[Credendovidis]

For all participating here :

I'm sorry to note Tj3's deliberate abuse of this topic.

Specially in view of Tj3's eagerness to lament on others posting "insults, ad hominems, and ridicule"...
Rather hypocrite I would say , as that is precisely what Tommy is doing himself here and in other topics...

Once more I have to request to stop any reaction on Tj3's queries on evolution, and instead of that address the only topic issue here.

That issue is if Tj3's questions on evolution and the possible replies to these have - or can provide - any validity towards OSE proof for the existence of "God".

The real issue is also that there is no - and never will be - any OSE proof for the existence of "God".
The only thing anyone can do is BELIEVE and have FAITH in the existence of "God".

I blame Tj3 once more for his deliberate and repeated side-stepping of that point - again and again and again - and it shows a dark shadow on his integrity as a real Christian.

===

Add-on : I wonder if that is the way in which organisations like the "Christian Discernment Resources" , the "Last Days Bible Conference" , and the "Signs of Scripture Conference" approach the issue of the existence of "God"...

If so one should not be discerned, but strongly concerned about the morality of the ideas of such organisations...


:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.

[Tj3]

Cred,

I find it funny how you started the discussion and once it is clear that no atheists / evolutionists have any answers to the question, you come on here on bended knee pleading for people to stop dealing with the topic.

In his OP, Cred says:

"Surely evolutionists will be able to reply to Tom's various questions"

Now he tries to change the topic. Reading the thread makes it clear that the lack of answers from evolutionists/atheists is why Cred wants the discussion to end.

I know that you don't like things like this backfiring on you. I don't know why you thought that the result would be different from that which happened on the other board, but now you are batting zero out of 2. It must be rough when your BELIEF and FAITH in evolution is shown to have no basis in fact.

Keep telling yourself that there is no OSE for God. Maybe eventually you'll be able to forget what happened, and convince yourself. :D

Hey, why don't you try to answer the questions! You were not able to when we discussed this a year or so ago, but you have had plenty of time to consider the topic since then.
Of course maybe you ready know that there is no natural explanation. If so, then I'll bet that all we can expect from you is more abusive responses.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The usual response to these issues from non-Christians are insults, ad hominems, and ridicule - but no answer. That is in and of itself an admission that no answer for a natural explanation exists. Sometimes they also plead for the discussion to end
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[JoeT777]

Hello Joe : you know that I respect the BELIEF in the existence of "God".
Why however people who BELIEVE in the existence of "God" keep insisting that they can "prove" that is beyond me, as till today they have always failed to just do that.

Tj3's queries on evolution are interesting and I look forward to see any replies to these on the Evolution board, but whatever is replied or not replied does not have any influence on the fact that one can only have BELIEF and FAITH in the existence of "God" and that OSE proof will never be available.

:)

.

.

Just to change the subject a bit see the following - it shows :

Arguments against evolution are rarely heard because academic institutions tend to restrict their presentations to data that support the theory of evolution. For example, recent laboratory tests have shown that stratified sedimentary rocks, containing fossils alleged to prove evolution, formed very quickly – not over extended periods as evolutionists contend. The tests were conducted by conference speaker Guy Berthault, and published by the Russian Academy of Sciences. A paleohydraulic analysis in the field, accompanying Berthault’s tests, showed that major rock formations deposited in 0.01% of the time attributed to them by the geological time-scale. (Press release: World-Renowned Scientists to Present Facts Against Evolution at Conference in Rome Participants Answer Pope Benedict’s Call for Truth and Tolerance in Evolution Debate FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE OCTOBER 27, 2008)

Also See Conference (SCIENTIFIC CRITIQUE OF EVOLUTION)

What could this do to michealb's 4.4 Billion Years?

