The Atheism Thread - Part 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
So you're saying you read some other magic book that says people lived for 100's of years?
Vestigial organs. My comment was about them and why they are no longer in use. I said that people lived longer in the past and may have been set to live for eternity in the garden. Once they were kicked out, conditions may have changed so that the human body became weaker as sickness and death would now occur. Perhaps these organs were not needed anymore.

This is my own take of it all. The Bible did not tell me this word-for-word, yet that is what you accused me of.
 
Do you realize how smartass that sounds? Just the tone of it. This ranks high among my pet peeves. It's like Christians think they've won an argument just by tacking this onto the end of their rebuttals.

Idk maybe you meant nothing by it, but it sounds very smartass and insincere.
It has nothing to do about winning-losing an argument. I already had answered a question directly before and he skips that and takes it elsewhere. Had he continued from that response and gradually went where he went, then maybe things could have kept on going (and probably would have).

Funny how in this thread the Christian is always the wrong one. But I do expect it. Praise God.

The prayer part was sincere. No bad intentions were meant. My discussion is done with him (at least for now). Even Jesus didn't continue to debate night and day with people. Since it is done, I actually want to show that I'm not angry or anything, hence the mention of prayer.
 
You don't think it's more likely that humans have tailbones because our non-human ancestors had tails?
 
Vestigial organs. My comment was about them and why they are no longer in use. I said that people lived longer in the past and may have been set to live for eternity in the garden. Once they were kicked out, conditions may have changed so that the human body became weaker as sickness and death would now occur. Perhaps these organs were not needed anymore.

This is my own take of it all. The Bible did not tell me this word-for-word, yet that is what you accused me of.

I'm sorry, but did you not just mention the Garden of Eden and that people lived longer in the past? Both of which you got from the Bible? I didn't say all of it was from the Bible. I've read it. I'm pretty sure that Vestigial Organs thing wasn't in there. I'm also pretty sure them monks who decided to take a bunch of scrolls and orally passed stories, write them down, and heavily edit it to suit their purposes, didn't know what a Vestigial Organ even was. But I do know that the Garden of Eden and people living for hundreds of years when they totally didn't is totally from the Bible....hence, the Bible told you so. Some of it anyway. The rest you made up with faulty logic......in that case, I guess I'm sorry. The Bible AND faulty logic told you so.
 
I don't understand how creationists can look at whales and not see evolution.

Look at their skeletons. See the digits in their fins?

heyyyy.jpg
 
I accept inconvenient facts. Things I have believed that have been contradicted by evidence, and then I was forced to change what I accepted.
.... and so have I. I didn't believe in evolution at all when I first became a Christian. When I found out about evolution being true, I checked to see where it would fit in with my faith. Amazingly, not only did it fit scripture that I was unaware of (such as the "after their kinds," it never clicked in in previous readings of the passage), but it also allowed my faith to grow.
 
You can't believe in evolution only partially. Well, I suppose you can, but that takes a whole lot of cognitive dissonance.
 
While that could be possible, I can provide a link on where it fits in with the creation account.

I'm sorry, but fossils, and genetics trump stories written thousands of years ago.

Creationism is fundamentally unworkable.
 
Right. I still don't have this cognitive dissonance thing down.

It's a skill.
 
It has nothing to do about winning-losing an argument. I already had answered a question directly before and he skips that and takes it elsewhere. Had he continued from that response and gradually went where he went, then maybe things could have kept on going (and probably would have).

Funny how in this thread the Christian is always the wrong one. But I do expect it. Praise God.

The prayer part was sincere. No bad intentions were meant. My discussion is done with him (at least for now). Even Jesus didn't continue to debate night and day with people. Since it is done, I actually want to show that I'm not angry or anything, hence the mention of prayer.

Fair enough. I believe your sincerity in the matter and I don't want you to feel that I'm ganging up on you. Your free to pray and believe as you will. Even in this thread.:)
 
I'm sorry, but did you not just mention the Garden of Eden and that people lived longer in the past? Both of which you got from the Bible? I didn't say all of it was from the Bible. I've read it. I'm pretty sure that Vestigial Organs thing wasn't in there. I'm also pretty sure them monks who decided to take a bunch of scrolls and orally passed stories, write them down, and heavily edit it to suit their purposes, didn't know what a Vestigial Organ even was. But I do know that the Garden of Eden and people living for hundreds of years when they totally didn't is totally from the Bible....hence, the Bible told you so. Some of it anyway. The rest you made up with faulty logic......in that case, I guess I'm sorry. The Bible AND faulty logic told you so.
Hmmm.... first it was "the Bible told me so..." now it's "the Bible told me some."
 
After having already talked about this with another poster or two above, if I said something wrong, then point it out.
Actually, your level of understanding of these concepts has not been made clear, especially not by your previous responses. It's impossible for me to continue this discussion without knowing your level of understanding of these concepts.

But your refusal to answer the simple question is noted.
 
Hmmm.... first it was "the Bible told me so..." now it's "the Bible told me some."


:facepalm:.....flying Spaghetti Monster give me the strength not to smite this macaroni heathen.
 
Fair enough. I believe your sincerity in the matter and I don't want you to feel that I'm ganging up on you. Your free to pray and believe as you will. Even in this thread.:)
No problem Marvolo. I apologize for the "ganging up" style of my letter, especially directed towards you and your first post in the conversation. I have to also remember where I am posting. And it's my choice to post here. So, even though indirectly, thanks for reminding me. :yay:
 
Actually, your level of understanding of these concepts has not been made clear, especially not by your previous responses. It's impossible for me to continue this discussion without knowing your level of understanding of these concepts.

But your refusal to answer the simple question is noted.
And my response as to why should be noted, too.
 
Adam and Eve's kids incest populated the Earth. Noah's grandkids incest populated the Earth. That's twice in the old testament that the Earth was populated by incest. Seems plausible.
 
But they can still breed offspring that could breed right?

Provided the chihuahua has access to a ladder.
Precisely. Barriers to reproduction come in two primary forms:

1) Prezygotic, which in itself has two subcategories: pre-mating and post-mating.

2) Postzygotic (intrinsic, extrinsic, etc.).

Any (or either) one of these is sufficient to establish reproductive isolation, and one need not be accompanied by another in order to consider two individuals separate species from one another.

Specifically, the barrier we're dealing with here is mechanical isolation: a prezygotic barrier to reproduction which functionally prevents mating between two individuals (so a pre-mating barrier) based upon some sort of anatomical incompatibility. Without human intervention, it seems extremely unlikely that these two breeds would be able to mate with one another by any conventional means. Depending upon the context, this could well be sufficient cause to consider these two breeds separate species.

There are also potential postzygotic barriers here. For instance, it may be that only male-Chihuahua/female-GD pairings will develop to term, given the size difference between the two. I don't know whether this is actually the case, however.

Human intervention muddies the waters here, of course, facilitating an otherwise impossible (note: this is an assumption on my part) reproductive event between two lineages.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"