- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 57 Maine School Districts Hide Kids’ Gender Dysphoria From Parents
Posted on 3/3/25 at 7:50 pm to StansberryRules
Posted on 3/3/25 at 7:50 pm to StansberryRules
quote:
There are very few things I"m willing to go to prison over but protecting my children from predators is one of them. Anyone messes with my kids like that, school or no, is gonna answer for it severely. I'll deal with any consequences with a clean conscious.
100% agree
Another weird arse thing about Maine is they don't allow hunting on Sunday's due to some old time religious observance of the Sabbath and yet this type shite is allowed to be perpetuated in the school system. Maine men better grow some f'ing nuts
0
Posted on 3/3/25 at 10:29 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
I agree, but I don’t like where you are headed…
quote:
Evolution of species is factual based on the overwhelming preponderance of evidence
I’m not arguing against speciation. Neither are ID proponents or creationists. I’m arguing against universal common ancestry- not because I need it to be false, not because I think I can prove it, but because I don’t think you or anyone else can prove it without coming to a point of belief about “how things must have been.” I also would argue that there is no known mechanism by which life could originate from non-life.
quote:
Only those who ignore that evidence
No one is ignoring evidence. We’re all interpreting the same evidence, differently, coming to unfalsifiable conclusions, and using our own arguments from authority as the foundation for our beliefs. The only difference is, the theist readily acknowledges that.
quote:
We also know Noah’s flood not only could not have happened, but we know it did not happen using all we have learned about our planet with the scientific method.
Because you assume uniformitarianism- that things must always have been just as they are now. Unfalsifiable argument from authority. See?
quote:
used the 7000 year old Yazidi calendar the other day that you didn’t like.
I liked it
I told you how I found it very interesting. It’s obviously influenced by Judaism, Christianity and Islam (among many others). Just because they have a calendar that says the earth is 7000 years old, doesn’t mean they have a 7000 year old calendar. quote:
What I want to have happened is irrelevant.
As far as how it affects objective truth? I agree. But, as far as how it influences the way you interpret reality- it is primary.
quote:
My fault for getting them confused
I can see how they are the same , from your perspective.
quote:
I know the Bible so well,
No offense, but you know the Bible like a democrat knows the constitution- only to twist it, as a means to get what you want.
quote:
and those “theistic evolutionists” must not.
They start with Genesis as allegory. Im not really a fan. But insomuch as salvation does not depend on your view on Adam and Eve, I’m inclined to hear the reasoning behind it.
quote:
The 6 day creation and young earth is integral to Judaism and Christianity
The only thing that’s integral to Christianity is Christ. Duh. If you’d quit feeding your fantasies with (your unjust judgement of) the difficult passages in the OT, and spend a little time in the NT, you’d realize that.
quote:
If you take creationism out of Christianity, you don’t have the same religion anymore. It’s all or nothing.
I disagree that it is necessary to hold a literal view of Genesis in order to be a Christian. You don’t have to believe in a literal 6 x 24hr day creation to understand Christ’s work on the cross. Salvation is a gift from God- not something you earn in any way. Your affinity for Gnosticism is showing.
Posted on 3/3/25 at 11:06 pm to loogaroo
Posted on 3/3/25 at 11:09 pm to loogaroo
Those school districts need a lot of pink slips.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 6:20 am to Prodigal Son
quote:
I’m not arguing against speciation.
Good, that would be silly.
quote:
Neither are ID proponents or creationists
They try to twist and bastardize known facts about evolution to fit their preconceived nonscientific beliefs about nature. “Let’s believe God created kinds, and that when they got off the ark, the animals went into a hyper-evolution mode and turned into all the species of today. Hyper evolution over hundreds of years! That’s it. But evolution from a common ancestor over millions of years is impossible nonsense.”
There’s no basis in facts or reality of ID / creationism.
quote:
I’m arguing against universal common ancestry- not because I need it to be false, not because I think I can prove it, but because I don’t think you or anyone else can prove it without coming to a point of belief about “how things must have been.”
In the colloquial sense, universal common ancestor is already proven scientific fact. You are closely related to monkeys, lesser to dogs and deer, lesser still to kangaroos, lesser still to duck billed platypus, lesser still to chickens and ducks, lesser still to frogs and fish, and even still you are distantly related to bananas and watermelon and aspen trees.
quote:
I also would argue that there is no known mechanism by which life could originate from non-life.
So what? Ever heard of God of the Gaps fallacy? Even if we were to somehow show that some higher power that you might call a deity started life on this planet, it still wouldn’t make your Bible any more factual. Muslims and Hindus and everyone else would use that as “evidence” their god did it too.
quote:
Because you assume uniformitarianism- that things must always have been just as they are now. Unfalsifiable argument from authority. See?
I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. Would you have convicted OJ? We know with millions of times more certainty that Noah’s flood could not and did not happen than we know about OJ’s alleged double homicide.
