Explaining Evolution And Why GOD is NOT LIKELY

TunerAddict

Starter
The main problem is that the gospels are man-made. This is why they contradict each other all the time. Therefore predictions are utterly pointless overall. Furthermore, you always refer to TRANSLATIONS of the bible. And there are so many -- and so many different ones -- that you can proof anything you want. If there were a devil, even he could quote the bible.

Owned.....
 

KnicksFan4Realz

Benchwarmer
Jesus said by this all will know you are my disciples (meaning true Christian) If you have love amongst yourselves. He also said, those doing the will of his father are favored by him. By your estimation, do ALL CHRISTIANS have love amongst themselves? Did you know that 24 of the 27 nations at war in ww1, were supposed Christian nations. Christians, killing Christians in effect. Is that showing love amongst themselves?

He also said not everyone saying to me Lord, Lord will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens. So even Jesus knew that there would be people who claim to be Christian, and those who prove they are by adhering to living how Jehovah says we should.

SO NO!!! NOT EVERYONE WHO SAYS IM CHRISTIAN IS IN FACT SUCH.


No one in the world would ever make me believe personally that EVERY SINGLE SCIENTISTS MAKES WEAPONS. That is an absurd gesture.


But for you to say science as a whole is for the betterment of mankind, that simply is a fallacy. Just like I well know that every religion saying they are for the betterment of mankind really proves otherswise by action. I have never lumped all scientists as individuals into a box. But you have said that science as in all of it, is for the betterment of mankind. That is not true in any facet. Sorry.




Does not bother me if they are armed. Jehovah said the earth will stand forever. If they start dropping warheads, that will be a lie, because the earth and all life on it will be a goner. And that is not Jehovah's purpose. And he always fulfills his purposes. But you don't believe in Jehovah, so what source are you trusting that most are de-armed? And a better question, why would you trust that source?

Why would people who come from monkies have or care about principles? That would also imply that those with the weapons care about principle. And obviously, you're not paying attention because this country is very concerned with Irans intentions to make them. Why? Everyone should have them since it's a threat that won't become reality based on M.A.D

False religion yes. Religion how Jehovah intended is a far cry from any religion outside of it. Not even close. It reveals truths. All day long.



He cured individuals. And he did it to show he could on a small scale, so when he becomes King in heaven,(which he has become for quite awhile now) he can do it on a grand scale(earthwide). That sounds reasonable to me. He basically gave a sample for proof it can be done.

And where did you read he cured someone with his urine? I missed that.

24/27 Christian nations went to war during WWI..you say...I'm not going to fact check that for the moment...but assuming that's correct...THANK YOU FOR PROVING MY POINT ABOUT RELIGION!!!

No saying that there will people that call unto Jesus means...even if you're devout in your faith, you got a chance of being assed out at the Pearly Gates. Dead and mother****ers still can't get into the club...THAT'S FUNNY.

The warheads are not armed. Most nations have deactivated their nuclear arsenals. The two largest being USA, and former USSR. You got a better chance of dying plugging in your toaster than the threat of nuclear war.

At the end of the day the positive advancements science completely and utterly outweigh the benefits of any/all religions on this planet earth. What achievements has religion accomplished?

From science we have...

This computer
Cars
Manufacturing
Medicines
DVD's
Breast Implants
PS3
Jack Daniels


I could go on and on...about the great things science has done for mankind.

Let's see religion...hmm...

Wars of idiocy
Homophobia
Incest
Rape
Racism
Genocide
Holy War
Torture
Insanity
Slavery
Women regarded as 2nd class human beings
Destruction of many African and Latin American/ Native American cultures
Destruction of Black Americans

The earth is not going to stand forever going to collapse into the sun in 500 million years due to the sun finally running out of hydrogen fuel...throwing off the orbit pulling the earth into it when the Sun turns into a red dwarf star. So Jehvoah lied. And if you're Jehovah is right that the earth will stand forever...us dropping nuclear warheads....the earth should be perfectly fine...the fact it wouldn't is another example..of your GOD being a LIAR.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
The Department of Energy
International Atomic Energy Commission
The UN Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Are my 4 sources of information as the validity of nuke's being disarmed.

What's your source for Jehovah? One book..and no one even knows the author real identity.

Hmm...let me think which one has more credibility.

The reason people are so concerned about Iran having a nuclear program is because of RELIGION. If they weren't the fanatical **** nuts...like you people...we wouldn't have to worry about them. See these folks actually believe in Revelation prophecy alot more than you do, and they are too crazy and too fanatical with their religion...to be trusted with such a device. If it wasn't for religion...they would not be as crazy and radical as they are. So until they stop being all radical and shit...they can't be trusted. Kind of like taking a BB gun away from a kid who can't resist shooting out windows. He's just not using it responsibly.

Your GOD is just as made up as Anglicans, Evangelicals, Methodists, Baptists, Lutherans, Calvanists, Protestants, Catholics, and Mormons.

Are you going to say that all these Christian groups are FAKE? When they are just as devout?

NOW THAT'S ****ING HYPOCRISY.

U know it's cute when a 5 year old rambles about their imaginary friend...it's a shame when you still do it at 25.

Wait I take it back...you gave us one thing...CHAMPAGNE...invented by monks. And entertainment.

So why didn't your Jesus cure everyone? What he was too busy to go further out into the valley that day?
 

KnicksFan4Realz

Benchwarmer
Jesus said by this all will know you are my disciples (meaning true Christian) If you have love amongst yourselves. He also said, those doing the will of his father are favored by him. By your estimation, do ALL CHRISTIANS have love amongst themselves? Did you know that 24 of the 27 nations at war in ww1, were supposed Christian nations. Christians, killing Christians in effect. Is that showing love amongst themselves?

He also said not everyone saying to me Lord, Lord will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens. So even Jesus knew that there would be people who claim to be Christian, and those who prove they are by adhering to living how Jehovah says we should.

SO NO!!! NOT EVERYONE WHO SAYS IM CHRISTIAN IS IN FACT SUCH.

No one in the world would ever make me believe personally that EVERY SINGLE SCIENTISTS MAKES WEAPONS. That is an absurd gesture.


But for you to say science as a whole is for the betterment of mankind, that simply is a fallacy. Just like I well know that every religion saying they are for the betterment of mankind really proves otherswise by action. I have never lumped all scientists as individuals into a box. But you have said that science as in all of it, is for the betterment of mankind. That is not true in any facet. Sorry.




Does not bother me if they are armed. Jehovah said the earth will stand forever. If they start dropping warheads, that will be a lie, because the earth and all life on it will be a goner. And that is not Jehovah's purpose. And he always fulfills his purposes. But you don't believe in Jehovah, so what source are you trusting that most are de-armed? And a better question, why would you trust that source?

