Yakuda Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 2 minutes ago, eyeball said: 🙄 Climate change is the best example. Any evidence offered to the contrary is disregarded as wrong or as denial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 7 minutes ago, Yakuda said: Any evidence offered to the contrary is disregarded as wrong or as denial. Try try again. That's the magic of science. When you get it right it just is what it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 38 minutes ago, eyeball said: Try try again. That's the magic of science. When you get it right it just is what it is. So we agree "holding up to closer scrutiny" is just a pile of horse sh*t. I love agreement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 15 minutes ago, Yakuda said: So we agree "holding up to closer scrutiny" is just a pile of horse sh*t. I love agreement We can't agree when the meanings of the words we're using can mean whatever we want them to mean. As I said, at least the people of Babel tried. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 7 minutes ago, eyeball said: We can't agree when the meanings of the words we're using can mean whatever we want them to mean. As I said, at least the people of Babel tried. As I said it's a crock of bull sh*t. So you want to say science holds up to closer scrutiny you don't want it to actually hold up to closer scrutiny. But I'll tell you what here is my favorite proofs of the dangers in climate change https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-2020-trnd/index.html How could anyone possibly question anything science says. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 (edited) On 2/20/2024 at 1:18 PM, impartialobserver said: I can say with certainty that neither of us can prove definitively our stance. We can opine, talk, hypothesize but neither of us has absolute reproducible proof. In the case of creation versus evolution, proof is a subjective term. Evidence is on the side of creation. The evidence is in the creation itself. It's extreme complexity points to the need for an intelligent designer-Creator. Science has barely scratched the surface of the complexity of life. The very fact of the complexity of the universe and of even the simple cell tells us that it required an extremely intelligent, designer - creator. Darwinists start from the premise that only a theory called evolution can explain the existence of the universe and life. That is an extremely biased starting point because they do not have the proof. It is a religion to them. Setting a premise like that is like putting a wall up and saying you cannot cross. The fact is the existence of the complex universe points to the need for a designer. The idea that it happened by accident has been rejected by many highly educated people. Edited February 22 by blackbird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 From your article... But the glacier warning isn’t being removed entirely, she told CNN. Instead, the new signs will say: “When they will completely disappear depends on how and when we act. One thing is consistent: the glaciers in the park are shrinking One of the self correcting features of science is to fine tune your predictions and hopefully learn from the mistakes you make. As the article continues to underscore however the glaciers are still shrinking there and elsewhere around the planet. 28 minutes ago, Yakuda said: How could anyone possibly question anything science says. That the entire point of it. You will however better results questioning it with science instead of a CNN article from their Travel section. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 13 minutes ago, eyeball said: From your article... But the glacier warning isn’t being removed entirely, she told CNN. Instead, the new signs will say: “When they will completely disappear depends on how and when we act. One thing is consistent: the glaciers in the park are shrinking One of the self correcting features of science is to fine tune your predictions and hopefully learn from the mistakes you make. As the article continues to underscore however the glaciers are still shrinking there and elsewhere around the planet. That the entire point of it. You will however better results questioning it with science instead of a CNN article from their Travel section. We should never question science should we? Do you know who Peter Boghossisn is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 22 minutes ago, Yakuda said: We should never question science should we? Is that really what I said? Go read it again. Do I have any idea why I keep pointing out the fact that the people of Babel tried to cooperate with one another? 23 minutes ago, Yakuda said: Do you know who Peter Boghossisn is? Never heard of him. Do you know who CdnFox is and why you're channeling him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 1 minute ago, eyeball said: Is that really what I said? Go read it again. Do I have any idea why I keep pointing out the fact that the people of Babel tried to cooperate with one another? Never heard of him. Do you know who CdnFox is and why you're channeling him? Yes it is what you said. It would help if you could keep up. Science is now a religion. Oppose the dogma, face the inquisition. I didn't think you would but you should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 31 minutes ago, Yakuda said: Do you know who Peter Boghossisn is? Cool story. Did you know economics is merely a social science too? 1 minute ago, Yakuda said: Yes it is what you said. You're full of shit. Why, what possible point does it serve? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 3 minutes ago, eyeball said: Cool story. Did you know economics is merely a social science too? You're full of shit. Why, what possible point does it serve? See what I mean any questioning of science dogma brings out the inquisitor in your type. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 22 Report Share Posted February 22 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Yakuda said: See what I mean any questioning of science dogma brings out the inquisitor in your type. You didn't question me you asserted I said we shouldn't question science when I clearly said the very exact opposite of that. Again I inquire, what possible point does your being full of shit serve? Edited February 22 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator Posted February 23 Report Share Posted February 23 Maybe not the "biggest" lie but... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herbie Posted February 23 Report Share Posted February 23 science dogma Another way to instantly recognize someone as a total uneducated m0ron.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 On 2/22/2024 at 2:51 PM, Yakuda said: If only that were true. It may have been at one time but science is a religion now. How does science come in to play with an infinite amount of genders, or did we skip science on that one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 On 2/23/2024 at 9:49 PM, Army Guy said: How does science come in to play with an infinite amount of genders, or did we skip science on that one... Yeah they have the stones to call other science "deniers" but if "infinite amount of genders" isn't science denial nothing is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 The two biggest lies ever told are: 1. The theory of evolution (or Darwinism). It is unproven. 