1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHe has never admitted that he is wrong. He will never take the humility to admit that he is wrong!
depends if he thinks he is deluded, the nature of his delusion may not permit this, and of course it takes humility to admit we are wrong!
I just wait for his evidence that he promised to provide, but never does. Until then I think he is a fraud, a plain fraud.
Originally posted by FabianFnasyes, such is the way when we harbor unreasonable beliefs that cannot be substantiated with reason, either an emotional defense ensues or nothing at all! it may be that he is gathering evidence, or quite simply he cannot substantiate his claims and you may dismiss it as such, an unsubstantiated belief!
He has never admitted that he is wrong. He will never take the humility to admit we are wrong!
I just wait for his evidence that he promised to provide, but never does. Until then I think he is a fraud, a plain fraud.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhen he says that there were dinosaurs in the Ark of Noah, he could have said "This is a part of my religious beliefs", and that would be the end of it. there are many crazy ideas in religions. I don't even believe that it was a world wide flooding, less that there was an ark with two animals of every species in the (known) world. But when he brings in dinosaurs in the ark, then I start doubt the status of his mind. But still, it's his religion...
yes, such is the way when we harbor unreasonable beliefs that cannot be substantiated with reason, either an emotional defense ensues or nothing at all! it may be that he is gathering evidence, or quite simply he cannot substantiate his claims and you may dismiss it as such, an unsubstantiated belief!
But when he claims that he has scientific evidence that it actually then he goes into my territory, science. My interest of his crazy theory starts me going. I want to know his ground fo claiming such an idea. And now he promise to show evidence of dinos in cave drawings made by man.
Again - he can believe whatever he wants. But honour says he has to tell me the truth. If he says that he will provide evidence, and he stalls it, wriggle like a worm, using false retorics (the infamous KellyJay retorics), hoping that we (okay, I) will forget about his little stunt, then he is wrong.
He has made a promise to show the evidence (he even corrected me when I claim a proof, "Never done that, I will provide an evidence", he said). He cannot hide behind his religion when he entered the stage of science.
He is a christian, a sinner, and he is a liar about his promise. The only thing I want from him is that he says, "I was wrong!". Then we can forget about it all.
Originally posted by JigtieIt's like watching a bus full of retards catch on fire and smash into firestation, you just can't take your eyes off it. This is why I keep a bag of marshmallows handy at all times.
I'm puzzled. We have here a man who believes in the existence of God,
and who believes that the word of the bible is the truth. And we're upset
about this man believing in the co-existence of man and dinosaur to the
point where we follow him around in the forums taunting him about it?
Fascinating.
It's like trying to dicuss a fundamental math problem like 1+1=2 and having someone insist that 1+1=1.45. No amount of explanation, physical demonstration, rubber hose beatings, water boarding or other form of persuasion will dissuade them from their faith based belief that 1+1=1.45. Eventually you have to give up on changing this wrong thinking belief, but, the frustration remains and every time the assertion that 1+1=1.45 comes up you feel obligated to explain that 1+1 really, no really, I'm serious here, 1+1=2.
The spiritual equation is not as clean as 1+1=2 of course. Nor is the scientific based one. There are a huge number of variables, the universe is too large and the experiment is hopelessly tainted by the observers bias.
For me, the equation could be expressed as follows:
The Observed Universe + Man + Science + Truth + Empircal Evidence + Religions of the World = There is no God (at least not in the form we assign to Him)
A Christian may look at the very same data, the exact same equation, the identical circumstances and, in what to me seems like an unconceivable fashion, comes up with the following result:
The Observed Universe + Man + Science + Truth + Empircal Evidence + Religions of the World = The God of the Christian Bible exists and dinosaurs roamed the Earth with Modern Man
Personally, I just don't get it. I don't understand the disconnect. I don't see how a Christian get's to an end result so different from mine with the same data. I've read the bible front to back and probably know it better than man Christians. I've read considerable biblical history and spent a great deal of time reading about other religions and philosophies in trying to come to a spiritual understanding. I simply don't understand how otherwise intelligent people can make what, seems to me, is a huge leap of faith based on such shaky evidence.
Originally posted by FabianFnasWell if he can't use google I managed to:
When he says that there were dinosaurs in the Ark of Noah, he could have said "This is a part of my religious beliefs", and that would be the end of it. there are many crazy ideas in religions. I don't even believe that it was a world wide flooding, less that there was an ark with two animals of every species in the (known) world. But when he brings in di ...[text shortened]... thing I want from him is that he says, "I was wrong!". Then we can forget about it all.
http://www.genesispark.org/genpark/ancient/ancient.htm
Here's your dinosaur cave drawings.
Originally posted by FabianFnaswhat can i say Fabian my friend, as a Christian he should tell the truth and also keep his promises, this is fundamental, however one must ask how he came to his belief? it was not the product of his own originality, was it? if not where did it originate from? are there others who have influenced him, who hold similar unsubstantiated beliefs, if so what is their evidence, if any? what you may have done is make him go away and rethink what it is he is actually stating, perhaps you have done him some good in this regard, if he is prepared to admit privately to himself that he was in error or at very least his thoughts cannot be substantiated then perhaps he may reevaluate them, if he will not then what can be done?
