- This topic has 6,414 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 2 months, 1 week ago by
.
- Posts
I don’t know why this response didn’t post yesterday. I posted it before the other two…
T8: Great video Mike. Well done.
It doesn’t prove a flat earth and doesn’t debunk a globe earth, but is seriously challenges Nat Geo and IIG’s proofs and observation.
Thanks. The video not only exposes the kind of tripe that constitutes ball earth “proof”, but also shows very clearly that Salton Sea is flat and level. I can’t stop you from believing that the white hot center of the laser (not just light rays from it) can refract up and around 157 feet of curve. I can only present our actual observational evidence so that sensible people will understand how ludicrous that belief is. And that is definitely working, because the flat earth community keeps growing and growing, and even gaining more PhD scientists all the time. Why do you think YouTube has admitted to “shadow banning” flat earth videos while promoting the “flat earth debunked” vids that you watch to the top of the suggested videos page? The same happens with evolution. The actual evidence destroys that comically flawed idea, and since the powers that be can’t scientifically defend their fantasy against the actual evidence, they suppress it. And hundreds of scientists who jumped from evolution to young earth creation based on the evidence they discovered in their own research have been fired from their jobs for talking about it. It’s the same with flat earth. So right now you have to ask yourself… WHY are they going out of their way to suppress this information? They don’t ban videos about fairies, bigfoot or alien abductions, right? Heck, they promote the crap out of videos that celebrate a little boy who has decided he’s a girl instead, right? They applaud the idea of grown men who identify as a woman sharing a bathroom with little girls, right? Yet if you say the earth flat and stationary – like taught in the Bible – you are all of a sudden promoting “hate speech”, and your channel gets demonetized, or banned altogether. If you can’t read the writing on the wall, then no amount of talking by me is going to change that. I’ve got this video queued for you, and you only need to watch 25 seconds of it to see what’s going on. This is the US government asking a high ranking YouTube exec what they’re doing to suppress flat earth. It took me a minute to find a clip of this, because when I searched “YouTube banning flat earth”, the page came up with a bunch of “flat earth debunked” videos. And that’s how it is now. I can even search the EXACT title and maker of a certain flat earth video, and there will be pages of “flat earth debunked” videos before I finally get to the one I’ve entered word for word… IF I ever do find that one. If you don’t recognize this as a deceptive form of propaganda, then what can I really do about it?
T8: However, last time I trusted you to present an accurate picture, you were wrong. Remember your Ruapehu math.
And this is why I stopped commenting here. I asked you to explain how my math was wrong. You haven’t. I asked you to explain what those closer bluffs were in the foreground of your Ruapehu photo. You haven’t. The answers to these two queries would expose the error of your Ruapehu thinking, but you refuse to address them. And I simply have no time to waste on an indoctrinated person who simply refuses to see what is right in front of his eyes. As James Underdown said in my Salton Sea vid, people will always find just enough wiggle room to arrive at their original belief – no matter how damning the evidence is against that belief.
Mike, I honestly don’t have the time to delve into this subject as much as you do. I have way bigger responsibilities and priorities.
If I say your math was incorrect based on someone else exposing it, then so be it. This is not actually about winning a debate, rather letting the truth win. Simple as that and nothing wrong with that. People who get upset about the truth winning are people who care little about the truth.
This doesn’t fit the Flat Earth narrative does it?
The Religious Moment On The Moon NASA Never Wanted You To See
Fifty years ago this Saturday, after Apollo 11’s Eagle lunar module had landed in the Sea of Tranquility, Buzz Aldrin took to the communication system and sent a message back to the ground crew on earth. “I would like to request a few moments of silence,” he asked. “I would like to invite each person listening in, wherever and whomever he may be, to contemplate for a moment the events of the past few hours and to give thanks in his own individual way.”
Then, NASA censored the most significant spiritual event in the history of space exploration.
After Aldrin ended the communication, he read a verse from the Gospel of John: “I am the vine, you are the branches. Whosoever abides in me will bring forth much fruit. Apart from me you can do nothing.” He then opened two small packages containing consecrated bread and wine from his church in Texas. Aldrin poured the wine into a chalice. “In the one-sixth gravity of the moon, the wine curled slowly and gracefully up the side of the cup,” he later recalled. As Neil Armstrong looked on in silence, Aldrin took communion. The first foods ever prepared or consumed on the moon were the Body and Blood of Christ.