Why would people who come from monkies have or care about principles? That would also imply that those with the weapons care about principle. And obviously, you're not paying attention because this country is very concerned with Irans intentions to make them. Why? Everyone should have them since it's a threat that won't become reality based on M.A.D

False religion yes. Religion how Jehovah intended is a far cry from any religion outside of it. Not even close. It reveals truths. All day long.



He cured individuals. And he did it to show he could on a small scale, so when he becomes King in heaven,(which he has become for quite awhile now) he can do it on a grand scale(earthwide). That sounds reasonable to me. He basically gave a sample for proof it can be done.

And where did you read he cured someone with his urine? I missed that.

The main problem is that the gospels are man-made. This is why they contradict each other all the time. Therefore predictions are utterly pointless overall. Furthermore, you always refer to TRANSLATIONS of the bible. And there are so many -- and so many different ones -- that you can proof anything you want. If there were a devil, even he could quote the bible.


If the Gospels are made up...wouldn't that all mean so to is Jesus? As well as GOD?
 
First off you said to make an argument using the Bible you have to take everything in context, but the problem with you is that you take quotes out of context.

Lets start off with your continued argument about the destruction of the earth. Go back to the flood sir, it was the same scenerio, instead God used water, this time he will use fire as is quoted in Scripture. Your argument by using Proverbs 2:21-22 is not about the end times! You once again took these two quotes out of context and misinterpreted it(classic cultic behavior). If you read the quotes before and after that it talks about knowledge, wisdom, and understanding of the Bible and the consequences for not knowing it. Proverbs chapter 2, talks about right from wrong, not the end times. This is an explanation of righteoues men and wicked men in general. Verse 21 says that if you are righteoues, you will stay on the earth, you will be given days added to your life and live longer on the Earth. Verse 22 says if you are not righteous that God will snatch you from the Earth, meaning if you are evil and remain a sinner, your days will be cut off. Its very simple.
Is really me taking these quotes out of context, or could it be you not understanding the bible as it explains itself? You became quite the philosopher in explaining from your viewpoint what those verses mean. Thing is, that is not needed, the bible explains itself.

We'll start here for the last time. God said once.
Isaiah 55:11 so my word that goes forth from my mouth will prove to be. It will not return to me without results, but it will certainly do that in which I have delighted, and it will have certain success in that for which I have sent it.

This verse is signifying clearly that whatever God purposes, must and will indeed come to fruition. HAS TO HAPPEN! I would hope that is indisputable.

If that is indisputable, then this also must happen.

Isa 45:18 For this is what Jehovah has said, the Creator of the heavens, He the [true] God, the Former of the earth and the Maker of it, He the One who firmly established it, who did not create it simply for nothing, who formed it even to be inhabited: ?I am Jehovah, and there is no one else.

You claimed once that I took this out of context and this refered to the "NEW EARTH". But how could you possibly get that this refers to a brand new rebuilt earth from this verse? You'd have to be a serious spin doctor to do so. There is only one earth that has already been established, and that is this one. There is already one earth that has been created, and again, it is this one. There is only one earth that has been inhabited, and that is this one. And if Jehovah blows this earth up, then in fact he has strayed away from his purpose to have it inhabited. Meaning that he INDEED WOULD HAVE CREATED IT SIMPLY FOR NOTHING. He says he cannot stray away from his purpose, he must indeed do as he set out to do, and that would mean to have this very earth we live on inhabited forever.

Now in light of what was just brought out, do the ensuing verses agree with your viewpoint, or another?

Ecc 1:4 4 A generation is going, and a generation is coming; but the earth is standing even to time indefinite

psalms 37:9 For evildoers themselves will be cut off,
But those hoping in Jehovah are the ones that will possess the earth.
10 And just a little while longer, and the wicked one will be no more;
And you will certainly give attention to his place, and he will not be.
11 But the meek ones themselves will possess the earth,
And they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace.

Staying in psalms 37:
28 For Jehovah is a lover of justice,
And he will not leave his loyal ones.
To time indefinite they will certainly be guarded;
But as for the offspring of the wicked ones, they will indeed be cut off.
29 The righteous themselves will possess the earth,
And they will reside forever upon it.

and psalms 37:34 Hope in Jehovah and keep his way,
And he will exalt you to take possession of the earth.
When the wicked ones are cut off, you will see [it].

In fact, God has already given us an example of the wicked being cut off and the righteous taking possesion of the earth with NOAH. God did not destroy the earth, or any stars or other universes or planets when he flooded the earth, but he did destroy the world of ungodly men at that time, while preserving the righteous over to possess the earth.

If that is not an example of the wicked being cut off while the righteous possess the earth, I don't know what is. Jesus and Peter both compared the end of our world in the same way as Noah's day, God ridding the earth of ungodly men, while preserving the righteous over.

It is a recurring theme that smacks you in the face. Some just choose to ignore it anyway.

Bottom line is, the earth being here forever, and righteous people living in it has always been God's plan from Jump. If Adam and Eve had never sinned, common logic indicates they would still be alive to this very day. God said they would only die if they ate from the tree. So had they never eaten from it, there would be no reason for them to die at all, hence, they'd still be here , on this very earth, continuing to live. Very easy.

If God blows up the earth, instead of allowing righteous people to live here forever which was his original plan, than he lied when he said in Isaiah 55:11 that his purposes will have the result that he sent it out for. Point blank.






You then talked about John 17:14-16 and then said,
Your Question and statement: When Jesus was ressurected, who saw him, his disciples, or the rest of the world?
His disciples!

My Answer: Sir Mathew 27:52-56 and 1 Corinthians 15:4-8 just destroyed the herecy which you wrote concerning post-resurrection eye witnesses. Read these versus and learn. Your eternity depends on it.
Like I said, the rest of the WORLD did not see Jesus during his ressurection. Cephas, and the rest were all his disciples. And Jesus said even though his disciples live in the world, they are no part of it. So in that sense to Jesus, and his disciples, he revealed himself again to them, and not the world.

Now about mathew 27:52-56

"THE earth quaked, and the rock-masses were split. And the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons, coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people." (Matthew 27:51-53) Catholic scholar Karl Staab calls this event that occurred at Jesus? death "most mysterious." What happened?

Epiphanius and other early Church Fathers taught that the holy ones literally came to life and went with the resurrected Jesus to heaven. Augustine, Theophylactus, and Zigabenus believed that these dead ones received a temporary resurrection but later returned to their tombs. The latter opinion, however, "did not gain wide recognition," comments scholar Erich Fascher. When rendering Matthew 27:52, 53, many modern Bible translations give the impression that a resurrection took place. Not so the New World Translation, which points to the effects of an earthquake. Why?

