Science Proves the Bible Again

[DOTR]

https://www.cs.umd.edu/~mvz/bible/bible-inconsistencies.pdf

Marvin Zelkowitz...hmmmmm. And I see he recommends books by Israel Finklestein and another by Elliot Friedman.

 

[Hollie]

https://www.cs.umd.edu/~mvz/bible/bible-inconsistencies.pdf

Marvin Zelkowitz...hmmmmm. And I see he recommends books by Israel Finklestein and another by Elliot Friedman.

Ahh, you're on the event horizon of a conspiracy theory.

 

[DOTR]

https://www.cs.umd.edu/~mvz/bible/bible-inconsistencies.pdf

Marvin Zelkowitz...hmmmmm. And I see he recommends books by Israel Finklestein and another by Elliot Friedman.

Ahh, you're on the event horizon of a conspiracy theory.

“Oy vey he noticed!”

 

[LittleNipper]

As science texts, the bibles are horrible.


Bible: Science and History

Here is a truthful thought: Scientific Facts and Christian Faith: How are they Compatible?

 

[Hollie]

https://www.cs.umd.edu/~mvz/bible/bible-inconsistencies.pdf

Marvin Zelkowitz...hmmmmm. And I see he recommends books by Israel Finklestein and another by Elliot Friedman.

Ahh, you're on the event horizon of a conspiracy theory.

“Oy vey he noticed!”

Gee, whiz. Your tender sensibilities are offended.

Don't be offended. The bibles are the only books you need to read.

 

[Hollie]

More errors in the various bibles


An Introduction to Biblical Nonsense

 

[LittleNipper]

The Bible claims that Jesus is the light of the world. The Bible in Revelations also states that there will be no need for the Sun because GOD will be the light. Imagine for a moment that GOD created light and then He establish a source for that light. The reality would be that any star, even trillions of miles away, would already become a source of light already reaching planet earth. In other words, before any problem or knowledge of the speed of light was known by man, GOD through HIS WORD, demonstrated the logical solution.

 

[DOTR]

Fort Fun Indiana, where is the chicken that became a dinosaur? If that experiment doesn't happen, then it never did happen and never will happen. You have LIED and are WRONG once again. What kind of brain dead are you?

Chickens descend from theropod dinosaurs. They don’t become dinosaurs.

 

[LittleNipper]

There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever.

 

[Hollie]

The Bible claims that Jesus is the light of the world. The Bible in Revelations also states that there will be no need for the Sun because GOD will be the light. Imagine for a moment that GOD created light and then He establish a source for that light. The reality would be that any star, even trillions of miles away, would already become a source of light already reaching planet earth. In other words, before any problem or knowledge of the speed of light was known by man, GOD through HIS WORD, demonstrated the logical solution.

Why did the gods put the stars millions of light years away to make the appearance of a vast and old universe?

Those gawds, they're such kidders.

 

[DOTR]

Humans are bipedal apes,

Humans are not apes. Evos just made that stuff up using circular reasoning and you are repeating their fallacies. Let's just add another notch to your countless lies you have pooped out of you rear end. It's no wonder you can't help but lie because you follow the lies master Satan.

Humans are obviously not apes. But we share the taxonomic classification Hominid with apes.

 

[DOTR]

The Bible claims that Jesus is the light of the world. The Bible in Revelations also states that there will be no need for the Sun because GOD will be the light. Imagine for a moment that GOD created light and then He establish a source for that light. The reality would be that any star, even trillions of miles away, would already become a source of light already reaching planet earth. In other words, before any problem or knowledge of the speed of light was known by man, GOD through HIS WORD, demonstrated the logical solution.

Why did the gods put the stars millions of light years away to make the appearance of a vast and old universe?

Those gawds, they're such kidders.

Yeah God should have checked with you first.

 

[DOTR]

You still have found a chimp or ape that is bipedal.

Uh...what? You write like a child.

Humans are bipedal apes, you imbecile. And all the other apes are at least partially bipedal, and the newly discovered Bili ape appears to be mostly, if not completely, bipedal.

Just shut up, you fraud. You are embarrassing yourself.

All specimens in the human family tree going back almost 2 million years are fully bipedal.

