atheists

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Sep 6, 2013
266
3
0
Yeah, it's overwhelming alright, an overwhelming amount of conjecture and assumptions and nothing more.
As a reminder, there is your claim. And here was my question :
Can you please name three books on the subject that you have read that, in your assessment, were nothing more than conjecture and assumptions?

I'll add this: If you can't, because you haven't actually read that many, then how many books do you think a person should read on a subject before they can make a claim like the one you've made above?
 
Aug 5, 2013
624
2
0
This is still not the evidence I asked for, and here's why it isn't. Let's revisit, yet again, what I asked for (for about the 10th time now, gee you guys still can't even get this part right). I asked for an EXPERIMENT following the scientific method which DEMONSTRATES the HYPOTHESIS that a PURELY ASEXUAL organism can evolve into a PURELY SEXUAL REPRODUCING organism.
So what you're asking for a scientific experiment, performed in a lab, that will demonstrate a change in species that scientists suggest would take millions of years. But you want to see it happen in real time. Can you guess why we haven't provided you with a link to that? You're asking for the impossible because you don't want your belief to be shown false.

However, such a request is unreasonable. Not only is it impossible, but you can't demonstrate creationism with this kind of evidence, either. Can you link to a scientific experiment, performed in a lab, that demonstrates God creating different species in real time? The problem with your observation of nature and saying "God did that" is that there's no control group to compare it to, which makes it unscientific... you criticized me for explaining the scientific method, but I think you take liberties with its meaning when it benefits you.
 
Aug 5, 2013
624
2
0
Would you say that people living longer and longer as generations pass is a sign of evolution? Or just a better understanding of medicine and nutrition?
I wouldn't say that it's a "sign of evolution", but it is one of the causes of our continuing evolution. A change in our environment (better medicine and knowledge of nutrition) has caused a change in our average lifetime, which has had side effects -- we can have babies later in life than we used to without worry about whether we'll be around to raise them, and that causes a change in the epigenetics that we pass on to our children. Our increased medical knowledge has also allowed children that would have died to some genetic causes to not die instead, so they live long enough to pass on their genes and make their "defects" more common in the gene pool.

The biblical explanation for longer life is how well one honors one's mother and father, but I have yet to see a correlation between the two.
 
M

megaman125

Guest
As a reminder, there is your claim. And here was my question :
Can you please name three books on the subject that you have read that, in your assessment, were nothing more than conjecture and assumptions?
Tell you what, I'll answer your question when you answer the questions I asked of you some pages back.

I'll add this: If you can't, because you haven't actually read that many, then how many books do you think a person should read on a subject before they can make a claim like the one you've made above?
Or maybe I'm not answering you becuase you evade my questions. Oh that's right, I forgot that your arrogance doesn't allow for possibilities like that, because that goes outside the view that your perception is correct.

So what you're asking for a scientific experiment, performed in a lab, that will demonstrate a change in species that scientists suggest would take millions of years. But you want to see it happen in real time. Can you guess why we haven't provided you with a link to that? You're asking for the impossible because you don't want your belief to be shown false.
It has nothing to do with "Waa, I don't want me belief to be shown false" as you so dishonestly claim. All I'm asking for is scientific evidence for something that claims to be scientific. If you don't have that evidence, that's fine, but that means the evolutionist claims are not scientific. But since you obviously don't have said evidence, rather than accept that your beliefs have holes, you try to use the typical dishonest tactic of pushing those problems back on to Christians with your whole "you're afraid to lose you faith" nonsense.

However, such a request is unreasonable.
Please tell me why it's unreasonable for me to request scientific evidence for something that claims to be scientific (this explaination ought to be good).

Not only is it impossible, but you can't demonstrate creationism with this kind of evidence, either. Can you link to a scientific experiment, performed in a lab, that demonstrates God creating different species in real time? The problem with your observation of nature and saying "God did that" is that there's no control group to compare it to, which makes it unscientific... you criticized me for explaining the scientific method, but I think you take liberties with its meaning when it benefits you.
Yep, all I do is question evolution, and instead of actually answering the question, you go off on this nonsensical tangent, attacking an arguement that I never made. Yet another typical dishonest tactic, but then again, they wouldn't be evolutionists without those.

