(February 23, 2012 at 7:19 pm)chipan Wrote:

(February 23, 2012 at 1:40 pm)Rhythm Wrote: You have to argue your evidence in? You argue for your conclusions, you don't bicker about what is or is not evidence. No special considerations will be given. Your evidence must stand up to the same scrutiny that all other evidence stands up to. There will be no "paranoid conspiracy theorist classification" of evidence. Creation rags are not science, they are political organs.

I am not going to play in this double standard game. A geologists can say that cliff took millions of years to form based on nothing but observation but when someone walks around and says that took days to form all the scientist does is ridicule. The only reason those cliffs form Mt St Helens isn't guessed to have formed gradually is because they saw it happen. Otherwise they would say "oh look a cliff, that's a gradual process." I made a prediction that I would present evedince that these long processes can be shortened and all I got was "no." if that's the case nothing I say can change your minds because you are not open to new ideas. This process happened therefore it's plausable.

(February 23, 2012 at 9:29 pm)Phil Wrote:

(February 23, 2012 at 7:19 pm)chipan Wrote: This process happened therefore it's plausable.

Wow, you learned a new word. Now learn probable.

(February 24, 2012 at 5:29 am)chipan Wrote:

(February 23, 2012 at 9:29 pm)Phil Wrote:

(February 23, 2012 at 7:19 pm)chipan Wrote: This process happened therefore it's plausable.

Wow, you learned a new word. Now learn probable.

Well you can choose to believe what you want but you can't say gradual process is most likely because there is no other plausable answer when there actually is.

(February 24, 2012 at 6:56 am)LastPoet Wrote: He will just hapilly continue to lie for jesus!

Quote: The Family International (TFI), formed as the Children of God (COG) and later named Family of Love and the Family, is a cult,[1][2] started in 1968 in Huntington Beach, California, United States. It began in the late 1960s, with many of its early converts drawn from the hippie movement. The Children of God was among the movements prompting the cult controversy of the 1970s and 1980s in the United States and Europe and triggered the first organized anticult group FREECOG.

Quote:Loving Jesus
This is a term that TFI members use to describe their intimate, sexual relationship with Jesus. TFI describes the "Loving Jesus" teachings as a radical form of bridal theology.[21] It is their understanding of the Bible that the followers of Christ are his bride, called to love and serve him with the fervor of a wife. They took bridal theology further than mainstream Christians by encouraging members to imagine that Jesus is having sex with them during sexual intercourse and masturbation. Male members were encouraged to visualize themselves as women, in order to avoid a homosexual relationship with Jesus. Many publications and messages TFI members received from the spirit work and even claim to be from Jesus himself refer to and elaborate on this intimate, sexual relation that they believe Jesus desires and needs from his church, and TFI in particular being his special "bride" in graphic poetry, guided visualizations, artwork [10] and songs [11], and more. Some literature was unable to be brought into more conservative countries for fear they might be classified at customs as pornography [12]. The literature that first revealed this new view of Jesus and his desire for a sexual relationship with believers was slightly edited and made available to 12 & 14 year olds [13], and then further edited and published in mild terms for children

(February 24, 2012 at 4:39 pm)Stimbo Wrote: This is all like saying that, since we know rocks can fall to Earth as meteorites, this means that the most likely explanation for every rock we see is they're all meteorites. A process which accounts for one observable facet of nature doesn't automatically account for all others, however similar. That's where scientific investigation comes in of course (and where "creation science" goes out).

Stephan Hawking Wrote:we are not able to make cosmological models without some admixture of ideology.