Really? Static noises coming into large audio antennae? And what “evidence” that it’s expanding? Redshift? Did you know that if we can detect “redshift” at all, there are at least FOUR different reasons for it… and only ONE of those reasons is that the object is moving AWAY from us. So the entire “expanding universe” idea is based on accepting on…

[Read more]

Proclaimer:  So let’s look at the Big Bang. It is true that we cannot view the Big Bang directly or indirectly…
Then it’s not a part of science – plain and simple.

Incorrect. You are talking here about the scientific method developed by Newton. Science existed before Newton. Further, you cannot test God, but you can see him indirectly too, thro…[Read more]

Cont.

Hi Mike,

Carmel: 2Peter3:5  For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God

the heavens were of OLD, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 

What the above scripture tells you clearly, regarding THE HEAVEN/S and THE EARTH

You: That heaven and earth were created a long time ago, and the earth as we n…[Read more]

Hi Mike.

Since you have created a new topic of debate to replace this one, should I merge this into the Conspiracy Theory topic. What do you think?

You pay attention.  The question was if there was any reason to suspect that the days were LONGER THAN 24 hours during the creation period.  And no scientist says that days have ever been LONGER THAN 24 hours on earth.

Okay, so you cannot extrapolate a conclusion from what was said. I will spell it out. If the hours of a day have changed in the…[Read more]

LU: So what will it be, mutual respect and giving the other the benefit of the doubt or you continuing to make negative declarations of my intentions that are far from accurate and that you have no way of knowing. 

Kathi, if you are telling me now that when I asked for other examples where we have to decide who is speaking like we have to always…[Read more]

Proclaimer:  Pay attention Mike. It has already been answered. I won;t repeat myself, but hopefully this jolts your memory. Scientists believe that days were not always 24 hours in the history of our planet.

You pay attention.  The question was if there was any reason to suspect that the days were LONGER THAN 24 hours during the creation p…[Read more]

Close. Here’s a diagram…

Lol. It is the same. Just different wording.

Well let’s see… I asked if there was any reason for you to suspect that the daily earth-sun cycles were longer than 24 hours during the creation period. You refused to answer that ONE question, and so I answered it for you.

Pay attention Mike. It has already been answere…[Read more]

Proclaimer:  You believe that the earth is flat, so please explain how this volcano that sits on land looks like it is in the middle of the ocean when viewing it from a distance that is beyond the horizon.

It’s a combination of visual acuity, air conditions, and perspective.  For example, looking down straight railroad tracks, the two different r…[Read more]

Proclaimer:  Anyway, it looks like my turn to ask a question. I answered three of your questions. But I will be gracious and ask one so this topic starts with your desired format.

Actually, you STILL haven’t answered either of the first two questions I asked in the other thread.  And the “three” that you FINALLY answered just yesterday were all o…[Read more]

Proclaimer:  If you are saying that the sun was created on the fourth day, then I contest that.

Then you are contesting, not me, but the Bible itself.

Proclaimer:  What happened on the 4th day is that the sun was placed in the vault. So looking up from the earth’s surface, you can see the sun in the sky.

Yes, the sun was placed in the domed, vau…[Read more]

In my opinion, Proclaimer has dishonored the spirit and intent of the first Bible vs Scientism Hot Seat thread by allowing other posters, inserting off-topic issues, and turning it into a regular thread like the one we were already on when he refused to directly answer my questions in the first place – the very reason I started the Hot Seat t…

[Read more]

Mike:  PROCLAIMER, IS THERE ANY SCRIPTURAL REASON FOR YOU TO SUSPECT THAT THE DAILY SUN-EARTH CYCLES – OR THE LIGHT-DARK CYCLES THAT PRECEDED THE APPEARANCE OF THE SUN – WERE ANYTHING OTHER THAN 24-HOUR CYCLES DURING THE CREATION PERIOD? IF SO, PLEASE PRESENT THAT SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE.

 
PROCLAIMER:  WHAT? LOL. DAY AND NIGHT CYCLES BEFORE THE SUN…[Read more]

Mike:  PROCLAIMER, IS THERE ANY SCRIPTURAL REASON FOR YOU TO SUSPECT THAT THE DAILY SUN-EARTH CYCLES – OR THE LIGHT-DARK CYCLES THAT PRECEDED THE APPEARANCE OF THE SUN – WERE ANYTHING OTHER THAN 24-HOUR CYCLES DURING THE CREATION PERIOD? IF SO, PLEASE PRESENT THAT SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE.

 
PROCLAIMER:  WHAT? LOL. DAY AND NIGHT CYCLES BEFORE THE SUN…[Read more]

Proclaimer:  Hi Mike. It is better to have one outstanding question. That way it is easier to keep track and you don;t have to moan about me not answering your questions because I have missed them.

Well let’s see… I asked if there was any reason for you to suspect that the daily earth-sun cycles were longer than 24 hours during the creation…[Read more]

Proclaimer:  The thing is, if you test something multiple ways and it always comes out as true, then that goes a long way to prove a truth about the physical universe.

Let me give you another couple of lessons…

1. Science is NEVER “settled”.  Even the most accepted conclusions in history are often later proven wrong.  Science is an ONGOING pr…

[Read more]

Proclaimer:  You most certainly deny science. Even the most predictable and repeatable of observations are denied by you.

😅😂🤣  After all that kicking and screaming and finally reluctantly agreeing with what I’ve been saying about science all along, you STILL erroneously think that someone can “deny” what you yourself called the “pursuit of k…[Read more]

Proclaimer: Then God is unscientific.

Correct.  The existence of God is not a part of science.

Proclaimer:  But he is observable through the things he has made. So I cannot see him, but I know he is there.

Correction:  You can observe things that clearly indicate an intelligent designer (like your circle of apples coupled with footprints), but you…[Read more]

Proclaimer:  So let’s look at the Big Bang. It is true that we cannot view the Big Bang directly or indirectly…

Then it’s not a part of science – plain and simple.

Proclaimer:  However, with the map of the background radiation coupled with the evidence for an expanding universe, you only need to play the movie backwards to see that eve…

[Read more]