Tonight Michael Savage has gone on another arrogant tirade against liberals and the entire world. He's ignored and warped the teachings of the Bible by proclaiming on his radio show, to the world: You don't go to church to celebrate, you go to get on your hands and knees and worship God." "You go to church to beg for forgiveness." "We're all bad." "Prayer is begging." "God is not your friend, it' s a vengeful God we have." He also said that we must "understand what the Muslim knows" (as in his Michael Savage's of God), we will fail. It's clear Michael Savage is trying to turn the non-violent type Jews and Christians into warmongers that will crush Islam by propaganda and war. In his madness he trying to make warmongers as bad who are as bad as Muslims and who will crush both atheists, socialists, communists, and Muslims who support war against Christians and Jews and attacks against himself.
It's obvious Michael wants to be the leader of these war monger Jews, Christians and anti-"extremist" Muslim Muslims. How deluded to think he will last as a leader of people who will become more corrupt than "extremist" Muslims and liberals, more corrupt because they will be turning their backs on the second greatest law: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
How can this so called modern "Samuel", one of the greatest Christians to ever live, have missed so many verses commanding God's people to be happy about him?:
"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions?
Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it?
On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone
while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels shouted for joy?"
Job 38:4-7
I will build you up again and you will be rebuilt,
O Virgin Israel. Again you will take up your tambourines
and go out to dance with the joyful.
Jeremiah 31:4
Then maidens will dance and be glad,
young men and old as well.
I will turn their mourning into gladness;
I will give them comfort and joy
instead of sorrow.
Jeremiah 31:13
Sing to him a new song;
play skillfully, and shout for joy.
Psalm 33:3
But may all who seek you rejoice and be glad in you;
may those who love your salvation always say,
"Yahweh be exalted!"
Psalm 40:16
My tears have been my food day and night,
while men say to me all day long,
"Where is your God?"
These things I remember as I pour out my soul:
how I used to go with the multitude,
leading the procession to the house of God,
with shouts of joy and thanksgiving
among the festive throng.
Psalm 42:3-4
Clap your hands, all you nations;
shout to God with cries of joy.
Psalm 47:1
God has ascended amid shouts of joy,
Yahweh amid the sounding of trumpets.
Psalm 47:5
The meadows are covered with flocks
and the valleys are mantled with grain;
they shout for joy and sing.
Psalm 65:13
Shout with joy to God, all the earth!
Psalm 66:1
may all who seek you rejoice and be glad in you;
may those who love your salvation always say,
"Let God be exalted!"
Psalm 70:4
My lips will shout for joy
when I sing praise to you—
I, whom you have redeemed.
Psalm 71:23
Sing for joy to God our strength;
shout aloud to the God of Jacob!
Psalm 81:1
Come, let us sing for joy to the Yahweh;
let us shout aloud to the Rock of our salvation.
Psalm 95:1
Shout for joy to Yahweh, all the earth,
burst into jubilant song with music;
make music to the Yahweh, with the harp,
with the harp and the sound of singing,
with trumpets and the blast of the ram's horn—
shout for joy before Yahweh, the King.
Let the sea resound, and everything in it,
the world, and all who live in it.
Psalm 98:4-7
He brought out his people with rejoicing,
his chosen ones with shouts of joy
Psalm 105:43
Shouts of joy and victory resound
in the tents of the righteous:
"Yahweh's right hand has done mighty things!"
Psalm 118:15
When the righteous prosper,
the city rejoices; when the wicked perish,
there are shouts of joy.
Proverbs 11:10
Shout aloud and sing for joy, people of Zion,
for great is the Holy One of Israel among you.
Isaiah 12:6
They raise their voices, they shout for joy;
from the west they acclaim Yahweh's majesty.
Isaiah 24:14
But your dead will live; their bodies will rise.
You who dwell in the dust, wake up and shout for joy.
Your dew is like the dew of the morning; the earth
will give birth to her dead.
Isaiah 26:19
The desert and the parched land will be glad;
the wilderness will rejoice and blossom.
Like the crocus, it will burst into bloom;
it will rejoice greatly and shout for joy.
The glory of Lebanon will be given to it,
the splendor of Carmel and Sharon;
they will see the glory of Yahweh,
the splendor of our God.
Strengthen the feeble hands,
steady the knees that give way;
say to those with fearful hearts,
"Be strong, do not fear;
your God will come,
he will come with vengeance;
with divine retribution
he will come to save you."
Then will the eyes of the blind be opened
and the ears of the deaf unstopped.
Then will the lame leap like a deer,
and the mute tongue shout for joy.
Water will gush forth in the wilderness
and streams in the desert.
Isaiah 35:1-6
Let the desert and its towns raise their voices;
let the settlements where Kedar lives rejoice.
Let the people of Sela sing for joy;
let them shout from the mountaintops.
Isaiah 42:11
I have swept away your offenses like a cloud,
your sins like the morning mist.
Return to me, for I have redeemed you."
Sing for joy, O heavens, for Yahweh has done this;
shout aloud, O earth beneath. Burst into song,
you mountains, you forests and all your trees,
for Yahweh has redeemed Jacob,
he displays his glory in Israel.
Isaiah 44:22-23
Leave Babylon, flee from the Babylonians!
Announce this with shouts of joy and proclaim it.
Send it out to the ends of the earth; say,
"Yahweh has redeemed his servant Jacob."
Isaiah 48:20
Shout for joy, O heavens; rejoice, O earth;
burst into song, O mountains! For Yahweh
comforts his people and will have compassion
on his afflicted ones.
Isaiah 49:13
Listen! Your watchmen lift up their voices;
together they shout for joy.
When Yahweh returns to Zion,
they will see it with their own eyes.
Isaiah 52:8
Sing, O barren woman,
you who never bore a child;
burst into song, shout for joy,
you who were never in labor;
because more are the children
of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband
Isaiah 54:1
Sing with joy for Jacob;
shout for the foremost of the nations.
Make your praises heard, and say,
"O Yahweh, save your people,
the remnant of Israel."
Jeremiah 31:7
They will come and shout
for joy on the heights of Zion;
they will rejoice in the
bounty of Yahweh—the grain,
the new wine and the oil,
the young of the flocks and herds.
They will be like a well-watered garden,
and they will sorrow no more.
Jeremiah 31:12
Then heaven and earth and all
that is in them will shout for joy
over Babylon, for out of the north
destroyers will attack her,"
declares Yahweh.
Jeremiah 51:48
Rejoice in the Lord always.
I will say it again: Rejoice!
Philippians 4:4
I'm a Christian, and will never endorse Savigism, a religion where Michael would have you kill those who made him look bad in court in order to bury that humiliation.
Showing posts with label refuted. Show all posts
Showing posts with label refuted. Show all posts
Monday, September 14, 2009
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Rush Limbaugh: Trojan Communist?
On "patriot day" Obama villified 9/11 truthers, saying that they had lied through their teeth to get on to his show, said that they were "politically insane" and that he did as much as he could to make sure that they remained a small minority. In his babbling arrogance he apparently forgot that "politically insane" is a nonsense accusation used by socialists and communists against those who would not agree with their political dogma in order to have an arbitrary reason to jail or kill them. This is the same Rush Limbaugh who in December 2008, allowed a caller to say to him, "You are my God." Excuse-maker for Gluttony Rush the Lie-for-a-High-Dimbog is not a conservative, but rather a trojan horse for the elitist anti-Christians. He's obviously trying to make Christians look stupid and gullible, and no doubt, Satan is behind him. But Satan's accusing the children of God backfires, as only the false fundamentalist Christians, the Arminians, stick with Rush, and that makes the true Christians shine true all the more in this world.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
More Coast to Coast AM Folly
LOL, a caller called into Coast to Coast AM right now, ignorant of Michael Cremo, who told George Noory that there was no way humans could have made nuclear weapons thousands of years ago, and when George mentioned that the caller must not have heard of Michael Cremo, the caller replied that he'd give Michael some credit and his sources, but that until he saw National Geographic and Popular Science say it was true, then it wouldn't be definitively true. Don't ya know the writers of National Geographic (who supported the Archeoraptor Hoax) and the Pop. Sci. editors (who's 9/11 debunking article was refuted) are the standard for truth, let alone scientific truth? Not. Then, incredibly, the caller asked if one of George Noory's past guests (Lynn McTaggart, an anti-Christian, sterotyping, myth-spreading, psuedo-scientist) would send some (good) intentions his way so that he could get a job (after having been out of a job since the end of January 2009. While listening to the caller I thought, "So these are the idiots supporting National Georgraph and Popular Science".
Earlier in the show George had a guest on named Frank Joseph Hoff, and a caller asked Frank what he thought of the possibility of Atlanteans having red hair, to which Frank replied, "You could do a whole show on that." George replied, "Well I'm not doing a whole show on red hair." LOL.
At 11:47 A.M., George said, "Allyou have to do is look at the book of revelation, apocalypse, look at the signs."
These people really need prayer. How sad their lives will be if they end up in Hell forever - the eternal shame they will have to live with.
Earlier in the show George had a guest on named Frank Joseph Hoff, and a caller asked Frank what he thought of the possibility of Atlanteans having red hair, to which Frank replied, "You could do a whole show on that." George replied, "Well I'm not doing a whole show on red hair." LOL.
At 11:47 A.M., George said, "Allyou have to do is look at the book of revelation, apocalypse, look at the signs."
These people really need prayer. How sad their lives will be if they end up in Hell forever - the eternal shame they will have to live with.
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Obscure Arminiest Kent R. Rieske Calls All Arminiest UFO Sighters Deluded by Satan and More
On Dec 26, 2007 7:33 AM, in his careless opinion bashing, the Arminius worshiper Kent at RieskeKR@aol.com accidentally bashed all Arminius worshipers who have seen UFO's. Since Arminus worshipers far outnumber those who believe in permanent salvation by Christ's grace alone, Arminians are the majority of those who see UFO's along with Buddhists, Atheists, and Muslims. The comic-looking font is the actual font and style he used along with an altered mocking subject heading (he's real mature and serious guy eh?):
Re: Calvinist Who Believes In UFOs Goes Ballistic.
"[...] I am not surprise that you believe in UFOs, since you are also a Calvinist. Boy... [text deleted due to the fact this Arminiest is an obviously contentious, and deceived moron].
