Re: Challenge for Seanpit


"Ray Martinez" <pyramidial@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1145835047.447184.155170@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
snipping a lot


I know Darwinists have no respect for Creationism - the feeling is
mutual.

Scientists have no respect for Creationists because Creationists have earned
no respect. Rejecting contrary evidence that does not support one's
position is sure to lead to disrespect from real scientists.


We know you are wrong - not a matter of opinion.

That's the problem. Creationists 'know' that evolution is wrong, even
though the evidence does not support that claim. A real scientist accepts
what the evidence shows, not what they want to "know".

The Great
Pyramid (singular) is physical evidence of technology and science that
surpasses our own today.

The Great Pyramid was constructed using fairly basic technology. Modern day
people could reproduce the Pyramids, what is lacking is the will to do so.
Modern buildings are constructed much faster, and much cheaper than the
Pyramids were.

No scientist denies that the latest it could
have been built is between 2700 and 3100 BC, however, the best
scholarship places the erection anywhere from 4000 to 12000 BC.

Who's "best scholarship"? Remember Ray's standard of scholarship is rather
low.

Both
sets of figures are either in the Stone Age or fresh out of the Stone
Age.

And the techniques used to build the pyramids don't go much beyond stone age
technology. The pyramids were built using muscle, levers, rollers, and a
few other simple machines.


The point is THIS physical evidence (which falsifies human evolution in
its tracks)

Even if the Great Pyramid were made with technology far beyond modern
humans, it's existance does not falsify human evolution. Where in the
theory of evolution does it say that modern human beings cannot use ropes,
levers, rollers, and teamwork? How does the Pyramid negate the massive
amount of fossil, genetic, anatomical, biochemical, biostratagraphic, and
other forms of evidence of human evolution?

is fraudulently overlooked and dismissed.

The pyramid is not 'overlooked', it's simply not relevant. Your claim is
dismissed because it's obviously false.

The monument
incorporates pi, allegedly not discovered until the Greeks did
thousands of years later;

As archeologists have shown, the use of a wheel to measure off distances
automatically incorporates PI into the measurements. That does not mean
that ancient Egyptians knew of, or understood the concept of PI.

and the EXACT dimensions of the Earth

If one fudges the numbers to make it match up, that is.

(the
designer knew the Earth was round).

That's as maybe, but that could be due to simple observatation. Remember,
the people who built the pyramids were just as intelligent as modern day
humans.

Modern man did not know the EXACT
dimensions of the Earth until 1957 Sputnik data.

As has been pointed out to you before the last time you brought this up, the
diameter of the Earth was calculated by Erasthenes around 200 BC.
http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Eratosthenes.html

The Soviet scientists who launched Sputnik already knew the exact dimentions
of the Earth, otherwise the satillilte would have crashed during orbit.


How did North African camel riding sun worshipping savages erect a
world wonder right out of the Stone Age or in the Stone Age ?

How does being from North Africa, riding camels (which Egyptians did not),
or worshiping the Sun (Sun worship post dated the Pyramids) prevent one from
using ropes, levers, rollers and teamwork? The ancient Egyptians were
many things but "savages" they were not. They had a highly developed
civilization, with plenty of manpower and plenty of will.

(Your
Stone Age has mankind just learning how to invent crude tools and
living in caves).

As you mentioned, the Egyptians were "right out of the Stone Age". That
means they were past it. In any case, they had copper and bronze tools at
the time the Pyramids were built, and were not living in caves.


They didn't because the Bible says ancient men of this time period were
created by God ultra-intelligent: the sons of Adam.

The Bible says nothing about humans being "ultra intelligent" The "sons of
Adam" were not directly created by God, but were born like any other human.
(One also must wonder if Adam and his sons were so "ultra intelligent" why
did Adam get talked into biting the apple?)


The monument was already there when the Egyptian civilization was
founded by Mizraim circa 3000 BC.

