- 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: Study: All Humanity Comes From One Couple.................... You don't say
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:26 pm to Jjdoc
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:26 pm to Jjdoc
There's no contextual evidence that I believe in a gas ball moon in comparison to your attempting to convince a coworker of the literalism of Genesis.
It's not a personal attack to make a logical inference.
quote:
My response was God started with light. He would not accept that. Why? Because I am not allowed to start at that verse, I had to start at the first verse. In the beginning God created..... to him that was an act of creation. But it's not. It's to say "once up on a time God created".... then it breaks down the acts and in orde
It's not a personal attack to make a logical inference.
1
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:27 pm to Yak
quote:
I am saying that you have no argument - period
I do. My argument is that this study helps confirm other studies on this topic.
As I stated.... nothing more... nothing less.
It's people like you who have taken this very personal. It lead you to make claims about what I have not said in fact.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:34 pm to Jjdoc
quote:No, it's not. If that was the case then the below...
I do. My argument is that this study helps confirm other studies on this topic.
quote:Is not true when you throw in your Nuclear Physicist friend and infer biblical references, and also saying the "God did it" was truth.
As I stated.... nothing more... nothing less.
quote:If you think I am taking this personal then
It's people like you who have taken this very personal. It lead you to make claims about what I have not said in fact.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:35 pm to dawgfan24348
quote:
you trust a 2000 year old book over science
Why cant he trust both?
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:37 pm to Logician
quote:
I consistently believe in a legitimate scientific approach, not when it's suddenly convenient.
If you believe in God, you do not believe in a scientific approach.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:39 pm to blackrose890
quote:
There's no contextual evidence that I believe in a gas ball moon in comparison to your attempting to convince a coworker of the literalism of Genesis.
There is no contextual evidence that I stated anything about a young earth. Yet here you are tKing liberty. You are guilty of your own accusations.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:42 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
There is no contextual evidence that I stated anything about a young earth. Yet here you are tKing liberty. You are guilty of your own accusations.
I'm accusing you of literalism, but I asked if you were a subscriber to the Hovind brand of literalism. You are once again proving incapable of making an apples-apples comparison.
This post was edited on 11/27/18 at 2:43 pm
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:45 pm to Yak
quote:
quote:
I do. My argument is that this study helps confirm other studies on this topic.
No, it's not. If that was the case then the below..
Sure it is. It's not my fault you cant accept that.
quote:
Is not true when you throw in your Nuclear Physicist friend and infer biblical references, and also saying the "God did it" was truth.
How are those things at odds in your mind? Don't forget to add the context.
This post was edited on 11/27/18 at 2:50 pm
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:49 pm to blackrose890
quote:
'm accusing you of literalism
I have answered that question. Is there another way for you to get the answer outside of me says parts are literal and some speak from a poetic view?
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:49 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
I do. My argument is that this study helps confirm other studies on this topic.
As I stated.... nothing more... nothing less.
It's people like you who have taken this very personal. It lead you to make claims about what I have not said in fact.
"Until this study, it was fantasy that we came from one couple"
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:52 pm to Jjdoc
Adam and Eve? God fundamentalists are dumb. If Noah's flood occurred how could you trace that back through a bottle neck of 8 people? You can't, no telling what's wrong with that study. Or perhaps the study is fine it's the idiots trying to suggest it says something more than it does.
And you would expect something like this through evolution. Humans have 46 chromosomes and the great apes have 48. Humans and the great apes share a common ancestor. But how? 46 vs. 48... Human chromosome #18 is the result of merging two great ape chromosomes. Having offspring with this genetic mutation would have caused a genetic reproductive barrier between those offspring and the rest of the great apes. It would manifest itself in the same way as that article described, we'd all share the same genetic lineage.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:53 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
I have answered that question. Is there another way for you to get the answer outside of me says parts are literal and some speak from a poetic view?
Which means it was settled (you didn't explicitly state anything btw), but your response was to make an accusation based on no evidence in return.
So it goes to the task at hand. The paper does not make the conclusion of a single breeding pair being the origin of the human species 100k-200k years ago.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:53 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
If you believe in God, you do not believe in a scientific approach.
Why is that? Are you saying God couldn't have created the universe like scientists believe it was created.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:54 pm to Esquire
quote:
Why is that? Are you saying God couldn't have created the universe like scientists believe it was created.
That's a fun discussion, but not one that can get anywhere just on the basis of lack of evidence for or against.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:55 pm to Esquire
quote:
Why is that? Are you saying God couldn't have created the universe like scientists believe it was created.
God did it = magic.
Science =/= magic.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:56 pm to blackrose890
quote:That's kind of what I gathered from it as well
So it goes to the task at hand. The paper does not make the conclusion of a single breeding pair being the origin of the human species 100k-200k years ago.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:58 pm to Azkiger
quote:
God did it = magic
Why can't it be God created the universe via the Bing Bang?
Posted on 11/27/18 at 2:59 pm to Yak
quote:
That's kind of what I gathered from it as well
Not to mention we have no evidence of a bottleneck causing massive death of humans in that time frame either, if he prefers the idea of Noah vs Adam/Eve.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 3:02 pm to Esquire
quote:
Why can't it be God created the universe via the Bing Bang?
The big band didn't create the universe, it just explains how the universe came to be the way it is today.
Posted on 11/27/18 at 3:03 pm to Esquire
quote:Well I'm pretty sure God wasn't going to wait 13 billion years to finally create Adam and Eve
Why can't it be God created the universe via the Bing Bang?
This post was edited on 11/27/18 at 3:04 pm
Page 10 of 24
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News