Bible Life Ministries - Salvation Prayer Hahahahaha
Kent"
Those few pieces I read kept my eyes from reading whatever else stupidity had been in reply. One of the problems of being an opinion basher like Kent, is that such bashing repels the eyes and ears of those you hope to bash. So, there you have it, an oh so loving Arminiast not just refusing to repent of his blatant opinion-bashing bigotry, misquoting me by calling me a Calvinist, and bashing all government officials, all police officers, pilots, everyone, including all Christians from Arminiast to Calvinistic as being gullible and deceived, and deluded by Satan while gloating, mocking, and stereotyping on top of it. Great ministry eh? Yet another reason not to worship the deceiver Arminius or to trust his worshipers.
He couldn't even be bothered to correct "surprise" to surprised". Real careful guy. That's the reply of a contentious, self-willed, money-loving, social-climber who is obsessed with airing his own opinions and could care less about the Bible. I checked my file storage site to see if he had downloaded my books which refute Arminian theology using almost 100% verses from the Bible but saw he did not bother to download them. The same is true of a previous Arminiest I had recently talked to who also did not bother to download them. That clearly shows what kind of people Arminiest-worshippers are.
And wasn't that just such a beautiful loving Christian reply? "Hahahaha"? Gloating with derision is Christ-like? Calling me a Calvinist implying that I worship Calvin when I said I was Calvinistic = careful and loving? Slandering all Calvinists = loving?
Here was the original message I sent this ballistic babbler:
In a message dated 12/25/2007 10:49:28 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, kyle ain writes:
"The reasons people believe in UFOs and aliens go back to the school education system. Kids are taught that life can evolve given enough time." [That's a quote from mocker Kent who illogically associats UFO's and evolution.]
That's an idiotic lie. I am a calvinistic Christian, I am saved and how can you not know better than to say something so stupid? How can you be so massively ignorant as to citing a government study (as if all the government is honest or knows what the other hand is doing lol? talk about naive!) and to ignore MILLIONS of sightings and thousands of videos and testimony from people of every walk of life? How can you ignore ancient art showing obvious ufos and aliens?
I saw two ufo's with my own eyes they were not meteors or airplanes or blimps flares or swamp gas. You have to nearly be nearly a master moron to have said what you did or very lazy or were being very impatient at that time.
I suppose angels are just swamp gas right and God's glory was a meteor shower? Get real man and stop rationalizing in stupid ways.
Check out the videos in my profile [...]
http://snipurl.com/oncesaved
merry christmas
Re: Calvinist Who Believes In UFOs Goes Ballistic.
"[...] I am not surprise that you believe in UFOs, since you are also a Calvinist. Boy... [text deleted due to the fact this Arminiest is an obviously contentious, and deceived moron].
Bible Life Ministries - Salvation Prayer Hahahahaha
Kent"
Those few pieces I read kept my eyes from reading whatever else stupidity had been in reply. One of the problems of being an opinion basher like Kent, is that such bashing repels the eyes and ears of those you hope to bash. So, there you have it, an oh so loving Arminiast not just refusing to repent of his blatant opinion-bashing bigotry, misquoting me by calling me a Calvinist, and bashing all government officials, all police officers, pilots, everyone, including all Christians from Arminiast to Calvinistic as being gullible and deceived, and deluded by Satan while gloating, mocking, and stereotyping on top of it. Great ministry eh? Yet another reason not to worship the deceiver Arminius or to trust his worshipers.
He couldn't even be bothered to correct "surprise" to surprised". Real careful guy. That's the reply of a contentious, self-willed, money-loving, social-climber who is obsessed with airing his own opinions and could care less about the Bible. I checked my file storage site to see if he had downloaded my books which refute Arminian theology using almost 100% verses from the Bible but saw he did not bother to download them. The same is true of a previous Arminiest I had recently talked to who also did not bother to download them. That clearly shows what kind of people Arminiest-worshippers are.
And wasn't that just such a beautiful loving Christian reply? "Hahahaha"? Gloating with derision is Christ-like? Calling me a Calvinist implying that I worship Calvin when I said I was Calvinistic = careful and loving? Slandering all Calvinists = loving?
Here was the original message I sent this ballistic babbler:
In a message dated 12/25/2007 10:49:28 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, kyle ain writes:
"The reasons people believe in UFOs and aliens go back to the school education system. Kids are taught that life can evolve given enough time." [That's a quote from mocker Kent who illogically associats UFO's and evolution.]
That's an idiotic lie. I am a calvinistic Christian, I am saved and how can you not know better than to say something so stupid? How can you be so massively ignorant as to citing a government study (as if all the government is honest or knows what the other hand is doing lol? talk about naive!) and to ignore MILLIONS of sightings and thousands of videos and testimony from people of every walk of life? How can you ignore ancient art showing obvious ufos and aliens?
I saw two ufo's with my own eyes they were not meteors or airplanes or blimps flares or swamp gas. You have to nearly be nearly a master moron to have said what you did or very lazy or were being very impatient at that time.
I suppose angels are just swamp gas right and God's glory was a meteor shower? Get real man and stop rationalizing in stupid ways.
Check out the videos in my profile [...]
http://snipurl.com/oncesaved
merry christmas
Using Kent's logic if any kid is taught a lie then there is no chance that they can ever make a correct judgment from then on. That effectively makes Kent's ministry worthless since there are no kids who haven't been taught lies. Another problem with his stupid logic is that there are Christians like me who have never been taught evolution in school or who never comprehended being told fossils were millions of years old. I used to have one or two dinosaur books and don't recall either of them saying dinosaurs were millions of years old and even if I was told that, wouldn't have understood since when I was a kid I was very poor with math. In fact I have dyscalculia which often corrupts and distorts how I perceive long periods of time. So then how does Ken's magical judgment corruption apply to me?
Note that I changed the snipurl.com link to a new one so that no one would go to the wrong link.
Note that I changed the snipurl.com link to a new one so that no one would go to the wrong link.
Carl Flygare's Raving "Review" of "The New Answers Book" Refuted
My refutation of the slanderous, blundering, contradictory, hypocrite Carl Flygare who according to his review stats deceived at least 289 of 309 people who read his contradictory rant by his "review" titled "The New Absurdities Book" of The New Answers Book which he didn't have the scientific understanding and knowledge to critique in a scientific way but sloppily bashed anways. He said:
"The New Answers Book channels Jacques Derrida (French philosopher, founder of deconstructionism) and literal biblical inerrancy: everyone's view of reality is invariably shaped and determined by their initial assumptions."
You mean everyone assumes and no one makes a hypothesis or can be logical? That includes you too right?
"Truth is an illusion and no one can ever really know anything - unless it ended up in that mishmash of myths, superstitions, and unverifiable special revelations known as the bible."
Because you said so, and whatever the angry assuming, hypocritical, ranter says is true, is true! Angry ranter said it so I believe it!
"Ken Ham et al present ludicrous conceits in ways that seem, if not actually true, then at least not quite so patently false - truthiness theology or alternate reality apologetics - also known as intentional ignorance 101."
Because you said so, and whatever the angry assuming, hypocritical, ranter says is true, is true! Angry ranter said it so I believe it!
Your scientific method is awesome so far. A mish mash of hatred, slander, arrogance, assumptions, time-wasting sarcasm, atheist and pagan myths and hypocrisy. Moving on.
"Stock-in-tirade for Answers in Genesis (AiG), the creation-cult ministry behind this silly and delusional diatribe."
Yawn.
"Let's start with dinosaurs..."
Yawn.
"Chapter 12 (Ham) asserts that humans and dinosaurs lived alongside one another and are mentioned in the bible - "The Flintstones" as documentary."
Ignorance-loving deciever, see:
http://snipurl.com/dinosalive
http://snipurl.com/ooparts
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/living_fossils.asp
http://www.hotlinkfiles.com/files/429481_tceor/why-i-dont-believe.pdf
Ignorance-lover according to evolution subhumans (who had religion and could paint better than many people today) lived along side dinosaurs. Is that silly to you to? You reek of extreme stupidity. Also hypocrite, Komodo dragons, giant crocodiles, alligators, snakes, giant birds, elephants, rhinos, giant chimpanzees, apes which are much stronger than humans, countless poisonous animals both on the land and see, and giant squids, deadly plants and trees live alongside humans and they attack humans and yet humans flourish all over the world and could easily exterminate them. Are you going to start raving because of that too? Are you running around screaming over the countless massive amounts of deadly poisonous chemicals both artificial and natural, even being released carelessly into the ground, water and air? Seemingly difficult doesn't = silly you hypocrite except to arrogant, childish, immoral nearly knowledge-barren liars like you.
"From an evolutionary perspective they are. Isaiah mentions various feathered Theropod dinosaur descendents - such as eagles, sparrows, owls, ravens, and doves - that we know and enjoy today as birds."
Wrong again gullible deceiver:
"Prior to the publication of the article “Dinosaurs Take Wing” in the July 1998 National Geographic, Lou Mazzatenta, the photographer for Sloan’s article, invited me to the National Geographic Society to review his photographs of Chinese fossils and to comment on the slant being given to the story. At that time, I tried to interject the fact that strongly supported alternative viewpoints existed to what National Geographic intended to present, but it eventually became clear to me that National Geographic was not interested in anything other than the prevailing dogma that birds evolved from dinosaurs.
Sloan’s article takes the prejudice to an entirely new level and consists in large part of unverifiable or undocumented information that “makes” the news rather than reporting it. His bald statement that “we can now say that birds are theropods just as confidently as we say that humans are mammals” is not even suggested as reflecting the views of a particular scientist or group of scientists, so that it figures as little more than editorial propagandizing. This melodramatic assertion had already been disproven by recent studies of embryology and comparative morphology, which, of course, are never mentioned.
More importantly, however, none of the structures illustrated in Sloan’s article that are claimed to be feathers have actually been proven to be feathers. Saying that they are is little more than wishful thinking that has been presented as fact. The statement on page 103 that “hollow, hairlike structures characterize protofeathers” is nonsense considering that protofeathers exist only as a theoretical construct, so that the internal structure of one is even more hypothetical.
The hype about feathered dinosaurs in the exhibit currently on display at the National Geographic Society is even worse, and makes the spurious claim that there is strong evidence that a wide variety of carnivorous dinosaurs had feathers. A model of the undisputed dinosaur Deinonychus and illustrations of baby tyrannosaurs are shown clad in feathers, all of which is simply imaginary and has no place outside of science fiction.