Aldrin had intended to broadcast the communion passage to Earth, but at the last moment NASA silenced him to avoid exacerbating an ongoing legal battle with Madalyn Murray O’Hair, a miserable, militant atheist widely considered “the most hated woman in America.” Seven months earlier, Murray had sued NASA for permitting the Apollo 8 astronauts to read from the Book of Genesis during a Christmas Eve broadcast from lunar orbit. By the time Apollo 11 landed on the moon, the skittish space agency kowtowed to the atheist activist and censored the lunar communion.
From the beginning, religious faith animated the American quest to explore the heavens. In 1962, President John F. Kennedy concluded his famous “we choose to go to the moon” speech by asking “God’s blessing on the most hazardous and dangerous and greatest adventure on which man has ever embarked.” Kennedy embarked on that journey to win a space race that pitted the God-fearing United States against godless Soviet communism.
So far my assessment is that there is a ton more evidence for a globe earth despite me not seeing the curve with my own eyes.
The Flat Earth lacks a single theory which is required if you want to argue it scientifically. It also has not even one photo or video whereas the globe is on view 24 hours a day.
All the Flat Earthers have are observations that seem to defy the Earth curve calculators on rare occasions. That is it and that against the evidence for the globe earth, I have to honestly say that Team Glove Earth won this debate and won it a long time ago.
Next time you drink a glass of beer or wine, take a look at the world through that glass. Funny how a lens distorts the light aye? Your supposed Earth Curve calculations despite errors also assume that light is always travelling in a perfectly straight line. I have a problem with that premise.
This doesn’t fit the Flat Earth narrative either
Every Flat Earther who is a Christian must believe this guy is a serious liar and child of the Evil One.
I do not believe that, but let’s face it, Dig and Mike must believe this guy is a Satanic goat right?
“Billions of years ago”? Do you really need to hear more?
Either you believe like he does and believe in evolution or you trust in the Lord and believe the Creation account. It looks like you have made your choice, t8.
Very unscientific to say that an old earth implies Evolution. Yes Evolution needs it, but an ancient earth doesn’t need Evolution.
to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.
in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus.
A little different to a 6000 year old disk with starry bowl over the top don’t you think?
Think for a minute
To a Flat Earther, all these folk are liars.
Imagine what goes through FErs minds when they think about the scale of this conspiracy.
Even this video must all be fake according to them.
And if it was fake, then my hats off to the creative story line.
Of course man did go to the moon, but there will always be those who say things like:
“If man was meant to fly, the good Lord would have given us wings”.
Yet very unbiblical to say the earth is millions or billions of years old. Adam was in the beginning of creation, was that millions or billions of years ago? Well is it?
But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. Mark 10:6
In the beginning was Adam and Adam was with God?
What about the serpent that tempted them. Would have thought that serpent was already ancient compared to Adam.
This 6000 year old disk with transparent glass fruit bowl isn’t holding much water for me.
Of course we are free to believe what we want. Each is responsible before God for lies we are caught up in and perpetuate.
T8, can you hear yourself sometimes?
Adam was in the beginning of God’s physical creation.
satan would have been created before the physical creation.
Yes, we are responsible for the lies we get caught up in, especially the ones that contradict the Word of God.
T8: If I say your math was incorrect based on someone else exposing it, then so be it.
I see. So then everything I say from here on out is automatically in question because SOMEONE TOLD YOU my math was incorrect in a way that you don’t even understand? Come on, man… you’re surely better than that, aren’t you?
Let’s see if I can dumb it down for you, so you can understand that of which you speak in the future.
A lost tribe of humans was discovered today in New Zealand. The adult males grow to a maximum of 8 inches tall… or 23% the height of an average human male.
Did you catch my math mistake there? Eight inches is NOT 23% the height of an average human male. It’s more like 14% the height of an average human male. Now is the percentage number the crux of the story? Or is the meat of the discovery that there exist humans who only grow to 8 inches tall? Of course it is the latter, right? The mistaken 23% doesn’t change the shocking part of the story one little bit, right? They still only grow to 8 inches, which is absolutely amazing no matter what percentage of normal humans you apply to it.
