Evolution is a hoax

[BADecker]

I agree it's a hoax as well,

We were created by a super being and to me is a fact, there is no big bang theory of any sort.

What is the connection between the big bang theory and evolution? Many of your religious friends agree with the Big Bang theory though they   said that it was designed by The Old Man.

Most religious people who believe that God used the Big Bang and evolution, are people who have been convinced by science that BB&E are factual. But they also believe that the Bible is factual. So, the thing that they do is understand the whole creation story as though it were figurative, just to make it fit with the science of BB&E.

The problem with Evolution being factual is that all the supposed evidence fits things like adaptation, simple change, and like-begets-like better. We don't have any natural evidence via DNA examination that shows the long-term changes... one kind of animal to another kind. And we forever can't find these changes until we develop time machines and methods to track the DNA of countless millions of animals over hundreds of thousands of years of history.

The BIG problem with BB is hidden right in BB itself. This problem is stated by BB with the description of the beginning of the Bang. BB theory states that at the beginning, things were extremely different in the universe than they are now. This means that math and the laws of physics were different, as well. And with math and physics being different, there is no way to extrapolate backward using our math and physics laws. Doing so would take way more computation power than any computers we have in existence, and probably will ever have... considering that it would be the computers themselves that would have to be internally abstract enough to calculate into different math... because people can't abstract themselves that much.

When you combine the facts that we don't know any factual BB&E, with what the Bible says in Genesis 1, we see that the Bible agrees with there being a lack of BB&E. God said "after their kind" referring to plants and animals having young, not evolution. The Bible also shows that the laws of physics and math weren't settled in the form we have, during at least the creation "time" thru the beginning of the third day, if not longer. But you have to think slowly and clearly to see it.

What this all means is that there is no billions of years to the universe, as well.

If religious leaders could think about science critically, and if they could express it properly, we would all see that the sciences of Big Bang and evolution are simply false religions. Why? Because they are distinctively not true, and show it within their theories, yet people believe them.

[Astargath]

I'm not letting it go badecker. You have to admit you were proven wrong, otherwise it's pointless to debate with you if you never admit defeat. You said that scientists have no proof because ''OTHERWISE THEY WOULD HAVE'' blasted the proof all over the headlines. I showed you the headlines, therefore you were wrong, admit it, stop being a delusional prick.

Look. In the Book of Ester in the Bible, it talks about "the law of the Medes and Persians." This law was a very strong law. It said that when the king made an edict to which he affixed the seal from his signet ring, that edict could not be changed. This law is talked about in the book of Daniel, as well.

So, in Esther, when a Medes-and-Persians edict was made to kill all the Jews, how did they get around it? Not by changing the edict. They couldn't do that. It was against the law.

They did it by making another edict that was stronger and longer lasting. The second edict outlasted the first.

Why is this important to the whole universe? When God finally settled His physics laws in place, they couldn't be changed thereafter. Satan knew how this worked, so he tricked people into using the laws of physics in a wrong way so that they would die.

Because of what God is and does, even He couldn't change something (laws of physics) that He had put His strength into making. So He did something to go around it all, just like in Esther. God sent Jesus to take the punishment for all people. This means that God will-make/is-making a New Universe, with new physics, to take His people to. Why? Because this universe is being destroyed through the trick that Satan pulled that is actually destroying this universe.

This way God doesn't break the physics of this universe. But He gets the results that He wants... just like in Esther.

God has shown me the way around what you are doing. He showed me this, and I already showed it to you. It lies in the fact that headlines don't prove anything except that they exist.

I'm sure you are feeling a bit like Satan did when He found out that he had duped himself.

That has nothing to do with what we were talking about, you were proven wrong and you can't admit it even if it's a simple thing like it was, it shows your inability to accept when you are wrong, which you clearly can't. This leads to you not accepting anything, ever, unless you think it's the right thing.

[BADecker]

I'm not letting it go badecker. You have to admit you were proven wrong, otherwise it's pointless to debate with you if you never admit defeat. You said that scientists have no proof because ''OTHERWISE THEY WOULD HAVE'' blasted the proof all over the headlines. I showed you the headlines, therefore you were wrong, admit it, stop being a delusional prick.

