Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[ChristineM]

As noted, science cannot "prove" anything.

First, science does not deal in proof, it deals in evidence

Second, and what has religion ever proven?

And the idea that you say life has been created "several times in a laboratory" is not making sense.

I suggest you try researching "life created in laboratory".

Science does not prove that God does not exist,

Nor does religion, science does not deal in the supernatural and religion stomps it foot and says "believe in magic"

Or that God does or does not give life.

As previously stated, science deals in evidence. There is no evidence to suggest a god (any of the 3800+ creator gods) did it

You and science will never prove that God does not exist and is not the Creator and guarantor of life

Nor will you but you will bluster and believe

 

[ChristineM]

As noted, science cannot "prove" anything.

Despite your insurance and despite the number of times you have been told, science does not deal in proof

And the idea that you say life has been created "several times in a laboratory" is not making sense.

I suggest you research "life created in the laboratory"

Science does not prove that God does not exist, it also does not prove that God does exist.

Nor does religion so the point of making that statement is what precisely?

Elements and possible electricity had to be introduced in order for whatever is deemed to be life to come about.

And?
Are you saying your god created life from nothing? Oh this could lead to a whole new can of worms ;-)

You and science will never prove that God does not exist and is not the Creator and guarantor of life.

Nor will you ever prove your god so another waste of time argument

No lab experiments prove that life can be formed in a laboratory, despite the claims made by "scientists."

You are welcome to your blind belief.

Sparks and chemicals are introduced into the mix.

And? I am not repeating myself

Argue away, but thanks anyway for the brief conversation.

And thank you to, you have been very enlightening

what you have demonstrated to me is your insistence on saying that the Arch of Titus is not a memorial recognizing the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy regarding the overrunning of Jerusalem

See previous post.

and the idea that scientists can create life. They cannot.

More repeating., Research it and learn. Blind denial does nobody any good

, I realize that I'm not going to argue with some philosophically any more.

So use evidence instead.

 

[ChristineM]

It "seems like" life emerged from chemical reaction. Seems like, you say. Hmm from the tests, nothing grows?? You said you would go step by step with me, teaching? So show where things grow from the 'life' you say was chemically induced in experiments. Grow as in evolve.

Here is a couple of university grade starters to evolution 101

Understanding Evolution - Your one-stop source for information on evolution

Evolution Entrance

Have fun or ignore at your choice.

If you so choose, once you have studied them we can talk evolution on a fairly level playing field.

But from your postings i am sure you are not willing so go there.

 

[YoursTrue]

Here is a couple of university grade starters to evolution 101

Understanding Evolution - Your one-stop source for information on evolution

Evolution Entrance

Have fun or ignore at your choice.

If you so choose, once you have studied them we can talk evolution on a fairly level playing field.

But from your postings i am sure you are not willing so go there.

I don't go to links in general when someone claims to know. If you can't explain in your own words, don't bother, and thank you.

 

[YoursTrue]

Despite your insurance and despite the number of times you have been told, science does not deal in proof



I suggest you research "life created in the laboratory"



Nor does religion so the point of making that statement is what precisely?




And?
Are you saying your god created life from nothing? Oh this could lead to a whole new can of worms ;-)




Nor will you ever prove your god so another waste of time argument



You are welcome to your blind belief.



And? I am not repeating myself



And thank you to, you have been very enlightening



See previous post.



More repeating., Research it and learn. Blind denial does nobody any good




So use evidence instead.

You mean like you don't? You use words and rhetoric, anyway, the future unfolds. You said you would explain it. So instead of that, you're giving me links. What's the matter, it's too complicated for you to explain in your own words, with what you call evidence? At first I thought you meant it but now I see the usual subterfuge, using someone else's thoughts that you agree with or disagree with, depending on context. Yes, time marches on, I'm happy to say. If you want to "talk about it," write out a paragraph or two that you agree with from the links you provided and I'll let you know if I have any questions.

 

[ChristineM]

I don't go to links in general when someone claims to know. If you can't explain in your own words, don't bother, and thank you.

As i expected, you are not willing to educate yourself and would rather you waste my time.

P.s. that washed out fundimentalist tactic failed when god was a lad

 

[YoursTrue]

As i expected, you are not willing to educate yourself and would rather you waste my time.

P.s. that washed out fundimentalist tactic failed when god was a lad

P.S. In other words, you're not willing or able to explain it yourself. OK, thanks.

 

[YoursTrue]

As i expected, you are not willing to educate yourself and would rather you waste my time.

P.s. that washed out fundimentalist tactic failed when god was a lad

Come on, just a few sentences for starters in favor of evolution, surely you don't mind that. And when I say 'ok,' you can go on. You're plenty on these boards, so how are a few sentences or brief paragraphs a waste of your time? But thanks for letting me know...

 

[YoursTrue]

As i expected, you are not willing to educate yourself and would rather you waste my time. ...

