13 Sep 10
1 edit
Originally posted by duecerits not a contradiction at all, no one has ascended to heaven prior to the Christ, not all good people go to heaven, David never, John the Baptist never, Enoch never and neither did Elijah. They are awaiting the resurrection, which i take it, on looking about me, has not yet occurred, unless of course your a zombie and have arisen from the grave, in which case i could be mistaken.
had you bothered to read my post, you would have read my comments. so one last time on this (and in better depth).
Let us compare the text from John 3:13No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man
compare that with John1:51He then added, "I tell you the truth, you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascen again harmony exists.
the point made: we are unable by our own merit to ascend into heaven
13 Sep 10
Originally posted by Rajk999Lol...So all the others are wrong as well as the rest of your Bible that totally says Adam was the first man and the only man he created? I think I hear weird special effect noises when some one has lost it. Pour Raj...
Conveniently not using the King James Version?
13 Sep 10
Originally posted by Proper Knobhttp://factbooks.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-long-has-man-been-walking-earth.html
Go on then, let's have a laugh.
http://www.bigsiteofamazingfacts.com/how-long-has-there-been-life-on-earth
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php?topic=8271.0
Just a few but anyone can look up this subject and see it goes all over the spectrum.
It seems if carbon dating was so accurate there would not be this discrepancy.
14 Sep 10
Originally posted by galveston75Is this a wind up? Surely you can't be serious?!
http://factbooks.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-long-has-man-been-walking-earth.html
http://www.bigsiteofamazingfacts.com/how-long-has-there-been-life-on-earth
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php?topic=8271.0
Just a few but anyone can look up this subject and see it goes all over the spectrum.
It seems if carbon dating was so accurate there would not be this discrepancy.
The first website doesn't even mention Homo sapiens, the second one doesn't work, and the third is a link to a Christian forum!!!!
Have you been drinking? I think this is your worst attempt yet, and the most bizarre form of 'proof' i've ever come across.
One final tidbit for you, how long we've been on the planet isn't worked out using carbon dating. Genetics.
14 Sep 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobAnd how does that show 200,000 years?
Is this a wind up? Surely you can't be serious?!
The first website doesn't even mention Homo sapiens, the second one doesn't work, and the third is a link to a Christian forum!!!!
Have you been drinking? I think this is your worst attempt yet, and the most bizarre form of 'proof' i've ever come across.
One final tidbit for you, how long we've been on the planet isn't worked out using carbon dating. Genetics.
14 Sep 10
Originally posted by Proper Knobhttp://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/ingman.html
By examining mitichondrial DNA (mtDNA).
Well darn it my friend. Those killer words like: generally supports, hypotheses, suggests, proposes, lack of statistical support, unfortunately, problems, there are many important questions that remain to be resolved, etc, etc.
I wish this could help you out but it seems they still don't have the proof yet.
14 Sep 10
Originally posted by galveston75Proof of what? You wanted to know how that date was achieved, i told you. Show me a scientific paper that contradicts what i have said. You won't be able to, because all the genetic evidence of the last 20yrs all points to that date.
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/ingman.html
Well darn it my friend. Those killer words like: generally supports, hypotheses, suggests, proposes, lack of statistical support, unfortunately, problems, there are many important questions that remain to be resolved, etc, etc.
I wish this could help you out but it seems they still don't have the proof yet.
The genetic evidence points to a date far beyond your fairytale story of Adam & Eve. Now you can stick your head in the sand and repeat over and over again your mantra -
'Gods words over man's ideas, Gods words over man's ideas, Gods words over man's ideas, Gods words over man's ideas, Gods words over man's ideas.
But the brute fact remains, you're wrong.
14 Sep 10
Originally posted by Proper Knob&feature=related
Proof of what? You wanted to know how that date was achieved, i told you. Show me a scientific paper that contradicts what i have said. You won't be able to, because all the genetic evidence of the last 20yrs all points to that date.
The genetic evidence points to a date far beyond your fairytale story of Adam & Eve. Now you can stick your head in the ...[text shortened]... n's ideas, Gods words over man's ideas.[/i]
But the brute fact remains, you're wrong.
14 Sep 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobI just found this and thought you might like to see it. That's all. So you must not have watched it all otherwise you will see how it disproves evolution.
Two things.
1. What does this have to do with mtDNA and human history? Which is what we were discussing.
2. How does that disprove evolution?
14 Sep 10
2 edits
Originally posted by galveston75It didn't 'prove' anything. It is just one persons 8min Youtube video on the HAR-1 gene, how you can come to your conclusions is rather absurd. At best it showed that our understanding of that particluar gene is limited and further research is needed.
It proves we did not evolve from apes or anything else. You must have missed that.
Yet again you appear to have fallen into the trap of posting anything you think may support your views without understanding what it is you've posted. Remember the debacle you got into when trying to proof the ice caps were only 4,000yrs old?