Chiefgroover Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 what i dont get though is that religious followers dismiss any scientific facts put forward yet dont question for a second how jesus could have fed 5000! people with a few loafs of bread and a couple of fish? F.Y.I it was 5000 men along with family, so thats maybe 15000. Thats alot of witnesses to the event. i wasnt there were you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt k Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 F.Y.I it was 5000 men along with family, so thats maybe 15000. Thats alot of witnesses to the event. i wasnt there were you? AFAIK that is physically impossible if i said i could fly and 15000 people backed me up but you didn't see it would you believe me? That is just using factul evidence not 2000 year old hearsay! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefgroover Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 AFAIK that is physically impossible if i said i could fly and 15000 people backed me up but you didn't see it would you believe me? That is just using factul evidence not 2000 year old hearsay! Why did you bring this up? its not in the movie? I merely corrected your statement. Whether you believe it or not, who cares? nobodys asking you to. Do you believe David Blain puts his hand through glass panels? OK so the witnesses are all dead now, so do we treat all history this way? The heresay bit, now thats something you ought to take up with the evolutionists as they seems to be the biggest users of it lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Chief, are you Catholic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefgroover Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 No Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 No Where did you learn about God, at school? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorin Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 No Pastafarian? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Pastafarian? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefgroover Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Ok, should i be atheist? hmmmm.....just thinking........I could sit around in pubs on week nights telling the gospel according to Darwin, with endless theories with flexible boundaries, never stuck for an answer as there is always something else I could add or attack to make my "view" seem modern, and politically correct. I suppose that would make me cool and evolved.......or it could make me as contrary and confused. I wouldnt have to worry about morals, they are man made and I can change them around as often as I need to, I could abuse anyone who thinks there is a God, even call them mad, and nobody would be challenging me. I would never have to think "what happens when I die", after all we are like that cabbage I thew in the bin, we just rot away and thats it, no chance of becoming a ghost, after all thats just some peoples hysteria. Sounds an easy and unchallenging life. I could then also deny the wind exists, I cant see it and all those things they contribute to its work, science will eventually find an explanation for it, probably something to do with gravity. I could also be full of my own importance, and ask why this supposed creator chap doesnt come down and prove himself to me? after all I would be a very important chappy then. Alternatively, I could consider that Evolution is IMPOSSIBLE, taking the following facts into consideration, and then wake up and smell the roses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefgroover Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Evolution refers to the fossil record on a regular basis. Firstly we need to ask - how do we form fossils? Well when I was at school they told me it took many years. Thats Nonsense. Any recently dead (or living) organism must be rapidly buried in sediment that can harden and exclude oxygen. Thats just what you'd expect from a worldwide catastrophic flood, something that Evolutionists dont want to hear about despite the evidence. Fossilisation and rapid formation of deep strata must occur rapidly. How else can you explain vertical fossilised trees? (without root) or a Dinosaurs neck sticking through strata that are allegedly millions of years old? Tell me how the trees or Dinosaur stayed alive for millions of years while the strata formed around it? There are thousands of examples, a catastrophic flood fits the evidence quite well. Staying with the "Great flood" How else do you explain the flood stories shared by dozens of unconnected cultures around the world (stories long recorded before "contaminated" bible carrying westerners arrived? Chinese pictograms - Ancient Chinese characters clearly and explicitly describe the Genesis creation and flood accounts. Scientists, an amazing bunch of smart people their community is changing, with Intelligent design becoming a more talked about and studied subject. (Non religious) scientists these days openly discuss evidence for: Rapid (years, not millions of years) formation of coal, oil and natural gas. Catastrophic formation of geological features such as the Grand Canyon. The apparent impossibility of the spontaneous formation of life from non living matter. Einstein , a man I greatly admire, in 1929 said the following. "We are in the position of a little child entering a library filled with books in different languages. The child knows someone must have written the books. It does not know how. It does not know the languages in which they are written. the child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That it seems to me, is the attitude of the most intelligent being towards God. We see a universe marvellously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand those laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. Such Humility has been lost in todays scientific world. Lets tackle DNA. In order to give credibility to Intelligent design we must address Evolution's most treasured subject. Evolutionist believe it came about by chance, here are the facts that Creationists have on DNA, which tell a different story and justify their stance on DNA. You asked for it so here it is. DNA stands for deoxyribonucleic acid (for the benefit of other readers), I have written the "to the power of figures" in brackets. DNA evidence demonstrates the intelligent design view much better than it does Evolution. Consider the complexity of this important component of living systems in order to see how ABSURD it is to believe that life came about by chance. We know that DNA is the primary information carrying molecule of living organisms. Being the "Blueprint" of living cells, it stores all the