15 Mar 19
@proper-knob saidNo can you show how and when everything started? Everything from nothing? I already admitted proving anything in the distant past is impossible, for that matter even things done in the here and now can be problematic!
Can you prove humans lived with dinosaurs?
@kellyjay saidThe answer to your questions, which has been the same answer every time you ask them is - i don't know. I've said this repeatedly, asking me the same questions over and over isn’t going to change this. I do not know what occurred before the existence of space and time.
No can you show how and when everything started? Everything from nothing? I already admitted proving anything in the distant past is impossible, for that matter even things done in the here and now can be problematic!
15 Mar 19
@proper-knob saidYou don't know; therefore, you can make the claim only natural causes have to be true? If the natural universe cannot produce itself don't you think something/someone that transcends this universe could be the cause? If so, then several other things that are hard to believe in the natural settings become possible?
The answer to your questions, which has been the same answer every time you ask them is - i don't know. I've said this repeatedly, asking me the same questions over and over isn’t going to change this. I do not know what occurred before the existence of space and time.
15 Mar 19
@proper-knob saidWhen we don't know, in some cases for somethings, it doesn't have to be long ago.
@KellyJay
How far back do we have to go to reach the ‘distant’ past?
16 Mar 19
1 edit
@kellyjay saidI have no idea what you are trying to say. Could you rephrase please.
When we don't know, in some cases for somethings, it doesn't have to be long ago.
When does the ‘past’ become the ‘distant past’?
You also haven’t answered the question regarding humans living with dinosaurs and the evidence which led you to believe this. What evidence do you have that humans lived with dinosaurs?
16 Mar 19
@kellyjay saidIn answer to your questions.
You don't know; therefore, you can make the claim only natural causes have to be true? If the natural universe cannot produce itself don't you think something/someone that transcends this universe could be the cause? If so, then several other things that are hard to believe in the natural settings become possible?
1. Natural causes are the best explanation for the evidence so far.
2. Sure. Anything is possible, but let’s base our beliefs on the evidence.
3. Not sure what you’re getting at.
16 Mar 19
@proper-knob saidYou are not reading the posts, so repeating myself is useless.
@KellyJay
Dinosaurs and humans Kelly?
16 Mar 19
@proper-knob said1. You don't know.
In answer to your questions.
1. Natural causes are the best explanation for the evidence so far.
2. Sure. Anything is possible, but let’s base our beliefs on the evidence.
3. Not sure what you’re getting at.
2. Yes, and your evidence on why natural causes are best when you don't know how or why we are here are?
3. That's a fact.
16 Mar 19
1 edit
@KellyJay
I'm reading them. I just don't see what your answers have to do with the question i asked. Here's your posts from earlier when i asked for your best evidence humans lived with dinosaurs.
The over arching argument for me is I believe we are in a created universe, that is tuned to support life, and the complexity of life. I believe this was done by someone who is that powerful, that the entire universe was not only created by Him, it is held together by Him, and all of the laws within the universe were written by him. I believe He is unlike us are not limited by time and space, and He so when I say He is all knowing there isn't a speck however small He isn't totally aware of from its past, present, and future completely. He has this for each part, and the whole of His creation.
I could go on and on about Him, but when I think the universe is nothing but the work of God, I don't see time as being anything that could hinder Him from doing anything or helping Him either. Therefore billions of years, or thousands of years are just two different periods He could have used, with billions why? If He created it all at once intact and it started playing out as recorded, I don't see anything in the history of this planet that would not be here as it is. From fossils, races, people in their fallen state, the Jewish nation, the nations around it that hate it due to a family fued between brothers families.
So, from the complexity of life to evil and good I see this planet as a place that is well described from a biblical perspective in a very cohesive manner taking in all the various questions in life. Most of the objections I see here and else where are what people think, all centering around things they cannot possibly know! What occurred billions, or millions of years ago, yet they think they have a handle on the distant past.
I don't think what they claim is logical in the slightest when it comes to life springing up with natural selection from a common ancestor, even the ID people who accept billions of years I think are all wrong too, for the same reason. A slow directed process, is no different than a instant one when God is concern.
I fail to see the need, the proof for either period of time is beyond us no matter what we believe occurred. Thousands of years ago, or billions I don't know which is true, and cannot prove either to anyone, so I don't try. I take what people say about the distant past as unproveable as well, they cannot know they can only think they do.
Can you highlight the sections you believe answer my question, because i'm at a miss here.
16 Mar 19
@proper-knob saidThere were many things said there, one common ancestor is not something that occurred, being dispelled for lack of evidence there is no creep through time where the two could show up at different times. The creation event has all of them being created at the same time, placing them in the same time period where they would have floated in a boat together.
@KellyJay
I'm reading them. I just don't see what your answers have to do with the question i asked. Here's your posts from earlier when i asked for your best evidence humans lived with dinosaurs.
