Should Christians support Obama?

[exphys88]

Ok, that's what I thought you meant. So lets assume this. (Big assumption).

That's why I mentioned Job's descriptions of creatures that looked like dinosaurs. Apparently it was written about but not sure I would discount an ancient writing even if it did leave it out. I may never in my life write about a certain animal that is common but that does not mean I'm ignorant of it.

I'm pretty sure that if we lived alongside dinosaurs, there would be many stories about them. And, there were all sorts of ridiculous things discussed in the bible, so making up stories about monsters isn't a far stretch. talking burning bushes, people rising from death, humans living 900 years old, parting seas. We could also pull the interpretation card and say maybe we shouldn't be interpreting his story as being literal.

 

[heavyiron]

BBQ dinosaur would be in my book......

 

[exphys88]

lol, You're just trying to ruffle my feathers. I know you're not a creationist, you're too critical, so I'm bowing out of this conversation. I do appreciate and value your perspective though.
Jimmy, I think you're a nice guy, but I know it's a waste of time to debate with creationists, and frankly creationism doesn't deserve to be debated with. It's like debating with someone that believes in astrology.

 

[heavyiron]

Job 40:15-24
"Behemoth" description fits that of a dinosaur

15 ? Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength [is] in his loins, and his force [is] in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones [are as] strong pieces of brass; his bones [are] like bars of iron.
19 He [is] the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his
sword to approach [unto him].
20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.
21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
22 The shady trees cover him [with] their shadow; the willows of the brook
compass him about.
23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, [and] hasteth not: he trusteth that he
can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
24 He taketh it with his eyes: [his] nose pierceth through snares.
25 But the mighty men of IronMag doth smite him and take him in pieces to heavyiron to BBQ whilst drinking beer.

Amen

 

[NVRBDR]

so, you're claiming humans lived alongside dinosaurs? lol
Don't you think there would be more mention of how awful it would've been for humans to have to deal with dinosaurs. And, then there is the problem with making the claim that dinosaurs died in the flood, since some dinosaurs actually lived in the sea.

It is possible to have left something out of a story and it still be accurate truth. I am certain by your posts, it doesn't matter what the bible says or doesn't say, at this point in your young life you have made up your mind as to whether or not you want to believe the bible as Gods Word. I'll mention this again, God gave man free will to choose life or choose death bro, He is pullin for ALL to choose life, it's that simple. On a new note, I don't know what you guys do for a living, but man you've got alot of free time! lol as do i...
The nanny leaves at 5 and I haven't WO yet, I gotta go for now. peace. I recommend the gospels, start with the book of John, if you want to find some peace, you''l find it there.

 

[bandaidwoman]

the problem with creationism is that it is intrinsically lazy,it basically says, such and such phenomenom is so complex, only god can do it so we need to just leave it alone. Which is why the scientific education of this country is going to hell.

as for the eye, creationists would not have discovered the pax-6 gene ( look it up), basically gene complexes that can generate large scale changes in a nonincremental fashion. evolutionary theory always taught us we use old genes to develop new tricks. The octopus eye is far better optical device than humans, why the hell would god give them the more perfect eye?. If the eye is so perfect, why do we have macular degeneration, astigmatism, nearsightedness, farsightedness, cataracts, river blindness, acute angle glaucoma, etc. etc. etc.

and god sure did a shitty job designing our eye , to an optic engineer it is built upside down and backwards,( blood vessels over the optic disc rather than behind so that when there is hemmorage it gets damaged), requires photons of light to travel through cornea, lens, acqueous fluid, blood vessels, ganglion cells, amacrine cells, horizontal cells, and bipolar cells before they reach the light senstive rods. This design only makes sense if eyes made from available materials of ancesteral orgins building on the scaffolding of existing structure.

and the creationists in my classes still cannot offer another scientific theory that explains why chimps and our closest primates lack the 1,3 gal antigen expression on the surface of our cells while the rest of the mamallian kingdom doesn't?( important in creating transgenic animals for xenotransplantation)

.