Becoming Human: The Evolution of Walking Upright | Science | Smithsonian

The earliest hominid with the most extensive evidence for bipedalism is the 4.4-million-year-old Ardipithecus ramidus. In 2009, researchers announced the results of more than 15 years of analysis of the species and introduced the world to a nearly complete skeleton called Ardi.

Although the earliest hominids were capable of upright walking, they probably didn’t get around exactly as we do today. They retained primitive features—such as long, curved fingers and toes as well as longer arms and shorter legs—that indicate they spent time in trees. It’s not until the emergence of H. erectus 1.89 million years ago that hominids grew tall, evolved long legs and became completely terrestrial creatures.​

Your basic circular reasoning fallacy. That is evolution in-a-nutshell.

Before Ardi, you were claiming it was Lucy. What a contradiction!

No monkeys are bipedal today. If things in the present help find how things were in the past, then the past monkeys were not bipedal. They also have small cranial capacity like the past monkeys. We also do not see any monkeys becoming human. Humans are humans. Monkeys are monkeys even though you look like a monkey.

So you are wrong again.

"Macro evolution" is not a scientific term. It's hocus-pocus. There is only evolution. Not all science is experiments. Furthermore, evolution has been tested in the lab with bacteria. We have bacteria resistant to antibiotics because of evolution.

I got the term "macroevolutio" from -- Macroevolution. How stupid can you be???!!!???!!!

Furthermore, the answer has already been found circa 2011. Your so-called evolution is behind .

"The cfr gene resides on a plasmid (mobile element) and can easily be transferred from one bacterium to another. The cfr protein transfers chemical groups called methyl groups to the ribosome (protein-making factory) that prohibits antibiotics from binding to the ribosome but does not affect the function of the ribosome. The gene has been found in MRSA bacteria and helps bacteria resist seven classes of antibiotics. This gene is a very powerful ally to the bacteria! It is unknown whether S. sciuri obtained the gene from another bacteria or whether the cfr gene was original to the bacteria and may have acquired mutations that permitted it to still perform the function of methylation but in a way that allowed the bacteria to resist antibiotics. Either way, it is clearly not the evolution of a new gene from “scratch.” Rather, it is the modification of a current gene that is beneficial to the bacteria in the presence of antibiotics.

The scientist involved in the study stated, “What we've discovered here is so exciting because it represents a truly new chemical mechanism for methylation. We now have a very clear chemical picture of a very clever mechanism for antibiotic resistance that some bacteria have evolved.” Although the bacteria are obviously not “clever,” God in His infinite wisdom and grace designed bacteria with amazing mechanisms to allow them to adapt in a post-Fall world (see this article for more information). If the scientist by using the word evolved means “change,” then yes the bacteria have changed, but they have not evolved new genes that would help them evolve from a microbe into a man."

Bacteria Keep “Outsmarting” Antibiotics

Thats great about the gods designing bacteria. Be sure to thank them for designing the cancer cell. A masterstroke of design.

And just when I was thinking I couldn’t be less impressed with you. Cancer isn’t a form of bacteria.

 

[DOTR]

https://www.cs.umd.edu/~mvz/bible/bible-inconsistencies.pdf

Marvin Zelkowitz...hmmmmm. And I see he recommends books by Israel Finklestein and another by Elliot Friedman.

Ahh, you're on the event horizon of a conspiracy theory.

“Oy vey he noticed!”

Gee, whiz. Your tender sensibilities are offended.

Don't be offended. The bibles are the only books you need to read.

Only for you pharisitical atheists. You are more provincial than you will ever grasp

 

[Hollie]

You still have found a chimp or ape that is bipedal.

Uh...what? You write like a child.

Humans are bipedal apes, you imbecile. And all the other apes are at least partially bipedal, and the newly discovered Bili ape appears to be mostly, if not completely, bipedal.

Just shut up, you fraud. You are embarrassing yourself.

All specimens in the human family tree going back almost 2 million years are fully bipedal.

Becoming Human: The Evolution of Walking Upright | Science | Smithsonian

The earliest hominid with the most extensive evidence for bipedalism is the 4.4-million-year-old Ardipithecus ramidus. In 2009, researchers announced the results of more than 15 years of analysis of the species and introduced the world to a nearly complete skeleton called Ardi.