[quote]The over arching argument for me is I believe we are in a created universe, that is tuned to support life, and the complexity of life. I believe this was done by so ...[text shortened]... quote]
Can you highlight the sections you believe answer my question, because i'm at a miss here.
The beginning is the answer to the questions, if you have no materialistic mechanism to accomplish that, you have nothing, and with nothing that is all you will ever have. Life too is no different, you don't know how or why that started, there is no evidence of slow changes over time building anything new in life, let alone life itself from dead things. At best you see fully formed new lifeforms in the fossil record with no reason to accept they came about through gradual changes, they just appear. Even single cell life forms are highly complex, they wouldn't just form out of dead things for no reason.
16 Mar 19
2 edits
@proper-knob saidI want to ask a clarifying questions here since you brought up some specific scientific minds. You didn't bring up Newton and many others who do not hold to the same materialistic limiting views on science. When you look at the universe and take it all in do you hold that only the material matter, that the only things that count are all we can see and measure?
Let's talk about odds Kelly, you see to partial to them at the moment. As i alluded to in the other thread for your YEC worldview to be correct, and by that i mean -
1. The age of the earth in the thousands
2. Adam & Eve
3. Th Biblical Flood
4. Dinosaurs living with humans on the Ark
5. Vegetarian T Rex's living on the Ark
For the above to be correct, that would ...[text shortened]... t? How many zeros would we need to put onto that probability calculation to end up in this scenario?
When Dawkins wrote in one of his books which I have, but forget the name now, claimed that when he looked at life, he said it appeared that life was designed, but he rejected what he was seeing, and instead said that was an illusion, it really wasn't designed.
Now one of your greatest scientific minds claims that life looks like it is designed, but he rejects what he sees, and instead goes with his core beliefs of Atheism, does that mean he isn't going where the evidence led him? His core beliefs not what he sees will make his findings what he wants over what he acknowledged?
We could say the real mass deception is really where what you see you reject over what you want? If what he acknowledged really is design, and still he refuses to grasp it for something other than evidence, what is that? We now must look at cynicism and skepticism don't we, a closed mind will not be going where all the evidence leads. When someone will always reject what is right in front of them what evidence can matter? Design in life if it is refused due to world views, that is not an evidential based conclusion. When people can see, and still refuse to acknowledge I think there is an illusion going on a world view blinding people to what is right in front of them.
16 Mar 19
@proper-knob saidYou have more patience with this than I would have..
The answer to your questions, which has been the same answer every time you ask them is - i don't know. I've said this repeatedly, asking me the same questions over and over isn’t going to change this. I do not know what occurred before the existence of space and time.
I would have lost it around page 4 or 5.
"Some men, you just can't reach."
17 Mar 19
@kellyjay saidOkay, let's break this down.
There were many things said there, one common ancestor is not something that occurred, being dispelled for lack of evidence there is no creep through time where the two could show up at different times. The creation event has all of them being created at the same time, placing them in the same time period where they would have floated in a boat together.
The beginning is ...[text shortened]... single cell life forms are highly complex, they wouldn't just form out of dead things for no reason.
There were many things said there
I know, this is the issue. The vast majority of your post above has zero bearing on the question i asked. My question is very specific, because i want a specific answer. If i ask for your best evidence that humans lived with dinosaurs why are you talking about the ID movement believing the earth is billions of years old? It makes no sense to me.
being dispelled for lack of evidence there is no creep through time where the two could show up at different times.
I've read this numerous times now, it makes zero sense. What is 'creep through time'?
The creation event has all of them being created at the same time, placing them in the same time period where they would have floated in a boat together.
Yep, i know this is your interpretation of the Genesis account. I've know that for probably 10 years. It's the evidence to substantiate this, or at least an attempt to substantiate this that i'm after.
[b/]The beginning is the answer to the questions, if you have no materialistic mechanism to accomplish that, you have nothing, and with nothing that is all you will ever have.[/b]
This is the answer to my question? This is your evidence that humans lived with dinosaurs? Or am i missing something?
Life too is no different, you don't know how or why that started
This is correct.
there is no evidence of slow changes over time building anything new in life,
This is incorrect.
let alone life itself from dead things.
Dead things?
At best you see fully formed new lifeforms in the fossil record with no reason to accept they came about through gradual changes, they just appear.
This is incorrect.
Even single cell life forms are highly complex, they wouldn't just form out of dead things for no reason.
I agree with the first part, i'm at a loss as to what you are getting at in the next part.
In the other thread you claimed i don't read your posts. I've been through this one sentence by sentence and i still don't see how any of it answers my question. I know you believe humans lived with dinosaurs because that's what your chosen literal interpretation of the Genesis creation account leads you to believe. As i said above, I've know this for probably 10 years. I'm trying to ascertain if there is anything more substantive to this belief than simply what you believe. Your constant inability to answer this question leads me to the conclusion that you don't.