 

[exphys88]

the problem with creationism is that it is intrinsically lazy,it basically says, such and such phenomenom is so complex, only god can do it so we need to just leave it alone. Which is why the scientific education of this country is going to hell.

as for the eye, creationists would not have discovered the pax-6 gene ( look it up), basically gene complexes that can generate large scale changes in a nonincremental fashion. evolutionary theory always taught us we use old genes to develop new tricks. The octopus eye is far better optical device than humans, why the hell would god give them the more perfect eye?. If the eye is so perfect, why do we have macular degeneration, astigmatism, nearsightedness, farsightedness, cataracts, river blindness, acute angle glaucoma, etc. etc. etc.

and god sure did a shitty job designing our eye , to an optic engineer it is built upside down and backwards,( blood vessels over the optic disc rather than behind so that when there is hemmorage it gets damaged), requires photons of light to travel through cornea, lens, acqueous fluid, blood vessels, ganglion cells, amacrine cells, horizontal cells, and bipolar cells before they reach the light senstive rods. This design only makes sense if eyes made from available materials of ancesteral orgins building on the scaffolding of existing structure.

and the creationists in my classes still cannot offer another scientific theory that explains why chimps and our closest primates lack the 1,3 gal antigen expression on the surface of our cells while the rest of the mamallian kingdom doesn't?( important in creating transgenic animals for xenotransplantation)

.

My physiology professor gave a great analogy that explained why so many human organs are very poorly constructed. He used a house as an example: If we were to build a house using plans that had the entire house thought out, including the plumbing, electrical, roofing etc, we would have a house that worked perfectly in sync. A house that starts off as a one room, then later has a kitchen is added, then a second bathroom, then plumbing is added years later, we would have something that resembled how the human body evolved.

Maybe not as eloquent as you put it, but for us common folk, it made a lot of sense.

 

[bandaidwoman]

Exactly!

In medical school we learn that human bodies are simultaneously vulnerable to disease and incredibly resiliant, because we are not built from a perfect blueprint, our bodies are millions of compromises weeded out by natural selection in small, small increments to maximize reproduction ( not health by the way). Why do we have narrow brith canals that can cause 15-30% mortality in birthing women in a paleolithic or third world conditon ( much higher than non biped mammals), wisdom teeth?, neonatal jaundice ( Evolution explains why our body goes through the trouble of making a difficule to exrete toxin, but that is whole biochemical evolutionary talk), hardening of the arteries, type II diabetes,

or why choking is the top ten cause of aaccidental death in humans? ( what a shitty thing putting the trachea below the esophagus in such a precarous position to make room for our larynx so the food and air passages cross.? )god would get a fail at a georgia tech's acoustic engineering and mechanical engineering). WHy did he confer other animals the ability to protect their larynx by interlocking the epiglotis with the soft palate so that a bridge forms and diverts the air into the trachea while channeling the food in to the esophagus? Does he reallly, really hate our infants and children ( who comprise most of the victims)

 

[bandaidwoman]

The simple fact that most american still do not know that general relativity has supplanted newton's theories as the best gravitational theory for explaining planetary bodies and the validity of evolution , shows the dismal mindset of this country.

The fact that evolution has far more lines of evidence than general relativity , doesn't seem to phase creationists. General relativity draws from atomic clocks, hubble space telescope etc, but evolution draws it's support from geology, paleontology, botany, zoology, herpetology, entomology, population genetics, plate techtonics, comparative anatomy, physiology, and the final nail on the coffin , molecular biology.... just doens't make sense.

 

[exphys88]

The simple fact that most american still do not know that general relativity has supplanted newton's theories as the best gravitational theory for explaining planetary bodies and the validity of evolution , shows the dismal mindset of this country.

The fact that evolution has far more lines of evidence than general relativity , doesn't seem to phase creationists. General relativity draws from atomic clocks, hubble space telescope etc, but evolution draws it's support from geology, paleontology, botany, zoology, herpetology, entomology, population genetics, plate techtonics, comparative anatomy, physiology, and the final nail on the coffin , molecular biology.... just doens't make sense.

I am fully convinced that faith is to blame. I am dumbfounded that we have come to place such value on believing without evidence. Here is a great quote from Sam Harris:

“Tell a devout Christian that his wife is cheating on him, or that frozen yogurt can make a man invisible, and he is likely to require as much evidence as anyone else, and to be persuaded only to the extent that you give it. Tell him that the book he keeps by his bed was written by an invisible deity who will punish him with fire for eternity if he fails to accept its every incredible claim about the universe, and he seems to require no evidence what so ever.”

 

[NVRBDR]

I can't help it... here's a stupid joke, to follow ole Sammys ^^^ joke.

Dick and Jane participated in a local college study research on self esteem.
Dick was asked if he likes dick, using his critical thinking, and knowing the research was on "self esteem", he assumed they were asking if he liked himself. So Dick replied "yes"
Jane was asked the same question, unaware the study was on "self esteem", Jane assumed they meant "penis", being a straight female, Jane replied, "yes"
Fast Forward 20 years.

New research shows 100% of males and females like "penis" The human race has evolved, and now it is normal to be gay

the lesson- Don't believe everything you read under the umbrella of research.

For the record- I have no problem with gay people, I don't condone it, never the less, no problem. I believe all people should enjoy the right to be what they want to be, after all, it is their God given right.

