Genesis 1 vs BBT debate 1 conclusions

[Divine Insight]

This thread is for both comments and voting on this debate. Comments may be posted here anytime. Please do not vote for a winner until the debate is officially closed. The debate is scheduled to run for no more than 36 posts.

The debate can be found here: My Theory Regarding "Genesis 1" vs "Big Bang - Which theory has been best verified? Wolfbitn Vs Divine

[Wolfbitn]

[Replying to post 297 by Divine Insight]

there you go with your cute lil charts... after you concede the debate... thats rather funny to me for some reason lol

.

[Wolfbitn]

[Replying to post 292 by Zzyzx]

Your problem is Divine conceded... gave up... quit... handed me the vioctory... So votes dont matter, he handed me the win after finding himself in a corner he couldnt dig out of... but if YOU would like to take his place and try for the win, i welcome it.

.

I would be willing to have a head-to-head debate. But not on the same question. Here are a few questions I would entertain:

1. Were the writers of Genesis chapter 1 describing an extinction event and not the formation of the universe?
2. Does the fossil record support the creation and flood stories recorded in Genesis?
3. Did the writers of Genesis envision a much smaller universe than what we now know that it is? Did they really believe that the stars were in the firmament that divides the waters above from the waters below?
4. Has there been a world-wide flood since the appearance of humans on earth?

Once we have agreed on the terms of debate and the question we can proceed. I suggest the following terms:

• The opening post will be simply a statement of what is being debated and a few housekeeping details. No argument, for or against will be included in the OP. The entire text of the OP will be agreed on between the debaters before the debate commences.
• Whoever is arguing the affirmative will respond first, with each debater alternating responses until they mutually agree that all relevant points have been covered.
• There is no time limit or size limit for posting.
• A discussion thread will be created for other forum participants to make comments with regard to this debate. [a peanut gallery]
• Civility and the rules of debate will be adhered to.

Mac, I'll tell you what i will debate with you...

As you know by now, My theory regarding Genesis 1, is that it represents an extinction event and the subsequent restoration of life.

I am willing to continue the debate that:

1) My theory has been more tested than the big bang.

2) It fares much better in testing

3) It is therefore the superior theory in regards to the quality of the theory, testability and verification.

This is what Iv been touting and this is something I can certainly do with no problem whatsover.

We can use the same rules Divine and i were using, and we can even pick up in the same thread, and you can take the post divine chose to concede on.

I dont imagine that is a very attractive position for you to start in though, so I sincerely understand if this is something you choose not to do.


.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 297 by Divine Insight]

there you go with your cute lil charts... after you concede the debate... thats rather funny to me for some reason lol

.

I didn't concede the debate Wolfbitn, I resigned from the debate because of your unethical behavior of relentlessly misrepresenting the truth of what has actually been said, just precisely as you are doing right now.

Your behavior speaks for itself.

[Wolfbitn]

[Replying to post 303 by Divine Insight]

You QUIT... and of course you cant show where i misrepresented you because you know i didnt. I challenge you to quote it right here right now... You make the charge back it up.

Anyone reading my last post to you knows why you quit.

You were simply backed into too many corners and had to make WAY too many concessions... and you were shown to be wrong in several issues one right after the other like saying string hasnt been falsified, Guth isnt into string, and of all things even to say there was no such thing as Darwinism... thats on you, thats not a misrepresentation.

.

[dianaiad]

[Replying to post 297 by Divine Insight]

there you go with your cute lil charts... after you concede the debate... thats rather funny to me for some reason lol

.

Moderator Warning


Unproductive one-liners are against forum rules. So are comments about the posters rather than the content of the posts. The above post is both unproductive and uncivil. Please read and follow the Rules.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Nickman]

[Replying to post 292 by Zzyzx]

Your problem is Divine conceded... gave up... quit... handed me the vioctory... So votes dont matter, he handed me the win after finding himself in a corner he couldnt dig out of... but if YOU would like to take his place and try for the win, i welcome it.

.

