What If...?

[theStudent]

Currently, I am doing what was suggested by some on these forums.
I am researching information both for, and against evolution, and trust me - I am doing so objectively.
While I am still researching, I want to put this out, to hear the different views on it.

During my research I discovered that lately, just over the last decade or so, a lot of informations has been surfacing about fake fossils.
In fact it has now become common place for fossils sold at museums to be checked for genuineness.
I find this interesting.

Why now, is this happening?
Could it be that evidence as it always does, is now surfacing?

For example
Remember the dinosaur hoax - the one that was said to be put together using different bones?
It has recently been found out that it wasn't a hoax after all.
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015/02/ ... ecies.html

That is quite interesting.

The fossils aren't the only things that were/are claimed to be fake.
There are the drawings, and pictures as well.
Right now, I am going through a very long document considered a case against some of Darwins picture illustrations.
But have you ever come across this one?

Pictures from the past powerfully shape current views of the world. In books, television programs, and websites, new images appear alongside others that have survived from decades ago. Among the most famous are drawings of embryos by the Darwinist Ernst Haeckel in which humans and other vertebrates begin identical, then diverge toward their adult forms. But these icons of evolution are notorious, too: soon after their publication in 1868, a colleague alleged fraud, and Haeckels many enemies have repeated the charge ever since. His embryos nevertheless became a textbook staple until, in 1997, a biologist accused him again, and creationist advocates of intelligent design forced his figures out. How could the most controversial pictures in the history of science have become some of the most widely seen?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Haeckel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Haec ... eks4-6.jpg
English: The pictures illustrate Ernst Haeckel's biogenetic law. In the beginning embryos of different species look remarkable similar, later different characteristics develop. The images initiated controversies and charges of fraud.

All of this lends to a possibility.
Consdering the fact that fossils can be faked, we must accept the fact that Darwin, and other scientists could have lied.

My question here, isn't whether he did lie or not, but rather, Does this not place evolutionists in the same position as the Christians they claim are believing in fables?

Consider:
Christians accept the Bible, as the word of God.
Here are just a few facts about the Bible.
With estimated total sales of over 5 billion copies, the Bible is widely considered to be the best-selling book of all time.
It has estimated annual sales of 100 million copies.
It has been a major influence on literature and history, especially in the West where the Gutenberg Bible was the first mass-printed book.
It was the first book ever printed using movable type.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible

Archaeological findings of the Dead Sea Scrolls, also called the Qumran Caves https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls

The evidence is there however, that the book we hold in our hand today (the Bible), contains information written centuries ago.

Atheist call the book fables - the reason I have yet to find out.
Maybe one of the reasons is that they have not seen God, or seen him write any book - whatever.
So they claim that Christians' belief in them and what they present is blind faith, and belief in stories.

However, is this not the case with those who accept the theory of evolution, where all they have to go by, is what scientists claim to be evidence?

By the way...
No one, to this day have seen them recreate the theories.
Any data they give you on species, is usually what already existed (at least what I have come across so far).
As regards other claims, all we have are pictures, and claimed fossils, which could have been edited.

So evolutionists are really believing what men claim - without any substantial proof of their claim.
How is this different to believing a book?

And what if Darwin, and others lied?


I'm just interested in you different opinions and thoughts, on the above.
Here is a nice short video of someone's opinion. Reasonable too.

[H.sapiens]

I love quantum theory, maybe I can't understand their details, but the meaning as a whole, what they are after I really do understand. I think even better than they do, .. !?

Wrong. A layman should never be so arrogant as to think that their understanding of a scientific theory exceeds that of scientists who devote their whole lives to the study. The Dunning-Kruger effect applies here. Take heed of the fact that your knowledge of science will almost always fall short of actual scientists, if you're just a layperson.

Or even if you are a scientist, but are outside of your field. I am appalled at the ignorance of many, many physicians, even when they have a bachelors in biology.

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 513 by RonE]

When I am having a sweet dream, I myself don't want to wake up.
But eventually I have to - don't I?

