More Liberal lies about the carbon taxes...

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, herbie said:

 

 

Opinions from the clinically insane.

Well - that certainly was a compelling and well thought out response. Everyone involved will now take the next 18 hours to re evaluate their lives. Thank you for your guidance.

[TreeBeard]

17 hours ago, blackbird said:

The climate has always changed.  Nobody denies that.

How do you know that’s not a lie by Satan?  Couldn’t climate science be the same devilish lie like evolution is?

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

How do you know that’s not a lie by Satan?  Couldn’t climate science be the same devilish lie like evolution is?

That's an easy one.  Climate change is easily proven and an established fact by the scientific method.  Climate records through history show its a fact.  

Evolution has never been proven and is only a theory, which has been rejected by many.  There are no transitional fossils for one thing.  So how could anyone believe man evolved from the sludge in a pond?  No evidence at all.  see creation.com

Just like Romanism has been easily proven by the Bible to be false.  There was was no priesthood, no Popes, and no Masses in the New Testament.  They were invented later by men seeking power over the people.  There is only one mediator between God and men, Christ Jesus.  "1 Timothy 2:5-7 King James Version 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. 

[CdnFox]

20 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Evolution has never been proven and is only a theory

hypothesis.  If it's just a reasonable assumption or 'best guess' explanation that hasn't been proven or isn't accepted as a mostly factual thing then it's a hypothesis. Theories are a little more concrete than that. The 'Theory' of evolution has indeed been scientifically proven but only within a species.  We can prove deer evolve into other deer creatures. We can't prove that a deer might evolve into a cat. We don't have any way of simulating enough generations of that yet to find out.

So the THEORY of evolution is real and it is HYPOTHESIZED that it's responsible for the creating of new species.

And thus - to say that there's NO evidence is, of course, poppycock of the highest order. There is in fact proof that evolution is a thing, and a reasonable amount of evidence that it could very well account for the creation of new species.

Meanwhile there really is NO evidence of god, and yet you believe in that. So - i think you need to work on being a little more consistent in either your logic or your hypocrisy.

[TreeBeard]

33 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Climate change is easily proven and an established fact by the scientific method.  Climate records through history show it’s a fact. 

That’s what’s the scientists are telling you….

So you believe the same climate scientists when they say that climate changes, but you don’t believe them when these same scientists say climate change is being caused by humans.  

But why couldn’t these scientists be spreading Satan’s lies just like the evolutionists?   

 

Edited April 4, 2023 by TreeBeard

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

So the THEORY of evolution is real and it is HYPOTHESIZED that it's responsible for the creating of new species.

Actually there are thousands of articles, videos, books written by scholars, and peoples with degrees that refute the theory of evolution.

There are lots of scientific articles refuting evolution.

"

The scientific case against evolution

How do evolutionists construct their scientific case for evolution? How can the creationist respond in scientific terms? Greg D. from New Zealand writes:

My oldest son is a Christian currently being persuaded by evolutionary science. He has challenged me to supply him names of peer reviewed geneticists who conclude that DNA is an information rich code (or language) that points to an intelligent source.

I would desperately appreciate any information you are able to supply on this topic.

CMI-New Zealand’s Shaun Doyle responds:

We can certainly offer some names: John Sanford, Maciej Giertych, CMI’s Robert Carter, James S. Allan, Matti Leisola, and Georgia Purdom are several PhD geneticists who have published in secular peer-reviewed journals and think DNA is a code that is best explained by a designer. In fact, they are all biblical creationists. I would recommend to you Dr Sanford’s book Genetic Entropy, and our book Evolution’s Achilles’ Heels, which may be of particular benefit to your son. Another book that may be beneficial to him, which is freely available online, but is not on our website, is Biological Information: New Perspectives.1 We certainly wouldn’t endorse all the perspectives offered in this book, but it provides some good information on population genetics and biological information that your son may find useful.

Evolutionists have an automatic ‘fall back’ position if their current ideas on mechanisms for evolution don’t work; the patterns of similarity that (supposedly) demonstrate common ancestry.

But this debate isn’t really about names; it’s about arguments. More specifically, it’s about the fact that mainstream science operates with a methodology that only accepts attempts to describe the origin of anything biological in terms of natural causes (physics and chemistry). For more information, please see Historical science and miracles. This is why he will not find articles in the secular biological literature arguing openly for a divine designer (see Creationism, Science and Peer Review for more information). If he doesn’t understand the different assumptions at play in this debate, and how they can constrain the interpretations of the evidence an investigator is willing to entertain, then he will fall quite easily for fallacious evolutionary arguments, such as equivocation. Why? Because of how they tend to construct their case.'

