₦airaland Forum

What does your personal faith have to do with the topic of this thread?
We're talking about history, not your personal views here.

^^^
I applaud your decision to follow your own conscious in your religious beliefs.

Deep Sight:
I had rather hoped for a little more than this, given that this thread was initiated at your instance.

An odd reply.
You asked an off-topic question on another thread and I recommended you start a fresh thread if you wanted to discuss a subject which didn't pertain to the historical evidence of the Kings David and Solomon.

I only saw this thread when I was logging off yesterday and so couldn't give it more than a quick reply.

Today is 11 September, a date graven in many people's mind as a memorial to the worst sort of instance of religious fanaticism taken to a tragic conclusion.
And on consideration, my answer is this, deep sight-

People have the right to nourish their own beliefs irrespective of historical truths.
I work with people of many beliefs, among them Odinism, agnosticism, Catholocism, Pentecostal Charismatic, B'hai Buddhist and Muslim.

I see no reason why plurality is not a desirable thing, which is why the radically fanatic attitudes I've encountered here at Nairaland have astonished me.
I've posted and responded, as is my right in a public forum.
Now someone starts a thread whose topic's declared purpose is to 'smoke out' my opinions about Buddhism?
Deep Sight, think about what this thread says about you.

Let's discuss my question. Should the historical accuracy of the stories within the lore of a religion be of necessary relevance within the worldview of the person subscribing to the fundamental tenets of that religion? And also - should such lack of accuracy form a valid ground for adopting an atheistic worldview?

First question-
Of course. Facts should not be suppressed by any religion.
People can't be expected to make up their own minds on any subject and especially about religion if facts aren't available to them.
For example, there are religious sects which deny the reality of a helio-centric solar system.
Would their beliefs remain once they understood the mechanics of the solar sytem?
I don't know nor care.
What IS important is that the peoples of that sect have free access to that information.

Second question-
Sorry?
Do you really think one has to choose between religious fundamentalism, that is, unquestioning acceptance of a determined faith and atheism?

I feel so flattered.
A thread named in my honour!

frosbel:
You are no Christian for sure !!!!!

And my religious beliefs have something to do with this topic, frosbel?
Anyway, back to science.

Deep Sight:
I doubt very much that this subject would be topical on this board if not for the sub-text: to wit - the possibility to discredit a faith. This is why I ask if indeed a faith can or should be discreditted on such grounds.

I don't think that i'm off-topic. However I will oblige you and open a new thread with same questions.

Now I understand you.
Where do you think this thread would be better situated?
Why not discuss it with the OP, rather than a contributer?

Open the thread, as you will, Deep Sight. See you there.

frosbel:
You keep learning but never able to come to the knowledge of truth.

Do you not think this is most unfortunate 

Where did you find that little wordbite?
In a fortune cookie?
Do you have something about the historical evidence for Kings David and Solomon or not?

Hmmm.
This thread is about the historical evidence for David and Solomon.
You have every right to speculate on worldviews an archeology, of course.

Deep Sight:
, To rephrase - let me ask if there is any worth in grounding one's atheistic or theistic worldview on the veracity or otherwise of these stories - proven or unproven.

Should the faith of a pure Buddhist be altered if he finds for instance that the Buddha never existed? I would be interested in your response to that.

This would be the subject of a different thread.
Why go off-topic here when you can simply start a fresh thread?

frosbel, racing through posts won't get you anywhere!
But reading them, will.

frosbel:
And what can all this endless chatter do to help you know more of the bible and hence come to a saving knowledge of Christ Jesus ?

What a presumpuous fellow you are to be sure!
Why is a discussion of the pre-Cambrian fossil evidence endless chatter?

I find it amusing how many conclusions you draw on the subject of my religious beliefs.

Anyway, back to Andrew, O's hero of the moment.
Oh, oh, oh!
Andrew's bio at answersingenesis
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/bios/a_snelling.asp

claims the good doctor had a 3 volumne book in the tubes:
Creation and the Genesis Flood
for 2008

Here we are in 2011, and no sign of it yet!

