animal questions for christians

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
1. you are confusing immortality with everlasting life, they are not one and the same
although i dont expect you to know the difference, unless you have researched it.
Its another common misconception to make the two synonymous.

2. i have explained why its absurd.

3. i dont think its tasty even cooked in regge regge barbecue sauce, cavemen ...[text shortened]... ed this and you have
nothing but a speculative nothingness with which to attempt to refute it.

cavemen are a fictional absurdity of scientific dogma masquerading as empirical science.

RING-A-DING-DONG!!!!!

Just when we thought it wasn't possible for you to become anymore insane you top the lot.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
[b]cavemen are a fictional absurdity of scientific dogma masquerading as empirical science.

RING-A-DING-DONG!!!!!

Just when we thought it wasn't possible for you to become anymore insane you top the lot.[/b]

its true, those fictional depictions of half men half ape are a nonsense. ZING a DING NEEEEXT!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
its true, those fictional depictions of half men half ape are a nonsense. ZING a DING NEEEEXT!

Which depictions are you referrring to here?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Which depictions are you referrring to here?

depictions of the so called missing link, like this, which are clearly fictional depictions,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/tv_radio/wwcavemen/

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
LOL, Bible states that its instinctive wisdom, no one messes with the sacred text.!

Was that an instinctive response? 😵

Originally posted by jaywill

why did god give animals such short lives?

Define "short".

why did god make homosexual animals if he dislikes it so much?

I don't know hardly anything about "homosexual animals". I may have seen some science discussion to the effect that certain animal behaviors were reminiscient of human homosexual actions.
...[text shortened]...

were adam and eve vegetarians or vegans?

They were conservatives.

Play That Funky Music

YouTube

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
depictions of the so called missing link, like this, which are clearly fictional depictions,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/tv_radio/wwcavemen/

So how do the rather large and intriguing amount of artifacts found in various caves throughout thr world fit into your scheme of things?

Originally posted by stellspalfie
why did god give animals such short lives?
why did god make homosexual animals if he dislikes it so much?
did god make beef tasty before humans could eat it or did it become tasty later?
why did god not give animals souls?
were adam and eve vegetarians or vegans?

the animals may be born homosexual, but they choose to be homosexual because they are evil and haven't found god. every time a chimp with a penis gets funky with another chimp with a penis, they are consciously choosing to do EEEVIL!!!!!

Originally posted by stellspalfie
why did god give animals such short lives?
why did god make homosexual animals if he dislikes it so much?
did god make beef tasty before humans could eat it or did it become tasty later?
why did god not give animals souls?
were adam and eve vegetarians or vegans?

You must be one of those Hindus that worship cows. Don't worry you want be reincarnated into an animal and especially not a holy cow. 😀

Originally posted by Proper Knob
So how do the rather large and intriguing amount of artifacts found in various caves throughout thr world fit into your scheme of things?

please answer the point, is the depiction fictional or is it not? Its naught but
scientific hocus pocus masquerading as empirical science, the article states, the first
upright ape, Lucy. Its a piece of speculative nonsense engineered by scientists (I
use term loosely), there is no way they could have observed Lucy walking upright,
in fact, they give the impression that she was something other than simian, not
true! This kind of unobserved phenomena palmed off as empirical science belongs
in the fiction department, not science and as for the, 'rather large and intriguing
amount of artefacts', just how large and extensive are these?

'Judged by the amount of evidence upon which it is based, the study of fossil man
hardly deserves to be more than a sub-discipline of palaeontology or anthropology.
. . . the collection is so tantalisingly incomplete, and the specimens themselves often
so fragmentary and inconclusive', New Scientist,

“Whatever Happened to Zinjanthropus?” by John Reader, March 26, 1981, p. 802

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
please answer the point, is the depiction fictional or is it not? Its naught but
scientific hocus pocus masquerading as empirical science, the article states, the first
upright ape, Lucy. Its a piece of speculative nonsense engineered by scientists (I
use term loosely), there is no way they could have observed Lucy walking upright,
in fact ...[text shortened]... Scientist,

“Whatever Happened to Zinjanthropus?” by John Reader, March 26, 1981, p. 802

These Atheists keep lying by telling us they have mountains of evidence for evolution. However when you exclude adaption within kind, they do not even have a mole hill. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
These Atheists keep lying by telling us they have mountains of evidence for evolution. However when you exclude adaption within kind, they do not even have a mole hill. 😏

I dont think its deliberate RJH, not at all, but empirical science and speculative
depictions of fictional beings are not one and the same.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I dont think its deliberate RJH, not at all, but empirical science and speculative
depictions of fictional beings are not one and the same.

why do we have goosebumps?

Originally posted by stellspalfie
why do we have goosebumps?

To highlight the difference between empirical and fictional science?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
please answer the point, is the depiction fictional or is it not? Its naught but
scientific hocus pocus masquerading as empirical science, the article states, the first
upright ape, Lucy. Its a piece of speculative nonsense engineered by scientists (I
use term loosely), there is no way they could have observed Lucy walking upright,
in fact ...[text shortened]... Scientist,

“Whatever Happened to Zinjanthropus?” by John Reader, March 26, 1981, p. 802

please answer the point, is the depiction fictional or is it not?

No. Whether an animal can walk upright or not can be determined by looking at it's pelvis or it's femur, you don't need to watch it walking.

Your quote was no doubt correct in 1981, we're now in the 21st century. Yet again you're reduced to providing 30+year old quotes when discussing the history of man. Neeeext!!

Check out Hinds Cave in Texas -

http://www.texasbeyondhistory.net/hinds/artifacts.html#peri