| Forum Index > Closed |
|
MaxdigsSoda
Sweden304 Posts
On April 19 2007 08:35 DarkYoDA wrote: Poll: Predict the outcome?! (Vote): Both will walk out believing they are right!! (Vote): One of them will be convinced by the other and go cry on the bed!! (Vote): Both will hug and kiss and make out!! obviosuly he will cry | ||
|
MaxdigsSoda
Sweden304 Posts
| ||
|
Lemonwalrus
United States5465 Posts
| ||
|
DarkYoDA
United States1347 Posts
On April 19 2007 08:56 Lemonwalrus wrote: We get it, you love yourself, now please go talk to a mirror and stfu. seconded. | ||
|
XelNaga
162 Posts
On April 19 2007 08:54 MaxdigsSoda wrote: I guess i won that battle with him, mainly because he probably did not understand most of my arguements (obvious by his responses) For the sake of clarification, I didn't respond to you because what would it gain? You don't want answers, you aren't looking for answers, you aren't being serious, you retort back with meager insults. Why should I reply to you? I'm perfectly content reading what you have to say and not replying to it. Sorry, I thought you'd all be happy at a "religious" poster who knew when to stop most of the time. | ||
|
j0ehoe
United States2705 Posts
On April 19 2007 08:48 XelNaga wrote: The same reason why there are a lot of matches between our chemical composition and dirt; God used the same materials for everything. It all came from the same materials, but that doesn't mean one evolved from another. As for the fossil evidence.. There really isn't any. For billions of years of evolution, and finding what might be a missing link every 50 years.. Just isn't enough to support it. my god. you really are a moron. you realize basing your views on a book with no factual backing? | ||
|
MaxdigsSoda
Sweden304 Posts
On April 19 2007 08:58 XelNaga wrote: For the sake of clarification, I didn't respond to you because what would it gain? You don't want answers, you aren't looking for answers, you aren't being serious, you retort back with meager insults. Why should I reply to you? I'm perfectly content reading what you have to say and not replying to it. Sorry, I thought you'd all be happy at a "religious" poster who knew when to stop most of the time. dude you know how to stop? man i stopped you so bad, i completely CRUSHED you man. Even if what i wrote was badly written and i'm high i completely got to you man. smoke reefa, 420 tommorow | ||
|
XelNaga
162 Posts
On April 19 2007 09:04 j0ehoe wrote: my god. you really are a moron. you realize basing your views on a book with no factual backing? Depends what aspect of the book you are talking about. It has "factual" historical backing. It has "factual" scientific backing. It has evidence that points to a global flood (much the same as your "ice age"). On April 19 2007 09:07 MaxdigsSoda wrote: [ Sorry, I thought you'd all be happy at a "religious" poster who knew when to stop most of the time. dude you know how to stop? man i stopped you so bad, i completely CRUSHED you man. Even if what i wrote was badly written and i'm high i completely got to you man. smoke reefa, 420 tommorow Oh yes, I was so... Crushed? You really devastated me, I don't think I'll ever be psychologically normal every again. Um? So if I throw in a 122-8 OWNED OWNED Does that mean I've won? Or are we just going to continue being idiots? And by "we" I mean "you". | ||
|
MaxdigsSoda
Sweden304 Posts
On April 19 2007 09:07 XelNaga wrote: Depends what aspect of the book you are talking about. It has "factual" historical backing. It has "factual" scientific backing. It has evidence that points to a global flood (much the same as your "ice age"). Oh yes, I was so... Crushed? You really devastated me, I don't think I'll ever be psychologically normal every again. Um? So if I throw in a 122-8 OWNED OWNED Does that mean I've won? Or are we just going to continue being idiots? And by "we" I mean "you". I WON Man stop trying to claim the victory, or a draw. you are the one that didnt even understand my arguements. | ||
|
nuclear_scarab
United States43 Posts
On April 19 2007 09:04 j0ehoe wrote: my god. you really are a moron. you realize basing your views on a book with no factual backing? Consider for a moment what NO FACTUAL BACKING means. Yes, if we were discussing the book of mormon this would be true, whereas the Bible has recorded tons of stuff, much of which has been PROVEN to be true, and some that has evidence to be true. For example, of all the cities, people, and nations listed in the Bible, they all match up with historical content. There is no historical reference that you can find that is more accurate than the Bible. | ||
|
lil.sis
China4650 Posts
| ||
|
ZaplinG
United States3818 Posts