Although the earliest hominids were capable of upright walking, they probably didn’t get around exactly as we do today. They retained primitive features—such as long, curved fingers and toes as well as longer arms and shorter legs—that indicate they spent time in trees. It’s not until the emergence of H. erectus 1.89 million years ago that hominids grew tall, evolved long legs and became completely terrestrial creatures.​

Your basic circular reasoning fallacy. That is evolution in-a-nutshell.

Before Ardi, you were claiming it was Lucy. What a contradiction!

No monkeys are bipedal today. If things in the present help find how things were in the past, then the past monkeys were not bipedal. They also have small cranial capacity like the past monkeys. We also do not see any monkeys becoming human. Humans are humans. Monkeys are monkeys even though you look like a monkey.

So you are wrong again.

"Macro evolution" is not a scientific term. It's hocus-pocus. There is only evolution. Not all science is experiments. Furthermore, evolution has been tested in the lab with bacteria. We have bacteria resistant to antibiotics because of evolution.

I got the term "macroevolutio" from -- Macroevolution. How stupid can you be???!!!???!!!

Furthermore, the answer has already been found circa 2011. Your so-called evolution is behind .

"The cfr gene resides on a plasmid (mobile element) and can easily be transferred from one bacterium to another. The cfr protein transfers chemical groups called methyl groups to the ribosome (protein-making factory) that prohibits antibiotics from binding to the ribosome but does not affect the function of the ribosome. The gene has been found in MRSA bacteria and helps bacteria resist seven classes of antibiotics. This gene is a very powerful ally to the bacteria! It is unknown whether S. sciuri obtained the gene from another bacteria or whether the cfr gene was original to the bacteria and may have acquired mutations that permitted it to still perform the function of methylation but in a way that allowed the bacteria to resist antibiotics. Either way, it is clearly not the evolution of a new gene from “scratch.” Rather, it is the modification of a current gene that is beneficial to the bacteria in the presence of antibiotics.

The scientist involved in the study stated, “What we've discovered here is so exciting because it represents a truly new chemical mechanism for methylation. We now have a very clear chemical picture of a very clever mechanism for antibiotic resistance that some bacteria have evolved.” Although the bacteria are obviously not “clever,” God in His infinite wisdom and grace designed bacteria with amazing mechanisms to allow them to adapt in a post-Fall world (see this article for more information). If the scientist by using the word evolved means “change,” then yes the bacteria have changed, but they have not evolved new genes that would help them evolve from a microbe into a man."

Bacteria Keep “Outsmarting” Antibiotics

Thats great about the gods designing bacteria. Be sure to thank them for designing the cancer cell. A masterstroke of design.

And just when I was thinking I couldn’t be less impressed with you. Cancer isn’t a form of bacteria.

Try paying attention. My response was to the suggestion of the gods "designing" bacteria. Were the gods selective in their "designs" and not design the cancer cell?

 

[Hollie]

https://www.cs.umd.edu/~mvz/bible/bible-inconsistencies.pdf

Marvin Zelkowitz...hmmmmm. And I see he recommends books by Israel Finklestein and another by Elliot Friedman.

Ahh, you're on the event horizon of a conspiracy theory.

“Oy vey he noticed!”

Gee, whiz. Your tender sensibilities are offended.

Don't be offended. The bibles are the only books you need to read.

Only for you pharisitical atheists. You are more provincial than you will ever grasp

You hold opinions based on ignorance.

 

[DOTR]

Haha, you are the number one plagiarizer of that idiot blog,

Well, you're the idiot that kept talking about creation.com and wrongly attributing it to me (despite my telling you I use AIG and ICR). Thus, I finally found an article of theirs I liked and now you don't like it and say I am plagiarizing it with zero evidence. Zero evidence is what you have for aliens, abiogenesis and we still haven't gotten anything from trying to back-engineer a chicken into a dinosaur or mini-raptor unless you are counting dino chicken nuggets .

