Hello,
I'm new here and I signed on because I was google searching and stumbled upon a post and read it and looked at some of the post here and seen and noticed how much zeal many here have that is not positive toward God. I also noticed many here commented in an abstract manner that science is the argument that Christians cannot contend with. Well I here am not a scholar nor smart enough to be working as a higher up in an office somewhere, no I am but a simple and humble machinist and not even a good one, but I do much biblical research and dab a bit into what I believe to be scientific proof that God exist through evidence found through researchers called Creationist. I have also seen and read many scriptures that contain information that pre-dates major information events found, and proved through science. My Challenge is that you tell me why God cannot exist and the scientific evidence that supports it, so you can see if I can not give you a viable argument based on scientific evidence in reply that proves God exist.

-I will make clear now that my responses could take up to two weeks, because I'm busy and also unable to immediately pull up the information needed for myself.
-&My point: is to prove that God exist, and to show that Christians (The type that read the Word and believe) can have good arguments, which should be taken into consideration in the field of scientific research.

Your point "is to prove that God exist".

Okay. The onus is now on you.

-Decay of the Earths magnetic field:
Dr. Thomas Barnes, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Texas at El Paso, has published the definitive work in this field. Scientific observations since 1829 have shown that the earth's magnetic field has been measurably decaying at an exponential rate, demonstrating its half-life to be approximately 1,400 years. In practical application its strength 20,000 years ago would approximate that of a magnetic star. Under those conditions many of the atoms necessary for life processes could not form. These data demonstrate that earth's entire history is young, within a few thousand of years.

-Helium Content in Earth's Atmosphere... Physicist Melvin Cook, Nobel Prize medalist found that helium-4 enters our atmosphere from solar wind and radioactive decay of uranium. At present rates our atmosphere would accumulate current helium-4 amounts in less than 10,000 years.

-Population Statistics proving the time from Noah till now is very close to accurate:
World population growth rate in recent times is about 2% per year. Practicable application of growth rate throughout human history would be about half that number. Wars, disease, famine, etc. have wiped out approximately one third of the population on average every 82 years. Starting with eight people, and applying these growth rates since the Flood of Noah's day (about 4500 years ago) would give a total human population at just under six billion people. However, application on an evolutionary time scale runs into major difficulties. Starting with one "couple" just 41,000 years ago would give us a total population of 2 x 1089. The universe does not have space to hold so many bodies.

-Carbon Dating has its flaws:
A less-common form of the carbon atom, carbon-14, is used today by scientists as a method to date once-living organisms. Many people believe that carbon dating disproves the Biblical time scale of history. However, because of the difficulties with current C14 dating techniques, the dates produced have been shown to be faulty.

Carbon-14 is produced in the upper atmosphere by action of cosmic rays. Once the C 14 has been formed, by converting nitrogen-14 into carbon-14, it behaves like ordinary carbon-12, combining with oxygen to give carbon dioxide, and freely cycling through the cells of all plants and animals. Carbon-14 is used for a dating material because once it has been formed, C14 begins to decay radioactively back to nitrogen-14, at a rate of change that can be measured. As soon as an organism dies, the C14 atoms which decay are no longer replaced by new ones through respiration. Consequently, the ratio of C14 to C12 in that once-living organism decreases as time goes on. The problem with the carbon dating method is—scientists can not be sure of what the C14/C12 ratio was when the organism died. Carbon dating assumes that the ratio has remained constant; however, events, such as the industrial revolution, are known to have raised C12 levels. Other possible factors, such as the presence of a water canopy, would have lowered the amount of C14 in the pre-Flood world. Because pre-Flood specimens had so little carbon-14 in them, some might appear to have been decaying for tens of thousands of years. Also, the decay of the earth’s magnetic field would have direct effects on C14 level, again, giving artificially old ages the farther you go back in time. Finally, carbon dating has been shown untrustworthy with some present day aquatic specimens that were concluded to be thousands of years old. For example, the shells of living snails’ were carbon dated and showed that the snails had died 27,000 years ago. Other specimens have been carbon dated more than once, each time producing a different date varying by thousands of years. In overview, we see that the radiocarbon dating method is certainly no embarrassment to the Biblical creationist who believes in a young earth. In fact, when all data, such as the decay of the magnetic field and the canopy, is taken into accord, carbon dating seems to support a young earth.

Much more info is available:
-----(information taken from creationevidence.org)

Hello,
I'm new here and I signed on because I was google searching and stumbled upon a post and read it and looked at some of the post here and seen and noticed how much zeal many here have that is not positive toward God. I also noticed many here commented in an abstract manner that science is the argument that Christians cannot contend with. Well I here am not a scholar nor smart enough to be working as a higher up in an office somewhere, no I am but a simple and humble machinist and not even a good one, but I do much biblical research and dab a bit into what I believe to be scientific proof that God exist through evidence found through researchers called Creationist. I have also seen and read many scriptures that contain information that pre-dates major information events found, and proved through science. My Challenge is that you tell me why God cannot exist and the scientific evidence that supports it, so you can see if I can not give you a viable argument based on scientific evidence in reply that proves God exist.

-I will make clear now that my responses could take up to two weeks, because I'm busy and also unable to immediately pull up the information needed for myself.
-&My point: is to prove that God exist, and to show that Christians (The type that read the Word and believe) can have good arguments, which should be taken into consideration in the field of scientific research.


Honey, what makes you think that the scientifc method is THE one to prove that God exists? Or that science has anything to do with God, either proving God or disproving God?

Hello, welcome, appropriate name.
I'm new here and I signed on because I was google searching and stumbled upon a post and read it and looked at some of the post here and seen and noticed how much zeal many here have that is not positive toward God.why would it?. I also noticed many here commented in an abstract manner that science is the argument that Christians cannot contend with. Well I here am not a scholar nor smart enough to be working as a higher up in an office somewhere, no I am but a simple and humble machinist and not even a good one, but I do much biblical research and dab a bit into what I believe to be scientific proofi'm glad it subjective to you, as it's cant be classed as scientific. that God exist through evidence found through researchers called Creationist. research means to check other avenues beside the bible, creationists Belief in the literal interpretation of the account of the creation of the universe and of all living things related in the Bible. I have also seen and read many scriptures that contain information that pre-dates major information events found,see above answer, have you any information to back up this assumption. My Challenge is that you tell me why God cannot exist and the scientific evidence that supports it, so you can see if I can not give you a viable argument based on scientific evidence in reply that proves God exist.the onus is quite clearly on you, it would be infantile to try and prove non-existence, it's blatently obvious.

this was posted by mis-t-highs,

Proving Existence or Non-Existence.

The existence of a thing can be conclusively proved by producing one single instance of the thing.

To put that another way: -
When the existence of a thing is denied, This can be proven wrong by producing one single instance of the thing said not to exist

The non-existence of a thing can never be conclusively proved because there is always the theoretical assumption that the thing exists but has not been seen yet or it exists in a place that can not be visited. Unless all places in the universe have been visited and are being constantly observed, we can not be absolutely certain.

From this we can say that there are only two possible statements we can make about the existence of a thing:


The thing exists.

It is unknown if the thing exists or not.

It is not possible to prove that a thing "does not exist" without further qualifying criteria.

If a thing does NOT exist it can not leave any evidence of it's non-existence. Only things that DO exist can leave evidence. From this we can derive that conclusive proof can only come from the person that claims that a thing exists. It is nonsensical to demand proof of non-existence.


I will make clear now that my responses could take up to two weeks, because I'm busy and also unable to immediately pull up the information needed for myself.
My point: is to prove that God exists, and to show that Christians (The type that read the Word and believe) can have good arguments, which should be taken into consideration in the field of scientific research.two weeks is but a blink, to the eternity it will take for you to prove a god exists.

Ahh Jeff...

All of your information from "creationevidence.org" is bogus. They have but one goal - prove creationism is right at all costs. This is not how science is done. Creationists presuppose the answer and then go looking for evidence to support it, tossing contrary evidence.

-Decay of the Earths magnetic field:
Dr. Thomas Barnes, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Texas at El Paso, has published the definitive work in this field. Scientific observations since 1829 have shown that the earth's magnetic field has been measurably decaying at an exponential rate, demonstrating its half-life to be approximately 1,400 years. In practical application its strength 20,000 years ago would approximate that of a magnetic star. Under those conditions many of the atoms necessary for life processes could not form. These data demonstrate that earth's entire history is young, within a few thousand of years.
The earths magnetic field goes through periodic reversals and has many times over the long history of the planet. It weakens and then reverses. The current trend is just one of weakening and may indicate an imminenet reversal (in several thousand years) or just a minor fluctuation. Dr. Barns is lying by omission in order to support his cause. He's not a real scientist, or his words have been misused. I guarantee it.

-Helium Content in Earth's Atmosphere... Physicist Melvin Cook, Nobel Prize medalist found that helium-4 enters our atmosphere from solar wind and radioactive decay of uranium. At present rates our atmosphere would accumulate current helium-4 amounts in less than 10,000 years.
It's also a common decay product for other radioactive elements as well. Did you know that helium (even helium 4) is very light? That it escapes from the atmosphere at a rate that eventually balances with it's production? Please don't post responses from any of the dozens of "creation research institutes" or whatever. I've read em all. No science contained in any of them.

-Population Statistics proving the time from Noah till now is very close to accurate:
World population growth rate in recent times is about 2% per year. Practicable application of growth rate throughout human history would be about half that number. Wars, disease, famine, etc. have wiped out approximately one third of the population on average every 82 years. Starting with eight people, and applying these growth rates since the Flood of Noah's day (about 4500 years ago) would give a total human population at just under six billion people. However, application on an evolutionary time scale runs into major difficulties. Starting with one "couple" just 41,000 years ago would give us a total population of 2 x 1089. The universe does not have space to hold so many bodies.
Human populations have gone through "bottlenecks" - environmentally stressful times - throughout our history. The most recent one was estimated to be some tens of thousands of years ago in which the population was greatly reduced. The linear progression you provide is childishly naive and a lie perpetrated by creationists.

