₦airaland Forum

simmy:
It's really sad, really sad, t.o.e fails very miserably in explaining a host of things, fossil evidence shows that complex organisms' appeared on stage' totally complex and very suddenly;there's ABSOLUTELY NO shred of evidence to support speciation; (read carefully for yourself through any such claims that might exist on the net and even if you're armed with o -level knowledge of biology you should be able to show that these claims are nothing more than glorified variation) and yet evolutionists cling dogmatically to their belief in t.oe, !!!
Until scientists can come up with more convincing arguments to support t.oe, it will continue to be the greatest myth of the scientific world

Funny guy. So no actual reply to my examples of the Elephants and peonies, eh? Can't say I'm surprised, though. I mean who needs to bother reading up on, and responding to evidence like ERVs, transitionals, etc, when it's easier to just attempt to handwave them away, shut off your brain, and yell "glory, we've defeated the evil evilutionists once again, in the name of our God".

I'm sorry, but what fossil evidence shows "complex organisms' appeared on stage' totally complex and very suddenly"? I guess moving on to a totally new topic wouldn't be amiss in such a heavily one-sided thread. Oh, and what ever you do don't say the Cambrian, just saying.

dignity:
Hi Friends,

I have to say from the start that the Bible os Universal Flood about the time it was said to have happened is not only true and factual but also agree with the latest and assured findings of modern science.

The latest and assured findings of modern science that I've seen still confirm what geologists over a century ago concluded, a worldwide flood could not have happened.

I should know better for some few reasons,

Number one,I am a GEOLOGIST by training,and consequently,a Creationist, by modern definition.

Well, whatever you present should confirm your claim. Also, when you say "creationist by modern definition", what exactly do you mean?

Secondly,our non-sectarian organization has done extensive work on the subject since the beginning of this century.From our results,we are fully convinced that there was indeed a Universal Flood about the time the Holy Scriptures said it took place.

In the days ahead,I shall present Biblical and extra-Biblical evidences in proof of the foregoing.My evidences will cover such fields as ARCHAELOGY,PALEONTOLOGY STRATIGRAPHY,HISTORY etc.

I shall give a prelude first,and that would cover the historical events leading up to,and necessitating the Flood.This will provide a foundation for what shall be said later.

I'd like to see them, and if it starts to go over my head, then I'd pass it on to some geologist e-acquaintances of mine. I hope you wouldn't mind that.

IDINRETE:
AS I UNDERSTAND, THE PYRAMIDS OF EGYPT WERE THOUSANDS OF YEARS IN EXISTENCE BEFORE THE MOSAIC BIBLICAL ACCOUNT ipso facto BEFORE NOAHS FLOOD. THERE ARE NO ARCHAELOGICAL EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT THE PYRAMIDS WERE DESTROYED BY THE FLOOD. IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THE FLOOD MAY HAVE JUST DETOURED ON GETTING TO PISA, LUXOR, ALEXANDRIA CAIRO AND MANY PLACES IN EGYPT OR THE FLOOD ANOTHER COPYRIGHTED HISTORY OF AFRICA ( MORE ISSUES TO COME ON THE BIBLICAL STORIES STOLEN FROM OUR AFRICAN HERITAGE--FOR A START THE TEN COMMANDMENTS WERE NEVER RECEIVED BY MOSES NOR WRITTEN BY YAHWEH OR JEHOVAH) PLEASE DONT START SENDING YOUR BALLISTIC MISSILES ON THIS BRACKETED TOPIC YET I WILL POSE THE QUESTION VERY SOON.

could you provide some evidence that Moses stole the commandments, if you don't mind?

ON KING JAMES BIBLE---- THE REASON KING JAMES DECIDED TO WRITE HIS OWN VERSION WAS BECAUSE HE WAS A POOF(HOMO) AND THE POPE CHALLENGED HIM ON THIS. HE TOLD THE POPE TO Bleep OFF. HE SAID HE WOULD WRITE HIS OWN BIBLE. THENCE, CHURCH OF ENGLAND STARTED AND BROKE AWAY FROM ROMAN PAPACY

History revisionism must be fun, 'cos everybody seems to be getting into it this days.

babyosisi:
KAG like Bejoule says,it only takes a time of problem for you to start saying"Oh God" and soliciting for prayers left right and center.