Look. In the Book of Ester in the Bible, it talks about "the law of the Medes and Persians." This law was a very strong law. It said that when the king made an edict to which he affixed the seal from his signet ring, that edict could not be changed. This law is talked about in the book of Daniel, as well.

So, in Esther, when a Medes-and-Persians edict was made to kill all the Jews, how did they get around it? Not by changing the edict. They couldn't do that. It was against the law.

They did it by making another edict that was stronger and longer lasting. The second edict outlasted the first.

Why is this important to the whole universe? When God finally settled His physics laws in place, they couldn't be changed thereafter. Satan knew how this worked, so he tricked people into using the laws of physics in a wrong way so that they would die.

Because of what God is and does, even He couldn't change something (laws of physics) that He had put His strength into making. So He did something to go around it all, just like in Esther. God sent Jesus to take the punishment for all people. This means that God will-make/is-making a New Universe, with new physics, to take His people to. Why? Because this universe is being destroyed through the trick that Satan pulled that is actually destroying this universe.

This way God doesn't break the physics of this universe. But He gets the results that He wants... just like in Esther.

God has shown me the way around what you are doing. He showed me this, and I already showed it to you. It lies in the fact that headlines don't prove anything except that they exist.

I'm sure you are feeling a bit like Satan did when He found out that he had duped himself.

That has nothing to do with what we were talking about, you were proven wrong and you can't admit it even if it's a simple thing like it was, it shows your inability to accept when you are wrong, which you clearly can't. This leads to you not accepting anything, ever, unless you think it's the right thing.

Well, thanks for proving me wrong. I thought that I was wrong. But since you have proven me wrong, I am right.

Two major reason why Evolution has not been proven true are:

1. Nobody can track the DNA of plants or animals over the many thousands of years it would take to see if even one of them changed into another, and probably, nobody will ever be able to;

2. We can date pottery back to between 4500 and 5000 years. But back beyond that we don't know for a fact that the methods we use are the methods that will work on things back then. Math, itself, might have been different back beyond 5000 years, as might have been the physics of the universe. Everything we use as proof might have acted differently back then. We simply don't know.

When we don't know, and know that we don't know, yet say that we do know, that's when the hoax comes into being.

Evolution is a hoax.

[Astargath]

I'm not letting it go badecker. You have to admit you were proven wrong, otherwise it's pointless to debate with you if you never admit defeat. You said that scientists have no proof because ''OTHERWISE THEY WOULD HAVE'' blasted the proof all over the headlines. I showed you the headlines, therefore you were wrong, admit it, stop being a delusional prick.

Look. In the Book of Ester in the Bible, it talks about "the law of the Medes and Persians." This law was a very strong law. It said that when the king made an edict to which he affixed the seal from his signet ring, that edict could not be changed. This law is talked about in the book of Daniel, as well.

So, in Esther, when a Medes-and-Persians edict was made to kill all the Jews, how did they get around it? Not by changing the edict. They couldn't do that. It was against the law.

They did it by making another edict that was stronger and longer lasting. The second edict outlasted the first.

Why is this important to the whole universe? When God finally settled His physics laws in place, they couldn't be changed thereafter. Satan knew how this worked, so he tricked people into using the laws of physics in a wrong way so that they would die.

Because of what God is and does, even He couldn't change something (laws of physics) that He had put His strength into making. So He did something to go around it all, just like in Esther. God sent Jesus to take the punishment for all people. This means that God will-make/is-making a New Universe, with new physics, to take His people to. Why? Because this universe is being destroyed through the trick that Satan pulled that is actually destroying this universe.

This way God doesn't break the physics of this universe. But He gets the results that He wants... just like in Esther.

God has shown me the way around what you are doing. He showed me this, and I already showed it to you. It lies in the fact that headlines don't prove anything except that they exist.

I'm sure you are feeling a bit like Satan did when He found out that he had duped himself.

That has nothing to do with what we were talking about, you were proven wrong and you can't admit it even if it's a simple thing like it was, it shows your inability to accept when you are wrong, which you clearly can't. This leads to you not accepting anything, ever, unless you think it's the right thing.

Well, thanks for proving me wrong. I thought that I was wrong. But since you have proven me wrong, I am right.

