Creation/evolution3

[Crossless2.0]

That's an easy one.

The egg.

No egg, no chicken.

So where did the egg come from? what ever 'bird/lizzard/crap theory' the chicken evolved from.

Do you now see why your peers are so paniced about this theory of mine? I allows a believer access to an unmolested account of creation and whatever science is currently serving up in the realm of 'orgins.'

Wrong.... the chicken.

I'm not sure I agree with you a hundred percent on your police work, there, dyresand.

[Tonus]

Reading forward I noticed you did not answer my request for the Evidence of alexander the great's desert marches?

Here is a historical event that supposedly had taken place in the 3ish century bc, upon which thousands of men died. which meant thousands of peices of armor and wepons, animal remains, and equipment and supplies. all happened 3000 years after the exodus. So again sport where is the evidence for this story?

You are comparing a two-month march by 30,000 men to a 38-year "march" by more than a million people (a lot more, if the men alone numbered 600,000). The account at the link you posted indicates that Alexander's men only stopped infrequently to drink whenever they found water, whereas the Israelites had to have made camp (likely for decades), otherwise their trek across the desert would have been fairly short.

The Wiki entry for Balochistan --the area which Alexander traversed-- shows evidence of the tribes and peoples who lived in the area as far back as 7,000-6,000 BCE. These would have to have been small tribes and villages, not massive groups of hundreds of thousands of men, plus their families and livestock and belongings. It would not be surprising that a relatively short trek through the desert by an army left no trace, but to assume that this means that a nearly forty-year occupation by almost two million people would also leave no trace is, at the least, a stretch.

[Drich]

Dirch here is a question since you believe in creation which came first the chicken or the egg?

I know you guys must cringe everytime he steps up to the plate..

I feel the same way when some well meaning 'brother' signs up here and wants to spam dump the typical christian responses to atheist questions.

[dyresand]

Wrong.... the chicken.

I'm not sure I agree with you a hundred percent on your police work, there, dyresand.

Dammit... the egg came first.

[Drich]

That's an easy one.

The egg.

No egg, no chicken.

So where did the egg come from? what ever 'bird/lizzard/crap theory' the chicken evolved from.

Do you now see why your peers are so paniced about this theory of mine? I allows a believer access to an unmolested account of creation and whatever science is currently serving up in the realm of 'orgins.'

Wrong.... the chicken.

So you don't believe in evolution?

[Davka]

I suppose that would also explain why none of those deportees seem to have survived long enough to leave a single trace of their passage eh?

What does a camping trip look like after 4000 years of sand blasting errosion look like in your opinion?

The desert has completely consumed entire cities that were are just now able to find due to satalite imagery and the cities foundational remains...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/09/...es_sahara/
If you read the artical you will note that these cities are no where near as old as the time of the exodus.

They are also nowhere near the Sinai desert, which is a completely different type of desert from the Sahara.

The Sahara is covered in sand dunes, which shift and bury things, as well as sand-blasting everything in the desert whenever a strong wind blows.

The Sinai is not sandy at all. It's hard packed dirt and rocks, with a very thin scattering of plants in the wadis, which are narrow gorges carved in the dirt and stone by occasional flash-floods. Archaeologists have discerned evidence of temporary Bedouin camps in the Sinai that are thousands of years old. These are relatively small camps, but they left a mark on the desert floor that was visible from space thousands of years later.

Yet absolutely zero trace has been found of a group of millions of people (along with their livestock) who supposedly spent 40 years wandering through the Sinai.

[dyresand]

Wrong.... the chicken.

So you don't believe in evolution?

I believe in evolution. I don't believe in creationism.

[Drich]

You are comparing a two-month march by 30,000 men to a 38-year "march" by more than a million people (a lot more, if the men alone numbered 600,000). The account at the link you posted indicates that Alexander's men only stopped infrequently to drink whenever they found water, whereas the Israelites had to have made camp (likely for decades), otherwise their trek across the desert would have been fairly short.

but again when these men died all of their stuff was left, that meant hundreds if not thousands if not ten thousands of men all of whole would have been armed and armored as well as personal effects, and whatever equipement they were responsible for.

Verses a completely different situation requiring the use, reuse and re- reuse of any and everything the jews brought with them till there was nothing left.

So we are comparing one large group who was just sheding material by the ton, verses another group who would have used everything (very little unusable garbage) till nothing was left/or it was burned to fuel a fire.

The Wiki entry for Balochistan --the area which Alexander traversed-- shows evidence of the tribes and peoples who lived in the area as far back as 7,000-6,000 BCE.

Yes! These people stayed in one place for generations upon generations.

These would have to have been small tribes and villages, not massive groups of hundreds of thousands of men, plus their families and livestock and belongings.

who lived in perminate/semi perminate structures.

It would not be surprising that a relatively short trek through the desert by an army left no trace, but to assume that this means that a nearly forty-year occupation by almost two million people would also leave no trace is, at the least, a stretch.

again a short trek that involved the loss of an entire army, tons of the supplies/wepons of war they carried. 2/[/quote]3000 years AFTER Moses.

---

So you don't believe in evolution?

I believe in evolution. I don't believe in creationism.

So then you don't believed the chicken evolved from some other animal?

[The Grand Nudger]

So again evidence.. If this were even remotly true then you should be able to provide a link.

You provided the link moron. Why don't you browse around through all of the things that the technique you mentioned has allowed us to do and determine(and that's just -one- method of a great many)? Silk road offshoots that saw maybe a dozen people in two thousand years? Yep..we can see that too. I have no desire to jump through the hoops held up by a monkey-with-no-soul. Your excuses are noted and rejected.

