240 million years old? Una dey lie too much abeg

Macsjebs:
Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-8647513/A-15-foot-ichthyosaur-lived-240-million-years-ago-died-eating-12-foot-long-reptile.html

who the f*ck gives those years?

kingxsamz:


Sorry, I don't respect nonsense.
One can't expect respect when he himself isn't worthy of respect.
If you check, you'd notice that my comment was directed at folks who disregarded this scientific research and claimed their fictitious beliefs were more reliable.
And since many doctors and scientists are either Christians or Muslims (according to you), which of them have you seen perform their duty with faith?

Hey that is what you belief and that is very fine. The same way the stories of Bible , Quran or any religious books are fictitious to you and you do question the authenticity of religion is the same way religious folks question the authenticity of Carbon dating. The conclusion that the bone is 250 millions of years old is fictitous to them just as the stories of Bible or any religious book are fictitous to you. Even science have doubters does not qualify such folks as slowpoke and this is the point i am trying to make to you. They have the right to express their faith , just as you have the right to express science. Disrespect comes when they insult you or attack you or they harm you physically. Please know the differences

cooltola:


Hey that is what you belief and that is very fine.

I don't know where you got this from, because I never stated my belief for anything in my write-up.

The same way the stories of Bible , Quran or any religious books are fictitious to you and you do question the authenticity of religion is the same way religious folks question the authenticity of Carbon dating.
The conclusion that the bone is 250 millions of years old is fictitous to them just as the stories of Bible or any religious book are fictitous to you.

This makes absolutely no sense. My writeup was directed at those making stupid remarks and disregarding this research without even trying to seek knowledge of how they arrived at the results. My write up was not directed at those who are questioning the authenticity of carbon dating.
You can't say they're lying, and make stupid comments like "How old is the earth", "when was Adam created" " how did they arrive at the number of years", without even making simple research.

Even science have doubters does not qualify such folks as slowpoke and this is the point i am trying to make to you. They have the right to express their faith , just as you have the right to express science. Disrespect comes when they insult you or attack you or they harm you physically. Please know the differences

If you're going to doubt a scientific research, you should at least provide your own proof to counter it, rather than making stupid statements, and calling them liars.
You can't say something is a lie when you know nothing about it. That's my point.
And if you can't understand that, let it be.

kingxsamz:
I don't know where you got this from, because I never stated my belief for anything in my write-up.

This makes absolutely no sense. My writeup was directed at those making stupid remarks and disregarding this research without even trying to seek knowledge of how they arrived at the results. My write up was not directed at those who are questioning the authenticity of carbon dating.
You can't say they're lying, and make stupid comments like "How old is the earth", "when was Adam created" " how did they arrive at the number of years", without even making simple research.



If you're going to doubt a scientific research, you should at least provide your own proof to counter it, rather than making stupid statements, and calling them liars.
You can't say something is a lie when you know nothing about it. That's my point.
And if you can't understand that, let it be.

Perhaps you do not understand my choice of word. Belief simply means what you know for a fact or what is you know is true e.g i belief or know water can exist in three form solid , liquid or gas or you belief that carbon dating is true and accurate or know for a fact. That is what i meant in that context when i wrote earlier.

cooltola:


Perhaps you do not understand my choice of word. Belief simply means what you know for a fact or what is you know is true e.g i belief or know water can exist in three form solid , liquid or gas or you belief that carbon dating is true and accurate or know for a fact. That is what i meant in that context when i wrote earlier.

Is that all you noted from my write up?

Anyways, @bolded is false. You don't need to believe a fact. A fact is a fact, whether you believe or not. It's like saying you believe the Sun is up there when you can obviously see it.
And I don't know where I stated that I believe carbon dating.

SegFault:

Rocks whose ages are known? Do you know how many years it takes for rocks to form. I did geography back in secondary school so this one I no fit gree, for example take zuma rock, that rock could take thousands of years to form.

What are you saying now? If you don’t have idea of what I meant, you should have just held your peace. Does it have anything to do with your secondary school geography? What are you saying by Zuma rock COULD take thousands of years to form?

I was talking of cooling of a lava flow which is when it is assumed (believed?) that you should only find parent radioactive atoms and which should decay to its daughter atoms at a rate. This rate is now used to measure the age of the rock from when it was formed. Now, there are lava flows whose formations are known (just few years, an example is the 1949 lava flow of Mt Ngauruhoe in New Zealand) and radio metric dating gave millions of years for them.

isthatso:


First of all I am not an atheist. An atheist is someone who does not believe in God, I do. I believe in God because my scientific mind is unable to explain the origins of man, so God is a way of accounting for the origin of man, the story of God and what form God remains a mystery. But there is a difference in believing in God and religion. Even science and logical deduction will point to the existence of a higher phenomenon which we call God. Religion on the other hand is man made for the manipulation and control of the behavior of man because no one can yet explain who or what is God.