Quit saying I’m arguing from authority. The facts are the facts not because some guy says it’s true, but only if they are evidently true.
quote:
Just because they have a calendar that says the earth is 7000 years old, doesn’t mean they have a 7000 year old calendar.
That is fair. But also consider how the Chinese and Vietnamese also have calendars with the year 1 being way older than the alleged time of Noah’s flood. Consider how these calendars normally are started in the ancient world. The year “1” is normally the birth or death of a certain king, but not always.
The ancient Egyptian solar calendar was started in what is our 4241 BCE on the Gregorian calendar. Yes in 4241 the Egyptians had a writing system and they were keeping track of the years and the sun so they could know when to plant and harvest.
According to most biblical types, Noah’s flood occurred around 2300-2400 BCE. In other words, about 400 years after the Egyptians build their first pyramid. What’s funny is the Egyptians didn’t know anything about the great flood of Noah as they just kept building their pyramids like nothing happened. They build their great pyramid of Khufu around 2500BCE and the last major pyramid was built around 1500BCE. They were writing hieroglyphics in 3200BCE all the way to the time of Alexander the Great. Same calendar, same writing system, same people (using archaeology and genetics from sequenced mummies), same pyramids before “Noah’s flood” and after… It’s like the flood never happened!
quote:
No offense, but you know the Bible like a democrat knows the constitution- only to twist it, as a means to get what you want.
bullshite. You know I know it well. And you know that I know the history of the Bible and early Christianity better than you and everyone else on this site.
It’s you guys who negotiate the text, who interpret it not on its original meaning in many cases, who make it say something it doesn’t. It’s your presupposition of univocality that drives your twisting of the text. You don’t even acknowledge the text in the first place is not even the same across all manuscripts and is often quite different.
When I point out that David killed Goliath when David was a boy, and that ElHanan also killed the exact same Goliath when David was old and decrepit, according to the two versions of the story, you’ll say I’m twisting the text. Absolute bullshite. I acknowledge what “the text” actually says and put it into its original context, while just like a filthy Democrat you do what you are guilty of and then try to claim I’m the one who did it.
quote:
They start with Genesis as allegory
Sure, it is a myth, a legend, a story. But that’s not what the Jews (not the Pharisees nor the Enochian Essenes) nor the Christians believed. The foundation of their entire religion is creationism and it is certainly what “Jesus” would have believed if he was a historical person.
quote:
The only thing that’s integral to Christianity is Christ
If everything surrounding Christ is made up myth, then why believe in Christ’s salvation being anything but a myth too?
quote:
Your affinity for Gnosticism is showing
I think you mean “Gnosis”.
ETA: just to be clear, I’m not calling you filthy, or a Democrat.
This post was edited on 3/4/25 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 3/4/25 at 5:47 pm to Squirrelmeister
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/4/25 at 6:53 pm
Posted on 3/4/25 at 5:49 pm to loogaroo
This is a Hank free thread.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 6:30 pm to loogaroo
This HAS to be violating a law of some sort. I mean, these are minors and the school is keeping this info from their guardians.
Oh wait, the law only applies to Americans. Libtards can do whatever they want.
Oh wait, the law only applies to Americans. Libtards can do whatever they want.
This post was edited on 3/4/25 at 6:31 pm
Posted on 3/4/25 at 6:52 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
They try to twist and bastardize known facts about evolution to fit their preconceived nonscientific beliefs about nature.
I don’t doubt that you can find some examples of this. There are many who use Christianity for personal enrichment. But I don’t think it’s reasonable to characterize every Christian scientist as continuously, knowingly engaging in deception. More accurately stated- this is how they interpret the evidence. Dr. James Tour comes to mind.
On the other hand, your side has quite a history of passing off outright lies as “facts” and then quietly (rarely, if at all) walking them back. The Miller/Urey experiment is another example.
quote:
Let’s believe God created kinds, and that when they got off the ark, the animals went into a hyper-evolution mode and turned into all the species of today.
You mean like this?
This example shows that reproductive isolation, which typically develops over hundreds of generations, can be established in only three.
You’re not gonna like this.
Answers in Genesis. In a post-flood scenario, speciation likely occurred in a relatively linear pattern. As animals spread from Ararat, new species would have emerged naturally as species moved away from each other and into varying habitats. The founder effect would have had a significant impact on these new populations. Variable alleles would have been uncommon in these original small populations. Due to genetic drift associated with the founder effect, fixed traits would have appeared quickly in populations, making them differentiate relatively easily. Each of these new populations likely could interbreed with their close relatives, at least in the beginning, resembling a peripatric model, except for both populations initially being small. As populations dispersed into new habitats, environmental pressures would fix even more traits, further diversifying the population until it either no longer could or no longer wished to regularly successfully interbreed with other related populations. Thus, in a very short space of time after Ararat, possibly only a few years for short-generation kinds, there would begin to be distinct species.
quote:
You are closely related to monkeys, lesser to dogs and deer, lesser still to kangaroos, lesser still to duck billed platypus, lesser still to chickens and ducks, lesser still to frogs and fish, and even still you are distantly related to bananas and watermelon and aspen trees.