-Carbon Dating has its flaws:
A less-common form of the carbon atom, carbon-14, is used today by scientists as a method to date once-living organisms. Many people believe that carbon dating disproves the Biblical time scale of history. However, because of the difficulties with current C14 dating techniques, the dates produced have been shown to be faulty.

Carbon-14 is produced in the upper atmosphere by action of cosmic rays. Once the C 14 has been formed, by converting nitrogen-14 into carbon-14, it behaves like ordinary carbon-12, combining with oxygen to give carbon dioxide, and freely cycling through the cells of all plants and animals. Carbon-14 is used for a dating material because once it has been formed, C14 begins to decay radioactively back to nitrogen-14, at a rate of change that can be measured. As soon as an organism dies, the C14 atoms which decay are no longer replaced by new ones through respiration. Consequently, the ratio of C14 to C12 in that once-living organism decreases as time goes on. The problem with the carbon dating method is—scientists can not be sure of what the C14/C12 ratio was when the organism died. Carbon dating assumes that the ratio has remained constant; however, events, such as the industrial revolution, are known to have raised C12 levels. Other possible factors, such as the presence of a water canopy, would have lowered the amount of C14 in the pre-Flood world. Because pre-Flood specimens had so little carbon-14 in them, some might appear to have been decaying for tens of thousands of years. Also, the decay of the earth’s magnetic field would have direct effects on C14 level, again, giving artificially old ages the farther you go back in time. Finally, carbon dating has been shown untrustworthy with some present day aquatic specimens that were concluded to be thousands of years old. For example, the shells of living snails’ were carbon dated and showed that the snails had died 27,000 years ago. Other specimens have been carbon dated more than once, each time producing a different date varying by thousands of years. In overview, we see that the radiocarbon dating method is certainly no embarrassment to the Biblical creationist who believes in a young earth. In fact, when all data, such as the decay of the magnetic field and the canopy, is taken into accord, carbon dating seems to support a young earth.
The carbon dating technique is regularly calibrated against known historical eventd (e.g. known ancient egyptian dynastic artifacts) and is reasonably reliable. All of the sources of error your info points to are taken into account in the error statements provided with any carbon date. The paragraph you provide is propaganda for the simpleminded who don't have the faintest clue as to how this is really done. Pointing out snail dates which scientists already know are suspect due to the nature of their environment is completely disingenuous. What about isochron dating? This is used to provide dates for the oldest rocks on earth - 3.5by or more.

Here's a better source of info:

http://www.talkorigins.org/

Superluminal,

What makes you think that the scientifc method is THE one to prove or disprove that God exists? Or that science has anything to do with God, either proving God or disproving God?

Water,

I don't give a crap about whether god exists or not anymore. It's a useless concept. All I did was respond to some scientific assertions by Mr. TheLearner. He posted bogus statements, I countered them. That's all.

What makes you think my post had anything to do with god at all?

Superluminal,

You have responded to Jeff's post. I think Jeff's position is a strawman, and you were fighting a strawman.
I don't know why attack strawmen and treat them as if they weren't that.
So, in case you insist that you were not fighting a strawman, you are in fact quietly accepting that science has somehting to do with proving/disproving God.

Water

Science isn't interested in gods, proving existence or anything else. Science is only interested in how things work.

The problem begins when people compare the hard evidence of science to religious dogma, and one is left to either ignore the evidence in favor of dogma or understand that the evidence clearly contradicts dogma. As time marches on and more hard evidence is found, we begin to conclude that gods may not exist afterall.

Perhaps one day, we may find enough hard evidence to conclude that gods could not possibly exist.

And then hopefully, religion will begin its final demise and be irradicated from the Earth.

Jeff's "position" is just some quotes from a creationist website about matters of physical reality (age of the earth, etc...). He wasn't arguing anything. And I wasn't attacking. I was correcting. Are you trying to start a fight with me water darling?

If

Science isn't interested in gods,

why


As time marches on and more hard evidence is found, we begin to conclude that gods may not exist afterall.

Perhaps one day, we may find enough hard evidence to conclude that gods could not possibly exist.

?

That is still using science to prove/disprove God.

Jeff's "position" is just some quotes from a creationist website about matters of physical reality (age of the earth, etc...). He wasn't arguing anything. And I wasn't attacking. I was correcting. Are you trying to start a fight with me water darling?

I can't stand a bad scientist, and I can't stand a bad theist. And I can't stand bad scientists fighting with bad theists and vice versa. Or even attempt to fight, or what might turn into a fight.

:mad: :mad: :mad:

- to the Biblical creationist who believes in a young earth.

Much more info is available:
-----(information taken from creationevidence.org)

-Decay of the Earths magnetic field:
Dr. Thomas Barnes,
Simply put, Dr. Barnes was wrong.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-yea.html#proof11

Helium Content in Earth's Atmosphere... Physicist Melvin Cook
Search for "cook" on this page and you will find his calculations were flawed. He overlooked facts while making his calculations, leading to his calculations being based on flawed numbers, therefore the results could not produce fact.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-yea.html

Population Statistics
Simply put. Using this math you get this: "At the time the Israelites entered Canaan, for instance, we get a world population of 2024!"

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-yea2.html

Carbon Dating has its flaws
Yes, it does. Science is aware of that.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CD/CD011_3.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CD/CD011_4.html

a more complicated read which helps explain multiple methods used to date things:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-c14.html

I would suggest you speak with someone familiar with carbon dating and its errors, and what researchers do to validate their date/time claims. If no one here can answer that clearly for you, try a post to talk.origins and ask for someone to explain specifically how this is done, and how science resolves these issues.

As far as the website you posted, I skimmed some contents and found it to be lacking in any proof at all. For example: A coal formation that was not formed the way most coal formations occur, does not negate the existance, nor the method by which most coalbeds are formed. It simply indicates there may be more than one way to form coal. Additionally, I found no date estimated for this Powder Basin coal formation, so that part is a complete unknown and may in itself predate the flood story, negating even further the conclusion in this part of your link. Being as other portions of that website used dates to try to prove their conclusion, I would have to suspect, the age of the Powder Basin coal formation Does impead their conclusion so therefore, it was discarded.

I am no expert on coal so this is as far as I will go.

I would suggest that the scientific evidence seems to point out that the earth is not the age the hyper-creationist insists upon and then "proves" by attacking what is quite possibly solid science, i.e. an accurate representation of physical processes.

I would also suggest that dalahar has something when he points out the lack of sun thing. How do you decide what the bible really means?
This is the question better answered by the religious than the scientist. Not the "carbon-dating has it's issues" thing.

I tend to go with the kabbalists description of the cycles of creation, since it was their book long before I ever read any of it, and because it results in an approximate age of the earth which is pretty close to scientific approximations, long before they had the science to do such approximations.

Science is all we have, water.

water:

I can't stand a bad scientist, and I can't stand a bad theist. And I can't stand bad scientists fighting with bad theists and vice versa. Or even attempt to fight, or what might turn into a fight.

And I can't stand your inane babbling.

That is still using science to prove/disprove God.
Why can we not use science to prove/disprove god? Why do theists insist on using logic, and reason only to dump it in the trash whenever it does not suit them best?

Because religion is a house of cards built on shifting ground on a windswept plain. That's why.

Science is all we have, water.

Muhaha, I am in a devilish mood.


Prove it, SouthStar, prove it that science is all we have.

Why can we not use science to prove/disprove god? Why do theists insist on using logic, and reason only to dump it in the trash whenever it does not suit them best?

Are you assuming that the scientific method is the proper toll to go about proving/disproving God?
If yes, what makes you think so?

And do consider the inherent relativity of any empirical endeavour.

A man once said "why are you seeking knowledge? Are you not indirectly seeking God?" I say why do we spend resources on going to space every couple of years? God must be the shy type. Obviously there is no known address or road to God so we seek him through knowledge, thus far he or she does not exist.

"We are like children in a library. We know all the books are in some sort of order but we have no idea how and who" -Albert Einstien

Muhaha, I am in a devilish mood.


Prove it, SouthStar, prove it that science is all we have.
no your quite clearly in an insane mood, if your the "clever one" you teach us, or shut the fuck up, all you've done with your inane rabblings, is hyjack the thread, we're on the second page, and nothing been said since, you opened your mouth.
your the one making assertions, theres something other, you know the rules regarding assertions dont you.

I have never believed anything is capable of creating the universe, maybe earth but certainly not the universe. The universe is all that is and everything comes from its womb. I deeply believe religion is early man's constitution but I can neither prove nor disprove that just like the notion of God itself. We have changed too many Gods in the past for me to go ahead and fully embrace another fictitious deity, who knows I might be offending Zeus or Orisi if I attend any Muslim ceremony. For this religion has easily failed in credibility. Necessity is the mother of all creations so I believe we are serving God a purpose by adopting us, pity some of us will burn in hell after all this servitude. Even a mother and father raise children because of one reason or the other, which is usually loneliness. However God creates us for no real reason, give us freedom and the rest is up to him or her. In my opinion freedom or free will is an illusion because you are only as free as you think. If I were a lesser animal like the dog I will probably not be worried about why I haven't traveled to Hong Kong lately. On the soul, I have never seen my soul but I can seriously tell you that the body is enough of a hassle believe me, just wait till you are a little older. I’ve never really been spiritual person; I find it too creepy and arrestingly ugly. If there is something anybody wants to tell me, whether from heaven or hell, let he or she come forth because I take no interest in punching other peoples believe with my skeptics. Let’s take two cars with the same engine but different body style; wouldn’t the difference be a superficial one? Psychologists believe that what differentiates humans is only our experiences and physical appearance, aside from these we are all the same. Your experiences however is largely subjected to how intelligent one is, which is not up to you but your brain and body’s physics, so its safe to say some of us are all dammed right from birth. It’s kind of like a river channel, the water flows in accordance with the physical nature of the channels. Yes, function follows form. Does God exist? Yes if only in our minds because psychologists believe there are people who see demons out of a preconceived respect for them. Sociologists believe that the collective human society is more influential that the single individual or nuclear family. In respect of this I think religion is the father and mother figure of the collective society, usually with parents around children do not run with scissors as much. Someone once said religion might be questionable but it is necessary. All so confusing.

