Let's talk about... yaweh

[Crossless2.0]

Nice try... but no.

It's real simple.. deceptively simple. (that is why so many of you object, because you haven't quite figured out how iron clad this is.)

The OP uses an old atheist argument that plant life can not exist without the sun. the assumption being the sun is the only source of light possible. However if one remains with in the confines of the narrative (which is what one does in the old atheist argument the OP uses) Light and darkness is created on the first day, which points to a light source other than the sun.

Now that said the conclusion of the old 'atheist argument' God/the bible is not scientific accurate itself is what is in error. Not the bible. Which again points to the lack of a 'scientific' basis in which that particular argument attacks scripture.

Oh, sorry Drich. I thought we were discussing reality, not engaging in hermetically sealed literary interpretation. Enjoy your circle jerk.

[FebruaryOfReason]

Light and darkness is created on the first day, which points to a light source other than the sun.

No. It asserts a light source other than the sun.

Your argument is that because the Bible says there was light without the sun, that means there was light without the sun.

In other words, you are saying it's right because it's right because it's right.

The "roll on floor laughing figure" isn't convincing anyone that you have a valid argument.

[Angrboda]

Genesis 2:19 speaks of Adam naming all the birds and animals.  According to Genesis 1, the animals didn't arrive until day 6, so there's no way all the events of Genesis 2 could have happened on day 3.  Your chronology is fucked.  Besides, why would God be saying "it was very good" if the Fall had already transpired by day 3?

If you read verse 8: 8 Then the Lord God planted a garden in the East,[c] in a place named Eden. He put the man he made in that garden.

Meaning everything in Chapter 2 happened in the garden apart from the rest of creation. The garden account is seperate from the genesis 1 creation account per verse 4.

You're on crack, Drich. It clearly says there were animals before he created Eve in Genesis 2. And it clearly says in Genesis 1 that animals were created on day 6.

What the fuck are you smoking?

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Xtians in general aren't very bright, and when they reject you as the idiot you are, DAMN!!! That must really hurt!

This is not a road you want to go down, trust me...

Hey there, Huggy-Buggy! It's been awhile since I've seen you around here.

Making threats won't win you any arguments here, which you should have learned the last time everyone mocked you for it, and handed you your ganster-attitude ass.

[Huggy Bear]

This is not a road you want to go down, trust me...

Hey there, Huggy-Buggy! It's been awhile since I've seen you around here.

Making threats won't win you any arguments here, which you should have learned the last time everyone mocked you for it, and handed you your ganster-attitude ass.

Although I'm really in interested in engaging with a fecalpheliac; I must know what about me gives the impression of a "gangster attitude"? Oh wait! it must be my avatar, black guy = gangster... prejudiced much?

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Let's Talk About...Huggie!!!

Is Huggie a dick because he's black?

No, Huggie-Druggie, it's your general paranoid bully attitude, it's that humungous chip you carry on your shoulder all the time, and most of all it's that really dumb face you made for that avatar photo - I don't personally give a fuck what color you are, but fuck you and your black grandma if you think I'm going to walk on eggshells for you just on account of that!

[Huggy Bear]

Let's Talk About...Huggie!!!

Is Huggie a dick because he's black?

No, Huggie-Druggie, it's your general paranoid bully attitude, it's that humungous chip you carry on your shoulder all the time, and most of all it's that really dumb face you made for that avatar photo - I don't personally give a fuck what color you are, but fuck you and your black grandma if you think I'm going to walk on eggshells for you just on account of that!

First of all, you have a track record for making baseless assumptions:

I don't even recall this "Huggy" prior to this post, but that sort of pettiness is typical of the sort of dude who beats on women and children, or worse. Pettiness is the mark of the true bully!

So stop trying to act like there is a method to your madness... there's not.

Apparently you do have a problem with black people. Is that a baseless assumption? no, but unlike you I'll provide the evidence.

... There's really no need to insinuate something like that. I just got out a post chastising someone for making presumptive statements about others based on no information, it'd be inconsistent of me not to call it out here too.

Sorry, but I feel that it's a fair enough guess, and in no way parallel to the asinine games played by Athrock. I generally don't like to profile others, and of course I could be wrong, but when I see the patterns of a monster I could do worse for not warning others on engaging it. I expect now he'll start beating the "racism" drum, because if you are of a certain color then your behavior is immune from all criticism.

*emphasis mine*
Although I wouldn't call you racist (yet) you are clearly prejudiced.

How about providing some evidence of my "gangster attitude" and this so-called "bullying"; I won't hold my breath.

(On the other hand why am I even engaging with a south park fan.)  

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Huggy74 pid='1219418' dateline='1457322152']

Let's Talk About...Huggie!!!

