₦airaland Forum

Macelliot:
If the Israelites were never slaves, then Moses never existed.

And if moses never existed then wasn't the bible wrong about it?

Macelliot:
Who are the Jews? The Jewish tales came into existence after King Solomon's reign.
The Jews were never slaves, Jews never existed then, but the Israelites during the (either) third or fourth dynasty.

So how then do you fix the disconnect between the bible and history?

Macelliot:
Not yet a Civil Engr. by profession, I'm a student, but am aspiring to be.
Do you know anything about the pyramid of Egypt? Modern Scientist are amazed on how such structure could be built with today Technologies. Lifting, Settings, and arrangement of the huge Stones in order. So amazing. Pyramid of Egypt is among the wonders of the Earth. Scientist finds it hard to explain how the stones can be lifted and placed in order with today's technology....
Learn more about the Pyramid of Egypt and its' biblical reference.

If you kept up to date you'd know that the difficulty is because many competing theories give account of how the pyramids were built....
Either way it is a non-sequitur,the same scientists(archeologists) that are amazed about Egyptian structures also agree hebrews(jews specifically) were never slaves in Egypt.

whytepawn1:
for some time now this thought has kept reoccurring to me... what and where is hell? ,the way the holy Bible portray it leaves chills in one's spine. I was watching a documentary about the sun recently... which had in details the massive size, the estimated temperature of its core and surface e.t.c. Then the thought hit me.... what if the SUN is actually HELL FIRE?
This is something we should take our time to ponder upon and if it happens to be that the sun is not hell, then hell will definitely be far hotter than the sun. May GOD GIVE US THE GRACE TO WALK THE PATH OF SALVATION.

The bible describes hell as sulphurous and never ending,the sun is powered by hydrogen,it burns it to make helium but never gets it to anything higher so no,the sun is not hell.
I once thought of the same thing when I was a christian.

SNCOQ3:
The "atheists" on this thread are using propaganda techniques to "expose" "creationist propaganda and misinformation"

Mention one creationist which I lied about please...

Joshthefirst:
Take a very good look at the bolded. You are quoted as saying the assimilation of oxygen and digestion of food and the liberation of energy by the sun are chaotic processes? . Chaos means disorder. All you've given me here are very purposeful and directed and sustained processes. I'll ignore this then, and wait for more examples.

My writing style excludes commas sometimes,surely you know that by now

And now you equivocate chaos as disorder,which means you typically think its entropy.

And how is any of that relevant,because a purpose is what people tend to think things are for....you are basically offering the straw-man of "purpose" as though that invalidates my statements.

Go in depth with your replies and be very precise.


Consider a metabolic system in which it possesses useful energy,for it to be less useful it has to used for work....thereby decreasing the amount of useful energy and vice versa increasing entropy(entropy is the amount of less useful energy by the way)..

This system would be ordered,as metabolic systems are most often sites of combustion...this permits liberation of useful energy to it's surroundings permitting an increase in order.

The above description is befitting the earths core,it liberates useful energy to power plate tectonics which in turn shape the earth or in "creationist talk" make it orderly.

I should probably deal with this shaa. As it seems you do not even understand the kinetic theory of matter.

The above is correct, but then you went on to say this:

Energy is random and chaotic by itself in nature.

Lying josh? :O In what way did I go against this?

That is readily known. And you've given examples of its manifestations of itself: sand dunes. I even gave another example for you; lightning.

Oh,so you now suddenly accept the sand dune analogy and have removed your own ban on lightning analogies...

I hope everyone can see the dishonest hypocrisy here...

It is only direct channeling and manipulation with sustaining of this force that yields order and useful work.

So what is channeling and manipulating the earths core?.....

It's heat from its formation that's still driving plate tectonics and as you know,heat is merely the product of the average kinetic energies of atoms,which you admitted are chaotic and random...(your comment below)

" Energy is random and chaotic by itself in nature."

You giving this example is very pathetic and shows the very basal deception I have noted over and over again: hijacking and twisting of scientific definitions to suit your own godless worldview. Quite pathetic.