Two major reason why Evolution has not been proven true are:

1. Nobody can track the DNA of plants or animals over the many thousands of years it would take to see if even one of them changed into another, and probably, nobody will ever be able to;

2. We can date pottery back to between 4500 and 5000 years. But back beyond that we don't know for a fact that the methods we use are the methods that will work on things back then. Math, itself, might have been different back beyond 5000 years, as might have been the physics of the universe. Everything we use as proof might have acted differently back then. We simply don't know.

When we don't know, and know that we don't know, yet say that we do know, that's when the hoax comes into being.

Evolution is a hoax.

You forgot to add:

3. Nobody can time travel therefore anything that happened in the past cannot be proven ever (unless it's the claim that god existed and performed miracles in which case, yes, it can somehow be proven)


2. How would math be different 20.000 years ago, you are just talking nonsense, if that's your argument, then everything could have been different at any given time, then we might as well just give up.

[BADecker]

Well, thanks for proving me wrong. I thought that I was wrong. But since you have proven me wrong, I am right.

Two major reason why Evolution has not been proven true are:

1. Nobody can track the DNA of plants or animals over the many thousands of years it would take to see if even one of them changed into another, and probably, nobody will ever be able to;

2. We can date pottery back to between 4500 and 5000 years. But back beyond that we don't know for a fact that the methods we use are the methods that will work on things back then. Math, itself, might have been different back beyond 5000 years, as might have been the physics of the universe. Everything we use as proof might have acted differently back then. We simply don't know.

When we don't know, and know that we don't know, yet say that we do know, that's when the hoax comes into being.

Evolution is a hoax.

You forgot to add:

3. Nobody can time travel therefore anything that happened in the past cannot be proven ever (unless it's the claim that god existed and performed miracles in which case, yes, it can somehow be proven)


2. How would math be different 20.000 years ago, you are just talking nonsense, if that's your argument, then everything could have been different at any given time, then we might as well just give up.

Well, well, well. You are starting to get the picture a little. Since we don't know how math and physics might be different a little, or the same for that matter, we obviously don't know that the earth or universe are billions of years old, or that they are even 20,000 years old.

Since we know that we don't know these things, yet we proclaim that we know these things that we know we don't know...

Evolution is a hoax... and you agreed.

[Astargath]

Well, thanks for proving me wrong. I thought that I was wrong. But since you have proven me wrong, I am right.

Two major reason why Evolution has not been proven true are:

1. Nobody can track the DNA of plants or animals over the many thousands of years it would take to see if even one of them changed into another, and probably, nobody will ever be able to;

2. We can date pottery back to between 4500 and 5000 years. But back beyond that we don't know for a fact that the methods we use are the methods that will work on things back then. Math, itself, might have been different back beyond 5000 years, as might have been the physics of the universe. Everything we use as proof might have acted differently back then. We simply don't know.

When we don't know, and know that we don't know, yet say that we do know, that's when the hoax comes into being.

Evolution is a hoax.

You forgot to add:

3. Nobody can time travel therefore anything that happened in the past cannot be proven ever (unless it's the claim that god existed and performed miracles in which case, yes, it can somehow be proven)


2. How would math be different 20.000 years ago, you are just talking nonsense, if that's your argument, then everything could have been different at any given time, then we might as well just give up.

Well, well, well. You are starting to get the picture a little. Since we don't know how math and physics might be different a little, or the same for that matter, we obviously don't know that the earth or universe are billions of years old, or that they are even 20,000 years old.

Since we know that we don't know these things, yet we proclaim that we know these things that we know we don't know...

Evolution is a hoax... and you agreed.

So we don't know those things but somehow we know a supernatural amazing being existed and performed miracles and not only that but he created the entire universe. Good one.

[BADecker]

Well, thanks for proving me wrong. I thought that I was wrong. But since you have proven me wrong, I am right.

Two major reason why Evolution has not been proven true are:

1. Nobody can track the DNA of plants or animals over the many thousands of years it would take to see if even one of them changed into another, and probably, nobody will ever be able to;

2. We can date pottery back to between 4500 and 5000 years. But back beyond that we don't know for a fact that the methods we use are the methods that will work on things back then. Math, itself, might have been different back beyond 5000 years, as might have been the physics of the universe. Everything we use as proof might have acted differently back then. We simply don't know.