"Dear lord how did you find the imagination to create all this beautiful things if you alone existed" - Aquinas

I think that in other threads, I and my fellow secularists have more than "proved" that god does not exist by any rational standards. In science, overwhelming evidence to the contrary along with zero compelling evidence for a proposition usually gets the theory in question relegated to the history books. I know that "proof" is a strong word. Let's just say we are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. God is a fantasy. An artifact of the particular way humans percieve the universe. Remember, our advanced brains are relatively recent and we haven't had a big chance to seperate the wheat from the chaff.

Given: god is all-knowing and all-powerful.

Can god create something he cannot lift? Can god create a thought he cannot comprehend?

If he can, he is not god. If he can't, he is not god.

Muhaha, I am in a devilish mood.


Prove it, SouthStar, prove it that science is all we have.

To prove it would require science. There you go.


Unless, of course, you have another method in mind.

Maybe the ancient Greeks were on to something when they anthropomorphized their gods. 'Course that wouldn't leave much to argue or write books or fight wars about.........

I think that in other threads, I and my fellow secularists have more than "proved" that god does not exist by any rational standards. In science, overwhelming evidence to the contrary along with zero compelling evidence for a proposition usually gets the theory in question relegated to the history books. I know that "proof" is a strong word. Let's just say we are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. God is a fantasy. An artifact of the particular way humans percieve the universe. Remember, our advanced brains are relatively recent and we haven't had a big chance to seperate the wheat from the chaff.

So you are after all using science to prove/disprove God ...

no your quite clearly in an insane mood, if your the "clever one" you teach us, or shut the fuck up, all you've done with your inane rabblings, is hyjack the thread, we're on the second page, and nothing been said since, you opened your mouth.
your the one making assertions, theres something other, you know the rules regarding assertions dont you.

You, the atheist, are the one who per default considers himself smarter.

I'm just challenging your rational thinking.

To prove it would require science. There you go.

Another one of our favourites sneaks up: argumentum ad ignorantiam.
Just because we think science is all we have, this doesn't make it so.


Unless, of course, you have another method in mind.

There is always a light that never goes out.

water:

There is always a light that never goes out.

Oh great water, stuff of life, please, please enlighten us as to the validity of your philosophical ways of knowing, and show us how your completely self referential methodology illuminates the universe for us. We beg you.

Religion is all about "...I think..." or "...I believe..." or "...I hope..." or "...I want...", but can never be about "...I know..." or "...I can prove to you..." Religion is about gambling on something that has never been proven and can never be proved. And there are too many games to choose from to say that any one of them is the right game to play. Religion is limited to being an unproveable theory.

Science, good science, has the Scientific Method for examining physical evidence and determining what is and what isn't true. Valid theories survive while invalid theories go into the trash.

marv,

Does it ever make you feel like throttling the nearest theist, just to get them to admit this simple fact (as you stated)? God is a construct of the human mind. Why does this seem so blatantly obvious to me...? Hmm... need a new thread.

Another one of our favourites sneaks up: argumentum ad ignorantiam. Just because we think science is all we have, this doesn't make it so.

Please I'm dying to know. Just what other method is there to detect weather or not god exists? You keep alluding to the fact that we cannot use science, what can we use then?

You, the atheist, are the one who per default considers himself smarter. you've got atheism totally wrong, I dont consider myself better, than any other person on this planet, we are all the same.we all eat through same hole and shit out of the same hole.
just because, I use facts over fantasy, to lead my life, does'nt make me smarter, it just put's me in more control of my thought processes.
I'm just challenging your rational thinking.you have'nt challenged anything, your just rabbling on.

Oh great water, stuff of life, please, please enlighten us as to the validity of your philosophical ways of knowing, and show us how your completely self referential methodology illuminates the universe for us. We beg you.

Ah. The funny thing is that you are caught in your own trap ...
I am not espousing any other methodology, I am only basing my whole position that an argumentum ad ignorantiam is not a valid basis.
You are assuming that I know some other way. I am only objecting the argumentum ad ignorantiam.

you've got atheism totally wrong, I dont consider myself better, than any other person on this planet, we are all the same.we all eat through same hole and shit out of the same hole.
just because, I use facts over fantasy, to lead my life, does'nt make me smarter, it just put's me in more control of my thought processes.

And for this sake, you consider yourself superior to those hwo don't do as you do. This is, after all, your position for calling some other people morons.


you have'nt challenged anything, your just rabbling on.

Then you aren't able to see the challenge, it seems.

Please I'm dying to know. Just what other method is there to detect weather or not god exists? You keep alluding to the fact that we cannot use science, what can we use then?

We should be true to science, and, using its own analytical method, surmise that it might not be sufficient to adequately describe and explain reality.

To insist science is all there is is to insist on an argumentum ad ignorantiam. This is all I am saying.

I haven't offered any other way. I am only objecting the argumentum ad ignorantiam, from the scientific perspective.

so if I called you an ass, blockhead, boob, booby, cretin, dimwit, donkey, dork, dumb ox, dumbbell, dunce, dunderhead, fool, geek, halfwit, ignoramus, imbecile, jackass, jerk, kook, meathead, mental defective, moron, nincompoop, ninny, nitwit, pinhead, pointy head, simpleton, stupid, tomfool, twit, yo-yo.
it would mean I thought I was smarter, than you would it, talk about over sensitive!
it's just name calling everbody does it, especially when you feel someone is being foolish.
my sig says "I see morons" ,which comes for a parody of the film sixth sense, it actually go's "I see dead people, and sometimes, sometimes they come here". some person had changed the dead people for morons, as a joke.
it's just humour.
To insist science is all there is is to insist on an argumentum ad ignorantiam. but nobody else but you think that way. it's only argumentum ad ignorantiam to you, to insist that science is'nt the only way, is completely irrational.
it's just an Argumentum ad baculum.

And for this sake, you consider yourself superior to those hwo don't do as you do. This is, after all, your position for calling some other people morons.

Yes.

it's just humour.

i doubt it (sarcasm)

but nobody else but you think that way.

I would

it's only argumentum ad ignorantiam to you, to insist that science is'nt the only way, is completely irrational.

why?

yorda:you dont count your in fantasyland.
yorda: supply a unscientific, but objective way of proving or disproving god.
even water has said he cant supply another way, he's only " objecting the argumentum ad ignorantiam, from the scientific perspective."

yorda:you dont count your in fantasyland.
yorda: supply a unscientific, but objective way of proving or disproving god.

stupid0. i've already proved the existence of "God". just consider: do you exist? therefore "god" exists. you are god. what else could he be, if not the self?

even water has said he cant supply another way, he's only " objecting the argumentum ad ignorantiam, from the scientific perspective."

what does it matter?

Does it ever make you feel like throttling the nearest theist,...No not really. To each his own - so long as they act as civilly toward me as I try to do toward them. If someone wants to believe in a diety, that's their business.

I think my wife and I are good examples. She knows I'm an atheist, and I know she's sincere as a born-again Christian. December will see our 26th anniversary and we haven't killed each other yet.

We should be true to science, and, using its own analytical method, surmise that it might not be sufficient to adequately describe and explain reality.
Why might science not be able to adequately describe reality? It seams to do quite a great job of doing exactly that. I'm willing to admit there may be another way, but until that time I'll continue using what works so far.

I haven't offered any other way. I am only objecting the argumentum ad ignorantiam, from the scientific perspective.
Yes, but you offer no other alternative, so how can it be an argument from ignorantiam? If I said the the earth was round would you argue that it may be flat, simply because we may not be able to use science to prove that it's round? This is just being plain silly!

dalahar:

People who believe in god also believe in science. Why do you talk as if we have thrown out science? We just believe in something that has not been proven, along with all the things that have been proven.
And that's just peachy. The problem arises when those cute, warm-and-fuzzy, unproven, beliefs of yours become entrenched in society and are used to restrict the freedom of individuals if they don't conform. Stay out of my government, my public schools, and the world of the testable and provable. It's easy.

Do you realize that most people have no clue how many atheists there are? And they still think atheist = satan spawn. Why is that? Because we don't have an agenda and we generally keep our mouths shut. Not until theists (christians) started this assault on the constitution (in the US) and the public education system, did we start to become activist. Take a lesson. Shut up and keep your religion private. That's the way Jesus would have wanted it.

dalahar:

I haven't been in your business, superL

Sheesh! I wasn't talking to you directly dalahar. It was more of a rant directed at those theists that think we should have a theocracy. I suppose I should be more clear when I use the collective "you". Sorry for any misunderstanding.

Yes, it's ok. Let it out. It's ok to cry you know. Breathe... There now. Feel better?

Oh'-Kay... Anyway I guess I'll open by quoting a weary Astronomer, and agnostic Dr. Robert Jastrow;
"For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."