And there's more.
http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/realsnelling.htm

There appear to be two geologists living, working and publishing in Australia under the name of Dr Andrew A Snelling. Both have impressive (and identical) scientific qualifications - a BSc (Hons), in Geology (University of NSW) and a PhD, for research in uranium mineralisation (University of Sydney).

Curiously, both Drs Snelling use the same address (PO Box 302, Sunnybank, Qld, 4109), which they share with an organisation called the Creation Science Foundation (CSF), the coordinating centre for fundamentalist creationism in Australia.

But the really strange thing about this is that the views of these two Drs Snelling, on matters such as the age of the earth and its geological strata, are diametrically opposed.

We've seen examples, thanks to O, of Snelling 1, output at answersingenesis.
I won't quote them again, unless needed.

This makes it very surprising to read the following, which I quote in full:

If we now turn to the scientific articles published by the other Dr A A Snelling, consulting geologist (also from PO Box 302, Sunnybank QLD, 4109), we find a remarkable contrast, both in approach and content. None of them mention the Creation or Creation Week, Flood geology or the need to revamp the classic geological timescale.

The latest paper by Snelling 2 (1990, 807 -812) is a detailed technical account of the "Koongarra Uranium Deposits" in the Northern Territory. It appears in an authoritative two volume work on "Geology of the Mineral Deposits of Australia and Papua New Guinea" (ed. F E Hughes), published by the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Melbourne. The references list eight earlier papers by Snelling 2 in refereed journals (or symposium volumes) on aspects of uranium mineralisation; three as sole author and five as junior co-author.

In discussing the regional geology (p. 807) and age (p. 811) of the Koongarra uranium deposits, Snelling 2 describes their geological history in fairly technical terms, however, to avoid the charge we lay against the creationists, of taking quotations out of context, I will quote Snelling 2 verbatim from the paper (p. 807):

"The Archaean basement consists of domes of granitoids and granitic gneisses (the Nanambu Complex), the nearest outcrop being 5 km to the north. Some of the lowermost overlying Proterozoic metasediments were accreted to these domes during amphibolite grade regional metamorphism (5 to 8 kb and 550� to 630� C) at 1870 to 1800 Myr. Multiple isoclinal recumbent folding accompanied metamorphism."

For the benefit of lay readers, this statement is summarised and simplified here:

"The oldest rocks in the Koongarra area, domes of granitoids and granitic gneiss, are of Archaean age (ie to geologists this means they are older than 2500 million years). The Archaean rocks are mantled by Lower Proterozoic (younger than 2500 million years) metasediments: all were later buried deeply, heavily folded and, between 1870 and 1800 million years ago, were subjected to regional metamorphism at considerable temperatures and pressures."

There is no question here of "abandoning the geological column and its associated terminology", and the term Myr refers unequivocally to millions of years.

One further quotation (p.807), "A 150 Myr period of weathering and erosion followed metamorphism.", is self explanatory.

There are several further references to ages of millions and thousands of millions of years, and to commonly accepted geological terminology, throughout the paper but, to spare the lay reader, I will only summarise them here:

1. During Early Proterozoic times (from 1688-1600 million years ago) the area was covered by thick, flat-lying sandstones.

2. At some later date (but after the reverse faulting) the Koongarra uranium mineral deposit forms, perhaps in several stages, first between 1650-1550 million years ago, and later around 870 and 420 million years.

3. The last stage, the weathering of the primary ore to produce the secondary dispersion fan above the No 1 orebody seems to have begun only in the last 1-3 million years.

Nowhere in this, or in any other article by Snelling 2 is there any reference to the creation week, to Noah's Flood or to a young age for the Earth. Nor is there any disclaimer, or the slightest hint, that this Dr Snelling has any reservations about using the standard geological column or time scale, accepted world-wide. The references above to hundreds and thousands of million of years are not interpolated by me. They appear in Dr Snelling 2's paper.

The problem is obvious - the two Drs A A Snelling BSc (Hons), PhD (with the same address as the Creation Science Foundation) publish articles in separate journals and never cite each other's papers. Their views on earth history are diametrically opposed and quite incompatible.