The idea of feathered dinosaurs and the theropod origin of birds is being actively promulgated by a cadre of zealous scientists acting in concert with certain editors at Nature and National Geographic who themselves have become outspoken and highly biased proselytizers of the faith. Truth and careful scientific weighing of evidence have been among the first casualties in their program, which is now fast becoming one of the grander scientific hoaxes of our age—the paleontological equivalent of cold fusion. If Sloan’s article is not the crescendo of this fantasia, it is difficult to imagine to what heights it can next be taken. But it is certain that when the folly has run its course and has been fully exposed, National Geographic will unfortunately play a prominent but unenviable role in the book that summarizes the whole sorry episode.
Sincerely,
Storrs L. Olson
Curator of Birds
National Museum of Natural History
Smithsonian Institution
Washington, DC 20560
Ph. 202-357-33212
FAX 1-202-633-8084
email: olson.storrs@nmnh.si.edu"
That snippet was information made easily available courtesy of answers in genesis, which you slandered.
It's interesting how you present as fact what your own atheist "scientist" evolutionists claim is not true.
"The Book of Job is offered as proof that Sauropod dinosaurs are also depicted."
Evil deceiver look up the words proof and evidence and learn the difference between the two. Hint: Just because it doesn't convince you evil deceiver doesn't mean 100+ million people you don't speak for aren't convinced.
"Job describes a large animal known as "Behemoth" which literally means "beast" or "dumb beast." Here is the key passage: "Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron (Job 40:16-17 KJV)."
"Here's a more accurate translation of the relevant text by Stephen Mitchell, who published a definitive translation of The Book of Job (available on amazon.com): "Look: the power in his thighs, the pulsing sinews of his belly. His p**** stiffens like a pine; his t******** bulge with vigor.'"
Wrong again easily deceived deciver:
zânâb
zaw-nawb'
From H2179 (in the original sense of flapping); the tail (literally or figuratively): - tail.
Not penis. Or do you think this is the correct translation?:
And Yahweh said unto Moses, "Put forth your hand, and take (the snake) by the penis."
Grabbed any snake penises lately Carl? Moving on:
"The KJV translation utilizes euphemism to avoid stating the obvious - this passage describes a large male mammal during rutting season. Ken Ham mistakes sexual antics for Sauropod dinosaurs!"
See above arrogant mocker.
"Next time check the supposedly inerrant autographs, if you can find them."
Arrogant mocking hypocrite that got refuted badly for his arrogant mocking hypocrisy says what? So much for your assuredness, so much for your mocking attitude. Isn't that called eating your own words or having your foot in your own mouth? How about punching yourself in the face and falling into the hole you dug?
See above.
"Another dinosaurian deception is the claim that red blood cells were found in a late Cretaceous T. rex (in Orwellian Ham-speak a 'missionary lizard') fossil some 70 million years old. Ham immediately declares victory over the non-existent yet necessary - for fund raising purposes anyway"
See above slanderer. You are ranting in hypocrisy, showing off your baseless opinions - for something as pathetic as shallow backpats from other lazy-minded truth haters like yourself anyways.
"- evil secular humanist and Darwinist conspiracy and declares his cretinous creationist timeline of some 6,000 years triumphant."
Since when does mere mocking sarcasm (especially after showing how massively stupid and gullible you are) count as scientific evidence? Moving on time-waster.
"Next time Ken read the primary literature - Schweitzer, Mary H., Mark Marshall, Keith Carron, D. Scott Bohle, Scott C. Busse, Ernst V. Arnold, Darlene Barnard, J. R. Horner, and Jean R. Starkey, 1997a. Heme compounds in dinosaur trabecular bone. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 94: 6291-6296 - before putting pen to paper. All the data supported the conclusion that the T. rex fossil in question contained fragments of hemoglobin molecules. 'The most likely source of these proteins is the once-living cells of the dinosaur.' No red blood cells, only protein fragments."
1. You are still missing the point: THE FACT THAT THEY CONTAIN PROTEIN FRAGMENTS IS STILL AMAZING BEING THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD.
2. THE CELLS WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE BEEN RECENTLY LIVING FOR THEIR TO BE PROTEIN FRAGMENTS STILL THERE. GET A CLUE, GET A CLUE, GET A CLUE. You are living in fantasy land pretending that it is more likely that those proteins are millions of years old rather than from recently living cells. What world are you living in where it is more likely that millions of years old proteins survived millions of years rather than thousands? Do you also believe in the tooth fairy? Moving on:
3. Eat your words again, from DISCOVER MAGAZINE (the information you TOOK OUT OF CONTEXT):
"When Schweitzer showed Horner the slide, she recalls, 'Jack said, "Prove to me they're not red blood cells." That was what I got my Ph.D. doing. She first ruled out contaminants and mineral structures. Then she analyzed the putative cells using a half-dozen techniques involving chemical analysis and immunology. In one test, a colleague injected rats with the dinosaur fossil extract; the rodents produced antibodies that responded to turkey and rabbit hemoglobins. All the data supported the conclusion that the T. rex fossil contained fragments of hemoglobin molecules.
"The most likely source of these proteins is the once-living cells of the dinosaur," she wrote in a 1997 paper."
That article, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, SPARKED A SMALL FLURRY OF HEADLINES (EMPHASIS MINE.)."
Genius can you figure out why it would spark a small flurry of headlines? MOVING ON WITH THE ARTICLE GENIUS:
"...Horner and others regarded Schweitzer's research as carefully performed and credible. Nonetheless, says Horner, 'most people were very skeptical. Frequently in our field people come up with new ideas, and opponents say, "I just don't believe it." She was having a hard time publishing in journals.'"
Genius, can you figure out why HER OPPONENTS LIKE YOU, WITH YOUR STUPID ARROGANT STUBBORN MIND AND HEART WOULD SAY "I JUST DON'T BELIEVE IT AND WHY THUGS LIKE YOU WOULD GIVE HER A HARD TIME PUBLISHING WHAT YOU ACKNOWLEDGE ARE FACTS? Genius, so what is the big deal that your skeptical friends give her such a hard time with her, as you imply "ordinary findings"? Hypocrite? Can you answer with a logical non-time-wasting answer? Moving on with the article hypocrite:
"Schweitzer was also stymied by her unconventional fusion of paleontology and molecular biology. 'Those are two disciplines we don't usually see in the same sentence,' says Lawrence Witmer, an Ohio University anatomy professor. Techniques that were routine in one discipline seemed odd when applied to the other. "If she was working with modern animals, there wouldn't be anything special about what she was doing," says Horner. But molecular paleontology was unheard-of. "It is a wide-open field that she invented," Horner says.
Soldiering on with minimal funding, Schweitzer continued to hunt for the retention of living tissue longer than scientific theory might predict. When a group of fossil hunters found a cluster of preserved bird eggs in a city dump in Neuquén, Argentina, they originally believed the shells contained nothing but sand. Schweitzer placed the remains under scanning electron and atomic force microscopes and concluded that the 70-million-year-old eggs still held embryos containing intact collagen."
Amazing isn't it genius? THAT "70-million-year-old eggs" would still contain intact collagen, LOL? Yeah, that's really realistic compared to 6000 years. Look everyone 70 million year old collagen and no evidence for it but sarcasm and fancy suits and degrees from like-minded skeptics! Moving on with the article:
"... Her lab was still stacked with unpacked cartons when she opened the cardboard box from the T. rex dig and pulled out the biggest fragment. Looking at it with the eyes of a biologist, she immediately saw it was more than a fossil. Time and history began to unwind. 'Oh, my gosh,' she said to her laboratory assistant, Jennifer Wittmeyer. 'It's a girl. And it's pregnant.'
What Schweitzer saw was medullary bone, a type of tissue that grows inside the long bones of female birds. Medullary bone is produced during ovulation as a way of storing the calcium needed for egg production; then it disappears. 'I looked at it under the dissecting scope,' Schweitzer says. 'There was nothing else it could be.' The medullary bone even contained gaps and mazelike fiber patterns resembling those of modern birds.
Until that moment, no one had ever identified that tissue in a dinosaur, making it impossible to definitively sex such an animal. 'Everything we've ever tried to do has been an utter guess,' Schweitzer says. For instance, researchers had tried to distinguish a male from a female based on the shape of a creature's body or the size of its head crest. Now they had a way to link gender with morphology and, drawing on parallels with living animals, even with behavior.
The second surprise hit in January 2004. While Schweitzer was attending a departmental taco party, Wittmeyer raced breathlessly into the room. 'You aren't going to believe what happened,' the lab assistant sputtered.
Wittmeyer had been pulling the late shift, analyzing pieces from the T. rex limb. She had just soaked a fragment of medullary bone in dilute acid to remove some calcium phosphate. This was an unusual procedure to carry out in a dinosaur lab. Scientists typically assume that a fossilized dinosaur consists of rock that would entirely dissolve in acid, but Schweitzer wanted to get a closer look at the fossil's fine structure and compare it with that of modern birds. That night Wittmeyer marveled at a small section of decalcified thighbone: 'When you wiggled it, it kind of floated in the breeze.'
Schweitzer and Wittmeyer pondered the meaning of the stretchy sample, feeling mystified and ecstatic. The remains seemed like soft tissue—specifically matrix, the organic part of bone, which consists primarily of collagen. Yet this seemed impossible, according to the prevailing understanding. 'Everyone knows how soft tissues degrade,' Schweitzer says. 'If you take a blood sample and you stick it on a shelf, you have nothing recognizable in about a week. So why would there be anything left in dinosaurs?'"
Yes genius, so why would there be anything left in dinosaurs? Tell us with your mocking arrogant ignoramus' attitude genius. Say it once again translation scholar who failed his own "be careful" test. Moving on with the article:
"Next Schweitzer examined a piece of the dinosaur's cortical bone. 'We stuck the bone in the same kind of solution,' she says. 'The bone mineral dissolved away, and it left these transparent blood vessels. I took one look, and I just said: 'Uh-uh. This isn't happening. This is just not happening.' She started applying the same treatment to bone fragments from another dinosaur that she had acquired for her dissertation. 'Sure enough,' she says, 'vessels all over the place.'"