You see these similarities as evidence for UCA. I see them as evidence of a common Creator.
quote:
So what? Ever heard of God of the Gaps fallacy?
There’s a difference between saying “God did it. No need to investigate further.” And, “God did it. Let’s try to figure out how.”
quote:
Even if we were to somehow show that some higher power that you might call a deity started life on this planet, it still wouldn’t make your Bible any more factual.
No, but it sure would wreck your foundation.
quote:
don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.
Uniformitarianism is a geological principle that suggests the same natural laws and processes that operate today have always operated in the past and will continue to do so in the future. It emphasizes that the present is the key to understanding the past, particularly in the context of Earth's geological history.
This is the assumption that your worldview hinges on. If you walk into a room, and find a candle already burning- can science determine when the candle was lit?
quote:
Quit saying I’m arguing from authority. The facts are the facts not because some guy says it’s true, but only if they are evidently true.
Prove it.
quote:
But also consider how the Chinese and Vietnamese also have calendars with the year 1 being way older than the alleged time of Noah’s flood
Same thing. I doubt they have calendar that is 10,000 years old. They just have a calendar, and a history, that claims to be 10,000 years old. I would bet that if you applied the same level of scrutiny to these claims, as you do Christianity, you’d have no choice but to dismiss them as false. But you don’t. You latch onto anything that supports your beliefs. Just. Like. Me. And. Foo.
quote:
The ancient Egyptian solar calendar was started in what is our 4241 BCE on the Gregorian calendar. Yes in 4241 the Egyptians had a writing system and they were keeping track of the years and the sun so they could know when to plant and harvest.
A calendar is not a writing system. The earliest known writing is Sumerian cuneiform from around 3500 BC.
quote:
According to most biblical types, Noah’s flood occurred around 2300-2400 BCE. In other words, about 400 years after the Egyptians build their first pyramid. What’s funny is the Egyptians didn’t know anything about the great flood of Noah as they just kept building their pyramids like nothing happened. They build their great pyramid of Khufu around 2500BCE and the last major pyramid was built around 1500BCE. They were writing hieroglyphics in 3200BCE all the way to the time of Alexander the Great. Same calendar, same writing system, same people (using archaeology and genetics from sequenced mummies), same pyramids before “Noah’s flood” and after… It’s like the flood never happened
When was the candle lit?
quote:
You know I know it well. And you know that I know the history of the Bible and early Christianity better than you and everyone else on this site.
Not really, no. You know how to use it for your own purposes, but you clearly don’t understand it.
quote:
The foundation of their entire religion is creationism and it is certainly what “Jesus” would have believed if he was a historical person.
Jesus did teach it, and I do believe it. While I think it’s possible that it’s allegorical, and that the truth it conveys is not necessarily dependent upon it being a literal, historical account of actual people and events, I do agree that abandoning the literal reading and denying its historicity can eventually lead to a compromised and impotent faith, and is often born out of a desire to neuter the rest of the Bible. So, in that regard, you are correct. It is foundational to the practice of Christianity. But, it is not a requirement for salvation.
quote:
If everything surrounding Christ is made up myth, then why believe in Christ’s salvation being anything but a myth too?
There’s more than enough evidence for the historicity of Christ’s life, death and resurrection. You just refuse to accept it and cling to fringe theories of book salesmen because it supports your preferred hypothesis.
quote:
I think you mean “Gnosis”
No. I was referring to your belief- not your knowledge.
quote:
ETA: just to be clear, I’m not calling you filthy, or a Democrat.
No worries, friend. It never crossed my mind.
This post was edited on 3/4/25 at 7:06 pm
Posted on 3/4/25 at 7:09 pm to Prodigal Son
quote:
I don’t think it’s reasonable to characterize every Christian scientist as continuously, knowingly engaging in deception
I don’t understand what this is. If one has presuppositions about reality based on myth and ignorance, and then attempts to “reinterpret” evidence away from known facts such that they reach their preconceived conclusions, rather than following the scientific method and seeing where it takes us, we can hardly call that type of person a scientist.
A “Christian scientist” is in the same boat with man putting on a dress claiming to be a woman.
quote:
On the other hand, your side has quite a history of passing off outright lies as “facts” and then quietly (rarely, if at all) walking them back
Irrelevant. None of the fakes like Piltdown Man change the scientific fact of evolution and common ancestors as explained by the theory of evolution.
Just like none of the fake Christian artifacts like Jesus’ foreskin and the Shroud of Turin in no way acts as evidence for or against your christian theology.
quote:
The Miller/Urey experiment
Also irrelevant. Why do you guys always want to equate biogenesis with evolution???
quote:
You mean like this? This example shows that reproductive isolation, which typically develops over hundreds of generations, can be established in only three.
That’s really cool.