Is Huggie a dick because he's black?

No, Huggie-Druggie, it's your general paranoid bully attitude, it's that humungous chip you carry on your shoulder all the time, and most of all it's that really dumb face you made for that avatar photo - I don't personally give a fuck what color you are, but fuck you and your black grandma if you think I'm going to walk on eggshells for you just on account of that!

First of all, you have a track record for making baseless assumptions:

I don't even recall this "Huggy" prior to this post, but that sort of pettiness is typical of the sort of dude who beats on women and children, or worse. Pettiness is the mark of the true bully!

So stop trying to act like there is a method to your madness... there's not.

Apparently you do have a problem with black people. Is that a baseless assumption? no, but unlike you I'll provide the evidence.

Sorry, but I feel that it's a fair enough guess, and in no way parallel to the asinine games played by Athrock. I generally don't like to profile others, and of course I could be wrong, but when I see the patterns of a monster I could do worse for not warning others on engaging it. I expect now he'll start beating the "racism" drum, because if you are of a certain color then your behavior is immune from all criticism.

*emphasis mine*
Although I wouldn't call you racist (yet) you are clearly prejudiced.

How about providing some evidence of my "gangster attitude" and this so-called "bullying"; I won't hold my breath.

(On the other hand why am I even engaging with a south park fan.)  

[/hide]

_____<...............................


Do you ever wonder why nobody ever respects you around here, or gives a shit what you have to say? Well, I couldn't either.

[Minimalist]

[Joods]

2. Then what's  the point of genesis 1? If gensis 2 is correct remove genesis 1. 

Read the following carfully:
Genesis 2 ALL HAPPENED ON DAY 3!!! That means your out line in incorrect. Genesis 2 describes the creation/completeion of the Garden and everything in chapter two describes just what was created in the Garden, between Day 3 and Day 4.

bold mine.
So..... you're not even going to answer dyres question about the point of Gen1? Typical. Gen1 and Gen2 directly contradict one another. Why not just admit that you can't answer the question correctly instead of making up some bullshit about hydroponic grow lights.
 
History of hydroponics reference #1.

History of hydroponics reference #2.

Furthermore, the term hydroponics, refers to growing plants without soil. Hence, the word "hydro". "Hydroponics is a subset of hydroculture and is a method of growing plants using mineral nutrient solutions, in water, without soil. Terrestrial plants may be grown with their roots in the mineral solution only, or in an inert medium, such as perlite or gravel."

]I asked you to google the word hydroponics[/b]. In Hydroponics Grow lights are often used to germinate and grow plants in light other than sun light. Do you understand?

bold mine.

You're an idiot. First of all, you don't even understand the terminology you used and then, to add insult to your own argument, you decide to throw the term "grow lights" in the mix. Hydroponics refers to growing plants without soil. You would have known that had you taken your own advice and googled it yourself.

Grow lights are a man-made invention. Your stupidity rats you out. Here, learn something for a change:

http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/cont.../1942.full

A Historical Background of Plant Lighting: An Introduction to the Workshop


Electric lamps have been used to grow plants for nearly 150 years with some of the earliest references being the work of Mangon (1861) and Prilleux (1869) (cited in Pfeiffer, 1926). As might be imagined, plant lighting technologies closely followed those used for human lighting, which took three general paths of development (Murdoch, 1985; Withrow and Withrow, 1947): 1) incandescent lighting, which was refined by Edison's invention of the incandescent filament lamp in 1879; 2) open arc lighting, which typically used carbon rods and became popular for street lighting in some cities in the late 1800s; and 3) enclosed gaseous discharge lamps, which were initially developed with mercury vapor in the late 1800s (Murdoch, 1985).

Carbon arcs were probably the first lamps used to grow plants with an extensive study conducted by Siemens (1880) that even included an economic analysis on the use of electric lamps for commercial plant production—a concept he titled “Electro-Horticulture.” Carbon arcs provided an intense point source with a broad, bluish spectrum and were still used for plant testing through the 1940s (Parker and Borthwick, 1949) but required regular replacement of the carbons and created hazards from their ultraviolet emission and exhaust products (Parker and Borthwick, 1949; Siemens, 1880).

Grow lights are used INDOORS, fool. If YOU would have googled the term "hydroponic grow lights", YOU would know this. Given that your gawd didn't construct buildings, I find your reasoning to be full of shit. See my above references. But in case you won't:

http://www.healthyharvestfl.com/blog/who...droponics/

While some credit is given to the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, clearly, no credit is given to your gawd, for the use of growing plants without soil. And again, you're misrepresenting the word hydroponics, as it, again, directly relates to growing plants without soil. Your entire hydroponics argument is false and is nothing but a really bad straw.