That was my horrendous “math mistake”, T8. The amazing part of the story was that 5473 feet of a 9176 foot tall mountain should be hidden in your photo. Which means “well over half” of Ruapehu should be hidden behind curvature. 5473 of 9176 is 59.6%. And when the decimal is 5 or greater, we round up, right? When it is 4 or less, we round down, right? So, generally speaking, 60%, which is “well over half” of Ruapehu should be missing in your photo. That is the crux of the story. That is the amazing and shocking part. And that part of the story doesn’t change no matter what percentage of the mountain I said it was. If I mistakenly said that 5473 feet was 90% of the mountain, then the 90% part would be wrong, but it wouldn’t change the fact that 5473 feet, or “well over half” of the mountain should be missing in your photo.
Do you understand this now? The IMPORTANT part is that WELL OVER HALF of Ruapehu should be missing in your photo, and it is clearly not – since we can see the much smaller bluffs in the foreground of your photo. See? If WELL OVER HALF of Ruapehu actually IS missing in your photo because it’s hidden behind the curve of the earth, then it would be impossible to see the smaller bluffs in the foreground, since they would be COMPLETELY hidden by that same earth curvature. Yet since we can see these bluffs that are less than 1000 feet tall, it means that the corresponding portion of Ruapehu that we see behind them is also the bottom 1000 feet of the 9176 tall mountain. So yes, your bluffs in the foreground make it abundantly clear that we are seeing all of Ruapehu… down to the very bottom 1000 feet of it.
Now, here is my “math mistake” from the video in plain view…
Do you see the mistake now? It wasn’t the “well over half” part. It was that I called it 67% instead of 60%. The “well over half” part still applies. The 5473 out of 9176 that should be missing still applies. The fact that 5473 feet can’t possibly be missing, or we wouldn’t be able to see the much smaller bluffs still applies. In fact every single thing of interest – all the important parts – still apply. The only thing that changes is that the part that would be missing if we lived on a ball is 60% of the total height of Ruapehu – not 67%. That’s it.
So you using my “math mistake” as your new get-out-of-jail-free card is pathetic. It would be like you saying the discovery of the 8 inch tall human beings was no big deal, simply because the writer of the article mistakenly said it was 23% of the average height of a human male, instead of 14%. It’d be like you saying, “Yeah? Well I don’t believe in those newly discovered humans because the writer got the percentage number wrong – and that means all the other stuff in that story (and any other stories he writes) must also be wrong!”
Do you see how utterly stupid it would be to take that kind of a stance because of a simple typo or calculation mistake that played no important role in the crux of the discovery anyway?
So here’s your photo…
Are the short bluffs in the blue oval part of Ruapehu? How about the bluffs in the red oval? How about the part in the yellow oval? Will you say all of these are part of Mount Ruapehu? I sure hope you’re not that blind. And since those bluffs are NOT a part of Mount Ruapehu, then we have two choices. Either they belong to OTHER mountains on North Island, which themselves must be a least 6400 feet tall so that we’re seeing only the top of them, while the bottom 5473 feet of them are hidden behind the same curve that’s hiding 5473 feet of Ruapehu. OR… we are seeing the vast majority of some much shorter bluffs in the foreground of Ruapehu – which means that we are also seeing Ruapehu itself as far down as we are seeing these much shorter bluffs. So if the shorter bluffs are, say, 1000 feet tall, and we are seeing 900 feet of them, then we are only missing the bottom 100 feet of them in your photo. And if we are only missing the bottom 100 feet of these shorter bluffs, it means we are also only missing the bottom 100 feet of Ruapehu behind them – since they overlap and block parts of Ruapehu.
No matter how much cognitive dissonance this gives you, one thing is for certain… There’s no way that 5473 feet of those closer bluffs are missing in your photo – which means there’s no way 5473 feet of Ruapehu is missing either.