OTOH, I did present Louis Pasteur's famous experiment to disprove abiogenesis -- only life begats life and how amino acids can't form proteins outside of the cell due to chilarity. Moreover, I presented the fine tuning facts and solar wind (including magnetic field and tectonic plates) to discard aliens. I even added SETI, Elon Musk's theories,Ferdi paradox, Drake equation, great filter and more to explain we should have made contact with ET already. Yet, you atheists and wrong scientists cannot "believe" even though panspermia has pretty much been ruled out. You still have not found a living chimp or ape that is bipedal. Yet, you claim to have the mountain of evidence and that evolution is fact. So far, the fact is evolution is wrong even though we want to see the chicken raptor .

I don’t think panspermia has been entirely ruled out. Francis Crick was convinced it was the only explanation. And it does solve some molecular clock issues. But that only begs the question of creation by pushing it back to another time and place.
There are no aliens so far as science knows. Nor any reason or evidence to postulate aliens. Life appears to have been a one time event. More than that...complex life seems to have been pushed upwards and onwards through a series (7 I believe) of events that are mind bogglingly unlikely.

 

[DOTR]

Uh...what? You write like a child.

Humans are bipedal apes, you imbecile. And all the other apes are at least partially bipedal, and the newly discovered Bili ape appears to be mostly, if not completely, bipedal.

Just shut up, you fraud. You are embarrassing yourself.

All specimens in the human family tree going back almost 2 million years are fully bipedal.

Becoming Human: The Evolution of Walking Upright | Science | Smithsonian

The earliest hominid with the most extensive evidence for bipedalism is the 4.4-million-year-old Ardipithecus ramidus. In 2009, researchers announced the results of more than 15 years of analysis of the species and introduced the world to a nearly complete skeleton called Ardi.

Although the earliest hominids were capable of upright walking, they probably didn’t get around exactly as we do today. They retained primitive features—such as long, curved fingers and toes as well as longer arms and shorter legs—that indicate they spent time in trees. It’s not until the emergence of H. erectus 1.89 million years ago that hominids grew tall, evolved long legs and became completely terrestrial creatures.​

Your basic circular reasoning fallacy. That is evolution in-a-nutshell.

Before Ardi, you were claiming it was Lucy. What a contradiction!

No monkeys are bipedal today. If things in the present help find how things were in the past, then the past monkeys were not bipedal. They also have small cranial capacity like the past monkeys. We also do not see any monkeys becoming human. Humans are humans. Monkeys are monkeys even though you look like a monkey.

So you are wrong again.

"Macro evolution" is not a scientific term. It's hocus-pocus. There is only evolution. Not all science is experiments. Furthermore, evolution has been tested in the lab with bacteria. We have bacteria resistant to antibiotics because of evolution.

I got the term "macroevolutio" from -- Macroevolution. How stupid can you be???!!!???!!!

Furthermore, the answer has already been found circa 2011. Your so-called evolution is behind .

"The cfr gene resides on a plasmid (mobile element) and can easily be transferred from one bacterium to another. The cfr protein transfers chemical groups called methyl groups to the ribosome (protein-making factory) that prohibits antibiotics from binding to the ribosome but does not affect the function of the ribosome. The gene has been found in MRSA bacteria and helps bacteria resist seven classes of antibiotics. This gene is a very powerful ally to the bacteria! It is unknown whether S. sciuri obtained the gene from another bacteria or whether the cfr gene was original to the bacteria and may have acquired mutations that permitted it to still perform the function of methylation but in a way that allowed the bacteria to resist antibiotics. Either way, it is clearly not the evolution of a new gene from “scratch.” Rather, it is the modification of a current gene that is beneficial to the bacteria in the presence of antibiotics.

The scientist involved in the study stated, “What we've discovered here is so exciting because it represents a truly new chemical mechanism for methylation. We now have a very clear chemical picture of a very clever mechanism for antibiotic resistance that some bacteria have evolved.” Although the bacteria are obviously not “clever,” God in His infinite wisdom and grace designed bacteria with amazing mechanisms to allow them to adapt in a post-Fall world (see this article for more information). If the scientist by using the word evolved means “change,” then yes the bacteria have changed, but they have not evolved new genes that would help them evolve from a microbe into a man."

Bacteria Keep “Outsmarting” Antibiotics

Thats great about the gods designing bacteria. Be sure to thank them for designing the cancer cell. A masterstroke of design.

And just when I was thinking I couldn’t be less impressed with you. Cancer isn’t a form of bacteria.