One Dr Snelling is a young-earth creationist missionary who follows the CSF's Statement of Faith to the letter. The other Dr Snelling writes scientific articles on rocks at least hundreds or thousand of millions of years old and openly contradicting the Statement of Faith. The CSF clearly has a credibility problem. Are they aware they have an apostate in their midst and have they informed their members?

Of course there may well be a simple explanation, eg that the two Drs Snelling are one and the same. Perhaps the Board of the CSF has given Andrew Snelling a special dispensation to break his Statement of Faith. Why would they do this? Well, every creation 'scientist' needs to gain scientific credibility by publishing papers in refereed scientific journals and books and the sort of nonsense Dr Snelling publishes in Creation Ex Nihilo is unlikely to be accepted in any credible scientific journal.

I think that both Dr Snelling and the CSF owe us all an explanation. WILL THE REAL DR ANDREW SNELLING PLEASE STAND UP?

That's an eye opener, isn't it.
Two Andrews.
Or a split personality?

We've seen examples of the divergent texts written by the two men.
Andrew is a YEC one day yes, one day no?
Very odd.

frosbel, while it's sweet of you to quote my post verbatim (that means entirely) it wasn't really necessary.
I gave my own conclusions and observations!
Perhaps you didn't see them in your eagerness to read the lins and watch the video.

And of course I give creditto all my sources.
I don't want there to be any question of me plagarising (that means stealing) others' published work!


Ah, lest I forget.
Andrew mentions:

In Australia’s Hamersley Basin, and similar sedimentary basins elsewhere, are special layers called banded iron formations that contain countless billions of tons of iron ore from which we make steel, one of the basic components of our world’s infrastructure.

Those banded iron formations are from the rust I mentioned in my post, that rust caused by the stomatolite's activity over 4 million years during the pre-Cambrian era.
I must learn more about Andrew.

That's an amusing excuse of a scientific argument, OLAADEGBU.
Comparing the formation of the planet to the miracle of the loaves and fishes is new to me, I must admit.

Rapidly moving water catastrophically erodes, so massive erosion must have occurred.  Thus laden with sediments, these waters would have drained into the ocean basins, where the sediments would have been deposited rapidly.  Because neither plant nor animal life had yet been created, the resultant sedimentary rocks would be devoid of animal or plant fossils.

Contrary to what OLAADEGBU  has learnt at answersingenesis, we have an enormous amount of fossils from the pre-Cambrian era.
Not very many dinosaurs, because they didn't exist at that period, though.

What did were Stromatolites.
https://img221.imageshack.us/img221/1858/strom1.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us


Here is some reading material on the subject.
http://www.fossilmuseum.net/Paleobiology/Precambrian-Fossils.htm

Excluding some exceedingly rare Precambrian fossils such as the Ediacaran fauna, stromatolites and thare the only fossils encoding the first 7/8th of the history of life on earth. They encode the role that ancient microorganisms played in the evolution of life on earth and in shaping earth's environments. The fossil record of stromatolites is astonishingly extensive, spanning some four billion years of geological history with the forming organisms possibly having occupied every conceivable environment that ever existed on earth.

One of the most intersting things here, is, of course how oxygen was introduced to our planet:

,  the largest volume of stromatolite formations was likely formed by biogenic processes involving photosynthetic cyanobacteria. Cyanobacteria’s metabolic byproduct, oxygen, rusted the earth, pumped enormous oxygen poison to them into earth’s atmosphere, and in so doing paved the way for aerobic-based life to emerge and diversify,

That rust, by the way, may still be seen in some of the most beautiful geological specimans to be found. You can even buy examples of them in mineral shops.


https://img856.imageshack.us/img856/9650/strom2.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us


Back to the pre-Cambrian.
An overview of the history of pre-Cambrian paleontology is given here:

http://www.pnas.org/content/97/13/6947.full

I find it a thrilling story.


And here is a site dedicated to living stromatolites- living fossils, as it were.
http://seapics.com/feature-subject/marine-invertebrates/stromatolite-pictures.html

I'll admit I find it ironic  that Andrew Snelling actually lives in Australia, where stromatolites still live on!

