"The Origin of Specious Nonsense"

Doctor Jimbob

J C wrote: »

If they are true rock-bound fossils then they probably were killed by the Flood ... but if they are found as bones in caves, then they are likely to be post-diluvian (and possibly quite recent) in origin.

J C, give us some real evidence for this ridiculous notion that all rock bound fossils are flood related. If you had even a basic understanding of geology you'd understand why this is one of the most absurd suggestions in the history of humankind.

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

If they are true rock-bound fossils then they probably were killed by the Flood ... but if they are found as bones in caves, then they are likely to be post-diluvian (and possibly quite recent) in origin.

A flood doesn't neatly organise different species into different layers. Don't be absurd.

Doctor Jimbob

dlofnep wrote: »

A flood doesn't neatly organise different species into different layers. Don't be absurd.

Exactly. Nor does it organise completely different rock types in the order we find them today.

dlofnep

J C doesn't understand basic geology you see - He just parrots material from AnswersInGenesis.org. He's not capable of actually formulating an original thought.

J C

dlofnep wrote: »

Slavery, murder and selling children is pretty outdated to be fair. All promoted in the Bible.

'Do onto others as you would have them do onto you' ... and 'love one another as I have loved you' ... would exclude slavery, murder and the selling children for all Saved Christians.:)

... 'survival of the fittest' ... doesn't exclude any of these horrors ... for somebody who thinks of themselves as 'the fittest'.:(

Doctor Jimbob

J C wrote: »

'Do onto others as you would have them do onto you' ... and 'love one another as I have loved you' ... seems to exclude slavery, murder and the selling children for all Saved Christians.:)

So you're admitting the bible contradicts itself?

... 'survival of the fittest' ... doesn't exclude any of these horrors ... for somebody who thinks of themselves as 'the fittest'.:(

joseph brand

J C wrote: »

What 'outdated Christian morals' are you talking about?

Loyalty, Love and Faithfulness never go out of fashion ... and I can confirm that being married to a Christian woman increases the 'fun' ... but without the clinical and sub-clinical 'disease loading' that inevitably results from having multiple partners ... even if you do cover 1% of your body surface in micro-thin latex!!!

For me it's about 5%. "Zzzzzzziiiipppp, BAADUMM!" :pac:

Sarky

Heh, 1%. J C must have a tiny cock.

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

'Do onto others as you would have them do onto you' ... and 'love one another as I have loved you' ... would exclude slavery, murder and the selling children for all Saved Christians.:)

Don't argue with me man, argue with the bible. It's the one that promotes slavery, murder and selling of children. Or have you read the Bible yet?

J C wrote: »

... 'survival of the fittest' ... doesn't exclude any of these horrors ... for somebody who thinks of themselves as 'the fittest'.:(

Survival of the fittest isn't an atheist doctrine I'm afraid.

Genghiz Cohen

Sarky wrote: »

Heh, 1%. J C must have a tiny cock.

In other news, Sarky, your new avatar actually made me laugh out loud.

joseph brand

Sarky wrote: »

Heh, 1%. J C must have a tiny cock.

He has a sensible little willy. Awww bless.

J C

dlofnep wrote: »

A flood doesn't neatly organise different species into different layers. Don't be absurd.

We don't find them 'neatly organised' ... we find them strewn all over the place and in drowning contortions.
... and we find them together largely with other creatures that occupied the same locations and ecological niches.
... we find fossilised creatures that are identical to current living species alongside creatures that are supposedly hundreds of millions of years extinct.

We find creatures that are perfectly preserved (and therefore had to be instantly entombed) with polystrate fossils sticking up through metres of sediment that Evolutionists claim to have been gradually laid down over millions of years.

... none of this makes any sense using a 'long ages' Evolutionist interpretation ... but it is perfectly in line with what would be expected if the rocks and their fossils were laid down raidly by Noah's Flood

Sarky

That's bollocks, J C. Yore posting bollocks again. Stop posting bollocks.

Doctor Jimbob

J C wrote: »

We don't find them 'neatly organised' ... we find them strewn all over the place and in drowning contortions.
... and we find them together largely with other creatures that occupied the same locations and ecological niches.
... we find fossilised creatures that are identical to current living species alongside creatures that are supposedly hundreds of millions of years extinct.

Sometimes we do find them neatly organised. There's quite a bit of variety in fossil preservation.
Of course we find them together with outher creatures which occupied the same locations, why on earth wouldn't we?
That bit you bolded shows you don't understand evolution. This has already been exaplined to you several times.

We find creatures that are perfectly preserved (and therefore had to be instantly entombed) with polystrate fossils sticking up through metres of sediment that Evolutionists claim to have been gradually laid down over millions of years.