First, whoever "the holy ones" were, Matthew did not say they were raised up. He said their bodies, or corpses, were. Second, he did not say these bodies came to life. He said they were raised up, and the Greek verb e?gei?ro, meaning to "raise up," does not always refer to a resurrection. It can, among other things, also mean to "lift out" from a pit or to "get up" from the ground. (Matthew 12:11; 17:7; Luke 1:69) The upheaval at Jesus? death opened tombs, tossing lifeless bodies into the open. Such occurrences during earthquakes were reported in the second century C.E. by Greek writer Aelius Aristides and more recently, in 1962, in Colombia.
This view of the event harmonizes with Bible teachings. In 1 Corinthians chapter 15, the apostle Paul gives convincing proof of the resurrection, but he completely ignores Matthew 27:52, 53. So do all other Bible writers. (Acts 2:32, 34) The corpses raised up at Jesus? death could not have come to life in the way Epiphanius thought, for on the third day thereafter, Jesus became "the firstborn from the dead." (Colossians 1:18) Anointed Christians, also called "holy ones," were promised a share in the first resurrection during Christ?s presence, not in the first century.?1 Thessalonians 3:13; 4:14-17.

Most Bible commentators have difficulty explaining verse 53, although several of them suggest that verse 52 describes the opening of tombs by the earthquake and the exposing of newly buried corpses. For example, German scholar Theobald Daechsel gives the following translation: "And tombs opened up, and many corpses of saints laying at rest were lifted up."
Who were those that "entered into the holy city" a considerable time later, namely after Jesus had been resurrected? As seen above, the exposed bodies remained lifeless, so Matthew must refer to persons who visited the tombs and brought news of the event into Jerusalem. Thus, the rendering of the New World Translation deepens Bible understanding and does not confuse readers concerning the resurrection.


Your question:DO YOU RECOGNIZE JEHOVAH AS THE ONLY TRUE GOD AS JESUS DOES HERE?
My Answer: Carefully read John 17:3 and many similar versus. When studying the Greek construction were "the" placed before a noun, followed by "and" makes the verse equal in equality. For example in Titus 1:4 states".....grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our savior."
Notice "the" before the Father followed by "and" will make the verse translate that the Father is equal to Christ Jesus. Therefore, the Father is equal to Jesus. In John 17:3".....'the' ony true God and Jesus Christ", means Jesus is God. Don't forget the Bible says study to show thyself approved and rightly divide the word.
Now we need to read english, as if it is greek? It is translated into english to come as closely as possible to the orginal language, for us to understand it in OURS. That is a pretty weak argument really.

And even more so because Jesus said YOU. Jesus could have said WE, OR US. He said YOU! If I say I'm talking to YOU, would you think I was saying I'm talking to a person besides YOU? What it appears here is, you need to inject philosophy into you argument, instead of letting God's word mean what it mean. If Jesus meant to say he was God, he would have blatantly said it. He had no issue at all in saying he was the son of God. So if he was God, he would have done the same.

Jesus was simply saying that his Father, Jehovah is the only true God in existence.



Your statement:but in the next breath say you have an immortal soul that survives life after your flesh dies? To be resurrected you have to DIE. ALL OF YOU. If some part of you lives, then that makes a resurrection null and void, because YOU'RE NOT DEAD.
My answer: The apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:51-52 states, "Behold I tell you a mystery, we shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed. in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed." When a believer sleeps, it means he dies. Paul says that there will be a time were "we shall not sleep" meaning we wont die. The trumpet being sound is the event of the Rapture and Paul showed proof that some of us will not die but will be changed.


1st thess 4:15 explains that they are faithful ones "who are left until the coming of the Lord," that is, they are still living at the time of Christ?s coming. Will they ever die? According to Romans 6:3-5 and 1 Corinthians 15:35, 36, 44 ,they must die before they can gain heavenly life. But there is no need for them to remain in the death(or asleep) state awaiting Christ?s return. They will instantly be "caught up," "in the twinkling of an eye,"(instead of remaining asleep in death) to be with the Lord.?1 Cor. 15:51, 52, RS; also Revelation 14:13.


Your statment and questions:Im being picky? That is scary that you said that really. For you of course. His disciples seemed to care a lot. It was a big issue to them. So much so they asked him what the sign would be of his return! (mat 24:3). Why would Jesus NOT tell them you will see me plain as day, instead of telling them what SIGN to look for? How does that agree with what you're saying? Jesus tells his disciples what sign to look for, you say that's nit picky, it does not matter, we will see him. Thinking the way you are, would you not then likely MISS THE SIGN THAT JESUS SAID WOULD SIGNIFY HIS RETURN??????????????????????????????????

My Answer: Jesus in Mathew 24 is telling us to know the signs of the end times. It doesnt talk about us seeing him in a cloud, around a cloud, etc. When I referred to you as "pickey" I was referrring to your insistence on knowing at the time of the Rapture if we actually will visibly see Him or wether He is on a cloud, around it, under it, many clouds, one cloud....PICKEY, your pickey and ignorant of the fact that this has nothing to do with Matthew 24. In Matthew 24, Jesus is talking about the coming Tribulation Period. Jesus is telling us to be ready, there are many signs that are happening today that tell us that the end of age is near. In Matthew 24:3, the disciples asked Him, "tell us when will these things be and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" The SIGNS are talked about from Matthew chapter 3 verse: 4 all the way to verse 28.
Actually, you missed it a bit. It says SIGN, not SIGNS. From 24:4-14 is the 1 SIGN. Meaning, when all of those things are happening within the earth, it is THE SIGN to HIS disciples, that his presence has arrived, meaning he is already King.

And again, you are off, the one SIGN stops at 14. Why? Because it says mat24: 14 And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come.

Then end coming means it has to be the end of the sign. Or else how could the end come if the sign is not finished?

Your question:I notice you did not mention the DEAL EVERY LIVING THING A BLOW PART at all. Convenient really.Answer this yes or no please. If he destroys the earth as you say he will, would he NOT BE DEALING EVERY LIVING THING A BLOW ON ACCOUNT OF MAN?
My answer: First of all man is a sinner. The heart of man is evil. Satan is alive and well on planet Earth. Man will destroy himself, it's obvious. You seem to have forgotten Satan. Maybe Satan's plan of making people think he is not real, has had his effect on you?
I already told you God is omniscient. He's well aware of the schemes of Satan. All the scriptures speak of this. God is not the author of evil, this "blow" your talking about is sin and Satan..
Let me post that scripture again.
Gen 8: 21 And Jehovah began to smell a restful odor, and so Jehovah said in his heart: ?Never again shall I call down evil upon the ground on man?s account, because the inclination of the heart of man is bad from his youth up; and never again shall I deal every living thing a blow just as I have done.

This is what God said shortly after HE, NOT SATAN, flooded the earth. Jehovah said he will never again deal every living thing a blow on the account of man.