When we don't know, and know that we don't know, yet say that we do know, that's when the hoax comes into being.

Evolution is a hoax.

You forgot to add:

3. Nobody can time travel therefore anything that happened in the past cannot be proven ever (unless it's the claim that god existed and performed miracles in which case, yes, it can somehow be proven)


2. How would math be different 20.000 years ago, you are just talking nonsense, if that's your argument, then everything could have been different at any given time, then we might as well just give up.

Well, well, well. You are starting to get the picture a little. Since we don't know how math and physics might be different a little, or the same for that matter, we obviously don't know that the earth or universe are billions of years old, or that they are even 20,000 years old.

Since we know that we don't know these things, yet we proclaim that we know these things that we know we don't know...

Evolution is a hoax... and you agreed.

So we don't know those things but somehow we know a supernatural amazing being existed and performed miracles and not only that but he created the entire universe. Good one.

We have the eye witness reports of God being faithful to His Word. So, since God said it, it's true.

On the other hand, we have scientists NOT being faithful to their word. They prove that they don't know, but then they say that they do.

Evolution is a hoax.

[Astargath]

Well, thanks for proving me wrong. I thought that I was wrong. But since you have proven me wrong, I am right.

Two major reason why Evolution has not been proven true are:

1. Nobody can track the DNA of plants or animals over the many thousands of years it would take to see if even one of them changed into another, and probably, nobody will ever be able to;

2. We can date pottery back to between 4500 and 5000 years. But back beyond that we don't know for a fact that the methods we use are the methods that will work on things back then. Math, itself, might have been different back beyond 5000 years, as might have been the physics of the universe. Everything we use as proof might have acted differently back then. We simply don't know.

When we don't know, and know that we don't know, yet say that we do know, that's when the hoax comes into being.

Evolution is a hoax.

You forgot to add:

3. Nobody can time travel therefore anything that happened in the past cannot be proven ever (unless it's the claim that god existed and performed miracles in which case, yes, it can somehow be proven)


2. How would math be different 20.000 years ago, you are just talking nonsense, if that's your argument, then everything could have been different at any given time, then we might as well just give up.

Well, well, well. You are starting to get the picture a little. Since we don't know how math and physics might be different a little, or the same for that matter, we obviously don't know that the earth or universe are billions of years old, or that they are even 20,000 years old.

Since we know that we don't know these things, yet we proclaim that we know these things that we know we don't know...

Evolution is a hoax... and you agreed.

So we don't know those things but somehow we know a supernatural amazing being existed and performed miracles and not only that but he created the entire universe. Good one.

We have the eye witness reports of God being faithful to His Word. So, since God said it, it's true.

On the other hand, we have scientists NOT being faithful to their word. They prove that they don't know, but then they say that they do.

Evolution is a hoax.

''We have the eye witness reports'' How do you know they are real? We cannot go back in time to verify them, can we?

[BADecker]

''We have the eye witness reports'' How do you know they are real? We cannot go back in time to verify them, can we?

But you can prove them out by using the scientific method on them, and then by:
1. Placing the correct interpretation on the results shown by the scientific method;
2. And proving them by the pleasure or pain that follows.

[Astargath]

''We have the eye witness reports'' How do you know they are real? We cannot go back in time to verify them, can we?

But you can prove them out by using the scientific method on them, and then by:
1. Placing the correct interpretation on the results shown by the scientific method;
2. And proving them by the pleasure or pain that follows.

How exactly? You can't measure or experiment with eye witnesses, where do you even start, are you just gonna ask someone if he knows someone that knows someone, etc until god? How can you test the bible for authenticity? You can't.

[BADecker]

''We have the eye witness reports'' How do you know they are real? We cannot go back in time to verify them, can we?

But you can prove them out by using the scientific method on them, and then by:
1. Placing the correct interpretation on the results shown by the scientific method;
2. And proving them by the pleasure or pain that follows.

How exactly? You can't measure or experiment with eye witnesses, where do you even start, are you just gonna ask someone if he knows someone that knows someone, etc until god? How can you test the bible for authenticity? You can't.