And it’s irrelevant to the argument. Sure, there have been documented cases of quick speciation in hybridization. But we know that that type of speciation is not the only type nor it is the dominant type, and it’s very rare, hence the article.
But we know and can demonstrate how organisms evolved over millions of years. You must not be paying attention to anything I type with my thumbs.
quote:
In a post-flood scenario, speciation likely occurred in a relatively linear pattern
Conjecture not based on any evidence or reason.
quote:
As animals spread from Ararat,
They most certainly did not.
What did the koala eat while he was walking and swimming to get to Australia?
quote:
Thus, in a very short space of time after Ararat, possibly only a few years for short-generation kinds, there would begin to be distinct species.
Everything from that website is Excusagenics. They make up lies to rationalize and negotiate the bible so that their propaganda aligns with their dogma.
The dude has exhibits of cave men riding dinosaurs.
You really have to ignore all scientific fact to believe this crap. You have somehow hypnotized yourself into a state of cognitive dissonance.
We have a series of tens of thousand of years of unbroken genetics, writing systems, series of monuments constructed by successive dynasties in Egypt all while the “flood of Noah” was said to take place (around the time of construction of the great pyramid of Giza) and we have the same people with same language and same writing and building the same monuments all the way into the late Bronze Age, early Iron Age, and into the period where they were conquered by Alexander and Rome. None of that makes any sense to you? Do you understand what I am writing? Don’t take my word for it - look it up.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:01 pm to Prodigal Son
quote:
There’s a difference between saying “God did it. No need to investigate further.” And, “God did it. Let’s try to figure out how.”
Not really. Both presuppose God did it without evidence. The conclusion comes before the investigation.
quote:
Uniformitarianism is a geological principle that suggests the same natural laws and processes that operate today have always operated in the past and will continue to do so in the future. It emphasizes that the present is the key to understanding the past, particularly in the context of Earth's geological history. This is the assumption that your worldview hinges on. If you walk into a room, and find a candle already burning- can science determine when the candle was lit?
So you presuppose that matter and energy don’t behave the same now as they did a few thousand years ago? With no evidence. Then base your worldview on a bunch of malarkey?
quote:quote:Prove it.
Quit saying I’m arguing from authority. The facts are the facts not because some guy says it’s true, but only if they are evidently true.
If the fossil hominem species in the ground showing a progression to a more chimp-like species over millions of years doesn’t do it for you, I don’t know what will. From Homo Heidelbergensis to Homo Erectus to Homo Habilis to the Australopithecus species found in deeper and older rocks and on and on, if those aren’t the missing link, then nothing will convince you.
If the hieroglyphics and cuneiform tablets and people groups and mummies shows an unbroken lineage right through the supposed time of Noah’s flood and was proven by genetics and archaeological evidence to have been unaffected by the flood doesn’t do it for you, nothing will I guess.
You are incapable to understanding acknowledging scientific fact, not from a lack of intelligence, but of willful cognitive dissonance. I wish I could help you but it’s looking like I might not be able to.
quote:
Same thing. I doubt they have calendar that is 10,000 years old. They just have a calendar, and a history, that claims to be 10,000 years old. I would bet that if you applied the same level of scrutiny to these claims, as you do Christianity, you’d have no choice but to dismiss them as false. But you don’t. You latch onto anything that supports your beliefs. Just. Like. Me. And. Foo.
I’m not using the calendars as proof. I should have made that clear. It’s weak and circumstantial at best.
Did you see my notes on the trees verified to be over 5 and 10 thousand years old?
quote:
You know how to use it for your own purposes, but you clearly don’t understand it.
I understand it much better than you. Sorry. You presuppose univocality as a dogma. You use scripture to interpret scripture as part of your dogma. That’s a weakness on your part and you don’t know what the original authors meant. You take much of it out of context. I don’t. And I have the history and all the other Christian writings that didn’t make the cut under my belt and the Dead Sea scrolls too so I understand what was going on. You don’t.
quote:
So, in that regard, you are correct. It is foundational to the practice of Christianity. But, it is not a requirement for salvation.
Posted on 3/9/25 at 8:17 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
So you presuppose that matter and energy don’t behave the same now as they did a few thousand years ago?
That’s the theory, yes. The flood was a catastrophic event, that changed the atmospheric conditions of earth, which affected all life.
quote:
With no evidence?
We have a historical record- which in any other case, you would agree that a historical account is sufficient to base a hypothesis on. As far as evidence goes, we all have the same evidence. Interpretation will vary according to bias. Just because you refuse to accept any science conducted in an effort to prove a hypothesis that you disagree with- doesn’t affect its validity.
quote:
From Homo Heidelbergensi
quote:
Homo Habilis
quote:
Homo Erectus
You sure know your homos!
But seriously,
Homo Habilus is no bulletproof case. To say the least. A handful of bone fragments found in a pile. No two paleo anthropologists agree on which bones belong to what species. The only important thing to note here, is that you guys don’t change your mind (or the textbooks) in light of new discoveries (that challenge your presuppositions).