Anyway, my big horrendous “math mistake” was saying 67% instead of 60%. This mistake didn’t in any way alter the 5473 feet out of 9176 that should be missing. It didn’t alter the “well over half” claim that I made. The problem with Ruapehu remains exactly the same whether I say 60% or 67%. Not one measurement changes in the least, and so you’re still left answering why “well over half” of your mountain should be missing, when it clearly isn’t.
T8: Very unscientific to say that an old earth implies Evolution…
It’s very unscientific to say an old earth at all. All the actual observational science clearly and distinctly points to a very young earth that went through a very recent worldwide flooding event. In other words, real science has ALWAYS aligned perfectly with what the Bible said all along. Of course we don’t expect you to know anything about that, since you don’t ever have time to look into things for yourself, and so are reliant on blindly believing anything the TV tells you. But keep in mind that I actually met D4T on a different discussion forum, where we spent YEARS researching and learning all about the evolutionism versus creation debate. I don’t suppose you know who Charles Lyell is, huh? He’s the man who had the most influence on conjuring up those millions and billions of years out of thin air. How? His principle of “uniformitarianism”. Know what that is? You can look it up if you want, but suffice to say that no geologist (not even secular atheist ones) believes in such nonsense today. And with one gravely mistaken idea in the 19th century, the world became billions of years old instead of thousands. There is a Wiki article on Lyell where the writers praise him as one of the greatest men who ever lived… right up there with their High Priest Charles Darwin himself. (The two were friends and contemporaries.) Anyway, this is from that Wiki article…
Lyell saw himself as “the spiritual saviour of geology, freeing the science from the old dispensation of Moses.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Lyell
Why is that said of him? Because he said himself in a letter that his intention was to “free the science of geology from Moses”. Do you understand what that means? He wasn’t some unbiased scientist who just let the data interpret itself. No… he – like EVERY scientist who ever lived – was a flawed human being with biases and ambitions and personal beliefs that he allowed to influence his interpretation of the data. And since he was an atheist who didn’t want there to be a God to whom he was beholden in any way, he felt he could do something about that by purposely interpreting any and all geological data as indicating vast ages of time – so that it would intentionally be at odds with the timeline Moses gave in the Bible. And so that’s what he did. When an old timer who’d lived by Niagara Falls for his entire life told Lyell that the waterfall was receding the cliff at about 10 feet per year, Lyell intentionally ignored the eyewitness testimony, and invented his own theory that the falls cut away at the cliff at the rate of 6-8 inches a year. See, that way the falls could be much older than the Bible would allow for. And this is just one example.
But if you want to believe that any man can look at any rock and determine how old it is – all the way to billions of years in the past – then you go right on believing such nonsense. And if you want to believe that radiometric dating accounts for anything at all, then you simply haven’t spent even an hour looking into it. You’ve been hoodwinked, dude. And you seem to be just fine with that. Others of us find this stuff important enough to spend a little time investigating… especially the stuff that clearly contradicts the scriptures.
When scientism says billions of year old, and the Bible says 6000 years old, doesn’t even a tiny part of you want to know how exactly they even came up with that billions of years? Do you think rocks are time machines? Do you suppose they have birth certificates on them so we know when they formed? Can you even imagine how far back a billion years would have been? And yet you blindly believe guys who say, “Well, we were wrong. It was long thought that flowers evolved 1.3 billion years ago. Now we’ve found evidence that they evolved 1.31 billion years ago.”
I mean, who in their right mind could believe that these mere men can look at some rocks and determine when flowering plants evolved billions of years ago – and then narrow it down to .1 billion years – as if they have the foggiest idea of what happened even 1000 years ago? Really? They’re going to minutely adjust the date of what happened more than a billion years ago – and people just eat that crap up as if they know what they’re talking about? And on the other hand, we’ve got Jesus saying God created them male and female from the BEGINNING of creation? Does that really sound like God created a molten ball, let it chill for billions of years, and then created Adam and Eve at the BEGINNING of that creation? If it had been only 4000 years – out of the 4.54 BILLION year age of the earth – since Adam and Eve were created when Jesus said those words, in what world would “the BEGINNING of creation” make a lick of sense? As if something that occurred in the last .0000009 percent of the history of the earth could be called the BEGINNING of creation by Jesus! It’s just too much for me, man.
