XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.atheism, alt.religion.christian
From: none@none.non
On Sep 11, 2025, Mitchell Holman wrote
(Message-ID: ):
> None wrote in news:109vbc8$2tbin$1@dont-email.me:
>
> > On Sep 11, 2025, Mitchell Holman wrote
> > (Message-ID: ):
> >
> > > "Andrew" wrote in
> > > news:rKAwQ.12261$7F4e.8283@fx05.ams4:
> > >
> > > > "Dawn Flood" wrote in message news:109tfa4$29gbi$1@dont-email.me...
> > > >
> > > > > To sum-up, paleoanthropology is a valid science, because,
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) Major universities exist which offer doctoral degrees in
> > > > > paleoanthropology.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) The US National Academy of Sciences has admitted
> > > > > paleoanthropologists to its ranks.
> > > > >
> > > > > 3) Peer-reviewed research journals exist for paleoanthropology.
> > > > >
> > > > > 4) Few, if any, scientists dispute the fact that
> > > > > paleoanthropology is a valid science.
> > > >
> > > > In spite of all that you say above, it is noted that
> > > > you are at a complete loss of words when I ask
> > > > you to tell us about any specific paleo-anthropological
> > > > discovery that shows that they have enlightened
> > > > us about ~anything~...in your own words.
> > >
> > > And you are a "complete loss of words"
> > > to tell us the age of the earth, or even
> > > us your opinion of it.
> >
> > The earth as you know it was not until it was called earth on the
> > 3rd day of this realm. The planets stars, etc were not until the 4th
> > day of this realm. All this occurred around 6,000 years ago. In
> > literal time, not figurative nor theoretical.
>
> Why 6,000?
>
> How do you determine that date?
What date? I mentioned time approximate.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > And are their so called ""discoveries"" built upon
> > > > scientific method, or are they built upon fantasy?
> > > >
> > > > Those who want the truth do not accept stories that
> > > > are built upon fantasy.
> > >
> > > Modern Christian: Someone who believes
> > > in dragons, unicorns, talking snakes and
> > > transmutation (all mentioned in the Bible)
> > > but accuses those citing scientific data
> > > of "indulging in fantasies".
> >
> > Then I do not fit your daffynition.
> >
> > Scientific data only recounts what is reversed engineered, and from
> > that understanding, some try to create variations based on the same
> > things that always existed in the time of man, reshape, and reuse, and
> > most generally it all contaminates the earth and its environment.
>
> What other data is there to
> measure time but scientific data?
> The universe expands at a known
> rate, the continents move at a
> known rate, starlight reaches our
> eyes at a known rate. If those
> known rates are wrong what rates
> are right?
If the continents moved at a known rate then there would be no earthquakes.
All volcanos would erupt and known cycles and explosive rates.
If such massive errors are made then what credibility does the rest of your
statement have.
Science has recently recognized another light form, one that was spoken of
near 5,000 years ago + or - and they have yet to determine its parameters.
>
>
> >
> > Same thing happens mentally to ones understandings which ends up in
> > confusion when the natural order of thought is modified for that
> > reason psychosis runs amuck. Mental diseases are directly attributed
> > to evil and those that are evil call good evil and attempt to over
> > rule the natural order of things. To their detriment.
>
> What does "psychosis" have to do
> the measurement of time?
It is mad scientists that determined your time beliefs. ;)
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
