Electropope
This is genius, somebody needs to invent this immediately.

Electropope
The evidence for this theory is quite compelling--just for one example, the salinity of seawater is, well, no more than an order of magnitude different than that of human blood and lots of the trace elements found in seawater are also to be found in human blood. Of course, if human blood is deficient in an important component of seawater--like, for example, squid--it should be noted that Ymir was a supernatural being (and a pretty big one, to boot) so he could probably have anything in his blood that he liked.
The Christian creation myth's greatest strength is that, instead of relying on mere observed facts and the correlation of current phenomena with physical evidence of past events, all interpreted by fallible human beings, it has the full force of the word of God behind it. From a theological standpoint, NCT is even more robust, being the word of not one God, but literally dozens of them--and not mamby-pamby Gods who couldn't make up their minds about how many legs a grasshopper has or had trouble figuring out pi to more than one significant figure, but tough, non-nonsense Gods with no qualms about beaning frost giants with a hammer or drinking the ocean on a dare.
It has more action and lens flares!I wish this guy would expand his theory
The Norse Creation story is so much more interesting that the Bible Creation story.The evidence for this theory is quite compelling--just for one example, the salinity of seawater is, well, no more than an order of magnitude different than that of human blood and lots of the trace elements found in seawater are also to be found in human blood. Of course, if human blood is deficient in an important component of seawater--like, for example, squid--it should be noted that Ymir was a supernatural being (and a pretty big one, to boot) so he could probably have anything in his blood that he liked.
The Christian creation myth's greatest strength is that, instead of relying on mere observed facts and the correlation of current phenomena with physical evidence of past events, all interpreted by fallible human beings, it has the full force of the word of God behind it. From a theological standpoint, NCT is even more robust, being the word of not one God, but literally dozens of them--and not mamby-pamby Gods who couldn't make up their minds about how many legs a grasshopper has or had trouble figuring out pi to more than one significant figure, but tough, non-nonsense Gods with no qualms about beaning frost giants with a hammer or drinking the ocean on a dare.
The whole of the Eddas are more fun and interesting.I wish this guy would expand his theory
The Norse Creation story is so much more interesting that the Bible Creation story.The evidence for this theory is quite compelling--just for one example, the salinity of seawater is, well, no more than an order of magnitude different than that of human blood and lots of the trace elements found in seawater are also to be found in human blood. Of course, if human blood is deficient in an important component of seawater--like, for example, squid--it should be noted that Ymir was a supernatural being (and a pretty big one, to boot) so he could probably have anything in his blood that he liked.
The Christian creation myth's greatest strength is that, instead of relying on mere observed facts and the correlation of current phenomena with physical evidence of past events, all interpreted by fallible human beings, it has the full force of the word of God behind it. From a theological standpoint, NCT is even more robust, being the word of not one God, but literally dozens of them--and not mamby-pamby Gods who couldn't make up their minds about how many legs a grasshopper has or had trouble figuring out pi to more than one significant figure, but tough, non-nonsense Gods with no qualms about beaning frost giants with a hammer or drinking the ocean on a dare.
Yeah. They are called "Christians". The rest of us don't care much for it (except for its literary value, which is undeniable).The core problem is that the Bible is a major issue for a lot of people.
Not so much. I accept that there are things that we can't comprehend. I state my beliefs and stand behind them. It's called "faith."
If you want to challenge that, go ahead. But don't expect me to argue the point for your entertainment.
Nice talkin' to ya.
Why don't they see that, if God existed, that Evolution, the result of random gene mutation, would be just one part of the Almighty's big tool box? If he created the universe, he set all the rules. Speed of light, gravity, time, strings, quarks, protons, neutrons, electrons, atoms, molecules, particle decay, radiation, it all works according to a strict set of rules. And evolution is the result of all that. If there is a God, he probably made all those rules. And then hit the 'Start' Button and enjoyed watching how it all unfolds. Not much unlike a programmer who created a simulation.
Isn't that enough?
I don't get why it's such an aggressive "either-or" debate when both could be true.
If one believes in a god, shouldn't evolution act as evidence for how wonderful and complex that god is?
Is it really that important to people that everything happened literally as described in the Bible?
Creationists are not afraid of evolution. They just realize that evolution is unscientific. Speciation is true, observable science, but evolution (the idea that non-life became life on the early life and then evolved over billions of years to become man) is not. We can't jump in a time machine and observe evolution happening, and any 'facts' of evolution, such as DNA, the fossil record, morphology, etc., must be subjectively interpreted (the facts don't speak for themselves), and could just as easily (actually, easier) be interpreted in a Biblical, creationist way.
There are plenty of websites which show the fallacies of evolution, and there are over 100 young earth/universe evidences. An objective person sees that these evidences indicate a young earth and that evolution therefore could not have happened.
The core problem is that the Bible is a major issue for a lot of people. The Christian God is unacceptable, and so of course evolution must be true. For those who accept evolution and God's existence, for some reason a Creator God Who created in six days is unacceptable.
I don't see how the glory of God is shown in millions of years of animal death culminating in the evolution of man, but everyone's entitled to an opinion. I think God's glory is clearly better shown in His creation of a sinless, perfect universe---which only became subject to death and futility after sin was committed, an act by free humans.
Go to creation.com (look up "101 evidences for a young earth" and "It's not science") for more information on what I wrote above. You can also research a great deal of other topics.
Scienceagainstevolution.org is another great site which shows the copious holes in evolution. Again, speciation is true, but this doesn't prove or imply evolution in any way. There is much observational science which shows that evolution is false. It is not surprising at all that large numbers of scientists in our day are abandoning it.