=Reading the post here I guess I'll start by pointing out an illusion of bias on part of Creationist presented by a couple of comments by Mr.Superluminal:
by: superluminal
All of your information from "creationevidence.org" is bogus. They have but one goal - prove creationism is right at all costs. This is not how science is done. Creationists presuppose the answer and then go looking for evidence to support it, tossing contrary evidence.
-So are Creationist bias, all I have to say is 'Dugh!'. But would they lie in order to present proof that God exist, most Christians believe that it is a sin to lie, so I highly doubt it. Is it wrong for a Creationist to use scripture as a guide into his/ or her research? No! as a matter of fact it is encouraged in scripture to do so:
(Job 12:7-10); 7"But now ask the beasts, and let them teach you; And the birds of the heavens, and let them tell you. 8"Or speak to the earth, and let it teach you; And let the fish of the sea declare to you. 9"Who among all these does not know That the hand of the LORD has done this, 10In whose hand is the life of every living thing, And the breath of all mankind?"
-So I pointed out the bias among Creationist so lets now see if there is bias on the other side. Lets start with an article in "Humanist magazine (an atheistic publication)" written by Professor J. Dunphy entitled -A Religion for a New Age-;
"I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level, preschool day care or large state university. The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old, and the new, the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism. It will undoubtedly be a long, arduous, painful struggle replete with much sorrow and many tears, but humanism will emerge triumphant, It must if the family of humankind is to survive."
…Some are a little less conspiracy, and more unchaste like in -Confession of a Professed Atheist- in it Aldous Huxley quoted;
"I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption ...For myself, as no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneous liberation from a certain political and economic system, and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom."
It's quite ironic to me that shortly before Darwin's "theory" took hold, the invention of the printing press was wide spread enough for everyone to have there own personal copy of God's Word, such as Romans 1:21-25 which states;"21…For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkend.22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four footed animals and crawling creatures. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen"
=================================================

-Now as for population:
All right, so it seems if you refuse to notice the evidence found in statistics coinciding with todays population, then you must obviously believe in a different scenario. So lets reveal how ridiculous this other scenario is by simple statistics:
-The population growth over a million years would produce 23,256 generations. We calculate the expected population by beginning with one couple one million years ago, and use the same assumptions of a forty-three year generation and 2.5 children per family. The calculations reveal that we should have a total population on earth today of 10^2700 people. The evolutionary theory of a million years of growth would produce trillions * trillions * trillions * trillions of people that should be alive today on our planet. To put this in perspective, this number is greater that the total number of atoms in the vast universe. As for "missing links" being hard to find, all I got to say to this theory is "BONE- Voyage"

Well that’s all I have time to type today I kind of ranted a bit too much, I will be back with a bombardment of information.There is a Creator and much visible proof all around and proof of a Designer, from the exact placement of earth, and the universe to sustain human life, and much more.
Yeshua said in (John 3:19-21):"19"This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. 20"For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21"But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God."

P.S. I wont go strawman on you like some think.

Mr The Learner:

-Now as for population:
All right, so it seems if you refuse to notice the evidence found in statistics coinciding with todays population, then you must obviously believe in a different scenario. So lets reveal how ridiculous this other scenario is by simple statistics:
-The population growth over a million years would produce 23,256 generations. We calculate the expected population by beginning with one couple one million years ago, and use the same assumptions of a forty-three year generation and 2.5 children per family. The calculations reveal that we should have a total population on earth today of 10^2700 people. The evolutionary theory of a million years of growth would produce trillions * trillions * trillions * trillions of people that should be alive today on our planet. To put this in perspective, this number is greater that the total number of atoms in the vast universe. As for "missing links" being hard to find, all I got to say to this theory is "BONE- Voyage"

If you want to discuss how stupid, naive, and ignorant this is, feel free to ask. We'll talk.

Is it wrong for a Creationist to use scripture as a guide into his/ or her research?

So I pointed out the bias among Creationist so lets now see if there is bias on the other side.Of course there is bias on both sides, that is to be expected. This is why we examine the evidence and the arguments themselves and not simply the opinions of others.

The calculations reveal that we should have a total population on earth today of 10^2700 people.A rabbit can have 6 litters per year of 5-8 kits. Using your method for calculating the human population on rabbits (let's say 6 kits per litter, 5 litters per year) that means any two rabbits would have over 590 TRILLION descendants in ten years. (Actually more, I just averaged one generation reproducing each year). Something is glaringly wrong with your methodology. The fact is that populations do not grow geometrically beyond the constraints of their environment; if they did we would be up to our elbows in rabbits. You are purely and simply incorrect.

Historical and archaeological evidence demonstrate that the human population remained under 200million until technological advances (specifically in agriculture and medicine) made it possible to support a much larger population.

http://www.biology.iupui.edu/biocourses/N100/2k4ch39pop.html

As for "missing links" being hard to find, all I got to say to this theory is "BONE- Voyage" "Missing links" abound. The only problem exists in the comprehension of creationists who somehow seem to expect a complete record of every generation of living creature in the fossil record. So that whenever a "missing link" fossil is found creationists reply, "Well what about that gap?"

I will be back with a bombardment of information.We'll be waiting.

P.S. I wont go strawman on you like some think.You already have but we expect it from creationists and forgive you. Hopefully we can help cure you of some of your ignorance.

~Raithere

Well that’s all I have time to type today I kind of ranted a bit too much, I will be back with a bombardment of information.There is a Creator and much visible proof all around and proof of a Designer, from the exact placement of earth, and the universe to sustain human life, and much more.
First off your logic here is faulty. Just because there was a creator does not make it automatically God. It could have been Zeus, Mishra, Vishnu, or even interglactic space aliens. That's your first biggest problem.

Secondly you shouldn't try to pedal design theory, it's been debunked for hundreds of years now. Honestly I believe it's one of the most poor arguments for a god around next to the ontological proof of god. I could go on to explain why, but I think I'll let you flesh out your argument a little better here, before we debate further.

A rabbit can have 6 litters per year of 5-8 kits. Using your method for calculating the human population on rabbits (let's say 6 kits per litter, 5 litters per year) that means any two rabbits would have over 590 TRILLION descendants in ten years.

Forget rabbits, a cockroach has around 600 kids per time which would mean what.. a total cockroach population of... (can't be bothered doing the maths - but it's damn huge) :D

-So are Creationist bias, all I have to say is 'Dugh!'. But would they lie in order to present proof that God exist, most Christians believe that it is a sin to lie, so I highly doubt it. most Christians believe that it is a sin to kill, but they still do it, so doubt all you like. and who's dugh, is it short for douglas.

Now as for population:
have you took in to consideration that men and women did'nt live as long, and many more children were still born, woman died at giving birth, and the average children per family was more likely 0.0125 ( one child being born to ever forty families) given that disasters, wars, famine and pestilence, and many other outside influences had an effect. also the figure 2.5 children does not take into account spinsters and bachelors, and lastly that there is always a equal ratio between woman and men.
really I should not even give this credence as super said "it's stupid, naive, and ignorant.

Well, Mr. Superluminal, why would I want to talk to you, your rude, hard headed, and a bit irritable. Your aviator of a rabid wolf suits you well.
As to Raithere even if the math is flawed ’though its not specific enough to be so’ …but your statistics showing that human population stayed under 200million as a constant is highly ridiculous, So then there should be an ample amount of proof for a specific “theory” contained in all the bones of those that died before our wonderful world of technology, sarcastically speaking. I would also like to add that even if this wonderful world of technology keeps us from working less, which it doesn’t, or if it helps us to eat better, which it doesn’t, or if it keeps us from dieing by disease, which it does in small variations among specific afflictions surely not to the extent of a 50% life increase in population, I find it quite odd that it just so happens today we have this great increase yet before the discovery of antibiotics an apparent population increase was quite obvious. As for trillions * trillions * trillions * trillions, go ahead and scratch off three of those trillions and forget multiplying it and give me just a trillion, No, give me 75 billion, how about 50 billion, ...25 billion? Anyway as I was reading that web site you gave me, all I could do is picture that rear end character from the Pink Floyd video speaking.
Now to Horseman42, actually there is more proof that many of your great minds through out history believed there is a Creator. There was an article by professors E. J. Larson and L. William in “Nature” a well known science journal April 3, 1997 issue. The survey asked a thousand TOP scientists very specific questions about their religious beliefs regarding a personal God. The survey said 40% of physicists, biologist, and mathematicians acknowledged that they now believe in a god. And not just some whacked out philosophy but rather they believed in a God as a Supreme Being who is involved in our earthly affairs and hears our prayers. So you guessed it I’m adding comments from one of the greatest minds in recent times Professor Einstein who through his research, and study we have results.
“to know how God created the world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this of that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details.”
Also
“The scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation... His religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings in an utterly insignificant reflection.”
And when bickering, with others about Quantum Physics Einstein stated,
“God does not just throw dice” ...which I agree, Quantum physics does try to distort the abilities of an Orchestrater, and choice, as well as good and evil.
Second of all out of all gods/idols, Yahweh Eloheem claims that He made the heavens and the earth and I believe Him, and I know that He has left ample proof in His creation, also additional proof is found in His Word, and can be used as a guide to lead one, or just blatantly tell what things are, where they came from, and where proof can be found, In (Numbers 23:10) it says;
”God is not a man that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent has He said, and will not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good.”
When you look at all the prophecies fulfilled in the Word of God and think of the odds, and those dealing with Yeshua (Jesus) alone, most say are 250 prophecies fulfilled I say more, the odds of just 10 of those events being fulfilled at one generation of time is one in 97,500 billion. As for the other prophecies all together ...I wouldn’t put my money on the opposing horse!
As for what is said in the book of Joel and Revelations in this subject, I will give you a scripture from recent findings found in Qumran referred to as Dead Sea Scrolls and you tell me what it may be talking about;
(DSS 1QH +4Q432 Frag.3 Col.11:entitled ‘Thanks to God for protection’)
“...mighty men have camped against me, they have surrounded me with all their weapons of war. Arrows burst forth without ceasing, and the blade of the spear devours trees as fire. Like the roar of mighty waters in the uproar of their voice; a cloudburst and a downpour to destroy many. As catapults, wickedness and fraud burst out when their waves pile up. As for me, when my heart melts like water, my soul becomes strong in Your covenant.”
-if you guessed ...the effects of a nuclear explosion or, from a hydrogen bomb then you did well, and if I could call someone up to give you a cookie, I would.
Anyway since I’ve been lead in the direction of ranting I’ll close for now and come back later and try to take on more. I’ll close with:
(Psalm 100:3)
”Know that the Lord Himself in God, it is He who has made us, and not we ourselves.”

-Chow

Can I also ask us not to forget the homos? I mean c'mon, there's always plenty of homos to ensure the population doesn't 'bounce' too high. We all also know that back in the early days homosexuality was even more prevalent than it is today, (they've just got more PC and sissy about it).

Maybe it's just an anti god thing, but all that detesting he does and it seems nobody cares and is deciding to be a homo anyway. I suppose some of it has to do with the graven image of a semi-naked man tied up bondage style, just begging for some homo anal plugging.

In truthfulness, I have never seen anything quite as "homosexual" as the image of jesus.. A thin, womanly looking male with arms and legs spread - face turned outward. I think it should have an 18 rating personally.