"Millions of years" is not a valid excuse either. Millions of years is just your catch-all vauge answer evolutionists hide behind when they can't provide answers to valid questions about evolution. Where's the scientific evidence that millions of years is capable of such feats that you claim it is? Oh yeah, there is no evidence, just believe in the millions of years, don't question the religion any further and just accept the vauge millions of years cop-out we're given, and then act surprised when people don't believe in evolution. You accuse us of the "God of the gaps" argument, when you sit there and use the same thing, with you millions of years of the gaps.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,780
13,541
113
The biblical explanation for longer life is how well one honors one's mother and father, but I have yet to see a correlation between the two.

look no further than the kids who don't listen to their parents when they tell them not to play in the street, take up smoking, drinking or using other drugs, to eat healthy or not to be rude to strangers.

parents give advice meant for their children to keep out of trouble. dishonoring such advice often puts you in harms way, decreasing your life expectancy.
 
D

danschance

Guest
I forgot that your arrogance doesn't allow for possibilities like that, because that goes outside the view that your perception is correct.
For the most part all of us perceive things correctly but the way we view it is overlaid with our own paradigm. Christians look at the stars and see God's handwork while atheists look at the same stars and see how random chance and accident have produced such a vast array of things.
 
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
182
0
All this reasoning really does no good at all. There are people who God has given the Holy Spirit, it is an addition to the mind and body that gives us an understanding of God. Without that, there can not be an understanding. There are people who decide not to accept it, people who feel it would interfere with sins they love, many people who choose not to accept this.

Reasoning with them is like reasoning with Satan. Only Christ has power over Satan, and they can only acknowledge God through the spirit.
 
K

Kerry

Guest
Man I miss the conversation again. I hate that worse than a pegged legged man at tail kicking.
 
K

Kerry

Guest
Starcrash, you have been on my heart. I want you to know that I am praying for you. You seem so familiar with the word of God. But are you trolling or searching. I think searching, I also think that you are on the fence. Man just taste and see. Evidence comes after faith. I know your stubborn heart says this man wont get me. I don't want to get you but God does. What I mean by that is that I am no more intelligent than you. I am not interested in comparing who can touch the water from bridge. I am no more of man than you are. But God wants you and will use you and reward you. Man don't spend eternity in hell. Say this prayer, and believe when you say it. thats all it takes. Lord I am a sinner and I ask you to forgive my sin and I make you the Lord of my life. I can't do it but Lord you can and I place my faith in you. thats all it takes if you mean it.
 
K

Kerry

Guest
And if you are a backslidden atheist which I think you are, I maybe wrong, but you know the bible more than most christians. He will still accept that prayer if it is in truth.
 
C

CoooCaw

Guest
so it didnt occur to you to ask me for proof?




you dont need proof obviously when you know you are right



and you wouldnt recognise it if someone gave it to you

Santa Claus doesn't come from the bible.
 
C

CoooCaw

Guest
Where do you think Santa and Yule trees are found in the Bible?

Zech 2:6 "Ho, ho, come forth, and flee from the land of the north, "

Jer 10:3,4 "one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.

They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not."
 
Sep 6, 2013
266
3
0
Tell you what, I'll answer your question when you answer the questions I asked of you some pages back.
Please reproduce what question or questions I have to answer before you're willing to tell us which books on evolution you've actually read.
 
Sep 6, 2013
266
3
0
Zech 2:6 "Ho, ho, come forth, and flee from the land of the north, "

Jer 10:3,4 "one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.

They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not."
Oh, a joke. Sorry. Thought you were serious. :p
 
M

megaman125

Guest
Please reproduce what question or questions I have to answer before you're willing to tell us which books on evolution you've actually read.
So you believe God created the universe then? And is that why you jumped all over CooCaw for not responding immediately to the so called "undeniable proof" that the billions of years ago claims of evolution are right and the Bible is wrong?
So it's exactly as Cycel predicted - it doesn't matter what evidence you're presented with; you will always deny that it counts as evidence. Is that correct?
Kinda like how it doesn't matter how much anti-evolution evidence is presented to you, you'll still cling to evolution?
Actually, I was waiting to listen to you. I asked you questions, honest questions, with question marks and all. The only part where I was judging you was for your arrogance from the first time you claimed CooCaw was intentionally avoiding this conversation. So no, it's not about "my righteousness," I would like you to actually answer those questions instead of evading them.
There's the questions and the parts of the conversation. I'd also like you to actually respond to post #617, where I also asked questions you ignored.

