The Origins of Religion (Among Humans)....

[Clyde 154]

You have just proven human nature hasn't changed in thousands of years. The scientific process separates us from our primitive ancestors and their superstitious beliefs.

What? A demonstration of CREATIVE WRITING pretending to be SCIENCE Demonstrated that man can lie better than he could thousands of years ago? You continaully deflect and attempt to steer away from factual information that you cannot refute. I simply demonstrated that SCIENCE can be Observed, Reproduced in experimentation with consistency........while Pseduo Science uses words to suggest, opine, and speculate void of any facts in evidence.

You cant prove the words used in your (wink, wink) scientific article are words used to present facts. LMAO......the very first paragraph contained the phrase......"It is BELIEVED.........." and that is supposed to be SCIENCE based facts in evidence?

Belief: A vauge IDEA. My point was proved. Why does this article contain only BELIEVES? That is simple........there is no source of calibrating objective truths/facts past the era of recorded history (about 5000-6000 years)........yet, you present an article as factual that deals in projected facts from 15000 years ago......all based upon the faulty theory of radio carbon dating that can be corrupted by something so common as water leeching......FYI: that same archaeological record proves that every inch of the earths surface has been covered with water at some point in history. There is not an inch of soil on earth that does not have evidence in the fossil record of SEA LIFE.

Can you spell WATER LEECHING?

 

[surada]

What? A demonstration of CREATIVE WRITING pretending to be SCIENCE Demonstrated that man can lie better than he could thousands of years ago? You continaully deflect and attempt to steer away from factual information that you cannot refute. I simply demonstrated that SCIENCE can be Observed, Reproduced in experimentation with consistency........while Pseduo Science uses words to suggest, opine, and speculate void of any facts in evidence.

You cant prove the words used in your (wink, wink) scientific article are words used to present facts. LMAO......the very first paragraph contained the phrase......"It is BELIEVED.........." and that is supposed to be SCIENCE based facts in evidence?

You're being a twerp. This is one article. There's many, many others over the years.

 

[surada]

You're being a twerp. This is one article. There's many, many others over the years.

Prehistoric people in Israel may have had trading system 15,000 years ago

***

www.haaretz.com

 

[Stann]

What? A demonstration of CREATIVE WRITING pretending to be SCIENCE Demonstrated that man can lie better than he could thousands of years ago? You continaully deflect and attempt to steer away from factual information that you cannot refute. I simply demonstrated that SCIENCE can be Observed, Reproduced in experimentation with consistency........while Pseduo Science uses words to suggest, opine, and speculate void of any facts in evidence.

You cant prove the words used in your (wink, wink) scientific article are words used to present facts. LMAO......the very first paragraph contained the phrase......"It is BELIEVED.........." and that is supposed to be SCIENCE based facts in evidence?

Belief: A vauge IDEA. My point was proved. Why does this article contain only BELIEVES? That is simple........there is no source of calibrating objective truths/facts past the era of recorded history (about 5000-6000 years)........yet, you present an article as factual that deals in projected facts from 15000 years ago......all based upon the faulty theory of radio carbon dating that can be corrupted by something so common as water leeching......FYI: that same archaeological record proves that every inch of the earths surface has been covered with water at some point in history. There is not an inch of soil on earth that does not have evidence in the fossil record of SEA LIFE.

Can you spell WATER LEECHING?

Human nature doesn't change; extrapolating how things were in the past is based on that. It is not a known fact cuz it was not recorded. In all probability it is the truth however. You're just want to view that in negative terms. Hope you're happy with that. Science is neither positive or negative, it simply is. Like it or not.

 

[Clyde 154]

Human nature doesn't change; extrapolating how things were in the past is based on that. It is not a known fact cuz it was not recorded. In all probability it is the truth however. You're just want to view that in negative terms. Hope you're happy with that. Science is neither positive or negative, it simply is. Like it or not.

I simply refuse to allow someone to urinate down my back and declare that it was only rain. Don't ask an open ended question without any possiblity of an answer and then attempt to present that question as LAW/FACT.

Science.......real science can be "applied" through experimentation using the laws of physics called the "scientific method". The main tenet and basics for establishing FACTS......i.e., LAWS of PHYSICS consists of 1. Observation 2 the capacity to reproduce with "3".......consistent conclusions (outcomes) with every application of the experiment.

There is a reason that evolution is not based upon the application of science...........the facts in evidence as derived by the Scientific Method do not support the theories, conjectures, assumptions and speculations projected by Darwinian Cultists........THERE IS NO LAW OF EVOLUTION, there is only an "ideology" based theory with insufficent evidences to conclude evolution as a LAW/FACT of science.

There is a difference between REAL SCIENCE "Applied Science" and Theorethical Science..........theorethical science is based upon "philosophy" not the application of the scientific method. Its all based upon assumptions, conjectures, speculations and opinion. And its demonstrable as demonstrated when a supposed Scientific Article calling itself FACT BASED used lanague such as "Is Believed" , "According to......." etc., These words are not based upon FACTS.......and cannot be considered truth........simply because you believe something does not make your belief a fact.

Again..............show the Scientific Experiment that verifies abiogenesis (life evloving from non-living matter) as suggested by all Darwinian Cultists, in fact every time an attempt to create life from non-living matter.....the scientific method falsifies such ideology. There have been countless attempts to create life in the lab.......every attempt has been falsified by Science, not supported. Can you present any experiment that has falsifed the Creation Model as presented in the Holy Bible? Life can only be produced by pre-existing life WITHIN THE SAME SPECIES as confirmed by Louis Pasteur?

 

[Stann]

I simply refuse to allow someone to urinate down my back and declare that it was only rain. Don't ask an open ended question without any possiblity of an answer and then attempt to present that question as LAW/FACT.

Science.......real science can be "applied" through experimentation using the laws of physics called the "scientific method". The main tenet and basics for establishing FACTS......i.e., LAWS of PHYSICS consists of 1. Observation 2 the capacity to reproduce with "3".......consistent conclusions (outcomes) with every application of the experiment.

There is a reason that evolution is not based upon the application of science...........the facts in evidence as derived by the Scientific Method do not support the theories, conjectures, assumptions and speculations projected by Darwinian Cultists........THERE IS NO LAW OF EVOLUTION, there is only an "ideology" based theory with insufficent evidences to conclude evolution as a LAW/FACT of science.

There is a difference between REAL SCIENCE "Applied Science" and Theorethical Science..........theorethical science is based upon "philosophy" not the application of the scientific method. Its all based upon assumptions, conjectures, speculations and opinion. And its demonstrable as demonstrated when a supposed Scientific Article calling itself FACT BASED used lanague such as "Is Believed" , "According to......." etc., These words are not based upon FACTS.......and cannot be considered truth........simply because you believe something does not make your belief a fact.

Again..............show the Scientific Experiment that verifies abiogenesis (life evloving from non-living matter) as suggested by all Darwinian Cultists, in fact every time an attempt to create life from non-living matter.....the scientific method falsifies such ideology. There have been countless attempts to create life in the lab.......every attempt has been falsified by Science, not supported. Can you present any experiment that has falsifed the Creation Model as presented in the Holy Bible? Life can only be produced by pre-existing life WITHIN THE SAME SPECIES as confirmed by Louis Pasteur?

Your logic is not realistic. Please try to explain subspecies then. Over long periods of time and isolation even subspecies become unique species with so much alteration they can no longer reproduce with each other.