In this case you can. How? By checking out this active nation that is miraculously doing what no other nation has ever done... nationally coming back from the dead after 2,000 years of silence. When you check out the importance of tradition in this nation, scientifically, you will find that scientifically, their stuff has to be accurate.

And this is only the start. There are things like fulfillment of prophesies, the facts that science is indirectly proving the creation story by nullifying its own Big Bang, no proof for evolution, and all kinds of other things that have been shown to be accurate in the Bible. Often its the hidden discoveries - hidden because when they are discovered, science wants to hide them - that are showing the bible to be true more and more. Nations all around the world have records of a worldwide flood. Standard science wants to ignore them.

[LUCKMCFLY]

I actually believe that it enters the belief of the person, some believe that we come from evolution through the monkey, others that we come by the big ban, and in my case I am a fervent believer in the creationist theory of God the Heavenly Father.

Although the monkeys are very similar and have characteristics similar to ours, I think they are only classified as wild animals that often is hard to domesticate, because they will remain wild.

There are many scientists who defend evolutionary theory through the monkey, and have pictures of possible evolutions, which, I think I do not think we come from a monkey, the human being has a much more privileged brain and is also right , which is far above what a monkey can develop.

[BADecker]

I actually believe that it enters the belief of the person, some believe that we come from evolution through the monkey, others that we come by the big ban, and in my case I am a fervent believer in the creationist theory of God the Heavenly Father.

Although the monkeys are very similar and have characteristics similar to ours, I think they are only classified as wild animals that often is hard to domesticate, because they will remain wild.

There are many scientists who defend evolutionary theory through the monkey, and have pictures of possible evolutions, which, I think I do not think we come from a monkey, the human being has a much more privileged brain and is also right , which is far above what a monkey can develop.

Actually, if you research it, you will find that there are aspects of the human genome that show that humans are so radically different than any monkeys, that there is no way that humans could have ever come from monkeys... or any other animals... even if evolution were completely true.

[Astargath]

''We have the eye witness reports'' How do you know they are real? We cannot go back in time to verify them, can we?

But you can prove them out by using the scientific method on them, and then by:
1. Placing the correct interpretation on the results shown by the scientific method;
2. And proving them by the pleasure or pain that follows.

How exactly? You can't measure or experiment with eye witnesses, where do you even start, are you just gonna ask someone if he knows someone that knows someone, etc until god? How can you test the bible for authenticity? You can't.

In this case you can. How? By checking out this active nation that is miraculously doing what no other nation has ever done... nationally coming back from the dead after 2,000 years of silence. When you check out the importance of tradition in this nation, scientifically, you will find that scientifically, their stuff has to be accurate.

And this is only the start. There are things like fulfillment of prophesies, the facts that science is indirectly proving the creation story by nullifying its own Big Bang, no proof for evolution, and all kinds of other things that have been shown to be accurate in the Bible. Often its the hidden discoveries - hidden because when they are discovered, science wants to hide them - that are showing the bible to be true more and more. Nations all around the world have records of a worldwide flood. Standard science wants to ignore them.

''this active nation that is miraculously doing what no other nation has ever done'' What is this even supposed to mean?
''When you check out the importance of tradition in this nation, scientifically, you will find that scientifically, their stuff has to be accurate. '' What exactly can you test scientifically? Are we testing how important tradition is? What are we testing, give specifics, your talk is useless blabber.
''the facts that science is indirectly proving the creation story by nullifying its own Big Bang'' Even if the Big Bang was proven to be inaccurate that won't prove creation, that's a fallacy, thinking that disproving one option automatically makes the other the truth.
''shown to be accurate in the Bible'' Like what? Talking snakes? People coming back from the dead? What has ever been proven to be accurate in the Bible?
''Nations all around the world have records of a worldwide flood'' Exactly the opposite, no other race has records of that flood, history books never talk about a flood.

[BADecker]

''We have the eye witness reports'' How do you know they are real? We cannot go back in time to verify them, can we?

But you can prove them out by using the scientific method on them, and then by:
1. Placing the correct interpretation on the results shown by the scientific method;
2. And proving them by the pleasure or pain that follows.