Yes, we do. This does not however mean that all fossils were preserved in one flood. It means some fossils were preserved in floods.

... none of this makes any sense using a 'long ages' Evolutionist interpretation ... but it is perfectly in line with what would be expected if the rocks and their fossils were laid down raidly by Noah's Flood

Open a ****ing book.

Doctor Jimbob

Sarky wrote: »

That's bollocks, J C. Yore posting bollocks again. Stop posting bollocks.

Bollocks of the complete and utter variety at that.

J C

dlofnep wrote: »

Don't argue with me man, argue with the bible. It's the one that promotes slavery, murder and selling of children. Or have you read the Bible yet?

I'm not arguing ... I'm telling you that Christians don't engage in such activities.

dlofnep wrote: »

Survival of the fittest isn't an atheist doctrine I'm afraid.

Never said it was ... but Evolution 'red in tooth and claw' it isn't rejected by them either!!!

Doctor Jimbob

J C wrote: »

I'm not arguing ... I'm telling you that Christians don't engage in such activities.

Then why does the bible promote these things?

Never said it was ... but Evolution 'red in tooth and claw' it isn't rejected by them either!!!

beerbuddy

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Then why does the bible promote these things?

Please give an example

J C

joseph brand wrote: »

For me it's about 5%. "Zzzzzzziiiipppp, BAADUMM!" :pac:

You should go to a doctor to get it checked out ... if its hanging down around your knees, like that!!!!:):D:)

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

We don't find them 'neatly organised' ... we find them strewn all over the place and in drowning contortions.

No we don't.

J C wrote: »

... we find fossilised creatures that are identical to current living species alongside creatures that are supposedly hundreds of millions of years extinct.

No we don't. It is true that some species have not seen much evolution over millions of years like the crocodile, but they are not 'identical' to crocodiles that exist today. Your wordplay is dishonest, and we don't like dishonesty around these parts.

J C wrote: »

We find creatures that are perfectly preserved (and therefore had to be instantly entombed) with polystrate fossils sticking up through metres of sediment that Evolutionists claim to have been gradually laid down over millions of years.

No evolutionist ever claimed that. Stop reading from answers in genesis again. Polystrate fossils are perfectly understood, and perfectly explained. Here for example:

As I said, you just parrot off AiG claims without actually understanding anything. Try reading a real scientific text sometime. You might actually learn something valid.

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

I'm not arguing ... I'm telling you that Christians don't engage in such activities.

Why subscribe to a book and not adhere to it's practices? Do you cherrypick what aspects of the Bible you subscribe to? Are you now accepting that the book is inaccurate in many places? Well done J C - You're maturing! We're ever-so proud of you.

Doctor Jimbob

beerbuddy wrote: »

Please give an example

No problem, as soon as someone gives an example of how CFSI and flood 'geology' aren't complete and utter drivel.

J C

Sarky wrote: »

Heh, 1%. J C must have a tiny cock.

You fixation with relative size ... sounds like you are trying to compensate for something yourself!!!

I never think about it myself ... as I have never had any complaints!!:)

Sarky

Maybe your boyfriend just has a really tight arse?

J C

dlofnep wrote: »

Why subscribe to a book and not adhere to it's practices? Do you cherrypick what aspects of the Bible you subscribe to? Are you now accepting that the book is inaccurate in many places? Well done J C - You're maturing! We're ever-so proud of you.

The Old Testament laws were written to regulate the relationships amongst the Israelites themselves ... and between them and their neighbours ... while the New Testament is for people under God's Grace.

J C

Sarky wrote: »

Maybe your boyfriend just has a really tight arse?

I don't know about you ... but I've never been sexually interested in boys myself!!!:(

Sarky

Sure. You just want Jesus inside you in a purely platonic sense.

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

The Old Testament laws were written to regulate the relationships amongst the Israelites themselves ... and between them and their neighbours ... while the New Testament is for people under God's Grace.

What about Rocky 4?

J C

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Sometimes we do find them neatly organised. There's quite a bit of variety in fossil preservation.
Of course we find them together with outher creatures which occupied the same locations, why on earth wouldn't we?

Yes ... its a record of Flood Burial.

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Yes, we do. This does not however mean that all fossils were preserved in one flood. It means some fossils were preserved in floods.

... go on ... and stop looking through your fingers ... and 'man up' ... and face the fact that fossiliferous sedimentary rocks were practically all laid down under water ... in a worldwide flood.

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

... I've never been sexually interested in boys myself!!!:(

And this saddens you. That's ok - there are groups that can help you with this.