Also, before I answer your questions, I'd also like you to explain the purpose of your questioning, and how you plan to use my response. For instance, do you plan to use my response to dishonestly discredit me because I didn't read enough evolution books to satisfy you, and therefore conclude that my view must be wrong becasue I didn't read X number of pro-evolution books, where X is equal to Y + Z, Y being the number of books I have read and Z being an arbitrary number you come up with?

Yeah, I'm well aware of all the typical dishonest tactics of evolutionists, like the one you're obviously trying to pull. Your obvious comeback to my response for your questions will be that I haven't read enough pro-evolution books (or watched enough pro-evolution videos if you want to count those too). The number I give doesn't matter to you, because you'll say I haven't read enough, and therefore my conclusion that evolution isn't valid is not a valid view for me to have.

And after you do all that and I answer your question, I'm going to ask you how many pro-Hinduism books you've read, and I'll be asking you for the same reason you're asking me how many pro-evolution books I've read.
 
Sep 6, 2013
266
3
0
Also, before I answer your questions, I'd also like you to explain the purpose of your questioning, and how you plan to use my response. For instance, do you plan to use my response to dishonestly discredit me because I didn't read enough evolution books to satisfy you, and therefore conclude that my view must be wrong becasue I didn't read X number of pro-evolution books, where X is equal to Y + Z, Y being the number of books I have read and Z being an arbitrary number you come up with?
Again, let's take a look at your claim:
"Yeah, it's overwhelming alright, an overwhelming amount of conjecture and assumptions and nothing more."

If, in fact, you have made that claim without reading ANY books on evolution, or maybe just one in passing, then I believe you have insufficient knowledge from appropriate sources to make your claim. Note that I didn't ask you to name ALL the books you have read or asked how many you read; I asked you for three, and an explanation of why you felt those three were nothing but conjecture and assumptions - because that's your claim regarding ALL of evolution.

It is a thoroughly unreasonable claim to make if you've never actually read anything about evolution except from its opponents.

And after you do all that and I answer your question, I'm going to ask you how many pro-Hinduism books you've read, and I'll be asking you for the same reason you're asking me how many pro-evolution books I've read.
I have only read one pro-Hinduism book in enough detail to feel I really understood it - which is why I would never make a statement that Hinduism is "an overwhelming amount of conjecture and assumptions and nothing more."

From the fact that you have repeatedly dodged the question and now tried to attack me for asking it, it seems pretty likely that you haven't actually studied evolution well enough to know anything about it. Dismissing any science in ignorance of what it actually says is, quite frankly, intellectually dishonest. It's very disappointing.

Does anyone other than megaman125 believe it's appropriate to claim that a field of science is "an overwhelming amount of conjecture and assumptions and nothing more" without having done any actual significant reading or study in the field? If so, please explain why.
 
G

Grey

Guest
Pro-hinduism books? Pro-evolution books?
I mean do you consider the new testament a pro-christian book? Or an extremely powerful religious document?

Sometimes books are just books.
 
Sep 6, 2013
266
3
0
Pro-hinduism books? Pro-evolution books?
megaman125's terminology, not mine.
I mean do you consider the new testament a pro-christian book? Or an extremely powerful religious document?
I think it's pretty clearly both - although I would classify it as 27 powerful religious documents.
The "pro-Hinduism book" I was talking about is a translation of the Ramayana, which is also a powerful religious document.
 
M

megaman125

Guest
If, in fact, you have made that claim without reading ANY books on evolution, or maybe just one in passing, then I believe you have insufficient knowledge from appropriate sources to make your claim. Note that I didn't ask you to name ALL the books you have read or asked how many you read; I asked you for three, and an explanation of why you felt those three were nothing but conjecture and assumptions - because that's your claim regarding ALL of evolution.
Even if I did all that, it would be a waste of my time, as you would just respond "Nope, your reasoning is wrong, I win." So no, I'm not going to type several essays for something that would never please you anyways, it's a waste. Although, if you really want to do that, you go ahead and start by dismantling a creationist site line-by-line and explaining why each line is wrong.

From the fact that you have repeatedly dodged the question and now tried to attack me for asking it, it seems pretty likely that you haven't actually studied evolution well enough to know anything about it. Dismissing any science in ignorance of what it actually says is, quite frankly, intellectually dishonest. It's very disappointing.
Typical evolutionist is typical. I said I'd answer your questions after you answered mine, to which you agreed to do. But now instead, you ignored all of that, then you try and label me as the dishonest one.