I really don't see why I'd do that. Surely you are not suggesting that people turn to the idea of God(s), because not just problems, but their inability to handle those "problems"? Also, it's not like I became an atheist yesterday or last week, or even last month. I've been an atheist for a good while, and I have weathered my share of problems and bad scenarios.

America took out prayers and any semblance of Christianity from the schools and work place but guess what happened after Columbine school massacre and 9/11 terrorist attacks,people were holding hands in public places and calling on the Almighty for strength and deliverance.

Not really. I'm pretty sure individuals are allowed to pray and practise their religions in American schools and workplaces, they just aren't allowed to try to use it to harrass others in the work place, and public schools aren't allowed to promote religion.

So If you keep denying God and his existence,he may just let some trouble your way.
I advice you to listen to what your mama said,they are usually right and would not tell you what will harm you.
There is indeed a God.He is Lord of all,Jesus is his name.

Ask me questions about Him and I'll try my best to answer them .

I cannot believe in in something I don't believe exists, irrespective of what I was taught as a child. Thanks for the offer, if I can think of any questions I will ask.

thebadguy:
According to evolutionists, the earth in which we all live, was perfectly formed through an evolutionary process.

No.

Humans too, if I'm not mistaken, are a result of evolution.

Yes.

So how come the same evolutionary process which perfected the earth, and it's components, did not perfect the humans as well? If you believe the earth was formed perfectly by evolution, then I see no reason why humans too should not be perfect. But since you already admitted that perfection isn't human, then I refuse to believe we all came into existence as a result of some process, cooked up by an Idle, ignorant fellow, who believes he's intelligent enough to deceive the whole world.

First, evolution, as used in biology and the theory of evolution, doesn't say things are perfect, nor does it say the Earth is perfect. In fact, no science theory I've come across says the Earth and all it contains, are perfect. I've only heard of a perfect Earth, etc, in religion.

Second, the theory of evolution wasn't "cooked up by an idle, ignorant fellow, who believe[d] he [was] intelligent enough to deceive the whole world.", not that it would have mattered much if that was what he was, because science theories aren't based on the character of the "founder", but based on the evidence behind them, and how they stand up to close examination.

Finally, just for emphasis, only religion speaks of the perfection of the Earth.

Brown-Eyes:
@KAG

King James version. if you check the beginning it mentions the creation twice. Afraid I am not one for remembering chapters and verses, i just read.
I came across an old version about 2 years ago, belonged to a preacher in Dominica. I have been scouring all the second hand shops looking for old bible as they reveal more than the revised modern day bibles.

Since i could not help you with the chapters and verses maybe this will. www.branchministry.net/bibleteachings/floods2.htm+two+floods+in+bible&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=1">http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:7HVy8qCyEyoJ:www.branchministry.net/bibleteachings/floods2.htm+two+floods+in+bible&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=1

Let me know what you think.

Interesting, it does read like an extremely weird exegesis, but thanks for it. I suppose there's nothing left to say but, wow, the Bible got it wrong twice (if you hold to a literalist interpretation, and interpret the beginning as talking about a flood)) on worldwide floods. What are teh odds?

bajoule:
babyosis is right,


you probably are not an atheist you just don't know of anything other than the thought process of aethiesm. In a time of need you will automatically ask for God's help. I did.

bajoule

To be honest, and no offence intended (honest), I really don't know how to respond to a post quite so ridiculous. I'm pretty much speechless…well i would be if i was speaking, but you get the point. I guess you are right, I'm probably not an atheist, well apart from the not believing any Gods exist bit, and perhaps believing spirits and the spiritual are not only absurd, but highly improbable.

By the way, I have no idea what the "thought process of atheism" is, but I'm pretty sure there was a time I was certain that I was Christian, which of course automatically invalidates your claim, you know the one about me not knowing "of anything other than the thought process of aethiesm".

On the last point, would I perhaps someday ask for help from the non-existant? Well, it's possible, but highly improbable. I might just as well ask the tooth fairy for some money while I'm at it, I suppose.

Brown-Eyes:
@KAG

Sorry don't keep any versions of the bible here. If you have an old version say dating back to 1950s you will find something on the 1st flood before recreation.

> 1950's, King James Version? Any chapter/verse reference, or some idea whwre in the Bible it appears, i.e. after in the beginning God created the heavens, and before, ?

Brown-Eyes:
@ KAG

Yes if you check the older versions of the bible, just before they realised it needed tampering with again, it mentions one flood before the creation of mankind the second time around.