The problem with religion is that everything is “according to the Bible”, “according to the Quoran” etc. who says the accounts in these books are factual? what if the accounts contained there are wrong? Religious followers base their whole existence on things for which there are no proof, no attempt to verify or ascertain the validity of the contents. The other problem with religion is that it is vastly dependent of the interpretation of man, usually the leaders. If for instance the Bible was the definitive story of man, Why do we have so many different churches with different interpretations? That alone should tell you something.

At least with science, you take a hypothesis and you try to prove it but it is never accepted until PROVEN. Science is based on fact, religion by definition is not. That is why the Bible and quoran are open to manipulation according to the agenda of the protagonists. You will always find a quote in the Bible or Quoran to suit whatever agenda you want because again it is not based on demonstrable fact. Religion is based on people accepting what cannot be proven so by definition it is open to manipulation. Science comes up with theories/hypothesis that can be explored, discredited or proven.

As for flat earth,

Revelation 7:1

7 And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any

Isiah 11:12

He will raise a banner for the nations
and gather the exiles of Israel;
he will assemble the scattered people of Judah
from the four quarters of the earth.

You are right in many things that you pointed out about religion and I won’t bother about that because that was not my argument
Your claim that the bible taught about the church teaching a flat earth was what caught my attention initially and which was why I assumed you are an atheist.

Now, the passage you quoted did not say that the earth is flat. Four corners does not imply four vertices. It is your (their?) assumption already that the bible teaches a flat earth. Other passages that you could find were categorized under (a) non sequiturs (b) ambiguous verses and (c) verses which involve misreading non modern English terminology in old versions. Your four corners fall in the second category. It does not say a flat earth nor a globe earth but prophetically describing the earth in its entirety just as four compass points North, South, East and West.
As you advised, Google is your friend. Please use it

destinable:


Applications of half-life is not limited to Carbon-14 for dating techniques. There are other stable isotopes that are utilized for half-life.
No, the question about fossil fuels is enough reason for you to know that organisms have roamed this earth millions of years ago because it takes millions of years for the formation of petroleum (I hope you know how petroleum forms). There are so many evidences today that prove the existence of organisms millions of years ago, even without radiometric dating.

Dating techniques are not entirely foolproof, hence the margin of error estimation, but to fault it entirely without sufficient research data is hypocritical because we believe far more illogical things in our various religions.

Of course, I know it is not limited to Carbon-14 but that was not the initial discussion as my argument is that fossils which are allegedly millions of years old are not carbon dated because they don’t expect to see any trace of Carbon 14 in that age. Also, it is to show that I have an idea of half-life which is used in most dating techniques.

Secondly, fossil fuel is not a fool proof that organisms roam millions of years ago. It is a known fact in physical science that INTENSITY can be traded for TIME. The millions of years ago works only on the assumption that uniformitarianism but research works have shown without doubt that this is not the case. A research by the Common Wealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (Australia) where they mimicked the way petroleum is formed naturally in a laboratory and their findings published in the Journal, Nature showed that rocks from sedimentary basins generated petroleum in just 6 years when subjected to similar geochemical conditions and reactions found in naturally subsiding sedimentary basin. Also, another research which was published showed that oil is formed rapidly under ocean in few thousands of years. This was found under the waters of the Gulf of California in an area called the Guaymas Basin.

Now, you also said that “there are many evidences which prove the existence of organism millions of years ago…”. But all these rely on an assumption that leads to millions of years ago which was why I mentioned axioms and paradigms earlier.
Accusing me of faulting it without sufficient research is arguing from silence. I don’t have to do the research, but I have access to read those researches which have shown that radiometric dating is not reliable. First is the assumptions on which they are built, second is that same specimen have been shown to give conflicting dates. Thirdly is that it has been found to give millions of years for rocks that their age of formation was known (formed like in 1949, Mt Ngauruhoe in New Zealand and others). Fourthly, other physical and geochemical activities falsify millions of ages for some of those rock. example is radiohalo. So, I don’t know who is being hypocritical here? Like I said, it is a matter of axioms and paradigms and not a matter of research. The consensus believe that the universe is very old. It makes sense to them as it goes against the literal teaching of religious text (Bible especially). You must have seen my mention of Prof Richard Lewontin’s quote in this thread. And I want to implore you that miracles are not illogical things (if that was what you are referring to) because it is difficult to prove its non existence.