And of course, a video to act as an antidote to Andrew's little effort.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9P09Sj4-Xs&feature=relmfu

I'm really impressed by the workouts people do!
A real inspiration.
AjanleKoko- logging water and food consumption really helps bring eating and drinking habits into perspective.
I'm finding it a challenge, but keep in mind the mantra-
1 kilo of body fat=7,700 calories.

My daily calorie count is between 1,000 and 1,500.
Even so, after the initial weight loss, the scale doesn't seem to budge.
Why?
Because according to the charts, I need 1,500 calories daily to maintain the weight I'm aiming for.
So we're talking about a weight loss of about 1 kilo a month, maximum.

This is wherre exercise playes such an important role-
Because it's about how you look and feel that matters in the long run, not what the scale says.
A fit, healthy and toned body is my goal.

This means eating healthy, drinking around two litres of water daily and exercising daily for the rest of my life.

Anyay.
Log for Friday-

water- 2.1 litres

exercise-
full side planks, morning and evening
10 each side

food-
300 grammes steamed green beans sliced
2 steamed carrots, cut into sticks

dipping sauce-
60 grammes lotfat cream cheese
30 grammems lot fat mayonaisse
1 tablespoon mustard.

1 slice pumpernickel bread
30 grammes low fat Maasdamer cheese
1/2 glass good red wine.

25 grammes crude almonds

^^^
I wanted to make sure we were singing from the same page of the hymn-book!

The clips of atrocities I've seen relate to that ghastly find in the shed with the 53 skulls.
That had nothing to do with Nigerians, of course.

What clip was it it YOU saw which showed the killing of Nigerians by the rebels?

frosbel hasn't  defended his cut-and-paste tactics of the OP.
Isn't stealing a sin, frosbel?

aletheia:
^Muslims hate Christianity with some soft spot for Catholics because of Mary.

Could you give some sources for that, please?

aletheia:
Catholics hate Protestant Christianity.

And protestants hate Catholics!
With a vengeance.
You knew it was illegal to be a Catholic in the UK for many years?
Nor possible to be an MP?

Have you ever heard of the KKK?
Did you know JFK was often slurred by his political opponents because he was a Catholic?
Protestant America was told JFK would sell them out to the Pope!

The history of sectarian hatred doesn't end there, of course, nor is limited to Protestant vs. Catholic.
Just limited to fanatic vs fanatic.

aletheia:
Both sects want Jerusalem. Both sects do so love "pilgrimages". Both sects have killed or will kill "in the name of God."

Jerusalem.
Yes.
I'm surprised you're leaving the Greek Orthodoxes out of the equation, aletheia.
Odd, considering the squabbles over religious details in points of pilgrimage.




Ah, frosbel.
Another hateful diatribe!
Let's see what this one is about.
By the way, has anyone else noticed how frosbel's writing skills plummet when he's not cutting and pasting?

frosbel:
Pagan Catholics and Pagan Muslims of the same feather, flocking together and defending each other.

Now you know what I am talking about !!!!

But it is very ignorant of you to say the catholics wrote the bible , because the bible was originally in greek and Hebrew and these were the manuscripts used to write the kings James bible , not the Latin catholic bible. Don't even get me started here before I expose the gaps in your knowledge of history.

The same catholics who prevented the poor masses from owning a copy of the bible for centuries.

Looks like you have never read history.

But keep on pallying with your catholic pagan brothers 

That's a good example of frosbel lashing out blindly at anything that moves, I must say.
And on the subject of bibles in the English language, there's a great deal to be said

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05140a.htm

the whole Bible was eventually published in two quarto volumes, in 1609 and 1610, by which time the college had returned to Douai, and the recommendation was signed by three doctors of that university. Thus the New Testament appeared nearly thirty years before the Anglican "Authorized Version", and although not officially mentioned as one of the versions to be consulted, it is now commonly recognized to have had a large influence on the King James Version

So the Catholic translation to English appeared 30 years before the KJV and influenced it considerably.