Not even a few sentences? aw...won't take long and who knows? Maybe it will educate you.

 

[YoursTrue]

@ChristineM - Not even a few sentences? aw...won't take long and who knows? Maybe it will educate you. Can't explain in your own words, too complicated??

 

[YoursTrue]

Hi, @ChristineM . You said, "Yes it seems life emerged from chemical reaction.
Life has, after all, been created several times in a laboratory so it doesn't really seem to difficult."
You say it doesn't seem too difficult to create life? Please explain how life was created in a laboratory, thanks. If you can't use your own words and explanation, don't bother. Thanks.

 

[YoursTrue]

Making a prophecy after the event is no prophecy.

The bluster of an army before an war/battle is no prophecy

You are entitled to interpret history in whatever way madsages you ego. I will go by the historical narrative

Exactly how do you know that it was a prophecy after the event? Thanks again for your knowledge, or rather, exposing what you know or don't know.

 

[ChristineM]

You mean like you don't? You use words and rhetoric, anyway, the future unfolds. You said you would explain it. So instead of that, you're giving me links. What's the matter, it's too complicated for you to explain in your own words, with what you call evidence? At first I thought you meant it but now I see the usual subterfuge, using someone else's thoughts that you agree with or disagree with, depending on context. Yes, time marches on, I'm happy to say. If you want to "talk about it," write out a paragraph or two that you agree with from the links you provided and I'll let you know if I have any questions.

I am not playing your silly games just so you can mock evidence. If you are willing to learn you would have begun by reading some evolution 101, you are not so i don't really care

 

[ChristineM]

Come on, just a few sentences for starters in favor of evolution, surely you don't mind that. And when I say 'ok,' you can go on. You're plenty on these boards, so how are a few sentences or brief paragraphs a waste of your time? But thanks for letting me know...

Ok lets see what happens .

Se my avatar its a human skull, it looks like a human skull, you would be confident to call it a human skull.

It's 22000 years old and along with the human skeletons from the same era there are several measurable differences between humans of 22000 years ago and today's humans.

 

[ChristineM]

Hi, @ChristineM . You said, "Yes it seems life emerged from chemical reaction.
Life has, after all, been created several times in a laboratory so it doesn't really seem to difficult."
You say it doesn't seem too difficult to create life? Please explain how life was created in a laboratory, thanks. If you can't use your own words and explanation, don't bother. Thanks.

Look it up.

Or perhaps i will explain after you detail how your god created life.

 

[ChristineM]

Exactly how do you know that it was a prophecy after the event? Thanks again for your knowledge, or rather, exposing what you know or don't know.

I have explained this to you before, i am not repeating myself because you are ignorant of this era of roman history and ignore facts because thry don't agree with your fictions

 

[YoursTrue]

I have explained this to you before, i am not repeating myself because you are ignorant of this era of roman history and ignore facts because thry don't agree with your fictions

I must have missed your "explanation." Meantime, go argue with those like @shunydragon who believe that Bahaullah received messages from god and he also believes in evolution. Go for it! Have fun.
Meanwhile, show me your post # where you explained how the prophecy was written after the fact, ok? Shouldn't take too long for you to find it.
Then, since you don't believe in God or the Bible, but rather the unproven status of evolution, maybe you can demonstrate your reason to @shunyadragon, ok? as to why you don't believe in God, and for those who believe in creation rather than "scientific experiments" that you say make life from non-life, ok?

 

[YoursTrue]

I have explained this to you before, i am not repeating myself because you are ignorant of this era of roman history and ignore facts because thry don't agree with your fictions

lol, all I'm asking is for you to show me the post # where you show evidence that the event was prophesied after it occurred, other than your own word.

 

[ChristineM]

I must have missed your "explanation." Meantime, go argue with those like @shunydragon who believe that Bahaullah received messages from god and he also believes in evolution. Go for it! Have fun.
Meanwhile, show me your post # where you explained how the prophecy was written after the fact, ok? Shouldn't take too long for you to find it.
Then, since you don't believe in God or the Bible, but rather the unproven status of evolution, maybe you can demonstrate your reason to @shunyadragon, ok? as to why you don't believe in God, and for those who believe in creation rather than "scientific experiments" that you say make life from non-life, ok?

Nope you deliberately ignored it.

I don't really care for that Baha'i say about Bahaullah in the same way I don't believe the bible tale of Jesus.

It would take almost exactly as long for you to find it.

How many times, science does not deal in proof but in evidence, and various lined of evidence show evolution to be valid.

Snd i wonder how many times you have been asked to provide evidence for your god? I know i have asked several times but each time you ignore the question. Its as though you have no evidence to show.

 

[YoursTrue]

I have explained this to you before, i am not repeating myself because you are ignorant of this era of roman history and ignore facts because thry don't agree with your fictions

I'm beginning to think you and shunya are phonies. But anyway -- it's been interesting.