Re: I'd like a better understanding of the debate


Robert Carnegie wrote:
tsquare21 wrote:
HI Diego

Interesting point about the age of man being only 6000 years old. This
is one of my infalibles (there are three), disproving evolution and
proving G-d.

As I attempted to point out many months ago (never could establish an
acceptable criteor) that to disprove one of these infalibles disproves
G-d.

So Deigo if you are serious in your inquires all you have to do (and
any one for that matter) is discover any evidence of man roaming this
earth longer then 10000 years. Sorry but carbon dating is not
acceptable.

Because it works. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating

If you read that Web page, then you will find clues to how to prove the
dates of prehistoric events without using radiocarbon dating, which you
can use to refute tsquare. However, you then must PERSONALLY go out
and find the archaeological evidence with which to prove that tsquare
is wrong, which will take you a few years, probably. And then tsquare
will say "Well done Deigo."

Now let me get this straight, are you saying that archaeology has never
been at any time performed by anyone. That's what you said when you
claim that I or someone in here has to go and find the evidence.
Carfull here, before you can in the positive answer be prepared to back
your statement "If you read that Web page, then you will find clues to
how to prove the events without using radiocarbon dating, which you can
use to refute tsquare"

So even if you do have to proove through means other then carbon 14 it
shoud be evident. after all were only talking a few thousand years
when you know for a fact of billions of years of evolution. It's a
simple, resonable and should be provable fact of man existing more then
10,000 years, other then carbon 14.

dates .
I hope you have begun to understand how all this works.

One more note - The bible is written for man and only concerens the AGE
of man. This fact suports the different priestoric timlines we see in
the fosile record. Does this sugests that evolution is evidend with ID
over sight, never. It just proves that G-d re-created it all many
times. Need proof of this fact just go out most nights and look up.
Of course this test doesn't work for 90% of man because we try to erase
all majestic evidence of G-d (city lights are very effective erasers
:-).

Aha! Street lighting was created by darwolutioists in order to prevent
God's creatures from seeing the glory of God in the sky, such as the
sun and moon. Darvolutionianists clearly are also responsible for
smog.


Of course not, just out of curiosity where do you live and have you
ever been to alaska or even the heartland Iowa, Kansas, Montana, sorry
but ANY where east or west won't do.

Unfortunately street lighting was introduced in England under the
Stuart dynasty because of some of the dreadful things that God's
creatures were doing when it was dark, and I think smog, if not the
term according to Wikipedia, also anticipates Darwin's astonishing
book, having arisen in industrial areas during the "Industrial
Revolution". But no doubt the devil had thought of the theory of
evolution /long/ before he put the idea into Charles Darwin's head.
That would be it, and not a silly offhand remark about city lights,
yes?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Id like a better understanding of the debate
    ... is one of my infalibles, disproving evolution and ... any one for that matter) is discover any evidence of man roaming this ... can use to refute tsquare. ... Does this sugests that evolution is evidend with ID ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Speculative Design Hypothesis (with predictions)
    ... intelligent design has produced these types of functions ... is just evidence that intelligence *can* produce such things. ... there's no proof that evolution did produce it, ... So how is the assertion that specific functions in biological systems ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Speculative Design Hypothesis (with predictions)
    ... intelligent design has produced these types of functions ... is just evidence that intelligence *can* produce such things. ... there's no proof that evolution did produce it, ... So how is the assertion that specific functions in biological systems ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Darwinian Mechanism of Mutation and Natural Selection Found Lacking
    ... The conclusions are that life could ... The evidence for evolution is broken down into three broad ... The first is direct evidence of small-scale changes in controlled ... types of fossils associated with only certain other fossils. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Atheists support evolution because evolution supports their worldview
    ... Atomic theory somehow manages to omit any reference to God. ... Harshman would not support Darwinian evolution if it supported ... If the evidence supported theism, ... No one can go back and undo Darwin in order to find ...
    (talk.origins)