Genesis 1 interpretation

Newborn,{the harsh comments in this post have been removed}[This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 07-19-2003]

All right, I'll admit my post was a bit harsh. I'll remove it. But only after you tell me what you meant by "The theory were made in precipitation." Because you really had me baffled there. Have you actually been sitting in the rain, thinking it all up???Well?[This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 07-18-2003]

Hey Newborn, if I were thinking in the rain, I'd run too. (Just kidding.)I read your link. Well, part of it anyway, because when I reached the term "creation week", I was incapacitated for at last half an hour. I'm still experiencing convulsions every now and then. I mean, imagine: God is lying on the couch, lazily watching TV, and suddenly he realises, with a start: "Oh, crikey, next week is creation week and my tux is still at the dry cleaner's."I'm sorry, but it's really hard for me to stay serious in the face of so much hilarious nonsense. I'm not even going to discuss it anymore, because I'll run the risk of being thrown off of the forum (if God doesn't smite me with some unspeakable horror first). So, good luck Newborn, and may the clouds above your head depart along with the fog inside it.Cheers.{edited to correct typo}[This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 07-20-2003]

Newborn,Why do I make fun of God? Although NosyNed pretty much said it all, I'd like to add this: You can't make fun of someone who does not exist. And if he does exist, he's probably laughing his Holy Ass off because of the drivel he reads in this here thread. A little humour from my side at his expense will only add to the merriment, if he is anywhere as intelligent as he's purported to be.Has the fog lifted yet?[This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 07-21-2003]

All right Newborn, you want to discuss? I'll discuss. But first: it's P-A-R-A-S-O-M-N-I-U-M. One of the first requirements, if we are to have a discussion, is that you read accurately.I've read the whole article now, without laughing this time, and I have a simple question for you, to begin with.If Dr. Humphreys is a real scientist, he must have had basic scientific training, yes? So I take it he knows, as every high school student knows, that water molecules are made of atoms, right? Two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. And that if there are no such atoms, there can be no water, ok? Yet, he has it that first there was water, which cooled down to 3000 Kelvin and then atoms were formed. Please explain this to me.

"Atoms already exist.He is only talking about fusion ."Unauthorized interpreting. And blatant nonsense at that. (See Coragyps' reply.) Argument dismissed.P.S. Saying a falsehood twice doesn't make it true.

Rrhain,Shouldn't you go to sleep?Nighty-night.

I don't think that's a good idea, Newborn. It will only clog this thread with too many subjects. Let's just concentrate on the question I asked you in post #31, which, to my taste, you haven't answered satisfactorily.It's a simple question really: how can there be water before there are atoms?Your first answer was: "Atoms already exist. He [Humphreys] is only talking about fusion."You are making three mistakes there: 1 - you are interpreting without justification; 2 - you flatly contradict the man you seek to defend: you say that atoms existed at a time when Humphreys says they were yet to form; and 3 - you posit impossible physics.If you study a bit more on what Humphreys says, and compare it to what physics teaches us about the world, you will see that "Dr." Humphreys doesn't know much about science, at least not about the science needed to explain his cosmological model, or any other cosmological model at that.Again, just concentrate on Humphreys' idea about the formation of atoms. Don't you see the absurdity?

Newborn, Yes. And yes. I tried to follow your reasoning, but after the word 'surprised' I got lost. What you are saying is gobbledegook to me.Anyway, you still didn't answer my question. I'll repeat it one more time and if you don't give me a straight answer in your next post, I'll consider our discussion closed. The question is "How can there be water before there are atoms?" No beating about the bush please.