I would call "Poe" but obvious trolling attempt is obvious.Why don't they see that, if God existed, that Evolution, the result of random gene mutation, would be just one part of the Almighty's big tool box? If he created the universe, he set all the rules. Speed of light, gravity, time, strings, quarks, protons, neutrons, electrons, atoms, molecules, particle decay, radiation, it all works according to a strict set of rules. And evolution is the result of all that. If there is a God, he probably made all those rules. And then hit the 'Start' Button and enjoyed watching how it all unfolds. Not much unlike a programmer who created a simulation.
Isn't that enough?
I don't get why it's such an aggressive "either-or" debate when both could be true.
If one believes in a god, shouldn't evolution act as evidence for how wonderful and complex that god is?
Is it really that important to people that everything happened literally as described in the Bible?
Creationists are not afraid of evolution. They just realize that evolution is unscientific. Speciation is true, observable science, but evolution (the idea that non-life became life on the early life and then evolved over billions of years to become man) is not. We can't jump in a time machine and observe evolution happening, and any 'facts' of evolution, such as DNA, the fossil record, morphology, etc., must be subjectively interpreted (the facts don't speak for themselves), and could just as easily (actually, easier) be interpreted in a Biblical, creationist way.
There are plenty of websites which show the fallacies of evolution, and there are over 100 young earth/universe evidences. An objective person sees that these evidences indicate a young earth and that evolution therefore could not have happened.
The core problem is that the Bible is a major issue for a lot of people. The Christian God is unacceptable, and so of course evolution must be true. For those who accept evolution and God's existence, for some reason a Creator God Who created in six days is unacceptable.
I don't see how the glory of God is shown in millions of years of animal death culminating in the evolution of man, but everyone's entitled to an opinion. I think God's glory is clearly better shown in His creation of a sinless, perfect universe---which only became subject to death and futility after sin was committed, an act by free humans.
Go to creation.com (look up "101 evidences for a young earth" and "It's not science") for more information on what I wrote above. You can also research a great deal of other topics.
Scienceagainstevolution.org is another great site which shows the copious holes in evolution. Again, speciation is true, but this doesn't prove or imply evolution in any way. There is much observational science which shows that evolution is false. It is not surprising at all that large numbers of scientists in our day are abandoning it.
Oh dear, you are in a serious need of a major dose of AronRa.
Here are 2 1/2 hours of a rundown of what kind of scientific evidence for evolution we have (and this is basically just the index!).
I dare you to watch it and tell me again evolution is not proven beyond reasonable doubt.
The problem is the concept of the almighty God, the omnipotent, all-knowing and always-right entity that is the creator of everything...
...If the Bible says Earth and men were created in 6-7 days, but science says Earth is 4 billion years old, then the Bible just must be right.
Creationists are not afraid of evolution. They just realize that evolution is unscientific.
Probably Osha regulations, they're a bugger.The problem is the concept of the almighty God, the omnipotent, all-knowing and always-right entity that is the creator of everything...
...If the Bible says Earth and men were created in 6-7 days, but science says Earth is 4 billion years old, then the Bible just must be right.
If he is omnipotent why did it take 6-7 days? He could have done it in the blink of an eye.
He sounds lazy to me.
It's fairly safe to say that anyone who thinks the bible is an accurate historical record has never had to think very hard about anything beyond what clothes to wear in the morning.
A sad cheap shot. Plenty of intelligent people believe in the Bible's historical record, and many scientists do as well.
Many events in the Biblical record have been verified by archaeology and other studies. Serious historians believe in the life, death, and post-mortem appearances of Christ (how these are interpreted is another question, of course).
Ironically, you, if you're an atheist, must believe in evolution, even though it's never been verified either! Of course, I assume you trust in the evolutionists' subjective interpretations of DNA, morphology, and the fossil record, and believe that this proves that evolution occurred. Of course it doesn't, but you're not willing to look at the contradicting evidence.
Of course, this is an emotions issue and not a facts issue. For some people, the Bible is wholly unacceptable and therefore they consider it false with zero credibility. Being in denial like this and making such false claims helps some to cope. It is much easier than to believe that the God of the Bible exists, since the God of the Bible demands accountability for the way we live.
I'd love to. Do you have any recommendations for reasonable people to check out? My experience w/ Glenn Beck has shown that he does not fit the description.Instead of "creation vs evolution," which will never be settled in our lifetimes, why not take a look at a conversation between reasonable people about good vs. evil?
Evil, Religion, and Responsibility
Project Steve: http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve
And why did he create beings that make mistakes?The problem is the concept of the almighty God, the omnipotent, all-knowing and always-right entity that is the creator of everything...
...If the Bible says Earth and men were created in 6-7 days, but science says Earth is 4 billion years old, then the Bible just must be right.
If he is omnipotent why did it take 6-7 days? He could have done it in the blink of an eye.
He sounds lazy to me.
I've always wondered if G-d's command to not eat from the Tree of Knowledge was just a simple case of reverse psychology.
God was lazy and needed someone he could subcontract the naming of the animals to. After that he needed to fire Adam, so he came up with the bogus Tree of Knowledge rule.In the span of time between G-d's creation of Man and Man's fall by eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge (of Good and Evil), what was our original purpose? Were Adam and Eve (and Adam's ex-wife Lilith?) just suppose to hang out in the Garden of Eden? What would they be doing? What was their purpose? Because it sounds like a simple zoo. Let's make Man in our own image, G-d said, but then let's leave him locked up in an enclosure.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.