Sheesh Mr. TheLearner. You do realize that you posted a simple linear population growth with no factors for acidental death, natural disease, resource limitations, environmental variations, affluence of culture, war, etc.? Population dynamics are one of the most complicated things to deal with, next to weather prediction. I mean, come on. Do you know how fast some bacteria reproduce? If projected in the simplistic way you propose, we would be ten feet deep in Staphylococcus epidermidis (armpit bacteria) in a week. If you want to believe the deliberate simplistic lies of creationist assholes, be my guest. You are clearly too lazy to do any real thinking for yourself. Good luck with that.

P.S. My friendly avatar "wolfie" is not rabid. He's just hungry, that's all. And he's not to discriminating about who... I mean, what he eats.

--------------------------

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
-- Albert Einstein

I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms.
-- Albert Einstein

I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it.
-- Albert Einstein

It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere.... Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.
-- Albert Einstein

It was the experience of mystery -- even if mixed with fear -- that engendered religion.
-- Albert Einstein

Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being.
-- Albert Einstein

I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation.
-- Albert Einstein

I am convinced that some political and social activities and practices of the Catholic organizations are detrimental and even dangerous for the community as a whole, here and everywhere. I mention here only the fight against birth control at a time when overpopulation in various countries has become a serious threat to the health of people and a grave obstacle to any attempt to organize peace on this planet.
-- Albert Einstein

The mystical trend of our time, which shows itself particularly in the rampant growth of the so-called Theosophy and Spiritualism, is for me no more than a symptom of weakness and confusion. Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions, and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seem to me to be empty and devoid of meaning.
-- Albert Einstein

Well as to all the comments you recorded, Einstein I I think they are wrong You trust some editors, statements by his wife, and his own works prove otherwise,
http://www.albert-einstein.org/
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21482
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21483
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21488
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21489
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21492
And as for his wife;
http://www.pbs.org/opb/einsteinswife/milevastory/index.htm

Well as to all the comments you recorded, Einstein I I think they are wrong You trust some editors, statements by his wife, and his own works prove otherwise,
I dont have time to search around the site for einsteins beliefs.
http://www.albert-einstein.org/

No god mentioned here:
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21482

Document does not exist in english
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21483

No god mentioned here. Science and art are talked about
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21488

Einstein does not profess any belief in any god here.
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21489

I havent a clue as to why you posted this link. Einstein is talking about reporters.
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21492

And as for his wife;
There is nothing at all about Einsteins belief system here.
http://www.pbs.org/opb/einsteinswife/milevastory/index.htm

What exactly are you trying to point out with all these links jeff?

I actually was chomping at the bit to respond to your post here. So full of fallacies, and illogical thinking I hardly know where to start...

Now to Horseman42, actually there is more proof that many of your great minds through out history believed there is a Creator. There was an article by professors E. J. Larson and L. William in “Nature” a well known science journal April 3, 1997 issue. The survey asked a thousand TOP scientists very specific questions about their religious beliefs regarding a personal God. The survey said 40% of physicists, biologist, and mathematicians acknowledged that they now believe in a god. And not just some whacked out philosophy but rather they believed in a God as a Supreme Being who is involved in our earthly affairs and hears our prayers. So you guessed it I’m adding comments from one of the greatest minds in recent times Professor Einstein who through his research, and study we have results.
First off I would care less if 40%, 30, or even 90% of all scientists thought there was a god. For to believe in god based on this is commiting the fallacy known as the argument from numbers or authority. Just because a large portion of the Earth believes in a god doesn't make it true. At one time most people on the planet believed that the Earth was flat. The fact that 90-99% of all people believed it did not make that fact true. Another good analogy is if what a majority of people believed was true, then why spend all this money on finding a cure for cancer when we could simply believe it could be cured by eating chocolate?

What we need to do is examine the REASONS why people believe, and not just accept them because most people believe. Any scientist understands this basic priniciple for it's what science is built on. So I don't really care what Einstien believed. What I do care about is examining why he (and theists in general) believed what he did.

Second of all out of all gods/idols, Yahweh Eloheem claims that He made the heavens and the earth and I believe Him, and I know that He has left ample proof in His creation, also additional proof is found in His Word, and can be used as a guide to lead one, or just blatantly tell what things are, where they came from, and where proof can be found,
Many faiths have a creation myth. The Greeks believed that Zeus and a patheon of gods created the universe. Again why do you simply believe "Yahweh did it"? Please explain the "proof" found in his creation, I'm a little uncertain what you mean by this.

When you look at all the prophecies fulfilled in the Word of God and think of the odds, and those dealing with Yeshua (Jesus) alone, most say are 250 prophecies fulfilled I say more, the odds of just 10 of those events being fulfilled at one generation of time is one in 97,500 billion. As for the other prophecies all together ...I wouldn’t put my money on the opposing horse!
Again what you have here is a logical fallacy. First off I think there is ample evidence to support that the prophecies (at least all 250) did not really occur, and some that are very vague that could have meant many different things. Secondly even if they did occur 100% true you could only claim that the people predicting them could predict future event. Any conjecture that "God did it" is a non-sequitor claim, for you do not know this. The prophecies could have come from angles, demons, or pan dimensional aliens you have no way to tell.

So try again. Try to prove god's existance without using a logical fallacy and I may believe. Until that time I have no logical choice but to be an atheist.

“God does not just throw dice” ...which I agree...

hehe - Einstein stated that to make fun of theists, and you fell for it.

As to Raithere even if the math is flawed ’though its not specific enough to be so’ …but your statistics showing that human population stayed under 200million as a constant is highly ridiculousIt is precisely the generality of the calculation that makes it so inaccurate. Yes, idealistically, living creatures reproduce at a geometric rate. However, even the most superficial of real-world observations demonstrates that this is not is not, in fact, accurate. That Biblical literalists deliberately ignore such a basic fact in their futile attempts to deny a world older than 6 - 12 thousand years merely demonstrates how bankrupt their position really is.

There is nothing constant about 200 million it's merely a point that the human population did not pass until relatively recently. The population generally increased until this time as humanity migrated across the globe. Unable to sustain larger populations within small regions the solution was to spread out. It was only the advent of a reliable agriculture that allowed for an increase in our capacity to support a larger local population. The invention of science and medicine further increased this capacity.

So then there should be an ample amount of proof for a specific “theory” contained in all the bones of those that died before our wonderful world of technology, sarcastically speaking.There's evidence there for many theories. To which would you be referring?

I would also like to add that even if this wonderful world of technology keeps us from working less, which it doesn’tTechnology allows us, not necessarily to work less, but to distribute labor differently. No longer are we generally hunter gatherers or subsistence level farmers where most, if not all, human labor must be directed towards feeding the population. Instead we are able to diversify our labor. This has allowed the further development of art, music, philosophy, science, even religion. In regions of naturally abundant food people do indeed need to work less, even if simply and without technological advances. They must, however, find some means (typically social) of capping their population.

or if it helps us to eat better, which it doesn’tActually, yes, it does. More people have enough or even more than enough to eat both in calories and nutrition than ever before possible.

or if it keeps us from dieing by disease, which it does in small variations among specific afflictionsActually, the difference is tremendous. In countries where treatment is readily available it is astounding.

I find it quite odd that it just so happens today we have this great increase yet before the discovery of antibiotics an apparent population increase was quite obvious.There's nothing odd about it. The first and single most important factor in reducing disease is the proper handling and availability of clean water. Proper handling of waste is a primary factor here and was invented prior even to the germ theory of disease.


As for trillions * trillions * trillions * trillions, go ahead and scratch off three of those trillions and forget multiplying it and give me just a trillion, No, give me 75 billion, how about 50 billion, ...25 billion?Why get mired in fantasy? We have reliable historical accounts of population sizes. You're suggesting we let the hypothesis supercede the data, this is simply stupid. If you're hypothesis calculates that it should be night-time when the sun is clearly in the sky then it's your hypothesis that needs to change, not the fact that the sun is in the sky. Do assert otherwise is to be delusional.

Anyway as I was reading that web site you gave me, all I could do is picture that rear end character from the Pink Floyd video speaking.It's quite obvious from your posts that you are completely wrapped up in authoritative arguments.

Examine things for yourself and stop letting others do you thinking, whether they be scientists, politicians, or priests. It doesn't matter if it's Einstein or the Pope, to relinquish your right to decide for yourself makes you a slave more completely than any whip or chain ever could.

~Raithere

Creation Evidence:
Well, as is my custom in this forum, hence; (Psalm 56:10-11);”In God’s Word I praise, in the Lord’s Word I praise. In God I have put my trust, I shall not be afraid.”

Now I would first like to point out what the Living God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, said in (Is 45:12);”It is I who made the earth, and created man upon it. I stretched out the heavens with My hands, and I ordained all their host.” Do you think this is just a boast? (Num 23:19); “God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man that He should repent; Has He said and, will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good.” So what should we ask to prove that He “created”? (Job 12:7-10); “But now ask the beast, and let them teach you, and the birds of the heavens, and let them tell you. Or speak to the earth, and let it teach you, and let the fish of the sea declare to you. Who among all these does not know that the Hand of the Lord has done this, in whose Hand is the life of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.” So according to the Words within the book of Job it says that we must ask the beast, the birds, the earth, and the fish. Now as some of you are mocking me by demanding a verbal deposition from your cat, or dog as to where it came from, I would like to remind you that they are not made in the image of God and unable to give you an intelligible verbal response. But there are other ways of asking which if you didn’t know, God supports the field of scientific research as a matter of fact He demands it. So lets ask the beast, birds, earth, and fish, who made you?

-Lets start with the beast;
The Gecko: Beside its ability to change the color of its skin according to its surroundings and regenerate a new tail, we will focus on something different. Geckos are pretty cool little creatures, when I lived in Maui I enjoyed observing them. Now besides its other abilities the Gecko can walk on surfaces upside down, sideways, etcetera, and on whatever surface they choose whether it be smooth, or ruff, and unlike the old Batman shows they use no suction devices, or glue like substances for that matter. Nope, hair and not just normal hairs, microscopic hairs on their toes. These hairs attach to molecules by a force referred to as “Van der Waals force” which is quite awesome, by calculation one million of these toe hairs, or setae which would cover a dime could support the weight of a 45 pound monkey, dog it don’t matter.