Many of the things you say about modern science, such as thiiiis whole thing: As for the fossil evidence.. There really isn't any. For billions of years of evolution, and finding what might be a missing link every 50 years.. Just isn't enough to support it. is simply not true. There are reasons missing links are being found all of the time. It is because of other non-religious factors, such as political turmoil, geologic disasters, and the improvement of technology. I honestly recommend, if you believe in your faith as strong as it seems, to at least give the other side a chance and try to learn about it before completely dismissing it. And when you say we are taking a leap of faith by believing in science rather than religion, you forget to realize how big these two leaps of faith are. For science, the leap is a very very small one that is gradually becoming smaller as we learn more things. For religion, the gap is large and only widening. | ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
On April 18 2007 21:29 testpat wrote: 58,000 x 2 = 100k huh, i would guess closer to 4 million. Not my figure, support below. This is just stored animals. Not animals needed to feed carnivores. + Show Spoiler + http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/8619_issue_11_volume_4_number_1__3_12_2003.asp Getting an accurate count. We can finally begin to make some calculations. Robert D. Barnes lists the number of living species for each phylum, ranging from the sole member of Placozoa to the 923,000 in Arthropoda (pp. 12, 85-88). Using his figures, we arrive at a total of 1,177,920 species. In addition, there are many animals that are as yet unknown. Wendt estimates that only 2 percent of all the parasitic worms are known, which would easily add another million species (p. 83). This includes as many as 500,000 nematodes, although only 15,000 have been described (Levine, p. 1). Ten thousand new species of insects are discovered every year, yet still only a small fraction of those in existence have been found (Atkins, p. 45). All of those creatures were known at one time, for Adam gave them all names (Genesis 2:19-20), and, since they exist today, they must have been on the ark. But we shall be extremely generous to the creationists and add only 500,000 undiscovered species to our figure of 1,177,920—thus giving a mere 1,677,920 species with which Noah had to contend. To this number, we must add the myriad of extinct prehistoric animals, which creationists assure us were alive at the time of the flood, making tracks in the Paluxy River, and which were known to Job afterward (John Morris, 1980, p. 65). This would vastly increase the numbers, since "only a tiny percentage of the animal and plant species that have ever existed are alive today" (Kear, p. 10). However, since creationists do not believe in transitional forms, we can again give them the benefit of the doubt and add to our total only the 200,000 different fossils that have been described. This brings the number to 1,877,920 species or animal pairs that were to be boarded onto the ark. Of course, we can't forget that Genesis 7:2-3 (particularly in the Revised Standard Version) makes it clear that only unclean animals come in single pairs, male and female; the clean animals and birds come in seven pairs, male and female. That means fourteen of each clean animal and each bird. But since figures for the number of clean animals are hard to find, we will have to let creationists off the hook and ignore them. Birds are another story. There are 8,590 species of birds. Since they have already been calculated into our figure of 1,877,920 species or 3,755,840 individual animals on the ark, we need only six more pairs of each species of bird to make it come out to seven pairs. That brings our count up to a grand total of 3,858,920 animals aboard the ark—two of each species, except birds which number fourteen each. But I'll go with 58,000. I never said it was built in 7 days. I've completely ignored the fact that the dimensions of the ark are 4 times larger than anything built during that time, 150 ft longer than any wooden ship ever built. Without steel reinforcement they break in half. Even then, they leak so badly they need constant pumping, and can only be used close to shore because they can't handle deep seas. I just assumed he was divinely inspired to figure out all the engineering necessary to built it. However, it was loaded in 7 days. The ark was loaded two by two. 58,000 x 2. Noah and his extended family (50?) loads 100k animals, their food for over a year in a week, after gathering it of course. They also collect enough fresh water until the magical salt rain/ fresh water rain falls. During this time, they would also have to be feed the animals they were loading. Can't you think for yourself. What we are having is a discussion about the requirement for the ark, physical things that are required to fit the text. The amount of time on the ship is necessary because it creates storage requirements for food. If you used your brain a little more, I wouldn't have to explain a thing about how impossible the ark is. These 50 people feed 104,000 animal a day, remove 6 - 12 tons of breath respiration (water vapour). Distribute 58 tons