subjective armageddon

[liberdave]

A buddy and I were talking the other night and came up with an interesting idea: What if the bible fortold the end of the white man in as far as not being the (using word very lightly) "dominant" race of peoples? I use the word dominant to mean most militarily and economicaly massive. I mean, we saw the Chinese take "control" of both of those titles in '03. If the bible was written by the white peoples (I don't care what you say, Hebrew people are "white"), then maybe the bible fortold "white" armaggedon? Maybe china and the east are the "kingdom of heaven"? I don't know, I just thought it would be neat.

And as a side note, I think I would like to rather have a Republic of Heaven instead of a Kingdom, wouldn't you?

[Beatnik Bob]

I'm not white damnit!

And neither was a few of Solomons wives!

And neither are the majority in the middle east.

So if your gonna judge by "masive" then the percent of white people in middle east is like 40%. Or at leaste Israel.

[Beatnik Bob]

over 36,000 Hebrews are black....well 36,000 flown in from Ethiopia...

And by that judgement asians are white too.

Allot of Hebrews/Jews only seem to be white because we've been exiled to Europe for so long.

Also, the Bible gives a hint that we are all the same no matter the race...all made from the dust of the Earth.

If "white" people die...we all die in this together.

If anything...it's the armageddon of HUMANITY.

[jeffweeder]

we are all the same, except for melinan pigment and eyeshape, strip the skin and you wouldnt know the diff . when the bible speaks about the end it seems to be the planet itself, not just the people liberdave. anyway i wouldnt mind seeing a black person rule things for a while, they have soul and they miove more to the rythmmm, probly wouldnt be any worse

[liberdave]

OK wait, wait, wait jut one second. Before I get nailed to a cross, PLEASE let me clarify, it seems that people didn't concentrate on what I said but how I said it. Now let me dig my foxhole and defend this.

I'm not white damnit! OK, not white, I meant more of a Caucasian based ancestry or even Indo-Aryan. (Including Middle Eastern, Indian, etc.) Not the actual flesh tone, more like a cultural differentiation?

And neither are the majority in the middle east.
So if your gonna judge by "masive" then the percent of white people in middle east is like 40%. Or at leaste Israel.Explain these statements?

Allot of Hebrews/Jews only seem to be white because we've been exiled to Europe for so long. Ok, I see that race is a touchy issue with you, How about Abrahamic based cultures?

Also, the Bible gives a hint that we are all the same no matter the race...all made from the dust of the Earth.OK! I get the point, can we move on to the content of the post?

If "white" people die...we all die in this together. I said nothing about death or dying. I am simply talking about the end of a Eurocentric earth. As in where The US, Canada, UK, France, Germany, Australia, India etc. etc. etc. are no longer the "central players" in this game of life.

we are all the same, except for melinan pigment and eyeshape, strip the skin and you wouldnt know the diff . Right, right, of course, I took cultural and physical anthropology in college. I understand that so called "races" are no longer used (only by the US govt. on loan forms).

when the bible speaks about the end it seems to be the planet itself, not just the people liberdave. Finally, we get to the content of my first post. Right, but just what if it is based on a <insert perfered definition here> -centered view of armageddon? WHAT IF!?

anyway i wouldnt mind seeing a black person rule things for a while, they have soul and they miove more to the rythmmm, probly wouldnt be any worse Woah, woah, woah I thought you said we are all the same? Melanian pigment, eyeshape, and all that? Now your the pot calling the kettle... er... um.. non-aryo-indo-abrahamic-caucasoidial?

[B.NyeTheUruk-Hai]

we are all the same, except for melinan pigment and eyeshape, strip the skin and you wouldnt know the diff .
Interesting that you would say this, weeder. Because if you stripped the skin off of an ape, there would be very little difference between it and us, including near-100% identical DNA. Something that I noticed the other day while watching TV - A commercial showed an ape and I was amazed to notice that their ears look EXACTLY like the ears of humans. How many animals have ears that look like ours? Think about it...

[wyltk75]

Actually if you strip the skin off, not only would it hurt like crazy, we'd most likely be dead!

[Beatnik Bob]

A commercial showed an ape and I was amazed to notice that their ears look EXACTLY like the ears of humans. How many animals have ears that look like ours? Think about it... It's not the ears tha matter, but the brains.

Find me an Ape that's designing sky scrapers and I swear I'll seriously think about becoming atheist.

[liberdave]

Find me an Ape that's designing sky scrapers and I swear I'll seriously think about becoming atheist. Give me enough time and materials, and it will be.. link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem) *clicky, clicky*

[jeffweeder]

they are very intelligent, but i couldnt imagine a monkey ,starting from scratch designing the atomic bomb, or even a recipe for banana and pecan pie. good point about the black leader liberdave, what im saying i suppose is spiritualy we are in the same place,the flesh shouldnt count for anything

[B.NyeTheUruk-Hai]

Just because apes are not as smart as us doesn't mean a thing. They're not as smart as us because they are not as evolutionarily advanced as us ( is 'evolutionarily' a word? ). Even so, they're smart enough to learn sign language and use tools. Humans evolved from them to become better organisms ( ie - smarter ). I find it amusing how so many religious people are so abhorred by the idea that we evolved from apes. It doesn't mean that we ARE apes, it just means that we are descended from apes and have evolved into something better than them.

[Beatnik Bob]

OK, not white, I meant more of a Caucasian based ancestry or even Indo-Aryan. (Including Middle Eastern, Indian, etc.) Not the actual flesh tone, more like a cultural differentiation? Well flesh tone is just a physical attribute of cultural differation. Same thing, different flavours.