Thank you sir

Sanchez01:

The one strength they think they have is their nothing-like-God stance. Take the question of science to them and everywhere will bust.

If I was an atheist, God forbid, I sure as hell would do better than the pseudo-intelligence they exhibit.

Some 7 years ago, their oga, during an argument in the religious section claimed he was an atheist and that he doesn't believe in anything. Another atheist ended up teaching him that atheists believe in something even though the God-ship doesn't sail with them. You needed to see the confusion and self discovery on that day.

When it started looking like oga was losing, he resorted to banning non-atheists on that thread. I can't forget, I was banned for breaking rule 2. The difference between the upcoming among them and their bosses is a hairline difference. You'd be amazed if you jam them in an argument.

You are right. I enjoyed how one of them was schooled that atheist also have their belief, by someone on a religious thread. I even had to show the confusion in an article: “What is Atheism?” on American Atheist website where they claim that they don’t have any belief but without reading too much, you’ll find the article talking about “what they believe”. Confusion on confusion.

I believe they just swallow whole whatever is dished out by sceptics without checking for rebuttals, yet they accuse religious folks of the same thing. Just pathetic.

Like you said, their weak point is on real science. You ask a simple question and they’ll shift the goal post.
Banning non atheists? Hahahah. That should show how deceitful some of them can be. Sure! I have seen how some of them reason. Refute them and they may even insult you instead of learning and having a wonderful intellectual discussion.
What amazes me most is how some of them are ignorant of the fact that modern science has its roots in religion, Christianity especially. Yet you see them claiming that religion is in the way of science and that they, the atheists are the intellectuals and logical ones. Like I do say; they should look at the percentage of religious people (say Christians) that are Nobel Laureates in Science – over 70%. So much that (generally speaking) religious folks are the “…the dumbest and illogical…” people, as most of them put it.

Macsjebs:

Boss see what I stumbled on tonight: https://ffrf.org/publications/freethought-today/item/26141-the-10-worst-old-testament-verses, pls accept my little token

I smile in Swahili. Now I'm getting why some God haters seem to reason the way they do.
Imposing one's interpretation on the Bible is what is called Eisegesis. If you can't do a proper exegesis of the Bible, why should I take you serious? If one can't differentiate an express command from a prophetic message, to a metaphor or allegory, to people's OWN opinion which was recorded, how is that person smart? Again, must you lie just to prove your point?

I just know that most folks will search for stuff against the Bible and then come to post it without even checking for rebuttal. That's why it is difficult having a real intellectual discussion with them as they have sealed their mind already.

Lastly, if you are an atheist, on what ground do you stand to call something good or evil?. I am interested in what you have to say about this question.

A word is enough for the wise

samsard:
Maybe you should educate yourself instead of displaying your ignorance.
The information is free on Google and you can meet an authority in the field if you so wish.
You grew up being told the Earth is 6000 years old so find it hard to believe that anything can possibly be that old.
The only fables I know are religious fables.
It's funny how you guys don't think science is fables when using smartphones until it challenges ignorant notions

Are you going to please STFU ?
Who told you I'm a religious biggots ?
I don't care about what the Bible say about heart or even the Quran.
All I just know is that we Africans should at least try reason on our own so that no be everything the white feed us we go they take

Kenny9857:

Are you going to please STFU ?
Who told you I'm a religious biggots ?
I don't care about what the Bible say about heart or even the Quran.
All I just know is that we Africans should at least try reason on our own so that no be everything the white feed us we go they take

Why don't you come down to my place to tell me to shut up?
If you weren't a fool you'd know that actual science doesn't consider race! That's why objectivity and repeatability are key. A black man will get the same result provided the variables are kept constant.
An arm chair scientist like you won't know that

...

SegFault:

I never saw anything like flat earth anywhere in the bible, but people would obviously have believed in it before Magellan sailed round the Earth. Though there were already proofs like the eclipse, the horizon and all.

Well, it's nice to hear that from you.
Anyway, a spherical earth has been taught by Greek Scientists and some even accurately calculated its RADIUS long before the time of Christ, not to talk of circumnavigation. Christian Scientist, Johan Keppler also accurately describe its eliptical orbit and that of other planets and so many works on a spherical earth that was done in Cathedrals even before the circumnavigation.
It's just some deceitful folks that are making it look like a flat earth is known in religious circle when there are atheists that are in the Flat Earth movements currently

SegFault:

Who said the sun is the centre of the universe? And two the Earth revolves around the sun because the sun changes position as the year goes by, the solstices and equinoxes are also proofs.

