If God's Flood was only a regional flood...

[Taz]

A 40 minute video isn't a real scientist. Please try again.

That would be the guy in the video who was giving his talk to all the other real scientists in the room who were listening to his talk.

First of all, I'm not watching a 40 minute video, link to a science site with real scientists that describe the boundaries of the universe. Secondly, that video is about the universe having a beginning. I never said that it didn't. I said that you don't know what was before that.

Since you didn't watch the video you don't know that he didn't.

You pick the stupidest things to show your ignorance.

You can't expect me to watch a 40 minute video. If that's all you have, then you have nothing. If it was real science, then there would be sites with real scientists explaining the boundary and what was before the BB. Now instead of posting a real site, you'll argue about how you've shown it to me already, because really, you have nothing. Same old, same old.

Sure I can. I've watched it several times. It's not like I am asking you to do something I haven't done. Stop being so lazy.

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

 

[ding]

That would be the guy in the video who was giving his talk to all the other real scientists in the room who were listening to his talk.

First of all, I'm not watching a 40 minute video, link to a science site with real scientists that describe the boundaries of the universe. Secondly, that video is about the universe having a beginning. I never said that it didn't. I said that you don't know what was before that.

Since you didn't watch the video you don't know that he didn't.

You pick the stupidest things to show your ignorance.

You can't expect me to watch a 40 minute video. If that's all you have, then you have nothing. If it was real science, then there would be sites with real scientists explaining the boundary and what was before the BB. Now instead of posting a real site, you'll argue about how you've shown it to me already, because really, you have nothing. Same old, same old.

Sure I can. I've watched it several times. It's not like I am asking you to do something I haven't done. Stop being so lazy.

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

 

[Taz]

First of all, I'm not watching a 40 minute video, link to a science site with real scientists that describe the boundaries of the universe. Secondly, that video is about the universe having a beginning. I never said that it didn't. I said that you don't know what was before that.

Since you didn't watch the video you don't know that he didn't.

You pick the stupidest things to show your ignorance.

You can't expect me to watch a 40 minute video. If that's all you have, then you have nothing. If it was real science, then there would be sites with real scientists explaining the boundary and what was before the BB. Now instead of posting a real site, you'll argue about how you've shown it to me already, because really, you have nothing. Same old, same old.

Sure I can. I've watched it several times. It's not like I am asking you to do something I haven't done. Stop being so lazy.

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

 

[ding]

Since you didn't watch the video you don't know that he didn't.

You pick the stupidest things to show your ignorance.

You can't expect me to watch a 40 minute video. If that's all you have, then you have nothing. If it was real science, then there would be sites with real scientists explaining the boundary and what was before the BB. Now instead of posting a real site, you'll argue about how you've shown it to me already, because really, you have nothing. Same old, same old.

Sure I can. I've watched it several times. It's not like I am asking you to do something I haven't done. Stop being so lazy.

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

The boundary is the event horizon dummy.

 

[ding]

Since you didn't watch the video you don't know that he didn't.

You pick the stupidest things to show your ignorance.

You can't expect me to watch a 40 minute video. If that's all you have, then you have nothing. If it was real science, then there would be sites with real scientists explaining the boundary and what was before the BB. Now instead of posting a real site, you'll argue about how you've shown it to me already, because really, you have nothing. Same old, same old.

Sure I can. I've watched it several times. It's not like I am asking you to do something I haven't done. Stop being so lazy.

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

You mean other than the laws of nature. They know those existed.

 

[james bond]

First of all, I'm not watching a 40 minute video, link to a science site with real scientists that describe the boundaries of the universe. Secondly, that video is about the universe having a beginning. I never said that it didn't. I said that you don't know what was before that.

Since you didn't watch the video you don't know that he didn't.

You pick the stupidest things to show your ignorance.

You can't expect me to watch a 40 minute video. If that's all you have, then you have nothing. If it was real science, then there would be sites with real scientists explaining the boundary and what was before the BB. Now instead of posting a real site, you'll argue about how you've shown it to me already, because really, you have nothing. Same old, same old.

Sure I can. I've watched it several times. It's not like I am asking you to do something I haven't done. Stop being so lazy.

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I watched the vid. Didn't think Taz would watch it since it's a lecture. He doesn't know imaginary time. I doubt that he could read Hawking's A Brief History of Time nor A Briefer History of Time (picture book). The guy is a mortar brick or very heavy brick. His head will fall and cause a large tremor one day.