First, if they were world wide floods then the evidence still says no, it didn't happen. Second, care to back up your claim of tampering? Anything from the older versions of the Bible should do, or even the version in question.

dondele:
it is only an atheist that will say that flood thing is impossible. God can do anything he so wishes and not even what man wrote can understand the work of God. go figure. either u believe or u don't.

Actually no. Many Christians who've looked at the lac of evidence for a worldwide flood, have dismissed it too, including the Christian geologists that were part of other geologists that falsified the FLOOD (ALL CAPS) over a century ago. Let's also not forget the many other theists of otehr religions, and the agnostics that also don't believe a worldwide flood occured.

Brown-Eyes:
There were two great floods actually. So which one is being referred to here?

The bible says a lot of things that have been derived from other older books so it will be partly truthful.

Not sure if a guy named Noah actually took in every single animal on the boat. i think it was just their DNA he collected.

It literally doesn't get any weirder…actually, it probably does. So, were your two floods worldwide floods too?

thebadguy:
http://www.worldviewweekend.com/secure/cwnetwork/article.php?&ArticleID=813

Cheers.

I remember posting that link on another forum, a good while ago, with something of a rebuttal after it (some of you who frequent that forum would of course remember it was the one titled "Noah's ark found…again.). What I liked about the article - and I still find it hilarious - was this part:

"Bob's team consisted of a "Who's Who" of business, law, and ministry leaders including Barry Rand (former CEO of Avis), the author and Christian apologist Josh McDowell, Frank Turek (co-author with Norm Geisler of I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist), Boone Powell (former CEO of Baylor Medical Systems), and Arch Bonnema (president of Joshua Financial)."

I mean why bother taking somebody who works in a field that deals with things like artifacts, petrification, etc, like say - I don't know - a geologist, or even an archeologist. Nah, businessmen, lawyers, and ministry leaders are just as good, because as we all know, Creationists are usually excellent at geology anyway…especially the Young Earth Creationists.

davidylan:
you may try;
noah_ark@flood.com

. Noah says hello.

thebadguy:
@IDINRETE:

Perhaps, these links below could answer your question.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/04/0427_040427_noahsark.html
http://www.noahsarksearch.com/davedeal.htm
http://www.arkdiscovery.com/noah's_ark.htm
http://www.worldviewweekend.com/secure/cwnetwork/article.php?&ArticleID=813
http://www.users.bigpond.com/rdoolan/notark.html
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a001.html
http://www.space.com/news/060309_ark_update.html
http://www.wyattmuseum.com/noahs-ark-07.htm

Cheers.

Anybody apart from godless heathens want to tackle this one? I'll give you a hint of where he started to go wrong, Ron "I found the blood of Jesus" Wyatt. That's just a start. Another hint would be, how many boatish stones are on the mountains, and how boatish is the one they chose inspite of the others. So, have at it!

Meh! One of your links: http://www.users.bigpond.com/rdoolan/notark.html Intentional?

davidylan:
Go ask Noah, shem, Ham or Japhet they would have a better idea. Or BTW are you also wondering if this guys existed at all?

You wouldn't happen to have their e-mail addresses on you, would you?

IDINRETE:
is the biblical account of the flood truthful?

That's a pretty loaded question, no? Put it this way, it's a midrash. Read it, not as history, but as a teaching (if you are so inclined).

thebadguy:
KAG, please do not mind the previous posters. Other 'religion section guys' and I know you better.

I thank you.

Viper:
KAg you must be born again now or else, i will beat shege out of you

. What's a shege btw? Is it a synonym of the other "s" word?

But seriously, what kind of proof of Gods existence do you want?

Well, I actually don't believe a God exists, which of course makes it impossible for a non-existant being to give proof of it's own existence, or something. However, if God did the whole pillar of fire thing, made it clear she was the one doing it, and many other people saw it and verified its occurence, then I would have no choice but to believe.

Alternatively, if tangible evidence can be presented for the existence of Bible God, that just might do the trick.

yemstar:
So Kag where do you go from here, are you at least trying to find your faith or you've completly given up. I am not the strong christian i would like to be if not i could preach to you all day but when i get there i'll let u know.

But where i am now my belief is past physical i feel it within me and it makes me yearn for more, i hope pretty soon you will come to know the satisfaction of being in the arms of God. Because i know God doesn't let his children stray too far, but till then stay blessed.