The point is that consensus science leads to junk science


JoeT

[Tj3]

Just to change the subject a bit see the following - it shows :

Arguments against evolution are rarely heard because academic institutions tend to restrict their presentations to data that support the theory of evolution. For example, recent laboratory tests have shown that stratified sedimentary rocks, containing fossils alleged to prove evolution, formed very quickly – not over extended periods of time as evolutionists contend.

There were also some excellent scientific studies regarding the stratification that occurred during the Mount St. Helen's eruption that proved that such an event could easily duplicate the stratification in an extremely short timeframe.

http://www.cnt.ru/users/chas/sthelens.htm

[Credendovidis]

In his OP, Cred says : "Surely evolutionists will be able to reply to Tom's various questions"

Tommy : I also clearly and repeatedly stated that such replies should be replied to on the Evolution board, and not here, as here the issue is not your queries on evolution, but if any answer to your queries can be considered (as you claim) to be "evidence for the existence of "God"".

Tj3 : I have reported you for deliberate abuse here in this topic.

===

For all participating here :

Once more I have to request to stop any reaction on Tj3's queries on evolution, and instead of that address the only topic issue here.

That issue is if Tj3's questions on evolution and the possible replies to these have - or can provide - any validity towards OSE proof for the existence of "God".

The real issue is also that there is no - and never will be - any OSE proof for the existence of "God".
The only thing anyone can do is BELIEVE and have FAITH in the existence of "God".

I blame Tj3 once more for his deliberate and repeated side-stepping of that point - again and again and again - and it shows a dark shadow on his integrity as a real Christian.

I wonder if that is the way in which organisations like the "Christian Discernment Resources" , the "Last Days Bible Conference" , and the "Signs of Scripture Conference" approach the issue of the existence of "God"...

If so one should not be discerned, but strongly concerned about the morality of the ideas of such organisations...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.

[Tj3]

Cred,

I see that you cannot even tolerate when scientific papers which disagree with you are posted. Why would someone who claims to believe in science, try so hard to stop and interfere with discussions on the science of creation?

I know that you blame me, but what you blame me for is exposing the lack of any atheist / evolutionist answer to the question.

In his OP, Cred says:

"Surely evolutionists will be able to reply to Tom's various questions"

Now he tries to change the topic. Reading the thread makes it clear that the lack of answers from evolutionists/atheists is why Cred wants the discussion to end.

I know that you don't like things like this backfiring on you. I don't know why you thought that the result would be different from that which happened on the other board, but now you are batting zero out of 2. It must be rough when your BELIEF and FAITH in evolution is shown to have no basis in fact.

Keep telling yourself that there is no OSE for God. Maybe eventually you'll be able to forget what happened, and convince yourself. :D

Hey, why don't you try to answer the questions! You were not able to when we discussed this a year or so ago, but you have had plenty of time to consider the topic since then. Of course maybe you ready know that there is no natural explanation. If so, then I'll bet that all we can expect from you is more abusive responses.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The usual response to these issues from non-Christians are insults, ad hominems, and ridicule - but no answer. That is in and of itself an admission that no answer for a natural explanation exists. Sometimes they also plead for the discussion to end
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------:

[Credendovidis]

Just to change the subject a bit see the following - it shows :
Arguments against evolution are ...

Joe I have to ask you too to stop posting here about the actual evolution queries or evolution in general, as this topic is not about evolution : the OS refers to Tj3's claims that the lack of any proper reply to these queries are "evidence" for the existence of "God".

I question that approach.

The only evidence for the existence of "God" is OSE proof for the existence of "God".
Nothing else will do.

One can only BELIEVE and have FAITH in the existence of "God".
You confirmed that yourself earlier here.

:)

.

.

[Credendovidis]

I see that you cannot even tolerate when scientific papers which disagree with you are posted.

I have asked you repeatedly to stop pushing these queries. This topic is about your approach that lack of "perfect" responses to your queries are evidence for the "existence of "God"".

Only OSE proof for the existence of "God" can be used as evidence for the existence of "God".

As stated : I have reported your abuse here.