The Beaver: There is much information as to the physical, and natural engineering capabilities of this creature, but I will only mention one point. That throughout the whole world, many hydroelectric dams base their designs on the same 45-degree angle of damns beavers construct.

The Bat: Well is clear that information on the bat, is quite vast on the Internet. I will just make mention of its complex sonar abilities and you can do the research. Also the heat detection of the rattlesnake would be interesting to look up as well.

-The birds:
The Cuckoo: Well I’m trying to keep this short but notice how this bird spies out nest of other birds as they lay their eggs, and then lays its own egg in that other birds nest after ejecting one of its eggs, when the new cuckoo bird is born being raised by parents of a different type, and never being raised or known by its own mother, yet this bird will grow up to do the very same thing its mother did with its young.

The Humming bird: Well, the awesome precision of this greatly engineered creature baffles evolutionist, as to the information, it too is vast on the Internet. Focus points, its flying abilities, heartbeat, its food, its temperature and conservation of energy, and stamina.

The Woodpecker: Focus points: sense of smell, the length of its tongue, how the long tongue is placed around its brain, the cushioning between its beak and skull, and its gripping and balancing abilities.

-The fish:
The South American, and African electric fish: Two different type of fish found on different sides of the world, have awesome abilities to see in the darkest of waters but not with there eyes. By generating an electrostatic field in surrounding dark waters these two creatures detect other sea creatures by measuring the alterations of their electrostatic field in the water from the presence of their bodies. These are just some of many sea creatures that use bioelectrical attributes, which proves there is something more than just a master electrical engineer involved in their existence.

Gray Sea Slugs: Out of all creatures this one swipes the abilities of another and uses it as there defensive and attack systems. The sea anemones, animals that look like plants. They have tentacles on their sides that have sharp poison stinging arrows that they can fire at pray and enemies which most avoid, but the gray-sea-slug rips these sea anemones apart and eats them without setting off the poison arrows in the stomach, but what happens is that these volatile arrows of poison with its cartages are loaded into small tubes extended from the slugs stomach through its body. When an enemy approaches the slug, it will shoot these arrows as a very effective attack mechanism.

-Construct mechanisms: (Psalm 139:13-14); “For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made, wonderful are Your works, and my soul knows it very well.”

The human brain: The most awesome, and complex network in the known Universe is contained within that block of wood you call a head commonly referred to as a brain and if you got one, “it’s pretty cool dude!” Anyway, There are billions of neurons in the brain connected to other neurons in awesome arrays of interconnections. Dendrites “tiny fibers” which more than 40 thousand of these connect to those neurons, allowing instantaneous transportation of messages throughout your brain. More than one quadrillion intricate electrical connections “synapses” found within the brain, is just part of what makes the most complex system discovered in the Universe. Research on the calculative abilities of the brain are available on the web.

The eye: When you were baby within your mothers womb, the genetic DNA code governing the formation of your eyes began growing optic nerves simultaneously both from the optic center of your brain, and also from the eye, then a million microscopic optic nerves begin growing from the eye through your flesh in the optical area of your brain, at the same time, a million optic nerves having a protective covering similar to a fiber-optic cable, begins to grow through the flesh towards your developing eye. Each of these million optic nerves must find and match up to its exact counter part to make your sight function without flaw. It’s the equivalent of two million engineers, digging one million half-mile tunnels about the size of a human under a river and all of them precisely meeting at its intended tunnel mate, and all this is done within a specific amount of time.

The “simple cell”: The very thought of a cell being referred to by many scholars of reputable positions as “simple” is quite laughable. It kind of reminds me of a hillbilly, when referring to a new paintjob on his automobile, and then busts out a paintbrush and a can of red simi-gloss house paint. In 1963 scientists penetrated the interior of the cellular wall, uncovering a massive microscopic universe, consisting of awesome mazes of microscopic tubes, and super tiny cells within cells. As to its duties, controlling the entry and exit of thousands of chemicals, enzymes, and proteins, and its functions controlling energy generation, defending against biological invaders, and highly complex communicative actions within and without the cell, the identification and consumption of nutritional products internally and externally, the elimination and disposal of destructive toxins, and the transportation systems that carry the needed products externally and internally to sustain life functions, all this is far from “simple” even if we were to upgrade the definition of “simple” to the development of a top of the line computer processor.

The Earth, (seeing that the existence of earth is reliable on the makeup of the entire universe, information will be provided of the universe as well.):
Universal expansion; Well I’ll start out in this, with many scriptures even though I understand that many of you are nether Judean, or Christians still the claims and information are very interesting. (Job 9:8); “…who alone stretches out the heavens, and tramples down the waves of the sea.”, (Psa 104:2); “ …Covering Yourself with light as with a cloak, stretching out the heaven like a curtain.”, (Isa 40:22); “It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.” (Isa 42:5), “Thus says God the Lord, who created the heavens, and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and its offspring, who gives breath to the people on it and spirit to those who walk in it.”, (Isa 44:24-25); “thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, ‘I, the Lord, am the maker of all things, stretching out the heavens by Myself, and spreading out the earth all alone, causing the omens of boasters to fail, making fools out of diviners, causing wise men to draw back, and turning their knowledge into foolishness.’”, (Isa 45:12); “It is I who made the earth, and created man upon it. I stretched out the heavens with My hands and I ordained all their host.”, (Jer 10:12); “It is He who made the earth by His power, who established the world by His wisdom, and by His understanding He has stretched out the heavens.”, (Zec 12:1); “The burden of the Word of the Lord concerning Israel. Thus declared the Lord who stretches out the heavens, lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him…”. Well there is no need for extensive information concerning the stretching out of the Universe just by simple observation and calculating, through the tools we have today makes this far from an impossibility to notice that galaxies are moving at extreme velocities from our galaxy, and at even more extreme velocities from surrounding galaxies. What does this have to do with the earth? The precise force of gravity to cause matter to merge together to construct galaxies and stars, while the expansion of space is causing the Universe to continue to grow in size and not cave in upon itself is obviously a very intricate one showing mindlessness has nothing to do with it. If the expansion force and speed were even slightly stronger, no stars or galaxies would be capable to become stable, and our solar system would not exist. If the expansion speed was even slightly weaker, the Universe will collapse upon itself.

Earths distance from the sun; The Earth is 93 million miles from the Sun. This distance is exactly what is required to allow biological life to subsist on Earth. If the earth was a little too far from or too close to the Sun, the earth would be a waist land whether because of extreme heat, or cold, just think of the great temperature difference between lower Canada, and Lower south America, or Russia to lower Africa. Note the rotation of earth also has its visible implications of the sustaining of life.

Earths circular orbit; The orbit of the Earth, unlike the other planets within are universe which orbit in a elliptical orbit, the Earth orbits in a consistent circular motion of 93 million miles from the sun.

Earths magnetic field and the human body; The electrical communication between every one of the sixty trillion cells in our body depends on the Earths magnetic field. In other words if the magnetic field was not what it is today, the communication system among your cells would cease.

-Other things to look into: the design of water, the size of the Sun and Earth, Earths rotation speed, the 23 degree inclination of the Earth, the balance of Gases in the Earths atmosphere, the impossibilities of carbon in creation, the granite layer in the earths crust, the weight of oxygen and why it travels and sustains, “simple proteins” containing complex genetic code, DNA and its construct and production, human hands and feet, the complex human digestive system, the complexities of the cardiovascular system, bone structures. Just search anything and everything, design is overwhelmingly apparent and for design you need a Designer.

-Now as to the Genesis account of creation, you may attempt to deny its authority, but one thing you can not deny is the accuracy, and pre-understanding of its order of events need to occur to sustain the next event of creation.
To quickly put into perspective I will paraphrase the account. Note: the scripture is pure and better understanding comes for it than I.
The first day; God created the universe, a formless and void Earth, and separated light from darkness (which is spiritual in understanding), but don’t not forsake that God is Light thus His brightness sustained life after this point, because He established that he was light on this day. Note: (Rev 21:23); “ …And the city has no need of the sun or of the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God has illumined it, and its lamp the Lamb.”, also God made mention of His measurements of days. (2Peter 3:8); But do not let this one escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.”
The second day; God created an atmosphere, and a rain system, which at that time before the flood was a mist. (Gen 2:6) “but a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground.”
The third day; God created dry land upon the earth, and gathered the waters making larger body of waters and called them seas. (Jer 5:22); “ Do you not fear Me? Declares the Lord. ‘Do you not tremble in My presence? For I have placed the sand as a boundary for the sea, An eternal decree, so it cannot cross over it. Though the waves toss, yet they cannot prevail; though they roar, yet they cannot cross over it.” Then God made various plants, with sustenance and seed.
The forth day; God created the Sun and Moon and stars for signs seasons and days, establishing the days, and years for something else that was going to be placed on earth, and not Himself. Also made lights different from His own establishing dominion created by Him for others.
The fifth day; God created the sea life, and then the winged creatures and told them to be fruitful, and multiply.
The sixth day, God made reptiles, mammals, and insects. Then God made man ON THIS DAY, made him in His image and gave him rule over all creatures of earth, and told man to concur the whole earth.
The seventh day, God blessed this day, cleansed and made it holy, because He rested from His work. Note: the genesis account also accounts for everything created in the universe, nothing more, nothing less, as for the details of his creation I think the reference in John should suffice (John 21:25) “and there are also many other things which Yeshua did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.”

So to part of my point, all of this inconceivable creative ability, unimaginable engineering, and awesome complexities which are better described by man then to even start to understand. Do you attribute this all to “Chance?” so if “Chance” far exceeds the collective abilities of man by accident, is not “Chance” more than able to contain within it all of the same abilities as you and much more. Are you not just bending a knee to “Chance” and saying; “you are my god!” and at the same time not acknowledging its wisdom, which accidentally far exceeds yours. You say there is no god, but even within your own hypocrisies you acknowledge one, and the funny thing is, that you people don’t even realize it.

And now to my final point, which is not mine; Yeshua (Jesus) said; “I’m the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no one comes to the Father but through me.”