Me stating you did not reply to that part is because while you tried to explain how God will blow up the earth, you did not refer to how this verse would contradict that.

How? QUITE SIMPLY, IF GOD DESTROYS THE EARTH THEN HE HAS ONCE AGAIN DEALT EVERY LIVING THING A BLOW ON THE COUNT OF MAN! NOT ONLY ON EARTH, BUT AS YOU SAY IT, HE IS GOING TO BLOW UP THE WHOLE UNIVERSE ON THE COUNT OF MAN!!!!! WHY? WHAT DID MARS DO TO MANKIND THAT WOULD MAKE GOD BLOW IT UP TOO?

This verse harmonizes well with the earth being here forever, and people living on it for two reasons. It was the account of Noah, which is God ridding the earth of wicked men, but saving 8 righteous people. And God saying he wiill never again deal every living thing a blow as he has just done with the flood.

DESTROYING THE EARTH AND THE UNIVERSE IS A SEVERE DEATH BLOW IN CASE YOU HAD NOT THOUGHT OF IT BEFORE.
And if God does that, he lied.

Who shall I believe, you or him?



My Answer: It is apparent from all your above quotes that Satan has blinded your mind. You suffer from the worse sin which is the sin of unbelief. It is also apparent that Jesus is not your personal Lord and Savior, therefore Biblically you will die in your sins. Furthermore by denying, refuting, misinterpreting, and taking out of context all the many scriptures I have discussed with you for the past couple of days, you have chose for yourself a path of destruction. As Proverbs 14:12 says, "there is a way which seems that you think is right, the end of which is death." I mentioned to you the other day that every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. Your herecy of the scriptures will condemn you. Romans 1:19-20 says, "you will be without excuse." Verse 22 goes even farther saying, "you profess to be wise but you became a fool." Romans 2:5 says "because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of god." However I will continue to pray for you.

How am I suppose to argue with Jesus when he says out of his own mouth he was created By God? Explain how I have taken Jesus out of context many times saying he has a God, the same God we worship is the one he worships, as Him saying he is God?

That is like me saying now that Im from staten Island in this post, and you go around telling people im from philadelphia. People who read this will wonder how is it you came to the conclussion I'm from philadelphia when they are reading the same thing you are, and I, MYSELF SAY I'M FROM STATEN ISLAND?

BE HONEST HERE. SERIOUSLY. REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU BELIEVE, VS ME. HAS JESUS, IN ANY VERSE IN THE BIBLE EVER SAID THESE WORDS?

I AM GOD? PLEASE ANSWER THIS DIRECTLY WITH A YES OR NO.

NOW AFTER THAT, ANSWER THIS WITH A YES OR NO.

HAS JESUS EVER SAID THAT HE HAS A GOD? HAS HE EVER PRAYED TO A GOD? AND HAS HE ALLUDED TO HAVING A GOD IN HEAVEN AND EARTH?

YES OR NO?

Now if you answer no to the first question, as you should, and you answer yes to the next set, I ask you, which one of us has the devil really blinded?
 
The main problem is that the gospels are man-made. This is why they contradict each other all the time.
Many people say this, but I have not seen one, can you give me an example?

Therefore predictions are utterly pointless overall. Furthermore, you always refer to TRANSLATIONS of the bible. And there are so many -- and so many different ones -- that you can proof anything you want. If there were a devil, even he could quote the bible.
There are many translations yes, but the bible, just like every other book in existence has but one theme. And that is the Sanctification of the soveriegnty of Jehovah god through his heavenly kingdom. That lone theme is purpetuated throughout any bible in existence. If you recognize the theme, you will understand any book. Bible is no different.


And the devil certainly knows whats in the bible, he used that knowledge of the bible to tempt Jesus in

Luke 4:9 Now he (he being the devil) led him into Jerusalem and stationed him upon the battlement of the temple and said to him: ?If you are a son of God, hurl yourself down from here; 10 for it is written, ?He will give his angels a charge concerning you, to preserve you,? 11 and, ?They will carry you on their hands, that you may at no time strike your foot against a stone.??

He has knowledge of the word, and he is good at decieving even those who believe in the bible. But they do not have to remain decieved.
 
24/27 Christian nations went to war during WWI..you say...I'm not going to fact check that for the moment...but assuming that's correct...THANK YOU FOR PROVING MY POINT ABOUT RELIGION!!!?
Maybe if you would try and rationally discuss the topic, instead of trying to beat everyone down ranting and raving because you believe you are right, you would have seen long ago that I agreed that religion as a whole has been the ruin of mankind.

FALSE RELIGION!

All religions claim to worship a loving God (if it's one with a deity of course) But all religions do not practice love amongst themselves and toward others. That does not mean each and every individual does not, speaking on the faiths as a whole. If everyone lived according to the way Jehovah intended, things would be perfect on earth. But very few actually live to serve Jehovah, even though many claim to know him.

This is why Jehovah is set to rid the earth of false religion very soon. If you pay attention, world leaders as a whole are fed up with it. It's crumbling all around us, and not many are seeing it.

Jehovah, the God of the bible blames false religion more than anything for the wicked state of mankind.

No saying that there will people that call unto Jesus means...even if you're devout in your faith, you got a chance of being assed out at the Pearly Gates. Dead and mother****ers still can't get into the club...THAT'S FUNNY.
The problem with that is, Jehovah has a specific criteria for how he wants to be worshipped. If carried out accordingly, this form of worship only benefits us
Don't lie, steal, covet, murder, fornicate. Love Jehovah your God above all, and love your neighbor as yourself. If the whole world lived by these things, the world would be stress free in every single way. So all God wants us to do is love him and love eachother, and live forever doing so.

Problem is, all religions except 1 in the whole world actually want this. Not even professed Christians in the world. They say they worship God, but do not wanna do what God says. Christians will enlist in the army, and go to war. So in effect they sign up to go kill their neighbor. What makes them any better than the Iraqi's? Christian leaders will urge their followers into politics, and big business, when their leader said to be no part of the world. The bible says in 1john 5:19 We know we originate with God,(TRUE DISCIPLES OF CHRIST WHO SERVE JEHOVAH) but the whole world(WHOLE WORLD AS IN THOSE IN OPPOSITION TO JEHOVAH, WHETHER RELIGIOUS, OR GOVERNMENT) is lying in the [power of the] wicked one.

This logically explains why the world is in such peril. Most of the world is under Satan's influence whether they know it or not. Satan is running the world! NO WONDER IT'S JACKED UP!