As for your Satan comment, and D4T’s response… I assume that God’s spirit sons were around for a while before God created the heavens and the earth and put two great lights in the firmament. But there’s really no reason for me to assume such a thing. For all I know, God could have created his spirit sons and then an hour later said, “Hey guys, check this out. I’m about to make a world.”
Anyway, you’re either for scriptural truth, or you take the book as a joke that is full of many mistakes when compared to man’s “science”. I stand with God – and his written word. Let ALL men (not just a few actor-nauts who claim to be Christian) be liars, and let God be true.
That last one posted all buggered up with the “span” crap. It’s done that so many times that I’m tired of fixing it. You’d think in this day of technology, one could make a post with some italics and different colors without breaking the system. Oh well…
T8: Very unscientific to say that an old earth implies Evolution…
It’s very unscientific to say an old earth at all. All the actual observational science clearly and distinctly points to a very young earth that went through a very recent worldwide flooding event. In other words, real science has ALWAYS aligned perfectly with what the Bible said all along. Of course we don’t expect you to know anything about that, since you don’t ever have time to look into things for yourself, and so are reliant on blindly believing anything the TV tells you. But keep in mind that I actually met D4T on a different discussion forum, where we spent YEARS researching and learning all about the evolutionism versus creation debate. I don’t suppose you know who Charles Lyell is, huh? He’s the man who had the most influence on conjuring up those millions and billions of years out of thin air. How? His principle of “uniformitarianism”. Know what that is? You can look it up if you want, but suffice to say that no geologist (not even secular atheist ones) believes in such nonsense today. And with one gravely mistaken idea in the 19th century, the world became billions of years old instead of thousands. There is a Wiki article on Lyell where the writers praise him as one of the greatest men who ever lived… right up there with their High Priest Charles Darwin himself. (The two were friends and contemporaries.) Anyway, this is from that Wiki article…Lyell saw himself as “the spiritual saviour of geology, freeing the science from the old dispensation of Moses.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Lyell
Why is that said of him? Because he said himself in a letter that his intention was to “free the science of geology from Moses”. Do you understand what that means? He wasn’t some unbiased scientist who just let the data interpret itself. No… he – like EVERY scientist who ever lived – was a flawed human being with biases and ambitions and personal beliefs that he allowed to influence his interpretation of the data. And since he was an atheist who didn’t want there to be a God to whom he was beholden in any way, he felt he could do something about that by purposely interpreting any and all geological data as indicating vast ages of time – so that it would intentionally be at odds with the timeline Moses gave in the Bible. And so that’s what he did. When an old timer who’d lived by Niagara Falls for his entire life told Lyell that the waterfall was receding the cliff at about 10 feet per year, Lyell intentionally ignored the eyewitness testimony, and invented his own theory that the falls cut away at the cliff at the rate of 6-8 inches a year. See, that way the falls could be much older than the Bible would allow for. And this is just one example.
But if you want to believe that any man can look at any rock and determine how old it is – all the way to billions of years in the past – then you go right on believing such nonsense. And if you want to believe that radiometric dating accounts for anything at all, then you simply haven’t spent even an hour looking into it. You’ve been hoodwinked, dude. And you seem to be just fine with that. Others of us find this stuff important enough to spend a little time investigating… especially the stuff that clearly contradicts the scriptures.
When scientism says billions of year old, and the Bible says 6000 years old, doesn’t even a tiny part of you want to know how exactly they even came up with that billions of years? Do you think rocks are time machines? Do you suppose they have birth certificates on them so we know when they formed? Can you even imagine how far back a billion years would have been? And yet you blindly believe guys who say, “Well, we were wrong. It was long thought that flowers evolved 1.3 billion years ago. Now we’ve found evidence that they evolved 1.31 billion years ago.”
I mean, who in their right mind could believe that these mere men can look at some rocks and determine when flowering plants evolved billions of years ago – and then narrow it down to .1 billion years – as if they have the foggiest idea of what happened even 1000 years ago? Really? They’re going to minutely adjust the date of what happened more than a billion years ago – and people just eat that crap up as if they know what they’re talking about? And on the other hand, we’ve got Jesus saying God created them male and female from the BEGINNING of creation? Does that really sound like God created a molten ball, let it chill for billions of years, and then created Adam and Eve at the BEGINNING of that creation? If it had been only 4000 years – out of the 4.54 BILLION year age of the earth – since Adam and Eve were created when Jesus said those words, in what world would “the BEGINNING of creation” make a lick of sense? As if something that occurred in the last .0000009 percent of the history of the earth could be called the BEGINNING of creation by Jesus! It’s just too much for me, man.