Hmmmm lets see here...

You gave ad hominems,I corrected you.

You equivocated words,I highlighted that.

You blatantly lied,I exposed that.

Now who neatly fits the above words you just wrote?

Joshthefirst:
Please give an example of a purposeful orderly system brought about by chaos. Don't give sand dunes or lightning for examples as they are just physical manifestations of haphazard energy. Give me substantial examples and stop using base cop-outs.

sand dunes are haphazardous energy?
And you claim I'm making a "cop-out", but you're the one telling me not to make an obvious case(in the bolded text)...

Anyway let's consider the demonstrable "kinetic theory of matter" in which all matter is made of molecules(or atoms) in constant motion....

The motions are more chaotic when they have no or less restrictive bonds or with increased temperature...

Without increase in the chaotic nature of this particles,useful energy cannot be obtained...so without the chaotic nature of molecules(or atoms) complex reactions that lead to order will not occur... The sun wouldn't liberate energy without the chaotic process of fusion,you couldn't live without the combustion(for digestion) and assimilation of oxygen to various parts of your body...etc

So aren't those chaotic processes that lead to order,or do you have to blacklist them too?

And your hot room analogy is also puerile.

All you've been doing(which is usual for a creationist) is to deny a response with no counter responses....I'm not surprised though

What I'm basically saying is analogous of being in a house in cold barren and dark Antarctica with a heater and water and light. I logically conclude that these things did not appear suddenly as a result of reckless and wild polar winds.

They sure demonstrably don't,so does "god".
Can you tell us why we have demonstrable evidence for all that except of a being that allegedly conjures matter from absolutely nothing?

Joshthefirst:
Aside from the fact that what you wrote there is false and shows you do not even have a true concept of creation, I am also not familiar with the hocus pocus ruse of evolution you deify.
You can prove it substantially please. Or you could just go and hide as usual. You and plaetton are quite good at that.

Order cannot come out of chaos without an existential force and power bringing it about.

Part with your ad hominems and give concise definitions....what exactly do you consider "order" and "chaos" because time and time again I keep telling you things like dunes are ordered and yet where brought together by chaotic sand storms...
Many things are "orderly" and yet are caused by chaotic systems...
And even still this is a non sequitur(no point), because "orderly" or not a "god" still has to be demonstrated before attaching any feature of nature to it.

What you're basically saying is analogous of being in a hot room and then concluding preconceived ideas that an invisible dragon is heating up the room....You can claim "it's a dragon/god" all you want but without substantial proof you have nothing.

In his seminar he starts off with the creationist basic features of dishonesty..

#1 Equivocation

#2 Misinformation

#3 Arrogance

#4 Basic science denialism

This was his introduction...



“There are four great questions that man tries to answer in this life. These are called the four great philosophical worldview questions. Every religion in the world, including Atheism, which is a religion, every religion tries to answer these four questions.”


Already he starts with misinformation and equivocation that atheism is a religion, you'd notice that till this day followers of creationist repeat this and make remarks about atheism being a "belief","philosophy",etc

Among kent hovinds exploits have been what he has termed the "hovind theory",it represents an apologetics used to meld biblical scripture and observations...

The video below is what it entails...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY0rj-TEx4o

https://archive.org/details/KentHovindTheHovindTheory
It's was long rebutted as pseudoscience,in the link above...

Kent hovind is a convicted charlatan who tried to exempt tax laws...
This would have been irrelevant(to the position of creationism) if it had not been the cause of his arrest..

During his 2006 criminal trial, the federal government said the organization does not have the proper licensing nor is it registered as a nonprofit, which resulted in legal troubles mentioned below. In May 1999, Eric Hovind, Kent Hovind's son, joined Creation Science Evangelism and his daughter, Marlissa, was training to become Kent Hovind's secretary.

Then in January 2007, Kent Hovind was sentenced to ten years in prison following his 58 felony convictions and Eric Hovind announced that he would run Creation Science
Evangelism due to his father's incarceration.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind

Next up on our list of creationist charlatans' is kent hovind.

