INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

Science Disproves Evolution

Any topic related to science can be discussed here.
Post Reply
Message
Author
VINDICATOR
Posts: 594
Joined: December 22nd, 2016, 11:07 am

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#661 Post by VINDICATOR » October 26th, 2017, 5:54 am

Latest post of the previous page:

Dear Pahu,
Obviously your purpose in disproving evolution is to prove that your God made the whole universe, including man. Just to get the argument out of the quick-sand, let's hypothesize that God did create everything. Now prove to us that it was your God, (The God of Abraham?) that did it, and not one of the other of the thousands of Gods worshipped on Earth. (Temporarily don't consider the extra-terrestrial Aliens' Gods) If you can't do that, then your effort is completely useless!

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#662 Post by Pahu » October 26th, 2017, 2:11 pm

Alan H wrote:You're not making any progress here, Pahu, are you? Do you understand why?

Do not post any more unnecessary graphics. And please do not quote large chunks of text copied from elsewhere: provide a few selected sentences with your own commentary in future. Do you understand all of that?
In other words, shut up, your facts are disturbing me.
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#663 Post by Pahu » October 26th, 2017, 2:15 pm

VINDICATOR wrote:Dear Pahu,
Obviously your purpose in disproving evolution is to prove that your God made the whole universe, including man. Just to get the argument out of the quick-sand, let's hypothesize that God did create everything. Now prove to us that it was your God, (The God of Abraham?) that did it, and not one of the other of the thousands of Gods worshipped on Earth. (Temporarily don't consider the extra-terrestrial Aliens' Gods) If you can't do that, then your effort is completely useless!
There is only one true, living, creator God who reveals Himself in the Bible:

[center]Bible Accuracy [/center][/color]

1. Archaeology confirms the historical accuracy of the Bible:
 
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/the_rocks_cry_out.html
http://christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a008.html
http://www.christiananswers.net/archaeology/home.html
http://www.ucg.org/the-good-news/the-bi ... cal-record
 
2. The Bible is not a science book, yet is scientifically accurate:
 
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/scienti ... bible.html
http://www.eternal-productions.org/101science.html
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
 
3. The Bible is filled with hundreds of accurately fulfilled prophecies:

http://www.100prophecies.com/
http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/
http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/bible ... filled.htm
http://www.reasons.org/fulfilled-prophe ... lity-bible
http://www.allabouttruth.org/Bible-Prophecy.htm
 
No other book, religious or secular, comes close to those requirements.
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

VINDICATOR
Posts: 594
Joined: December 22nd, 2016, 11:07 am

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#664 Post by VINDICATOR » October 26th, 2017, 3:11 pm

Dear Pahu,
Fine, now we're getting warm! Here is your logic:
First you prove that the Bible is true. Since the Bible says God created man, then that proves that God created man! QED! Evolution is false.
However, if you want to use the Bible as proof of anything, you must be sure that the Bible is 100% true. If there are untruths in the Bible then using the Bible for proof is invalid. Are you ready to guarantee that the Bible is 100% correct? Would you bet your after-life on it? (Pahu's Wager)

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#665 Post by Pahu » October 26th, 2017, 3:13 pm

VINDICATOR wrote:Dear Pahu,
Fine, now we're getting warm! Here is your logic:
First you prove that the Bible is true. Since the Bible says God created man, then that proves that God created man! QED! Evolution is false.
However, if you want to use the Bible as proof of anything, you must be sure that the Bible is 100% true. If there are untruths in the Bible then using the Bible for proof is invalid. Are you ready to guarantee that the Bible is 100% correct? Would you bet your after-life on it? (Pahu's Wager)
Yes.
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24062
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#666 Post by Alan H » October 26th, 2017, 3:37 pm