information necessary for the cell to feed and protect itself, as well as propagate itself into more living cells, also to co-operate with other living cells to make up a complex organism. If the DNA of one human cell were unravelled and held in a straight line, it would be literally be about one meter long, and yet be so thin it would be invisible to all but the most powerful microscopes. This string of DNA must be packaged into a space that is much smaller than the head of a pin, and thats this tiny string of human DNA contains enough information to fill almost 1000 books, each containing 1000 pages of text. One human cell contains 3x10(9) nucleotide bases (genetic letters) in just one of the two copies of DNA present in the cells.) Human engineers would have a helluva time trying to fit one book into that amount of space, one thousand books in that amount of space is mind boggling to say the least!!. Since DNA and the machinery of the cell are co-dependent, the complete system must be co dependent from the beginning or it will be meaningless bits and pieces. When converting DNA information into proteins, we must adhere to the following points: every step, and I mean every step of the overall process absolutely requires proteins that are unique and extremely complex, these proteins can only be produced by the overall process in which they themselves are critically involved. So the making of RNA (ribonucleic acid) from a DNA template is a critical first step in the process of protein formation. For RNA to be synthesised you need at least five different protein chains to co-operate. Four of these proteins from the RNA polymerase complex tells the RNA where to start reading the DNA template. The enzyme complex must recognise where to start transcribing DNA into RNA. It must then move along the DNA strand adding individual building blocks to the growing RNA chain, and lastly it must know where to finish the transcription process. Now we need three types of RNA to process the making of proteins, messenger RNA (mRNA), ribosomal RNA (rRNA) and Transfer RNA (tRNA). Molecules of mRNA carry the information extracted from the DNA blueprint which encodes the protein to be synthesised; rRNA molecules make up a critical component of ribo-somes; and tRNA is responsible for carrying individual animo acids to the site where they will be added, to a new protein. Befroe tRNA molecules can do their stuff they must be charged with a suitable animo acid in order that they can be added onto a growing protein chain at the correct time. Then you will need 20! different aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase proteins to attach individual animo acids to the corresponding tRNA molecules (thats at least one for each type of animo acid). One the three types of molecules have been synthesised, the info needs to translate from the mRNA into a protein molecule. This is carried out by a huge complex of proteins called the ribosome. These totally amazing protein synthesis machines contain multiple different proteins, together with various ribosomal RNA molecules all associated with two main sub units. In a simple bacterium such as E.coli ribsosmes are composed of 50 different proteins and three different rRNAs! The above is mearly the core reactions in the process of synthesising proteins, we ALSO need the energy molecules that must be present for many of these reactions. The cell needs to harvest energy, therefore it has to have a mechanism from pre-encoded information located in the cell. A summation will reveal that the process of converting DNA info into proteins requires at least 75 different protein molecules. Each one of those must be synthesised in the first place, by the process in which they are involved. How could it begin without ALL the necessary proteins? Could ALL 75 proteins have arisen in the same place by chance? in the right place at the right time? and all the precursor molecules happen to be around in their energised form so the proteins could utilise them properly? As we know, without proteins life would not exist; it is as simple as that. The same is true of DNA and RNA. It is true that they and proteins must ALL be present if any of them are going to be present in a living organism. LIFE HAD TO HAVE BEEN CREATED COMPLETELY FUNCTIONAL OR IT WOULD BE A MEANINGLESS MESS. To claim otherwise in the light of the above scientific facts would be either ignorance or desperation . No offence meant to anyone. Therefore God came first, or if anyone can explain it better I am all ears. There are those who will insist it happened by chance. If thats what you think read on. 75 proteins coming about by chance? OK then consider a smaller than average protein of just 100 animo acid residues. IF all the necessary left handed animo acids were actually available and IF the interfering compounds including right handed animo acids were somehow eliminated and IF (thats a lotta if's lol) our pool of animo acids were able to join together into protein chains faster than the proteins normally fall apart, then the chances of this random 100 animo acid protein have the correct sequence would be one in 20(100) possible sequence combinations, 20 available animo acids raised to the power of the number of residues in the protein, i.e. 1 in 12, 680,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000!!!. Therefore EVOLUTION IS IMPOSSIBLE !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefgroover Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 wtf ??? THIS IS off topic, WHAT AM i DOING HERE ! 5% of my post go in this unecessary thread style. I should not be in here, its back to the rest of the forum where I should be!. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 What a load of crap... if you actually got to the point occasionally instead of ranting about floods and DNA, your arguments might be a little more compelling. Instead it comes off as the insane rantings, sorry. How you could accept that this whole place was 'created' by someone/thing rather than it just 'came about' over a few million years is baffling to say the least - so science is conspiring against the existence of god now? OK.... Sorry if any of this sounds 'trendy' or 'modern', but the fact remains, we live, we die, there is no god and that's it.