Reading forward I noticed you did not answer my request for the Evidence of alexander the great's desert marches?

Jump, monkey, jump.

Here is a historical event that supposedly had taken place in the 3ish century bc, upon which thousands of men died. which meant thousands of peices of armor and wepons, animal remains, and equipment and supplies. all happened 3000 years after the exodus. So again sport where is the evidence for this story?

Shakes the hoop.

You didn't read the artical did you? We found them using satalites because we located the cities foundational foot prints. The Jews were wandering in the desert in tents much like alexander the Great's army would have been. So where is the satalite confirmation of Alexander's army?

Magical tents, magical shoes, all withstood the test with no wear, countless scores of people - decades and decades. Why am I providing you with the nagging details? Your claim to biblical scholarship is evaporating. No amount of trying to shift the attention away from your claims will work with me. Your stories are extra-biblical and fare no better in reality than they do by comparison to the fantasy.

(Note if you find some rusty piece of tin I am just going to ask you to imagine what 2 or 3000+ years more in the desert will do to what ever you find so make sure what ever you present is immune to sandblasting and high heat and fridged cold exposure.)

LOL, you didn;t even look it up before you shot off at the mouth. You're worried I might come back with something....wipe the sweat off your lying brow...there is no reason for me provide you with anything. Do work.

Again, how old is this trail?

When did exodus happen? You see, if you can;t place your own fairy tales there's no reason for me to compare dates or even consider them relevant. Do work.

Argumentum ad hominem anyone?
(the evasion of the actual topic by directing an attack at your opponent.)

L2logic. An ad hom is the implication that a persons claim is wrong because something about that person is "wrong". I stated, explicitly, that I didn't see any need to address your claim, not that you were wrong -because- you're a fraud..merely stating the fact that you -are- a fraud.

Your example literally follows the wiki defination, good job sport.

Guess you need to work on reading comprehension as well. Wiki can't help a semi-literate.

again I am asking for specific evidence, not what you assume to be true.

I'd tell you to wiki it yourself....but.....

The last part of Genesis 2 and the first 1/2 of Genesis 3

No dice, lay it out, show us where the bible tells the narrative drich tells us. Your claims set aside the verses you lay claim -to-, charlatan.

Same as above

....indeed.

One would think if you were going to based your whole arguement on a single word you would at least know what the word means before you hang out your dirty landuary exposing yourself to a basic comperhension failure, and follow up correction. To me this would undermine what one would think of your basic comperhension and ablity to formulate sound accidemic thought from it.

You're attempting science buddy, fail. You have no theory.

Now taking this into account (along with the rest of your sad attempt at a dismissal) one could apply all that you said to your own work. How you ask? Because I have Indeed provided BCV,

You have not, because your tale is extra-biblical and there is no explanation to be found within the book. You understand this perfectly well, that's why the crux of the whole thing is "it doesn't say it didn't happen that way" -That's what makes you a charlatan, as opposed to being simply ignorant. You -know- you're selling a bill of goods.

and I even take care in providing the literal definations to the words I use. Rather than haphazardly stringing together basless accusations to forumulate a Argumentum ad hominem Fallacy rather than specifically address what you can not.

L2logic.

In short you are trying to throw me under the bus rather than being made to answer questions you know you have no answers for, by projecting your own intelectual failures onto me.

You throw yourself under the bus, don't blame me for the unfortunate things that escape your mouth. This thread, and all previous threads on this subject are available for anyone to see. That's what makes you a hack.

I've lost any motivation to pussyfoot around with those who have demonstrated their unwilligness to engage in a rational conversation, and particularly so with those who have demonstrated their willingness to lie for christ. No amount of civility is due to you, and your claims are now, precisely as they were when you first made them - complete and utter horseshit. You don;t have BCV, you don't have evidence, you can't form a competent argument (and clearly wouldn't even know what that means), and you don't have a theory. You're shitting in my earholes and I'm not going to smile and engage with you as though you or your claims deserved anything more or less than what I've given. If you don't like being called a hack or a charlatan, there's an easy way to make that stop.

Do work. Sure, you may not find what you want (but you already know that)......at least, though, the deceit won't be so transparent. You'll have shown -your own remarks- the respect and diligence a person might expect to find applied to the things that people decide to advance as their own positions. What is it that you expect from me (or anyone else) when you treat your own statements in the manner that you have?

[Drich]

What does a camping trip look like after 4000 years of sand blasting errosion look like in your opinion?

The desert has completely consumed entire cities that were are just now able to find due to satalite imagery and the cities foundational remains...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/09/...es_sahara/
If you read the artical you will note that these cities are no where near as old as the time of the exodus.

They are also nowhere near the Sinai desert, which is a completely different type of desert from the Sahara.

The Sahara is covered in sand dunes, which shift and bury things, as well as sand-blasting everything in the desert whenever a strong wind blows.

The Sinai is not sandy at all. It's hard packed dirt and rocks, with a very thin scattering of plants in the wadis, which are narrow gorges carved in the dirt and stone by occasional flash-floods. Archaeologists have discerned evidence of temporary Bedouin camps in the Sinai that are thousands of years old. These are relatively small camps, but they left a mark on the desert floor that was visible from space thousands of years later.

Yet absolutely zero trace has been found of a group of millions of people (along with their livestock) who supposedly spent 40 years wandering through the Sinai.

Ooops, wrong link.
http://www.geographia.com/egypt/sinai/history.htm

You would think that you would have googled Alexander the great and the Sinia desert before you posted your conclusion.

So again the question still stands where are all the 'earmarks' you called for of the exodus in the sinia, for Alexander, Neoplean, Ramseys ect?