How exactly? You can't measure or experiment with eye witnesses, where do you even start, are you just gonna ask someone if he knows someone that knows someone, etc until god? How can you test the bible for authenticity? You can't.

In this case you can. How? By checking out this active nation that is miraculously doing what no other nation has ever done... nationally coming back from the dead after 2,000 years of silence. When you check out the importance of tradition in this nation, scientifically, you will find that scientifically, their stuff has to be accurate.

And this is only the start. There are things like fulfillment of prophesies, the facts that science is indirectly proving the creation story by nullifying its own Big Bang, no proof for evolution, and all kinds of other things that have been shown to be accurate in the Bible. Often its the hidden discoveries - hidden because when they are discovered, science wants to hide them - that are showing the bible to be true more and more. Nations all around the world have records of a worldwide flood. Standard science wants to ignore them.

''this active nation that is miraculously doing what no other nation has ever done'' What is this even supposed to mean? - As usual, you neglect to quote my entire sentence, which has the answer in it.
''When you check out the importance of tradition in this nation, scientifically, you will find that scientifically, their stuff has to be accurate. '' What exactly can you test scientifically? Are we testing how important tradition is? What are we testing, give specifics, your talk is useless blabber. - Certainly you have heard about the science of DNA testing of a nation. There are loads of ways that nations are tested scientifically. Your self-proclaimed ignorance is astounding.
''the facts that science is indirectly proving the creation story by nullifying its own Big Bang'' Even if the Big Bang was proven to be inaccurate that won't prove creation, that's a fallacy, thinking that disproving one option automatically makes the other the truth. - Except that the way that BB proves itself to be wrong, is the same way that it proves the start of the creation story in Genesis to be right.
''shown to be accurate in the Bible'' Like what? Talking snakes? People coming back from the dead? What has ever been proven to be accurate in the Bible? - As usual, you neglect to quote my entire sentence, which has the answer in it.
''Nations all around the world have records of a worldwide flood'' Exactly the opposite, no other race has records of that flood, history books never talk about a flood.

For example, certainly you have heard of the Epic of Gilgamesh, yes? There are cave drawings that we scientifically term as prehistory, around the world, that depict the Flood.


However, thank you for such easy questions to answer. And actually, your questions help any reader who is really interested to focus his research a little better. So, thanks for the help, because my points are often too brief for the avid student.

[Astargath]

''We have the eye witness reports'' How do you know they are real? We cannot go back in time to verify them, can we?

But you can prove them out by using the scientific method on them, and then by:
1. Placing the correct interpretation on the results shown by the scientific method;
2. And proving them by the pleasure or pain that follows.

How exactly? You can't measure or experiment with eye witnesses, where do you even start, are you just gonna ask someone if he knows someone that knows someone, etc until god? How can you test the bible for authenticity? You can't.

In this case you can. How? By checking out this active nation that is miraculously doing what no other nation has ever done... nationally coming back from the dead after 2,000 years of silence. When you check out the importance of tradition in this nation, scientifically, you will find that scientifically, their stuff has to be accurate.

And this is only the start. There are things like fulfillment of prophesies, the facts that science is indirectly proving the creation story by nullifying its own Big Bang, no proof for evolution, and all kinds of other things that have been shown to be accurate in the Bible. Often its the hidden discoveries - hidden because when they are discovered, science wants to hide them - that are showing the bible to be true more and more. Nations all around the world have records of a worldwide flood. Standard science wants to ignore them.

''this active nation that is miraculously doing what no other nation has ever done'' What is this even supposed to mean? - As usual, you neglect to quote my entire sentence, which has the answer in it.
''When you check out the importance of tradition in this nation, scientifically, you will find that scientifically, their stuff has to be accurate. '' What exactly can you test scientifically? Are we testing how important tradition is? What are we testing, give specifics, your talk is useless blabber. - Certainly you have heard about the science of DNA testing of a nation. There are loads of ways that nations are tested scientifically. Your self-proclaimed ignorance is astounding.
''the facts that science is indirectly proving the creation story by nullifying its own Big Bang'' Even if the Big Bang was proven to be inaccurate that won't prove creation, that's a fallacy, thinking that disproving one option automatically makes the other the truth. - Except that the way that BB proves itself to be wrong, is the same way that it proves the start of the creation story in Genesis to be right.
''shown to be accurate in the Bible'' Like what? Talking snakes? People coming back from the dead? What has ever been proven to be accurate in the Bible? - As usual, you neglect to quote my entire sentence, which has the answer in it.
''Nations all around the world have records of a worldwide flood'' Exactly the opposite, no other race has records of that flood, history books never talk about a flood.