Kent E. Hovind (born January 15, 1953) is an American
young Earth creationist and conspiracy theorist. Hovind
has spoken on creation science and has aimed to
convince listeners to reject scientific theories of
evolution , geophysics, and cosmology in favor of his
interpretation of the Genesis creation narrative from the
Bible . Hovind's views are contradicted by scientific
evidence and some of his ideas have also been criticized
by young Earth creationist organizations such as
Answers in Genesis .

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind

Joshthefirst:
an act of creation should be substantiated? Lol. The very technology you are using is an act of creation. The very clothes you wear. The nuclear energy that now gives us electricity, the painting hanging on the wall of your bedroom, all the advances and achievements of the sciences and the arts, the well-trimmed lawn in front of your house. All these are substantiated acts of creation. Don't be foolish. Man has been creating for millennia now. And it is creativity and inquiry that forms the bedrock of science. Not nonsense self-insulting fantastical speculations like the evolution of all things from a form of life.

joshthefirst we don't create things we use "starting materials" to make things, we're familiar with that.
What we're not familiar with is a hocus pocus "creation" where anything can be led into existence ex nihilo(from nothing)...
And why are you pointing to the pretty side of nature and human activity?...Is the hiv/aids virus not a creation too?
Now about evolution....let me put it this way,you believe we all share a common ancestor that is adam and eve correct?

Thugnificent:
Sir, your premise was quite outlandish.

instead of pulling a red herring why not highlight it?

I get it that most secular scientists use the term "pseudoscience" to classify creationist/intelligent design arguments forgetting that evolution, big bang, abiogenesis and all "origins" theories are all pseudoscience

Really?...let me list a few qualities of pseudoscience,tell me if "creation science" has none of it.

1. Vague terminology: what is a "kind" in creationism?

2. Lack of predictive power: what predictions does creationism give?

3. Untestable hypothesis: How can one test or demonstrate that things are "created" ex nihilo.

4. Lack of data: What data could you draw from creationism that can be tested in a setting,would dipping birds blood on people cure leprosy as claimed in the bible?

to say the least. firstly, the biogenesis theory that life can only come from life was proved by Louis Pasteur

lol....you're not only terribly misinformed you're also contradicting your belief,where life spontaneously arises from dust(non-life)...
And to put it in perspective he(pasteur) held that stance when he proved that dead matter(meat) didn't spontaneously generate new life but was being contaminated by "continuing life"(flies)...herego life comes from life,a living thing is subject to produce other living things by either reproduction or contamination by continuing life in the environment.

a creationist hearby dispelling the theory of spontaneous generation which was partly the bedrock of abiogenesis.

Read my above post....
Ironically you are arguing against "spontaneous generation" when your bible gives an account of how a being speaks things spontaneously into existence in what can only be described as an incantation spell...

Now back to evolution, the so called TOE hasn't been able to explain obvious "missing links" and the so called transitional fossils most notably the Archaeopteryx was proven to be a fraud.

How do we know if something is a transition form?
When creationist A says it is and creationist B disagrees...bottomline is that to deny a transitional form creationist have to endure a cognitive dissonance where it can never be admitted that a creature is one,it is either A or B and that again highlights their dishonesty
And an astronomer has no say in paleontology,just like Richard dawkins has no say in computer science....so fred hoyle has no say in something outside of his field...

In a nut shell, creationist have made the greatest impact in science so it is foolhardy to term creation science as "pseudoscience" while inane theories are having a field day because they don't involve God in the equation.

Take a good look at your own comment....You said they've done a great deal for science, therefore we should accept their "creation science"? lol
Might as well say I should accept alchemy because newton proposed the theory of gravity...
Until you can demonstrate "creation science" it'll still be pseudoscience...

Thugnificent did newton ever succeed in his creationism and his philosophers stone?...
If creationism or an act of "creation" cannot be substantiated and/or demonstrated why call it "science"?
This is basically a masquerade...where you claim "science is being hijacked"when you're the one spreading misinformation.

