1. Joined
    14 Mar '04
    Moves
    94554
    16 Jun '14 23:49
    Phil Collins?
  2. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12733
    17 Jun '14 00:17
    Originally posted by Great Big Stees
    Phil Collins?
    Was he an Egyptian?
  3. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    78638
    17 Jun '14 00:50
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    It is obvious to anyone with even common sense that the Genesis creation account is the real one. The others, like those of the Egyptians, are rip-offs and distortions that don't make common sense. That is the same with all the flood stories that are rip-offs and distortions of the Genesis account.
    The Egyptian creation myths go back to at least 3,000 B.C. long before the Hebrews existed. They certainly did not "rip off" the Hebrew creation myths. That claim is not historically credible.
  4. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12733
    17 Jun '14 00:56
    King Tut

    YouTube
  5. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    78638
    17 Jun '14 01:541 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    King Tut

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvGHMvESWak
    While that makes some sense as his father was Ahkenaten (the monotheist I mentioned in the other thread), he was a child king and was at the mercy of his advisors who were restoring all the other cults. Ahkenaten would make more sense, except this is all happening too late to be ready for Moses to write it down.
  6. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12733
    17 Jun '14 02:34
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    While that makes some sense as his father was Ahkenaten (the monotheist I mentioned in the other thread), he was a child king and was at the mercy of his advisors who were restoring all the other cults. Ahkenaten would make more sense, except this is all happening too late to be ready for Moses to write it down.
    I agree that Moses would probably not write of events that came after his time. However, since I admit to not knowing much about ancient history, then I must leave the dating of such matters to the experts as long as it does not contradict with the Holy Bible,
  7. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    17 Jun '14 06:36
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    ... I admit to not knowing much about ancient history, ...
    Well done! Good boy!

    Why not follow with everything else you don't know much about.

    ...like biology, geology, cosmology, ... well, pretty much everything?
  8. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12733
    17 Jun '14 07:04
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Well done! Good boy!

    Why not follow with everything else you don't know much about.

    ...like biology, geology, cosmology, ... well, pretty much everything?
    I obviously know more about them than you do.
  9. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    17 Jun '14 07:37
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I obviously know more about them than you do.
    That's what you think. That's not what you show.
  10. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    17 Jun '14 10:53
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I obviously know more about them than you do.
    Again being the comedian. You only know what your creationist buddies have fed you when you watch those video's and you THINK you are getting science. What you are really getting is duped, thoroughly duped.
  11. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12733
    17 Jun '14 19:13
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Again being the comedian. You only know what your creationist buddies have fed you when you watch those video's and you THINK you are getting science. What you are really getting is duped, thoroughly duped.
    I watch the videos, that is one reason I know more than you non-believers.
  12. Joined
    13 Apr '11
    Moves
    1232
    17 Jun '14 19:341 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I watch the videos, that is one reason I know more than you non-believers.
    You have provided ample evidence that this is not the case. The have been numerous times you have posted videos that are not remotely relevant to the discussion, and often times you even admit to not watching the videos.

    For example, you recently posted this about a video that you linked to on page 13 of your poorly titled "Evidence For A Young Earth" thread:

    "I guess I could have picked a different video than that one from Kent Hovind on "Lies in the Textbooks", but I found it very quickly also and I did not know that you were already aware of his teachings. However, since he was a high school science teacher for 17 years and collected science books, I thought this quicker video might be better. But it appears in this one he doesn't point out many textbooks with the known frauds that I was thinking about. Those must be on one of those real long 2 hour videow of his."

    The fact that you frequently hide behind videos to make your points instead of making them yourself makes you an unserious debater. The fact that you frequently point to videos that you haven't even watched, but expect others to watch, makes you even more unserious, and bad-mannered as well. It is just one of the many reasons you are not taken seriously here.
  13. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12733
    17 Jun '14 19:42
    Originally posted by PatNovak
    You have provided ample evidence that this is not the case. The have been numerous times you have posted videos that are not remotely relevant to the discussion, and often times you even admit to not watching the videos.

    For example, you recently posted this about a video that you linked to on page 13 of your poorly titled "Evidence For A Young Earth" th ...[text shortened]... , and bad-mannered as well. It is just one of the many reasons you are not taken seriously here.
    In that case, I thought this video was one of Kent Hovind's that I had previously watched, but my memory failed me. However, I did watch it later. So it is true that I watched the video.
  14. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    17 Jun '14 21:041 edit
    Originally posted by PatNovak
    You have provided ample evidence that this is not the case. The have been numerous times you have posted videos that are not remotely relevant to the discussion, and often times you even admit to not watching the videos.

    For example, you recently posted this about a video that you linked to on page 13 of your poorly titled "Evidence For A Young Earth" th ...[text shortened]... , and bad-mannered as well. It is just one of the many reasons you are not taken seriously here.
    If he doesn't watch himself the videos presented by him, then what's the point?
    That's not very genius, is it?
  15. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12733
    17 Jun '14 21:211 edit
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    If he doesn't watch himself the videos presented by him, then what's the point?
    That's not very genius, is it?
    Well, that video did mention lies in the textbooks concerning evolution. It just did not mention the titles of every textbook, etc. that I thought was there. But it is a known fact that textbooks have contained lies to support evolution.
Back to Top