Please note that your attempt to get me abusive here is doomed to fail.

In the meantime you provide a clear example of your own abusive approach towards others.

:(

.

.

[Tj3]

Joe I have to ask you too to stop posting here about the actual evolution queries or evolution in general, as this topic is not about evolution : the OS refers to Tj3's claims that the lack of any proper reply to these queries are "evidence" for the existence of "God".

The OP says:


"Surely evolutionists will be able to reply to Tom's various questions"

I have seen many reactions to the scientific evidence being posted regarding creation, but I have never seen such constant demands that everyone stop discussing the science regarding creation!

I can think of only one reason why there would be such fear of science. It interferes with one's BELIEFs.

Cred, instead of trying to stop people from discusing the scientific evidence (especially when you started the discussion), why not join in a respectful discussion of the science of creation.

Those who love truth have nothing to fear from the truth.

[Tj3]

To try to get this back on the topic of science:

Just to change the subject a bit see the following - it shows :

Arguments against evolution are rarely heard because academic institutions tend to restrict their presentations to data that support the theory of evolution. For example, recent laboratory tests have shown that stratified sedimentary rocks, containing fossils alleged to prove evolution, formed very quickly – not over extended periods of time as evolutionists contend.

There were also some excellent scientific studies regarding the stratification that occurred during the Mount St. Helen's eruption that proved that such an event could easily duplicate the stratification in an extremely short timeframe.

Mount St. Helens And Catastrophism

[Credendovidis]

I have seen many reactions to the scientific evidence being posted regarding creation, but I have never seen such constant demands that everyone stop discussing the science regarding creation!!

Tommy : I have asked you repeatedly to stop pushing these queries. This topic is about your approach that lack of "perfect" responses to your queries are evidence for the "existence of "God"".

Only OSE proof for the existence of "God" can be used as evidence for the existence of "God".

As stated : I have reported your abuse here.

Please note that your attempt to get me abusive here is doomed to fail.

In the meantime you provide a clear example of your own abusive approach towards others.

:(

.

.

[Tj3]

Tommy : I have asked you repeatedly to stop pushing these queries. This topic is about your approach that lack of "perfect" responses to your queries are evidence for the "existence of "God"".

Only OSE proof for the existence of "God" can be used as evidence for the existence of "God".

As stated : I have reported your abuse here.

Please note that your attempt to get me abusive here is doomed to fail.

In the meantime you provide a clear example of your own abusive approach towards others.

:(

.

.

Cred,

Fine, you reported it. Now let that process take it's course and let those who wish to discuss the topic continue to do so!

I have no interest in your interruptions because we may disagree with your BELIEFS, nor do I have any interest in your abuse and false accusations.

So, if you reported it, then allow the mods to do their job and in the meantime, let those who wish to discuss the topic, do so!

Those who love truth do not need to fear truth.

[Credendovidis]

Now let that process take it's course and let those who wish to discuss the topic continue to do so!!

This topic is NOT about evolution or your queries on evolution.
I know, as I started THIS TOPIC!

So all I want is to get back on thread : MY THREAD.

The thread about the argument that any evidence for the existence of "God" can only be valid if supported by OSE for the existence of "God".

If you want to continue with your queries on evolution DO THAT ON THE EVOLUTION BOARD, WHERE IT BELONGS !!

:(

.

.

[Tj3]

This topic is NOT about evolution or your queries on evolution.

I did not raise any queries on evolution.

I know, as I started THIS TOPIC!

Starting the topic does not give you the right to abuse others who wish to discuss it when things go contrary to your beliefs.

Or to change the topic when people don't agree with what you would like. Here is a quote from the OP;


"Surely evolutionists will be able to reply to Tom's various questions"

Apparently you are unhappy because they have been unable to do so.

[Credendovidis]

Starting the tiopic does not give you the right to abuse others who wish to discuss it when things go contrary to your beliefs.

