Hoops wrote: Ssshhhh.... the adults are talking. Go back to the kids table. Do you need help back into your chair?
There is no end to how unintentionally entertaining you can be.
You intimate that I'm a child because I'm apparently interrupting your conversation... one that attempts to justify your own childish beliefs and mindset.
That's awesome.
I suppose it's not entirely your fault. Your circle of friends is likely just as (im)mature as you are (assuming they're all going to the same institution you are) and so you confuse yours and their ages with maturity. Why should you have to grow up if your friends haven't, right? Besides, it's fun for you to all play dress up and make-believe every Sunday and symbolically cannibalize your precious savior. Who can resist that?
But yes. I'm the child. I'm completely fine with letting you believe that too. It's kind of cute.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Hoops wrote: Ssshhhh.... the adults are talking. Go back to the kids table. Do you need help back into your chair?
There is no end to how unintentionally entertaining you can be.
You intimate that I'm a child because I'm apparently interrupting your conversation... one that attempts to justify your own childish beliefs and mindset.
That's awesome.
I suppose it's not entirely your fault. Your circle of friends is likely just as (I'm)mature as you are (assuming they're all going to the same institution you are) and so you confuse yours and their ages with maturity. Why should you have to grow up if your friends haven't, right? Besides, it's fun for you to all play dress up and make-believe every Sunday and symbolically cannibalize your precious savior. Who can resist that?
But yes. I'm the child. I'm completely fine with letting you believe that too. It's kind of cute.
GR33N wrote: Dinosaurs lived on the earth up until the flood.
I can respect your entitlement to your opinion and recognize the source of these opinions that come from your belief in your religion of choice.
What Tarski says is not an opinion. It is scientific fact.
Words have meanings. You don't just get to make them mean whatever you want them to mean.
What Tarski says is an opinion. Your faith in the religion of science appears very strong.
Words do have meanings. Although I'm not sure what you mean by this based on my comment.
keithb wrote:
No reason to call my opinions silly considering you have no more credible evidence than I do to support those opinions. Reducing yourself to name calling and judgmental accusations does not improve your ability to appear intellectually enlightened. Therefore your opinions on such matters is left lacking in credibility.
To suggest that there is no more evidence to support science than there is to support your superstition is beyond stupid. Literally, you have to either be abysmally ignorant or a liar to make this statement.
If you actually believed this, you wouldn't live in a house, use electricity, drive a car, and you certainly wouldn't use a computer to type idiotic things on message boards. After all, the gremlins that make your car drive might eat you, Thor might get mad that you're stealing his lightning and strike you dead, and and the demons that haunt your computer and make it run might possess your soul.
Did you read my quote before you responded? Please excuse me for not following your logic on this one either. It seems you have a need to belittle me to prove your point. It doesn't get us anywhere with worthwhile discussions.
keithb wrote:
I find the rules of thought that some place upon others and unfortunate choice. I can believe that dinosaurs roamed the earth prior to the flood and subscribe to the YEC theory. I would appreciate your regard for allowing me to have that opinion. If you want to have an open minded discussion about these topics, that would be fine with me. Don't tell me what I can believe and what I can't. Thank you.
keithb wrote:You can hold any idiotic belief you want. You can believe that the earth is 10,000 years old, that the sun is pulled across the sky by Trundholm's chariot, or that Elvis is still alive. However, I don't have to respect your beliefs. I reserve the right to ridicule you for your willful rejection of science, just as I would ridicule someone that believes that John Edwards talks to their dead cat.
I can hold any belief I want, just as you can. I did not say you had to respect my beliefs I asked you to respect my right to have my own beliefs, you can choose not to if you like. You can ridicule me all you want but I won't be telling you that your opinions are stupid. Reducing a discussion to ridicule just gets in the way of the discussion.
Then saith He to Thomas... be not faithless, but believing. - John 20:27
GR33N wrote: Your faith in the religion of facts appears very strong.
Edited for clarity.
Tarski himself has commented on this before - when fundamentalists wish to insult science, they compare it to a religion. When they wish to inflate their religious views, they compare it to science. Very telling.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Quasimodo wrote: You would like it. It's the distal end of an ulna (lower forelimb) of some poor animal that was caught in a volcanic ash fall and died as a result. It's about twice the thickness of a human ulna. It is a cast. I.E. the bone itself completely decomposed and left a cavity that later filled with minerals. In this case it filled with opal. Not gem quality, but beautiful to look at.
pics? I love fossils. Paleohistory was part of my Utah childhood...
Sorry for the very long delay, Blixa (my last few days have been very busy). Here's the fossil:
The white outer surface is pumicite. The gray core is opal. You can't see it on this image, but the opal looks almost like liquid.
I've toyed with the idea of polishing the ends, but I'm still too afraid to "mess it up".
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
Hoops wrote:But it's worth considering that if Genesis were to be taken literally, how would that be manifest in the creation? That's what I'm driving at.
But how do you explain Kennewick Man?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Hoops wrote:But it's worth considering that if Genesis were to be taken literally, how would that be manifest in the creation? That's what I'm driving at.
But how do you explain Kennewick Man?
It doesn't matter harmony. I could post a thousand links that refute Genesis. My own photos of a grinding stone on the shore of a Pleistocene lake bed that dried out 10,000 years ago should be enough. It wouldn't make a difference.
"There are none so blind as those that will not see" John Heywood 1546.
The emotional need to believe in Genesis is stronger that the desire to know the truth.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
I just had a thought! Maybe this will help those who might be wondering why God would want to create a young earth in the first place. The question is, why would God want to create a whole solar system and earth in such a short amount of time and make it appear old?
Answer: procrastination. God must have a deadline! The end of the world date must be set in stone. I don't know why he would have a deadline but he must! God woke up one day and said, "Oh my God! I need to get this creation started! I only have 7,000 years and I haven't even moved the planets into orbit. Crap, I'm so damn late! Ok, I'll have to whip something together and make it look like it took forever. Yeah, that's the ticket!"
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
It doesn't matter harmony. I could post a thousand links that refute Genesis. My own photos of a grinding stone on the shore of a Pleistocene lake bed that dried out 10,000 years ago should be enough. It wouldn't make a difference.
"There are none so blind as those that will not see" John Heywood 1546.
The emotional need to believe in Genesis is stronger that the desire to know the truth.
When I need to answer Harmony like an arrogant ass, I'll let you know and you can do it for me. Until then, I can answer for myself, thankyou.
What is it you want me to explain? A man that fits within a YEC timeframe? I'm not sure how devestating that is supposed to be, perhaps you'll explain?