But, there is a people on earth who live to do just as God says we should. That is why they are said to be no part of the world. Cuz the world does not care to do what God says to do. Even those who really should (Christians as a whole)


The warheads are not armed. Most nations have deactivated their nuclear arsenals. The two largest being USA, and former USSR. You got a better chance of dying plugging in your toaster than the threat of nuclear war.
Like I said, it does not bother me whether they are pointed in this direction with the fuse lit, Jehovah will not let mankind ruin his earth. Period. That is what I rely on. You saying they have defused it just further strengthens my faith there (even though I am amazed you would trust the world governments enough to believe that lol)

At the end of the day the positive advancements science completely and utterly outweigh the benefits of any/all religions on this planet earth. What achievements has religion accomplished?

From science we have...

This computer
Cars
Manufacturing
Medicines
DVD's
Breast Implants
PS3
Jack Daniels


I could go on and on...about the great things science has done for mankind.
Science has made advancements that truly benfit mankind. But most of your list, if abused can cause serious problems for men (especially the cars, and Jack Daniels) Car pollution is part of the reason why the air is so unclean, and the ozone is tore up. Science must not have accounted for that. It's helping to ruin the earth. And I have mentioned warfare already.
You will never hear me say that science as a whole is not a worthy endeavor. But it all depends on the intentions of the scientists.

Let's see religion...hmm...

Wars of idiocy
Homophobia
Incest
Rape
Racism
Genocide
Holy War
Torture
Insanity
Slavery
Women regarded as 2nd class human beings
Destruction of many African and Latin American/ Native American cultures
Destruction of Black Americans.
False religion, yes. Not the TRUTH. The true religion enlightens on how God views these things and what it takes to please him. It's your choice, no arm wrestling you to baptism. Jehovah will deal with those who choose to remain out of his love.

The earth is not going to stand forever going to collapse into the sun in 500 million years due to the sun finally running out of hydrogen fuel...throwing off the orbit pulling the earth into it when the Sun turns into a red dwarf star. So Jehvoah lied.
Says who? Earth's all powerful and all knowing minds of science? These minds that are only using on avg, what, 10 % of their brain capacity? These scientists who have made many, many mistakes in their calculations in various fields? The brilliant minds who can't reverse the effects of aging? The brilliant minds who use an inconsistent method of dating, but rely on it anyway to try and prove they have figured it all out?

You trust these guys with your life? More power to you.




And if you're Jehovah is right that the earth will stand forever...us dropping nuclear warheads....the earth should be perfectly fine...the fact it wouldn't is another example..of your GOD being a LIAR.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
The Department of Energy
International Atomic Energy Commission
The UN Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
I trust Jehovah when he says he will bring to ruin those who are ruining the earth. Nuclear warheads being dropped would destroy the earth. He won't let that happen. What's nut though, is that you trust the UN. EVEN A LITTLE BIT THATS SCARY!



What's your source for Jehovah? One book..and no one even knows the author real identity.

Hmm...let me think which one has more credibility.
But you know the author... You have said Jehovah quite a bit this post. So you now know who the author of the bible is.
He're a question. Do you think the most advanced science book will be applicable and practical over 1500 years from now? Now do you think the Bible will be?, And you want to compare that knowledge to the wisdom of God, which has stood the test of time and is still very much so practical??



The reason people are so concerned about Iran having a nuclear program is because of RELIGION. If they weren't the fanatical **** nuts...like you people...we wouldn't have to worry about them. See these folks actually believe in Revelation prophecy alot more than you do, and they are too crazy and too fanatical with their religion...to be trusted with such a device. If it wasn't for religion...they would not be as crazy and radical as they are. So until they stop being all radical and shit...they can't be trusted. Kind of like taking a BB gun away from a kid who can't resist shooting out windows. He's just not using it responsibly.

Well again, say them people. Because a true worshiper of Jehovah is the last person on earth anyone is concerned with aquiring nuclear weapons. That is false religion at it's finest. Jesus said not everyone saying Lord lord will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens. That implies that there will be those who claim to know and worship in truth, but have no idea what truth is. Therefore, if you are worried about a religious group blowing up half the world, it is safe to say that According to Jesus, they do not have the truth. Or else they would not even be thinking of such nonsense.

Just test it for yourself. When was the last time a bomb went off and someone said it was Jehovah's witnesses? Last time a war was going on a Jehovahs witnesses were there to support it? When is the last time you went to a presidential election rally somewhere and a hopeful was speaking in front of an audience of Jehovah's witnesses? Why? Because we stay out of worldy affairs like Jehovah tells his true followers to do. Therefore, we give a witness, even to those who don't believe what we do that Jehovah is our ruler. And that is why he has revealed the truth of his word to us. And that is why we are the only people in the world preaching the Kingdom message of truth.


Your GOD is just as made up as Anglicans, Evangelicals, Methodists, Baptists, Lutherans, Calvanists, Protestants, Catholics, and Mormons.

Are you going to say that all these Christian groups are FAKE? When they are just as devout?

NOW THAT'S ****ING HYPOCRISY.
Actually, the God of the bible is not made up, you just choose to ignore him. Personal reasons.

Becuase people are devout, does it have to mean they are worshipping the right way? Devil worshippors are devout too, is that ok?(not comparing these faiths to devil worshipors, just illustrating a point) Jesus said those doing the will of his father will be saved. So it's quite simple, you do Jehovahs will you will be saved. If you are not, then are you a follower? A true follower follows, not make their own rules and doctrines on what Serving God is. The Jews were God's people once. Even they had to abandon some things of their faith to be accepted By God into Christianity.

Same way with the Christian faiths of today. While they have the bible and some knowledge of the word, through false teachings and reasonings, they are being mislead. And it is misleading others.

If the religion is not doing what God says, why would Jehovah back them?



U know it's cute when a 5 year old rambles about their imaginary friend...it's a shame when you still do it at 25.

Wait I take it back...you gave us one thing...CHAMPAGNE...invented by monks. And entertainment.
Word?

So why didn't your Jesus cure everyone? What he was too busy to go further out into the valley that day?
He cured as many that believed my friend. Read on it.

He plans on curing the entire human race of disease and old age, restore the earth to full glory and supreme living conditions, even ressurect people!

He showed he could do some of these things on a small scale (resurrected Lazarus and others, walked on water to stop a storm, cured a wealth of infirmities)

Better question for you, do you want to live to see it happen?
 

LJ4ptplay

Starter
Why do we have an appendix?

I know why. Just want to hear the religious viewpoint. Why did God give us an organ that isn't used at all? An organ that can be fatal to us? How could an all powerful, all knowing, perfect designer screw up like that?

Why do whales have femur bones? Why did God give whales thigh bones? They don't have legs. It's a useless bone that serves no function.
 
Last edited:
Why do we have an appendix?

I know why. Just want to hear the religious viewpoint. Why did God give us an organ that isn't used at all? An organ that can be fatal to us? How could an all powerful, all knowing, perfect designer screw up like that?

Why do whales have femur bones? Why did God give whales thigh bones? They don't have legs. It's a useless bone that serves no function.