The earth revolves around the sun, the equinoxes and solstices are also proofs, because you read that from the book, and you accepted it and assumed you are enlightened by what you read, that is the same way those religious folks you claim they are ignorant read what they believe from their book, so learn to respect people's view you are not different, if you were taught that in school, there's no way you will ever find out or agree that the Earth revolves around the sun, because literal evidence that you don't have to anything to believe doesn't agree that the Earth revolves around the sun.

kalu61:
e. g the sun as the center of the universe, and categorically say you saw it with your eyes?
stop fooling yourself, if astrologers change the story line today this hour and you see it on the internet, your idea changes immediately, you have no stand of your own,


Your quote.

Tell us your own stand as researched with your idea, methodology and equipment. This where l await you since you don't read others work but only yours.

Then we are back to my point, the first guy I quoted said something like 'African minds and ignorance, they are so backward that they believe everything the whites and Arabs have taught them about religion and anything that doesn't conform to that to them is false, ' (although this is not verbatim but you can check it up, the first page, first comment by isthatso,) he later came up with another post "with all the numerous materials on the internet, they can't educate themselves", from his comments here and your comments it means you agree that those things that makes you so "logical" and "intellectual" that makes you think religious folks are fools were things you read from "white men" not your own research and you accept them hook, line and sinker, you call them facts, they may be facts but you call them facts because you BELIEVED them to be facts not because you can prove them as a result of your research,
so my point to you all supposed scientist and civilised men is that, you read and believe, the religious folks read and believe, all written by the "white men", so what makes you more enlightened than them?
They are ignorant because the believed what the white men brought to them, and you are enlightened because you also believes what the white men brought all on different subject matters, what makes you superior to them, this where your folly lies,
that is the message I have been trying to pass, am neither against science nor religion, I can't be against what I have spent tons of naira to study for clearly over a decade at different levels, so that's my point,
READ AND UNDERSTAND.

Pelecius:


You are right in many things that you pointed out about religion and I won’t bother about that because that was not my argument
Your claim that the bible taught about the church teaching a flat earth was what caught my attention initially and which was why I assumed you are an atheist.

Now, the passage you quoted did not say that the earth is flat. Four corners does not imply four vertices. It is your (their?) assumption already that the bible teaches a flat earth. Other passages that you could find were categorized under (a) non sequiturs (b) ambiguous verses and (c) verses which involve misreading non modern English terminology in old versions. Your four corners fall in the second category. It does not say a flat earth nor a globe earth but prophetically describing the earth in its entirety just as four compass points North, South, East and West.
As you advised, Google is your friend. Please use it

Well One thing I think we can both agree upon is
As I said earlier and you seem to have just agreed, the Bible is not based on proven facts, it is ambiguous and open to numerous interpretations based on your defined agenda. If you are looking for a reason to kill a transgressor you will find it in the bible, if you are looking for a reason to forgive a trangressor you will also find it. This is hardly the reference book for a logical mind but rather sheep or those who wish to manipulate sheep. Like i say you dont need religion to know how to live a moral righteous life. Common sense and life experiences will soon enough teach you simple rules like nothing good comes easy, stealing has its consequences, lying has consequences, sleeping with another mans wife etc.

ParpahSeventy:

Then we are back to my point, the first guy I quoted said something like 'African minds and ignorance, they are so backward that they believe everything the whites and Arabs have taught them about religion and anything that doesn't conform to that to them is false, ' (although this is not verbatim but you can check it up, the first page, first comment by isthatso,) he later came up with another post "with all the numerous materials on the internet, they can't educate themselves", from his comments here and your comments it means you agree that those things that makes you so "logical" and "intellectual" that makes you think religious folks are fools were things you read from "white men" not your own research and you accept them hook, line and sinker, you call them facts, they may be facts but you call them facts because you BELIEVED them to be facts not because you can prove them as a result of your research,
so my point to you all supposed scientist and civilised men is that, you read and believe, the religious folks read and believe, all written by the "white men", so what makes you more enlightened than them?
They are ignorant because the believed what the white men brought to them, and you are enlightened because you also believes what the white men brought all on different subject matters, what makes you superior to them, this where your folly lies,
that is the message I have been trying to pass, am neither against science nor religion, I can't be against what I have spent tons of naira to study for clearly over a decade at different levels, so that's my point,
READ AND UNDERSTAND.

the most idotic write up i have seen. Because a man lies sometimes does not mean he does not tell the truth sometimes. The point of having a brain is to determine what makes sense and what is logical, what sounds reasonable. That the white man has bullshit shit religion does not mean his science is bullshit or his education is totally bullshit....or for that matter that it should be taken hook line and sinker....Same with the black man.