of food, remove 50 tons of manure. They also repair the ship as necessary. Distribute 10 tons of fresh water. I can see why you give such well thought out answers - its obvious that this is possible. The fact that you don't understand that some animals will not survive if they cannot move is understandable with the how well you've thought out the rest of the questions. The fact that the ark has 3 levels, and therefore two levels don't have natural sunlight confuses me since i thought you read your bible is not understandable. A fair number of creatures will not live in total darkness. Living bodies also generate and output heat, this has to go someplace. While not a problem for houses, its a serious problem for an enclosed boat. A non magical boat. By the way, you believe in evolution huh? Before the ark, there were no polar bears? That just seems wrong. If that's your postulate, i'll explore it with you. You now have to figure out how polar bears are created after the flood in the time possible, and the fossil record should show this right? You have a lot of species to deal with though, there are amazing number of animals that only exist in certain places on earth. Otherwise you need to think how the ark recreates cold, warm, humid (probably not a problem), and arid environments. God also filled the earth with animals and the seas with fishies - he must have brought them to adam for the naming ceremony. Or are you postulating that the earth was barren outside of a fixed radius from Noah, and God lied when he said he filled the earth? Finally, these animals come off the ark. Noah then visits the four corners of the earth, shepherding animals back to the native habitats, carrying their food. By some miracle, each animal finds their respective mate in their respective part of the earth, and produce offspring. These magical animals survive, even though conservation biologists estimate a minimum size of fifty for a species's survival, with 150 or more being a more realistic figure. Posts like these make this entire thread worthwhile | ||
|
zoast
United States91 Posts
On April 19 2007 08:48 XelNaga wrote: As for the fossil evidence.. There really isn't any. For billions of years of evolution, and finding what might be a missing link every 50 years.. Just isn't enough to support it. ![[image loading]](http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t46/Zoast/theoryitsjusta.jpg?t=1177001470) P.S. here's a pretty comprehensive link concerning the troubles with the flood http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
XelNaga
162 Posts
On April 19 2007 09:50 ZaplinG wrote: xelnaga, have you ever taken a high level geology, chemistry, biology, or evolutionary paleontology class? Many of the things you say about modern science, such as thiiiis whole thing: is simply not true. There are reasons missing links are being found all of the time. It is because of other non-religious factors, such as political turmoil, geologic disasters, and the improvement of technology. I honestly recommend, if you believe in your faith as strong as it seems, to at least give the other side a chance and try to learn about it before completely dismissing it. And when you say we are taking a leap of faith by believing in science rather than religion, you forget to realize how big these two leaps of faith are. For science, the leap is a very very small one that is gradually becoming smaller as we learn more things. For religion, the gap is large and only widening. First question, yes I have, a few courses. I don't really know how accurate I would think a missing link is if it's fossils are assembled from bones hundreds of feet, even miles apart, seems like a far stretch? I really don't know why you assume I haven't looked at the "other side"? It would be simply ignorant of me to have not taken the time to look at the "other side". As for those leaps of faith? Nope.. Religions gap isn't growing wider? Why would you think that? As for science, well good luck with that. I'm going to go back to reading about light photons, still have no answer for that question ;\ | ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
Why do you pick the name of XelNaga knowing it is probably offensive to God who's obviously the creater of protoss and zerg? Isn't it atrocious that Blizzard made a pegan god XelNaga who's the creater of 2 races? Aren't you deeply offensed by it? Why do you pick the name then? | ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
On April 19 2007 11:08 evanthebouncy~ wrote: I have a curious quesiton: Why do you pick the name of XelNaga knowing it is probably offensive to God who's obviously the creater of protoss and zerg? Isn't it atrocious that Blizzard made a pegan god XelNaga who's the creater of 2 races? Aren't you deeply offensed by it? Why do you pick the name then? It's a fictional world. It is science fiction. It is fun. It is starcraft. Btw, that article about the evidence against the great flood was very informative and should be read by anyone who wants to continue debating that topic. Also... THIS IS MADNESS! | ||