My wife asked me those same questions once, and I don't know enough to say why, or why not. Good question though.

That said, that does not mean he screwed up. And keep in mind with mankind, we are imperfect and die. That was not his original intention. It is apparent though that as time passed humans began to live shorter lives biblically. Who knows what function the organ had then. Patriarch times seen people live a long time compared to us.

But Good question.
 

KnicksFan4Realz

Benchwarmer
My wife asked me those same questions once, and I don't know enough to say why, or why not. Good question though.

That said, that does not mean he screwed up. And keep in mind with mankind, we are imperfect and die. That was not his original intention. It is apparent though that as time passed humans began to live shorter lives biblically. Who knows what function the organ had then. Patriarch times seen people live a long time compared to us.

But Good question.

A perfect GOD like designer LOGICALLY CAN'T **** UP THE DESIGN OR IMPROVE ON IT....

I'm gonna respond to the post above a bit later when I got more time. I got a few patients coming in a 1...but I'll have plenty time after my office hours to finish you off later.

OH AND BY THE WAY...

I AM RIGHT!!!
 

LJ4ptplay

Starter
My wife asked me those same questions once, and I don't know enough to say why, or why not. Good question though.

That said, that does not mean he screwed up. And keep in mind with mankind, we are imperfect and die. That was not his original intention. It is apparent though that as time passed humans began to live shorter lives biblically. Who knows what function the organ had then. Patriarch times seen people live a long time compared to us.

But Good question.

The answer is, we evolved from primates that needed the appendix to digest raw meat. The whale evolved from Ambulocetus, a mammal that walked on land and swam in the sea. These are called vestigial structures, structures or organs that have lost all or most of their original function through evolution.
 
The answer is, we evolved from primates that needed the appendix to digest raw meat. The whale evolved from Ambulocetus, a mammal that walked on land and swam in the sea. These are called vestigial structures, structures or organs that have lost all or most of their original function through evolution.

Problem is, there is not proof those primates existed. They have not found one in any form.

I'll never understand how you guys can put faith in a science that can be TRULY proven.

Same way you will never understand it appears how we worship an invisible sky daddy as you say.

Is what it is.
 
A perfect GOD like designer LOGICALLY CAN'T **** UP THE DESIGN OR IMPROVE ON IT....

I'm gonna respond to the post above a bit later when I got more time. I got a few patients coming in a 1...but I'll have plenty time after my office hours to finish you off later.

OH AND BY THE WAY...

I AM RIGHT!!!

But all humans after Adam have a birth defect. We're imperfect. That means physically, mentally, we are not at our peak as a species. But Adam once was.
 

LJ4ptplay

Starter
Problem is, there is not proof those primates existed. They have not found one in any form.

I'll never understand how you guys can put faith in a science that can be TRULY proven.

Same way you will never understand it appears how we worship an invisible sky daddy as you say.

Is what it is.

Australopithecus
australopithecus_taung.jpg


Homo habilis
homo_habilis_cran.jpg

H_habilis_200.jpeg


Tools of Homo habilis:
homo-habilis-tools.jpg


Homo erectus
Homo-erectus-Cranium-W-stand_F51CEA6C.jpg


Homo habilis

2.4 million years ago to 1.5 million years ago

Homo habilis, which actually means "handy man," may have been the first species to make and use primitive stone tools. About five-feet-tall and weighing 100 pounds, H. habilis had a brain that was larger than the largest Australopithecus brain, but smaller than the Homo erectus brain.

Homo erectus

1.8 mya to 300,000 years ago

The first example of Homo erectus, known as "Java Man," was discovered in Indonesia in 1893. Fossil remains of H. erectus have since been found throughout Africa and Asia, making it the first known wide-ranging hominid. Despite the primitive appearance of its skull, the H. erectus skeleton is very similar to that of modern humans, although more robust (thicker and heavier). H. erectus was probably the first hominid to use fire.

Homo heidelbergensis

800,000 to 200,000 years ago

Sometimes classified as Homo sapiens archaic, this species contains a range of specimens that share features with both H. erectus and modern humans. In general, its brain was larger and more rounded than H. erectus, but smaller than that of a modern human. Fossil remains of H. heidelbergensis have been found in Africa and Europe.

Homo neanderthalensis

230,000 to 30,000 years ago

Neanderthals are classified by some as Homo sapiens neanderthalensis -- a subspecies of H. sapiens. Averaging five-and-a-half feet in height and possessing short limbs, Neanderthals were well-adapted to living in a cold climate. Attached to their thick, heavy bones were powerful muscles. The Neanderthal brain cavity was larger than that of today's humans, but that may be related to the Neanderthals' greater bulk in general. Neanderthals were mostly found in Europe, and their skeletons show they lived brutal lives. Earlier theories suggested that modern humans are descended from Neanderthals, but most paleontologists have ruled out that idea. The fossil record suggests the two groups co-existed in some areas. Some speculate that Neanderthals interbred with modern humans, but genetic studies suggest the two groups didn't mate.

Homo sapiens idaltu

160,000(?)

In the June 12, 2003 issue of Nature, a team led by Tim White reports finding fossils worthy of a new subspecies of Homo sapiens: Homo sapiens idaltu. The skull of an adult male found in Middle Awash, Ethiopia, is slightly larger than the upper limits seen in contemporary humans, but it shares more characteristics -- in particular, less prominent brow ridges -- with modern humans than any other fossils found to date.

Homo sapiens sapiens (modern)

120,000 years ago to present

Modern Homo sapiens, also known as Homo sapiens sapiens, have been around for at least the past 120,000 years. Homo sapiens living about 40,000 years ago made elaborate tools out of bone, antler, ivory, stone and wood, and produced artwork in the form of carvings and cave paintings. In the last 100,000 years, the fossil record shows that even among this species, there is a trend toward smaller tooth sizes and lighter body frames.

Sources: Smithsonian Institute National Museum of Natural History, PBS

Your lack of knowledge is astounding. Were you home-schooled?
 
Last edited:
Australopithecus
australopithecus_taung.jpg


Homo habilis
homo_habilis_cran.jpg

H_habilis_200.jpeg


Tools of Homo habilis:
homo-habilis-tools.jpg


Homo erectus
Homo-erectus-Cranium-W-stand_F51CEA6C.jpg




Your lack of knowledge is astounding. Were you home-schooled?
I have enough knowledge to know that no form of life that ever existed on earth has the frontal lobe except mankind. Do monkeys of any kind have that? If they don't they are not human.

And again with the 3.4 million plus numbers. Stop the madness, the system is faulty, and nothing you say or anyone else says will make me feel any different. The people who use it have issues with it, you have never saw a reading, so you are just choosing to want to believe it. Totally your choice. But don't throw this at me as if it's the only way to go when I have an article posted on ape men and all that scientists go through to try and convince us it's real. They don't call it the missing link for nothing bro lol.