Most Biblical scholars are already aware of some of those creepers.
In fact, if you check some Bible translations, including NWT, you wouldn't find a number of them.
You might find a long dash, or brackets enclosing the text, or the text written seperately, and commented.

If some missed creepers need to be removed however, how does that significantly affect the text?
It doesn't. So no - The Bible is not debunked.
It's not even bunked, because there is nothing about it that is deceptive, since it is not man's work.

Of course, there are many who would like to dismiss it, at the drop of a hat, because they can't dismiss it otherwise, but looking for such an easy dismissal, based on something so frivolous as copyist mistakes, would mean that nothing is beneficial, including science, which depend upon guesses that one doesn't have to wonder, but is guaranteed there are often mistakes.
The record of mistakes and adjustments, are not minor.
Yet we don't debunk that, because of mistakes - do we?

I know, as I mentioned, how much sweet dreams mean to us, but it is my belief, that some day many people will wake up to the fact that the word of God can never be destroyed, made void, or proven to be untrue.

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 514 by rikuoamero]

Thanks for pointing out the error, rikuoamero.
Only, I can't find where I wrote that.
Can you point out the post please.

I'm sure it wasn't a typo though, but an honest calculation error.
Something the neurons in my brain seem to misfire - probably a mutation occured, that didn't result in a perfect brain.

Speaking of which... I was wondering...
Why does man have such a large nose, compared to tiny creatures, and yet he can't smell water, even when he puts his nose up close, but tiny creature can smell water for miles.
Wait a minute... The apes can smell water too. In fact, all the animals can smell water, and food over great distances. Why can't man? Did his nose get a serious harmful mutation?

I'm not really asking for an answer.
I'm already aware that the scientists still have a lot of unanswered question, and I doubt very much that they ever considered this one.
I just though about it, and decided I would mention it.

However, you commented on an error in my post. Thanks.
Is there anything else you would like to point out, or comment on.
Please, feel free to, and show me the post, cause I am not finding it.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 530 by theStudent]

Thanks for pointing out the error, rikuoamero.
Only, I can't find where I wrote that.
Can you point out the post please.

I got that from RonE's comment, the one immediately above my post 514. RonE, in post 513 has in blue "Replying to post 19 by theStudent".
I then knew thereabouts where your post was. Since each page of a thread on this site has a maximum of 10 posts, that meant your post 19 would be on page 2.

I'm sure it wasn't a typo though, but an honest calculation error.
Something the neurons in my brain seem to misfire - probably a mutation occured, that didn't result in a perfect brain.

Yeah, your imperfect brain designed by a perfect designer didn't do something correctly.
Wait a minute...there's something wrong with that logic...

Why does man have such a large nose, compared to tiny creatures, and yet he can't smell water, even when he puts his nose up close, but tiny creature can smell water for miles.

Probably because, through evolution, we humans tend to use sight and our brains more than we use our other senses, so those other sense atrophy and become less useful.
Over time, over many generations, our ancestors would have used their eyes and their brains to figure out where water is, instead of just smelling it out.

Wait a minute... The apes can smell water too. In fact, all the animals can smell water, and food over great distances

Can they? Can all animals smell over great distances?

I'm not really asking for an answer.

Oh, so it's rhetorical. You already have your answer. Your perfect designer designed man with imperfect noses.

I'm already aware that the scientists still have a lot of unanswered question, and I doubt very much that they ever considered this one.

Really? You think evolutionary biologists of the calibre of Dawkins have NEVER considered simple things like this?
Are you really selling PhD scientists that short? Wow, I guess they can't know as much as theStudent, he's asking the really tough questions, things no-one else has ever pondered!

I'm sure it wasn't a typo though, but an honest calculation error.

So then your mysterious documents (that you never linked to or divulged upon) that supposedly show every word in the Bible to be correct...where are they? How old are they?

Please, feel free to, and show me the post, cause I am not finding it.

I have. Page 2 of this thread, since it's post 19, it'll be near the bottom.

[H.sapiens]

[Replying to post 514 by rikuoamero]

Thanks for pointing out the error, rikuoamero.
Only, I can't find where I wrote that.
Can you point out the post please.

