has responded
 Message 140 by Coyote, posted 05-13-2012 2:18 AM ScottyDouglas has responded
 Message 141 by JonF, posted 05-13-2012 8:51 AM ScottyDouglas has responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 142 of 220 (662246)
05-14-2012 2:05 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by JonF
05-13-2012 8:51 AM


Re: Giants
Though evolution is not science! There is not any true observable scientific evidence. To claim that evolution is science you must have actual observed it happening and no one has seen evolution take place. If evolution was real then practically every species today would still have sub species still left and also sub species going into our next evolve would be taking place. Saying it would never stop the process is in fact not evolution becasue it is a continual state of motion. It would be taking place always and sub species would be and always been.
In fact you are being unscientific to claim facts to things unwitnessed.
Impersonations of fossil records and fossil beds is just that. Its theory and fairytales are accepted, only because Creationism is clearly not possible.
"I admit that an awful lot of that has gotten into the textbooks as though it were true. For instance, the most famous example still on exhibit downstairs (in the American Museum) is the exhibit on horse evolution prepared perhaps 50 years ago. That has been presented as literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now I think that that is lamentable, particularly because the people who propose these kinds of stories themselves may be aware of the speculative nature of some of the stuff. But by the time it filters down to the textbooks, we've got science as truth and we've got a problem." (Dr. Niles Eldridge, Curator of Invertebrate Paleontology at the American Museum)
You can not deny that, esp. if you claim no flood, that million upon millions of all different varities of species bones and sub species and then so on and so on. Our grounds all over the planet should be filled of fossils but it is not. No one has found one fossil that is deemed signifiant enough to account for billions upon billions of years of life and in the complexitity we have today. The links for all forms today is not in the fossil record because it simply never occured that way. This also proves that billions of years of life has not been on earth for that long.
Evolution and life is like playing darts. And the darts are theories. And the board is truth. Points are facts. You can throw and miss entirely. You can hit a point. and sometimes you'll hit the inside of the bullseye. But hardly never do you hit spot on. This is evolution they get so good at throwing and hitting points but miss the bullseye. They hit all around the bullseye but never hit spot on because they have blinded their ability to see it.
Once again I will state that evolution is not science and is nothing but a storytellers worldview with acceptable facts that fit neatly in, nothing more.
What is even more sad is scientist who support it are bein unscientific at the least. And evolutionist are constantly out to propulse their propaganda.
"Darwin is liked by evolutionist because he liberated science from the straightjacket of observation and opened the door to storytellers. This gave professional evolutionists job sercurity so they can wander through biology labs as if they belonged there." -David Coppedge
This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by JonF, posted 05-13-2012 8:51 AM JonF has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by Coyote, posted 05-14-2012 2:15 AM ScottyDouglas has responded
 Message 160 by RAZD, posted 05-14-2012 8:52 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 144 of 220 (662252)
05-14-2012 2:20 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by Coyote
05-14-2012 2:15 AM


Re: Giants
Im speaking about actual recorded history and clear evidence is abound. You can deny the truth from as false as much as you want. The fossil record is not there for evolution and it is essential to verifing your theory and it is not there clearly making that theory untrue and not possible.
I havent read your poat, I will.

Edited by ScottyDouglas, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by Coyote, posted 05-14-2012 2:15 AM Coyote has not yet responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 145 of 220 (662255)
05-14-2012 2:29 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by Coyote
05-13-2012 2:18 AM


Re: Giants
I will take the reliablity and documented record of goat herders, nomads, native indians, norse, china, greece, roman, egyptian, babolonian, sumerian, daninites, Jasher, Enoch, and history of Israel which has never been disproven.
Not modern science and storytellers such as yourself who thinks thier insignifiant 50 or such years of life can account for what thousands of years of men have not.
You think you have more ability and knowledge than our ancestors and we do not.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Coyote, posted 05-13-2012 2:18 AM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Coyote, posted 05-14-2012 10:05 AM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 146 of 220 (662258)
05-14-2012 3:03 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by RAZD
05-12-2012 10:18 PM


Re: Giants
We have millions of animals today to have so would been million upon millions of species before us. Not only does multi-species(hybrids) between species would and should still be taking place in every species all over the world. But also we would have a fossil record littered of these animals of every species, but we do not. We have a few so called evolved examples and even they do not show exstinsive example of evolving. Even if evolutionist had a few examples of animals evolving which they do not that is only partcial evidence because billions should be found. With the rigour you all support and preach evolution accross the web shows either lack of true scientific evidence for anyone to see without evolutionist propoganda in the way.
You have practically no fossil record.
You can not witness it happening.
And our simple form from the beginning to create our form today can not be found or repeated. End of story you have no emperical evidence except from biology which only proves animals have simliar traits and dna.
Your storified palentologist find bones then create a story of thier history and nothing more.