 

[Taz]

You can't expect me to watch a 40 minute video. If that's all you have, then you have nothing. If it was real science, then there would be sites with real scientists explaining the boundary and what was before the BB. Now instead of posting a real site, you'll argue about how you've shown it to me already, because really, you have nothing. Same old, same old.

Sure I can. I've watched it several times. It's not like I am asking you to do something I haven't done. Stop being so lazy.

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

The boundary is the event horizon dummy.

Prove it, cumstain.

 

[Taz]

You can't expect me to watch a 40 minute video. If that's all you have, then you have nothing. If it was real science, then there would be sites with real scientists explaining the boundary and what was before the BB. Now instead of posting a real site, you'll argue about how you've shown it to me already, because really, you have nothing. Same old, same old.

Sure I can. I've watched it several times. It's not like I am asking you to do something I haven't done. Stop being so lazy.

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

You mean other than the laws of nature. They know those existed.

Prove it.

 

[ding]

Sure I can. I've watched it several times. It's not like I am asking you to do something I haven't done. Stop being so lazy.

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

The boundary is the event horizon dummy.

Prove it, cumstain.

It's why Hawking created imaginary time, Taz, to get past the boundary or event horizon. It's just a mathematical gimmick. It doesn't change our understanding of anything.

 

[ding]

Sure I can. I've watched it several times. It's not like I am asking you to do something I haven't done. Stop being so lazy.

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

You mean other than the laws of nature. They know those existed.

Prove it.

Because the universe was created through a natural process, Taz. That natural process is the laws of nature. The laws of nature are effectively rules that govern the behavior of inanimate and animate matter.

It's not that complicated to follow the logic.

 

[Taz]

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

The boundary is the event horizon dummy.

Prove it, cumstain.

It's why Hawking created imaginary time, Taz, to get past the boundary or event horizon. It's just a mathematical gimmick. It doesn't change our understanding of anything.

So you don't have a link, gee, what a surprise.

 

[james bond]

Sure I can. I've watched it several times. It's not like I am asking you to do something I haven't done. Stop being so lazy.

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

The boundary is the event horizon dummy.

Prove it, cumstain.

Not only ding, but we've all proved that you are a dummy. If I were you, I'd quit when I was behind. You probably changed the subject because that's what you did when I was explaining that evos and Christians have different GC tours. Moreover your answers or lack off prove that you are a dense brick. You are discussing the beginning of the universe when the thread is about floods.

As for this flood business, if I was a skeptic, then I'd question the people who survived and their descendants. Or look at the history of peoples who lived afterward. I'd stay within or close to the period. We find that every culture has a global flood story. It goes to show that there were stories handed down to them when they were in remote distances and there was no way for them to communicate. I'd listen to the skeptics, too, and they hypothesize that it was mythical flood stories. However, it still doesn't explain why there were so many of the same type of stories in far away locations. If there were one or two stories, then it probably was a myth.

What you did was choose something that no one was there to witness. You can't even find a group of people who first appeared after it happened. See how stupid your topics of discussion devolve into?

Furthermore, you ask questions, but it leads to no discussion. It just ends up you repeating yourself. This is boring, so I will bid you adieu. You'll end up getting your proof, but I doubt you will like it.

 

[Taz]

Then you should be able to point me to the passages that talk about the boundary and what was before the BB. I bet you won't because it's not there.

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

The boundary is the event horizon dummy.

Prove it, cumstain.

Not only ding, but we've all proved that you are a dummy. If I were you, I'd quit when I was behind. You probably changed the subject because that's what you did when I was explaining that evos and Christians have different GC tours. Moreover your answers or lack off prove that you are a dense brick. You are discussing the beginning of the universe when the thread is about floods.

As for this flood business, if I was a skeptic, then I'd question the people who survived and their descendants. Or look at the history of peoples who lived afterward. I'd stay within or close to the period. We find that every culture has a global flood story. It goes to show that there were stories handed down to them when they were in remote distances and there was no way for them to communicate. I'd listen to the skeptics, too, and they hypothesize that it was mythical flood stories. However, it still doesn't explain why there were so many of the same type of stories in far away locations. If there were one or two stories, then it probably was a myth.

What you did was choose something that no one was there to witness. You can't even find a group of people who first appeared after it happened. See how stupid your topics of discussion devolve into?

Furthermore, you ask questions, but it leads to no discussion. It just ends up you repeating yourself. This is boring, so I will bid you adieu. You'll end up getting your proof, but I doubt you will like it.

