klassenkid
Well-Known Member
Good job Nucturn, you have passed the ignorant scientist club. If you cant be right, ya insult 
Science Over Faith?
- Thread starter BOOM WHOMP
- Start date
doobnVA
Well-Known Member
If you're willing to change beliefs, you don't have faith... you have hope.
So you're just following the bible until something better comes along?
"I believe in God, but I might be wrong", is that it?
If so, LOL! Your beliefs are about as rigid as putty, eh?
dontexist21
Well-Known Member
Where did you get your 27% I would like to know. I just stated that I believe in what has the most evidence, since God can not be proven or dis proven it is very hard for me to believe in it. What other theories are out there that can explain this, if someone gave me an alternative that had data to back it up I would listen. You have not given me a alternative with data and test.
doobnVA
Well-Known Member
Here's an alternate theory:
Aliens.
We're an experiment. There is life on other planets, but we'll never find it because the aliens won't let us. Technologies "discovered" by humans were really just passed down to us by the aliens, and all the religious texts and artifacts were put here by aliens to throw us off so we wouldn't figure out where we really came from.
Missing link? Easy peasy... we can't find it because it doesn't exist. Aliens abducted some early hominids and created a hybrid species of themselves, leaving no evidence of an evolutionary transition to homo sapiens.
Discuss.
Aliens.
We're an experiment. There is life on other planets, but we'll never find it because the aliens won't let us. Technologies "discovered" by humans were really just passed down to us by the aliens, and all the religious texts and artifacts were put here by aliens to throw us off so we wouldn't figure out where we really came from.
Missing link? Easy peasy... we can't find it because it doesn't exist. Aliens abducted some early hominids and created a hybrid species of themselves, leaving no evidence of an evolutionary transition to homo sapiens.
Discuss.
dontexist21
Well-Known Member
There was more oxygen, but that was during the Jurassic age, during the age of the dinosaurs. Yet that is not a complete explanation of why they grew bigger. It could also be because there was more vegetation, or that the oceans were higher which changed the climate. There are so many theories out there. But 900 years ago dinosaurs did not exist. Can you give me a credible source on this 13 ft man, I would like to see it and the test the did on it. A neutral site preferably. Isotopes half life is the way that is used to date things yet you still refuse to state WHY you think its wrong, and on the theory of half life of isotopes is wrong. If you state that the dating method is wrong you must state why half life of isotopes is wrong. Maybe it is because you do not understand it, and have no understanding of basic science. Yes we stick to it since it is a proven theory that has been tested. If you can give me information to disprove it I will listen.Hmmm I think this is like win 5 for anti evolutionist. I have brought up so many different peices to the puzzel. Proven there was more oxygen back in the day and yet all you guys stick to is the fucking istopes. How bout I let you win that one and we move onI really want your answers for my other statements you guys have continously ignored.
what... huh?
Active Member
That pretty much covers Mormonism AND Scientology.
klassenkid
Well-Known Member
Ill try to find all my references, might take a while because I learned most of it on a lecture a while back. Now im scarred to say his name because he is the Macro evolutionist most hated enemy but "Kent Hoven" does a few true facts in their that take apart the whole Isotope science. It is really religiousy just to warn you so yeah please dont take all of his other bullshit and assume it all is.
Oh and if you want to know my side of this whole debate? Lets just role a blunt and enjoy the ride of life and not care of what our origin is
. ( not spend money into false propaganda)
fish601
Active Member
faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.
dontexist21
Well-Known Member
Haha good stuff, I am going to look it up. I join you on that blunt.Ill try to find all my references, might take a while because I learned most of it on a lecture a while back. Now im scarred to say his name because he is the Macro evolutionist most hated enemy but "Kent Hoven" does a few true facts in their that take apart the whole Isotope science. It is really religiousy just to warn you so yeah please dont take all of his other bullshit and assume it all is.
Oh and if you want to know my side of this whole debate? Lets just role a blunt and enjoy the ride of life and not care of what our origin is
fish601
Active Member
I dont know if this is true or not and really dont care i just rememberd u all talking about it
Attachments
what... huh?
Active Member
Not true.
That display is a "model" they made based on a letter from someone who "heard" that they found "legs" which measured 47" (even IF you chose to believe the rumor, the LEGS are not a femur). Where are these bones? Nobody knows...
[youtube]IkJqKOb0ZhY[/youtube]
That display is a "model" they made based on a letter from someone who "heard" that they found "legs" which measured 47" (even IF you chose to believe the rumor, the LEGS are not a femur). Where are these bones? Nobody knows...