I'm sure it wasn't a typo though, but an honest calculation error.
Something the neurons in my brain seem to misfire - probably a mutation occured, that didn't result in a perfect brain.

Speaking of which... I was wondering...
Why does man have such a large nose, compared to tiny creatures, and yet he can't smell water, even when he puts his nose up close, but tiny creature can smell water for miles.
Wait a minute... The apes can smell water too. In fact, all the animals can smell water, and food over great distances. Why can't man? Did his nose get a serious harmful mutation?

I'm not really asking for an answer.
I'm already aware that the scientists still have a lot of unanswered question, and I doubt very much that they ever considered this one.
I just though about it, and decided I would mention it.

However, you commented on an error in my post. Thanks.
Is there anything else you would like to point out, or comment on.
Please, feel free to, and show me the post, cause I am not finding it.

Human noses have only a little to do with ofaction, their primary purpose is obtaining and conditioning large quantities of air, since humans are persistence hunters.

[RonE]

[Replying to post 529 by theStudent]

[Replying to post 513 by RonE]

When I am having a sweet dream, I myself don't want to wake up.
But eventually I have to - don't I?

Most Biblical scholars are already aware of some of those creepers.
In fact, if you check some Bible translations, including NWT, you wouldn't find a number of them.
You might find a long dash, or brackets enclosing the text, or the text written seperately, and commented.

If some missed creepers need to be removed however, how does that significantly affect the text?
It doesn't. So no - The Bible is not debunked.
It's not even bunked, because there is nothing about it that is deceptive, since it is not man's work.

Of course, there are many who would like to dismiss it, at the drop of a hat, because they can't dismiss it otherwise, but looking for such an easy dismissal, based on something so frivolous as copyist mistakes, would mean that nothing is beneficial, including science, which depend upon guesses that one doesn't have to wonder, but is guaranteed there are often mistakes.
The record of mistakes and adjustments, are not minor.
Yet we don't debunk that, because of mistakes - do we?

I know, as I mentioned, how much sweet dreams mean to us, but it is my belief, that some day many people will wake up to the fact that the word of God can never be destroyed, made void, or proven to be untrue.

Typos are not new, even with spell check I still get them sometimes. However, I don't declare it "divine intervention" when I get it right. The other part that made your post worthy of a my 'debunk' claim was the reference to "over 100 centuries old". That is 10,000 years. The oldest known writing found so far only goes back 5,000 years.

[Clownboat]

Hello Clownboat, took you off ignore because this new ideology caught my attention, you know the one the atheist Morgan Freeman is used for promoting, also, so I can see if you have changed any yet or not?
But, .. doesn't look like it, you are still out there to deface God.

Wait! There is a god out there to deface? Is this just another empty claim or has the government been letting off too many chem trails where you live? If there are no gods, then your claim that I'm out to deface them is not accurate.

Hope all is well with you and yours!

And you and yours as well.

OK, how does my post there show it's false??

Easy! You claimed that there was but one god. I provided many gods that are available. Anything more than 1 is not 1, therefore your claim that 'there is only one god' is not accurate nor truthful.

The rest is just un-evidenced claims and more conspiracy theories. I just couldn't get through it all. So if there is anything specific you would like me to address or respond to, just let me know.

[Clownboat]

Ah yes, .. things will be like before I was born, as if I never existed.

Wait! Do you claim that this is not an option? If not, why scoff at it as if it is not an option?

That goes right-smack against your BB-Evolution Agenda 21-2030 religious beliefs.

Come back arian! Come back! Can we not have a serious discussion without you interjecting your conspiracy theories?

Here is what you're saying: "Same as it ever was"

Talking Heads - "Once in a lifetime"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1wg1DNHbNU

Crazy world, so yes, .. let's go fishing buddy!?

Not able to watch videos at this moment. Is there anything important in the video that you would like to relay (preferably not more conspiracy theories)? I have to try really hard as it is to take you serious.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to post 513 by RonE]

When I am having a sweet dream, I myself don't want to wake up.
But eventually I have to - don't I?