This is only a small beginning of the article.  If you want to read the whole article go to;

The scientific case against evolution (creation.com)

 

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

That’s what’s the scientists are telling you….

So you believe the same climate scientists when they say that climate changes, but you don’t believe them when these same scientists say climate change is being caused by humans.  

But why couldn’t these scientists be spreading Satan’s lies just like the evolutionists?   

 

Scientific "facts" have to be proven by the scientific method, which involves experiment and observation.  This has not been done in the case of man-made climate change.  Because of the nature of the earth it is not something one can replicate.  Climate is determined by a number of different factors.  This cannot be simulated.  So the claim is simply speculation.

[Nefarious Banana]

8 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Actually there are thousands of articles, videos, books written by scholars, and peoples with degrees that refute the theory of evolution.

There are lots of scientific articles refuting evolution.

"

The scientific case against evolution

How do evolutionists construct their scientific case for evolution? How can the creationist respond in scientific terms? 

 

Multiple translations, interpretations, revisions, deviations, deletions, etc., etc.  . . . . who's to say the Bible is the 'be-all, end-all, of any of the many worldwide religions?

[CdnFox]

21 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Actually there are thousands of articles, videos, books written by scholars, and peoples with degrees that refute the theory of evolution.

No there aren't.  And they'd be pretty stupid if there were. Evolution exists period. That has been proven.

Of course - you believe in a storybook and imaginary friends so i guess it's not hard to understand you'd fall for nonsense and fake books.

And what  you posted shows you didn't undrestand what you were told in the slightest.  It's disappointing to see people that uneducated in this day and age. Still - i guess people make a hell of a lot of money off of religion so they're going to print crap like that knowing a percent of people aren't smart enough to realize the issues with it.

Evolution is a proven and repeatable thing. We can see it in nature, we can reproduce it in the lab. it's real.

Cross species evolution is more hypothetical.  There is much evidence for it but not enough to be definitive or certain enough to say 'that's it for sure'. It probably is but there's room for doubt.

There is ZERO evidence that god did anything at all. That is the LEAST evidence based conclusion.

 

[Perspektiv]

On 4/2/2023 at 3:39 PM, herbie said:

If you've noticed your paying more with carbon taxes, you're 'getting the picture'.

Tell that to your delivery driver, when you order via Uber eats. 

Some people literally cannot afford not to drive, but have zero alternatives.

With your logic, costing them double in fuel helps. Reality, is they must pass on the costs to your grocery store. So that "fuel", becomes a 7$ dozen of eggs, when it used to be 3,99$. It means a family on the brink, is pushed over it. Homelessness is skyrocketing. Gaps between the rich and poor are widening. All you can think of is fuel.

I can bike to work, but if your city is Vancouver, and you live in a rural area outside of it, its not an option. 

"Just move" if thats your logic, the reason you would move outside the city is because you can't afford it.

You're displaying why policies based on emotions vs research and logic don't work.

 

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Evolution is a proven and repeatable thing.

No, it's not.   

Have you heard of the Piltdown man?   A lot of people believed in evolution because of the Piltdown man which later turned out to be a fraud.

"

On the contrary, Piltdown man was extremely influential in shaping evolutionary thinking and early research on human evolutionary theory. For the four decades before it was exposed, Piltdown man was considered the ‘missing link’. It was used as one of the key evidences against creation in the Scopes trial. It altered the education in the United States for a whole generation and found its way into major science textbooks and encyclopedias—and it was a hoax. There were over 250 publications on Piltdown man alone!1 The implications for evolutionary theory were tremendous. Entire evolutionary-developmental theories about hominid evolution were based on Piltdown and many of those were demolished when the fraud was exposed. 250 publications! It would be nothing short of historical revisionism to downplay its significance.

As for evolutionists exposing fraud, that is precisely the point! The best evidence that can be presented in a court of law is an admission against interest. It is one thing for an opponent to claim fraud exists. It happens all the time! And we have often pointed out the numerous mistakes evolutionists make in many of our articles. But when someone from the evolutionary camp comes along and testifies against a key aspect of evolution, that testimony carries a lot more weight. In any case, CMI has often encouraged readers to take a wait-and-see approach when it comes to dubious claims made by the media concerning the latest evidence for evolution. In most cases, the science corrects itself after a few months; and the corrections have often served to embarrass the evolutionary case. For example, in the Archaeoraptor case, CMI cast doubt about the fossil before it was even confirmed by National Geographic to have been a fraud a month later."