And the sources of the KJV?
From Wiki

James gave the translators instructions intended to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefs about an ordained clergy.[9]

The KJV owes a great deat to Beza's work, of course.
Again, from Wiki:

Of no less importance are the contributions of Beza to Biblical science. In 1565 he issued an edition of the Greek New Testament, accompanied in parallel columns by the text of the Vulgate and a translation of his own (already published as early as 1556). Annotations were added, also previously published, but now he greatly enriched and enlarged them.

In the preparation of this edition of the Greek text, but much more in the preparation of the second edition which he brought out in 1582, Beza may have availed himself of the help of two very valuable manuscripts. One is known as the Codex Bezae or Cantabrigensis, and was later presented by Beza to the University of Cambridge; the second is the Codex Claromontanus, which Beza had found in Clermont (now in the National Library at Paris).

It was not, however, to these sources that Beza was chiefly indebted, but rather to the previous edition of the eminent Robert Estienne (1550), itself based in great measure upon one of the later editions of Erasmus. Beza's labors in this direction were exceedingly helpful to those who came after. The same thing may be asserted with equal truth of his Latin version and of the copious notes with which it was accompanied. The former is said to have been published over a hundred times.

Although some contend that Beza's view of the doctrine of predestination exercised an overly dominant influence upon his interpretation of the Scriptures, there is no question that he added much to a clear understanding of the New Testament.

As time goes by, obviously we have access to better sources, better translations of the available manuscripts.
And especially with the advantage of computer analysis, things are much clearer.

We should never forget, however the tremendous debt we have to those great 16th century thinkers!

chukwudi44:
@copy n paste frosbel

Too true, chukwudi44.
And from here
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/simple_gospel.htm

Real Christians aren't afraid of admitting their sources, frosbel, unless, of course, you're trying to deceive the readers into thinking you thought that post up on your own!

^^^You've forgotten to recognise the source of your posts yet again, OLAADEGBU.
Some of OLAADEGBU latest offerings have been combos of various sites, as a quick google search shows, though the majority of his output is simplly word for word from yes, the site which has turned its back on Kent Hovind.
None other than answersingenesis.

Why do you try to palm off your  posts here at nairaland as your own original thinking?
I'll bet there are readers here who think your posts are the product of your own thought, not copy-paste jobs.

Anway, here's a video for the readers here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gnQz32c5EA

Enjoy!

Martian-

My temple is praying for visas to North Korea right now so we can go with CNN to shed more light on these miraculous finds.

I'm interested in funding your investigations. Do you accept payment by WU?

^^^Archeology is fascinating because the next discovery is simply there waiting to be found.
And to answer your question- it's outside the scope of the thread, which is evaluating the evidence David and Solomon existed as historical personages.
Why not start a new thread on the subject?

As that BBC article I posted up yesterday  pointed out, the evolution of the dinosaurs is bracketed by two extinction events:


About 250 million years ago, at the end of the Permian period, something killed some 90 percent of the planet's species. Less than 5 percent of the
animal species in the seas survived. On land less than a third of the large animal species made it. Nearly all the trees died.
http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/prehistoric-world/permian-extinction/



This cataclysm had the effect of empotying the earth of almost all life, down to the microbes!
It 's sobering to think of, isn't it.
So much happened on our planet and so long before our existence.
However, this emptied planet formed the home of the dinosaurs, who evolved into an amazing variety of forms.
Some flying, some earthbound, some sea dwellers and some inhabited  fresh water sources.
All shared a common ancestry via the archosaurs.
Along the way, the families of the crocodiles and the avian species broke off and developed on their own, with rather interesting results.

The world of the dinosaurs is an marvel of variety.
It's really difficult to sum up just how many types of dinosaurs there were, especially as new fossils are found almost everyday.
The BBC has a series of videos on the subject, which I'll post up regularly.


All good things come to an end, though.
here, it was the K/T extinction event.
The K/T event killed of over 90% of the living creatures present at the
time, a true apocalptic event that left it's signature on the Earth, one actually
visible from space.