BLOOD VESSELS ALL OVER THE PLACE? Genius Carl, explain how that's likely after millions and millions of years? Wow, so no cells, but entire blood vessels. Even better! Moving on with the article genius who loves to argue:
"Less than a month later, while Schweitzer was still collecting data on the soft tissue, came a third score. Wittmeyer walked into the lab looking anxious. 'I think maybe some of our stuff's gotten contaminated, because I see these things floating around, and they look like bugs,' she said. Worried that she would lose her dinosaur blood vessels before she could publish an article about them, Schweitzer rushed to rescue the sample. What she found startled her. Through the microscope she could see what looked like perfectly formed osteocytes, the cells inside bone."
OOOPS??????? HOW DID YOU MISS THAT PART GENIUS? You careless lying hypocrite. You deceived over 280 people according to your review stats. How's that feel being proved a gross, careless, hypocritical liar who was so sure of himself while slandering those who did not do him any wrong but informed him of the truth in order to save his life from an eternity of pain in Hell that he deserved? Or were you lying on purpose? Moving on virtual murderer:
"The past was roaring to life."
Wow Carl, so her no-big deal findings are "The past ... ROARING TO LIFE." Back to your hypocrisy:
"Here is the abstract on the PNAS paper authored by Schweitzer et al:
'Six independent lines of evidence point to the existence of heme-containing compounds and/or hemoglobin breakdown products in extracts of trabecular tissues of the large theropod dinosaur Tyrannosaurus rex. These include signatures from nuclear magnetic resonance and electron spin resonance that indicate the presence of a paramagnetic compound consistent with heme. In addition, UV/visible spectroscopy and high performance liquid chromatography data are consistent with the Soret absorbance characteristic of this molecule. Resonance Raman profiles are also consistent with a modified heme structure. Finally when dinosaurian tissues were extracted for protein fragments and were used to immunize rats, the resulting antisera reacted positively with purified avian and mammalian hemoglobins. The most parsimonious explanation of this evidence is the presence of blood-derived hemoglobin compounds preserved in the dinosaurian tissues."
Wow, and you quoted that because? That really proved something! So immunizing rats with millions of years old biological material is evidence that dinosaurs didn't live alongside man HOW? You remind me of a confused, bitter, hypocritical, babbling, non-sensical "troll" from yahoo! answers (it's a breeding ground for such) who claimed that the universe wasn't designed by God because, because, lol, THE UNIVERSE HAS A MATHEMATIC STRUCTURE. OF COURSE! DON'T YOU KNOW THAT HIGHLY ORDERED UNIVERSES ARE NOT EVIDENCE THAT THEY WERE ORDERED BY ANYTHING WITH INTELLIGENCE? Yes, that's right everyone, order is not a sign of intelligence, just the opposite according to this bitter "biologist" novangelis. Moving on:
"The lead author of the PNAS paper, Mary Schweitzer, happens to be an evangelical Christian who notes that "If God is who He says He is, He doesn't need us to twist and contort scientific data."
And don't you know that saying that means that Ken Ham is automatically a liar? So far liar your scientific method, your scientific reasoning is turning out to be mere spin. That's childish don't you know? To repeat and say, "bad!" as if you merely saying "bad!" makes whatever it is you are talking about bad. That's non-Christian's kid-reasoning. Immature. Moving on.
"The thing that's most important to God is our faith. Therefore he's not going to allow Himself to be proven by scientific methodologies."
Because she said so. What she said is not in the Bible and not implied in the Bible. It's also common sense ignorance-lover that you can find evidence God exists through the scientific method being that it's a simple thought to think, "If the universe has no design then I should be able to observe with my eyes that it has none" and to then LOOK AT LEAST ONCE LET ALONE REPEATEDLY TO USE THOSE INSTRUMENTS YOUR EYES TO SEE IF THERE IS A DESIGN. You don't even need eyes to determine if you are designed. You can think: "If I am not designed I should not be able to think." and then see with your mind if you can think. It's not hard to determine if you are thinking is it?
And why are you being a hypocrite and quoting a Christian when you are attacking Christ, when you are attacking his people? You can't have it both ways hypocrite. Either Christ lied about Noah and the Flood being real events, or he was telling the truth. Which is it hypocrite? On with your rant:
"Creationists routinely accuse Schweitzer of collaboration, conspiracy, or worse: 'It rips my guts out,' she says. 'These people are claiming to represent the Christ that I love. They're not doing a very good job. It's no wonder that a lot of my colleagues are atheists.' She told one zealot, 'You know, if the only picture of Christ I had was your attitude towards me, I'd run.'"
Don't you know all Christians who claim to be Christians really do have God on their side? Is that what you are saying? Hypocrite? To believe anyone? You are an arbitrary biased hypocrite who touts whatever agrees with your opinion. You are a parrot repeating what other parrots repeat. Haven't you ever heard the expression, "Think for yourself."? More ranting from you:
"Molecular paleontology - an exciting new branch of science - has been opened up by Schweitzer's insights and research; proof that workers of any religious tradition, or none at all, can be good scientists"
Wow, did you read that everyone? You are contradicting yourself again genius: "any religious tradition" NOT "any religious tradition EXCEPT THAT OF CREATIONISTS". So are you admitting that there are hateful, biased, illogical hypocrites practicing scientists who were discriminating against Christians? Finally after thousands of years lol, NOW THERE'S PROOF? So you are admitting that for thousands of years those on your side have been hateful hypocrites yet you think you have anything to teach the ones you've been persecuting after all that time? Wow, thanks for that admission. More ranting from you:
"since science is based on methodological naturalism"
Oh, so the hypocrites are the sole definers and controllers of what philosophy science must be bonded to? Science can't just be a field of knowledge and the testing and measurement of things to find out what they do and are? It has to be "naturalistic" aye? I suppose that belief is scientific in itself too, right? Any evidence for that? Nope. It's all: Because you said so. More of your ranting:
"- not the medieval demon-haunted supernatural religious conceits Ham learned on his daddy's lap."
Demons haunting wasn't an invention of medieval times historical ignoramuses. IT'S A TEACHING FROM THE FIRST KNOWN CIVILIZATIONS AND THAT INCLUDES THE ADVANCED CIVILIZATION OF SUMERIA WHICH YOU HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH COMING INTO IT'S ADVANCED STATE OF CIVILIZATION.
Furthermore hypocrites, last time I checked medieval demon-haunted religious Europe conquered the world. Those deluded religious people are advancing the world while atheists fault-find, "Oh look at those evil Christians giving their Bibles to the poor and starving" or "All these starving kids, therefore, 'opens a beer'. More of your rant:
"Chapter 13 (Hodge) explains away the inconvenient fact that human and dinosaur fossils are never found together in the same geologic context."
See above hypocrite. Have fun with all those inconvenient facts you, in your ignorance (or pretension) claimed don't exist. More ranting:
"After a futile attempt to determine the pre-deluge human population (from a few hundred thousand to 17 billion people!),"
Why are you shouting, "!"? If the Bible doesn't say then it doesn't say. Would you have God put every fact in the Bible for your personal convenience and so that it can't be lifted up or covers the entire planet thirty times over? Why are you proclaiming "fault!" because a Christian admits to not knowing something? You hypocrite, I thought Christians were arrogant for never admitting that they don't have an answer for everything or exact answer? See, that's the game of the deluded hypocrite: Damn Christians if they do and damn them if they don't. Massive hypocrite where are the billions of transitional dinosaur fossils that should be around? Did you forget that inconvenient problem you hypocrite? Hypocrite can you answer all of the problems, those dozens upon dozens of problems listed all over the internet that can easily be found? Are you going to start mocking and throwing firts because you can't answer them. Go on, start shouting and running around screaming while laughing. Moving on:
"Hodge regurgitates"
Hypocritical sarcastic parrot-immitator says what? Parrot-immitator are you using slanderous wording to achieve "proof"? Moving on you pretensious hypocrite:
"the tired trinity of hydrodynamic sorting, ecological zonation and differential escape - all of which utterly fail to explain the fossil record."
Because the gullible hypocrite that ate his words over and over along with the thousands of biased years on his side said so. More from the false teacher:
"Any 'new answers' Hodge provides should at least address the following old questions: Why didn't any dinosaurs make it to high ground along with modern mammals (many species were quick and agile enough to do so)?"
Why should they at least address the following old questions which have had the following old answers:
THE WHOLE PLANET WAS FLOODED GENIUS SO WHAT THE HELL WOULD IT MATTER IF DINOSAURS ESCAPE TO "HIGH GROUND". I THOUGHT YOU READ THE WHOLE BIBLE? WHAT'S WRONG? DID YOU GET LAZY, CARELESS, FELT LIKE-ASSUMING AND IMMITATING A SILLY PARROT? It's only the world's best-selling most written about book and has been for years. Why don't you show some respect? And besides my answer it has already been answered by other creationists:
"If the Flood were local, people who did not happen to be living in the vicinity would not have been affected by it. They would have escaped God’s judgment on sin. It boggles the mind to believe that, after all those centuries since creation, no one had migrated to other parts—or that people living on the periphery of such a local flood would not have moved to the adjoining high ground rather than be drowned. Jesus believed that the Flood killed everyone not on the Ark (Matt. 24:37–39)." - http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/global10.asp
Incredibly your rant continues:
"Why don't flowering plants appear in Precambrian strata when stromatilites appear in Cretaceous deposits with flowering plants?"
See the above links hypocrite. Also hypocrite, did you know the Bible has been shown to be historically accurate by both hypocrite atheists and Christians? Hypocrite, could it be if that the Bible is repeatedly shown to be historically (and that includes prophetically) accurate, THAT IT IS THEN TRUSTWORTHY? My specific point is, just because you can't figure out a few things wouldn't mean that God or anyone who shows themselves trustworthy can't be trusted. Big duh there. Or would you like to argue that if you can't answer all my questions and do all the leg and mind-work for me, after repeatedly telling me the truth, that you don't qualify as trustworthy? How arrogant and stupid. Ranting:
"Why are some groups of organisms, such as mollusks, found in many geologic strata? "How were organisms (such as brachiopods), which are very similar hydrodynamically (nearly the same size, shape, and weight), still perfectly sorted?"
You're right, that totally shows the Bible to be wrong that mollusks are not found in one strata and labeled primitive and obsolete but continue to exist as "living fossils" along side man. Would you like to crack open a 100% alcholoic bottle of beer and be even more contradictory? But let's play your lazy game: Take a box, put some lumps of clay with crevices all over it, put in some plastic dinos and sand. Fill and shake it. Notice the sand is both on top of the clay and wherever and on the bottom? Should they only sink to the bottom or pile up top in the crevices? If so, why?