Thanks again for coming out.
 

LJ4ptplay

Starter
I have enough knowledge to know that no form of life that ever existed on earth has the frontal lobe except mankind. Do monkeys of any kind have that? If they don't they are not human.

And again with the 3.4 million plus numbers. Stop the madness, the system is faulty, and nothing you say or anyone else says will make me feel any different. The people who use it have issues with it, you have never saw a reading, so you are just choosing to want to believe it. Totally your choice. But don't throw this at me as if it's the only way to go when I have an article posted on ape men and all that scientists go through to try and convince us it's real. They don't call it the missing link for nothing bro lol.

Thanks again for coming out.

Well, it's well known that apes have frontal lobes.

Humans and great apes share a large frontal cortex
K. Semendeferi1, A. Lu1, N. Schenker1 & H. Damasio2
1 Department of Anthropology, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093

2 Department of Neurology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242

Correspondence should be addressed to K. Semendeferi [email protected]


Some of the outstanding cognitive capabilities of humans are commonly attributed to a disproportionate enlargement of the human frontal lobe during evolution. This claim is based primarily on comparisons between the brains of humans and of other primates, to the exclusion of most great apes. We compared the relative size of the frontal cortices in living specimens of several primate species, including all extant hominoids, using magnetic resonance imaging. Human frontal cortices were not disproportionately large in comparison to those of the great apes. We suggest that the special cognitive abilities attributed to a frontal advantage may be due to differences in individual cortical areas and to a richer interconnectivity, none of which required an increase in the overall relative size of the frontal lobe during hominid evolution.


Chimpanzee skull:
bc03-lg.jpg



The evolution of the frontal lobes : a volumetric analysis based on three-dimensional reconstructions of magnetic resonance scans of human and ape brains

Author(s)
SEMENDEFERI K. (1) ; DAMASIO H. (1) ; FRANK R. (1) ; VAN HOESEN G. W. (2) ;
Affiliation(s) du ou des auteurs / Author(s) Affiliation(s)
(1) Department of Neurology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, ETATS-UNIS
(2) Departments of Neurology & Anatomy, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, ETATS-UNIS

Résumé / Abstract
Scenarios regarding the evolution of cognitive function in hominids depend largely on our understanding of the organization of the frontal lobes in extant humans and apes. The frontal lobe is involved in functions such as creative thinking, planning of future actions, decision making, artistic expression, aspects of emotional behavior, as well as working memory, language and motor control. It is often claimed that the frontal lobe is disproportionately larger in humans than in other species, but conflicting reports exist on this issue. The brain of the apes in particular remains largely unknown. In this report we measure the volume of the frontal lobe as a whole and of its main sectors (including cortex and immediately underlying white matter) in living humans, and in post-mortem brains of the chimpanzee, gorilla, orang-utan, gibbon and the macaque using three-dimensional reconstructions of magnetic resonance (MR) scans of the brain. On the basis of these data we suggest that although the absolute volume of the brain and the frontal lobe is largest in humans, the relative size of the frontal lobe is similar across hominoids, and that humans do not have a larger frontal lobe than expected from a primate brain of the human size. We also report that the relative size of the sectors of the frontal lobe (dorsal, mesial, orbital) is similar across the primate species studied. Our conclusions are preliminary, because the size of our sample, although larger than in previous studies, still remains small. With this caveat we conclude that the overall volume of the frontal lobe in hominids enlarged in absolute size along with the rest of the brain, but did not become relatively larger after the split of the human line from the ancestral African hominoid stock. Aspects other than relative volume of the frontal lobe have to be responsible for the cognitive specializations of the hominids.


Homo habilis , a maker and user of crude stone tools, (click to see image of tools) ©1 appeared no earlier than 2.5 million years ago ( the earliest evidence of tool use). Fossils of this species span 750,000 years (at least 500,000 years)! Little physical change took place during this period, suggesting a successful and enduring species. The main features of the transition from Australopithecines to H. habilis are the use of tools and an enlarged braincase (700 cc). Physical features of H. habilis are almost identical to those of A. afarensis , showing that the primitive apelike characteristics served well for the role of this creature in nature for a very long time. H. habilis shows a sulcal pattern in the left frontal lobe, so H. habilis had at least the beginnings of speech.



The only knowledge you have is either from the bible or from a creationist website. All those articles and quotes you give are from creationist websites where I've already exposed the misquotes or quotes out of context. How can you trust those sources when I've shown you they're dishonest? They have a motive to disprove scientific evidence because it exposes their religion to be untrue.

Well then, it's obvious you make a serious effort to ignore information. I understand. It can be difficult to accept the fact that you've dedicated your life to something that doesn't exist. Totally your choice bro.
 
Well, it's well known that apes have frontal lobes.




Chimpanzee skull:
bc03-lg.jpg










The only knowledge you have is either from the bible or from a creationist website. All those articles and quotes you give are from creationist websites where I've already exposed the misquotes or quotes out of context. How can you trust those sources when I've shown you they're dishonest? They have a motive to disprove scientific evidence because it exposes their religion to be untrue.

Well then, it's obvious you make a serious effort to ignore information. I understand. It can be difficult to accept the fact that you've dedicated your life to something that doesn't exist. Totally your choice bro.


These numbers are not really saying they are the same. Come on man. They are trying to relegate differential based on other things. That is not the same as simply saying, do our brains match. And that answer is no they don't, they never have, never will. No brain in existence is like the human brain. Period.


Why is a scientific journal saying this
A scientific journal reported on studies showing that "dates determined by radioactive decay may be off?not only by a few years, but by orders of magnitude." It said: "Man, instead of having walked the earth for 3.6 million years, may have been around for only a few thousand."53?

I doubt a scientific Journal would say this unless it was true. Hurts what they believe.

And just tell me why it's called the missing link if you say it's a fact they exist? What link is missing?
 

LJ4ptplay

Starter
These numbers are not really saying they are the same. Come on man. They are trying to relegate differential based on other things. That is not the same as simply saying, do our brains match. And that answer is no they don't, they never have, never will. No brain in existence is like the human brain. Period.

Duh. I know our brains don't match perfectly with the other primates. That's why they are different species. I was simply refuting your argument that no other animal on the planet has a frontal lobe except humans.



Why is a scientific journal saying this
A scientific journal reported on studies showing that "dates determined by radioactive decay may be off?not only by a few years, but by orders of magnitude." It said: "Man, instead of having walked the earth for 3.6 million years, may have been around for only a few thousand."53?

At this point I can't trust your quotes. You've been misleading in the past. You'll have to give me a link to the actual journal so I can read it for myself. Not a link to a creationist website.

But I've already addressed this argument. There are several methods of dating. Absolute dating methods and relative dating methods.