|
testpat
United States565 Posts
On April 19 2007 07:48 XelNaga wrote: Wait a second.. Did you just tell me that he's psychoanalyzing every atheist, an impossibility because every atheist is different and don't follow evolution the same. Then go on to say that every Christian is the same? You do realize that there are hundreds of different Christian denominations, different interpretations and opinions? Exegetical and hermenuetical differences? There are many more ways to view and understand and believe Christianity (Not saying they are all right) than there are ways to believe and understand evolution. Funny.. you degrade him because he made a "generalization" according to you. Then you did the same thing... Why is it that Christians are considered hypocrites? Maybe some of you should start self examining (not meaning to be rude, but really..) Sheep eh? Yeah, we really are. And God is our shepherd (Psalm 23). But seriously, you'd be appalled to learn that faith and belief can often be the height of intellectuality. We argue from what we believe and so far, except for a few people, everyone here has been arguing out of.. some opinion they were taught when they were younger and didn't question. Okay, lets hear your beliefs. 1) Is the Bible the literal word of God or just divinely inspired? 1a) Does the bible contains falsehoods, contradictions, or lies? 2) Is Genesis an accurate description of how the universe was created? 2a) Is Genesis 1:1 to 2:3 or 2:4 to 2:25 the right order? 3) Is Babel why we have different languages on earth? 4) Did the great flood happen? 5) How old is the earth? 6) Does the test for infidelity in the bible work? (Numbers 5) 7) For men who marry their brother's wife, is it an abomination that will not bear children (Leviticus), or is marriage and the duties required? (Deuteronomy) 8) Is mold the same thing as leprosy? I'm also interested how arguing from belief (opinion) can be the height of intellectuality. I've always considered arguing without supporting facts kind of ridiculous. Isn't that just the "Is so", "Is not" or "I'm not listening la la la la la la la la" argument 8 year olds have?. If we want to argue in a rational manner, it should go something like this. I believe X. I believe X because of Y. Here are (some) of my reasons. These are my support. Then your opponent can say, I disagree with your reason, I disagree with your support, i have differing reasons, i have differing support. For example, I do not believe certain events in the bible happened, one of these is the great flood. The ark is physically impossible to build, physically impossible to maintain during the voyage, its physically impossible to gather and spread out the animals, flooding the earth in a short time does not follow the laws of physics. Fish die because of salinity changes, plants die because some can't survive in salt water. There is no geological record of such an event. Since all the other animals die, and you don't believe in evolution (assumption), all parasites & diseases must have been present in the animals on the ark. Since some diseases are fatal to their host and cannot survive outside the host, the ark must have contained larger numbers of animals - yet there is no record of such. As someone mentioned above, talk-origins discusses large number of impossibilities with the ark story. Now, you can describe what is wrong with this, or you can postulate your own theories and we can discuss them - How it was created, how it was maintained, how the animals were gathered & dispersed, how genetic dispersity works, and why there isn't a geological record. | ||
|
XelNaga
162 Posts
On April 19 2007 11:08 evanthebouncy~ wrote: I have a curious quesiton: Why do you pick the name of XelNaga knowing it is probably offensive to God who's obviously the creater of protoss and zerg? Isn't it atrocious that Blizzard made a pegan god XelNaga who's the creater of 2 races? Aren't you deeply offensed by it? Why do you pick the name then? It's offensive? I don't think so, why would it be? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  44730Bisu 2199Horang2 923firebathero  606EffOrt  563Mini 456Light 448Stork 399Killer 276ggaemo 262[ Show more ] League of Legends Other Games singsing2511 B2W.Neo1109 hiko1005 DeMusliM495 Lowko354 ArmadaUGS156 KnowMe150 Beastyqt104 Mew2King83 ZerO(Twitch)14 fpsfer  1Organizations Other Games StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
Big Brain Bouts
Fjant vs Bly
Serral vs Shameless
OSC
The PiG Daily
Maru vs Rogue
TBD vs Classic
herO vs Solar
ByuN vs Solar
Replay Cast
CranKy Ducklings
RSL Revival
SHIN vs Bunny
ByuN vs Shameless
WardiTV Invitational
Krystianer vs TriGGeR
Cure vs Rogue
SC Evo League
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL
Artosis vs TerrOr
spx vs StRyKeR
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