More ranting:
"Why don't pterosaurs (flying reptiles) appear alongside bats and modern birds?"
See above links hypocrite. Also hypocrite why do you assume the entire Earth has been completely examined? Don't you know new animals of all kinds are still being discovered? Furthermore do you know what hunting is? Do you know what disease is? Ugh, more ranting:
"How were coral reefs hundreds of feet thick and miles long preserved intact with other fossils below them?"
BY MILLIONS OF YEARS OF TEMPERATURE CHANGES, EXPOSURE TO ELEMENTS RUBBING AGAINST THEM, AND EARTHQUAKES. YES, THAT IS SO MUCH MORE LIKELY THEN THOUSANDS OF YEARS. Are you ok? You are a very confused contradictory person. More ranting:
"How were fossil artifacts of living animals such as footprints and burrows also sorted?"
The hell are you talking about? Anyways see above links hypocrite. Wow, more laziness:
"Why are no human contrivances found except in the very uppermost strata?"
Supercrite, see above links (or instead of being lazy search the net, read books, watch videos, not just the ones that please your itching ears, that match your personal opinions based on your emotions and hastily gathered "facts"). Super wow, he is still talking:
"Any civilization capable of shipbuilding should have left behind tools or buildings intermingled with trilobite or dinosaur fossils! But then the entire ghastly Noachian global genocide is, thankfully, a myth."
SEE, ABOVE, LINKS. Oh, my, wow, still ranting:
"How about the age of the earth..."
How about it fake historian? More!:
"Chapter 9 (Riddle) attempts to cast doubt on the incontrovertible scientific consensus that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old."
No arrogant hypocrite who thinks he speaks for all Christians and everyone in the universe, he didn't just cast doubt he helped millions of Christians add to the evidence that people like you are lazy-minded liars. Yet more laziness:
"The most direct means of calculating the Earth's age is a Pb/Pb isochron age, derived from samples of the Earth and meteorites. This technique measures three isotopes of lead (Pb-206, Pb-207, and either Pb-208 or PB-204). A plot is then constructed of the resulting PB-206/PB-204 versus Pb-207/Pb-204 ratios. If the solar system formed from a common pool of matter, which was uniformly distributed in terms of Pb isotope ratios, then the initial plots for all objects from that pool of matter would fall on a single point. Over time, the amounts of Pb-206 and Pb-207 will change in samples after they form since these isotopes are decay end-products of uranium (U-238 decays to Pb-206 and U-235 decays to Pb-207). This causes the data points to separate from each other. The higher the uranium-to-lead ratio of a terrestrial rock or meteorite, the more the Pb-206/Pb-204 and Pb-207/Pb-204 values will change with time. If the source of the solar system was also uniformly distributed with respect to uranium isotope ratios, then the data points will always fall on a single line. From the slope of the line we can compute the amount of time (age) which has passed since the pool of matter became separated into discrete objects."
See Conflicting Ages of Tertiary Basalt and Contained Fossilized Wood. Woah, you're still ranting:
"A 'Young Earth Creationist' (YEC), such as Riddle, would object to the assumptions noted above. However the test for these assumptions is a plot of the data itself. The actual underlying assumption is that, if these requirements have not been met, then there is no reason for the data points to fall on a line. Every time a credible researcher or lab runs these tests on valid samples and plots the results, the data points fall on a line. Not only is the age of the Earth determined, but the underlying assumption is validated - something creationists, including Riddle, never tell the reader. Scientific case closed. The Earth is old, immensely old, deep time old, 4.54 billion years old. Deal with it."
See above pdf and links hypocrite. Are you able to you pass your own hypocritical standards and answer every point we bring up with a refutation? Amazing, you're still ranting (which is notable because when I posted long "reviews" like yours amazon moderator and yahoo answers hypocrites would delete them repeatedly and right away):
"The remaining chapters are equally shallow and inane but this review is already pushing size limits. Note to AiG: include some reality-based (honest) answers in the next edition - and leave deconstructionism up to Derrida."
understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. AVOID SUCH PEOPLE. For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions, always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth. Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith. But they will not get very far, for THEIR FOLLY WILL BE PLAIN, as was that of those two men. You, however, have followed my teaching, my conduct, my aim in life, my faith, my patience, my love, my steadfastness, my persecutions and sufferings that happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium, and at Lystra--which persecutions I endured; yet from them all the Lord rescued me. Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. - 2 Timothy 3:1-13, ESVB
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. And you say, 'If we had lived in the days of our forefathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.' So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of the sin of your forefathers! You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. I tell you the truth, all this will come upon this generation." - Matthew 23:29-36, NIV
"As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37-39
"A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions." - Proverbs 18:2
"A man's own folly ruins his life, yet his heart rages against Yahweh." - Proverbs 19:3
"Stop judging by mere appearances and make a right judgment" - Jesus.
"The New Answers Book channels Jacques Derrida (French philosopher, founder of deconstructionism) and literal biblical inerrancy: everyone's view of reality is invariably shaped and determined by their initial assumptions."
You mean everyone assumes and no one makes a hypothesis or can be logical? That includes you too right?
"Truth is an illusion and no one can ever really know anything - unless it ended up in that mishmash of myths, superstitions, and unverifiable special revelations known as the bible."
Because you said so, and whatever the angry assuming, hypocritical, ranter says is true, is true! Angry ranter said it so I believe it!
"Ken Ham et al present ludicrous conceits in ways that seem, if not actually true, then at least not quite so patently false - truthiness theology or alternate reality apologetics - also known as intentional ignorance 101."
Because you said so, and whatever the angry assuming, hypocritical, ranter says is true, is true! Angry ranter said it so I believe it!
Your scientific method is awesome so far. A mish mash of hatred, slander, arrogance, assumptions, time-wasting sarcasm, atheist and pagan myths and hypocrisy. Moving on.
"Stock-in-tirade for Answers in Genesis (AiG), the creation-cult ministry behind this silly and delusional diatribe."
Yawn.
"Let's start with dinosaurs..."
Yawn.
"Chapter 12 (Ham) asserts that humans and dinosaurs lived alongside one another and are mentioned in the bible - "The Flintstones" as documentary."
Ignorance-loving deciever, see:
http://snipurl.com/dinosalive
http://snipurl.com/ooparts
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/living_fossils.asp
http://www.hotlinkfiles.com/files/429481_tceor/why-i-dont-believe.pdf
Ignorance-lover according to evolution subhumans (who had religion and could paint better than many people today) lived along side dinosaurs. Is that silly to you to? You reek of extreme stupidity. Also hypocrite, Komodo dragons, giant crocodiles, alligators, snakes, giant birds, elephants, rhinos, giant chimpanzees, apes which are much stronger than humans, countless poisonous animals both on the land and see, and giant squids, deadly plants and trees live alongside humans and they attack humans and yet humans flourish all over the world and could easily exterminate them. Are you going to start raving because of that too? Are you running around screaming over the countless massive amounts of deadly poisonous chemicals both artificial and natural, even being released carelessly into the ground, water and air? Seemingly difficult doesn't = silly you hypocrite except to arrogant, childish, immoral nearly knowledge-barren liars like you.
"From an evolutionary perspective they are. Isaiah mentions various feathered Theropod dinosaur descendents - such as eagles, sparrows, owls, ravens, and doves - that we know and enjoy today as birds."
Wrong again gullible deceiver:
"Prior to the publication of the article “Dinosaurs Take Wing” in the July 1998 National Geographic, Lou Mazzatenta, the photographer for Sloan’s article, invited me to the National Geographic Society to review his photographs of Chinese fossils and to comment on the slant being given to the story. At that time, I tried to interject the fact that strongly supported alternative viewpoints existed to what National Geographic intended to present, but it eventually became clear to me that National Geographic was not interested in anything other than the prevailing dogma that birds evolved from dinosaurs.
Sloan’s article takes the prejudice to an entirely new level and consists in large part of unverifiable or undocumented information that “makes” the news rather than reporting it. His bald statement that “we can now say that birds are theropods just as confidently as we say that humans are mammals” is not even suggested as reflecting the views of a particular scientist or group of scientists, so that it figures as little more than editorial propagandizing. This melodramatic assertion had already been disproven by recent studies of embryology and comparative morphology, which, of course, are never mentioned.
More importantly, however, none of the structures illustrated in Sloan’s article that are claimed to be feathers have actually been proven to be feathers. Saying that they are is little more than wishful thinking that has been presented as fact. The statement on page 103 that “hollow, hairlike structures characterize protofeathers” is nonsense considering that protofeathers exist only as a theoretical construct, so that the internal structure of one is even more hypothetical.
The hype about feathered dinosaurs in the exhibit currently on display at the National Geographic Society is even worse, and makes the spurious claim that there is strong evidence that a wide variety of carnivorous dinosaurs had feathers. A model of the undisputed dinosaur Deinonychus and illustrations of baby tyrannosaurs are shown clad in feathers, all of which is simply imaginary and has no place outside of science fiction.
The idea of feathered dinosaurs and the theropod origin of birds is being actively promulgated by a cadre of zealous scientists acting in concert with certain editors at Nature and National Geographic who themselves have become outspoken and highly biased proselytizers of the faith. Truth and careful scientific weighing of evidence have been among the first casualties in their program, which is now fast becoming one of the grander scientific hoaxes of our age—the paleontological equivalent of cold fusion. If Sloan’s article is not the crescendo of this fantasia, it is difficult to imagine to what heights it can next be taken. But it is certain that when the folly has run its course and has been fully exposed, National Geographic will unfortunately play a prominent but unenviable role in the book that summarizes the whole sorry episode.
Sincerely,
Storrs L. Olson
Curator of Birds
National Museum of Natural History
Smithsonian Institution
Washington, DC 20560
Ph. 202-357-33212
FAX 1-202-633-8084
email: olson.storrs@nmnh.si.edu"
That snippet was information made easily available courtesy of answers in genesis, which you slandered.
It's interesting how you present as fact what your own atheist "scientist" evolutionists claim is not true.
"The Book of Job is offered as proof that Sauropod dinosaurs are also depicted."
Evil deceiver look up the words proof and evidence and learn the difference between the two. Hint: Just because it doesn't convince you evil deceiver doesn't mean 100+ million people you don't speak for aren't convinced.