Geez, it's about you left, you have no proof for any kind of a flood that would have needed animals to be saved. So what if other cultures have flood stories, are you saying that the bible is just copied bullshit. Like you? :biggrin;

 

[LittleNipper]

The whole talk is about. You have to watch every second of it.

You do realize that even Hawking admits his imaginary time no boundary theory still means that there was still a beginning of the universe, right?

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

The boundary is the event horizon dummy.

Prove it, cumstain.

Not only ding, but we've all proved that you are a dummy. If I were you, I'd quit when I was behind. You probably changed the subject because that's what you did when I was explaining that evos and Christians have different GC tours. Moreover your answers or lack off prove that you are a dense brick. You are discussing the beginning of the universe when the thread is about floods.

As for this flood business, if I was a skeptic, then I'd question the people who survived and their descendants. Or look at the history of peoples who lived afterward. I'd stay within or close to the period. We find that every culture has a global flood story. It goes to show that there were stories handed down to them when they were in remote distances and there was no way for them to communicate. I'd listen to the skeptics, too, and they hypothesize that it was mythical flood stories. However, it still doesn't explain why there were so many of the same type of stories in far away locations. If there were one or two stories, then it probably was a myth.

What you did was choose something that no one was there to witness. You can't even find a group of people who first appeared after it happened. See how stupid your topics of discussion devolve into?

Furthermore, you ask questions, but it leads to no discussion. It just ends up you repeating yourself. This is boring, so I will bid you adieu. You'll end up getting your proof, but I doubt you will like it.

Geez, it's about you left, you have no proof for any kind of a flood that would have needed animals to be saved. So what if other cultures have flood stories, are you saying that the bible is just copied bullshit. Like you? :biggrin;

You keep saying this and maybe you will convince yourself! However, the Grand Canyon (as well as others), and aquatic fossils on mountains, petrified trees running through layer after layer of sediment, a whale fossil found standing on its head through layers of sediment are all proof that something out of the ordinary happened. You "believe" what you wish, but there iare more and more things found that point to a terrible cataclysm.

 

[Taz]

I never said that there wasn't a beginning. I said no scientists claim to know what is before the BB and no scientists claim that the universe has a clear boundary.

The boundary is the event horizon dummy.

Prove it, cumstain.

Not only ding, but we've all proved that you are a dummy. If I were you, I'd quit when I was behind. You probably changed the subject because that's what you did when I was explaining that evos and Christians have different GC tours. Moreover your answers or lack off prove that you are a dense brick. You are discussing the beginning of the universe when the thread is about floods.

As for this flood business, if I was a skeptic, then I'd question the people who survived and their descendants. Or look at the history of peoples who lived afterward. I'd stay within or close to the period. We find that every culture has a global flood story. It goes to show that there were stories handed down to them when they were in remote distances and there was no way for them to communicate. I'd listen to the skeptics, too, and they hypothesize that it was mythical flood stories. However, it still doesn't explain why there were so many of the same type of stories in far away locations. If there were one or two stories, then it probably was a myth.

What you did was choose something that no one was there to witness. You can't even find a group of people who first appeared after it happened. See how stupid your topics of discussion devolve into?

Furthermore, you ask questions, but it leads to no discussion. It just ends up you repeating yourself. This is boring, so I will bid you adieu. You'll end up getting your proof, but I doubt you will like it.

Geez, it's about you left, you have no proof for any kind of a flood that would have needed animals to be saved. So what if other cultures have flood stories, are you saying that the bible is just copied bullshit. Like you? :biggrin;

You keep saying this and maybe you will convince yourself! However, the Grand Canyon (as well as others), and aquatic fossils on mountains, petrified trees running through layer after layer of sediment, a whale fossil found standing on its head through layers of sediment are all proof that something out of the ordinary happened. You "believe" what you wish, but there iare more and more things found that point to a terrible cataclysm.

You don't like what real science says about the erosion of the GC, and all the other stuff, so you live in a fantasy world. How does denying reality get you closer to a god?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The boundary is the event horizon dummy.

Prove it, cumstain.

Not only ding, but we've all proved that you are a dummy. If I were you, I'd quit when I was behind. You probably changed the subject because that's what you did when I was explaining that evos and Christians have different GC tours. Moreover your answers or lack off prove that you are a dense brick. You are discussing the beginning of the universe when the thread is about floods.

As for this flood business, if I was a skeptic, then I'd question the people who survived and their descendants. Or look at the history of peoples who lived afterward. I'd stay within or close to the period. We find that every culture has a global flood story. It goes to show that there were stories handed down to them when they were in remote distances and there was no way for them to communicate. I'd listen to the skeptics, too, and they hypothesize that it was mythical flood stories. However, it still doesn't explain why there were so many of the same type of stories in far away locations. If there were one or two stories, then it probably was a myth.