[youtube]IkJqKOb0ZhY[/youtube]
CrackerJax
New Member
The Bible and religion are a non scientific entity. They don't belong in the same category with science.
Science is testable, religion is not.
The more religion tries to be scientific, the more ridiculous it appears........and desperate.
People will eventually move beyond needing a superstition to get through life. The numbers of clear headed folks is growing, and if the apocalyptic religious zealots don't get us all killed first, man will eventually make it to the next level of enlightenment.
Science is testable, religion is not.
The more religion tries to be scientific, the more ridiculous it appears........and desperate.
People will eventually move beyond needing a superstition to get through life. The numbers of clear headed folks is growing, and if the apocalyptic religious zealots don't get us all killed first, man will eventually make it to the next level of enlightenment.
CrackerJax
New Member
Hopefully this will be the last wave of myths for mankind. It's about time we move up a notch on our perceptions. It's time we face realities which make us uncomfortable.
Let go of the blanket Linus.....let go.
Let go of the blanket Linus.....let go.
jfgordon1
Well-Known Member
I hope so too. Hopefully my generation will get there head of there ass and not continue the religious teachers to their children *crosses fingers*
CrackerJax
New Member
Not in our lifetime I'm afraid. Unless something major and earth shaking occurs. Religion, both Islam and Christianity are WORKING on making their prophecies of doom come true. Both have an "Armageddon" prophecy, although quite different from each other, both WANT to see an apocalypse take place. This is the MAIN reason why the Middle East is NOT allowed to become a place of peace. It would ruin the prophecies. No, that place must remain agitated for the HOPE of destruction by a personal made up myth....
We're so advanced.
We're so advanced.
fish601
Active Member
here is more from that page
In White County, Tennessee, an "ancient fortification" contained skeletons of gigantic stature averaging at least 7 feet in length.
Giant skeletons were found in the mid-1800s near Rutland and Rodman, New York.
J.N. DeHart, M.D. found vertebrae "larger than those of the present type" in Wisconsin mounds in 1876.
W.H.R. Lykins uncovered skull bones "of great size and thickness" in mounds of Kansas City area in 1877.
George W. Hill, M.D., dug out a skeleton "of unusual size" in a mound of Ashland County, Ohio.
In 1879, a nine-foot, eight-inch skeleton was excavated from a mound near Brewersville, Indiana (Indianapolis News, Nov 10, 1975).
A six foot, six inch skeleton was found in a Utah mound. This was at least a foot taller than the average Indian height in the area, and these natives- what few there were of them -were not mound builders.
A skeleton which is reported to have been "of enormous dimensions" was found in a clay coffin, with a sandstone slab containing hieroglyphics, during mound explorations by a Dr Everhart near Zanesville, Ohio.(American Antiquarian, v3, 1880, pg61)
Ten skeletons "of both sexes and of gigantic size" were taken from a mound at Warren, Minnesota, 1883. (St. Paul Pioneer Press, May 23, 1883)
A skeleton 7 feet 6 inches long was found in a massive stone structure that was likened to a temple chamber within a mound in Kanawha County, West Virginia, in 1884. (American Antiquarian, v6, 1884 133f.
Cyrus Thomas, Report on Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology, 12th Annual Report, Smithsonian Bureau of Ethnology, 1890-91).
A large mound near Gasterville, Pennsylvania, contained a vault in which was found a skeleton measuring 7 feet 2 inches. Inscriptions were carved on the vault. (American Antiquarian, v7, 1885, 52f).
In 1885, miners discovered the mummified remains of woman measuring 6 feet 8 inches tall holding an infant. The mummies were found in a cave behind a wall of rock in the Yosemite Valley.
In Minnesota, 1888, were discovered remains of seven skeletons 7 to 8 feet tall. (St. Paul Pioneer Press, June 29, 188
.
A mound near Toledo, Ohio, held 20 skeletons, seated and facing east with jaws and teeth "twice as large as those of present day people," and besides each was a large bowl with "curiously wrought hieroglyphic figures." (Chicago Record, Oct. 24, 1895; cited by Ron G. Dobbins, NEARA Journal, v13, fall 197.
The skeleton of a huge man was uncovered at the Beckley farm, Lake Koronis, Minnesota; while at Moose Island and Pine City, bones of other giants came to light. (St. Paul Globe, Aug. 12, 1896).