"Job describes a large animal known as "Behemoth" which literally means "beast" or "dumb beast." Here is the key passage: "Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron (Job 40:16-17 KJV)."
"Here's a more accurate translation of the relevant text by Stephen Mitchell, who published a definitive translation of The Book of Job (available on amazon.com): "Look: the power in his thighs, the pulsing sinews of his belly. His p**** stiffens like a pine; his t******** bulge with vigor.'"
Wrong again easily deceived deciver:
zânâb
zaw-nawb'
From H2179 (in the original sense of flapping); the tail (literally or figuratively): - tail.
Not penis. Or do you think this is the correct translation?:
And Yahweh said unto Moses, "Put forth your hand, and take (the snake) by the penis."
Grabbed any snake penises lately Carl? Moving on:
"The KJV translation utilizes euphemism to avoid stating the obvious - this passage describes a large male mammal during rutting season. Ken Ham mistakes sexual antics for Sauropod dinosaurs!"
See above arrogant mocker.
"Next time check the supposedly inerrant autographs, if you can find them."
Arrogant mocking hypocrite that got refuted badly for his arrogant mocking hypocrisy says what? So much for your assuredness, so much for your mocking attitude. Isn't that called eating your own words or having your foot in your own mouth? How about punching yourself in the face and falling into the hole you dug?
See above.
"Another dinosaurian deception is the claim that red blood cells were found in a late Cretaceous T. rex (in Orwellian Ham-speak a 'missionary lizard') fossil some 70 million years old. Ham immediately declares victory over the non-existent yet necessary - for fund raising purposes anyway"
See above slanderer. You are ranting in hypocrisy, showing off your baseless opinions - for something as pathetic as shallow backpats from other lazy-minded truth haters like yourself anyways.
"- evil secular humanist and Darwinist conspiracy and declares his cretinous creationist timeline of some 6,000 years triumphant."
Since when does mere mocking sarcasm (especially after showing how massively stupid and gullible you are) count as scientific evidence? Moving on time-waster.
"Next time Ken read the primary literature - Schweitzer, Mary H., Mark Marshall, Keith Carron, D. Scott Bohle, Scott C. Busse, Ernst V. Arnold, Darlene Barnard, J. R. Horner, and Jean R. Starkey, 1997a. Heme compounds in dinosaur trabecular bone. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 94: 6291-6296 - before putting pen to paper. All the data supported the conclusion that the T. rex fossil in question contained fragments of hemoglobin molecules. 'The most likely source of these proteins is the once-living cells of the dinosaur.' No red blood cells, only protein fragments."
1. You are still missing the point: THE FACT THAT THEY CONTAIN PROTEIN FRAGMENTS IS STILL AMAZING BEING THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD.
2. THE CELLS WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE BEEN RECENTLY LIVING FOR THEIR TO BE PROTEIN FRAGMENTS STILL THERE. GET A CLUE, GET A CLUE, GET A CLUE. You are living in fantasy land pretending that it is more likely that those proteins are millions of years old rather than from recently living cells. What world are you living in where it is more likely that millions of years old proteins survived millions of years rather than thousands? Do you also believe in the tooth fairy? Moving on:
3. Eat your words again, from DISCOVER MAGAZINE (the information you TOOK OUT OF CONTEXT):
"When Schweitzer showed Horner the slide, she recalls, 'Jack said, "Prove to me they're not red blood cells." That was what I got my Ph.D. doing. She first ruled out contaminants and mineral structures. Then she analyzed the putative cells using a half-dozen techniques involving chemical analysis and immunology. In one test, a colleague injected rats with the dinosaur fossil extract; the rodents produced antibodies that responded to turkey and rabbit hemoglobins. All the data supported the conclusion that the T. rex fossil contained fragments of hemoglobin molecules.
"The most likely source of these proteins is the once-living cells of the dinosaur," she wrote in a 1997 paper."
That article, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, SPARKED A SMALL FLURRY OF HEADLINES (EMPHASIS MINE.)."
Genius can you figure out why it would spark a small flurry of headlines? MOVING ON WITH THE ARTICLE GENIUS:
"...Horner and others regarded Schweitzer's research as carefully performed and credible. Nonetheless, says Horner, 'most people were very skeptical. Frequently in our field people come up with new ideas, and opponents say, "I just don't believe it." She was having a hard time publishing in journals.'"
Genius, can you figure out why HER OPPONENTS LIKE YOU, WITH YOUR STUPID ARROGANT STUBBORN MIND AND HEART WOULD SAY "I JUST DON'T BELIEVE IT AND WHY THUGS LIKE YOU WOULD GIVE HER A HARD TIME PUBLISHING WHAT YOU ACKNOWLEDGE ARE FACTS? Genius, so what is the big deal that your skeptical friends give her such a hard time with her, as you imply "ordinary findings"? Hypocrite? Can you answer with a logical non-time-wasting answer? Moving on with the article hypocrite:
"Schweitzer was also stymied by her unconventional fusion of paleontology and molecular biology. 'Those are two disciplines we don't usually see in the same sentence,' says Lawrence Witmer, an Ohio University anatomy professor. Techniques that were routine in one discipline seemed odd when applied to the other. "If she was working with modern animals, there wouldn't be anything special about what she was doing," says Horner. But molecular paleontology was unheard-of. "It is a wide-open field that she invented," Horner says.
Soldiering on with minimal funding, Schweitzer continued to hunt for the retention of living tissue longer than scientific theory might predict. When a group of fossil hunters found a cluster of preserved bird eggs in a city dump in Neuquén, Argentina, they originally believed the shells contained nothing but sand. Schweitzer placed the remains under scanning electron and atomic force microscopes and concluded that the 70-million-year-old eggs still held embryos containing intact collagen."
Amazing isn't it genius? THAT "70-million-year-old eggs" would still contain intact collagen, LOL? Yeah, that's really realistic compared to 6000 years. Look everyone 70 million year old collagen and no evidence for it but sarcasm and fancy suits and degrees from like-minded skeptics! Moving on with the article:
"... Her lab was still stacked with unpacked cartons when she opened the cardboard box from the T. rex dig and pulled out the biggest fragment. Looking at it with the eyes of a biologist, she immediately saw it was more than a fossil. Time and history began to unwind. 'Oh, my gosh,' she said to her laboratory assistant, Jennifer Wittmeyer. 'It's a girl. And it's pregnant.'
What Schweitzer saw was medullary bone, a type of tissue that grows inside the long bones of female birds. Medullary bone is produced during ovulation as a way of storing the calcium needed for egg production; then it disappears. 'I looked at it under the dissecting scope,' Schweitzer says. 'There was nothing else it could be.' The medullary bone even contained gaps and mazelike fiber patterns resembling those of modern birds.
Until that moment, no one had ever identified that tissue in a dinosaur, making it impossible to definitively sex such an animal. 'Everything we've ever tried to do has been an utter guess,' Schweitzer says. For instance, researchers had tried to distinguish a male from a female based on the shape of a creature's body or the size of its head crest. Now they had a way to link gender with morphology and, drawing on parallels with living animals, even with behavior.
The second surprise hit in January 2004. While Schweitzer was attending a departmental taco party, Wittmeyer raced breathlessly into the room. 'You aren't going to believe what happened,' the lab assistant sputtered.
Wittmeyer had been pulling the late shift, analyzing pieces from the T. rex limb. She had just soaked a fragment of medullary bone in dilute acid to remove some calcium phosphate. This was an unusual procedure to carry out in a dinosaur lab. Scientists typically assume that a fossilized dinosaur consists of rock that would entirely dissolve in acid, but Schweitzer wanted to get a closer look at the fossil's fine structure and compare it with that of modern birds. That night Wittmeyer marveled at a small section of decalcified thighbone: 'When you wiggled it, it kind of floated in the breeze.'
Schweitzer and Wittmeyer pondered the meaning of the stretchy sample, feeling mystified and ecstatic. The remains seemed like soft tissue—specifically matrix, the organic part of bone, which consists primarily of collagen. Yet this seemed impossible, according to the prevailing understanding. 'Everyone knows how soft tissues degrade,' Schweitzer says. 'If you take a blood sample and you stick it on a shelf, you have nothing recognizable in about a week. So why would there be anything left in dinosaurs?'"
Yes genius, so why would there be anything left in dinosaurs? Tell us with your mocking arrogant ignoramus' attitude genius. Say it once again translation scholar who failed his own "be careful" test. Moving on with the article:
"Next Schweitzer examined a piece of the dinosaur's cortical bone. 'We stuck the bone in the same kind of solution,' she says. 'The bone mineral dissolved away, and it left these transparent blood vessels. I took one look, and I just said: 'Uh-uh. This isn't happening. This is just not happening.' She started applying the same treatment to bone fragments from another dinosaur that she had acquired for her dissertation. 'Sure enough,' she says, 'vessels all over the place.'"
BLOOD VESSELS ALL OVER THE PLACE? Genius Carl, explain how that's likely after millions and millions of years? Wow, so no cells, but entire blood vessels. Even better! Moving on with the article genius who loves to argue:
"Less than a month later, while Schweitzer was still collecting data on the soft tissue, came a third score. Wittmeyer walked into the lab looking anxious. 'I think maybe some of our stuff's gotten contaminated, because I see these things floating around, and they look like bugs,' she said. Worried that she would lose her dinosaur blood vessels before she could publish an article about them, Schweitzer rushed to rescue the sample. What she found startled her. Through the microscope she could see what looked like perfectly formed osteocytes, the cells inside bone."
OOOPS??????? HOW DID YOU MISS THAT PART GENIUS? You careless lying hypocrite. You deceived over 280 people according to your review stats. How's that feel being proved a gross, careless, hypocritical liar who was so sure of himself while slandering those who did not do him any wrong but informed him of the truth in order to save his life from an eternity of pain in Hell that he deserved? Or were you lying on purpose? Moving on virtual murderer:
"The past was roaring to life."