What you did was choose something that no one was there to witness. You can't even find a group of people who first appeared after it happened. See how stupid your topics of discussion devolve into?

Furthermore, you ask questions, but it leads to no discussion. It just ends up you repeating yourself. This is boring, so I will bid you adieu. You'll end up getting your proof, but I doubt you will like it.

Geez, it's about you left, you have no proof for any kind of a flood that would have needed animals to be saved. So what if other cultures have flood stories, are you saying that the bible is just copied bullshit. Like you? :biggrin;

You keep saying this and maybe you will convince yourself! However, the Grand Canyon (as well as others), and aquatic fossils on mountains, petrified trees running through layer after layer of sediment, a whale fossil found standing on its head through layers of sediment are all proof that something out of the ordinary happened. You "believe" what you wish, but there iare more and more things found that point to a terrible cataclysm.

You don't like what real science says about the erosion of the GC, and all the other stuff, so you live in a fantasy world. How does denying reality get you closer to a god?

Softball question.

Religious nutballs like Bond here start with one premise: the Bible is absolute fact.

All of this public masturbation on his part is just smoke and mirrors. He is too embarrassed just to say "because the Bible says so", so he furiously Google for talkong points he doesnt even understand from creationist blogs in an effort to look like his arguemnts have some legitimacy.

Of course, they do not, and his efforts only really result in him not just appearing to be a religious nutball, but also a liar , a charlatan, and an uneducated fool.

 

[LittleNipper]

The boundary is the event horizon dummy.

Prove it, cumstain.

Not only ding, but we've all proved that you are a dummy. If I were you, I'd quit when I was behind. You probably changed the subject because that's what you did when I was explaining that evos and Christians have different GC tours. Moreover your answers or lack off prove that you are a dense brick. You are discussing the beginning of the universe when the thread is about floods.

As for this flood business, if I was a skeptic, then I'd question the people who survived and their descendants. Or look at the history of peoples who lived afterward. I'd stay within or close to the period. We find that every culture has a global flood story. It goes to show that there were stories handed down to them when they were in remote distances and there was no way for them to communicate. I'd listen to the skeptics, too, and they hypothesize that it was mythical flood stories. However, it still doesn't explain why there were so many of the same type of stories in far away locations. If there were one or two stories, then it probably was a myth.

What you did was choose something that no one was there to witness. You can't even find a group of people who first appeared after it happened. See how stupid your topics of discussion devolve into?

Furthermore, you ask questions, but it leads to no discussion. It just ends up you repeating yourself. This is boring, so I will bid you adieu. You'll end up getting your proof, but I doubt you will like it.

Geez, it's about you left, you have no proof for any kind of a flood that would have needed animals to be saved. So what if other cultures have flood stories, are you saying that the bible is just copied bullshit. Like you? :biggrin;

You keep saying this and maybe you will convince yourself! However, the Grand Canyon (as well as others), and aquatic fossils on mountains, petrified trees running through layer after layer of sediment, a whale fossil found standing on its head through layers of sediment are all proof that something out of the ordinary happened. You "believe" what you wish, but there iare more and more things found that point to a terrible cataclysm.

You don't like what real science says about the erosion of the GC, and all the other stuff, so you live in a fantasy world. How does denying reality get you closer to a god?

CORRECTION! I don't agree with what Uniformitarian scientists have theorized from the data that they have regarded. So you may call everything that ignores GOD as scientific, but I do not. How does believing only secular science can be reality get you closer to GOD?

 

[WinterBorn]

Prove it, cumstain.

Not only ding, but we've all proved that you are a dummy. If I were you, I'd quit when I was behind. You probably changed the subject because that's what you did when I was explaining that evos and Christians have different GC tours. Moreover your answers or lack off prove that you are a dense brick. You are discussing the beginning of the universe when the thread is about floods.

As for this flood business, if I was a skeptic, then I'd question the people who survived and their descendants. Or look at the history of peoples who lived afterward. I'd stay within or close to the period. We find that every culture has a global flood story. It goes to show that there were stories handed down to them when they were in remote distances and there was no way for them to communicate. I'd listen to the skeptics, too, and they hypothesize that it was mythical flood stories. However, it still doesn't explain why there were so many of the same type of stories in far away locations. If there were one or two stories, then it probably was a myth.

