Let's see.
Mercury- All the water boiled off. Venus- all steam.
Mars and everything beyond. Frozen.
This isn't complicated, stupid.
This is why we need to ban the Bible...It just makes people stupid.
Mercury - wrong
Venus - wrong
Mars and beyond - wrong, wrong, wrong
So it's based on your opinion on what happened and not any real science. Like I said, atheists are usually wrong. What we are doing is comparing the planets you mentioned without water to Earth and we are finding Earth is unique. That it has surface water from a global flood while other planets do not. They also do not have an atmosphere like Earth nor habitability zone due to its prime proximity placement to the sun. Obviously, this is an area that you do not have much knowledge even though you have lived much longer than I.
I think if you study evolution.berkeley.edu, then you would gain some knowledge.
do you actually have a source that isn't from Crazy Bible Thumpers... you know, from a legitimate, peer reviewed source?
Creation scientists have been eliminated from doing peer reviews of secular/atheist scientists. They peer review their own papers and its based on the God or Bible theory.
The Video I posted earlier in the thread, which you saw and tried to lamely address... Here it is again for all those playing along at home.
Okay, it was before we started talking. I'll watch later, but it says an atheist reads the Bible so it's biased.
Donkeys can't talk either, but there was a talking Donkey in Numbers 22. (I'm sure he didn't sound like Eddie Murphy)
Who did the talking through the donkey in Numbers 22? Hint: It wasn't Eddie Murphy to Shrek. What could the donkey see that Balaam couldn't? What do we learn about Balaam from his story? Basically, he was like a low brow internet atheist a dullard. This sets us up for Balaam talking with Balak. We discussed the serpent talking to Eve, but you dismissed my explanation like you do this in order to further your argument and lack of faith in God. We also know that things have changed from the past. We do not see angels and demons anymore as they may not be able to come into the physical world anymore and we do not have spiritual beings talking through animals. The past is not like the present.
What is so different about this to the fantastic stories I hear about a big bang from a point of infinite temperature and infinite density? That there was a great cosmic expansion microseconds after the defy all of physics. That there is invisible, but powerful dark energy and dark matter throughout the universe? That many people believe in aliens because of the vastness of space? That we are not the only universe and there are an infinite number of other universes. All of this are "faith-based" beliefs, too. There is no evidence for it.
Where I can separate the past stories in the Bible to stories still relevant to today, it seems that atheists and you cannot separate false science or made-up science (in order to eliminate God) from real science using the scientific method. Thus, I'm usually right while you are usually wrong.
But here's the thing. Satan acts within God's permission in that story, as opposed to the NT< where he is God's enemy/adversary. It shows the evolution of the character that I talked about.
There are parts of the Bible that is in the future (prophecy) in Revelations, so we have to have the anti-Christ and the end of days before we have their final battle of Armageddon. Satan has to have his anti-Christ and his evil Trinity which we haven't seen yet. As for the serpent and Adam and Eve, we know that Satan had free will and was banished from heaven for wanting to be like God, i.e. believing his powers were equal to God and disobeying and challenging God, so he was able to find Adam and Eve and do his dastardly deed. Isn't this how people do bad things even today? They do not have a snake talking to them, but "something" convinces them to take wrong actions or unlawful behavior.
That you bible thumpers always oppose scientific progress.
Cotton Mather: Witches or Vaccines? | Passport Health
Opponents felt using a lesser disease to prevent a greater disease was against the work of God. Pamphlets
claimed that inoculation “is a delusion of the Devil.” The detractors even referenced Salem’s history, saying that this was the greatest evidence of witchcraft since the end of the trials.
The pamphlets didn’t name Mather specifically. But, there were references to his work against witchcraft. Rather than continuing support, they wrote that he recanted against his actions that previously cost many lives.
The mudslinging in pamphlets led to a stalemate.
The entirety of New England couldn’t choose a side despite facing an epidemic.
Vaccines remained mired in witchcraft for the rest of the century until Edward Jenner’s smallpox breakthrough.
We see what the majority of people believed in during the 1700s. They believed in witches. Isn't that like the people today who believe in evolution? You yourself cannot read and comprehend your own link. We see that Cotton Mather was a Puritan and religious leader so he could separate the wheat from the chaff. To the contrary, he promoted using vaccines, so your explanation is "ass backwards."
Cotton Mather | American religious leader