Wow Carl, so her no-big deal findings are "The past ... ROARING TO LIFE." Back to your hypocrisy:
"Here is the abstract on the PNAS paper authored by Schweitzer et al:
'Six independent lines of evidence point to the existence of heme-containing compounds and/or hemoglobin breakdown products in extracts of trabecular tissues of the large theropod dinosaur Tyrannosaurus rex. These include signatures from nuclear magnetic resonance and electron spin resonance that indicate the presence of a paramagnetic compound consistent with heme. In addition, UV/visible spectroscopy and high performance liquid chromatography data are consistent with the Soret absorbance characteristic of this molecule. Resonance Raman profiles are also consistent with a modified heme structure. Finally when dinosaurian tissues were extracted for protein fragments and were used to immunize rats, the resulting antisera reacted positively with purified avian and mammalian hemoglobins. The most parsimonious explanation of this evidence is the presence of blood-derived hemoglobin compounds preserved in the dinosaurian tissues."
Wow, and you quoted that because? That really proved something! So immunizing rats with millions of years old biological material is evidence that dinosaurs didn't live alongside man HOW? You remind me of a confused, bitter, hypocritical, babbling, non-sensical "troll" from yahoo! answers (it's a breeding ground for such) who claimed that the universe wasn't designed by God because, because, lol, THE UNIVERSE HAS A MATHEMATIC STRUCTURE. OF COURSE! DON'T YOU KNOW THAT HIGHLY ORDERED UNIVERSES ARE NOT EVIDENCE THAT THEY WERE ORDERED BY ANYTHING WITH INTELLIGENCE? Yes, that's right everyone, order is not a sign of intelligence, just the opposite according to this bitter "biologist" novangelis. Moving on:
"The lead author of the PNAS paper, Mary Schweitzer, happens to be an evangelical Christian who notes that "If God is who He says He is, He doesn't need us to twist and contort scientific data."
And don't you know that saying that means that Ken Ham is automatically a liar? So far liar your scientific method, your scientific reasoning is turning out to be mere spin. That's childish don't you know? To repeat and say, "bad!" as if you merely saying "bad!" makes whatever it is you are talking about bad. That's non-Christian's kid-reasoning. Immature. Moving on.
"The thing that's most important to God is our faith. Therefore he's not going to allow Himself to be proven by scientific methodologies."
Because she said so. What she said is not in the Bible and not implied in the Bible. It's also common sense ignorance-lover that you can find evidence God exists through the scientific method being that it's a simple thought to think, "If the universe has no design then I should be able to observe with my eyes that it has none" and to then LOOK AT LEAST ONCE LET ALONE REPEATEDLY TO USE THOSE INSTRUMENTS YOUR EYES TO SEE IF THERE IS A DESIGN. You don't even need eyes to determine if you are designed. You can think: "If I am not designed I should not be able to think." and then see with your mind if you can think. It's not hard to determine if you are thinking is it?
And why are you being a hypocrite and quoting a Christian when you are attacking Christ, when you are attacking his people? You can't have it both ways hypocrite. Either Christ lied about Noah and the Flood being real events, or he was telling the truth. Which is it hypocrite? On with your rant:
"Creationists routinely accuse Schweitzer of collaboration, conspiracy, or worse: 'It rips my guts out,' she says. 'These people are claiming to represent the Christ that I love. They're not doing a very good job. It's no wonder that a lot of my colleagues are atheists.' She told one zealot, 'You know, if the only picture of Christ I had was your attitude towards me, I'd run.'"
Don't you know all Christians who claim to be Christians really do have God on their side? Is that what you are saying? Hypocrite? To believe anyone? You are an arbitrary biased hypocrite who touts whatever agrees with your opinion. You are a parrot repeating what other parrots repeat. Haven't you ever heard the expression, "Think for yourself."? More ranting from you:
"Molecular paleontology - an exciting new branch of science - has been opened up by Schweitzer's insights and research; proof that workers of any religious tradition, or none at all, can be good scientists"
Wow, did you read that everyone? You are contradicting yourself again genius: "any religious tradition" NOT "any religious tradition EXCEPT THAT OF CREATIONISTS". So are you admitting that there are hateful, biased, illogical hypocrites practicing scientists who were discriminating against Christians? Finally after thousands of years lol, NOW THERE'S PROOF? So you are admitting that for thousands of years those on your side have been hateful hypocrites yet you think you have anything to teach the ones you've been persecuting after all that time? Wow, thanks for that admission. More ranting from you:
"since science is based on methodological naturalism"
Oh, so the hypocrites are the sole definers and controllers of what philosophy science must be bonded to? Science can't just be a field of knowledge and the testing and measurement of things to find out what they do and are? It has to be "naturalistic" aye? I suppose that belief is scientific in itself too, right? Any evidence for that? Nope. It's all: Because you said so. More of your ranting:
"- not the medieval demon-haunted supernatural religious conceits Ham learned on his daddy's lap."
Demons haunting wasn't an invention of medieval times historical ignoramuses. IT'S A TEACHING FROM THE FIRST KNOWN CIVILIZATIONS AND THAT INCLUDES THE ADVANCED CIVILIZATION OF SUMERIA WHICH YOU HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH COMING INTO IT'S ADVANCED STATE OF CIVILIZATION.
Furthermore hypocrites, last time I checked medieval demon-haunted religious Europe conquered the world. Those deluded religious people are advancing the world while atheists fault-find, "Oh look at those evil Christians giving their Bibles to the poor and starving" or "All these starving kids, therefore, 'opens a beer'. More of your rant:
"Chapter 13 (Hodge) explains away the inconvenient fact that human and dinosaur fossils are never found together in the same geologic context."
See above hypocrite. Have fun with all those inconvenient facts you, in your ignorance (or pretension) claimed don't exist. More ranting:
"After a futile attempt to determine the pre-deluge human population (from a few hundred thousand to 17 billion people!),"
Why are you shouting, "!"? If the Bible doesn't say then it doesn't say. Would you have God put every fact in the Bible for your personal convenience and so that it can't be lifted up or covers the entire planet thirty times over? Why are you proclaiming "fault!" because a Christian admits to not knowing something? You hypocrite, I thought Christians were arrogant for never admitting that they don't have an answer for everything or exact answer? See, that's the game of the deluded hypocrite: Damn Christians if they do and damn them if they don't. Massive hypocrite where are the billions of transitional dinosaur fossils that should be around? Did you forget that inconvenient problem you hypocrite? Hypocrite can you answer all of the problems, those dozens upon dozens of problems listed all over the internet that can easily be found? Are you going to start mocking and throwing firts because you can't answer them. Go on, start shouting and running around screaming while laughing. Moving on:
"Hodge regurgitates"
Hypocritical sarcastic parrot-immitator says what? Parrot-immitator are you using slanderous wording to achieve "proof"? Moving on you pretensious hypocrite:
"the tired trinity of hydrodynamic sorting, ecological zonation and differential escape - all of which utterly fail to explain the fossil record."
Because the gullible hypocrite that ate his words over and over along with the thousands of biased years on his side said so. More from the false teacher:
"Any 'new answers' Hodge provides should at least address the following old questions: Why didn't any dinosaurs make it to high ground along with modern mammals (many species were quick and agile enough to do so)?"
Why should they at least address the following old questions which have had the following old answers:
THE WHOLE PLANET WAS FLOODED GENIUS SO WHAT THE HELL WOULD IT MATTER IF DINOSAURS ESCAPE TO "HIGH GROUND". I THOUGHT YOU READ THE WHOLE BIBLE? WHAT'S WRONG? DID YOU GET LAZY, CARELESS, FELT LIKE-ASSUMING AND IMMITATING A SILLY PARROT? It's only the world's best-selling most written about book and has been for years. Why don't you show some respect? And besides my answer it has already been answered by other creationists:
"If the Flood were local, people who did not happen to be living in the vicinity would not have been affected by it. They would have escaped God’s judgment on sin. It boggles the mind to believe that, after all those centuries since creation, no one had migrated to other parts—or that people living on the periphery of such a local flood would not have moved to the adjoining high ground rather than be drowned. Jesus believed that the Flood killed everyone not on the Ark (Matt. 24:37–39)." - http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/global10.asp
Incredibly your rant continues:
"Why don't flowering plants appear in Precambrian strata when stromatilites appear in Cretaceous deposits with flowering plants?"
See the above links hypocrite. Also hypocrite, did you know the Bible has been shown to be historically accurate by both hypocrite atheists and Christians? Hypocrite, could it be if that the Bible is repeatedly shown to be historically (and that includes prophetically) accurate, THAT IT IS THEN TRUSTWORTHY? My specific point is, just because you can't figure out a few things wouldn't mean that God or anyone who shows themselves trustworthy can't be trusted. Big duh there. Or would you like to argue that if you can't answer all my questions and do all the leg and mind-work for me, after repeatedly telling me the truth, that you don't qualify as trustworthy? How arrogant and stupid. Ranting:
"Why are some groups of organisms, such as mollusks, found in many geologic strata? "How were organisms (such as brachiopods), which are very similar hydrodynamically (nearly the same size, shape, and weight), still perfectly sorted?"
You're right, that totally shows the Bible to be wrong that mollusks are not found in one strata and labeled primitive and obsolete but continue to exist as "living fossils" along side man. Would you like to crack open a 100% alcholoic bottle of beer and be even more contradictory? But let's play your lazy game: Take a box, put some lumps of clay with crevices all over it, put in some plastic dinos and sand. Fill and shake it. Notice the sand is both on top of the clay and wherever and on the bottom? Should they only sink to the bottom or pile up top in the crevices? If so, why?
More ranting:
"Why don't pterosaurs (flying reptiles) appear alongside bats and modern birds?"
See above links hypocrite. Also hypocrite why do you assume the entire Earth has been completely examined? Don't you know new animals of all kinds are still being discovered? Furthermore do you know what hunting is? Do you know what disease is? Ugh, more ranting:
"How were coral reefs hundreds of feet thick and miles long preserved intact with other fossils below them?"
BY MILLIONS OF YEARS OF TEMPERATURE CHANGES, EXPOSURE TO ELEMENTS RUBBING AGAINST THEM, AND EARTHQUAKES. YES, THAT IS SO MUCH MORE LIKELY THEN THOUSANDS OF YEARS. Are you ok? You are a very confused contradictory person. More ranting:
"How were fossil artifacts of living animals such as footprints and burrows also sorted?"
The hell are you talking about? Anyways see above links hypocrite. Wow, more laziness:
"Why are no human contrivances found except in the very uppermost strata?"