Explain these statements? I'm saying that Jews are ultimately from the middle east, and the middle east percentage of cultural backrounds is more Islamic/Hebrew than anglo-saxon.


Ok, I see that race is a touchy issue with you, What did you expect?


How about Abrahamic based cultures? How about em'?


I am simply talking about the end of a Eurocentric earth. As in where The US, Canada, UK, France, Germany, Australia, India etc. etc. etc. are no longer the "central players" in this game of life. Ok. But isn't the USA, and many other "anglo-saxon" countries multi-cultural?


WHAT IF?! The deffinition should make sense.

You back this all up by saying that the Bible was writen by white people, who you say Hebrews are. But this isn't so.
We can safely assume that all Hebrews 3000 years ago became Jewish and followed the Torah and wrote it.
There are thousands of Jews in Ethiopia....who are African denomination. And they are descended from Jews. And there are a few people in Jamaica that claim to be descended from Solomon.


Just because apes are not as smart as us doesn't mean a thing. They're not as smart as us because they are not as evolutionarily advanced as us ( is 'evolutionarily' a word? ). Even so, they're smart enough to learn sign language and use tools. Humans evolved from them to become better organisms ( ie - smarter ). I find it amusing how so many religious people are so abhorred by the idea that we evolved from apes. It doesn't mean that we ARE apes, it just means that we are descended from apes and have evolved into something better than them. I see this all the time.
Christian: G-d exists and Satan exists because the Bible says so!
Atheist/agnostic/etc.: The Bible isn't necessarily true. But we are descended from apes because science says so!

You guys just do the same thing you discourge. I guess we all do it.

Bill Nye,
1. Just because we look alike doesn't mean we're the same entity...or even related. And if brains don't count, then ears don't count.
Would you say aliens evolved from humans and wen't to another planet? No. Even though we might both be humanoid, it doesn't mean we're related.

[B.NyeTheUruk-Hai]

Just because we look alike doesn't mean we're the same entity...or even related. And if brains don't count, then ears don't count.
The ears thing was just something that I noticed recently. My point was, considering how complex the shape of the human ear is, it is only apes and some other simians that have ears the same as humans. Coincidence? But the main reason, by far, that apes are believed to be our ancestors is the fact that human DNA and ape DNA differs by ONLY ONE PERCENT. Don't you find that fact compelling?


Would you say aliens evolved from humans and wen't to another planet? No.
My personal opinion would be 'no' as well. BUT, if you were to look at this question objectively, who's to say that they didn't? I mean, really, there is NO evidence that says that they haven't! Believers in God are constantly challenging non-believers to prove that God doesn't exist. I feel that this is a poor way to confirm the existence of God. Again, if you look at things objectively, can you conclusively prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist? Can you prove that dragons don't exist? It is an incredibly flawed argument to ask for proof that something doesn't exist. Who's to say that, next week, aliens won't arrive on earth and tell us that they left our planet centuries ago on a giant ship that was actually the city of Atlantis and now they've returned to say 'hi'. It probably won't happen, but can you say with 100% certaintly that it won't? You can't...


they are very intelligent, but i couldnt imagine a monkey ,starting from scratch designing the atomic bomb
Can YOU design the atomic bomb from scratch, jeff? See? You DO have something in common with monkeys. Ironically, your statement does more to prove my point than it does to prove your point. What do you think would happen if you took a newborn baby, isolated it from EVERYTHING ( ie - no human contact, no access to television or books etc. ) and then leave it alone until it was, let's say, 30 years old? Do you think that this human being would be capable of designing the atomic bomb from scratch? Do you think that this human being would know how to spell its name? Would it even know that it HAD a name? Would it even walk on two legs or would it be crawling on all fours still? Most likely, this human's greatest talents would be picking its nose, shitting and picking bugs out of its hair. In other words, it would be VERY ape-like...

[jeffweeder]

my point was MAN has the ability to do these things, monkeys dont, and yes if i was to study this field ,then as a human i would have a chance of succeeding,as man has. What these monkeys have done is no diff to what my dog does for a treat.

[nrj]

my point was MAN has the ability to do these things, monkeys dont, and yes if i was to study this field ,then as a human i would have a chance of succeeding,as man has. What these monkeys have done is no diff to what my dog does for a treat. You haven't read the evolution theory, have you? It took us 40 000 years to get to the "we have nukes"-stadium, and if the monkeys would be better than us and didn't have to fight for survival then they could quietly evolve and research until they reach our stadium.

But, since they don't, I suspect they will be below us for a long time. You have to understand that evolution takes hundreds of thousands of years. It's not just something happening over night. You can't ask the monkeys to make a nuke and it will be ready next week.

[B.NyeTheUruk-Hai]

and yes if i was to study this field ,then as a human i would have a chance of succeeding,as man has.
Wow, you can read and follow instructions, jeff. It doesn't mean that you would understand it. You're basically following a recipe. If humans were to figure out ape language and then talk to an ape and tell it all of the steps that are required to build an atomic bomb ( ie - read this book to the ape ), then it is very possible that the ape would actually build an atomic bomb. You require a book to tell you how to build one, and the ape requires a human to tell it what to do ( ie - the human is the ape's book ).