Here are two photos of visible remains of the K/T boundary, one from Tibet
http://www.icess.ucsb.edu/~alsdorf/Pages/personalme.html
https://img836.imageshack.us/img836/2766/structurebig.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Here's one taken from the ISS centre, by NASA.
It's from that wicked wiki source, but a great photo all the same!
https://img821.imageshack.us/img821/920/400pxravenridgecolorado.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Below this distinctive geological signature, there are  dinosaur fossils.
Above it, none.
Curiously enough, what we do find above the K/T Boundary are fossilised remains of the two families which
split off from the dinosaur family-crocodiles and birds!


Here's a Youtube video about the evolution of feathers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6kViYeDcmA&feature=related

It's a fascinating watch!

OLAADEGBU:
The first fraud is that the particle to human evolution does not occur as this shows in the fossil record.  What is the evidence that an amoeba can change into a man over millions of years?

Well, it happened, O.

OLAADEGBU:
The onus is on you to tell us where all the millions of transitional fossils in the Precambrian and Cambrian layers are?

If you cannot show us where the millions of transitional fossils in the Precambrian and Cambrian layers are then show us examples of such intermediate fossils in museums.

Why the insistence on fossils in the pre-Cambrian and Cambrian layers, OLAADEGBU?
Are you admitting these eras existed?
I'd like to understand your reasoning there.

OLAADEGBU:
,  It is because you don't want to admit that God is in control of all things including yourselves is the reason why you persist on propagating this satanic indoctrination of evolution as an alternative to the creation account.  You will rather believe that you evolved from slime over million of years than to obey God.

Satanic indoctrination?
Too funny, even from OLAADEGBU.
Lots  of Christians are comfortable with evolution.
And why not, OLAADEGBU?

More repetition of outdated sources, more gibberish and , a variant of a Kent Hovind meme.
"From goo to the zoo to you"
You know what answersingenesis has to say about Kent, don't you?

Enigma, last but not least- by no means sweeping!
I realise that for many, the authorship of 2 Peter is a matter of dogma, which explains  the convoluted conclusions drawn by the sites we've both sourced.
What I found most interesting was the conclusion of one Bible scholar- that no church doctrine would be negated by denying Peter's authorship of 2 Peter.

[quote][/quote]^^^
Thanks, HISchild, for that excellent post and I've bookmarked it.

konfessor:
@all: i implore you all who belive that Godprophet is real not to join issues with people who dont believe, afterall it takes only the grace of God to believe in the first place
if you choose not to believe fine, but dont clogg this thread with unneccesary argument, afterall the op did not create it for the purpose of your argument.

You're absolutely right.
The OP posted to find followers.
Of course he is real.
And I hope to see how all this spins out with time.

^^^Yeah. That's what's keeping me faithful to my food routine.
That and logging here.
And seeing the results.

Water:
1.8 litres

exercise:
fullside planks, morning and evening
10 each side

food:
huge salad divided in 2 and eaten for lunch and supper
50 grammes of Cos lettuce, shredded
1 cucumcer, diced
2 carrots, slivered
1 onion, diced
2 tomatoes, diced
1 beetroot, diced
2Tablespoons of olive oil
salt and herbs.

1 slice pumpernickel bread,
30 grammes lofat cheese

100 grammes of grapes
30 grammes lofat cheese
1/2 glass good red wine.

2buff:
Unless you're a child, there are some things that you KNOW may cause problems with your spouse.
Because you would have run it through in your mind and asked the question "What if it was him/her that was doing this right now. Would I be disturbed by it?"

I think if folks just ask these questions before doing certain things they will find that within them lies the capacity to not be so dumb.

Excellent advice for both husband and wife!
In fact, it's about applying the Golden Rule in everyday life.

OLAADEGBU:
What is wrong about the argument about the speed of light? It would be much easier for everyone if you can point out what and why you object to an argument rather than making general statements. Your youtube is doing the exact thing you are accusing me of.

If it's such a good argument, answersingenesis wouldn't recommend avoiding it.
And the youtube eposode of mr Deity is not anything more than entertainment andcommentary.
perhaps on a different level than you cartoons, but you'll get used to them.

frosbel:
Dear young woman, I am so 1 million % certain of the accuracy of the bible, that I need read no other book, articles or literature for that matter that states the contrary to what is factual in my opinion.