P.S. His never ending loving kindness, and mercy endures forever and ever. May the One who blessed me, bless you even more so. So be it –“amen”

-Quick Scriptures pointing out information, & technology of today-
(Dan 12:4) “But as for you, Daniel, conceal these Words, and seal up the Book until the end of time; many will go back and forth, AND KNOWLEDGE WILL INCREASE.”
(2Chron 15:2);”The Lord is with you when you are with Him, and if you seek Him, He will let you find Him; but if you forsake Him, He will forsake you.”

_Motor vehicles & transportation;

(Nah 2:4)
The chariots race madly in the streets, They rush wildly in the squares, Their appearance is like torches, They dash to and fro like lightning flashes.

(Exo 19:4) ‘name meaning – Egypt=”double straits” …thus, bondage/slavery’
'You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and I bore you on eagles' wings, and brought you to Myself.

_Communications & Satellite;
(Rev 11:5-11)(*Note: instant communications have to be possible for any of this to happen.)
“And if anyone wants to harm them, fire flows out of their mouth and devours
their enemies; so if anyone wants to harm them, he must be killed in this way.
These have the power to shut up the sky, so that rain will not fall during the
days of their prophesying; and they have power over the waters to turn them
into blood, and to strike the earth with every plague, as often as they desire.
When they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes up
out of the abyss will make war with them, and overcome them and kill them.
And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which mystically is
called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified. Those from the
peoples and tribes and tongues and nations will look at their dead
bodies for three and a half days, and will not permit their dead bodies to be laid
in a tomb. And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them and celebrate; and
they will send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented
those who dwell on the earth. But after the three and a half days, the breath
of life from God came into them, and they stood on their feet; and great
fear fell upon those who were watching them.”

(Zac 5:1-4)
Then I lifted up my eyes again and looked, and behold, a flying scroll.
And he said to me, "What do you see?" And I answered, "I see a flying scroll; its length is twenty cubits and its width ten cubits." (*Note the size of a satellite, it is identical.)
Then he said to me, "This is the curse that is going forth over the face of the
whole land; surely everyone who steals will be purged away according to the
writing on one side, and everyone who swears will be purged away according
to the writing on the other side.
"I will make it go forth," declares the LORD of hosts, "and it will enter the house of the thief and the house of the one who swears falsely by My name; and it will spend the night within that house and consume it with its timber and stones."

_Missiles and Nuclear devastation;

(Isa 3:24-16) –effects of radiation-
Now it will come about that instead of sweet perfume there will be putrefaction;
Instead of a belt, a rope; Instead of well-set hair, a plucked-out scalp;
Instead of fine clothes, a donning of sackcloth; And branding instead of beauty.
Your men will fall by the sword And your mighty ones in battle.
And her gates will lament and mourn, And deserted she will sit on the ground.

(Nah 3:3-4)
Horsemen charging, Swords flashing, spears gleaming, Many slain, a mass
of corpses, And countless dead bodies-- They stumble over the dead bodies!
because of the many harlotries of the harlot, The charming one, the mistress of
sorceries, Who sells nations by her harlotries And families by her sorceries.

(DSS 1QH +4Q432 Frag.3 Col.10) Titled –Thanks to God for protection-
…mighty men have camped against me, they have surrounded me with all their weapons of war. Arrows burst forth without ceasing, and the blade of the spear devours trees as fire. Like the roar of mighty waters in the uproar of their voice; a cloudburst and a downpour to destroy many. As catapults, wickedness and fraud burst out when their waves pile up. As for me, when my heart melts like water, my soul becomes strong in Your covenant.

(DSS 1QH +4Q432 Frag.3 Col.11) Titled –Thanks to God for deliverance from the torments of enemies-;
When all the traps of the pit open, and all the wicked snares and the net of the wretched ones are sperad out on the water when all the arrows of the pit fly off without returning and burst forth without hope,
(it goes on) … then the torrents of Belial shall go over all the high banks, like a fire that devoured all their channels, so as to destroy every green tree and dry tree alongside their tributaries. It spreads with sparks from the flames, until all that drink from them are gone. It devours the cliffs of clay and the plains; the foundations of the mountains are set to burning and the roots of flint become torrents of pitch. I devours right down to the great deep.

Personal Comments:
As for the personal comments directed at me, this is for them and you know who you are. Now there are some who think I’m narrow minded, desiring the acceptance of my peers, looking for a place to fit, and I’m just a stupid mislead idiot, or maybe they think in a more sympathetic manner that I’m just a pushover gullible fool. But seeing that we are in opposition of one another in debate couldn’t I say the same thing about you? Or if someone with opinions differing from us who are in opposition, could that someone say the same about us both? First of all I once was an active atheist as for other things, people hate and despise me more, as among peers within houses of prayer “church” I’m an outcast, and when it comes to relating with others, I don’t, whether I’m not pretty, cool, or rich enough, I don’t know. Believers, even non-believers revile me more so, because I practice the Sabbath sun down Friday to sun down Saturday. And to those who think I have a “holier then thou” attitude I don’t, especially if you knew of my recent acts of misbehavior, in the eyes of family and co-workers I seem like a saint, but under Gods standard I’m a hypocrite and a filthy slime bag. But there is one thing I do know for sure, that there is a complete deliverance from sin and it is found in Yeshua the Anointed. But if you insist on thinking I’m just another mislead fool looking for acceptance, Oh-well! (1Cor 1:18);” For the Word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” Now don’t get me wrong, I understand why you would think that way about Christians there are many fakes among us, and also many mislead. Also I use to think that way myself, and I found out that everyone thinks like that toward Christians, especially when I became one, but do I cease from thinking that myself, it depends. There are many Christians who don’t read the Word, and some wont go any farther than two or three scriptures a week and making sure they attend church at least once in that week, they get a little pep talk of stuff they want to hear and happily go home willfully deceived. I tell you they have a strong unwavering faith, a steadfast and admirable faith in preachers, which in many cases the word “Christian” is no longer applicable, they should be addressed as “Preacherians”. And as to many here, who I could say the same, that students worship there professors, and professors worship there past professors which in turn, many are like cattle being lead by cattle, blindly praising chance and its monkey. Now I’m not going into how preachers learn from many books in seminary, or bible schools which in most cases are about the Bible, but not quite from the bible itself. (Is 29:18-19); On that day the deaf will hear the Words of a Book, and out of gloom and darkness the eyes of the blind will see. The afflicted also will increase their gladness in the Lord, and the needy of mankind will rejoice in the Holy One of Israel.”
As for the Preachers of today I don’t know but in Scripture it warns:
(Is 3:12); ” …O My people! Those who guide you lead astray, and confuse the direction of your paths.”, (Is 5:13); ” …Therefore My people go into exile for their lack of knowledge, and their glory are men of famine.”, (Is 9:16); “For those who guide this people are leading astray.”, (Mat 7:15); “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves”. But there is One Teacher who truly teaches, Yeshua said in (John 13:13-14); “ You call Me Teacher and Lord and you say well, for so I am. If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet.” Later He says in, (John 14:26); “ …But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My Name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance ALL THAT I SAID TO YOU.”
Now as to the Universalism I noticed among this forum. I include these scriptures to exclude The Word of the Living God in this way of thought. Now pay attention; Yeshua says in (John 15:1); “I am the true Vine, and My Father is the Vine Dresser.” To understand this you must understand who Yeshua is, it says in (John 1:14); “ And THE WORD BECAME FLEASH, and DWELT AMONG US, and WE SAW His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.” Later it says in (John 1:18); “No one has seen God at any time, the ONLY BEGOTTEN GOD, who is in THE BOSOM of the FATHER, He has EXPLAINED.” The Greek meaning for the word “only begotten” actually should read “only generated” which in “Strongs notes” describes as, “single of its kind.” Understand that the First of creation was Word, God’s Word, and the Father sees the everlasting existence of His Living Word as His Son; (Rev 3:14); “To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD, says this,.” Take note what Yeshua said in (John 6:45); “It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and LEARNED from the Father, COMES TO ME.” Note Yeshua says (John 14:6); “I am the Way, and the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father but through Me.” Now look at the first scripture where Yeshua said in (John 15:1); “I am the true Vine, and My Father is the Vine Dresser.” Think in this context, which is not scripture “I am the True creation, and result of the Dressers actions, And the Dresser is the Maker and Decorator of the existing Vine.” So when Yeshua says in (Mark 12:29); “ …The foremost is HEAR, O Israel! The Lord our God IS ONE LORD.” Also it says in (James 2:19); “You believe that GOD IS ONE. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.” It reveals that God is One, and maybe if One opens your eyes you will now understand why the death and resurrection is necessary, and what He did. Note (John 17:8); “…for the Words which You GAVE ME I have GIVEN TO THEM.” And for greater understanding into this if you wish, I would read the whole Chapter of (John 17).
As for the thinking that the Universe is God, do not be deceived it clearly says in scripture in (1Ki 8:27); ” But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven CANNOT CONTAIN YOU, how much less this house which I have built!” and, (2Ch 2:6); “But who is able to build a house for Him, for the heavens and the highest heavens CANNOT CONTAIN HIM? So who am I, that I should build a house for Him, except to burn before Him?” If the Universe cannot even contain Him how can He be the Universe, the scripture speaks for Him self. But if you insist on believing that God is the universe, do what Hindu’s do, worship anything and everything, not focusing on the variations of Hinduism which involves a confusing array of aviators, but the main “Philosophy”, to them is that god is the universe and, everything in it and if you were to worship anything, thus you are worshiping god. Also as to the comments as to why not attribute things to that chubby little “idol” while I rub the image of a tummy, that too does not have anything to do with attributing anything to any god, but that as well is another “philosophy” just like Taoism and Confucianism. As for aliens, if anyone is trying to prove the existence of a very sophisticatedly engineered human being, by something more sophisticated and intelligent, being brewed up in the same manner. You increase your odds of impossibility, in endless circles of “Who created them?” thus the answer would be, “Must be by something more intelligent then they”, and “Who created them?” and so on. As to the capabilities of science you need resources to even attempt to create anything as for biological, even the smallest of components need to be in agreement. When science can construct a working atom and all the sophisticated components of its makeup out of thin air, then I’ll be amazed. If you think that it is too hard to create an atom, your thinking is wrong. If I was to say a banana and you think that’s easier, a banana consist of multiple atoms, and many other complex difficulties that is of its makeup. As for the Einstein comments I put those comments up there because I thought you would care. And to the ones that make no since as to why I put them up, I just simply looked at what category most likely would have been the most personal, skimming through the first one in that category and posted all of them up. But maybe in this point I may have gone about it wrong, but those quotes wolfy posted from that one book, sounded to me like Einstein had a gun to his head when he stated them. I don’t know, if my mother was to call me and she spoke to me in a different voice that matches hers in no way, all she would have to do is say a small paragraph worth and I would sense it was her, even a letter written in different handwriting would provoke the same inclinations.