Pahu wrote:
VINDICATOR wrote:Dear Pahu,
Obviously your purpose in disproving evolution is to prove that your God made the whole universe, including man. Just to get the argument out of the quick-sand, let's hypothesize that God did create everything. Now prove to us that it was your God, (The God of Abraham?) that did it, and not one of the other of the thousands of Gods worshipped on Earth. (Temporarily don't consider the extra-terrestrial Aliens' Gods) If you can't do that, then your effort is completely useless!
There is only one true, living, creator God who reveals Himself in the Bible:

[center]Bible Accuracy [/center][/color]

1. Archaeology confirms the historical accuracy of the Bible:
 
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/the_rocks_cry_out.html
http://christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a008.html
http://www.christiananswers.net/archaeology/home.html
http://www.ucg.org/the-good-news/the-bi ... cal-record
 
2. The Bible is not a science book, yet is scientifically accurate:
 
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/scienti ... bible.html
http://www.eternal-productions.org/101science.html
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
 
3. The Bible is filled with hundreds of accurately fulfilled prophecies:

http://www.100prophecies.com/
http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/
http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/bible ... filled.htm
http://www.reasons.org/fulfilled-prophe ... lity-bible
http://www.allabouttruth.org/Bible-Prophecy.htm
 
No other book, religious or secular, comes close to those requirements.
Does your bible:

1. Have any historical inaccuracies?
2. Have any scientific inaccuracies?
3. Have any false prophecies?

and not forgetting:

4. How accurate is your figure of 8,000 years for the age of the Universe?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3244
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#667 Post by Tetenterre » October 26th, 2017, 3:50 pm

Pahu wrote:In other words, shut up, your facts are disturbing me.
I call bullshit!

Speaking only of myself (obviously), I would prefer to debate with you, in your own words, rather than with some person who does not interact on these forums but whose words you keep copying and pasting here. It's as if you are scared to interact as yourself, so you cower behind the words of others. You reinforce this appearance with your repeated failure to respond, in your own words, to what others write/ask in these posts, other than to occasionally repeat an assertion that you have previously made, but without explaining, in your own words, (a) why you believe your assertion is true and, more importantly, (b) where you believe the flaws are in the arguments of others.
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#668 Post by Pahu » October 26th, 2017, 6:19 pm

Alan H wrote:
Pahu wrote:
VINDICATOR wrote:Dear Pahu,
Obviously your purpose in disproving evolution is to prove that your God made the whole universe, including man. Just to get the argument out of the quick-sand, let's hypothesize that God did create everything. Now prove to us that it was your God, (The God of Abraham?) that did it, and not one of the other of the thousands of Gods worshipped on Earth. (Temporarily don't consider the extra-terrestrial Aliens' Gods) If you can't do that, then your effort is completely useless!
There is only one true, living, creator God who reveals Himself in the Bible:

[center]Bible Accuracy [/center][/color]

1. Archaeology confirms the historical accuracy of the Bible:
 
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/the_rocks_cry_out.html
http://christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a008.html
http://www.christiananswers.net/archaeology/home.html
http://www.ucg.org/the-good-news/the-bi ... cal-record
 
2. The Bible is not a science book, yet is scientifically accurate:
 
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/scienti ... bible.html
http://www.eternal-productions.org/101science.html
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
 
3. The Bible is filled with hundreds of accurately fulfilled prophecies:

http://www.100prophecies.com/
http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/
http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/bible ... filled.htm
http://www.reasons.org/fulfilled-prophe ... lity-bible
http://www.allabouttruth.org/Bible-Prophecy.htm
 
No other book, religious or secular, comes close to those requirements.
Does your bible:

1. Have any historical inaccuracies?
2. Have any scientific inaccuracies?
3. Have any false prophecies?
No
and not forgetting:

4. How accurate is your figure of 8,000 years for the age of the Universe?
I don't know.
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#669 Post by Pahu » October 26th, 2017, 6:22 pm

Tetenterre wrote:
Pahu wrote:In other words, shut up, your facts are disturbing me.
I call bullshit!

