People like to comment how the Bible was written by men all-be-it inspired by God. However, there is one section that was in fact written by the hand of God himself; the 10 commandments.

#2: "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments." -- Exodus 20:4-6

The CGI images of fake globe Earth produced by NASA are in direct violation of the ten commandments given to man by God.

Lol I think we have the answer we were looking for.

The guy thinks Earth is 6000 years old, what do you want to discuss with someone like him? xD

You've known that since 2000 years ? The globe earth theory was only invented in 15th century.

I think you need to check your boob licking facts first.

Ok well I did my best but you really don't want to try and read. You just build your own walls and I can't do much against that...

Do you agree on the fact that matter is made of atoms?

How do you think this theory was created? Where do you think it comes from? Empirical data?
Absolutely not.
Because there was no data... The technical means of the 19th century didn't allow John Dalton to imagine experiments. There was no experiments! He just imagined a theory and it answered some good questions, seemed logical, had no counter examples.

You seem to believe science is either "proven" or "not proven" but that's not the case... I don't know how to tell you otherwise: it doesn't work that way. That's all.

Yes but I think the key issue is in the claim that the mechanisms of evolution are via random, unintelligent forces rather than the mastermind of an intelligent designer. Astargath and I discussed about the central issue of abiogenesis earlier, and I repeat the following.

Imagine trolling on a topic u do 0 research about and do nothing but argue BS.


Have u ever been in a rocket ? No ?

Do u believe everything you are told ? Yes ?


Rockets travel at 18.5K Miles per hour to leave Earth ( With People INside)

Fastest Bullet Travel 1.5k Miles per hour.


People realized after 1 point people will believe anything as long as they say scientists said so.

You probably believe in the nuclear fraud, Flouride scam , We evolved from a monkey spinning on a ball eh ?

^^^ Imagine being so delusional and retarded to think heavy balls balls in garden shed viewed through a hole drilled in side with a telescope proves the fictional force gravity is real. The nature of electrostatics and the coulomb force on the heavy balls completely invalidates the results.

Also I've made it clear that electrostatics and coulomb force makes density and buoyancy work, you're just pissing into strong wind screaming gravity!

So, after you literaly said "not a majority of scientists believe in evolution" you admit you're wrong at least?

When asked why an object falls the globalist will tell you "gravity", he then proceeds to describe how an object falls with multiple volumes (Newton) of mathematical formulae without ever explaining the why. What causes gravity?

The FE explanation for how an object falls is density and buoyancy; the object sinks. The answer for why it is pushed down is because of electricity and the Coulomb Force.

I agree, evolution needs to deal with this central issue of the origin of life, ignoring the issue does not make it go away.

I won't believe that humans evolved from single cell bacteria billions of years ago until I see evidence of it. I also don't believe evolution's explanation for how the first living organism came about either.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. 

Scientists like Stephen Meyer, the director of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture (CSC) for example?

If the evidence for evolution is so clear, this debate would have ended a long time ago.

It has never been scientifically proven that we came from single-celled organisms, and to use the atheist's favorite phrase:

"I won't believe anything until there is evidence"  

What?
But... Adaptation IS evolution.
That's like literaly the same thing.
Evolution is the selection of species based on what is most adapted to its environment...

What would be the difference between adaptation and evolution for you? Because evolution is EXACTLY adaptation but on bigger time frames.

We need a reason to believe evolution. We need some example of it happening that is not just words... and not simply some engineered genetics. Here's what we need.

We need Critter A that we think evolved into Critter B. Then we need the DNA of Critter A, and the changed DNA of it's offspring, baby Critter A+. Then we need the DNA from the grandchild - baby Critter A++. We need the whole line of DNA, showing how the changes came about, until it was finally Critter B.

We don't have anything close to the above.

Everything we have so far can be explained by adaptation, like-begets-like, and simple change. We don't have one thing where a critter changes into another critter, naturally.

But, even if we DID find one critter that changed into another, we would still have to find a whole bunch of them to even begin to suggest that evolution is the way present-day critters - plants and animals - came about.

We are so far from this that we might as well say...

Evolution is a hoax.

Probably very few definitions include all instances of the defining use. Definitions attempt to be brief enough, yet inclusive enough, so that people who use them can understand the other things that they cover which are not listed in the definition, itself. This is part of the reason why languages change with use, over time... because the definitions are not inclusive enough.

Oxford says that non belief is lack of belief in something, especially religion - https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/non-belief. As I said, just because someone doesn't believe something, doesn't make him a vacuum regarding that thing. Lack of belief in something is simply believing that it doesn't exist. The consideration of "it" is belief in it enough that the non-believer considers it. Lack of believing that atheism is a religion, is simply lack of looking at the definition of religion entirely.

In other words, imagine a person and a church who has never heard of the word religion. Yet they practice it on a regular basis in their church services. Just because they haven't heard the word, doesn't mean that they don't have religion.

Atheism falls into the pattern of religion, even though many people want to deny it. The fact that they look at the word makes them religious in their observation of the word. Talking about it, even in a negative and negating way causes, at least, simple belief in it. The closest that you can come to an atheist is someone who has not even considered the subject of God, ever.

But we are taking about atheists/religion. Even if non-believing something simply put the non-believer into a vacuum regarding that subject, the mouthy atheists especially have beliefs. And they have beliefs about God and all kinds of things regarding Him. One of those beliefs is that they don't know that He doesn't exist... or is that part of their knowledge, and not part of their belief system?

Even if a person could hold a position of non-belief regarding God, He would only be making himself into God by holding that position. Why? Because He would be attempting to defy the natural and scientific knowledge of God that is all around him.

This means that he still has religion, no matter how angry at this fact he gets.

So a bunch of impossible theories are supposed to prove another bunch of impossible theories ?.


In Flat Earth is quite simple . Objects Heavier than their medium surrounding them go sink. just how happens in water and air.

No Theory Of Spinning Ball Gluing us on to it while it travels 10k miles per her around a vaccum in space which we cant feel and cant prove except for animated pics and stories.


You gotta be dumb to believe the bullshit you are talking.



How can a force which holds millions of tonnes of water on a ball be so weak to let something fly off of it ? Proves who is the real knuclehead and gullibble kid.