Try paying attention. My response was to the suggestion of the gods "designing" bacteria. Were the gods selective in their "designs" and not design the cancer cell?

Cancer cells were designed?

 

[DOTR]

Marvin Zelkowitz...hmmmmm. And I see he recommends books by Israel Finklestein and another by Elliot Friedman.

Ahh, you're on the event horizon of a conspiracy theory.

“Oy vey he noticed!”

Gee, whiz. Your tender sensibilities are offended.

Don't be offended. The bibles are the only books you need to read.

Only for you pharisitical atheists. You are more provincial than you will ever grasp

You hold opinions based on ignorance.

You hold yours based in a provincial and limited worldview...like any other Puritan fundamentalist.

 

[Hollie]

All specimens in the human family tree going back almost 2 million years are fully bipedal.

Becoming Human: The Evolution of Walking Upright | Science | Smithsonian

The earliest hominid with the most extensive evidence for bipedalism is the 4.4-million-year-old Ardipithecus ramidus. In 2009, researchers announced the results of more than 15 years of analysis of the species and introduced the world to a nearly complete skeleton called Ardi.

Although the earliest hominids were capable of upright walking, they probably didn’t get around exactly as we do today. They retained primitive features—such as long, curved fingers and toes as well as longer arms and shorter legs—that indicate they spent time in trees. It’s not until the emergence of H. erectus 1.89 million years ago that hominids grew tall, evolved long legs and became completely terrestrial creatures.​

Your basic circular reasoning fallacy. That is evolution in-a-nutshell.

Before Ardi, you were claiming it was Lucy. What a contradiction!

No monkeys are bipedal today. If things in the present help find how things were in the past, then the past monkeys were not bipedal. They also have small cranial capacity like the past monkeys. We also do not see any monkeys becoming human. Humans are humans. Monkeys are monkeys even though you look like a monkey.

So you are wrong again.

"Macro evolution" is not a scientific term. It's hocus-pocus. There is only evolution. Not all science is experiments. Furthermore, evolution has been tested in the lab with bacteria. We have bacteria resistant to antibiotics because of evolution.

I got the term "macroevolutio" from -- Macroevolution. How stupid can you be???!!!???!!!

Furthermore, the answer has already been found circa 2011. Your so-called evolution is behind .

"The cfr gene resides on a plasmid (mobile element) and can easily be transferred from one bacterium to another. The cfr protein transfers chemical groups called methyl groups to the ribosome (protein-making factory) that prohibits antibiotics from binding to the ribosome but does not affect the function of the ribosome. The gene has been found in MRSA bacteria and helps bacteria resist seven classes of antibiotics. This gene is a very powerful ally to the bacteria! It is unknown whether S. sciuri obtained the gene from another bacteria or whether the cfr gene was original to the bacteria and may have acquired mutations that permitted it to still perform the function of methylation but in a way that allowed the bacteria to resist antibiotics. Either way, it is clearly not the evolution of a new gene from “scratch.” Rather, it is the modification of a current gene that is beneficial to the bacteria in the presence of antibiotics.

The scientist involved in the study stated, “What we've discovered here is so exciting because it represents a truly new chemical mechanism for methylation. We now have a very clear chemical picture of a very clever mechanism for antibiotic resistance that some bacteria have evolved.” Although the bacteria are obviously not “clever,” God in His infinite wisdom and grace designed bacteria with amazing mechanisms to allow them to adapt in a post-Fall world (see this article for more information). If the scientist by using the word evolved means “change,” then yes the bacteria have changed, but they have not evolved new genes that would help them evolve from a microbe into a man."

Bacteria Keep “Outsmarting” Antibiotics

Thats great about the gods designing bacteria. Be sure to thank them for designing the cancer cell. A masterstroke of design.

And just when I was thinking I couldn’t be less impressed with you. Cancer isn’t a form of bacteria.

Try paying attention. My response was to the suggestion of the gods "designing" bacteria. Were the gods selective in their "designs" and not design the cancer cell?

Cancer cells were designed?

Bacteria was designed?

If we are to believe that the gods are responsible for all of creation then we have to accept that things are the way they are because the gods want them precisely this way.. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes and disease etc., none of which are essential to a world created by the gods. They could have just as easily made things otherwise, they just didn't.