assassin_696

No rush.

Didn't they also ban ties? Or did I hear that wrong?

Try again: The truth about Leviathan The truth about behemoth Plus http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH711_1.html Still so sure about that "proof"?

Actually the wikipedia was an afterthought. I'd generally consider the English school syllabus a more authorative body but since they both agree it's irrelevant really I suppose. It's you who seem to be going against the status quo of what a fundamentalist is, so there's no need to get irrate about it when people can't follow. To be honest, you're posing the hypothesis of God (specifically the validity of the Bible) so the burden of proof lies with you, but i'm always up for a debate, so i'll go back to some of your original claims. You said that God might have destroyed the dinosaurs as a precursor to Adam and Eve's expulsion from the Garden of Eden. Since God is omniscient, didn't he see that coming? So why did he bother making dinosaurs in the first place? Why did he kill the dinosaurs but not equally dangerous predators, or diseases etc. Need I go on?

[hide] Dinosaurs would be among the beasts of the fields mentioned in Genesis. For all we know, God began his shift towards preparing Earth for Man millions of years ago, clearing out predators that would present a drastic challenge for Man to survive amongst. He would have known that Man would eat the fruit, and therefore be expelled from Eden and have to face predators. Oh please. Excellent argument. And I'd thought this topic was going to diminish into some anti-Fundamentalist topic. And I am serious on both counts. His questions are addressed to me, not you. That's the kind of redundant logic that allow Christians to attribute any single natural event to a simple "God did it" and then rational people can't disprove that. The fact is, the fossil record and the theory of evolution does not fit with the fundamentalist view of the Bible. But when you try and reconcile Genesis with it by saying "well, maybe God did this then God did that" then you're missing the point and trying to save an argument that's already on thin ice with the trump card of "God did it". That's without even attacking the obvious flaws. As I stated before, and for the last time: DO NOT CONFUSE LITERALISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM!!!1 Keep in mind by these terms I am referring to Christianity alone. *Ahem*, now back on the subject. Fundamentalism is the belief that God is supreme and that all of the miracles in the Bible are true. By definition, we are the folks that believe "God did it." Fundamentalist scholars do not doubt the fossil record or the existance of Dinosaurs. As I stated in a nother thread, I can literally walk to a museum 5 minutes away and touch a Tricerotops. We believe in the Creation and that the Bible is true. However, we acknowledge that the Bible is often written in figurative language, and must be deciphered to know what is meant figuratively and what is literal. Literalism are the hardcore extremist righ-wing "Jesus Camp" nuts who believe in a Young Earth and that every last word of the Bible is true. Let's compare a Fundamentalist and Literalist view of a Biblical prophecy: In the Revalation of John, John's dream prophecizes a beast with 6 heads coming out of the depths of the Earth. The AntiChrist. Fundamentalists believe that the prophecy will come true. We believe that the Beast will be a man with very high charisma and will fulfill the prophecies of the End Times. Literalist believe that the prophecy will come true. They believe that a giant beast will come from the Earth and lead us. Literally. And tell me why exactly the fossil record does not fit in with the "Fundamentalist" view? What exactly is the Fundamentalist view? Chances are, you will probably give me a Literalist view, because that's what you have been trained to think us Fundamentalists as. I've already demonstrated my abilities to fight you in other threads Assassin. Please bring it on. I have just as vast a field of resources to use to prove my point as you do. PS: God did it. [/hide] I will concede that your interpretation of what a fundamentalist is is different to mine and the entire English school's syllabus' (and indeed, Wikipedia's), so a lot of my points are as you said, irrelevant. Clearly, there are variations on the actual definition of the word fundamentalist, yours might be applicable to you but not everyone else who can equally consider themselves fundamentalists. However, the fact remains that you're trying to put a square peg in a round hole. A fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible does not fit with the mountains of scientific evidence against miracles, creation or indeed the supposed necessity for a creator.

I've always felt that Coming Back To Life by Pink Floyd relates to me on so many levels. But it's an interesting question and i'll have to think about it more.

Do Me A Favour - The Arctic Monkeys Lovin' their new album :)

Right, i've split off the debate about what are forces and what aren't. People are perfectly entitled to their own opinion, this topic is supposed to be a bit of fun, pedantry is never fun. Catbert, get off this thread. Unless you've got something worthwhile to add instead of attacking magekillr with baseless accusations to inflate your self esteem with intellectual superiority, leave it. Alright?

Perfectly accurate. That's why we had the discussion about that planet getting our 80's TV shows about now. :P

Of the ones i've seen, that was my favourite by far.

Check your black hole history, they were observed long after the theorists proved them as a solution to Einstein's field equations, namely Karl Schwarzchild (known as a Schwarzchild singularity). John Wheeler coined the term black hole. No one sent an x-ray into space. We sent satellites into space which could observe x-rays, showing the shock front of hot gases spiralling into black holes from another star in a binary pair.