Edited by ScottyDouglas, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by RAZD, posted 05-12-2012 10:18 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by jar, posted 05-14-2012 8:53 AM ScottyDouglas has responded
 Message 148 by Admin, posted 05-14-2012 9:15 AM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 161 by RAZD, posted 05-14-2012 9:14 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 150 of 220 (662288)
05-14-2012 1:23 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by jar
05-14-2012 8:53 AM


Re: Fossils
No I still suggest that all of the recent theory of evolution is a hoax in the highest degree. It is quite easy to have a theory be assumed true when it can and does change to accept new evidence. If a theory can change and accept any evidence then it does not mean its true. It could be just as untrue as true if it can change by the evidence. That is nothing more than changeable theory to fit within the facts. The facts and evidence should prove the theory not the theory change and prove the facts and evidence. Two comepletely different ideas of science and truth.
Furthermore if evolution as exstintsive as you suggest not only should be view by all as fact. But it would have been happeninf forever and it would no longer have theory behind it and be provided as absolute but it is not. It is taught in school but so is creationism. If evolution was factual beyond needing furthert proof then that would reflect in all society and teaching without any equal or teaching.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by jar, posted 05-14-2012 8:53 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Panda, posted 05-14-2012 1:37 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 152 by Coyote, posted 05-14-2012 2:01 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 153 by frako, posted 05-14-2012 2:01 PM ScottyDouglas has responded
 Message 157 by jar, posted 05-14-2012 2:51 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 154 of 220 (662294)
05-14-2012 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by Coyote
05-13-2012 2:18 AM


Re: Giants
I provide history, and most certainly history provides proof of that. Just because it is not your belief and deemed not empirical by you means nothing. Just because you and all of acience who claim it is not real or proof means nothing as well thats your opinion and not unprovable. I rely on the truth of thousands of years who tell of the future and end instead some theory brought as truth in the last 150 years. That solely relies on belief of that theory and untestable time to say their theory is so and their expert opinion is inquestionable. Do I agree species adapting and stronger or more clear traits take over and this would be looked trademark within groups. This is valid and reasonable. Not to be able to see a man turn into another full species in a lifetime or two or twenty is clearly plausable. What is not plausable is the fact that it is no way around that transitional species should be abundant today and past. We should enormous amounts of transitional species not only in man but all species and 'you say 20 million artifacts of transition.' Ok thats a real real small number compared that we have atleast 6,000 to 10,000 years of life and you have 20 mill? You should have billions upon billions. It should be mass amounts of fossils beyond finding. Some things in this world are beyond finding and that is what all of you can not understand and refuse by your simple science of observation and not being the observed. You use these theories with science as your banner but your theory is nothing about science. It is fiction, a fairytale, a hoax, trivial, and less than a God. You ignore that real of Occum razor- the simplest thing- God is the simplest thing to believe. Evolution- science in general is like the grass and sky we all look up and see blue and look at grass and see green. It doesnt take study and theories to know that. What you do need is to interpret what you see between each other and evolution and by sciences help interprets bad. Anyone would know and see the clear evidence of what takes place but evolution has come and not proved nothing. We knew and know all animals and life forms are simliar nothing from evolution, this is the way Creationist see it as well.You take ourside here. We easily say a God come here and make this earth, plants, animals, and man. Man has a soul inner knowing and ability. We all know we do. But yall say that we evovled into massive amounts of pre-existing animals and so on. First I take a whole different approach to creationism. My God doesnt make formless and void things and therefore it was reason why it was Gen 1:2. This hints previous life with other passages. Second you can take the stance that two sets of man was created. You can take that eons of time happened between the 7 days because 1 in a 1000 and 1000 in 1. But in those days 1,000 was also equal to infinity. Nothing contridicts the Bible at all. Miss translations from Hebrew to other languages. Hebrew is a destinct language and believed by record that could be the first. Hebrew is a simple form of talk with deep meaning in its words.
You know as a absolute that evolution does not have 1/10 of the fossils it should to be thought as a absolute. Then lack of this much of a record that should be there is far cry from a absolute. After billions of years of this life the fossil record fit well within Biblical account. If you think I will or I will support anyone believing in things at best taking a well educated guess into our past and origin. Biology proves common ancestor- so does creationism- God. Evolutionist bing forth that theory and fits it within known facts and what doesnt isnt talked about. Then palentologist is allowed to go to the feild and use methods to date things that at best will test 100,000 years. Then they can dig up the fossil and make a story of know facts and evidences found ever. This is how things should be do if people seek things beyind God then evidence and your test do. But that doesnt make you a exspert in anything to do in the eons of time. Just today and now.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Coyote, posted 05-13-2012 2:18 AM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by Coyote, posted 05-14-2012 2:35 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded
 Message 159 by Admin, posted 05-14-2012 2:54 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded

    
ScottyDouglas
Member (Idle past 2560 days)
Posts: 79
Joined: 05-10-2012


Message 156 of 220 (662298)
05-14-2012 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by frako
05-14-2012 2:01 PM


Re: Fossils
My hoax is because you claim that this is because of that. And then that is because of this here. This here is because that there. And that there is because of this there. This there is because then there. And then there was because of that. That and then there shows use what that, then, and there is.
The simpliest answer will do.

Edited by ScottyDouglas, : No reason given.

Edited by ScottyDouglas, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by frako, posted 05-14-2012 2:01 PM frako has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by frako, posted 05-14-2012 2:51 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019