What you did was choose something that no one was there to witness. You can't even find a group of people who first appeared after it happened. See how stupid your topics of discussion devolve into?

Furthermore, you ask questions, but it leads to no discussion. It just ends up you repeating yourself. This is boring, so I will bid you adieu. You'll end up getting your proof, but I doubt you will like it.

Geez, it's about you left, you have no proof for any kind of a flood that would have needed animals to be saved. So what if other cultures have flood stories, are you saying that the bible is just copied bullshit. Like you? :biggrin;

You keep saying this and maybe you will convince yourself! However, the Grand Canyon (as well as others), and aquatic fossils on mountains, petrified trees running through layer after layer of sediment, a whale fossil found standing on its head through layers of sediment are all proof that something out of the ordinary happened. You "believe" what you wish, but there iare more and more things found that point to a terrible cataclysm.

You don't like what real science says about the erosion of the GC, and all the other stuff, so you live in a fantasy world. How does denying reality get you closer to a god?

CORRECTION! I don't agree with what Uniformitarian scientists have theorized from the data that they have regarded. So you may call everything that ignores GOD as scientific, but I do not. How does believing only secular science can be reality get you closer to GOD?

You want everything to be literally as the Bible says it. A book largely written by nomadic tribes thousands of years ago, edited by a group of religious/political leaders, and without the benefit for centuries of scientific advancement. I do not understand why you think that gets you closer to God.

You want the beginning to be God waving his magic wand and everything appearing. But if God is as you say, he could have just as easily planted a seed and made the world grow as the scientists say it did. Would that be less miraculous?

 

[LittleNipper]

Prove it, cumstain.

Not only ding, but we've all proved that you are a dummy. If I were you, I'd quit when I was behind. You probably changed the subject because that's what you did when I was explaining that evos and Christians have different GC tours. Moreover your answers or lack off prove that you are a dense brick. You are discussing the beginning of the universe when the thread is about floods.

As for this flood business, if I was a skeptic, then I'd question the people who survived and their descendants. Or look at the history of peoples who lived afterward. I'd stay within or close to the period. We find that every culture has a global flood story. It goes to show that there were stories handed down to them when they were in remote distances and there was no way for them to communicate. I'd listen to the skeptics, too, and they hypothesize that it was mythical flood stories. However, it still doesn't explain why there were so many of the same type of stories in far away locations. If there were one or two stories, then it probably was a myth.

What you did was choose something that no one was there to witness. You can't even find a group of people who first appeared after it happened. See how stupid your topics of discussion devolve into?

Furthermore, you ask questions, but it leads to no discussion. It just ends up you repeating yourself. This is boring, so I will bid you adieu. You'll end up getting your proof, but I doubt you will like it.

Geez, it's about you left, you have no proof for any kind of a flood that would have needed animals to be saved. So what if other cultures have flood stories, are you saying that the bible is just copied bullshit. Like you? :biggrin;

You keep saying this and maybe you will convince yourself! However, the Grand Canyon (as well as others), and aquatic fossils on mountains, petrified trees running through layer after layer of sediment, a whale fossil found standing on its head through layers of sediment are all proof that something out of the ordinary happened. You "believe" what you wish, but there iare more and more things found that point to a terrible cataclysm.

You don't like what real science says about the erosion of the GC, and all the other stuff, so you live in a fantasy world. How does denying reality get you closer to a god?

Softball question.

Religious nutballs like Bond here start with one premise: the Bible is absolute fact.

All of this public masturbation on his part is just smoke and mirrors. He is too embarrassed just to say "because the Bible says so", so he furiously Google for talkong points he doesnt even understand from creationist blogs in an effort to look like his arguemnts have some legitimacy.

Of course, they do not, and his efforts only really result in him not just appearing to be a religious nutball, but also a liar , a charlatan, and an uneducated fool.

It is very telling that you refer to Christians who hold to the Bible as "nutcases". And it is also interesting with regarding to all the misapplied sexual connotations that you flaunt as a seeming means to embarrass and belittle people who simply disagree with what you have to say. I believe I have been very conscientious in trying not to insult anyone but to merely present an opposing view. I do believe much of what Bond says is merely mirroring what students of evolution say to him. To say that Evolution is true and science disproves the Bible are hardly comments of value. They clarify nothing, prove nothing and enlighten no one.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It is very telling that you refer to Christians who hold to the Bible as "nutcases".

That's correct, they are. The people who hold the Bible is absolute truth despite evidence to the contrary are, in fact, nut balls.