Heidelbergensis is no slam dunk, either.
Homo heidelbergensis was widely considered the most recent common ancestor of modern humans and Neanderthals, but this view has been increasingly disputed since the late 2010s
Home Erectus? Apparently there is a growing opinion among scientists that erectus was totally human. A study found that
A group of 202 modern Australian aborigines share an astonishing 14 of 17 homo erectus traits. The most recent evidence suggests that only a handful of traits separate these two presumed species of man, and even these are doubtful.
Lucy?- Not a human. All ape.
quote:
if those aren’t the missing link, then nothing will convince you.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. The vast majority of these “discoveries” are a handful of scattered bones/fragments, and a whole lot of imagination. A bunch of educated men, making educated guesses. Then passing that off as fact, because of muh current consensus.
quote:
If the hieroglyphics and cuneiform tablets
Simply a matter of dating. For one, some scholars believe that the flood may have been around 3500-5000bc. The oldest known cuneiform is from around 3500bc. I don’t know much about Egyptology, but everything I’ve read says the oldest known hieroglyphics are also from around 3500-4000bc. (Which is interesting, given a young earth view) Also, I don’t see any reason why some things like these couldn’t have survived the flood. And just because the Egyptians don’t mention the flood, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. In fact, just about every other ancient culture has a flood story that resembles that of Noah’s. That’s interesting, given the biblical relationship between the Jews and Egyptians. The God of Israel skull-dragged the entire Egyptian pantheon. They certainly would have had motive, as well as means, to erase this blemish from their history.
quote:
proven by genetics
You mean like the population bottleneck that proves that all people descended from one man and one woman? Mitochondrial Eve? Or how the genetic mutation rate suggests a human history of just thousands of years?
quote:
You are incapable to understanding acknowledging scientific fact, not from a lack of intelligence, but of willful cognitive dissonance
Because it’s not fact. It’s the inference to the best explanation. And it’s clearly biased.
quote:
Did you see my notes on the trees verified to be over 5 and 10 thousand years old?
Yes. It presupposes uniformitarianism. It makes an assumption about when the candle was lit.
quote:
I understand it (the Bible) much better than you. Sorry.
quote:
You presuppose univocality as a dogma.
Yes. And then I test that hypothesis thoroughly by investigating your claims otherwise, and coming to the same conclusion that Christians have come to for 2000 years: the 66 books, by 40+ authors, over a span of 1500 years- is one overarching meta narrative. I concede that copies are not necessarily inspired or inerrant. But I don’t see where any copyist error calls into question anything of theological significance.
quote:
You use scripture to interpret scripture as part of your dogma.
Guilty! Thanks for the compliment!
quote:
That’s a weakness on your part
How is it any different than you citing scholars and scientists?
quote:
you don’t know what the original authors meant
The irony.
That’s why we use scripture to interpret scripture. It’s a theological system of checks and balances, that is there to help guard against heresy. Anyone (ahem, you) can take small sections or single verses out of context, and derive all sorts of heretical views. I’m not claiming that it’s all cut and dry, simple. But, the information needed for salvation is accessible to all. quote:
You take much of it out of context. I don’t
I might get some things wrong, but your sole purpose for reading it is to try to disprove it. Unlike Islam, you can’t do that without taking it out of context. Your rigid ideology is incapable of tolerating a coherent scripture. To you, it’s not whether or not the Bible is true, it’s that it must not be true. quote:
And I have the history and all the other Christian writings that didn’t make the cut under my belt and the Dead Sea scrolls too so I understand what was going on. You don’t.
You cling to anything that relieves you of reckoning your impending judgement. Yazidis, aliens, gnostics, Egyptians, ancient Mesopotamian religions- anything and everything you can find to bolster your case. You put your blind faith in any academic source that confirms your presuppositions. Posted on 3/9/25 at 8:57 pm to Prodigal Son
quote:
That’s the theory, yes. The flood was a catastrophic event, that changed the atmospheric conditions of earth, which affected all life.
You are asserting as fact that which you have no evidence to support. You are clearly making up nonsense which has no basis in reality.
quote:
As far as evidence goes, we all have the same evidence. Interpretation will vary according to bias.
Sorry you can’t put two and two together because of your presuppositions, biases, and cognitive dissonance.
quote:
Lucy?- Not a human. All ape.
An upright walking ape, just like me and you. You are a chordate, a mammal, a placental, a primate, a monkey, an ape, a hominid, a hominem, and a homo.
quote:
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. The vast majority of these “discoveries” are a handful of scattered bones/fragments, and a whole lot of imagination
Yeah so how do the laws of physics change before the flood? You were just about to explain that.
quote:
The God of Israel skull-dragged the entire Egyptian pantheon
And he killed all those evil firstborn babies too!
quote:
You mean like the population bottleneck that proves that all people descended from one man and one woman?