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorin Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 there is no god and that's it.... There you go again, I'm beginning to think you don't like me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefgroover Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 What a load of crap... if you actually got to the point occasionally instead of ranting about floods and DNA, your arguments might be a little more compelling. Instead it comes off as the insane rantings, sorry. How you could accept that this whole place was 'created' by someone/thing rather than it just 'came about' over a few million years is baffling to say the least - so science is conspiring against the existence of god now? OK.... Sorry if any of this sounds 'trendy' or 'modern', but the fact remains, we live, we die, there is no god and that's it.... The above post by me states facts, not the fiction evolutionists tout. Its not ranting, its well considered objective science. It certainly rattled your cage. You dont know there has been millions of years, thats the theory YOU believe and want to brain wash others with. I have stated why the odds are pretty much infinity of all this coming about as chance, you reply is weak and without substance. Yes, science has been trying to wipe out religion since Darwins time, a once religious man, who lost his faith after his daughter died young, and then recanted on his death bed. The FACT remains you have proved nothing, and I can scientifically disprove your belief of random chance. You obviously are struggling for a reply so you state theory as fact. The words kettle pot and back all come to mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 The above post by me states facts, not the fiction evolutionists tout. Its not ranting, its well considered objective science. It certainly rattled your cage. You dont know there has been millions of years, thats the theory YOU believe and want to brain wash others with. I have stated why the odds are pretty much infinity of all this coming about as chance, you reply is weak and without substance. Yes, science has been trying to wipe out religion since Darwins time, a once religious man, who lost his faith after his daughter died young, and then recanted on his death bed. The FACT remains you have proved nothing, and I can scientifically disprove your belief of random chance. You obviously are struggling for a reply so you state theory as fact. The words kettle pot and back all come to mind. GOOD POST! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 What a load of crap... if you actually got to the point occasionally instead of ranting about floods and DNA, your arguments might be a little more compelling. Instead it comes off as the insane rantings, sorry. How you could accept that this whole place was 'created' by someone/thing rather than it just 'came about' over a few million years is baffling to say the least - so science is conspiring against the existence of god now? OK.... Sorry if any of this sounds 'trendy' or 'modern', but the fact remains, we live, we die, there is no god and that's it.... how is any of the above "factual" dude? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 The FACT remains you have proved nothing, and I can scientifically disprove your belief of random chance. You obviously are struggling for a reply so you state theory as fact. The words kettle pot and back all come to mind. I don't really think he's trying to prove anything unlike some people who force their opinions on everyone else. It obviously doesn't bother him as much as it does you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 how is any of the above "factual" dude? How is it not fact that 'we live, we die'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 The above post by me states facts, not the fiction evolutionists tout. Its not ranting, its well considered objective science. It certainly rattled your cage. You dont know there has been millions of years, thats the theory YOU believe and want to brain wash others with. I have stated why the odds are pretty much infinity of all this coming about as chance, you reply is weak and without substance. Yes, science has been trying to wipe out religion since Darwins time, a once religious man, who lost his faith after his daughter died young, and then recanted on his death bed. The FACT remains you have proved nothing, and I can scientifically disprove your belief of random chance. You obviously are struggling for a reply so you state theory as fact. The words kettle pot and back all come to mind. Oh, yeah... my half cocked theory of evolution, 'it all just came about' crumbles next to you 'someone made it' theory... I feel very subversive. I could type three pages of incompensable gibberish and pass it off as scientific argument, but that would be denying any kind of education I've had in the past... I don't really believe in just ranting inanely and then patronising whoever comes back... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 how is any of the above "factual" dude? How is the existence of god, jesus or any of the 'religious folk' factual? I'm not saying mine is fact and the god stuff isn't, but evolution takes a fairly small jump in the belief stakes against this creation stuff...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefgroover Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 I don't really think he's trying to prove anything unlike some people who force their opinions on everyone else. QUOTE] Yes you do it so well Charlotte, all those great posts in this thread, I cant wait for the next go back to the hair and nails section. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 I don't really think he's trying to prove anything unlike some people who force their opinions on everyone else. Yes you do it so well Charlotte, all those great posts in this thread, I cant wait for the next go back to the hair and nails section. I think we've just seen your true colours there Chief Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snooze Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 I have stated why the odds are pretty much infinity of all this coming about as chance I can scientifically disprove your belief of random chance. And here's where it falls flat. According to your argument; "it couldn't happen by chance", means you believe that: 12,680,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000 .... is "pretty much" equal to infinity and constitutes "proof". Which is nonsense. Fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian W Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 go back to the hair and nails section. you should come along mate, today we're discussing buffing techniques to get the best shine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bobbling Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 I'm not saying mine is fact and the god stuff isn't, but evolution takes a fairly small jump in the belief stakes against this creation stuff...? Why's that then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.