I mean , admittedly there has been a little 'heat' in my debate , but maybe it's because I am passionate about the truth.

But tell me, why does everything to you sound like abuse !!!

There's a simple answer to that, frosbel.
I don't kowtow to you.
From a woman, that reads like abuse to you.
Also, I laughed at the sophomoric excuse of a link you offered when I first asked you for a source.
What truth are you so hot about that you find yourself 'accusing' me of being a Muslim?

KAG:
Um, did you read what you posted? Where in that article is the subject of pollen order in varves addressed? Did . . . did you just do a search on AIG for G. R. Morton, and then posted the first thing that came up?

Nice catch, KAG.
What are the odds OLAADEGBU actually understands the content of Morton's investigations?

^^^^
Yes.
I think a little wine is a good thing.
Remember, I log EVERYTHING I eat and drink.
And the side planks are amazing, aren't they?
Arms, waist, hips and legs all benefit.

Yes, I referred to MyJoe.
And I stand my my statement- one thing is passion, another is hurling insults.

For example.

frosbel:
Abuse

You are hiding behind the facade of abuse to stifle what was once a promising debate.

For example the Pastor AIO and yourself perhaps , had the temerity to direct insults at my person simply because I refused to answer one of the easiest questions in Sunday school circles. You simply turned this whole issue into a debacle , typical Nigerian Style.

If A Muslim , Hindu, atheist had asked, me then I would have provided them with details , but I knew you guys were up to no good, just engaging in unnecessary arguments about Christ that take you farther from the truth.

Anyway bye to all , continue your discussion, I have no further interest.

Still no defense of the OP, frosbel?
It was your video that sparked the discussion, after all.

Yes, which is why the truth is so important.
Not only is the age of the artefact important, but actually what it says.
This is why we're discussing the meaning of the word 'bethel'.

Whatever the provenance and meaning of this artefact, it neither proves nor denies anyone's faith.

Links, please!
I want to see what it was YOU saw.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haP7Ys9ocTk&feature=player_embedded

I have no problem here!
Countries differ with youtube usage.

Joagbaje -Try cutting and pasting and using your browser?

What is clear is that the OP is an accomplished cold reader!

Done and shared at fb.

I'm finally back on track with the exercising!
Log for Wednesday
water
2.1 litres

exercise
full side planks, morning and evening, 10 each side

food.
400 grammes endive
100 grammes fresh radishes

with my dipping sauce.
1 no fat yoghurts
50 grammes lofat mayonnaise
1 tablespoon mustard

divided in two and eaten for lunch and supper

40 grammes lofat cheese
1/2 glass good red wine

hey, Enigma!
One of the strangest things I've come accross in this on-line searching is the strange reluctance of the article writers to draw a logical conclusion from their findings.
I get the impression the authors' objective is to lull the readership into acceptance in spite of the evidence.
Here's yet another example:
http://newapologia.com/who-wrote-2-peter/

I see the argument by cartoon and oneliner slurs continues!
So here's a video to accompany it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fpe2n6FA_DE&feature=fvsr

And another

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6_o1GxgNMQ


Well.
OLAADEGBU can't cope with the Smithsonian site on the subject of the origins of dinosaurs.
He feels Wiki isn't a good enough source for a readership he chooses to feed with quote-mining and cartoons.

Let's try the BBC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11481232

he first dinosaur-like creatures emerged up to nine million years earlier than previously thought.

That is the conclusion of a study on footprints found in 250 million-year-old rocks from Poland.

Writing in a Royal Society journal, a team has named the creature that made them Prorotodactylus.

The prints are small - measuring a few centimetres in length - which suggests the earliest dinosaur-like animals were about the size of domestic cats.

They would have weighed at most a kilogram or two, they walked on four legs and they were very rare animals.

Their footprints comprised only two or three per cent of the total footprints on this site.

The footprints date to just two million years after the end-Permian mass extinction - the worst mass extinction in the history of the planet.


According to Stephen Brusatte, from the American Museum of Natural History in New York, who led the research: "In geological terms this is just the blink of an eye."