The following are absolute dating techniques: Archaeomagnetism, Astronomical Dating, Dendrochronology, Electron Spin Resonance, Fission Track, Optically Stimulated Luminescence, Oxidizable Carbon Ratio (OCR), Potassium- Argon Dating, Racemization, Radio-Carbon Dating (Carbon-14), Thermoluminescence Dating and Uranium-Thorium Dating.

Relative dating methods include floral evidence such as fossil pollen present, stratigraphy, climatic evidence, chemical changes, Cation Ratio, Cultural Affiliation, Fluorine Dating, Obsidian Hydration, Patination, Pollen Analysis, Rate of Accumulation, Seriation, Varve Analysis and Archaeological evidence.

Scientists use multiple combinations of these methods to accurately determine the age of a fossil. They don't just use one and say, "that's it". The basis behind science is to be thorough to avoid skepticism and scrutiny.

And just tell me why it's called the missing link if you say it's a fact they exist? What link is missing?

"Missing link" is an outdated term used to designate transitional forms. The above examples I gave (Australopithecus africanus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, and Sinanthropus pekinensis) are examples of these transitional forms or "missing links". The term "missing link" is really only used by the regular media and creationists, but is inaccurate and confusing.
 
Duh. I know our brains don't match perfectly with the other primates. That's why they are different species. I was simply refuting your argument that no other animal on the planet has a frontal lobe except humans.
Vast difference between monkeys and men. In many, many ways. And Our frontal lobe gives us far more capabilities than not only monkeys, but all other life on earth.

There is no proof it evolved.




At this point I can't trust your quotes. You've been misleading in the past. You'll have to give me a link to the actual journal so I can read it for myself. Not a link to a creationist website.

But I've already addressed this argument. There are several methods of dating. Absolute dating methods and relative dating methods.

The following are absolute dating techniques: Archaeomagnetism, Astronomical Dating, Dendrochronology, Electron Spin Resonance, Fission Track, Optically Stimulated Luminescence, Oxidizable Carbon Ratio (OCR), Potassium- Argon Dating, Racemization, Radio-Carbon Dating (Carbon-14), Thermoluminescence Dating and Uranium-Thorium Dating.

Relative dating methods include floral evidence such as fossil pollen present, stratigraphy, climatic evidence, chemical changes, Cation Ratio, Cultural Affiliation, Fluorine Dating, Obsidian Hydration, Patination, Pollen Analysis, Rate of Accumulation, Seriation, Varve Analysis and Archaeological evidence.

Scientists use multiple combinations of these methods to accurately determine the age of a fossil. They don't just use one and say, "that's it". The basis behind science is to be thorough to avoid skepticism and scrutiny..

There will always be doubt in those systems because not every scientific group believes in them the same. Like jumping on a scale that says you weigh 4k lbs one day and 200 the next. And the main issue is that it is scientists saying these things, not every day people who don't know, or give a rats piss on cotton care about their dating method.

YOU BELIEVE THAT! I can't. Especially since we can only go back 5000 years of accurate written human history.(that harmonizes with the bibles take on things by the way) That says it all to me. If we have all these great dating machines, and we can only go back 5000 years in human history accurately, what makes me trust these people who put a lot of zero's on their research with machines that they admit read inaccurately at times?

And on top of that, I'm not impressed one bit when they claim to go back 3 million years. It's a pretty easy and convenient thing to claim when no one, or nothing is around to refute such a claim.

Science will impress me when they can start accurately telling us about our future in exact details. Pretty easy to say well 50000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years from now this or that will happen. Tell us some evolutionary changes and such in our time. How people believe that, is beyond me. Especially coming from imperfect men who live no longer than 70 years on avg.

But hey, you continue to put faith in men. That has always been a fruitful endeavor.

NOT!



"Missing link" is an outdated term used to designate transitional forms. The above examples I gave (Australopithecus africanus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, and Sinanthropus pekinensis) are examples of these transitional forms or "missing links". The term "missing link" is really only used by the regular media and creationists, but is inaccurate and confusing.

Lets discuss a couple of the missing links. I believe the first one you mention, the africanus is discussed here.

28 Another gap of vast proportions lies between that creature and the next one that had been listed as an "ape-man" ancestor. This is called Australopithecus?southern ape. Fossils of it were first found in southern Africa in the 1920?s. It had a small apelike braincase, heavy jawbone and was pictured as walking on two limbs, stooped over, hairy and apish looking. It was said to have lived beginning about three or four million years ago. In time it came to be accepted by nearly all evolutionists as man?s ancestor.

29 For instance, the book The Social Contract noted: "With one or two exceptions all competent investigators in this field now agree that the australopithecines . . . are actual human ancestors."40 The New York Times declared: "It was Australopithecus . . . that eventually evolved into Homo sapiens, or modern man."41 And in Man, Time, and Fossils Ruth Moore said: "By all the evidence men at last had met their long unknown, early ancestors." Emphatically she declared: "The evidence was overwhelming . . . the missing link had at long last been found."42

30 But when the evidence for anything actually is flimsy or nonexistent, or based on outright deception, sooner or later the claim comes to nothing. This has proved to be the case with many past examples of presumed "ape-men."
31 So, too, with Australopithecus. More research has disclosed that its skull "differed from that of humans in more ways than its smaller brain capacity."43 Anatomist Zuckerman wrote: "When compared with human and simian [ape] skulls, the Australopithecine skull is in appearance overwhelmingly simian?not human. The contrary proposition could be equated to an assertion that black is white."44 He also said: "Our findings leave little doubt that . . . Australopithecus resembles not Homo sapiens but the living monkeys and apes."45 Donald Johanson also said: "Australopithecines . . . were not men."46 Similarly Richard Leakey called it "unlikely that our direct ancestors are evolutionary descendants of the australopithecines."47

32 If any australopithecines were found alive today, they would be put in zoos with other apes. No one would call them "ape-men." The same is true of other fossil "cousins" that resemble it, such as a smaller type of australopithecine called "Lucy." Of it Robert Jastrow says: "This brain was not large in absolute size; it was a third the size of a human brain."48 Obviously, it too was simply an "ape." In fact, New Scientist said that "Lucy" had a skull "very like a chimpanzee?s."49


Let's discuss homo erectus now, which has not even been classifed as ape.Another fossil type is called Homo erectus?upright man. Its brain size and shape do fall into the lower range of modern man?s. Also, the Encyclop?dia Britannica observed that "the limb bones thus far discovered have been indistinguishable from those of H[omo] sapiens."50 However, it is unclear whether it was human or not. If so, then it was merely a branch of the human family and died off.

Why are you putting a mark on it as if it was actually ape, when it could certianly be human?

And if it's human, and it's indistinguishable from modern man, then one must say that modern man must have been around those millions of years ago as well.
 
Top