There's no evidence that the Great Pyramid was there first, or that Egypt
was founded by "Mizriam".






Dr. Scott: "It is impossible to expose oneself to evidence and not form
an opinion."

One hopes they kept the late Dr. Scott off juries, while he was still
eligible to serve on them. It seems to me that one can expose oneself
to evidence and conclude that it is insufficient to justify a
conclusion, and that one can revise an opinion in light of later
evidence. You and the late Dr. Scott, however, seem to deny this;
one's initial prejudices are all-determining. One wonders, given such
a state of mind, why one would bother to expose oneself to evidence in
the first place, if no evidence can alter or overrule one's initial
bias and presuppositions.

Like the Great Pyramid evidence that you evos MUST evade ?

There is no need to "evade" Great Pyramid claims of Mr. Scott, as they are
irrelevant to the scientific evidence of evolution. Even if everything
that Mr. Scott stated about the Great Pyramid were true, it does not affect
the massive amount of physical evidence for human evolution.



Dr. Scott has a Ph.D. in philosophy and religion and a Ph.D. minor is
psychology. What he is saying is that it is impossible for educated
persons to be agnostic if the stipulated meaning is "don't know".

Then what he is saying is stupid and wrong, and I don't care how many
degrees he had to adorn and conceal his foolishness.

Like we knew: evos disregard all evidence produced by scholarship that
conflicts with their needs.

Ray, assertions, and wild speculations about the Great Pyramid does not
amount to "scholarship". Having a PhD in "Philosophies of Education" does
not make one an expert in general philosophy, religion, or psychology.
Failing to publish any significant work in any of those diciplines also
indicates that one was not a scholar of any renoun.

snipping


Its not a matter of opinion: Darwin rejected God

Wrong. Darwin did not reject God.

and NS says Genesis
Creator and His record is wrong.

Natural selection says no such thing. It's the evidence of biology,
geology, cosmology, chemistry and physics that contradicts a literal reading
of Genesis. A legendary creation account can hold truths, without it
being scientifically accurate. Therefore science does not say that the
"Genesis Creator" is wrong, just not science.

The whole point of Darwin's theory.

As you have been informed numerous times, the whole point of Darwin's theory
was to explain the evidence, and the observations Darwin made. Darwin had
no desire to reject God, or to falsify the Bible.


I just defended a round earth against someone asserting it was flat.

No, you merely asserted your personal opinions, without any backing, and
expected everyone to accept them as if they had some kind of evidence to
support them.

You cannot be trusted.

Steven appears to be much more trustworthy than Ray.



snip

The "freaks" are not sterile, and saying that they remain fruit flies
does not mean that speciation has not occurred. Humans remain
hominines, and apes, and mammals.

They cannot reproduce on their own. Are you saying they can ?

Yes, the species of fruit fly that evolved in the lab can and do reproduce
"on their own" with other members of their population. They can't
reproduce with members of their parent population, which shows they are a
separate species.

snip

That was not an example of "macroevolution." That was an example of
how behaviors can exist that might enable one species to move gradually
into a new niche, which could in turn provide selective pressure for
changes in morphology.

Same fucking thing.

Looks like someone is getting fustrated......

snip

No genetic barrier exists ?

That's correct. No genetic barrier exists to prevent speciation.


Denial of the most proven fact in biology because Steven knows it has
never been crossed in experimentation,

Actually, I'm sure Steven is familiar with the many observational studies
that have shown the species "barrier" being crossed. The fruit fly
experiments above are just one such study.

yet Darwinists, who claim to
only base their views on evidence must ignore this fact because their
entire theory fails right here.

There is no "fact" to ignore. Your claim is false.

In response, traditionally, this is
where the Darwinist says "how else did we get here ?"

No, the traditional response has been to point out where you are wrong.

(evolution-must-of-did-it).

Evolution is the known process that has been observed to "did it".


DJT



.

Loading