He told BBC News: "We can basically say that the dinosaur lineage originated in the immediate aftermath of this extinction which is a completely new idea and a very radical re-interpretation of the early history of dinosaurs".

In the end-Permian extinction event, more than 90% of all life on Earth was wiped out due to massive volcanic eruptions, sudden global warming and the stagnation of the oceans.

Up until recently, scientists had thought that dinosaurs emerged 15 to 20 million years after the mass extinction, when the planet had become more habitable.

But the new footprints suggest that the rise of dinosaurs was intimately related to the devastating extinction event.
Prorotodactylus Prorotodactylus was about the size of a domestic cat, say the researchers

"Without this mass extinction there would never have been dinosaurs," said Mr Brusatte.

"There's a degree of symmetry about that because when dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago, that opened space for mammals," he added.

This article is over a year old, granted, but it's interesting to see the news that relates dinos to the end-Permian extinction event, isn't it.
Ah.
No flood in that extinction event.
Volcanoes.

OLAADEGBU:
As long as her links and sources are anti Biblical she would swallow them hook line and 'stinker' as nothing but the whole truth.

And more slurs.
How Christian of you, OLAADEGBU!
Is that really all you have to bring to the table?
I'm not surprised!

Enigma:
An indication of her misinformation in this particular instance is a failure to understand or appreciate the difference between a pseudepigraph and a "forgery" ----- and that is even assuming for argument purposes only that the epistle is not rightly associated with the apostle Peter.

And wrong again, Enigma!
And right, at the same time.

A pseudoepigraph IS a forgery.
But you are right in that not all forgeries are pseudoepigraphs!

edited-
I'll leave it to you, Enigma, to explain that to OLAADEGBU.
Off to read your link! CU

OLAADEGBU:
You must have been watching too much entertainment films such as the Jurassic Park and confusing them to be scientific facts.  Where you there to observe them evolving from the little animals?  What was the common ancestor of these dinosaurs and what were they like when they were in their transitional forms, have they been found? if so show us the evidence.

I never saw those movies, I read the books.
Were they good movies, OLAADEGBU?
Did  you end up throwing your popcorn at the cinema screen in a fit of righteous indignation?

Transitional forms, OLAADEGBU?
Didn't you understand the anwersingenesis recommendation about arguing that?

Tell me, OLAADEGBU, did you examine the chart?
It's not as pretty as a cartoon, but interesting all the same.

Where you there to observe them evolving from the little animals?

That's a fantastic question, OLAADEGBU.
Did the same person who coached you so bady on identifying logical errors tell you ask that?

Enigma, wrong again!
I posted two sources I thought would be easy to follow.
There are plenty more, as you probably know.
Off to read the link you provided, and in advance,thanks!

OLAADEGBU:
Then spare us of sending us to wikipedia where everyone is free to post his idea, and if you insist then at least try understanding what it says and then use its point in making your case here.

I'm not surprised you dislike Wiki.
I am surprised you didn't read the link.
Shall I spood feed it to you?
That way the readership will read it with you.
No problem.

OLAADEGBU:
If you remove those evolutionary spectacles you will see the author of those cartoons.

Hey, how about stopping the insults.
It really make you look like a bully

OLAADEGBU:
If you are nairaland literate, if not computer literate, you would have seen the link to what I posted in the said cartoon.  It is not just the wikipedia links that you have to click on, whenever you see hyperlinks try clicking on them before you start crying wolf.

Stop the slurs, OLAADEGBU!
It makes you look like a forum bully.
And of course you're right about the cartoons' hyperlinks.
Now.
Why didn't you source the articles you quoted and that I had to source for the thread?
I hope it won't happen again!

OLAADEGBU:
Is that what you got from your wikipedia again?  I wouldn't be surprised that you are given to fallacies.

More slurs!
Apart from showing the weakness of your argument, you're simply wrong wrong on that, as the sources I posted up show.

I'll start posting up a decon of the wiki article on the origin of the dinos for you, OLAADEGBU.
I'm sure it will be an interesting source of discussion.