 

[bandaidwoman]

English is my sixth language and I have decided that americans just still don't understand the difference between linguistic meaning of theory and scientific theory. It does not mean "conjecture", "speculation", or "guess" . Most languages don't use such redundant jargon to imply completely different things.


The theory of evolution is the same degree of correctness as the theory of gravity( now dominanated by general and special relativity) , the germ theory, the platetechtonic theory, quantum theory, etc, etc.

englilsh 101



A SCIENTIFIC THEORY IS A COHERENT SET OF PRINCIPLES OR STATEMENTS THAT EXPLAINS A LARGE SET OF OBSERVATIONS OR FINDINGS. THESE PRINCIPLES ARE THE PRODUCT OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND EXPERIMENTS, VERIFIED OVER AND OVER AND COME CLOSE TO APPROXIMATING A "FACT"

scientists use theory because they change and are fluid, not dogmatic like religion. It builds upon others but if something new comes around and totally changes the fundamental facts of it's predecessors ( like general relativity to newton and quantum theory) then the theory evolves into a better one, it never , never reaches a end or period.

 

[heavyiron]

Don't forget the law of gravity....

 

[exphys88]

Don't forget the law of gravity....

I think it's techically a law and a theory. It's a law when we're describing the attraction of two objects, but the theory has to do with why two objects attract.

This is way above my intelligence, it's just what I can remember. I'm sure that bandaidwoman can decipher this for us.

Nobody seems to want to debate with her.

 

[heavyiron]

I was trolling.....like for the last 5 pages.....you atheists need to drink beer and get laid or something....

 

[exphys88]

I was trolling.....like for the last 5 pages.....you atheists need to drink beer and get laid or something....

lol. I'm trying to cut and the wife is "out" for a few days.

please keep your trolling to AG

 

[heavyiron]

Diet coke and whisky?

 

[NVRBDR]

trying to cut and the wife is gone? that explains alot. lol

 

[exphys88]

trying to cut and the wife is gone? that explains alot. lol

do you mean my antagonistic demeanor? I'm always like that when it comes to creationists.

 

[NVRBDR]

I think it's techically a law and a theory. It's a law when we're describing the attraction of two objects, but the theory has to do with why two objects attract.

This is way above my intelligence, it's just what I can remember. I'm sure that bandaidwoman can decipher this for us.

Nobody seems to want to debate with her.

in plain english... A law doesn't change, it doesn't care that you don't believe it. theories change on a regular basis. dam bro, you are seriously wound TIGHT.

 

[exphys88]

in plain english... A law doesn't change, it doesn't care that you don't believe it. theories change on a regular basis. dam bro, you are seriously wound TIGHT.

Yes they change, but they usually don't go away. Evolution has been around for a very long time and the more we learn about genetics, the more it is proven to be fact. Why aren't creationists leading the fight against atomic theory? It's just a theory after all. That's right, it doesn't challenge what they base their entire life on, therefore they accept it as fact.

 

[exphys88]

the problem with creationism is that it is intrinsically lazy,it basically says, such and such phenomenom is so complex, only god can do it so we need to just leave it alone. Which is why the scientific education of this country is going to hell.

as for the eye, creationists would not have discovered the pax-6 gene ( look it up), basically gene complexes that can generate large scale changes in a nonincremental fashion. evolutionary theory always taught us we use old genes to develop new tricks. The octopus eye is far better optical device than humans, why the hell would god give them the more perfect eye?. If the eye is so perfect, why do we have macular degeneration, astigmatism, nearsightedness, farsightedness, cataracts, river blindness, acute angle glaucoma, etc. etc. etc.

and god sure did a shitty job designing our eye , to an optic engineer it is built upside down and backwards,( blood vessels over the optic disc rather than behind so that when there is hemmorage it gets damaged), requires photons of light to travel through cornea, lens, acqueous fluid, blood vessels, ganglion cells, amacrine cells, horizontal cells, and bipolar cells before they reach the light senstive rods. This design only makes sense if eyes made from available materials of ancesteral orgins building on the scaffolding of existing structure.

and the creationists in my classes still cannot offer another scientific theory that explains why chimps and our closest primates lack the 1,3 gal antigen expression on the surface of our cells while the rest of the mamallian kingdom doesn't?( important in creating transgenic animals for xenotransplantation)

.

The simple fact that most american still do not know that general relativity has supplanted newton's theories as the best gravitational theory for explaining planetary bodies and the validity of evolution , shows the dismal mindset of this country.