Thugnificent:
Sir, your premise was quite outlandish. I get it that most secular scientists use the term "pseudoscience" to classify creationist/intelligent design arguments forgetting that evolution, big bang, abiogenesis and all "origins" theories are all pseudoscience to say the least. firstly, the biogenesis theory that life can only come from life was proved by Louis Pasteur a creationist hearby dispelling the theory of spontaneous generation which was partly the bedrock of abiogenesis. Now back to evolution, the so called TOE hasn't been able to explain obvious "missing links" and the so called transitional fossils most notably the Archaeopteryx was proven to be a fraud. In a nut shell, creationist have made the greatest impact in science so it is foolhardy to term creation science as "pseudoscience" while inane theories are having a field day because they don't involve God in the equation.

spontaneous generation is ironically an act of "creation" from ex nihilo,abiogenesis is only proposing the building blocks of life being abundant in the early earth leading to life...how are those two principles the same?
Dishonesty yet again, creationism knows no bounds...

Thugnificent:
I get your point, but are you staying there aren't creationist who have made great impact in science. from the top of my head, Isaac Newton and Charles Babbage should ring a bell. but Talk origins would have none of that. I find it funny that creationists aren't giving a chance to publish creation science in peer reviewed journals, that also strikes me as discriminating.

lol....can you demonstrate "creation science" is there such a thing that can be called "creation science"?
What methods would be used?

Thugnificent:
There is a difference between operational science and historical or "origins" science .

There's no such thing, creationist invented words like "historical science" to blur a well defined line.....you'd see that when asked what group radioscopy is they can tell you "observational/historical" just so they can escape stop their own fallacies argument.
When asked why they call their bias "creation science" when an act of "divine creation" is not demonstrable they have no answer....
You can watch these two videos to understand better..



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skRSrGX543M



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9yQEG7mlTU&itct=CB0QpDAYAiITCNPDz9rr4cMCFVHXHAodCHIAaTIHcmVsYXRlZEjChNyN4ZfI1M8B&client=mv-google&gl=NG&hl=en

vooks:
One of the lies is that evolution is science. Evolution is a religion

Take a good look people, misinformation at it's very best...

Kitzmiller v. Dover: Intelligent Design on Trial


This famous trial is a testament to creationist dishonesty',here they tried to cover-up creationism as "intelligent design".

"Intelligent design" was used as a proxy to teach creationism.

"In the legal case Kitzmiller v. Dover , tried in 2005 in a
Harrisburg, PA, Federal District Court, " intelligent design"
was found to be a form of creationism, and therefore,
unconstitutional to teach in American public schools.
As the first case to test a school district policy requiring the
teaching of "intelligent design," the trial attracted national
and international attention. Both plaintiffs and defendants in
the case presented expert testimony over six weeks from
September 26 through November 4, 2005). On December 20,
2005, Judge John E. Jones issued a sharply-worded ruling
in which he held that "intelligent design" was, as the
plaintiffs argued, a form of creationism."

http://www.ncseprojects.org/creationism/legal/intelligent-design-trial-kitzmiller-v-dover

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/intelligent-design-trial.html

The second dishonest character here is this one.

It was a viral video of a blonde mother auditing chicago's evolving earth exhibit....



Here are her comments..

“I don’t want to hear about your theories – your s.tupid
theories about how these creatures became – came from
one cell when you can’t prove it to me.”

“Just show me the animals, tell me about them,”

“But don’t tell me that you know exactly how they came to be, because you don’t, and don’t tell my children that you know either, that makes me angry.”

“I would prefer we just tell them, ‘it’s okay not to know,’”

“There’s plenty of people around the world throughout the ages who wrote these stories about dragons, drew pictures of dragons, who said they saw dragons. And then we have this dragon skull, that looks exactly like a dragon that people have drawn from stories.”

“And yet, here’s this woman in a lab coat saying to me, ‘That is not a dragon.’”

http://deadstate.org/creationist-mom-audits-natural-history-museum-reveals-that-dinosaurs-are-actually-dragons/

Among many of Ray comforts apologetics' is his popular banana argument.