Your problem, jeff, is one that too many believers also have. What is it, you ask? You simply assume, wrongly so, that man's knowledge of the universe will not change from what it is TODAY. In this particular example with the apes, you assume that they will stay EXACTLY the way that they are and NEVER change, EVER. This is wrong. Apes have already evolved to the point where they use tools in the wild ( nobody had to teach them this unlike how you have to teach a dog its tricks ). You assume that they will stay this way forever and never learn anything else ever again. Who's to say that they won't develop language or writing several hundred or several thousand years from now? Your refusal to take into account ALL future possibilities is what makes you narrow-minded and biased. I like to keep an open mind and I take into account as many possibilities that I can think of when I'm debating something. Hell, I even admit that there is a possibility that God actually does exist. I'm open-minded. I find that most believers are so close-minded that they have simply lost the ability to be objective which makes the search for the truths and nature of the universe ridiculously biased. I search for the truth and I don't care what the nature of that truth is. Unfortunately, you and many other believers are mysteriously terrified of any truth that conflicts with the Bible, which is essentially a book written 2000 years ago during a time when man believed that the earth was flat. You are not interested in the absolute truth. You are interested in the Bible even though there is a veritable plethora of scientific evidence that contradicts the Bible at every turn. You will never find the truth as long as you remain tied to the Bible. Thank goodness that science ignored the Bible otherwise humanity might still be stuck in the dark ages...

Oh yeah, I noticed that you didn't comment on how human DNA and ape DNA differ by a infinitessimal 1%. Kinda hit home, didn't it? No matter how much you deny it, the simple fact is that we are descended from apes. Plugging your ears and yelling "La La La La La La" won't make it go away. Just deal with it already...

Edit: I just read nrj's post. He brought up some great points. Well said, nrj!

[nrj]

Edit: I just read nrj's post. He brought up some great points. Well said, nrj! Thank you, Bill. :D

And I agree, the problem with those who doesn't see the possibility of evolution really forget how long time it took for our spiecy to get this far. I mean, hell, if I was to ask an ancient egyptian or chinese to make a nuke she propably wouldn't know how to do either since our science back then hadn't "evolved" into that stadium. Same goes for spiecies. It takes a loooooooooooooooooooooooong time to get this advanced. Plus we have a great advandtage of the other animals; we're on top of the food chain. :smokin:

[jeffweeder]

b nye the ork, nothing, i repeat nothing has hit home to me. So it is different dna, thats a good start for you now take it a step further and youll realise( without the bible) that we were never the same. I think you stuck in the ork age, believing old theories. S cience has come along way and your eyes are obviously shut to it.I ts my passion to know the absolute truth, that is why i believe what i believe. Cant you understand that man wrote the book on atomic development, he didnt need one, he developed his ideas, and nothing will be impossible for him. Hes a creator, like god. We are made in gods image not monkey image....you ape

[nrj]

b nye the ork, nothing, i repeat nothing has hit home to me. So it is different dna, thats a good start for you now take it a step further and youll realise( without the bible) that we were never the same. I think you stuck in the ork age, believing old theories. S cience has come along way and your eyes are obviously shut to it.I ts my passion to know the absolute truth, that is why i believe what i believe. Cant you understand that man wrote the book on atomic development, he didnt need one, he developed his ideas, and nothing will be impossible for him. Hes a creator, like god. We are made in gods image not monkey image....you ape You dodged every single one of our points, you say that we drown our minds in old theories and go on calling Bill an ork (He's an URUk-HAI! LOL!). But still, you didn't reply any of our points. Did you even read our posts?

Was that post really necessary?

Why am I up? It's school tomorrow!

[jeffweeder]

I thought i was being gentle as uruk hai are much uglier ,and of course i read your posts. ( ive posted also onthe science page, in a response). Looking at reality, man has not changed much at all, but this generation has seen an explosion of knowledge,due to certian discoverys, i think we are rather fortunuate, if this explosion would have happened long ago, we probably wouldnt have the opportunity to be born,as we use knowledge the wrong way,against ourselves.

[Philosopher Foelhe]

but i couldnt imagine a monkey ,starting from scratch designing the atomic bomb, or even a recipe for banana and pecan pie

I'm sorry, I have to jump in because I'm amazed nobody has pointed this out. Jeffweeder, you do realize mankind has been able to build atomic weapons for less than a hundred years, right? By your definition, men and women from Victorian England aren't human, either.

And I wouldn't be surprised if a chimpanzee could make a pie. You'd have to have someone sign out the recipe, and I doubt it'd come out right, but it's a possibility.


my point was MAN has the ability to do these things, monkeys dont, and yes if i was to study this field ,then as a human i would have a chance of succeeding,as man has.

YOU might be able to, perhaps. But I know a lot of people who are no good at science, who could study this for their entire lives and still not be able to grasp the intricacies of something as advanced as an atomic warhead. And we're not suggesting chimps are as smart as we are.


What these monkeys have done is no diff to what my dog does for a treat.

Your dog can use sign language? Your dog can use tools? That's a damn smart dog.


So it is different dna, thats a good start for you now take it a step further and youll realise( without the bible) that we were never the same.

How so? You are aware that I have different DNA from you, yes? Does that mean we aren't related on a biological level?


Cant you understand that man wrote the book on atomic development, he didnt need one, he developed his ideas

Yes, he was very intelligent. Smarter than a chimp is. Smarter than I am, certainly. Your point?


Looking at reality, man has not changed much at all

I'm guessing anthropology isn't your strong suit?