Supercrite, see above links (or instead of being lazy search the net, read books, watch videos, not just the ones that please your itching ears, that match your personal opinions based on your emotions and hastily gathered "facts"). Super wow, he is still talking:
"Any civilization capable of shipbuilding should have left behind tools or buildings intermingled with trilobite or dinosaur fossils! But then the entire ghastly Noachian global genocide is, thankfully, a myth."
SEE, ABOVE, LINKS. Oh, my, wow, still ranting:
"How about the age of the earth..."
How about it fake historian? More!:
"Chapter 9 (Riddle) attempts to cast doubt on the incontrovertible scientific consensus that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old."
No arrogant hypocrite who thinks he speaks for all Christians and everyone in the universe, he didn't just cast doubt he helped millions of Christians add to the evidence that people like you are lazy-minded liars. Yet more laziness:
"The most direct means of calculating the Earth's age is a Pb/Pb isochron age, derived from samples of the Earth and meteorites. This technique measures three isotopes of lead (Pb-206, Pb-207, and either Pb-208 or PB-204). A plot is then constructed of the resulting PB-206/PB-204 versus Pb-207/Pb-204 ratios. If the solar system formed from a common pool of matter, which was uniformly distributed in terms of Pb isotope ratios, then the initial plots for all objects from that pool of matter would fall on a single point. Over time, the amounts of Pb-206 and Pb-207 will change in samples after they form since these isotopes are decay end-products of uranium (U-238 decays to Pb-206 and U-235 decays to Pb-207). This causes the data points to separate from each other. The higher the uranium-to-lead ratio of a terrestrial rock or meteorite, the more the Pb-206/Pb-204 and Pb-207/Pb-204 values will change with time. If the source of the solar system was also uniformly distributed with respect to uranium isotope ratios, then the data points will always fall on a single line. From the slope of the line we can compute the amount of time (age) which has passed since the pool of matter became separated into discrete objects."
See Conflicting Ages of Tertiary Basalt and Contained Fossilized Wood. Woah, you're still ranting:
"A 'Young Earth Creationist' (YEC), such as Riddle, would object to the assumptions noted above. However the test for these assumptions is a plot of the data itself. The actual underlying assumption is that, if these requirements have not been met, then there is no reason for the data points to fall on a line. Every time a credible researcher or lab runs these tests on valid samples and plots the results, the data points fall on a line. Not only is the age of the Earth determined, but the underlying assumption is validated - something creationists, including Riddle, never tell the reader. Scientific case closed. The Earth is old, immensely old, deep time old, 4.54 billion years old. Deal with it."
See above pdf and links hypocrite. Are you able to you pass your own hypocritical standards and answer every point we bring up with a refutation? Amazing, you're still ranting (which is notable because when I posted long "reviews" like yours amazon moderator and yahoo answers hypocrites would delete them repeatedly and right away):
"The remaining chapters are equally shallow and inane but this review is already pushing size limits. Note to AiG: include some reality-based (honest) answers in the next edition - and leave deconstructionism up to Derrida."
understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. AVOID SUCH PEOPLE. For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions, always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth. Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith. But they will not get very far, for THEIR FOLLY WILL BE PLAIN, as was that of those two men. You, however, have followed my teaching, my conduct, my aim in life, my faith, my patience, my love, my steadfastness, my persecutions and sufferings that happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium, and at Lystra--which persecutions I endured; yet from them all the Lord rescued me. Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. - 2 Timothy 3:1-13, ESVB
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. And you say, 'If we had lived in the days of our forefathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.' So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of the sin of your forefathers! You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. I tell you the truth, all this will come upon this generation." - Matthew 23:29-36, NIV
"As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37-39
"A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions." - Proverbs 18:2
"A man's own folly ruins his life, yet his heart rages against Yahweh." - Proverbs 19:3
"Stop judging by mere appearances and make a right judgment" - Jesus.
Arminiest Kent R. Rieske Calls All Arminiest UFO Sighters Deluded by Satan and More
On Dec 26, 2007 7:33 AM, in his careless opinion bashing, the Arminius worshiper Kent R. Rieske at RieskeKR@aol.com accidentally bashed all Arminius worshipers who have seen UFO's. They necessarily outnumber those who worship God alone being that Arminus worshipers far outnumber those who believe in permanent salvation by Christ's grace alone, Arminians are the majority of those who see UFO's along with Buddhists, Atheists, and Muslims. The comic-looking font is the actual font and style he used along with an altered mocking subject heading (he's real mature and serious guy eh?):
Re: Calvinist Who Believes In UFOs Goes Ballistic.
"Hi KY,
I am not surprise that you believe in UFOs, since you are also a Calvinist. Boy... [text deleted due to the fact this Arminiest is an obviously contentious, and deceived moron].
Bible Life Ministries - Salvation Prayer Hahahahaha
Kent"
Obviously that was all I needed to read of his letter to not bother to read the rest. So, there you have it, an oh so loving Arminiest not just refusing to repent of his blatant opinion-bashing bigotry, misquoting me by calling me a Calvinist, and bashing all government officials, all police officers, pilots, everyone, including all Christians from Arminiest to Calvinistic as being gullible and deceived, and deluded by Satan while gloating, mocking, and stereotyping on top of it. Great ministry eh? Yet another reason not to worship the deceiver Arminius or to trust his worshipers.
He couldn't even be bothered to correct "surprise" to surprised". Real careful guy. That's the reply of a contentious, self-willed, money-loving, social-climber who is obsessed with airing his own opinions and could care less about the Bible. I checked my file storage site to see if he had downloaded my books which refute Arminian theology using almost 100% verses from the Bible but saw he did not bother to download them. The same is true of a previous Arminiest I had recently talked to who also did not bother to download them. That clearly shows what kind of people Arminiest-worshippers are.
And wasn't that just such a beautiful loving Christian reply? "Hahahaha"? Gloating with derision is Christ-like? Calling me a Calvinist implying that I worship Calvin when I said I was Calvinistic = careful and loving? Slandering all Calvinists = loving?
Here was the original message I sent this ballistic babbler:
In a message dated 12/25/2007 10:49:28 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, kyle ain writes:
"The reasons people believe in UFOs and aliens go back to the school education system. Kids are taught that life can evolve given enough time." [That's quoting Kent, who by illogically tying in UFO's and evolution has essentially said that if your child is taught any lie that their judgment from then on is irrepairably damaged. And that being the case Kent's ministry is worthless being that no kid (unless you count the unborn and new borns) has been free from lies.]
That's an idiotic lie. I am a calvinistic Christian, I am saved and how can you not know better than to say something so stupid? How can you be so massively ignorant as to citing a government study(as if all the government is honest or knows what the other hand is doing lol? talk about naive!) and to ignore MILLIONS of sightings and thousands of videos and testimony from people of every walk of life? How can you ignore ancient art showing obvious ufos and aliens?
I saw two ufo's with my own eyes they were not meteors or airplanes or blimps flares or swamp gas. You have to nearly be nearly a master moron to have said what you did or very lazy or were being very impatient at that time.
I suppose angels are just swamp gas right and God's glory was a meteor shower? Get real man and stop rationalizing in stupid ways.
Check out the videos in my profile http://youtube.com/kyleain [corrected ur]
and http://snipurl.com/eternia
merry christmas
So there you have it. Kent showing his worthlessness by not repenting and continuing to be a deliberately ignorant contentious mocker, hating correct and blocking me. Yes, the mocker blocked me so I couldn't reply lol. Big suprise; he's a hit and run coward.
Re: Calvinist Who Believes In UFOs Goes Ballistic.
"Hi KY,
I am not surprise that you believe in UFOs, since you are also a Calvinist. Boy... [text deleted due to the fact this Arminiest is an obviously contentious, and deceived moron].
Bible Life Ministries - Salvation Prayer Hahahahaha
Kent"
Obviously that was all I needed to read of his letter to not bother to read the rest. So, there you have it, an oh so loving Arminiest not just refusing to repent of his blatant opinion-bashing bigotry, misquoting me by calling me a Calvinist, and bashing all government officials, all police officers, pilots, everyone, including all Christians from Arminiest to Calvinistic as being gullible and deceived, and deluded by Satan while gloating, mocking, and stereotyping on top of it. Great ministry eh? Yet another reason not to worship the deceiver Arminius or to trust his worshipers.
He couldn't even be bothered to correct "surprise" to surprised". Real careful guy. That's the reply of a contentious, self-willed, money-loving, social-climber who is obsessed with airing his own opinions and could care less about the Bible. I checked my file storage site to see if he had downloaded my books which refute Arminian theology using almost 100% verses from the Bible but saw he did not bother to download them. The same is true of a previous Arminiest I had recently talked to who also did not bother to download them. That clearly shows what kind of people Arminiest-worshippers are.
And wasn't that just such a beautiful loving Christian reply? "Hahahaha"? Gloating with derision is Christ-like? Calling me a Calvinist implying that I worship Calvin when I said I was Calvinistic = careful and loving? Slandering all Calvinists = loving?
Here was the original message I sent this ballistic babbler:
In a message dated 12/25/2007 10:49:28 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, kyle ain writes:
"The reasons people believe in UFOs and aliens go back to the school education system. Kids are taught that life can evolve given enough time." [That's quoting Kent, who by illogically tying in UFO's and evolution has essentially said that if your child is taught any lie that their judgment from then on is irrepairably damaged. And that being the case Kent's ministry is worthless being that no kid (unless you count the unborn and new borns) has been free from lies.]
That's an idiotic lie. I am a calvinistic Christian, I am saved and how can you not know better than to say something so stupid? How can you be so massively ignorant as to citing a government study(as if all the government is honest or knows what the other hand is doing lol? talk about naive!) and to ignore MILLIONS of sightings and thousands of videos and testimony from people of every walk of life? How can you ignore ancient art showing obvious ufos and aliens?
I saw two ufo's with my own eyes they were not meteors or airplanes or blimps flares or swamp gas. You have to nearly be nearly a master moron to have said what you did or very lazy or were being very impatient at that time.
I suppose angels are just swamp gas right and God's glory was a meteor shower? Get real man and stop rationalizing in stupid ways.
Check out the videos in my profile http://youtube.com/kyleain [corrected ur]
and http://snipurl.com/eternia
merry christmas
So there you have it. Kent showing his worthlessness by not repenting and continuing to be a deliberately ignorant contentious mocker, hating correct and blocking me. Yes, the mocker blocked me so I couldn't reply lol. Big suprise; he's a hit and run coward.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