2. There are more than two genders and one can change his/her gender. This also is obviously false. The biology of humans proves it is false. That fact that many people believe both of these lies just proves that humans are easily deceived and will fall for almost anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 1 minute ago, blackbird said: The two biggest lies ever told are: 1. The theory of evolution (or Darwinism). It is unproven. 2. There are more than two genders and one can change his/her gender. This also is obviously false. The biology of humans proves it is false. That fact that many people believe both of these lies just proves that humans are easily deceived and will fall for almost anything. #3 Jesus tortures people FOREVER in Hell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 5 minutes ago, Gator said: #3 Jesus tortures people FOREVER in Hell. I suspect you do not bother reading replies so I won't hold my breath. But here it is for anyone else who might be interested. quote First, the Bible declares that all sin is ultimately against God (Psalm 51:4). The extent of the punishment depends, in part, on the target of the crime. In a human court of law, a physical assault against an individual will usually result in a fine and possibly some time in jail. In contrast, a physical assault against the president or prime minister of a country will likely result in a lifetime in prison. And this is the case despite the fact that the crime was a one-time offense, not a continual, ongoing action. God is infinitely higher and greater than any human being. How much more are our crimes worthy of a great punishment in light of the fact that our sins are against God (Romans 6:23)? Second, the idea that we cease sinning after death is not taught in the Bible. Are those who go to hell suddenly sinless and perfect? No. Those who go into eternity without Christ will be confirmed in their wickedness. The hard-hearted will be eternally hard-hearted. There will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” in hell (Matthew 25:30), but no repentance. Sinners in hell will be given over to their own nature; they will be sin-infected, evil, immoral, and depraved beings for all of eternity, forever unredeemed and unregenerate. The lake of fire will be a place of eternal rebellion against God—even as that rebellion is judged (Revelation 20:14–15; cf. Revelation 16:9, 11). Unsaved people do not only sin for 70, 80, 90, or 100 years. They sin for eternity. What it comes down to is this—if a person wants to be separated from God for eternity, God will grant that desire. Believers are those who say to God, “Your will be done.” Unbelievers are those to whom God says, “Your will be done.” The will of the unsaved is to reject salvation through Jesus Christ and remain in sin; God will honor that decision, and its consequences, for eternity. unquote How is an eternity in hell a just punishment for only a human lifetime of sin? | GotQuestions.org Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 (edited) I think hell will probably be a place where unsaved sinners will meet up with the worst unrepentant criminals that lived. They will be in the company of these people, people like Hitler, Stalin, Chairman Mao, and others like violent criminals, liars, thieves, serial killers, mass murderers, rapists, etc. who have never repented and been born again. " 43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: 48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." Mark 9:43-48 KJV Edited February 26 by blackbird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 15 minutes ago, blackbird said: I suspect you do not bother reading replies so I won't hold my breath. But here it is for anyone else who might be interested. quote First, the Bible declares that all sin is ultimately against God (Psalm 51:4). The extent of the punishment depends, in part, on the target of the crime. In a human court of law, a physical assault against an individual will usually result in a fine and possibly some time in jail. In contrast, a physical assault against the president or prime minister of a country will likely result in a lifetime in prison. And this is the case despite the fact that the crime was a one-time offense, not a continual, ongoing action. God is infinitely higher and greater than any human being. How much more are our crimes worthy of a great punishment in light of the fact that our sins are against God (Romans 6:23)? Second, the idea that we cease sinning after death is not taught in the Bible. Are those who go to hell suddenly sinless and perfect? No. Those who go into eternity without Christ will be confirmed in their wickedness. The hard-hearted will be eternally hard-hearted. There will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” in hell (Matthew 25:30), but no repentance. Sinners in hell will be given over to their own nature; they will be sin-infected, evil, immoral, and depraved beings for all of eternity, forever unredeemed and unregenerate. The lake of fire will be a place of eternal rebellion against God—even as that rebellion is judged (Revelation 20:14–15; cf. Revelation 16:9, 11). Unsaved people do not only sin for 70, 80, 90, or 100 years. They sin for eternity. What it comes down to is this—if a person wants to be separated from God for eternity, God will grant that desire. Believers are those who say to God, “Your will be done.” Unbelievers are those to whom God says, “Your will be done.” The will of the unsaved is to reject salvation through Jesus Christ and remain in sin; God will honor that decision, and its consequences, for eternity. unquote How is an eternity in hell a just punishment for only a human lifetime of sin? | GotQuestions.org So your theology is that Jesus created billions (or more) people knowing that he would torture them forever. Do you think Jesus will let you go into Hell with him to torture the bad people? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 2 minutes ago, Gator said: So your theology is that Jesus created billions (or more) people knowing that he would torture them forever. Do you think Jesus will let you go into Hell with him to torture the bad people? That is blasphemy. Do you believe in Jesus Christ of the Bible? 4 minutes ago, Gator said: So your theology is that Jesus created billions (or more) people knowing that he would torture them forever. Why are you worried about what hell will be like or how long it lasts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 4 minutes ago, blackbird said: That is blasphemy. Do you believe in Jesus Christ of the Bible? Why are you worried about what hell will be like or how long it lasts? Of course I believe in Jesus. Would you say that what Jesus does to the bad people makes Heinrich Himmler look like an amateur? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 2 minutes ago, Gator said: Of course I believe in Jesus. Would you say that what Jesus does to the bad people makes Heinrich Himmler look like an amateur? You claim to believe in Jesus, yet you have no idea what you are talking about and make repeated false claims. As I said, you need to seek a good Bible counsellor or believer to meet regularly, maybe in a church. 1 minute ago, blackbird said: Of course I believe in Jesus. If that is true, you better stop posting nonsense on the forum and go find a knowledgeable believer to study the Bible with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.