[B.NyeTheUruk-Hai]

b nye the ork, nothing, i repeat nothing has hit home to me. So it is different dna
No, we have virtually the SAME DNA as apes ( 99% THE SAME ). We are NOT different from apes. We are INCREDIBLY SIMILAR to apes. Deal with it...


take it a step further and youll realise( without the bible) that we were never the same.
That's your proof? "Take it a step further"? I give you a PROVEN FACT that human DNA and ape DNA are 99% identical, and your response is "Take it a step further"? Why on earth would I realize that we were never the same by taking it a step further? What exactly is this "further step" that you speak of? Please enlighten me...


I think you stuck in the ork age, believing old theories.
WTF?!?! Are you kidding me? I've given you MODERN SCIENTIFIC FACT that apes and humans have 99% identical DNA. How exactly is this an old theory? It is neither old, nor is it a theory - it is FACT. For a theory to be considered old, it would have to be more like... oh, I don't know... let's say 2000 years old. And it would also have to be full of theories like... oh, I don't know... let's say a bunch of mythological stories about omnipotent and magical beings, people with wings, global floods and we'll throw in magically fitting billions of animals onto a single boat. THAT'S an old theory, jeffy. Damn, the most frustrating thing about arguing with people like you is not that you are incapable of bringing up good points, it's that you simply ignore overwhelming and irrefutable evidence that is clearly presented to you. That and the fact that you're a fucking idiot...


S cience has come along way and your eyes are obviously shut to it.
Again, I have to say WTF? Yes, science HAS come a long way. It has proven that we are descended from apes. So I'm baffled as to how you think my eyes are closed to science when I'm actually CITING scientific evidence in my favor. Oh yeah, I forgot that you're a fucking idiot...


We are made in gods image not monkey image....you ape
Sigh... I'm dealing with a cretin here... Let's try this again, and I'll try to keep it simple for you because you clearly have difficulty understanding even the simplest of concepts. Just because we are descended from apes does not mean that we have to look like apes. We have EVOLVED from apes which means that we have changed and become different from apes. Do you look EXACTLY like your grandfather? I won't even get into the fact that your ridiculous statement above fatally assumes that God exists...

P.S. - I'd LOVE to hear your explanation of the existence of Australopithecus afarensis or Lucy or other extinct intermediaries in the fossil record that are CLEARLY advancements of the ape evolutionary line but are also CLEARLY precursors to Homo sapiens. Also, just as an added challenge, please explain to me how the dinosaurs fit into the Bible. You know, how they lived on the earth for MILLIONS of years and became extinct 65 million years ago WELL before modern humans appeared on the earth. I'd love to know how this figures into the Bible's account of the earth being only a few thousand years old and the fact dinosaurs existed WELL before humans did. Eagerly awaiting your response...

[jeffweeder]

I AM NOT A F N ID T, i have posted thread and respond to these questions with absolute glee, in the appropriate place, theres one in science now. I do not look at history the way you do b nye. I believe in a young earth ,as i favour this way of thinking (creationism, biblical ), but you believe the alternative view. one without god. There is evidence of human and dinosaur together. As far as the ark goes, well there are dino eggs he could have preserved. With other species of dino, they had what is known as growth spurts. They were small for a period, then at a given point boom. The human dna is very similar to an ape , but as we learn more you will notice rna that is altogether different., as i hope to explain in a proper post. I look at it through 2 eyes this worlds (education system) and biblically. And i think the former is crumpling around as like the garbage it is, and the biblical is never going to change and it stands up as more reasonable, in light of ever unfolding mysteries. pf, um yes i realise the bomb is recent ,my point is , if we knew back then what we now , we would have built it- in other words at no point will a ape acheive on this scale. Is this reasonable. No anthropology isnt - man only differs in what he think he knows, and he has smarter tools to work with

[liberdave]

Well flesh tone is just a physical attribute of cultural differation. Same thing, different flavours.
Ok, naming conventions, whatever.

I'm saying that Jews are ultimately from the middle east, and the middle east percentage of cultural backrounds is more Islamic/Hebrew than anglo-saxon.Ok, Jews, Anglos, whatever.

What did you expect?
For you to not argue semantics and respond to the original idea.

How about em'?Can we ues them as a naming convention? Abrahamic religions?

Ok. But isn't the USA, and many other "anglo-saxon" countries multi-cultural? Yeah, but primarily Abrahamic-based. Right?

We can safely assume that all Hebrews 3000 years ago became Jewish and followed the Torah and wrote it. Ah, I forgot, Jews have no Revalations. Ok, Ok, so this dosen't apply to them. So then maybe this thought of subjective armageddon only aplies to the x-ians?

Christian: G-d exists and Satan exists because the Bible says so!
Atheist/agnostic/etc.: The Bible isn't necessarily true. But we are descended from apes because science says so!Yeah, Blind Faith is a motherfucker, huh? :Llol: :lol: :rolling:

[nrj]

I thought i was being gentle as uruk hai are much uglier ,and of course i read your posts. ( ive posted also onthe science page, in a response). Looking at reality, man has not changed much at all, but this generation has seen an explosion of knowledge,due to certian discoverys, i think we are rather fortunuate, if this explosion would have happened long ago, we probably wouldnt have the opportunity to be born,as we use knowledge the wrong way,against ourselves. Uh ... Are you for real? We use science the wrong way? My dad's alive thanks to surgeons who didn't give a fuck abot the churchs "don't touch the heart policy".