Where am I now? I'm pretty much as atheistic as I can get. I do thank you for taking the time to respond though.

yemstar:
Well good for you

you still didn't give any substantial reason though.

What would a substantial reason be then? If no evidence - short of ad-hoc explanations and massive leaps in logic - has been presented, and to make it worse the alleged almighty has been as non-existent as many other fabled creatures of the past, then I can't help but disbelieve and dismiss the notion of God(s). Like one of my favorite Christians was\is fond of saying, "God made me a skeptic".

I bet there are so many other things out there that you believe in but was based on the reasonings and machinations of man as you put it.

That may very well be true, but I can't think of any that doesn't have substantial and testable evidence backing it.

babyosisi:
Hey kag I was the girl that asked you to start your thred and I haven't even been here since.

You must be well rested from your boxing matches to assert yourself lol

Hey babyossis.

Do you really believe that there is no God.

Yes, I do believe there is no God.

C'mon now,what did your mama teach you,let's be honest and start from there.

She taught me to believe in the existence of Bible God.

nferyn:
All of these can easily be measured. We, as humans, may have limited senses, but that doesn't mean there aren't any indirect means of measurement.
Supernatural things on the other hand tend to escape measurement.

^^ what he said.

To answer your question Viper, I don't believe any Gods exist because I haven't seen any tangible evidence for their existence, and like many other fabled creatures, they only seem to exist in the imaginations and machinations of both peoples minds and their anecdotes.


@aloib, that would be nice.


To the others, yes I know there are other atheists here, I've e-met quite a few of them.


And to those I ended up insulting, my apologies. I was cranky and tired, and you guys certainly weren't helping, not that it is any excuse, and not that I won't do it again.

shango:
gravity is an observable mechanism in nature.

So is evolution.

The law of gravity or Newtonian gravity attempts to explain this mechanism scientifically and has held up to intense scrutiny mathematically and physically when the frame of reference is not moving at speeds approaching the speed of light. I never said laws where perfect, but they are always above and hold more weight than theories.

This is getting rather inane and ridculous. Newtonians's law of gravity only represented mathematically the phenomena known as gravity. The theory of gravity sought to explain that phenomena. Einstein's theory of relativity has taken up the explanation of the phenomena known as gravity.

read it again, those are some of the conclusions drawn from the TOE, the TOE never explicitely said that, it is a theory used to explain many things, one of those things is that macroevolution occurs over billions of years to create distinct species from previous species, the TOE in of itself doesnt state this. Again, read and understand what i said.

At least this time you didn't try claiming that wasn't what you wrote. Those are not the conclusions drawn from the ToE, because while the ToE does include common descent and the relatedness of all species, it does not claim "therefore the pine tree evolved to a dog over billions of years". That's a misconception many (at least in my experience) anti-evolution proponents share. Something that I wouldn't expect anybody who accepts the theory of evolution, to write\say.

Again, using the TOE, please explain how the homo erectus became the homo sapien, this is the second time I will ask, explain away since the TOE explains this.

You probably missed it, so I'll post it again, a brief explanation:

"First, there's a good chance homo sapiens aren't direct descendants of homo erectus, although homo erectus would most likely have been in the same genus as the homo sapiens ancestor (someone correct me if I'm wrong, because it's being a good while since I read anything on human evolution, and my memory is kind of hazy). So, how could homo erectus or a similar species, have evolved into homo sapiens? Simply put, mutations, selection, and genetic drift."

Get your head out of your ass and read what I have stated. I am NOT ANTI-EVOLUTION dumbass. I believe in evolution.

If it looks like a duck, spouts as much mis-information, has no idea what the theory states, and seems absurdly clueless, then it would probably be better if it played for the other team.

All I am arguing is it is a theory and is not the end all and be all in explaining the origin of man, it still has a long way to go in explaining our origins, much like any other THEORY, my point is theory have been and will continue to undergo revisions and corrections because they do not precisely explain mechanisms and events like laws do. And laws are often times approximations as well and have strict limits within which they can be used.

the law of evolution would be: change in allele frequencies in populations of organisms happen over time

theory would be explaining how that affects changes in life, the mechanisms that drive it, etc. Also, I don't think anybody claims the theory of evolution has explained to a T, the orgins of man, but it has howver established a good case for the origins and relationship of man with not just other apes, but other species as well.