You might want to read some legitimate papers on that topic.
quote:
Or how the genetic mutation rate suggests a human history of just thousands of years?
You better check your crystal ball again Jafar
Posted on 3/9/25 at 9:00 pm to loogaroo
UnReal!!!!!!! How can this happen?
the Northeast is a fricking DISASTER!!!!!!!!
the Northeast is a fricking DISASTER!!!!!!!!
Posted on 3/18/25 at 9:55 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
You are asserting as fact that which you have no evidence to support.
Lol. I’m not asserting that as fact. I literally said “theory.” I find it interesting, but whether it’s true or not has no bearing whatsoever on my relationship with God, or the fact that I have to go to work tomorrow.
quote:
Sorry you can’t put two and two together because of your presuppositions, biases, and cognitive dissonance.
Translation:”Sorry you can’t come to the same speculative conclusion that I have, because your presuppositions, biases, and cognitive dissonance differ from my own.”
I’m glad you said “putting two and two together.” 2+2=4, all day every day everywhere all the time. It can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Universal common ancestry can’t. You can make a compelling case, but you can’t prove it. Proofs exist only in mathematics and, interestingly, logic.
quote:
An upright walking ape, just like me and you
That’s quite the imagination you’ve got there.
quote:
You are a chordate, a mammal, a placental, a primate, a monkey, an ape, a hominid, a hominem, and a homo.
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
Taxonomy doesn’t prove common ancestry. It provides the same framework for belief in a common Designer as it does for a common ancestor.
quote:
Yeah so how do the laws of physics change before the flood? You were just about to explain that.
I lean towards the theory that it changed after the flood. I think the water vapor canopy theories are interesting, though I know they have serious heat problems.
quote:
And he killed all those evil firstborn babies too!
Is that objectively wrong?
quote:
You might want to read some legitimate papers on that topic.
live science.com..
Modern men's genes suggest that something peculiar happened 5,000 to 7,000 years ago: Most of the male population across Asia, Europe and Africa seems to have died off, leaving behind just one man for every 17 women.
This so-called population "bottleneck" was first proposed in 2015, and since then, researchers have been trying to figure out what could've caused it.
One hypothesis held…
…while another idea suggested…
Now, a new paper,
…published… May 25 in the journal Nature Communications, offers yet another explanation
… might have…
That ratio of 17 females for every one male "struck us as being very extreme, and there must be another explanation,"
Nobody knows, but they know it can’t be God. How is it any different for you to cite science as proof that scientific materialism is true, than it is for me to quote scripture, or theology?
Posted on 3/19/25 at 7:34 am to Prodigal Son
quote:
I’m not asserting that as fact. I literally said “theory.”
You are careful to talk about proofs only in mathematics but when you say “theory” in relationship to scientific observation you misuse the word “theory”. A “theory” is an explanation of a body of scientific facts. Maybe you should use the word “hypothesis” if that’s what you mean.
quote:
Translation:”Sorry you can’t come to the same speculative conclusion that I have, because your presuppositions, biases, and cognitive dissonance differ from my own.”
Facts don’t care about Prodigal Son’s feelings or desires for make believe to be true. There is no speculation on the general premise of the theory of biological evolution and common ancestry of all known life on earth - that is scientific fact. Sorry.
quote:
That’s quite the imagination you’ve got there.
Sure, Jan. Why don’t you post some skulls of Australopithecus Afarensis, Homo Habilis, and Homo Erectus.
quote:
Taxonomy doesn’t prove common ancestry
Make up your mind on proofs belonging in mathematics. Taxonomy is but one of the many pieces of evidence supporting the overwhelming preponderance of evidence as explained by the theory of biological evolution of species.
quote:
just one man for every 17 women
Sounds like some Brigham Young type stuff there.
This post was edited on 3/19/25 at 7:40 am
Posted on 3/21/25 at 12:46 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
You are careful to talk about proofs only in mathematics but when you say “theory” in relationship to scientific observation you misuse the word “theory”. A “theory” is an explanation of a body of scientific facts. Maybe you should use the word “hypothesis” if that’s what you mean
Fair point. Yes, I mean hypothesis.
quote:
Facts don’t care about Prodigal Son’s feelings
Agreed. Nor do they care about yours. It’s interesting that atheists always say this- as though it is only applicable to theists. What’s more comforting- having to account for your life before a perfect and holy God, or the sweet bliss of ceasing to exist? I think it’s obvious that the atheist position is a much more comfortable position (in life) than that of the theist. As they say, ignorance is bliss.
quote:
There is no speculation on the general premise of the theory of biological evolution and common ancestry of all known life on earth
Sure there is. First, it speculates that the material world is all that exists. It speculates that nothing created everything, and that life spontaneously evolved from non-living materials in a cosmic accident. I know you’ll say that we’re not talking about the origin of life, but the primordial ooze theory (hypothesis?) is still taught in textbooks, and is the necessary precursor to UCA. The very foundation of all of your precious scientific facts, rests upon the belief (speculation) that there is no God. You see apparent design in biology, and speculate that it’s an illusion. You see similarities between apes and humans, and speculate that there must be a common ancestor instead of a common Creator. You see deformities and imperfections in life and nature, and speculatively attribute them random, undirected natural processes- rather than attribute them to the results of a fallen creation.
quote:
Sure, Jan. Why don’t you post some skulls of Australopithecus Afarensis, Homo Habilis, and Homo Erectus.