Man hasn't changed much in reality? What on earth are you talking about? The reality? All those paeloentholigsts wrote about Narnia, or what? I'm sorry, but I don't understand you're post nor point. Clarify.


i have posted thread and respond to these questions with absolute glee, in the appropriate place, theres one in science now. Yeah, I've viewed those thread. There ain't a shred of evidence backing up creationism in them only blows against evolution.
I do not look at history the way you do b nye. I believe in a young earth ,as i favour this way of thinking (creationism, biblical ), but you believe the alternative view. one without god. Well, here's some fact for you: Our geologists have dated the Earth to be at least 5 billion years old. Either you can learn advanced geology and find proofs of a young Earth or get over it.
There is evidence of human and dinosaur together. Foot prints of a dinosaur and a man in the same soil around the same time. How do you know this wasn't a humanoid spiecy wich died out in the impact?
As far as the ark goes, well there are dino eggs he could have preserved. You're kinda forgetting the rest of our 10 billion species. How the hell did he get 20 billion animals on a boat?
The human dna is very similar to an ape , but as we learn more you will notice rna that is altogether different., as i hope to explain in a proper post. Yeah ... You're point being?
pf, um yes i realise the bomb is recent ,my point is , if we knew back then what we now , we would have built it- in other words at no point will a ape acheive on this scale. Is this reasonable. No anthropology isnt - man only differs in what he think he knows, and he has smarter tools to work with Heh, that's conjecture from the very start of the post. And I repeat, have you read about evolution theory? Think of it as science.

A man tries to build a boat from grain. It doesn't work. He learns to build it with stronger materials. He then builds it from wood. It works.

A monkey tries to break a bottle with his hands. It doesn't work. He then uses a stick to break the bottle. It works. The monkey now knows how to break a bottle.

Now, imagine 100 000 years full of these challenges and tasks. Each with a new learning point and a new way to addapt. After 100 000 years that monkeys spiecy will learn how to break bottles from their mothers and fathers, how to clean the food, how to go to the bathroom, what ever ... It's all about trial and error and addapting for millions of years.

[B.NyeTheUruk-Hai]

I AM NOT A F N ID T
Yes you are. The incoherent drivel that I've quoted above is quite indicative of this fact. Just accept the fact that you are a fucking idiot...


I do not look at history the way you do b nye. I believe in a young earth ,as i favour this way of thinking (creationism, biblical ), but you believe the alternative view.
The age of the earth has been scientifically PROVEN and VERIFIED NUMEROUS times using proven methods. This is NOT history and it is NOT an alternative view. The age of the earth is 4.5 BILLION years old. That is FACT. Not only that, but COUNTLESS dinosaur fossils have been found that are MORE than 65 MILLION years old. CLEARLY, the earth is NOT a few thousand years old. Claiming otherwise does nothing but perpetuate your idiocy...


There is evidence of human and dinosaur together.
Oh... my... fucking... goodness... I'll refrain from calling you a fucking idiot this time in order to give you a chance to prove this "claim" of yours by providing a link. Please don't provide any Biblically-biased websites and citing "The Flintstones" doesn't count either. This should be worth a few laughs...


As far as the ark goes, well there are dino eggs he could have preserved. With other species of dino, they had what is known as growth spurts. They were small for a period, then at a given point boom.
This is comedy GOLD, people!!! So, let me get this straight... You're saying that Noah just happened to find preserved dinosaur eggs for EVERY single dinosaur species, the youngest of which would be 65 MILLION years old. You have to remember that the dinosaurs were on this earth BEFORE humans, became extinct, and then humans came along 65 million years later. I'm explaining this to you because, once again, your explanation about growth spurts and such is incoherent...


The human dna is very similar to an ape , but as we learn more you will notice rna that is altogether different.
DNA is the blueprint of an organism. RNA is simply involved in the intermediate steps involving the translation of DNA into protein along with a couple of other lesser roles. RNA has nothing to do with the biological blueprint of an organism ( unless we're talking about certain viruses ). Just out of curiosity, jeff, what is your formal educational background regarding biology?


I look at it through 2 eyes this worlds (education system) and biblically. And i think the former is crumpling around as like the garbage it is, and the biblical is never going to change and it stands up as more reasonable, in light of ever unfolding mysteries.
Well then, your two eyes are nearly blind. Science becomes bigger and bigger and has grown in leaps and bounds over the past few decades alone. As science grows, more and more people are seeing what a farce the Bible is. Sure, the Bible will never change which is one of its major flaws - I'm sure that you've known a few people in your lifetime that have disobeyed certain Biblical laws which require the offenders to be stoned to DEATH for their indiscretions. Well, have you stoned anybody lately? If not, why not? The Bible says to, so you've disobeyed the Bible. Now go to confession...


if we knew back then what we now , we would have built it- in other words at no point will a ape acheive on this scale.
Again, who is to say that apes won't achieve this knowledge in the future? Consider PhilFoel's example. The people of Victorian England had NO inkling that they would EVER be capable of building a bomb as powerful as the atomic bomb. But there was a possibility in their future that they WOULD do this. Apes COULD POSSIBLY develop an atomic bomb in the FUTURE. You CANNOT say with ABSOLUTE certainty that they will not. It may take a few hundred years. It may take a few thousand years. It may take a few HUNDRED thousand years. The simple fact remains that apes DO have the POTENTIAL to develop the atomic bomb if given the time to do so. I'm not saying that they WILL develop it, but the POSSIBILITY is there. They may or they may not. Only time will tell...

P.S. - I'm still waiting to hear your explanation for the existence of Australopithecus afarensis and Lucy. FAR too many times logical questions are dodged because you can't answer them. No more dodging. Answer the question...