As for your Satan comment, and D4T’s response… I assume that God’s spirit sons were around for a while before God created the heavens and the earth and put two great lights in the firmament. But there’s really no reason for me to assume such a thing. For all I know, God could have created his spirit sons and then an hour later said, “Hey guys, check this out. I’m about to make a world.”
Anyway, you’re either for scriptural truth, or you take the book as a joke that is full of many mistakes when compared to man’s “science”. I stand with God – and his written word. Let ALL men (not just a few actor-nauts who claim to be Christian) be liars, and let God be true.
I have been trying to post something for quite a while. That happened the other day too. I made the post, later it was just gone, and I have to page back through Chrome to find it and post it again. This time it posted once already. It was before my previous text about the “span” crap. In fact, it was the one that posted with the “span” crap that my previous post is talking about. So it was there when I wrote the “span” post right above this one. But I tried to edit it to add the Wiki link I mentioned, and it disappeared altogether. I found it back a few pages on Chrome, and since then have been trying to copy and paste it so it will post again. I keep hitting “Submit”, but it doesn’t post.
T8: Very unscientific to say that an old earth implies Evolution…
It’s very unscientific to say an old earth at all. All the actual observational science clearly and distinctly points to a very young earth that went through a very recent worldwide flooding event. In other words, real science has ALWAYS aligned perfectly with what the Bible said all along. Of course we don’t expect you to know anything about that, since you don’t ever have time to look into things for yourself, and so are reliant on blindly believing anything the TV tells you. But keep in mind that I actually met D4T on a different discussion forum, where we spent YEARS researching and learning all about the evolutionism versus creation debate. I don’t suppose you know who Charles Lyell is, huh? He’s the man who had the most influence on conjuring up those millions and billions of years out of thin air. How? His principle of “uniformitarianism”. Know what that is? You can look it up if you want, but suffice to say that no geologist (not even secular atheist ones) believes in such nonsense today. And with one gravely mistaken idea in the 19th century, the world became billions of years old instead of thousands. There is a Wiki article on Lyell where the writers praise him as one of the greatest men who ever lived… right up there with their High Priest Charles Darwin himself. (The two were friends and contemporaries.) Anyway, this is from that Wiki article…
Lyell saw himself as “the spiritual saviour of geology, freeing the science from the old dispensation of Moses.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Lyell
Why is that said of him? Because he said himself in a letter that his intention was to “free the science of geology from Moses”. Do you understand what that means? He wasn’t some unbiased scientist who just let the data interpret itself. No… he – like EVERY scientist who ever lived – was a flawed human being with biases and ambitions and personal beliefs that he allowed to influence his interpretation of the data. And since he was an atheist who didn’t want there to be a God to whom he was beholden in any way, he felt he could do something about that by purposely interpreting any and all geological data as indicating vast ages of time – so that it would intentionally be at odds with the timeline Moses gave in the Bible. And so that’s what he did. When an old timer who’d lived by Niagara Falls for his entire life told Lyell that the waterfall was receding the cliff at about 10 feet per year, Lyell intentionally ignored the eyewitness testimony, and invented his own theory that the falls cut away at the cliff at the rate of 6-8 inches a year. See, that way the falls could be much older than the Bible would allow for. And this is just one example.
But if you want to believe that any man can look at any rock and determine how old it is – all the way to billions of years in the past – then you go right on believing such nonsense. And if you want to believe that radiometric dating accounts for anything at all, then you simply haven’t spent even an hour looking into it. You’ve been hoodwinked, dude. And you seem to be just fine with that. Others of us find this stuff important enough to spend a little time investigating… especially the stuff that clearly contradicts the scriptures.