Has science shown that we evolved from ape-like creatures?
When the human-like members of our genus Homo appear, they do so abruptly. A paper in the Journal of Molecular Biology and Evolution called the appearance of Homo sapiens “a genetic revolution” in which “no australopithecine species is obviously transitional.”16 In a 2004 book, the famed evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr explained that “the earliest fossils of Homo, Homo rudolfensis and Homo erectus are separated from Australopithecus by a large, unbridged gap” without “any fossils that can serve as missing links.”17
The lack of fossil evidence for this hypothesized evolutionary transition was confirmed by three Harvard paleoanthropologists, who wrote:
“Of the various transitions that occurred during human evolution, the transition from Australopithecus to Homo was undoubtedly one of the most critical in its magnitude and consequences. As with many key evolutionary events, there is both good and bad news. First, the bad news is that many details of this transition are obscure because of the paucity of the fossil and archaeological records.”
And the good news? “Although we lack many details about exactly how, when, and where the transition occurred from Australopithecus to Homo,” the three went on, “we have sufficient data from before and after the transition to make some inferences about the overall nature of key changes that did occur.”19
In other words, the fossil record provides us with ape-like australopithecines (“before”) and human-like Homo (“after”), but not with fossils documenting a transition between them. In the absence of intermediaries, we’re left with “inferences” of a transition based strictly upon the assumption of Darwinian evolution. No wonder one commentator argued that if we take the fossil evidence at face value, it implies a “big bang theory” of the appearance of our genus Homo.20
Question: If literally all life is the result of one life form transitioning into another- why is the earth not littered with millions of transitional fossils?
quote:
Make up your mind on proofs belonging in mathematics
Mathematics and logic.
quote:
Taxonomy is but one of the many pieces of evidence supporting the overwhelming preponderance of evidence as explained by the theory of biological evolution of species.
Provide your best example and let’s discuss.
quote:
Sounds like some Brigham Young type stuff there.
Clever deflection. Funny though.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 12:50 pm to SOSFAN
quote:
Glad I don't live in Maine because I would be doing life.
Everyone in Maine is doing life, California and New York too.
Posted on 3/21/25 at 11:07 pm to Prodigal Son
quote:
What’s more comforting- having to account for your life before a perfect
Perfect god who ruined his creation and humanity because he put a juicy steak on the coffee table and told his cockapoo sitting on the couch not to eat it when he went grab another beer? Perfect god with a perfect plan who had to kill everyone to restart creation? Perfect god who couldn’t just forgive the imperfect beings he created so he had to kill himself as a sacrifice to himself to appease himself? I’m not buying what you’re selling.
quote:
What’s more comforting
Irrelevant. I’m not going to lie to myself and believe in fantasy because it is more comfortable. The facts are what the evidence shows them to be.
quote:
The very foundation of all of your precious scientific facts, rests upon the belief (speculation) that there is no God.
There can be a god or many gods. It’s irrelevant. The facts are the facts. The god and gods in the Bible are all obviously fantasy.
quote:
You see apparent design in biology, and speculate that it’s an illusion
You never understood Dawkins’ quote. The illusion is to people like you who are uneducated on the subject matter. Apparent design is only apparent to you, not to anyone who’s studied biology.
quote:
First, it speculates that the material world is all that exists
I think you are trying to say I only believe in things that can be shown and demonstrated to be factual based on the preponderance of evidence. Thanks, I guess.
quote:
Has science shown that we evolved from ape-like creatures?
Do you realize you are posting articles from a website that is a pseudoscience-based joke?
quote:
When the human-like members of our genus Homo appear, they do so abruptly
No, they don’t. They appear just about identical from the neck down to Australopithecus Afarensis but with slightly larger craniums and 50% more brain volume and slightly less protruding jaws and smaller teeth. It’s what actual scientists call Homo Habilis. And this Homo - the first species our genus - lived alongside other Australopithecus and Paranthropus species in Africa for millions of years. In fact, Many legitimate scientists can’t even agree whether Habilis should be lumped into the Australopithecus or the Homo genus.
quote:
Ernst Mayr explained that “the earliest fossils of Homo, Homo rudolfensis and Homo erectus are separated from Australopithecus by a large, unbridged gap” without “any fossils that can serve as missing links.”
Complete nonsense. Homo Habilis is the most commonly attributed bridge between the Homo species and the Australopithecine species.
quote:
In other words, the fossil record provides us with ape-like australopithecines (“before”) and human-like Homo (“after”), but not with fossils documenting a transition between them. In the absence of intermediaries, we’re left with “inferences” of a transition based strictly upon the assumption of Darwinian evolution.