It all boils down to whether to want to engage your brain... The point is you just dont take things and accept them like a robot especially things for which there is no proof. End of!

kalu61:
I pity who did this to you. That Africa don't have tools for research, does it make research none existing? Does it mean you can't figure out loopholes in others work and propose a theory? Or a better methodology you think can work and less cumbersome?

Sorry, in as much as l respect people's perspective of things, yours had no logical achor.


I know you are Methuselah but please, go discover yourself.

I'm a research and work in a molecular lab.

You are making a greater fool out of yourself my friend, I wonder what kind of researcher you are and what kind of "molecular lab" you work in, if you are a researcher you should know simple ethics of researching, you should know that not every discovery you make from your research will be accepted by the general public, not even all fellow researchers will accept your findings, that's why research are always revisited, and then you should also know that those who don't accept your results you not be abused or termed ignorant, neither should you go ahead to call them fools for holding unto their beliefs, who taught you research and it's methodology should have made this clear to you if you are really a professional researcher which I find it so hard to believe or accept because your comments don't make you look like one.
Before you talk about figuring out loop holes in others research and proposing an audio theory, I wasn't talking in that direction, my point is, some of those things you accept are purely based on Faith, you are not different from religious folks.

TimCook:


Don't mind them. Always shouting illiterates at the slightest chance as if they're any better than the average Nigerian.

The so called intelligence is just there to attack others, it's just to comfort themselves, they don't know any of those things outside Google Search.

kingxsamz:


If you are looking for answers, there are thousands of proof you need rather than asking me silly questions. And by the way, where did you get the thought that I believe everything science says?
If there is enough evidence to prove it, then why wouldn't I?
Still you have failed to realize what Faith and Evidence means.

Lol.
it seems you are embittered about religion, so the simple way to console yourself is to claim you are highly intellectual to follow religion, if I were looking for answers, you would be least of the last thing I look unto for answers, your far from giving an answer, you talk about faith and evidence, you accept that the sun revolves and same time rotates on it's axis while going round the sun, what are the evidences you have to support this claim, if you didn't accept those "evidences" by FAITH.??

isthatso:


the most idotic write up i have seen. Because a man lies sometimes does not mean he does not tell the truth sometimes. The point of having a brain is to determine what makes sense and what is logical, what sounds reasonable. That the white man has bullshit shit religion does not mean his science is bullshit or his education is totally bullshit....or for that matter that it should Be taken hook line and sinker....Same with the black man.

It all boils down to whether to want to engage your brain... The point is you just dont take things and accept them like a robot especially things for which there is no proof. End of!

Lol.
End of...
End of your stupidity I guess.
if you call that the most idiotic write up, then it is glaring you haven't read yours, you have a brain to think?
if you do you wouldn't jump into a thread and call millions of souls fools, according to science, "...what is seen by the observer depends solely on the observers interest... "
this is a basic language in science, you barely take note of side reactions in a research if you don't create room for serendipity, on a more realistic note due to our context here, you can't see proofs for what you don't research, you can't find answers to questions you don't ask, if you sought for proofs in religion you wouldn't be typing the trash you have been filling this thread with since yesterday, most of you don't ask questions you accept everything being taught in Sunday school with all wholesomeness, so when you discover a single thing outside what you have been taught all these years, then you think you have been liberated so you want to abuse others, I asked so many questions to prove religion wrong, my life almost went with it, so I can categorically tell you that whatever you think makes religion shitty has an answer, you barely use your brain that is why you can't find answers, you read already made answers from Google and feel you are enlightened, you claim to have evidences that given the whole apparatus and equipments required to prove your evidence, you won't know where to start, you are talking about using your brain when you can't even think, I know your kind I have held them to ransom before, just enjoy fooling yourself around ok
Have a nice time.

ParpahSeventy:

Lol.
it seems you are embittered about religion, so the simple way to console yourself is to claim you are highly intellectual to follow religion, if I were looking for answers, you would be least of the last thing I look unto for answers, your far from giving an answer, you talk about faith and evidence, you accept that the sun revolves and same time rotates on it's axis while going round the sun, what are the evidences you have to support this claim , if you didn't accept those "evidences" by FAITH.??