In 1911, several red-haired mummies ranging from 6 and a half feet to 8 feet tall were discovered in a cave in Lovelock, Nevada.
In February and June of 1931, large skeletons were found in the Humboldt lake bed near Lovelock, Nevada. The first of these two skeletons found measured 8 1/2 feet tall and appeared to have been wrapped in a gum-covered fabric similar to the Egyptian manner. The second skeleton was almost 10 feet long. (Review - Miner, June 19, 1931)
A 7 ft 7 inch skeleton was reported to have been found on the Friedman ranch, near Lovelock, Nevada, in 1939.(Review - Miner, Sept. 29, 1939).
In 1965, a skeleton measuring 8 feet 9 inches was found buried under a rock ledge along the Holly Creek in east-central Kentucky.
In White County, Tennessee, an "ancient fortification" contained skeletons of gigantic stature averaging at least 7 feet in length.
Giant skeletons were found in the mid-1800s near Rutland and Rodman, New York.
J.N. DeHart, M.D. found vertebrae "larger than those of the present type" in Wisconsin mounds in 1876.
W.H.R. Lykins uncovered skull bones "of great size and thickness" in mounds of Kansas City area in 1877.
George W. Hill, M.D., dug out a skeleton "of unusual size" in a mound of Ashland County, Ohio.
In 1879, a nine-foot, eight-inch skeleton was excavated from a mound near Brewersville, Indiana (Indianapolis News, Nov 10, 1975).
A six foot, six inch skeleton was found in a Utah mound. This was at least a foot taller than the average Indian height in the area, and these natives- what few there were of them -were not mound builders.
A skeleton which is reported to have been "of enormous dimensions" was found in a clay coffin, with a sandstone slab containing hieroglyphics, during mound explorations by a Dr Everhart near Zanesville, Ohio.(American Antiquarian, v3, 1880, pg61)
Ten skeletons "of both sexes and of gigantic size" were taken from a mound at Warren, Minnesota, 1883. (St. Paul Pioneer Press, May 23, 1883)
A skeleton 7 feet 6 inches long was found in a massive stone structure that was likened to a temple chamber within a mound in Kanawha County, West Virginia, in 1884. (American Antiquarian, v6, 1884 133f.
Cyrus Thomas, Report on Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology, 12th Annual Report, Smithsonian Bureau of Ethnology, 1890-91).
A large mound near Gasterville, Pennsylvania, contained a vault in which was found a skeleton measuring 7 feet 2 inches. Inscriptions were carved on the vault. (American Antiquarian, v7, 1885, 52f).
In 1885, miners discovered the mummified remains of woman measuring 6 feet 8 inches tall holding an infant. The mummies were found in a cave behind a wall of rock in the Yosemite Valley.
In Minnesota, 1888, were discovered remains of seven skeletons 7 to 8 feet tall. (St. Paul Pioneer Press, June 29, 188
.A mound near Toledo, Ohio, held 20 skeletons, seated and facing east with jaws and teeth "twice as large as those of present day people," and besides each was a large bowl with "curiously wrought hieroglyphic figures." (Chicago Record, Oct. 24, 1895; cited by Ron G. Dobbins, NEARA Journal, v13, fall 197
.The skeleton of a huge man was uncovered at the Beckley farm, Lake Koronis, Minnesota; while at Moose Island and Pine City, bones of other giants came to light. (St. Paul Globe, Aug. 12, 1896).
In 1911, several red-haired mummies ranging from 6 and a half feet to 8 feet tall were discovered in a cave in Lovelock, Nevada.
In February and June of 1931, large skeletons were found in the Humboldt lake bed near Lovelock, Nevada. The first of these two skeletons found measured 8 1/2 feet tall and appeared to have been wrapped in a gum-covered fabric similar to the Egyptian manner. The second skeleton was almost 10 feet long. (Review - Miner, June 19, 1931)
A 7 ft 7 inch skeleton was reported to have been found on the Friedman ranch, near Lovelock, Nevada, in 1939.(Review - Miner, Sept. 29, 1939).
In 1965, a skeleton measuring 8 feet 9 inches was found buried under a rock ledge along the Holly Creek in east-central Kentucky.
CrackerJax
New Member
Fish you are one naive dude....... super naive.
CrackerJax
New Member
C'mon doob....you don't actually believe a creationist would use an ape as a substitute for human fossils...... 
Sacrilege!!!
Sacrilege!!!