Speaking only of myself (obviously), I would prefer to debate with you, in your own words, rather than with some person who does not interact on these forums but whose words you keep copying and pasting here. It's as if you are scared to interact as yourself, so you cower behind the words of others. You reinforce this appearance with your repeated failure to respond, in your own words, to what others write/ask in these posts, other than to occasionally repeat an assertion that you have previously made, but without explaining, in your own words, (a) why you believe your assertion is true and, more importantly, (b) where you believe the flaws are in the arguments of others.
Most of the time I prefer to use the words of others on a subject they are more knowledgeable about.
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24062
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#670 Post by Alan H » October 26th, 2017, 6:58 pm

Pahu wrote:Does your bible:

1. Have any historical inaccuracies?
2. Have any scientific inaccuracies?
3. Have any false prophecies?
No[/quote]You're not really trying, are you Pahu?
and not forgetting:

4. How accurate is your figure of 8,000 years for the age of the Universe?
I don't know.
That's quite an admission, isn't it? But could it be (as I previously suggested), 83 -0, +13.8199929 years?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#671 Post by Pahu » October 26th, 2017, 7:13 pm

Alan H wrote:
Pahu wrote:Does your bible:

1. Have any historical inaccuracies?
2. Have any scientific inaccuracies?
3. Have any false prophecies?
No
You're not really trying, are you Pahu?
and not forgetting:

4. How accurate is your figure of 8,000 years for the age of the Universe?
I don't know.
That's quite an admission, isn't it? But could it be (as I previously suggested), 83 -0, +13.8199929 years?
As shown above, evidence shows the age of the earth and universe are in the thousands of years old. Would you like to see the evidence again?
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24062
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#672 Post by Alan H » October 26th, 2017, 7:24 pm

Pahu wrote:
I don't know.
That's quite an admission, isn't it? But could it be (as I previously suggested), 83 -0, +13.8199929 years?
As shown above, evidence shows the age of the earth and universe are in the thousands of years old. Would you like to see the evidence again?
Why? Has it changed since yesterday? Which of the sections with the headings I repeated gave the answer? But anyway, if it's 'thousands of years' as you say, is it 13,820,000 thousand years?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3244
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#673 Post by Tetenterre » October 26th, 2017, 9:06 pm

Pahu wrote: Most of the time I prefer to use the words of others on a subject they are more knowledgeable about.
That is obvious. Bur we are not debating with these others; we are debating with you.
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24062
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#674 Post by Alan H » October 26th, 2017, 9:14 pm

Pahu wrote:
Tetenterre wrote:
Pahu wrote:In other words, shut up, your facts are disturbing me.
I call bullshit!

Speaking only of myself (obviously), I would prefer to debate with you, in your own words, rather than with some person who does not interact on these forums but whose words you keep copying and pasting here. It's as if you are scared to interact as yourself, so you cower behind the words of others. You reinforce this appearance with your repeated failure to respond, in your own words, to what others write/ask in these posts, other than to occasionally repeat an assertion that you have previously made, but without explaining, in your own words, (a) why you believe your assertion is true and, more importantly, (b) where you believe the flaws are in the arguments of others.
Most of the time I prefer to use the words of others on a subject they are more knowledgeable about.
If it's them who are more knowledgeable than you, Pahu, how can we ever be sure you actually understand what it is you are copy and pasting from your playbook?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

VINDICATOR
Posts: 594
Joined: December 22nd, 2016, 11:07 am

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#675 Post by VINDICATOR » October 27th, 2017, 4:45 am

Dear Pahu,
Are you absolutely certain that your Bible is 100% correct? Please answer "yes" or "no".

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#676 Post by Pahu » October 27th, 2017, 2:41 pm

VINDICATOR wrote:Dear Pahu,
Are you absolutely certain that your Bible is 100% correct? Please answer "yes" or "no".

Yes.
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
animist
Posts: 6521
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 11:36 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#677 Post by animist » October 27th, 2017, 4:23 pm

Pahu wrote:
VINDICATOR wrote:Dear Pahu,
Are you absolutely certain that your Bible is 100% correct? Please answer "yes" or "no".