The fact that evolution has far more lines of evidence than general relativity , doesn't seem to phase creationists. General relativity draws from atomic clocks, hubble space telescope etc, but evolution draws it's support from geology, paleontology, botany, zoology, herpetology, entomology, population genetics, plate techtonics, comparative anatomy, physiology, and the final nail on the coffin , molecular biology.... just doens't make sense.

She says it much better than I can ever hope to.

 

[NVRBDR]

Exactly!

In medical school we learn that human bodies are simultaneously vulnerable to disease and incredibly resiliant, because we are not built from a perfect blueprint, our bodies are millions of compromises weeded out by natural selection in small, small increments to maximize reproduction ( not health by the way). Why do we have narrow brith canals that can cause 15-30% mortality in birthing women in a paleolithic or third world conditon ( much higher than non biped mammals), wisdom teeth?, neonatal jaundice ( Evolution explains why our body goes through the trouble of making a difficule to exrete toxin, but that is whole biochemical evolutionary talk), hardening of the arteries, type II diabetes,

or why choking is the top ten cause of aaccidental death in humans? ( what a shitty thing putting the trachea below the esophagus in such a precarous position to make room for our larynx so the food and air passages cross.? )god would get a fail at a georgia tech's acoustic engineering and mechanical engineering). WHy did he confer other animals the ability to protect their larynx by interlocking the epiglotis with the soft palate so that a bridge forms and diverts the air into the trachea while channeling the food in to the esophagus? Does he reallly, really hate our infants and children ( who comprise most of the victims)

God provided a perfect environment for us, however, sin entered in and brought with it all kinds of evil, sickness, abnormalities, pestilence, hate, etc...
We were not created to live in a world full of sin, disease, destruction, death, etc... God provided a perfect environment, as before the flood, people lived a lot longer than today. We changed things, God designed us perfect for the intended environment. The bible will always prove itself over and over and confirm it's Truth.
Your theory of evolution says things happen out of necessity, right? the strong survive, the weak die off, well today there are more diseases and abnormal birth defects than ever in recorded history. If over the (millions) years things improve upon themselves, what's the dealio? The whole theory contradicts itself over and over, we should be perfect by now or at least closer.

 

[NVRBDR]

She says it much better than I can ever hope to.

lol, shitty design on the eye?

Again this answer is the same. we live in a fallen world of sin, sickness, disease, this explains the diseases, etc...
If we were designed and created to live in fricken salt water, we might have an eye designed for that! lol. the last time I opened my eyes underwater in saltwater, I was in PCB Florida, it burned like hell, you want to know why? I am not an octopus, lol
you can try to complicate things all you want, that answers don't change.

 

[exphys88]

Lol

 

[troubador]

Your theory of evolution says things happen out of necessity, right? the strong survive, the weak die off, well today there are more diseases and abnormal birth defects than ever in recorded history.

Why has God decided to spontaneously create new diseases in recent years?

The whole theory contradicts itself over and over, we should be perfect by now or at least closer.

Yeah, based on my advanced knowledge of biology, if evolution was true we'd be able to teleport and shoot lasers out of our eyes.



If evolution was true, why haven't monkeys developed wings like in the Wizard of Oz? Clearly it'd be easier to reach bananas and little dogs.

 

[Iron8]

Heavy for pope 2013

 

[exphys88]

Why has God decided to spontaneously create new diseases in recent years?



Yeah, based on my advanced knowledge of biology, if evolution was true we'd be able to teleport and shoot lasers out of our eyes.



If evolution was true, why haven't monkeys developed wings like in the Wizard of Oz? Clearly it'd be easier to reach bananas and little dogs.

if monkeys turned into humans why are there still monkeys?

 

[troubador]

if monkeys turned into humans why are there still monkeys?

Exactly, evolution ain't real. It's a lie satan made up to lead mankind astray.

Evolution can't be real cause cells and stuff are complicated. I can't understand that shit so God must of done it.

 

[Zaphod]

God provided a perfect environment for us, however, sin entered in and brought with it all kinds of evil, sickness, abnormalities, pestilence, hate, etc...
We were not created to live in a world full of sin, disease, destruction, death, etc... God provided a perfect environment, as before the flood, people lived a lot longer than today. We changed things, God designed us perfect for the intended environment. The bible will always prove itself over and over and confirm it's Truth.
Your theory of evolution says things happen out of necessity, right? the strong survive, the weak die off, well today there are more diseases and abnormal birth defects than ever in recorded history. If over the (millions) years things improve upon themselves, what's the dealio? The whole theory contradicts itself over and over, we should be perfect by now or at least closer.

What, exactly, has the bible proven? Keep in mind I'm a Christian and grew up in a fairly religious family so I know what the deal is. Parts of it have been backed up by other recorded history and through archeological and anthropological work, not the other way around.