Most Biblical scholars are already aware of some of those creepers.
In fact, if you check some Bible translations, including NWT, you wouldn't find a number of them.
You might find a long dash, or brackets enclosing the text, or the text written seperately, and commented.

If some missed creepers need to be removed however, how does that significantly affect the text?
It doesn't. So no - The Bible is not debunked.
It's not even bunked, because there is nothing about it that is deceptive, since it is not man's work.

Of course, there are many who would like to dismiss it, at the drop of a hat, because they can't dismiss it otherwise, but looking for such an easy dismissal, based on something so frivolous as copyist mistakes, would mean that nothing is beneficial, including science, which depend upon guesses that one doesn't have to wonder, but is guaranteed there are often mistakes.
The record of mistakes and adjustments, are not minor.
Yet we don't debunk that, because of mistakes - do we?

I know, as I mentioned, how much sweet dreams mean to us, but it is my belief, that some day many people will wake up to the fact that the word of God can never be destroyed, made void, or proven to be untrue.

Your claim once again is in error.
I was a born again, spirit filled, drunk in the holy ghost, street evangelizing Christian for two decades. Letting go of my beliefs was one of the hardest things I have ever done because I sincerely wanted them to be true.

However, after examining them carefully, and holding on to that which was good, this what you call 'the word of a god' was proven to in fact be un-true as told. Again, my desire was to hold on to my beliefs, not to lose them. I even justified evolution (that's how my god did it), and why there was not world wide flood before I was freed of my beliefs. That's how bad I wanted to maintain them.

[arian]

I love quantum theory, maybe I can't understand their details, but the meaning as a whole, what they are after I really do understand. I think even better than they do, .. !?

Wrong. A layman should never be so arrogant as to think that their understanding of a scientific theory exceeds that of scientists who devote their whole lives to the study. The Dunning-Kruger effect applies here. Take heed of the fact that your knowledge of science will almost always fall short of actual scientists, if you're just a layperson.

Layman, .. lol. I have dedicated my whole life to curiously, and carefully "observe the world around me" for 60 years, .. who yu calling layman succa?

Yeah, it did sound arrogant IF it wasn't for their miss-understanding of Infinite, of nothing, of Eternal, and telling the difference between their brain and the mind, not to forget the "special-Olympics' where time dilation, length contraction and weight-gain happens .. you know, those "minor things", that they just brush off. Where they just throw in their religiously created sci-fi BB-Evolution version definitions that would not only support, but like if they were to correct the "nothing is no longer nothing" doctrine, heck the entire Big-Bang story would fail since it hangs on "nothing not actually being nothing" for the nature-goddess to exist in.

So yeah, only on those minor things I believe I understand better than anyone I heard so far. I wrote e-mails, posted a lot, but so far no takers. Heck, even the religious don't actually want evidence for God (pun intended, .. the last thing any religion would want is "evidence" of God), .. so go figure!?

So as it stands unchallenged (My challenges don't count, I'm just a mindless evolving animal fossil, .. (since that's when speciation occurs, in the fossil stage) after all)

* "nothing is no longer nothing" (BB-Evolution hangs on it)

* "Infinite is no longer boundless" (our infinite "size" universe can now expand into itself and 666CERN can keep creating parallel universes in 'nothing that is no longer nothing', .. and claim it is "infinitely big" (infinitely big, get it, ..??) all because they have to have their universe expanding. So now some "thing" expanding can be considered "Infinite", also because they have by 666CERNtification a PhD before their names. Now every religion gets to "Coexist"

* "Eternal has a beginning and an end" (Christians get to keep their "sun-god")

* "Time travel is possible" because two things move away from each other, but no one can tell me if it's the "motion/speed, of ONE object", .. or the "distancing/not distancing of the two objects" or "which object that is considered distancing from the other" that creates this magical time-dilation effect?

But, I don't matter, religion and religious doctrines that have to be taken on blind-faith matter, always did, and looks like, on this earth that everyone want's to live forever on, it always will .. so there goes my two whole years of 'public education' right down the drain. Not to mention my GED.

It's OK, just throw me a bone, and I'll find my "happy place" in some dark corner of the room debating with myself on my computer.

Love you Neatras.