When scientism says billions of year old, and the Bible says 6000 years old, doesn’t even a tiny part of you want to know how exactly they even came up with that billions of years? Do you think rocks are time machines? Do you suppose they have birth certificates on them so we know when they formed? Can you even imagine how far back a billion years would have been? And yet you blindly believe guys who say, “Well, we were wrong. It was long thought that flowers evolved 1.3 billion years ago. Now we’ve found evidence that they evolved 1.31 billion years ago.”
I mean, who in their right mind could believe that these mere men can look at some rocks and determine when flowering plants evolved billions of years ago – and then narrow it down to .1 billion years – as if they have the foggiest idea of what happened even 1000 years ago? Really? They’re going to minutely adjust the date of what happened more than a billion years ago – and people just eat that crap up as if they know what they’re talking about? And on the other hand, we’ve got Jesus saying God created them male and female from the BEGINNING of creation? Does that really sound like God created a molten ball, let it chill for billions of years, and then created Adam and Eve at the BEGINNING of that creation? If it had been only 4000 years – out of the 4.54 BILLION year age of the earth – since Adam and Eve were created when Jesus said those words, in what world would “the BEGINNING of creation” make a lick of sense? As if something that occurred in the last .0000009 percent of the history of the earth could be called the BEGINNING of creation by Jesus! It’s just too much for me, man.
As for your Satan comment, and D4T’s response… I assume that God’s spirit sons were around for a while before God created the heavens and the earth and put two great lights in the firmament. But there’s really no reason for me to assume such a thing. For all I know, God could have created his spirit sons and then an hour later said, “Hey guys, check this out. I’m about to make a world.”
Anyway, you’re either for scriptural truth, or you take the book as a joke that is full of many mistakes when compared to man’s “science”. I stand with God – and his written word. Let ALL men (not just a few actor-nauts who claim to be Christian) be liars, and let God be true.
T8: Very unscientific to say that an old earth implies Evolution…
It’s very unscientific to say an old earth at all. All the actual observational science clearly and distinctly points to a very young earth that went through a very recent worldwide flooding event. In other words, real science has ALWAYS aligned perfectly with what the Bible said all along. Of course we don’t expect you to know anything about that, since you don’t ever have time to look into things for yourself, and so are reliant on blindly believing anything the TV tells you. But keep in mind that I actually met D4T on a different discussion forum, where we spent YEARS researching and learning all about the evolutionism versus creation debate. I don’t suppose you know who Charles Lyell is, huh? He’s the man who had the most influence on conjuring up those millions and billions of years out of thin air. How? His principle of “uniformitarianism”. Know what that is? You can look it up if you want, but suffice to say that no geologist (not even secular atheist ones) believes in such nonsense today. And with one gravely mistaken idea in the 19th century, the world became billions of years old instead of thousands. There is a Wiki article on Lyell where the writers praise him as one of the greatest men who ever lived… right up there with their High Priest Charles Darwin himself. (The two were friends and contemporaries.) Anyway, this is from that Wiki article…
Lyell saw himself as “the spiritual saviour of geology, freeing the science from the old dispensation of Moses.”
Why is that said of him? Because he said himself in a letter that his intention was to “free the science of geology from Moses”. Do you understand what that means? He wasn’t some unbiased scientist who just let the data interpret itself. No… he – like EVERY scientist who ever lived – was a flawed human being with biases and ambitions and personal beliefs that he allowed to influence his interpretation of the data. And since he was an atheist who didn’t want there to be a God to whom he was beholden in any way, he felt he could do something about that by purposely interpreting any and all geological data as indicating vast ages of time – so that it would intentionally be at odds with the timeline Moses gave in the Bible. And so that’s what he did. When an old timer who’d lived by Niagara Falls for his entire life told Lyell that the waterfall was receding the cliff at about 10 feet per year, Lyell intentionally ignored the eyewitness testimony, and invented his own theory that the falls cut away at the cliff at the rate of 6-8 inches a year. See, that way the falls could be much older than the Bible would allow for. And this is just one example.
But if you want to believe that any man can look at any rock and determine how old it is – all the way to billions of years in the past – then you go right on believing such nonsense. And if you want to believe that radiometric dating accounts for anything at all, then you simply haven’t spent even an hour looking into it. You’ve been hoodwinked, dude. And you seem to be just fine with that. Others of us find this stuff important enough to spend a little time investigating… especially the stuff that clearly contradicts the scriptures.