Evolution fraud (creation.com)

[blackbird]

4 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Multiple translations, interpretations, revisions, deviations, deletions, etc., etc.  . . . . who's to say the Bible is the 'be-all, end-all, of any of the many worldwide religions?

The King James Version (1611) was the main English translation for hundreds of years.  It the past 100 years there have been many modern translations produced which have a lot of mistakes in them.  The King James Version is the only version that is based on the Received Text, which is the Greek New Testament made of the earliest available Greek manuscripts that existed in the 1500s.  There is no question about the accuracy of the King James Version,  It is 100% accurate.  There are over 5,000 manuscripts and parts of manuscripts backing it (New Testament).  The Old Testament is based on the Hebrew Bible.

Even though there are hundreds of other modern translations which are based on corrupt manuscripts, the general accounts they give are in agreement.  Most churches agree in many basic doctrines as well, with the exception of Romanism which is an unbiblical religion all it's own.

As for all the other world religions, a study of the Bible will show why Biblical Christianity is credible and the other religions are false.  But that requires study.  One can't expect to know that kind of thing without some study.  Without the Bible's information, of course it would be impossible to know which religion is correct and which ones are false.  The existence of false religions goes back thousands of years.

Edited April 4, 2023 by blackbird

[CdnFox]

12 minutes ago, blackbird said:

No, it's not.   

 

Of course it is. Proven in the field, replicated in the lab. Absolutely cast iron real.

It boggles my mind you can pretend something that is proven using the scientific method is NOT true and yet believe something with ZERO evidence like your imaginary friend or the roman equivalent of 'harry potter' is absolutely guaranteed 100 percent real.  Oh well.

 

[blackbird]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Of course it is. Proven in the field, replicated in the lab. Absolutely cast iron real.

It boggles my mind you can pretend something that is proven using the scientific method is NOT true and yet believe something with ZERO evidence like your imaginary friend or the roman equivalent of 'harry potter' is absolutely guaranteed 100 percent real.  Oh well.

 

You realize of course you are replying with an automatic dismissal without ever reading any of the countless articles refuting evolution.  You obviously just stick to your same several sentences, which is like a mantra to your false god of Darwinism or evolution.  It just proves your mind is closed.  Repeating the same mantra over and over proves nothing for your claim.

You said nothing about the Piltdown man that had a huge effect on society and the educational systems.  It was supposed to prove evolution of man, but it turned out to be a fraud.

Edited April 4, 2023 by blackbird

[CdnFox]

Just now, blackbird said:

You realize of course you are replying with an automatic dismissal without ever reading any of the countless articles refuting evolution.

Nope, but i can see why you'd believe that. After all, apparently you believe anything that sounds good to you.

[blackbird]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

Nope, but i can see why you'd believe that. After all, apparently you believe anything that sounds good to you.

You said nothing about the Piltdown man that had a huge effect on society and the educational systems.  It was supposed to prove evolution of man, but it turned out to be a fraud.

[blackbird]

Evolution fraud (creation.com)

Why is evolutionary theory so full of frauds?

That is the question everyone should be asking.

Edited April 4, 2023 by blackbird

[Nefarious Banana]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

Evolution fraud (creation.com)

Why is evolutionary theory so full of frauds?

That is the question everyone should be asking.

Why is your religion so full of frauds?

That is the question I'm asking you.

[blackbird]

12 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Why is your religion so full of frauds?

That is the question I'm asking you.

My religion is not full of frauds.  There are some scammers in the world that have used religion to scam people, but I have not personally seen any of that in the churches I attended in the past 40 years.  

Why are there scammers in any industry?  We hear about scammers in real estate.  I get a scam phone call almost every day?  Why is that?  It is because the world is a corrupt, fallen place.  Mankind is a fallen sinner.  

My religion is not "full of frauds".  There are millions of Christians in the world and the number of scammers would be very small.  Why have there been sexual abusers in Romanism, professional hockey, boy scouts, and countless other organizations and fields?  It's a crooked world.  Why are there wars?  Why are there lies in politics?  Probably the biggest scam in history is the climate change scam.  Carbon tax is a fraud.  That's just the way the world is.  We have to live with it and avoid scammers whenever possible.

There are cults around too.  We can avoid them by knowing what the truth is in the Bible.  People are sucked in by false teaching and scams all the time.  Old people conned by scammers on the phone lose millions of dollars every year.