I would be willing to have a head-to-head debate. But not on the same question. Here are a few questions I would entertain:

1. Were the writers of Genesis chapter 1 describing an extinction event and not the formation of the universe?
2. Does the fossil record support the creation and flood stories recorded in Genesis?
3. Did the writers of Genesis envision a much smaller universe than what we now know that it is? Did they really believe that the stars were in the firmament that divides the waters above from the waters below?
4. Has there been a world-wide flood since the appearance of humans on earth?

Once we have agreed on the terms of debate and the question we can proceed. I suggest the following terms:

• The opening post will be simply a statement of what is being debated and a few housekeeping details. No argument, for or against will be included in the OP. The entire text of the OP will be agreed on between the debaters before the debate commences.
• Whoever is arguing the affirmative will respond first, with each debater alternating responses until they mutually agree that all relevant points have been covered.
• There is no time limit or size limit for posting.
• A discussion thread will be created for other forum participants to make comments with regard to this debate. [a peanut gallery]
• Civility and the rules of debate will be adhered to.

Mac, I'll tell you what i will debate with you...

As you know by now, My theory regarding Genesis 1, is that it represents an extinction event and the subsequent restoration of life.

I am willing to continue the debate that:

1) My theory has been more tested than the big bang.

2) It fares much better in testing

3) It is therefore the superior theory in regards to the quality of the theory, testability and verification.

This is what Iv been touting and this is something I can certainly do with no problem whatsover.

We can use the same rules Divine and i were using, and we can even pick up in the same thread, and you can take the post divine chose to concede on.

I dont imagine that is a very attractive position for you to start in though, so I sincerely understand if this is something you choose not to do.


.

If only it actually was a theory. Its not a theory. It is an interpretation of ancient texts that twists the literal meaning of Genesis to fit scientific findings. The same science that formed our understanding of our earliest past, you dismiss when it comes to the big bang. The evidence that supports the BB, you dismiss without any substance in return. You quoted from scientists that support the BB, such as Guth, and whom have made scientific findings that add to it, i.e. inflation. This further backed by WMAP. The Hubble exploration showed that the predictions made based on earlier research were true. It is a fact that the universe is expanding. If you deny that, you have not studied the evidence. Your "theory" doesn't explain how the universe came into existence and what happened during the first seconds of its birth. It assumes that an invisible creator god made everything. That is not an explanation. You are missing too much data. Your "theory" starts with god creating the universe and then fast forwards to an unknown time, where you then shoehorn an extinction event into an ancient text that doesn't support your interpretation. The BB explains how all the visible matter was created in superheated reactions deep inside supernovas. Then it explains how this matter collaborated to form the cosmos that we see today. Your "theory" says "god did it." The BB is scrutinized by leading scientists on a daily basis. Your "theory" has never seen the light of scientific peer-review. It is not even recognized by leading proponents for the authenticity of scripture. The peer-review that it has met here on the forum has already shown that your "theory" fails in comparison to BB cosmology.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 301 by Wolfbitn]

[Wolfbitn]

While trying to stay within the rules as much as possible...

...i would like to publicly apologize to everyone in this thread, and most especially Divine, for not posting something more substantial.

Moving forward...


.

[Nickman]

While trying to stay within the rules as much as possible...

...i would like to publicly apologize to everyone in this thread, and most especially Divine, for not posting something more substantial.

Moving forward...


.

You are fervent in the debate and in your posts elsewhere, but I just don't think you will find many people who will agree that you have a theory from either camp. If you had your ideas reviewed by theologians and scientists (in favor), then I would agree that you were onto something. Your views have not been dismissed based on your affiliation. They have been dismissed based on textual evidence and scientific evidence.

[Wolfbitn]

I have offered, in the debate thread, to allow Divine to officially withdraw his concession. If he wishes, he may take up the debate where we left off, be addressing post 19...

Divine if you accept, simply give me 12 hour notice... I will allow you all the time you need unless someone else steps up and decides they can take over where you left off 12 hours from now... then its open to anyone.


.