For example, certainly you have heard of the Epic of Gilgamesh, yes? There are cave drawings that we scientifically term as prehistory, around the world, that depict the Flood.


However, thank you for such easy questions to answer. And actually, your questions help any reader who is really interested to focus his research a little better. So, thanks for the help, because my points are often too brief for the avid student.

''Except that the way that BB proves itself to be wrong, is the same way that it proves the start of the creation story in Genesis to be right'' Science still holds the big bang as the general theory of how the universe began to exist so I don't know where you heard we even started to prove the big bang is wrong.

''There are cave drawings that we scientifically term as prehistory, around the world, that depict the Flood'' You mean there are some drawings somewhere that depict some flood? That's it? A global flood and all you have is a painting somewhere? People knew how to write it in the bible but didn't know how to write about it anywhere else? LUL.

[BADecker]

^^^ As usual, you are mistaken in many ways. Science doesn't do (hold) anything. Only scientists do that. This means that scientists might hold that BB is true, but the fact that they know it is a theory is a simple way to see that they do not know that it is true. If they tell you it is true, it is from lack of knowledge. When you add the part that I have shown you as to how BBT proves BB doesn't exist, then we see that BB is a hoax right along with evolution... the non-BB stealing away some of the credibility of ETE.

Since I showed you the Epic of Gilgamesh already, why don't you do us the favor of finding some more written evidence of the Flood. Oh, that's right. I almost forgot that you don't know how to do research... or accept it as fact when it is prove true.

[Astargath]

^^^ As usual, you are mistaken in many ways. Science doesn't do (hold) anything. Only scientists do that. This means that scientists might hold that BB is true, but the fact that they know it is a theory is a simple way to see that they do not know that it is true. If they tell you it is true, it is from lack of knowledge. When you add the part that I have shown you as to how BBT proves BB doesn't exist, then we see that BB is a hoax right along with evolution... the non-BB stealing away some of the credibility of ETE.

Since I showed you the Epic of Gilgamesh already, why don't you do us the favor of finding some more written evidence of the Flood. Oh, that's right. I almost forgot that you don't know how to do research... or accept it as fact when it is prove true.

Actually nope, as explained like 100 times, a scientific theory doesn't mean it's not true and also as explained 100 times you can never know anything with an 100% certainty so it's meaningless to talk about ''facts''
The FACT is that scientists still hold the big bang as the best theory and you keep saying they are proving more and more the theory to be wrong yet that's simply not true and you never provided any evidence of such because you are a fucking liar.

[BADecker]

^^^ Now that you have agreed with yourself like 100 times that a scientific theory doesn't mean that it's not true, let's state clearly what a scientific theory DOES mean. A scientific theory means that we don't know if it is true or not. And to clarify, the theory is real. The thing we don't know about is the object of the theory.

If some scientists happen to hold that BB theory is the best scientific theory, so what? All they are agreeing to is that they don't know. There are probably millions of potential science theories that they could think up. The fact that they have placed BB into theory status, only says that they don't know if its true or not.

Now, if you happen to want to go and worship scientists' thinking rather than finding out what is true and real, have at it. All I did regarding BBT is show you how it disproves itself. If there were scientists looking at my explanation, they could continue to hold BBT as a scientific theory, or they could go on to more productive things. Up to them.

And regarding you, since you don't refute the things that I showed regarding how BBT proves itself wrong, but rather go into some kind of a spiel about science theories, shows that you would rather maintain the stupidity status of not knowing, rather than finding out what is true and real.

[Magister Magus]

Well, it seem s that this debate can't evolve...
The problem is that science can't fight against religion, as believer won't accept anything that will deny their believes.
So, it's a waste of time.