Edited April 4, 2023 by blackbird

[Army Guy]

3 minutes ago, blackbird said:

My religion is not full of frauds.  There are some scammers in the world that have used religion to scam people, but I have not personally seen any of that in the churches I attended in the past 40 years.  

Why are there scammers in the any industry?  We hear about scammers in real estate.  I get a scam phone call almost every day?  Why is that.  It is because the world is a corrupt, fallen place.  Mankind is a fallen sinner.  

My religion is not "full of frauds".  There are millions of Christians in the world and the number of scammers would be very small.  Why have there been sexual abusers in Romanism, professional hockey, boy scouts, and countless other organizations and fields?  It's a crooked world.  Why are there wars?

Religion is involved in more wars than any other cause, have killed more people than any other cause or sickness, religion has been involved or is reasonable for most dark periods in human history, it was religion that had a major hand in how this nation treated our indigenous population during their supposedly reeducation programs, abused children etc etc etc.....It was Rome that had assisted in escaping Nazis after WWII, the list is full of examples of religion, not serving god, but instead of individuals religious workers, such as the pope, etc...So ya there are frauds... and a lot of them...

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

Religion is involved in more wars than any other cause, have killed more people than any other cause or sickness, religion has been involved or is reasonable for most dark periods in human history, it was religion that had a major hand in how this nation treated our indigenous population during their supposedly reeducation programs, abused children etc etc etc.....It was Rome that had assisted in escaping Nazis after WWII, the list is full of examples of religion, not serving god, but instead of individuals religious workers, such as the pope, etc...So ya there are frauds... and a lot of them...

You might be surprised to learn I agree with you.  I have read a fair amount about the history of Romanism and know it is not Biblical Christianity.  It is a false religion, yet that is a major religion in Canada and many countries in the world.  I was RC until I was about 35 and heard the gospel over the radio one evening.  Home Page | Let the Bible Speak (ltbs.tv)

I would ask why did the Vatican sign concordats with the Nazis, Franco in Spain, and Mussolini in Italy?  You are correct, they were not serving God.

Rome persecuted any Bible-believers they could find down through the ages.  They ran the Holy Roman Inquistion for 400 years during which they hunted down any heretics, and punished them with various methods, imprisoned them, or burned them at the stake.  Rome controlled Kings and ruled the western world for around 1,000 years or more.  I was reading the History of the Inquisition.  Rome controlled local rulers and the local authorities were forced to comply with punishing heretics.  Any heretic who did not recant was often executed.  Most of what went on in the name of religion or god was not Biblical and not serving god as you said.

Edited April 4, 2023 by blackbird

[Nefarious Banana]

blackbird . . . why/how did you become a zealot?  Were you abused, or an alcohol/drug abuser, abandoned as a child?  How did you become the person you are?

[TreeBeard]

4 hours ago, blackbird said:

Scientific "facts" have to be proven by the scientific method, which involves experiment and observation.  This has not been done in the case of man-made climate change.

So how was it done for natural climate change?   What’s the difference between how the two were derived?

 

4 hours ago, blackbird said:

Because of the nature of the earth it is not something one can replicate.  Climate is determined by a number of different factors.  This cannot be simulated.  So the claim is simply speculation.

So, if it can’t be simulated, how do we know that the climate changes naturally and it’s not just weather?   Maybe the climate never changes, and it is Satan up to no good through science again. 
 

Why is Satan lying through the same scientists about human changed climate, but then these SAME SCIENTISTS are telling us the truth about natural climate change?    That doesn’t make much sense.  

[blackbird]

36 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

blackbird . . . why/how did you become a zealot?  Were you abused, or an alcohol/drug abuser, abandoned as a child?  How did you become the person you are?

 No I wasn't abused and wasn't an alcohol or drug addict.   I did have some stresses in my life.   I grew up as an RC and heard the gospel over the radio one night when I was 35.  I felt convicted and called upon Jesus to be my Lord and Savior.  I believe He saved me.  The Bible says "13  For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."  Romans 10:13 KJV

We never know the day or the hour of our death.  It's better to be ready to meet our Creator.  Are you ready?

Home Page | Let the Bible Speak (ltbs.tv)

 

 

 

Edited April 4, 2023 by blackbird

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, blackbird said:

You said nothing about the Piltdown man that had a huge effect on society and the educational systems.  It was supposed to prove evolution of man, but it turned out to be a fraud.

Utterly irrelevant.  As you'd know if you had half a brain. And i'd obviously have better luck teaching a labradoodle calculus than explaining why that's true to you.