When he says that there were dinosaurs in the Ark of Noah, he could have said "This is a part of my religious beliefs", and that would be the end of it. there are many crazy ideas in religions. I don't even believe that it was a world wide flooding, less that there was an ark with two animals of every species in the (known) world. But when he brings in di ...[text shortened]... ly thing I want from him is that he says, "I was wrong!". Then we can forget about it all.
Originally posted by Hand of HecateNot so fast, my dear HoH.
Apparently, dinosaurs were roaming around in the middle ages as well. We have our proof gentlemen.
We have found fossils of Mammoths, Sabeltooht tigers, Elefants small as ponys - but no Dinosaurs from ths history of mankind. Funny, isn't it? The roaming dinosaurus without a track, no shred of evidence in the form of fossils.
I think this Dr Jack Cuozzo is a fraud, a creationist fraud. Can he provide us with fossils of recent dinosaurs with radiometric measurable age? No, I bet not.
So I discard this evidence. Give me another evidence of the Flintstone Family cartoon actually took place.
Just to ask you thae same questions I put to KellyJay:
(1) When do you think the last dinosaur died?
(2) When do you think the era of mankind started?
I prefer an estimate of years ago. Millions or thousands of them, doesn't matter, just a rough number will do.
Originally posted by FabianFnasFn@sshole, do I look like Google to you? Find your own dinosaur evidence. The website is well thought out and obviously had some work put into it and you reject it out of hand? At least take some time to evaluate the information. I expect a report on my desk refuting this evidence by this Sunday. As an alternative, you may write a sermon about Able being trampled by dinosaurs and his death not really being Kane's fault. Do it! Do it now!
Not so fast, my dear HoH.
We have found fossils of Mammoths, Sabeltooht tigers, Elefants small as ponys - but no Dinosaurs from ths history of mankind. Funny, isn't it? The roaming dinosaurus without a track, no shred of evidence in the form of fossils.
I think this Dr Jack Cuozzo is a fraud, a creationist fraud. Can he provide us with fossils of re ...[text shortened]... mate of years ago. Millions or thousands of them, doesn't matter, just a rough number will do.
To answer your questions:
1) Are turtles dinosaurs? If so, I ran one over on the way to work a few days ago. He shot out from under my truck tire like a rocket.
2) Based on what I've read, I'd say we were just starting to get organized 50,000 years ago. I'm confident that some semblence of humanity existed before then, but, define humanity.
I demand that you change your title to FabianFn@sshole immediately!
Originally posted by Hand of HecateIf you attack me personally, you have already lost the discussion. That is a cheap trick, a low trick, even KellyJay is not so low. Okay, enough of that.
Fn@sshole, do I look like Google to you? Find your own dinosaur evidence. The website is well thought out and obviously had some work put into it and you reject it out of hand? At least take some time to evaluate the information. I expect a report on my desk refuting this evidence by this Sunday. As an alternative, you may write a sermon about Ab ...[text shortened]... but, define humanity.
I demand that you change your title to FabianFn@sshole immediately!
If a website is well done is not a sigh that its content is true, is it? You know that. Many nazi pages are very nicely designed, but its truth value is very low. Like this one.
I have taken some time to evaluate it, but I don't see anything about fossils. Fossils would be a hard evidence for the presence of dinosaurs during historic times. Absence of fossils are equally hard evidence of the contrary. No fossils, no dinosaurs. Dino fossils are easy to find if you know where to look, but they have an age of at least 65 million of years.
No, turtles are not dinosaurs. Try to answer the question (1) again.
In the end of your posting you try to insult me again. You know that you describe yourself very accurately. "If you don't have arguments, try to insult and thus go off-topic." Is this a retorics of yours? Well, it failed.
Originally posted by FabianFnasi am truly sorry that you are subject to this type of verbal abuse, you would think that on a chess site one would meet more gentlemanly conduct given the rather noble nature of the game!
If you attack me personally, you have already lost the discussion. That is a cheap trick, a low trick, even KellyJay is not so low. Okay, enough of that.
If a website is well done is not a sigh that its content is true, is it? You know that. Many nazi pages are very nicely designed, but its truth value is very low. Like this one.
I have taken some t ...[text shortened]... guments, try to insult and thus go off-topic." Is this a retorics of yours? Well, it failed.
Originally posted by FabianFnasI'm denying anything, but you have a habit of reading things into my
Oh, don't pretend, you have promised evidence a number of times, and now you suddenly don't know what I'm talking about?
So you don't have any evidence then? And when you said it is a scientific proof, then you were lying? May christians lie?
Just say the magic words "I have no evidence, I was wrong."
posts that are not there and start crying about hurts only you see so
could you please quote to me what you are going on about?
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by Hand of HecateI actually did that, saw that link, but I didn't think he'd accept it.
Well if he can't use google I managed to:
http://www.genesispark.org/genpark/ancient/ancient.htm
Here's your dinosaur cave drawings.
I have not taken the time to try and run down links that were not
from that site. Personally, I actually don't think I'll find any, mainly
because to say some of these were actual evidence would right
away call into question the person making the claim, because anyone
who suggests it would lose his/her credibility immediately. If you do
not hold to the common thought on this subject you don't have any
credibility, to say anything else is to be against science in the eyes of
some.
Kelly