If it is speciation explain how the homo erectus became the homo sapien through speciation/macroevolution. Shoot,

See above.

We are not talking about the science community when discussing opponents of evolution we are talking about the community at large. DUH.

It's usually those that actually make use of the theory in question, that define the meanings of terms used in the theories. You would also hope that anybody with at least a decent understanding of the theory, would have the ability to not conflate terms (which does nothing but confuse issues). In fact most who discuss the theory, have enough sense to say exactly what they mean, and that's why we get many creationists who try to seperate macro- from micro-, stressing on macro-evolution.

luvu567:
you are posting pure rubbish anyhow ill leave you alone to post more rubbish

What's that Mr. Pot? The Kettle is black? My, how ironic!

Eurphoria:
You are an atheist , WOW biggest news flash of the year 2006, EXTRA EXTRA READ ALL ABOUT IT! _hiss

Wow, another annoying idiot to the fore. Feel free to read the thread for why I created the thread, news vendor.

Listen Nairalander we got another attention seeker in the house, first there was tenik , now you got this one.

Guys stand firm and make a stance for once please ignore this attention deficit individual, enough of all these shite posts in this place fuksakes
Rubbish i am out

Promise not to come back? This thread, for one, could do with less of your ilk, you know the ignorant arse with a beam in the eye, that still tries foolishly to point out the grain in another's eye.

Txlonghorn:
Mr Atheist if you want people to piss off why in the world did you start this thread

Not everybody in the world, sheesh! Just the two of them, for now [and probably you too]

No really, could you guys just piss off.

You nitwits, I was told to make a thread about my lack of beliefs by another poster, and so I did. Now piss off! *rolls eyes*

Now what?

babyosisi:
Kag start a thread about your non belief and we shall join you there.

What a thread titled "I'm an atheist", followed by "now what"? Sure, why not.

Viper:
Retract to where? Where u post on doesn't realy bother me, its you that does.

Retract your claim that I "go around all nigerian forums denying God and making him look like he doesn't exist". That isn't true.

What proofs do you want before you believe? You want God to come down fromheaven because of you?
I don't think that will happen, at least not now, you are not proving to him that you are worth it even.
You get what you deserve, if you want God to prove himself to you, you have to prove yourself worthy first.
You are too little for the sky to drop for you. you better think about your life and your seeming all-knowing self.

I don't expect anything from the non-existent, I have thought about my life, and I have never claimed to be all knowing.

You can't even prove that God doesn't exist. You can't prove your exisence yourself.

No, I can't.

You amuse me truely. Keep rolling in the mud of ignorance, i only pray it wont be too late for you.

Indeed.

Keep trying, you might just meet what you never wished you met

That would be bizarre, yes. Imagine meeting Ritchie Falzone, that would truly suck.

Viper:
You need to look and see

Look and see that you believe I evolved from a monkey or worm? Alrightey then.

Quote
So eve is here? Shocked , where is she? Angry

Hey Eve.

Viper:
I believe you evolved from a monkey or worm then?

Good for you, don't know why you do though.

As for me, i would ask adam what he was doing when the serpent was tempting eve and ask eve why she didn't call adam before eating the fruit.

then beat the rubbish out of her

Poor eve[seh]

Viper:
@KAG
yes God can be that mean, he is not all goody goody.

Indeed, I mean who can forget that whole Titanic debacle.

Viper:
KAg, you go around all nigerian forums denying God and making him look like he doesn't exist.

No, good heavens no. I only post in TWO Nigerian forums, this one and the Ryders one. I only came to this forum, because the admin posted some good satire on NR, which of course made me want to read more, which in turn led me to this section, so no I don't do what you've claimed, so please retract.

P.S. Story on how how I came accross NR by accident, will have to be saved for another day.

I actually look at most of your religion related posts and laugh, you know why?
Cos of your clear ignorance. your posts show you have been deceived by obvious lies and that speaks a lot.

That's wonderful, obvious lies for those that don't subscribe to your school of thought, and inerant truth for those on your side. Who needs to actually back up claims and give reasons, when flippant statements are a dime a dozen anyway.

You need to stop denying God in you, he may just decide to forget you and that will be very bad for you and anybody associated to you.

And you need to stop denying Brahma in you, or *all of that*.

And watch your speeches and writeups so you don't end up in apostacy.

I thought I was already an apostate? Must try harder I guess.