RE: Jesus did not rise from the dead -- My debate opening statement.
19th January 2017, 14:31
(This post was last modified: 19th January 2017, 14:52 by Khemikal. Edited 13 times in total.)
(19th January 2017, 13:01)Drich Wrote:
(19th January 2017, 12:07)Khemikal Wrote: I'd be careful with that one Drich, it allows for dating and falsification of your entire genesis story...and..as you know, no genesis, no play.
Genetic bottlenecks are observable and dateable. So is hybridization. The trouble with attempting to make your fairy tales sound scientific, is that success in doing so necessarily renders them falsifiable (and in this case falsified). You ask, in a response to another below this one, "how can I know" the date of the flood...well, you supplied the how in an effort to make magic sound sciencey, that's how, so follow through on that...or accept that sounding sciencey was all that interested you.
So, tell me which of our many genetic bottlenecks fit the biblical narrative......of happening after the dawn of civilization, during a deluge, wherein one species of hominid -monkey men with souls, your claimed ancestors, survived an event by virtue f a single family..... that eradicated the other population, my well evidenced ancestors, homo ss.....or, if you prefer, the marker of hybridization between these two species...the "soul" gene, what portion of our population possess the hybridized genetics, and to what extent.
Now, we've been through all of this before...and you reel against egentics as soon as it's applied to the fairy tale, not realizing that the tinest little detail of the story -you- concocted regarding genetics can afford us an immense wealth of knowledge about it, were it even remotely accurate. You enjoy imagining that your fantasies have the credibility of scientific plausibility but refuse to actually -apply- the standards whose respect you clearly and desperately covet. Others say "oh, you don't know your shit" but that's ancillary. OFC you don't know your shit, and you don;t care....all you know and all you care to know is that you need a way to redeem this story - of making it plausible without threatening it with falsifiability. Well, that's true....but this isn't that way, you'll have to keep searching. This way tells us only that the story is dead wrong, or that -you- are dead wrong. Which do you prefer?
Is your need to feel vindicated in the stories that you tell so strong that you would throw the bible itself under the bus just to satisfy your ego?