[jeffweeder]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/us/newsletters/0505lead.asp

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v12/i3/lucy.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4256news5-5-2000.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i2/lucy.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i1/focus.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i1/humanfossils.asp

This should help you rude $&*!# , be prepared to be humbled, fingers crossed . your going to check them bn?

[B.NyeTheUruk-Hai]

This should help you rude $&*!#
A word of advice, jeffy - If somebody is rude to me ( ie - they call me an ape, as you did ), I will, rest assured, be rude to them in return. So don't act all innocent and call me a rude $&*!#, you rude fuck...

And can you read? Did I not specifically say NO BIBLICALLY-BIASED websites? Not only are ALL of your citings Biblically-biased websites, but they're ALL from the SAME site. Pathetic. I thought that you said that you look at things from an unbiased point of view. Oh well, here are some interesting quotes from your cited articles:


This has occurred because the church—by and large—handed dinosaurs over to the “world” when they abandoned the literal history so clearly communicated in Genesis and allowed belief in millions of years and evolutionary ideas (like the big bang) to be taught to generations.

Think about it: according to evolutionary time, crocodiles have been around since the time of the dinosaurs1—and yet, humans live with crocodiles today. So why is it ridiculous to think humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time?
Bill's response: HAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Too funny! Find me evidence that human and T.Rex lived at the same time, jeffy. This is a laughable "argument" where the author is playing semantic games. Clearly, T.Rex, Stegosaurus, Brachiosaurs, Velociraptors, Archaeopteryx and a BILLION other dinosaur species are not around today ( they haven't been around for 65 million years ). What about them? Clearly, many organisms ( a tree is not considered a dinosaur by the way ) survived during the time when MOST of the dinosaurs died out. Small mammals survived and we evolved from them and the crocodile survived as well. But, just for kicks, please explain to me why humans and THESE dinosaurs are separated by 65 million years or more. I suspect that you'll simply ignore this and hope that it goes away...

Many evolutionists themselves concede such errors, acknowledging that australopithecine hands and feet were ‘not at all like human hands and feet; rather, they have long curved fingers and toes’
Bill's response: "Many" evolutionists? Which ones? Look closely and you'll notice that this "statement" references an article that was written by a "creationist anatomist", whatever the fuck that is. Biased...

First, the pigment in some paintings in the Chauvet cave in France carbon-dated at around 30,000 years, making them ‘the world’s oldest rock paintings’. Note how comfortably these finds sit with Genesis history.
Bill's response: How exactly does finding something that is 30,000 years old support Genesis?

It’s not surprising that students who have been indoctrinated with the ‘Darwinian point of view’—that they are just animals, that the concept of ‘god’ evolved along with them—should live according to the ‘law of the jungle’. They are not given a solid reason to behave in a moral, civilized manner, and to respect the property of others.
Bill's response: BAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!! Yeah, no CHRISTIAN would EVER do anything like that! Wait a minute... hold on a moment... Sorry, I just felt this overwhelming urge to pick up a baseball bat and smash other peoples' property. It's difficult to suppress these "law of the jungle" urges of mine...

As we have investigated the evidence, we have seen nothing to contradict what the Bible says about a world Flood.
Bill's response: How about providing evidence that SUPPORTS a world flood? Anyone? Anyone? Beuller?

I've got to say thanks, jeffy, for the amusing links. I love how creationists always try to use scientific evidence to support their claims or to debunk evolution but they just absolutely LAMBASTE the WEALTH of scientific evidence that contradicts the Bible. Yes, there are holes in the evolution theory. But as I've mentioned before, these holes MAY be filled in sometime in the future. The evidence to support evolution SIGNIFICANTLY outweighs the evidence against it. In fact, there is actually no evidence AGAINST evolution, there are simply a few missing pieces of the puzzle. The number of fossils that are waiting to be found FAR, FAR outnumber what has been found to date. It's just a matter of time before these puzzle pieces are found. But, for some inexplicable reason, you assume that NO FURTHER discoveries will EVER be made EVER again. Instead of keeping your mind open to the practically INFINITE number of possibilities that science will eventually discover, you have closed your mind and have chosen to adhere to the finite and outdated knowledge of a 2000 year-old book. Jeebus, you even mention in your profile that you are narrow-minded...

[jeffweeder]

how can you possibly be offended at me calling you an ape, when you believe that your great great great great great uncle was one of them. SPEAKING OF FOSSILS where are all the human ones. Truth that one finds usually narrows the mind. AT least my mind isnt welded shut. Id be on frodos side every day of the week.

[Philosopher Foelhe]

how can you possibly be offended at me calling you an ape, when you believe that your great great great great great uncle was one of them

My grandfather was a racist. Doesn't mean I am also a racist. See, there's this thing called "progress"...


SPEAKING OF FOSSILS where are all the human ones

Well, some of them are in graveyards. Some of them are in masoleums. And absolutely NONE of them are found among dinosaur fossils.

