Evidence for and against young earth creationism.

[Brian Schuh]

Why should I care what someone claims that does not have the integrity to submit his views for the review of his peers, physicists? Your argument can be used by any crackpot theorists, which your doctor is, as a defense. So rather than challenge me challenge your "authority" to have some intellectual integrity to have his view challenged by his fellow experts. Until his happens your authority is just another fringe crackpot outside of academia and hiding within religious circles. A circle that is more than willing to accept his claims as its nothing but confirmation bias for their silly views.

Keep up your view of God as ultimate goodness in the naive view of ignorant brainwashed "believers," and then point out the evils of the world as proof they are fooled and then claim that disproves their god.

I don't play these games. I admit my God can be wicked as hell, and I have more proof of it than you. Now, you have any games to play now?

 

[Shad]

Keep up your view of God as ultimate goodness in the naive view of ignorant brainwashed "believers," and then point out the evils of the world as proof they are fooled and then claim that disproves their god.

I don't play these games. I admit my God can be wicked as hell, and I have more proof of it than you. Now, you have any games to play now?

So much for me being on ignore....

You response is pure sophistry dodging my points about your model and authority figure.

 

[Brian Schuh]

So much for me being on ignore....

You response is pure sophistry dodging my points about your model and authority figure.

What exactly have you against ,(not my sophistry, but rather, my sophisticated) view of God? Why are you an infidel? Humor me, why don't you believe? Again?

 

[Brian Schuh]

So much for me being on ignore....

You response is pure sophistry dodging my points about your model and authority figure.

Dr. Michael Schulman may be a Torah scholar, but he is one of many. He is not a cult leader, nor is he anyone's father figure nor is he anyone's god. I do not speak for him, nor does he speak for me.

By the way, have you cited any authorities for your claims and how I can reach them? Hello?

 

[Brian Schuh]

Hello? Any infidels out there? Anyone have an argument against a believer in the one true God? Anyone? Hello?

 

[Shad]

Dr. Michael Schulman may be a Torah scholar, but he is one of many. He is not a cult leader, nor is he anyone's father figure nor is he anyone's god. I do not speak for him, nor does he speak for me.

If put forward your model he is still a fringe pandering to the believer rather than his peers in physics.

By the way, have you cited any authorities for your claims and how I can reach them? Hello?

What authorities?

What exactly have you against ,(not my sophistry, but rather, my sophisticated) view of God?

I was talking about your absurd physics model

Why are you an infidel? Humor me, why don't you believe? Again?

I do not believe in the claims of the Bible, or any religion. Simple. However I am taking issues with your model which is literally "Natural law changed" as if that is a good argument. I can use it to. Natural laws changed to make the Bible impossible. See how easy that is....

 

[Brian Schuh]

If put forward your model he is still a fringe pandering to the believer rather than his peers in physics.



What authorities?



I was talking about your absurd physics model



I do not believe in the claims of the Bible, or any religion. Simple. However I am taking issues with your model which is literally "Natural law changed" as if that is a good argument. I can use it to. Natural laws changed to make the Bible impossible. See how easy that is....

Okay here is another easy one. God created dinosaur skeleton fossils already fossilized during Creation week. And He did it not to trick you but that was like a hobby of His, like some like to paint pictures, He thought it cool to create fossils. See how easy it is to poke holes in evolution once you admit there is a God?

 

[Shad]

Okay here is another easy one. God created dinosaur skeleton fossils already fossilized during Creation week.
And He did it not to trick you but that was like a hobby of His, like some like to paint pictures, He thought it cool to create fossils. See how easy it is to poke holes in evolution once you admit there is a God?

Hilarious and nonsenical idea as an ad hoc rescue

Those are not holes as you are just making something up and claim it pokes holes in evolution, it doesn't. More nonsense to save your literalism.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Hilarious and nonsenical idea as an ad hoc rescue

Those are not holes as you are just making something up and claim it pokes holes in evolution, it doesn't. More nonsense to save your literalism.

Lol

 

[Shad]

Lol

Great rebuttal. Try again.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Hilarious and nonsenical idea as an ad hoc rescue

Those are not holes as you are just making something up and claim it pokes holes in evolution, it doesn't. More nonsense to save your literalism.