Yes.
so how about all the internal contradictions?

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#678 Post by Pahu » October 27th, 2017, 4:25 pm

animist wrote:
Pahu wrote:
VINDICATOR wrote:Dear Pahu,
Are you absolutely certain that your Bible is 100% correct? Please answer "yes" or "no".

Yes.
so how about all the internal contradictions?
Such as?
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3244
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#679 Post by Tetenterre » October 27th, 2017, 4:39 pm

Pahu wrote:
Alan H wrote:Does your bible:

1. Have any historical inaccuracies?
2. Have any scientific inaccuracies?
3. Have any false prophecies?
No
Historical inaccuracy:
In Genesis, there is mention of Abraham's servant travelling by camel. According to Biblical chronology, this was around the 2nd millennium BCE. However, the evidence is that the camel was not domesticated until about 1000 years after this. (This is a rare case of the Bible claiming things are older than they actually are; it's usually the other way round.) How is the Bible correct in this? Please explain your reasons for your answer in your own words.


Mark 14:35-36 portrays Jesus in agony and distress before his death, yet John 16:32-33 says he was calm and in total control. These are mutually exclusive. How can they both be correct? Please explain your reasons for your answer in your own words.

Matthew and Luke both correct Mark's geography. If Mark was accurate, then entire locations (including their archaeology) must have magically moved. Is this what happened? If not, how can the gospels of Mark, Luke and Matthew all be correct? Please explain your reasons for your answer in your own words.

I suppose you are aware, Pahu, that both St Augustine of Hippo (4th Cent CE) and St Thomas Aquinas (13th Cent CE) acknowledged not only that there were factual errors in the Bible, but that those who insisted that these errors were facts were guilty of "bringing our faith into ridicule". Were they wrong? Please explain your reasons for your answer in your own words.
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

User avatar
Pahu
Posts: 387
Joined: April 25th, 2016, 4:03 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#680 Post by Pahu » October 27th, 2017, 6:19 pm

Tetenterre wrote:
Pahu wrote:
Alan H wrote:Does your bible:

1. Have any historical inaccuracies?
2. Have any scientific inaccuracies?
3. Have any false prophecies?
No
Historical inaccuracy:
In Genesis, there is mention of Abraham's servant travelling by camel. According to Biblical chronology, this was around the 2nd millennium BCE. However, the evidence is that the camel was not domesticated until about 1000 years after this. (This is a rare case of the Bible claiming things are older than they actually are; it's usually the other way round.) How is the Bible correct in this? Please explain your reasons for your answer in your own words.
Whoever said the camel was not domesticated at the time of Abraham was wrong.
Mark 14:35-36 portrays Jesus in agony and distress before his death, yet John 16:32-33 says he was calm and in total control. These are mutually exclusive. How can they both be correct? Please explain your reasons for your answer in your own words.
Two different times and places.
Matthew and Luke both correct Mark's geography. If Mark was accurate, then entire locations (including their archaeology) must have magically moved. Is this what happened? If not, how can the gospels of Mark, Luke and Matthew all be correct? Please explain your reasons for your answer in your own words.
Where do Matthew and Luke both correct Mark's geography?
I suppose you are aware, Pahu, that both St Augustine of Hippo (4th Cent CE) and St Thomas Aquinas (13th Cent CE) acknowledged not only that there were factual errors in the Bible, but that those who insisted that these errors were facts were guilty of "bringing our faith into ridicule". Were they wrong? Please explain your reasons for your answer in your own words.
Since God is the author of the Bible, it cannot be in error regardless of the opinions of men.
Truth frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24062
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Science Disproves Evolution

#681 Post by Alan H » October 27th, 2017, 6:26 pm

Hi Pahu. Since you're here, can you see your way to addressing these questions? Much obliged.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

Post Reply