You're not bright at all.
@bolded. I don't know how you arrived at that or where you got that from to make such baseless conclusion.
No where in my write-up did I say that. But I understand that you're looking for something to hold on to, so you make silly assumptions to feel you have a point.
Maybe you're religious, that's why my initial post hurt you so bad, but it's okay.
My initial post was referring to dumb religious folks who disregarded the research and called it lies/trash, without having any single knowledge of how the scientists came to that conclusion .
You cannot call something you don't know a lie, can you?
My post didn't refer to religious folks arguing about the accuracy or inaccuracy of carbon dating, it was meant for those discrediting this research without having any knowledge of it.
I know you'll miss the point and say another silly trash to hold on to, but okay.

ArisingStorm:
Lies!!!
Scam!!!

Mercury, Venus, Saturn, Jupiter etc : they are all names of gods o and yet NASA is still giving us top quality entertainment scam, a well financially sponsored scam. And Hollywood and media too are perfectly brainwashing the masses. They quickly brainwash us with western education at a tender age so our mind remains sealed and closed to real truth. They will go to any length to make us not believe the existence of The Creator of all things.

Abeg, people that don't like scam, research this, knowledge makes a man unfit to be a slave :
The Hidden origin of science
The Satanist Scientist
The Foundations of the earth is firm and immovable
The Firmament

See another scam below. (Image)

I must say this is incredible. I mean coming from someone brainwashed and colonised by the white man, so much, that he believes in some God that resides in heaven and has an enemy, a God that has allowed "Satan to originate science " to condemn the white man's science with the white man's religion?

cooltola:


Hey that is what you belief and that is very fine. The same way the stories of Bible , Quran or any religious books are fictitious to you and you do question the authenticity of religion is the same way religious folks question the authenticity of Carbon dating. The conclusion that the bone is 250 millions of years old is fictitous to them just as the stories of Bible or any religious book are fictitous to you. Even science have doubters does not qualify such folks as slowpoke and this is the point i am trying to make to you. They have the right to express their faith , just as you have the right to express science. Disrespect comes when they insult you or attack you or they harm you physically. Please know the differences

Don't argue with him.
People like him join science and atheism, which are two different thing.
Science is wide and broad, but most of them lump doctor, pharmacist, archaeologist, geologist, chemist, space engineer, astronaut etc together. even evolutionist.

kingxsamz:


You're not bright at all.
@bolded. I don't know how you arrived at that or where you got that from to make such baseless conclusion.
No where in my write-up did I say that. But I understand that you're looking for something to hold on to, so you make silly assumptions to feel you have a point.
Maybe you're religious, that's why my initial post hurt you so bad, but it's okay.
My initial post was referring to dumb religious folks who disregarded the research and called it lies/trash, without having any single knowledge of how the scientists came to that conclusion .
You cannot call something you don't know a lie, can you?
My post didn't refer to religious folks arguing about the accuracy or inaccuracy of carbon dating, it was meant for those discrediting this research without having any knowledge of it.
I know you'll miss the point and say another silly trash to hold on to, but okay.

You sound funny my little friend, you wholesomely believe in science, so you should be believe whatever science says since those who don't believe in them are "ignorant fools", you claim to be bright that's where I keep hammering, you are not better than those you label "ignorant", it's a general scientific idea that the Earth rotates on it's axis, while revolving around the sun, if you don't know that as a supposed intelligent individual then I wonder what makes you intelligent, you don't have to say that before I bring it up, I brought it up for you to tell me what are the evidences that makes you believe it's true, since you can't prove just one of your thousands or you said millions of evidences, what makes you bright? you are not ignorant yet you barely know, so what's your ground when you abuse others?
What is hurting me is your stark stupidity that you shield in half baked "intelligence", you attack the religious folks criticizing the post without having any knowledge of it, yet you criticize those religious folks about their own beliefs without having any knowledge of it, whatever knowledge you think you have, ends with same "ignorance" you throw at people, yours is a case of "a butterfly thinks himself a bird".
If you were that knowledgeable you shouldn't attack them for criticizing it "without having any knowledge of it" because even renowned scientists criticized the discoveries of other scientists "without having a knowledge of it", that is why we have statements like "...scientists who reason beyond their time". criticizing something doesn't mean you must have an alternative like you are trying to make us believe, people criticize because the idea doesn't conform to what they know.
Get some sense before you assume you are bright, you look more dull than being close to "bright".
It just occurred to me, are you so "bright" you can't remember who first quoted who?
I quoted just isthatso, you quoted my reply to him, and I replied you.