There are enough holes in evolution as it is, no need for me or anyone else to point out the obvious- that if there is an omnipotent being, anything could have happened.

 

[Shad]

There are enough holes in evolution as it is, no need for me or anyone else to point out the obvious- that if there is an omnipotent being, anything could have happened.

You have yet to specific a hole. All you have done is make up an ad hoc rescue as modern methods show literalism to be in error. Your only standard is "the bible must be right" and you work from that point.

 

[Brian Schuh]

You have yet to specific a hole. All you have done is make up an ad hoc rescue as modern methods show literalism to be in error. Your only standard is "the bible must be right" and you work from that point.

Look back at this thread, there is a hole in evolution that someone besides myself pointed out and I immediately jumped on it in my own words.

But you are so dogmatic in your belief in evolution, that it doesn't matter.

I choose to believe the way I do, the same thing you do. And it is not up to further debate.

 

[Shad]

Look back at this thread, there is a hole in evolution that someone besides myself pointed out and I immediately jumped on it in my own words.

I see a bunch of creationist quoting creationist sites that have no knowledge of the subject themselves, their sources are not experts in the subject nor do these experts submit their work for peer-review. They only circulate their ideas within a circle that is isolated from criticism.

But you are so dogmatic in your belief in evolution, that it doesn't matter.

Say the one that produces ad hoc rescue and ad hoc rescue to save their dogmatic believe in literalism of a set of text from 2-3k years ago. Hilarious

I choose to believe the way I do, the same thing you do. And it is not up to further debate.

You are free to believe what you want. However your arguments are not convincing for people that are not you. Such as fossil are a hobby of God....

 

[Brian Schuh]

I see a bunch of creationist quoting creationist sites that have no knowledge of the subject themselves, their sources are not experts in the subject nor do these experts submit their work for peer-review. They only circulate their ideas within a circle that is isolated from criticism.



Say the one that produces ad hoc rescue and ad hoc rescue to save their dogmatic believe in literalism of a set of text from 2-3k years ago. Hilarious



You are free to believe what you want. However your arguments are not convincing for people that are not you. Such as fossil are a hobby of God....

That was a joke, tongue in cheek. You obviously not only lack tolerance of other views besides your own, you lack a sense of humor.

 

[Shad]

That was a joke, tongue in cheek. You obviously not only lack tolerance of other views besides your own, you lack a sense of humor.

Considering people post all sorts of ideas I believe are absurd I usually take posts at face value. The alternative is to conclude that most of what people post is a joke from Noah, Adam and Eve. etc.

No one is obligated to entertain nor tolerate any idea anyone has. As I said you are free to believe what you want, that is tolerance. However when you make a supporting argument to justify your views I can attack flawed arguments, that isn't intolerance but is called criticism. Criticism is a basis of debate and for exposing bad idea.

When you figure out the difference between criticism and intolerance let me know. When you figure out you are posting in a debate thread let me know.

 

[Brian Schuh]

My girlfriend has a genetic defect and she has 4 children who might have inherited it. 1 of the 4 also has autism. According to Shad, after 100 or let's just say X number more genetic defects, it might all add up to genetics that significantly increases her line's chance of survival. And what I say is, her line will die out before that happens.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Considering people post all sorts of ideas I believe are absurd I usually take posts at face value. The alternative is to conclude that most of what people post is a joke from Noah, Adam and Eve. etc.

No one is obligated to entertain nor tolerate any idea anyone has. As I said you are free to believe what you want, that is tolerance. However when you make a supporting argument to justify your views I can attack flawed arguments, that isn't intolerance but is called criticism. Criticism is a basis of debate and for exposing bad idea.

When you figure out the difference between criticism and intolerance let me know. When you figure out you are posting in a debate thread let me know.

Simply calling creationism nonsensical, ignorant or false is neither tolerance nor criticism. It is called ridicule.

 

[Shad]

Simply calling creationism nonsensical, ignorant or false is neither tolerance nor criticism. It is called ridicule.

No when an idea and it's argument are flawed, incoherent, based on fallacious ideas and unsupported pointing this out is not ridicule.

 

[Brian Schuh]

No when an idea and it's argument are flawed, incoherent, based on fallacious ideas and unsupported pointing this out is not ridicule.

Of course it is.