Sorry but this is complete stupidity from cognitive dissonance. And there’s more to evolution than fossils - comparative anatomy, genetics, etc.
quote:
Question: If literally all life is the result of one life form transitioning into another- why is the earth not littered with millions of transitional fossils?
Giant list of fossils of transitional species
Posted on 3/22/25 at 9:33 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
Perfect god who ruined his creation
Lol. You might want to reserve your judgment for the finished product. I’d bet the farm that you’ll be singing a different tune on judgement day.
quote:
Irrelevant. I’m not going to lie to myself and believe in fantasy because it is more comfortable.
Absolutely relevant. I think you’re missing the point. Intentionally.
quote:
The god and gods in the Bible are all obviously fantasy.
Not Jesus.
quote:
You never understood Dawkins’ quote. The illusion is to people like you who are uneducated on the subject matter. Apparent design is only apparent to you, not to anyone who’s studied biology.
Lol. Ok buddy.
quote:
I think you are trying to say I only believe in things that can be shown and demonstrated to be factual based on the preponderance of evidence. Thanks, I guess.
No, I’m saying that you’re saying that the physical world is all that exists. Do you love your children? How much does it weigh? How many units of love do you have? Where do you keep it? What about logic? Where is it on the periodic table of elements? What about the laws of nature and mathematics? Did we create them or discover them? Are they physical? No. But, somehow they describe and govern the physical world. Hmmm.
quote:
Do you realize you are posting articles from a website that is a pseudoscience-based joke?
About the author
Casey Luskin is a scientist and an attorney with graduate degrees in science and law
He holds a PhD in Geology from the University of Johannesburg where he specialized in paleomagnetism and the early plate tectonic history of South Africa.
His B.S. and M.S. degrees in Earth Sciences are from the University of California, San Diego, where he studied evolution extensively at the graduate and undergraduate levels, and conducted geological research at Scripps Institution for Oceanography
And he’s citing references from secular sources (and Christian sources). Their group of fellows is highly credentialed. These are not quack grifters. They are highly educated, highly intelligent individuals who use the same scientific method to come to different conclusions, because they start with a different hypothesis. Your insults carry no weight. They are nothing more than a conditioned response from an intolerant worldview. With all due respect, obviously. Just my opinion.
quote:
No, they don’t
Yes, they did.
New study suggests big bang theory of human evolution
The first members of early Homo sapiens are really quite distinct from their australopithecine predecessors and contemporaries
Gee, that seems to be the opposite of what you said.
Two million years ago somewhere in Africa, a small group of individuals became separated from other australopithecines. This population bottleneck led to a series of sudden, interrelated changes—in body size, brain size, skeletal proportions, and behavior—that jump-started the evolution of our species.
Wow- population bottleneck? Where have I heard that before? Sudden, interrelated changes? That sounds like rapid evolution- not slow, gradual, undirected change over millions of years. Jump-starting the evolution?
I’ve never heard a better argument for design than that! All this from the University of Michigan- not some creationist website. quote:
Many legitimate scientists can’t even agree
That’s the most intellectually honest thing you’ve said in a while.
quote:
Complete nonsense. Homo Habilis is the most commonly attributed bridge between the Homo species and the Australopithecine species.
Take that up with Ernst Mayr. I’m just telling you what he said:
“the earliest fossils of Homo, Homo rudolfensis and Homo erectus are separated from Australopithecus by a large, unbridged gap” without “any fossils that can serve as missing links.”
Your attack on Ernst Mayr, and any scientist who challenges the current paradigm, is a mirror image of the way democrats eat their own when one steps off the reservation/plantation. It’s uncanny. It’s like an uncontrollable reflex.
quote:
Sorry but this is complete stupidity from cognitive dissonance.
Oh look- you did it again. Don’t tell me it’s stupidity- tell me why it’s stupidity. Engage the material, instead of relying on the logical fallacy of dismissing it because you don’t like the source.
quote:
And there’s more to evolution than fossils - comparative anatomy, genetics, etc.
Ok. Show me how any of these eliminates God as a hypothesis. Show me how comparative anatomy could only be explained by UCA, and is not even remotely possible to be explained by a Universal Common Designer. Show me how Y chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve couldn’t in any way be affirming of the biblical concept of Adam and Eve.
I guess what I’m saying is, show me something that has no other possible explanation- like 2+2=4, or how two competing truth claims cannot both be true- and I’ll relent. At least until I find a logically coherent workaround.
quote:
Giant list of fossils of transitional species
The link did not work for me. But I know- archaeopteryx, tiktaalik, etc. I’m just saying that it, at some point, requires belief- in the absence of firsthand knowledge. That doesn’t mean that you’re wrong. It doesn’t mean that I’m right. It just means what it means- that belief exists in the absence of proof. Regardless of the subject. Atheism is a belief.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News