Originally posted by RJHindsWhy don't you give a synopsis of the video, we are not just going to watch an hour long creationism lecture on your say so. But it is clear the objective, only watching the first minute of it. So no thanks. I watched your so-called expert Riddle, that left me with a huge bitter taste in my mouth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=X4FOsxvCOc4&feature=endscreen
Originally posted by sonhouseThis video may also give you a bitter taste, since it gives evidence that dinosuars and man lived together. Dragons is one of the names the ancient people gave to dinosaurs.
Why don't you give a synopsis of the video, we are not just going to watch an hour long creationism lecture on your say so. But it is clear the objective, only watching the first minute of it. So no thanks. I watched your so-called expert Riddle, that left me with a huge bitter taste in my mouth.
Originally posted by Pianoman1Scholarly work is not exempt from typing errors. You make the big leap that it is a spelling error. Even if it was, that does not negate all of the other information. If that was the case, every time I find a spelling error, I could claim your atheist/evolutionary information is not scholarly based on that alone.
Endured this nonsense until I came to the following at 39 minutes, 45 seconds in giant letters across the screen: TRANSCRIBED ACCURATLY.
Not much of a scholarly work if they can't even spell!
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsThis is not a typing error, this is poor spelling and sloppy proof reading. Poor spelling indicates poor education, which does not give a scholarly, which this purports to be, work much credence. At least get the spelling correct if you are going to challenge people's presuppositions!
Scholarly work is not exempt from typing errors. You make the big leap that it is a spelling error. Even if it was, that does not negate all of the other information. If that was the case, every time I find a spelling error, I could claim your atheist/evolutionary information is not scholarly based on that alone.
Originally posted by ZahlanziZahlanzi, this is just another of RJHinds' classics! They crack me up! This guy is a one-off - he should be canonized, his comments are surreally funny.
i wonder how many people on this forum will endeavor in trying to prove to this ignorant buffoon that dragons indeed didn't live with humans. it is one thing to explain evolution (even if that is futile as well), but this?
Originally posted by Pianoman1English scholars don't make good mathematicians, engineers, medical doctors, and scientists. I know this from personal experience.
This is not a typing error, this is poor spelling and sloppy proof reading. Poor spelling indicates poor education, which does not give a scholarly, which this purports to be, work much credence. At least get the spelling correct if you are going to challenge people's presuppositions!
Originally posted by RJHindshow can it give such evidence when it tells 3 lies in the first minute? that's about as far as i got before stopping. 3 lies/minute * 64 minutes = 192 lies. a bit more than i can handle.
This video may also give you a bitter taste, since it gives evidence that dinosuars and man lived together. Dragons is one of the names the ancient people gave to dinosaurs.
Originally posted by ZahlanziThe point is dragons are dionsaurs. So since both dragons and dinosaurs are the same thing, then clearly they lived with man and there is a lot of evidence to prove it.
i wonder how many people on this forum will endeavor in trying to prove to this ignorant buffoon that dragons indeed didn't live with humans. it is one thing to explain evolution (even if that is futile as well), but this?
Originally posted by RJHindsI believe that dragons and dinosaurs were each created by God according to their kind. I believe that Adam gave them each their own name, just like it says in the Bible. You speak only the lies of Satan!
The point is dragons are dionsaurs. So since both dragons and dinosaurs are the same thing, then clearly they lived with man and there is a lot of evidence to prove it.