ParpahSeventy:

You sound funny my little friend, you wholesomely believe in science, so you should be believe whatever science says since those who don't believe in them are "ignorant fools", you claim to be bright that's where I keep hammering, you are not better than those you label "ignorant", it's a general scientific idea that the Earth rotates on it's axis, while revolving around the sun, if you don't know that as a supposed intelligent individual then I wonder what makes you intelligent, you don't have to say that before I bring it up, I brought it up for you to tell me what are the evidences that makes you believe it's true, since you can't prove just one of your thousands or you said millions of evidences, what makes you bright? you are not ignorant yet you barely know, so what's your ground when you abuse others?
What is hurting me is your stark stupidity that you shield in half baked "intelligence", you attack the religious folks criticizing the post without having any knowledge of it, yet you criticize those religious folks about their own beliefs without having any knowledge of it, whatever knowledge you think you have, ends with same "ignorance" you throw at people, yours is a case of "a butterfly thinks himself a bird".
If you were that knowledgeable you shouldn't attack them for criticizing it "without having any knowledge of it" because even renowned scientists criticized the discoveries of other scientists "without having a knowledge of it", that is why we have statements like "...scientists who reason beyond their time". criticizing something doesn't mean you must have an alternative like you are trying to make us believe, people criticize because the idea doesn't conform to what they know.
Get some sense before you assume you are bright, you look more dull than being close to "bright".

I couldn't read all that unnecessary epistle you wrote displaying how pained you're, but don't worry, you'll be fine.
You have no point and you're looking for something to hold on to.
Quote where I said I believe any of the assumptions you made.
Leaving the main point and looking for something else to talk about...
I have made my point with my previous post , you can go on crying and ranting about nothing.
Abeg goodnight.

kingxsamz:



I couldn't read all that unnecessary epistle you wrote displaying how pained you're, but don't worry, you'll be fine.
You have no point and you're looking for something to hold on to.
Quote where I said I believe any of the assumptions you made.
Leaving the main point and looking for something else to talk about...
I have made my point with my previous post , you can go on crying and ranting about nothing.
Abeg goodnight.

Lol
it's good to watch people fool themselves, you didn't read but you know what it was talking about.
Keep fooling yourself by putting yourself in a make believe environment, truth remains that you are not in any way better than those you call "ignorant African mind" you can pretend as hard as you can, you are currently facing the reality, it's on this site you claim to be civilized, civilized keee you there.
If what you see online pains you, sorry am not in that category.
Someone that can't organize or Carry out a simple research is typing nonsense since yesterday about science and civility, if you know what it entails to be scientifically knowledgeable, you won't term others "ignorant" for not knowing.
I can pay for you to rent sense sha, you really need it, since you are now hiding from your profound belief in science to saying they were my assumptions.

ParpahSeventy:

Lol
it's good to watch people fool themselves, you didn't read but you know what it was talking about.
Keep fooling yourself by putting yourself in a make believe environment, truth remains that you are not in any way better than those you call "ignorant African mind" you can pretend as hard as you can, you are currently facing the reality, it's on this site you claim to be civilized, civilized keee you there.
If what you see online pains you, sorry am not in that category.
Someone that can't organize or Carry out a simple research is typing nonsense since yesterday about science and civility, if you know what it entails to be scientifically knowledgeable, you won't term others "ignorant" for not knowing.
I can't pay for you to rent sense sha, you really need it.

You'll be fine my brother.
You can continue wasting your time writing epistles I won't read, just leave my mention out of it. Goodnight.

ParpahSeventy:

The earth revolves around the sun, the equinoxes and solstices are also proofs, because you read that from the book, and you accepted it and assumed you are enlightened by what you read, that is the same way those religious folks you claim they are ignorant read what they believe from their book, so learn to respect people's view you are not different, if you were taught that in school, there's no way you will ever find out or agree that the Earth revolves around the sun, because literal evidence that you don't have to anything to believe doesn't agree that the Earth revolves around the sun.