[B.NyeTheUruk-Hai]

SPEAKING OF FOSSILS where are all the human ones.
First of all, modern humans have been on this earth for less than 100,000 years, so there won't be as many specimens around as is the case with the dinosaurs who ruled the earth for hundreds of millions of years. Second of all, modern humans generally bury their dead, so there are plenty of human remains, but they remain unfossilized. For the most common type of fossilization to occur, an organism has to die near or in the water and become buried in the silt and mud. This is why we see many more fossils of aquatic organisms as opposed to land dwellers. Humans are not aquatic organisms ( This is, to most people, obvious. But I've learned that the obvious must be pointed out to you, jeffy ). By the way, I've actually SEEN Human fossils. A couple of years ago, my wife and I vacationed in Italy and we visited the city of Pompeii. If you are unfamiliar with Pompeii, it was buried under several meters of ash from a massive volcanic eruption of Mount Vesuvius. The people of the city were caught by surprise in the pyroclastic flow which killed them instantly where they stood. The subsequent ash that spewed out of Mount Vesuvius buried the entire town and the dead bodies. Over time, the bodies decomposed, leaving behind a hollow hole in the ash in the shape of the human body. Paleontologists poured plaster into these holes which created plaster replicas of the bodies as they were at the exact moment of their death. Yes, jeffy, this IS a type of fossil and I've SEEN these Pompeii fossils with my OWN eyes. Oh, although not quite modern human, Lucy is pretty close to a human fossil. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, jeffy: You know JACK SHIT about science so don't pretend that you do...


AT least my mind isnt welded shut.
BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA AAA !!!!!!!!!!!

[jeffweeder]

you do know when this volcano blew its top dont you?
lucy may be close, but the fact remains she isnt, i do i need a degree to say that.
If we can find a (so called million yr old dino fossil ) why cant we find a ( so called 100,000 human one )
I find it interesting about finding these things buried in mud and silt and at the bottom of lakes etc. FLOOOOOOD perhaps. Im not pretending to know it all bn, maybe you should think the same

[B.NyeTheUruk-Hai]

you do know when this volcano blew its top dont you?
I visited Pompeii, fucktard, so I think I might have an idea. You asked about human fossils, so I gave you a valid example.


If we can find a (so called million yr old dino fossil ) why cant we find a ( so called 100,000 human one )
As I've already pointed out, but apparently have to say it again, dinosaurs lived on the earth for several HUNDRED MILLION YEARS. Humans have only been on the earth for about 100,000 years. In terms of proportion, the ratio of dinosaur fossils to human fossils would be RIDICULOUSLY skewed in favor of the dinosaur fossils. So human fossils would be few and far between, thus EXTREMELY difficult to find. Not only that, but humans generally tend to bury their dead and they generally don't go to the edge of a body of water to die or choose the shoreline as their deathbed, which is an essential first step of the fossilization process. Both myself and Foelhe have already mentioned this, but apparently we have to repeat things to you.


I find it interesting about finding these things buried in mud and silt and at the bottom of lakes etc. FLOOOOOOD perhaps.
Holy... fucking... shit... are you for real, jeffy? Do you actually think about what you type before you type it? If you just think about your FUCKING ABSURD "claim" for TWO seconds instead of just brainlessly spewing the "objective" conclusions of AnswersInGenesis.org, you'll realize that MOST of the fossils EVER found would ALL be the SAME AGE. This is clearly NOT the case. There actually exists a fossil of a filament of algae that is about 2 BILLION years old. And there are THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS of fossils that exist of all ages from WAY back then up until recent times. Jesus fucking Christ. Flooooood. Not only that, but your claim that all, or at least many, of the fossils that have ever been discovered are because of THE FLOOD ( and this will also answer your very good question of "SPEAKING OF FOSSILS where are all the human ones?" ) has one little implication that you obviously HAVEN'T thought of ( ie - you're a fucking stupid idiot who has now unwittingly painted himself into the mother of all corners )... wait for it, jeffy... wait for it... here it comes...

Where are all of the HUMAN FOSSILS of the ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE EARTH that supposedly DIED in THE FLOOD which conveniently provided OPTIMAL CONDITIONS for fossil formation?
<< crickets chirping >> Where are all of the human fossils INDEED...

I mean... correct me if I'm wrong here, jeffy. But didn't you say the following:

I find it interesting about finding these things buried in mud and silt and at the bottom of lakes etc. FLOOOOOOD perhaps.

SPEAKING OF FOSSILS where are all the human ones.
I mean, how come we find EVERY SINGLE ORGANISM EVER TO WALK THE EARTH in the fossil record which YOU BELIEVE were killed by THE FLOOD and became fossilized BY THE FLOOD, BUT NO FUCKING HUMAN FOSSILS? Needless to say, I'm EAGERLY awaiting whatever bullshit, if any, you manage to pull out of your ass to explain THIS one...

[jeffweeder]

bn your dating methods are absurd, you always fall back on these millions of years.. it simply isnt true anymore man. Did ancient civilisations beleive in evolution? When was the theory born bn. If life created itself, we are very lucky then to have everthing we need to survive, we are very lucky that the sun just so happens to be the correct distance away, animals are lucky that they no how to survive what to eat etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc....... no i dont see a phenominal creation, nothing intelligent about it at all is there, it just happened ... sorry bn but god has left his sig on everthing that has been made, and just to rub it in he's foretold things about the people he chose to demontrate his will, or a the jews and their history a myth to.

[Philosopher Foelhe]

Dammit, there was a quote on another thread that fit this perfectly, but I can't seem to find it anywhere. The basic gist was, "Being surprised because life fits the environment it lives in is like being surprised because a puddle is the size of the hole." Douglas Adams, maybe? You get the idea, I hope.

[TheWorldJoker]

Dammit, there was a quote on another thread that fit this perfectly, but I can't seem to find it anywhere. The basic gist was, "Being surprised because life fits the environment it lives in is like being surprised because a puddle is the size of the hole." Douglas Adams, maybe? You get the idea, I hope.

Is this the quote you're talking about?


