Spirituality
03 Oct 12
07 Oct 12
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper Knobtell the forum how your mitochondrial DNA 'evidence', and i use the term loosely, were
[b]i cannot possibly state why there is a discrepancy.
So that's a no then?[/b]
dated and i can guarantee you are reading from the same cook book as other
materialists.
08 Oct 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAre you accepting that the genetic evidence doesn't corroborate your literal interpretation of the Genesis account? It's a simple yes or no question. I fail to see why you can't give a straight answer.
your evidence relies upon interpretation of data, and like all materialists you are reading from the same cookbook, now if you will fess up, I will take your confession although i cannot guarantee absolution 😛
08 Oct 12
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper Knobyes that's exactly what I am saying, although the term evidence should not be construed as anything other than a materialistic interpretation of data.
Are you accepting that the genetic evidence doesn't corroborate your literal interpretation of the Genesis account? It's a simple yes or no question. I fail to see why you can't give a straight answer.
08 Oct 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhy then are you claiming that the Genesis account is 'scientifically accurate', as you did earlier in this thread, when you know that it isn't?
yes that's exactly what I am saying, although the term evidence should not be construed as anything other than a materialistic interpretation of data.
08 Oct 12
Originally posted by Proper Knobbecause i do not hold that your materialistic theories are science, they cannot be subject to falsification, there is no empirical evidence, the evidence that is available is open to interpretation and in many instances, so called reputable scientists simply fabricate evidence.
Why then are you claiming that the Genesis account is 'scientifically accurate', as you did earlier in this thread, when you know that it isn't?
08 Oct 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieEarlier on in the thread you said this -
because i do not hold that your materialistic theories are science, they cannot be subject to falsification, there is no empirical evidence, the evidence that is available is open to interpretation and in many instances, so called reputable scientists simply fabricate evidence.
as i stated before all materialists read from the same cook book and not having considered your so called, 'genetic evidence'.
How can arrive at the conclusions you have when you stated that you haven't even considered the evidence?
08 Oct 12
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper KnobI considered some evidence in the interim, specifically with regard to Neanderthal man and attempts to date it through mitochondrial DNA, initially estimated by a reputable scientist to be 36,000 years old an independent study by Oxford university found it to be more like 7,500, still outwith the scope of the Biblical record but never the less a far cry from the assumed 36,000 years. Now perhaps you would like to tell the forum how you arrive at your dates, if you please and one knows that the materialist must of necessity read from the same cook book as other materialists, otherwise, his theories make no sense.
Earlier on in the thread you said this -
as i stated before all materialists read from the same cook book and not having considered your so called, 'genetic evidence'.
How can arrive at the conclusions you have when you stated that you haven't even considered the evidence?
08 Oct 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieProper Knob arrives at his dates just like others who believe in evolution. It is by a "guesstimate " - a half-assed job at estimating. 😏
I considered some evidence in the interim, specifically with regard to Neanderthal man and attempts to date it through mitochondrial DNA, initially estimated by a reputable scientist to be 36,000 years old an independent study by Oxford university found it to be more like 7,500, still outwith the scope of the Biblical record but never the less a far ...[text shortened]... ssity read from the same cook book as other materialists, otherwise, his theories make no sense.
08 Oct 12
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo you read one case, and that still contradicts your Biblical view. Forgive me if i'm not bowled over my the enormity of your research, i didn't realise you had gone to so much trouble.
I considered some evidence in the interim, specifically with regard to Neanderthal man and attempts to date it through mitochondrial DNA, initially estimated by a reputable scientist to be 36,000 years old an independent study by Oxford university found it to be more like 7,500, still outwith the scope of the Biblical record but never the less a far ...[text shortened]... ssity read from the same cook book as other materialists, otherwise, his theories make no sense.
My dates? They're the accepted dates from the scientific community. Why would they be my dates, i'm not a geneticist?
Edit - show me a link to this story. It doesn't make any sense.
08 Oct 12
3 edits
Originally posted by Proper KnobMy dates? They're the accepted dates from the scientific community.
So you read one case, and that still contradicts your Biblical view. Forgive me if i'm not bowled over my the enormity of your research, i didn't realise you had gone to so much trouble.
My dates? They're the accepted dates from the scientific community. Why would they be my dates, i'm not a geneticist?
Edit - show me a link to this story. It doesn't make any sense.
IS THAT A JOKE?
There are NO ACCEPTED DATES from the scientific community from evolutionists.
As I said, any date submitted by an evolutionist is a "guesstimate " - a half-assed job at estimating. 😏
10 Oct 12
Originally posted by Proper KnobRob???????? You've disappeared.
So you read one case, and that still contradicts your Biblical view. Forgive me if i'm not bowled over my the enormity of your research, i didn't realise you had gone to so much trouble.
My dates? They're the accepted dates from the scientific community. Why would they be my dates, i'm not a geneticist?
Edit - show me a link to this story. It doesn't make any sense.
Have you a link to this Neanderthal story please?