Dinosaurs would be among the beasts of the fields mentioned in Genesis. For all we know, God began his shift towards preparing Earth for Man millions of years ago, clearing out predators that would present a drastic challenge for Man to survive amongst. He would have known that Man would eat the fruit, and therefore be expelled from Eden and have to face predators. Oh please. Excellent argument. And I'd thought this topic was going to diminish into some anti-Fundamentalist topic. And I am serious on both counts. His questions are addressed to me, not you. That's the kind of redundant logic that allow Christians to attribute any single natural event to a simple "God did it" and then rational people can't disprove that. The fact is, the fossil record and the theory of evolution does not fit with the fundamentalist view of the Bible. But when you try and reconcile Genesis with it by saying "well, maybe God did this then God did that" then you're missing the point and trying to save an argument that's already on thin ice with the trump card of "God did it". That's without even attacking the obvious flaws.

Moved to Tech and Computers and clarified the title a bit. :) Maybe add a few more details of what the problem is? Why exactly does the printscreen button not work?

Dinosaurs would be among the beasts of the fields mentioned in Genesis. For all we know, God began his shift towards preparing Earth for Man millions of years ago, clearing out predators that would present a drastic challenge for Man to survive amongst. He would have known that Man would eat the fruit, and therefore be expelled from Eden and have to face predators. Oh please.

Theres no such thing as a wormhole...is a theory. The theory is that a wormhole lys in the middle of a blackhole. Depisoting everything the blackhole sucks in some where else. Now we know theres black holes out there as we x-rayed a bank spot in the univese and saw this big thing sucking stuff in, just theres no way to tell if theres a wormhole in it. The theory seems right because if there was nothing there then the black hole would suck in everything and compact into a a little ball thats denser then anything we know of...let me put it into somthing you might under stand, if there was nothing taking away the junk the blackhole sucked up then the WHOLE earth would be compated into a little 1x1 inch square...think about that the WHOLE earth in a little 1 by 1 inch square. So there must be somthing in the middle thats linked some where else depositing it at the other end of the universe, thus support that the univere is never ending. Pfft, don't act so superior, black holes were a theory for a long time until they could be proved. Just because something is only in the theoretical stage doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I admit, wormholes sound very far fetched, but so did black holes. Also, you're black hole physics is a little off, I think. It isn't really generally accepted that there is a wormhole at the centre of every black hole, instead the solutions describe a gravitational singularity, a point of infinite density/matter/gravitational attraction etc. You said that the Earth would be compacted into a 1x1 inch square. That's incorrect, a singularity compacts infinite density into an infinitely small point. Your final point about there "having to be" somewhere for the matter to go is still very debateable. It's been hypothesised that an infinitely advanced civilisation might be able to extrapolate wormholes from the quantum foam and maintain them with "exotic material" with a negative energy density. No chance of us doing it though. Thirdly, it has been hypothesised that wormholes could

Magic squares? I fail to see how they can be so amazing or capable of generating money unless you show us some proof. Please. E=mc^2 may be simple but the rest of his equations in his field equations certainly aren't. E=mc^2 has been popularised because of it's simplicity and relation to nuclear weapons.

Ha, both are terrible examples. If they'd shown something equivalent to a STEP question I might have been impressed, or examples of the first year mathematics exams at Cambridge for physics or maths students. Examples of STEP questions, if you're curious Quantum mechanics exam in first term.

That's psychological though, not the power of prayer. Also I'd like to see your source for your critique of the dating method, even if it is non Christian.

The Ocean [Live] - Led Zeppelin

Cells are incredibly complex, but not unexplainably so.

Pfffffft am I the only one who thinks the 80 frakin' rocked?!!! :D I hear you brother! DO THE TRUFFLE SHUFFLE! Well, to be fair I wasn't even born, but I do remember that the ChuckleBrothers were about then... :P Although I actually liked them

For the record, Einstein was no maths prodigy. Yes, he was pretty good at it by most people's standards but he wasn't some absolute maths genius who could solve problems instantly. His greatest revelations came from profound physical insight, thinking about the nature of light (specifically what it would be like to ride a motorcycle next to a beam of light). He was a creative genius, not a mathmatical one. Secondly, I would be genuinely interested in seeing this mysterious "formula" and the reasoning behind it. I'm not trying to be cynical, it's a genuine curiosity. Pm it to me if you want somehow and i'll have a look over it. No, I won't "steal" it or whatever. (I fail to see how any mathematical reasoning can generate that kind of money, especially if it's already been done, as you said, but I wouldn't anyway).

They'll be getting our 80's TV shows about now, so they won't come looking for us :P Cool stuff, we won't be going anytime soon though. Mars seems hard enough at the moment and that's relatively very close.

i realize that...but to me evidence points towards a God, and things in the Bible just shout out to me (if you'd like i guess i'll go over those things) Darwin once said "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find no such case." and just look at the cell: http://youtube.com/watch?v=jjexZ88wIno If you're referring to irreducible complexity, there is still no proven example of that.

I'm doing my GCSE's and the odd extra AS level, so all I have to do is imagine getting that brown envelope in august with my results and opening it, because that's what i've got and that's it. I can change that now though, I haven't sat those exams yet, so I can still determine what's on that piece of paper. That's my motivation.