When scientism says billions of year old, and the Bible says 6000 years old, doesn’t even a tiny part of you want to know how exactly they even came up with that billions of years? Do you think rocks are time machines? Do you suppose they have birth certificates on them so we know when they formed? Can you even imagine how far back a billion years would have been? And yet you blindly believe guys who say, “Well, we were wrong. It was long thought that flowers evolved 1.3 billion years ago. Now we’ve found evidence that they evolved 1.31 billion years ago.”
I mean, who in their right mind could believe that these mere men can look at some rocks and determine when flowering plants evolved billions of years ago – and then narrow it down to .1 billion years – as if they have the foggiest idea of what happened even 1000 years ago? Really? They’re going to minutely adjust the date of what happened more than a billion years ago – and people just eat that crap up as if they know what they’re talking about? And on the other hand, we’ve got Jesus saying God created them male and female from the BEGINNING of creation? Does that really sound like God created a molten ball, let it chill for billions of years, and then created Adam and Eve at the BEGINNING of that creation? If it had been only 4000 years – out of the 4.54 BILLION year age of the earth – since Adam and Eve were created when Jesus said those words, in what world would “the BEGINNING of creation” make a lick of sense? As if something that occurred in the last .0000009 percent of the history of the earth could be called the BEGINNING of creation by Jesus! It’s just too much for me, man.
As for your Satan comment, and D4T’s response… I assume that God’s spirit sons were around for a while before God created the heavens and the earth and put two great lights in the firmament. But there’s really no reason for me to assume such a thing. For all I know, God could have created his spirit sons and then an hour later said, “Hey guys, check this out. I’m about to make a world.”
Anyway, you’re either for scriptural truth, or you take the book as a joke that is full of many mistakes when compared to man’s “science”. I stand with God – and his written word. Let ALL men (not just a few actor-nauts who claim to be Christian) be liars, and let God be true.
T8: Very unscientific to say that an old earth implies Evolution…
It’s very unscientific to say an old earth at all. All the actual observational science clearly and distinctly points to a very young earth that went through a very recent worldwide flooding event. In other words, real science has ALWAYS aligned perfectly with what the Bible said all along. Of course we don’t expect you to know anything about that, since you don’t ever have time to look into things for yourself, and so are reliant on blindly believing anything the TV tells you. But keep in mind that I actually met D4T on a different discussion forum, where we spent YEARS researching and learning all about the evolutionism versus creation debate. I don’t suppose you know who Charles Lyell is, huh? He’s the man who had the most influence on conjuring up those millions and billions of years out of thin air. How? His principle of “uniformitarianism”. Know what that is? You can look it up if you want, but suffice to say that no geologist (not even secular atheist ones) believes in such nonsense today. And with one gravely mistaken idea in the 19th century, the world became billions of years old instead of thousands. There is a Wiki article on Lyell where the writers praise him as one of the greatest men who ever lived… right up there with their High Priest Charles Darwin himself. (The two were friends and contemporaries.) Anyway, this is from that Wiki article…
Lyell saw himself as “the spiritual saviour of geology, freeing the science from the old dispensation of Moses.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Lyell
Why is that said of him? Because he said himself in a letter that his intention was to “free the science of geology from Moses”. Do you understand what that means? He wasn’t some unbiased scientist who just let the data interpret itself. No… he – like EVERY scientist who ever lived – was a flawed human being with biases and ambitions and personal beliefs that he allowed to influence his interpretation of the data. And since he was an atheist who didn’t want there to be a God to whom he was beholden in any way, he felt he could do something about that by purposely interpreting any and all geological data as indicating vast ages of time – so that it would intentionally be at odds with the timeline Moses gave in the Bible. And so that’s what he did. When an old timer who’d lived by Niagara Falls for his entire life told Lyell that the waterfall was receding the cliff at about 10 feet per year, Lyell intentionally ignored the eyewitness testimony, and invented his own theory that the falls cut away at the cliff at the rate of 6-8 inches a year. See, that way the falls could be much older than the Bible would allow for. And this is just one example.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