P.S. –def: Strawman; (according to this forum), Any believer in God, who is classified under Creationist, who objects to anything in any way, shape or form, who if was to so much as speak, move, or breathe, would automatically be classified as a disillusioned crack head, on PCP, and acid in the process of a hangover from a month long alcohol binge.

Try reading a book on evolution rather than tossing out 'inconceivable, unimaginable complexities' nonsense.

Chance does not equal evolution, doughead.

Is not evolution a series of mutations developing into some freak like creature? I say that is very much chance. As to me reading a book on evolution, how about you just start off by reading a book.

Creation Evidence:
Well, as is my custom in this forum, hence; (Psalm 56:10-11);”In God’s Word I praise, in the Lord’s Word I praise. In God I have put my trust, I shall not be afraid.”

Now I would first like to point out what the Living God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, said in (Is 45:12);”It is I who made the earth, and created man upon it. I stretched out the heavens with My hands, and I ordained all their host.” Do you think this is just a boast? (Num 23:19); “God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man that He should repent; Has He said and, will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good.” So what should we ask to prove that He “created”? (Job 12:7-10); “But now ask the beast, and let them teach you, and the birds of the heavens, and let them tell you. Or speak to the earth, and let it teach you, and let the fish of the sea declare to you. Who among all these does not know that the Hand of the Lord has done this, in whose Hand is the life of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.” So according to the Words within the book of Job it says that we must ask the beast, the birds, the earth, and the fish. Now as some of you are mocking me by demanding a verbal deposition from your cat, or dog as to where it came from, I would like to remind you that they are not made in the image of God and unable to give you an intelligible verbal response. But there are other ways of asking which if you didn’t know, God supports the field of scientific research as a matter of fact He demands it. So lets ask the beast, birds, earth, and fish, who made you?

-Lets start with the beast;
The Gecko: Beside its ability to change the color of its skin according to its surroundings and regenerate a new tail, we will focus on something different. Geckos are pretty cool little creatures, when I lived in Maui I enjoyed observing them. Now besides its other abilities the Gecko can walk on surfaces upside down, sideways, etcetera, and on whatever surface they choose whether it be smooth, or ruff, and unlike the old Batman shows they use no suction devices, or glue like substances for that matter. Nope, hair and not just normal hairs, microscopic hairs on their toes. These hairs attach to molecules by a force referred to as “Van der Waals force” which is quite awesome, by calculation one million of these toe hairs, or setae which would cover a dime could support the weight of a 45 pound monkey, dog it don’t matter.

The Beaver: There is much information as to the physical, and natural engineering capabilities of this creature, but I will only mention one point. That throughout the whole world, many hydroelectric dams base their designs on the same 45-degree angle of damns beavers construct.

The Bat: Well is clear that information on the bat, is quite vast on the Internet. I will just make mention of its complex sonar abilities and you can do the research. Also the heat detection of the rattlesnake would be interesting to look up as well.

-The birds:
The Cuckoo: Well I’m trying to keep this short but notice how this bird spies out nest of other birds as they lay their eggs, and then lays its own egg in that other birds nest after ejecting one of its eggs, when the new cuckoo bird is born being raised by parents of a different type, and never being raised or known by its own mother, yet this bird will grow up to do the very same thing its mother did with its young.

The Humming bird: Well, the awesome precision of this greatly engineered creature baffles evolutionist, as to the information, it too is vast on the Internet. Focus points, its flying abilities, heartbeat, its food, its temperature and conservation of energy, and stamina.

The Woodpecker: Focus points: sense of smell, the length of its tongue, how the long tongue is placed around its brain, the cushioning between its beak and skull, and its gripping and balancing abilities.

-The fish:
The South American, and African electric fish: Two different type of fish found on different sides of the world, have awesome abilities to see in the darkest of waters but not with there eyes. By generating an electrostatic field in surrounding dark waters these two creatures detect other sea creatures by measuring the alterations of their electrostatic field in the water from the presence of their bodies. These are just some of many sea creatures that use bioelectrical attributes, which proves there is something more than just a master electrical engineer involved in their existence.

Gray Sea Slugs: Out of all creatures this one swipes the abilities of another and uses it as there defensive and attack systems. The sea anemones, animals that look like plants. They have tentacles on their sides that have sharp poison stinging arrows that they can fire at pray and enemies which most avoid, but the gray-sea-slug rips these sea anemones apart and eats them without setting off the poison arrows in the stomach, but what happens is that these volatile arrows of poison with its cartages are loaded into small tubes extended from the slugs stomach through its body. When an enemy approaches the slug, it will shoot these arrows as a very effective attack mechanism.

-Construct mechanisms: (Psalm 139:13-14); “For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made, wonderful are Your works, and my soul knows it very well.”

The human brain: The most awesome, and complex network in the known Universe is contained within that block of wood you call a head commonly referred to as a brain and if you got one, “it’s pretty cool dude!” Anyway, There are billions of neurons in the brain connected to other neurons in awesome arrays of interconnections. Dendrites “tiny fibers” which more than 40 thousand of these connect to those neurons, allowing instantaneous transportation of messages throughout your brain. More than one quadrillion intricate electrical connections “synapses” found within the brain, is just part of what makes the most complex system discovered in the Universe. Research on the calculative abilities of the brain are available on the web.

The eye: When you were baby within your mothers womb, the genetic DNA code governing the formation of your eyes began growing optic nerves simultaneously both from the optic center of your brain, and also from the eye, then a million microscopic optic nerves begin growing from the eye through your flesh in the optical area of your brain, at the same time, a million optic nerves having a protective covering similar to a fiber-optic cable, begins to grow through the flesh towards your developing eye. Each of these million optic nerves must find and match up to its exact counter part to make your sight function without flaw. It’s the equivalent of two million engineers, digging one million half-mile tunnels about the size of a human under a river and all of them precisely meeting at its intended tunnel mate, and all this is done within a specific amount of time.

The “simple cell”: The very thought of a cell being referred to by many scholars of reputable positions as “simple” is quite laughable. It kind of reminds me of a hillbilly, when referring to a new paintjob on his automobile, and then busts out a paintbrush and a can of red simi-gloss house paint. In 1963 scientists penetrated the interior of the cellular wall, uncovering a massive microscopic universe, consisting of awesome mazes of microscopic tubes, and super tiny cells within cells. As to its duties, controlling the entry and exit of thousands of chemicals, enzymes, and proteins, and its functions controlling energy generation, defending against biological invaders, and highly complex communicative actions within and without the cell, the identification and consumption of nutritional products internally and externally, the elimination and disposal of destructive toxins, and the transportation systems that carry the needed products externally and internally to sustain life functions, all this is far from “simple” even if we were to upgrade the definition of “simple” to the development of a top of the line computer processor.

The Earth, (seeing that the existence of earth is reliable on the makeup of the entire universe, information will be provided of the universe as well.):
Universal expansion; Well I’ll start out in this, with many scriptures even though I understand that many of you are nether Judean, or Christians still the claims and information are very interesting. (Job 9:8); “…who alone stretches out the heavens, and tramples down the waves of the sea.”, (Psa 104:2); “ …Covering Yourself with light as with a cloak, stretching out the heaven like a curtain.”, (Isa 40:22); “It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.” (Isa 42:5), “Thus says God the Lord, who created the heavens, and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and its offspring, who gives breath to the people on it and spirit to those who walk in it.”, (Isa 44:24-25); “thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, ‘I, the Lord, am the maker of all things, stretching out the heavens by Myself, and spreading out the earth all alone, causing the omens of boasters to fail, making fools out of diviners, causing wise men to draw back, and turning their knowledge into foolishness.’”, (Isa 45:12); “It is I who made the earth, and created man upon it. I stretched out the heavens with My hands and I ordained all their host.”, (Jer 10:12); “It is He who made the earth by His power, who established the world by His wisdom, and by His understanding He has stretched out the heavens.”, (Zec 12:1); “The burden of the Word of the Lord concerning Israel. Thus declared the Lord who stretches out the heavens, lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him…”. Well there is no need for extensive information concerning the stretching out of the Universe just by simple observation and calculating, through the tools we have today makes this far from an impossibility to notice that galaxies are moving at extreme velocities from our galaxy, and at even more extreme velocities from surrounding galaxies. What does this have to do with the earth? The precise force of gravity to cause matter to merge together to construct galaxies and stars, while the expansion of space is causing the Universe to continue to grow in size and not cave in upon itself is obviously a very intricate one showing mindlessness has nothing to do with it. If the expansion force and speed were even slightly stronger, no stars or galaxies would be capable to become stable, and our solar system would not exist. If the expansion speed was even slightly weaker, the Universe will collapse upon itself.

Earths distance from the sun; The Earth is 93 million miles from the Sun. This distance is exactly what is required to allow biological life to subsist on Earth. If the earth was a little too far from or too close to the Sun, the earth would be a waist land whether because of extreme heat, or cold, just think of the great temperature difference between lower Canada, and Lower south America, or Russia to lower Africa. Note the rotation of earth also has its visible implications of the sustaining of life.

Earths circular orbit; The orbit of the Earth, unlike the other planets within are universe which orbit in a elliptical orbit, the Earth orbits in a consistent circular motion of 93 million miles from the sun.

Earths magnetic fi