"It’s rather like a puddle waking up one morning— I know they don’t normally do this, but allow me, I’m a science fiction writer— A puddle wakes up one morning and thinks: “This is a very interesting world I find myself in. It fits me very neatly. In fact it fits me so neatly… I mean really precise isn’t it?… It must have been made to have me in it.” And the sun rises, and it’s continuing to narrate this story about how this hole must have been made to have him in it. And as the sun rises, and gradually the puddle is shrinking and shrinking and shrinking— and by the time the puddle ceases to exist, it’s still thinking— it’s still trapped in this idea that— that the hole was there for it. And if we think that the world is here for us we will continue to destroy it in the way that we have been destroying it, because we think that we can do no harm."
-- Douglas Adams

[B.NyeTheUruk-Hai]

I KNEW that you would dodge the question, so I ask again:

Where are all of the HUMAN FOSSILS of the ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE EARTH that supposedly DIED in THE FLOOD which conveniently provided OPTIMAL CONDITIONS for fossil formation?


bn your dating methods are absurd, you always fall back on these millions of years...
Please explain to me YOUR dating methods. This should be good...


Did ancient civilisations beleive in evolution?
OMFG... How old are you, jeffy? I feel like I'm speaking to a child. Okay, I guess that I'll have to explain this one in simpler terms for you. First of all, as I've advised you before, THINK about what you want to type BEFORE you type it. You CONTINUE to make an IMMENSE fool of yourself. Did ancient civilizations believe in evolution? No. Why not? YOUR ANSWER: Because evolution is not true. Because, if evolution was true, then man would have thought of it a LONG time ago. MY ANSWER: Ancient civilizations had NO SCIENCE. They did NOT have adequate knowledge of how the earth and the universe works. Essentially, in matters of science, they were STUPID and IGNORANT JUST LIKE YOU. Here's a question for you, jeffy. This question SHOULD show you ( I say "should" because you've consistently shown that you have the inability to grasp even the most simplest of concepts ) how your inexplicable faith in the virtually non-existent scientific knowledge of ancient civilizations is sadly misplaced. Are you ready? QUESTION: Did ancient civilizations believe that the world was round? No. Why not? YOUR ANSWER: Because the world is not round. Because, if the world was round, then man would have known it a long time ago. MY ANSWER: Ancient civilizations had NO SCIENCE. They did NOT have adequate knowledge of how the earth and the universe works. Essentially, in matters of science, they were STUPID and IGNORANT JUST LIKE YOU. So basically, jeffy, you SOMEHOW believe that ancient civilizations should not only know ABOUT evolution, but they should UNDERSTAND evolution. These people THOUGHT THAT THE EARTH WAS FUCKING FLAT. They were MONUMENTALLY INCAPABLE of understanding even BASIC science. Fuck, even YOU don't understand evolution even after it has been EXPLAINED to you, yet you amazingly and bafflingly expect ancient civilizations to understand it... Shit, you're a fucking idiot...

Where are all of the HUMAN FOSSILS of the ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE EARTH that supposedly DIED in THE FLOOD which conveniently provided OPTIMAL CONDITIONS for fossil formation?

[Beatnik Bob]

The age of the earth has been scientifically PROVEN and VERIFIED NUMEROUS times using proven methods. This is NOT history and it is NOT an alternative view. The age of the earth is 4.5 BILLION years old. That is FACT. Not only that, but COUNTLESS dinosaur fossils have been found that are MORE than 65 MILLION years old. CLEARLY, the earth is NOT a few thousand years old. Claiming otherwise does nothing but perpetuate your idiocy... You say it is a fact and proven solid....yet they are always changing the age of the Earth....just in the 70s the Earth's age was about 2 billion.
Seems a bit unstable, don't you think?

[Beatnik Bob]

Where are all of the HUMAN FOSSILS of the ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE EARTH that supposedly DIED in THE FLOOD which conveniently provided OPTIMAL CONDITIONS for fossil formation? Have you ever noticed how the ocean is mostly salt? That's one theory.

Another theory is that the Torah is actually "symbolism."

[New Creature]

And yet there is another theory, one that I like: Fountains of the Great Deep

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/PartII.html

This guy makes a good point with the Grand canyon and why no other rivers have carved a huge canyon elsewhere.

Pretty interesting theory.

[Beatnik Bob]

Ok, naming conventions, whatever.
Ok, Jews, Anglos, whatever. Well, your speculation of world power prescribes to specific peoples....so "whatever" really doesn't have a place here...


Ah, I forgot, Jews have no Revalations. Ok, Ok, so this dosen't apply to them. So then maybe this thought of subjective armageddon only aplies to the x-ians?
*ponders*
Actually, revelations is a bit of a rip off of texts written by the Kumeran (sect of Jews)
Ever here af the Dead Sea Scrolls? Those scrolls were writen by the Kumeran, a unique branch of Jews that wrote Revelations. Well, the Kumeran version is a bit different but they're very similar, and considering the Kumeran came a few humdred years before the Christian Revelations, only one conclusion can be drawn...
But it's very similar, the Kumeran dead sea scrolls talk about an end of the world, and all that are not on their path of light and goodness will perish, and there'll be a final war between good and evil, and in the end of days there will be a deciever, through which the Kumeran will not be swayed, and still pass into heaven, et cetera et cetera et cetera...

But it makes it even more believable, when there's a passage in the dead sea scrolls that talks about a man, believed to be one of Jesus's desciples, who visits the Kumeran, and they teach him what they believe.....