In this video, evangelist Ray Comfort introduces what he
calls "The Atheist's Nightmare," the banana that we all
know and love. He argues that the form of the fruit,
conveniently sized for human in an easy-to-open
package, is proof that it was created by God for human
consumption. This segment is from a 2003 episode of
"The Way of the Master," a television series that Comfort
produces with Christian actor Kirk Cameron, who also
stars in the video.
In response to criticism after this video went viral,
Comfort said that atheists had maliciously omitted his
related argument that the spontaneous evolution of the
world is as unlikely as that of a Coca-Cola can. To
address that concern, the Coke can argument is included,
too.

http://m.christianpost.com/news/creationist-presents-the-banana-as-the-atheists-nightmare-to-prove-intelligent-design-video--114306/

Besides the basic information about creationism....one must understand that to be a young-earth creationist, you must vehemently deny anything that contradicts a literal interpretation of religious texts.
Here are some examples of that dishonesty.

The first is Ray comfort.


en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Comfort

Who proposes arguments against well-known scientific principles...the picture below is an extract of his rebutal to slugs being animals.

I'm dedicating this thread to exposing creationist propaganda and misinformation...I'll cite videos, articles, journals, websites of creationists and scientific knowledge they deny.
Before we start we need to define the terms....

[b]
"Creationism is the belief that the Universe and Life originate "from specific acts of divine creation." For young Earth creationists , this includes taking a Biblical literalism to the Genesis creation narrative and the rejection of the scientific theory of evolution .

As the history of evolutionary thought developed from the 18th century on, various views aimed at reconciling the Abrahamic religions and Genesis with biology and other sciences developed in Western culture .

Those holding that species had been created separately (such as Philip Gosse in 1857) were generally called "advocates of creation" but were also called "creationists," as in private correspondence between Charles Darwin and his friends. As the creation–evolution controversy developed over time, the term "anti-evolutionists" became common.

In 1929 in the United States, the term "creationism" first became associated with Christian fundamentalists , specifically with their rejection of human evolution and belief in a young Earth —although this usage was contested by other groups, such as old Earth creationists and evolutionary creationists , who hold different concepts of creation, such as the acceptance of the age of the Earth and biological evolution as understood by the scientific community." [/b]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism

plaetton:
Davidylan is perhaps the biggest mystery in this part of the universe.
This is why I always question his much touted educational credentials.
He argues straight from Sunday school curriculum.

He is a creationist,what do you expect?
Creationism relies on tenants like arrogance, science denialism,equivocation and misinformation....examine his posts and you'll see the trend where he bursted in arrogantly,then began denying CMB,then equivocated the earth and the universe...thus spreading misinformation.
Look no further and you'll see the same in the puppet masters like ken ham and his flintstones museum...

I've rooted my phone dozens of times....the only danger is when you don't know what you're doing.
Rooting is merely gaining special permissions to do what you want with the phones OS(operaing system),meaning you can delete system apps,clear system logs,install foreign apps etc...
For those who are interested in rooting a phone for the first time I would recommend downloading a youtube video entailing how it's done.
You could also temporarily root your phone with some softwares that grant temporary root access.

Ask yourself this....how many times has a religious person done this same thing over and over again and why an atheist would kill for hatred of an unsubstantiated belief?...do geologists kill flat-earthers?

And in sincerity the gullible eat this stuff up...it even made me go look for the book of Mormon..


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06jF1EG8o-Q

MzNelly:
I talk about God everywhere and everyday

He who doesn't wanna hear should shut his ears or something

Would you also be so presumptive if this very comment was made by a muslim?...
Either listen to those arabic chants or shut your ears?

Hiswordxray:
I speak the truth, whether bitter or sweet.

The guy is concerned about the future and he needed to hear where he will end up. I didn't intend to threaten him, I only wanted to help him find answers to his questions.

So yes he is going to Hell if he doesn't repent and if doesn't like his future he could change it by repenting.

So how do you feel about your future in "allah's hell"?

Hiswordxray:
This future is that you are going to Hell if You don't repent.

I never knew you were along the hell threatening people, you usually like luring people with promises...