Rubbish. There is something called common sense and reasoning, read about the equinoxes and solstices online then use your sense to put two and two together because I don't have time to start explaining them before you'll start talking another long nonsense. Comparing knowledge to religion the height of stupidity. Don't worry you'll soon tell us that what we know about gravity is a lie rubbish.

isthatso:


Well One thing I think we can both agree upon is
As I said earlier and you seem to have just agreed, the Bible is not based on proven facts, it is ambiguous and open to numerous interpretations based on your defined agenda. If you are looking for a reason to kill a transgressor you will find it in the bible, if you are looking for a reason to forgive a transgressor you will also find it. This is hardly the reference book for a logical mind but rather sheep or those who wish to manipulate sheep. Like i say you don't need religion to know how to live a moral righteous life. Common sense and life experiences will soon enough teach you simple rules like nothing good comes easy, stealing has its consequences, lying has consequences, sleeping with another mans wife etc.

I guess that I replied in haste, forgetting the second paragraph of your initial response. What I agreed with was what was written in the first paragraph and on the third paragraph which talked about religion can be open to manipulation. And as a Christian, I know that my relationship is categorized under religion but I am not a religious person. I have a relationship with God (Father – son relationship), and a plain reading of the scriptures teaches that.

Now to the second paragraph of the previous response. CHRISTIANITY is firmly hinged on the Bible and it is as a result of a plain EXEGESIS of the Bible (Sola Scriptura) that modern Science was born. Any informed Historian of modern science knows that the founding fathers of modern science worked out their experimental and empirical science because their FAITH motivated them to do so. My question now should be; if the Bible is not factual, how did it enable them to believe that the universe can be studied; thereby birthing modern science?
Again, the fact that the texts of the Bible is open to interpretations of man does not rule out its authenticity. The reason is that it is not just a book of history, it contains different genres and figures of speech. And the fact that man is selfish, deceitful and wicked (Jer 17:9), he would love to manipulate and force his selfish mind on a certain text for his wicked ambition. It is important to note that this is not just a problem of the Bible, but it also cut across Historical Science where data that is available to all is being INTERPRETED according to a certain PARADIGM (I want to believe you know what I meant by that, if not, you can check it up).
So I didn’t agree with you that the Bible is not based on proven FACTS, (the statement alone is ambiguous and open to various interpretation. Lol) because there are historical and prophetical statements of the Bible that have been proven true and some are yet to be discovered while others are heavily contended, miraculous events especially. This shows that it is not ALL of the text that are ambiguous.
Talking of misinterpretation of words is exactly what you did with my statements that were bolded by you. What I meant by those words is that the various passages (you talked of about 15) that are quoted by either Flat Earthers or bibliosceptics can be subdivided into those types of fallacies. The first one should tell you that I was talking about logical fallacies and not ambiguity of the Bible
Now, a good EXEGESIS (Sola Scriptura) of the Bible is found to be the best method of expounding the scripture rather than interpreting based on one’s idea. For example, you talked about reason to kill or forgive a transgressor. It is a well-known fact that the scripture is usually divided into the LAW, PROPHETS and the text of the NEW COVENANT. And the inspired New Testament writers taught extensively that the coming of Jesus fulfilled the (over 628) codes where God showed man that he is helpless in the face of sin without His grace of redemption, hence believers are NO LONGER bound to follow the (over 600) codes written during but now summarized into LOVING GOD (which directly translates to obedience to God, and summarizes the first 4 of the ten commandments; expounded by the New Testament writers) and LOVING MAN (which summarizes the last 6 of the ten commandments and as explained by the writings of the prophet and the New Testament writers.
You said “…you don’t need religion to know how to live a moral righteous life”. There is a philosophical problem with that. There is an African proverb which says; “where there is no law, there is no transgression”. This is very true because there must be a ‘rule’ which defines what is righteous and what is not. Common sense does not give rule, else how do we know who have it or not? What is sensible to me may not be sensible to you. In a free world, lying should not have a consequence if it is not considered wrong but who made the rule that it is wrong to lie? All these rules that defines righteousness are borrowed from one form of religion or the other (though I will speak for the Bible as that has been the crust of my argument). It’s good that you are not an atheist, hence you have a reason to be righteous – to do what is good but this good has to be defined by some sort of standard. Who sets the standard of what is good or bad? Because as I said earlier, common sense alone can’t set rules for what is good or bad. Atheists too should have common sense but their philosophy doesn’t have anything which defines what is good or evil. This is why a theist (Christian especially) cannot be divorced from his sacred writing (Bible in this case).

On a final note, it is true that the Bible is being used by selfish and wicked people to propagate their ambition, this does not make the Bible illogical. It is a trait in humans that even scientific data are interpreted differently to suit a certain worldview which has sparked controversy since ages. The scripture cannot be broken, so the best EXEGESIS is Sola Scriptura.