I do not abuse anyone, Tommy.
All I want is to get back to the thread of this topic.

The thread about the argument that any evidence for the existence of "God" can only be valid if supported by OSE for the existence of "God".

If you want to continue with your queries on evolution DO THAT ON THE EVOLUTION BOARD, WHERE IT BELONGS!!

:(

.

.

[Tj3]

I do not abuse anyone, Tommy.

Your posts say otherwise

All I want is to get back to the thread of this topic.

Good! I hope that this means that you will stop interrupting those who are trying to discuss it.

[Tj3]

Now that Cred says that he wants to get back to the topic, let's try to get back on the original topic with the hope that there will be no further interruptions:


Cred says in the OP - ""Surely evolutionists will be able to reply to Tom's various questions"". We are still waiting for atheists / evolutionists to provide a feasible answer to these questions as suggested by Cred:

EYE : How about the eye. Can anyone give a plausible explanation as to how the eye came to be?

DNA : In every living or previously living cell, we find an operating system (O/S) program written which is more complex than any MAC or PC. In addition to the program, we find that every cell has the built in capability to read and interpret this programming language. And this goes back to the simplest, and, according to evolutionists, most ancient type of cell in existence. If one found a PC with Windows O/S on it, or even a simple handheld with Windows CE O/S on it, it would automatically be taken to be proof positive of the existence of a capable and intelligent advanced designer. Do any atheists have a plausible explanation for how this advanced programming language, along with reader/interpreter came to be?

SIMPLE SINGLE CELL :
How did the simple cells come to be created?

POND SCUM : Cred claimed that the answer to the question above was that the single cells came from pond scum, which is in and itself a form of life - how did it come to be?

AUSTRALIAN BRUSH TURKEY : An interesting animal. It does not sit the eggs to incubate them, but rather creates a compost pile to provide the heat, which must be maintained at around 33 degrees. The eggs are laid down at the precise depth and in a circle where that exact heat will be maintained. The turkey does not lay the eggs right away, but waits until the compost pile has reached the necessary temperature. The is requires that the brush turkey understand heat and decomposition, as well as how the heat radiates and be able to calculate the precise depth and pattern at which the necessary heat occurs. And it has to understand that this is all required to hatch chicks. To have gained this knowledge by chance would be impossible because there are too many variables to all the brush turkey to figure out the linkage between heat and hatching eggs and then precisely what heat is required and how to obtain it.

MACAWS : Macaws are birds that feed on poisonous seeds, and in order to live, after they eat, they must eat a certain type of mud which neutralizes the poison.
How did this evolve? What is the natural explanation for this?

DIVING BELL SPIDER

Still waiting for any feasible approach for this animal to have been created:

Diving bell spider - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The usual respond to these issues from non-Christians are insults, ad hominems, and ridicule - but no answer. That is in and of itself an admission that no answer for a natural explanation exists.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Credendovidis]

I hope that this means that you will stop interrupting those who are trying to discuss it.

No Tommy : it means that I will keep trying to get back to the topic I posted to this board, and that I will keep reporting you for abuse here, every time you try to return to your evolution queries instead of addressing the topic issue itself.

Now be nice, and start your own topic on evolution queries.

Remember why your were suspended from AW...

:(

.

.

[Tj3]

No Tommy : it means that I will keep trying to get back to the topic I posted to this board, and that I will keep reporting you for abuse here, every time you try to return to your evolution queries instead of addressing the topic issue itself.

Oh, so it means that you will keep abusing those who try to discuss the original topic.

Are you saying that want to discuss why you were one of the most frequently suspended persons on the other boards?

[Credendovidis]

Now that Cred says that he wants ...

I want to get back to the topic question. Not to what you BELIEVE to be the topic question...

Oh, so it means that you will keep abusing those who try to discuss the original topic ...

Returning to the REAL original topic thread is now abuse ? Get real, Tommy !

You have been reported for abuse once again...

:(

.

.