h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

<>

I didn't say that, as I said, my one and only reason for thinking that you are like Sam is that you have been discussing this with us and not once have you disagreed with Sam or mentioned that any of the things he is saying is just plain wrong, morally. If you don't think the same things that he does, then you should say so, or you can't really blame anyone for assuming you agree.

<>

OK, once again, and I'll type slower this time. Yes, I don't know, no and yes. As I said, she thinks I'm going to Hell. That doesn't bother me because I don't believe it exists. I assume being Baptist she thinks you have to be 'born again' but I'm not sure. She has witch friends; she may think it's a sin, but she doesn't think they should be killed as Sam seems to. And as I've said, she is a YEC.

<>

The fact that she believes in what I've already said she believes in doesn't change the fact that she wouldn't write the things that Sam has written. There is a difference between her and Sam because Sam has shown himself to be a mean bigoted prat while my friend isn't one, and you're going to have to take my word for that. I am not grouping evangelicals together, that's my point - you can be evangelical without being prejudiced.

And I'm sorry if you feel that everyone is assuming that you and Sam are alike - the fact is, Sam has written some mean things and you haven't said one word against him. We can't read your mind, if you disagree, say so.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The big problem with fossils is that fossils are just interestingly shaped bits of rock.

That web page is faily interesting, however they appear to have ignored Australopithecus Gracile, which along with Australopithecus Robustus, is one of the two very distinct forms of Australopithecine found to date after the dissapearance of the lush woodland of the savanah. Australopithecus Gracile fossils have been found with crude tools, which would be usable for breaking open the bones of dead animals to get at the bonemarrow and brains contained within. These would be a good source of protien and fat, necessary for humans to develop a big brain.

Further to this due to humanities large brain we have to be born before our skulls are fully formed as the human birth canal is not designed for a creature with a brain as large as ours. This is why a newborn's skull is often slightly deformed by the birth process, unless delivered by C section. This is also why labour is so very painful and why an disproportionately lage number of women have died in child birth

Oh I'll agrre that child birth is very painfull


I think we got a bum deal to be honest over this whole apple buisness

Hi Good News

"Creationists, on the other hand, interpret the evidence based on the idea that the Bible is the Word of God."

And that is where there entire house of cards falls down.

If the Bible is the Word of God it must be inerrant, yet there are hundreds of examples of errancy, and internal contradictions.

I know you are going to ask for a for instance or two so chew on these my friend:

1. What does the Bible say the value of Pi is?
2. Why does the Bible state categorically that a Bat is a Bird?
3. Reconcile the contradictory accounts of the life of Jesus of the Four Gospels.
4. Why are there two, contradictory accounts of the creation?
5. Adam and Eve were the first humans, and were followed by their sons, Cain and Abel. Who did the sons marry? Where did all these other people come from?

The first two are just plain wrong. They are mistakes that only human authors could have made, not an omniescent deity. The latter three show that the Bible was edited by humans, cobbled together from hundreds of stories and accounts, not by the divine inspiration of an omniescent deity.

I could go on and on and on. But there is no need for if you instead regard much of the Bible as allegorical rather than literal then many of your problems disappear and allow Christianity and Science to walk hand in hand (mostly).

Ignorance is no excuse GN, no excuse at all.

Blessings,
Matholwch /|\

<>

I've *always* wondered that.

And Seth! Poor lad always gets forgotten. He had to have a wife as well!

Sorry Seth.

Abel didn't really need a wife after his brother bumped him off! I suppose Seth could have had his!!!!

Seth was alright as Genesis 5 says

3When Adam had lived one hundred thirty years, he became the father of a son in his likeness, according to his image, and named him Seth. 4The days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years; and he had other sons and daughters.

So Seth probably slept with one of his sisters. It was Cain who miraculously plucked an entire civilisation out of thin air

<>

Yes, it's true that when we study the past we only have the present to look at. We study how processes work *now*, and we look at the results of those processes, and we extrapolate backwards. It's on that basis that scientists have come to the conclusion that the earth is very old - it's not just something that they "have simply had drummed into them since childhood."

Creationists, however "start" with the assumption that the Bible is the Word of God, and then try to twist the evidence to fit. They claim, without supporting evidence, that the processes involved are not as scientists say, or that they were different in the past, without thinking things through coherently.

Noggin

'It was Cain who miraculously plucked an entire civilisation out of thin air'

Cain also slept with one of his sisters. It tells us that Adam and Eve had many daughters-it just does not say when.

Oooh.. I wish daughter VC was online.. she knows this story well..

I think it was that we are all supposed to be the children of Rebecca [?] something like that.. she was the "earth woman" God created before Eve.

Are you thinking of Lilith?


Concerning the principal topic of this thread:

'Those who cavalierly reject the Theory of Evolution, as not adequately supported by facts, seem quite to forget that their own theory is supported by no facts at all.'

Herbert Spencer (1820-1903)

I'm terribly sorry, Goodnews, Sam; You have nothing meaningful to communicate since absolutely everything you are arguing is indemonstrable and unsharable. You can not show anyone any tiny bit of evidence for your truth, you can only tell them what you say is true and ask that they accept it (rather rudely in some instances). Meanwhile, science, including evolutionary science, has built up a sturdy framework of understanding of the real world, a framework each member of which can be touched and felt and measured by anyone, believer or not.

You are telling us that you believe in an invisible vaporous ladder with no rungs and that we have to climb that ladder. Seems rather absurd.

Plus, I'm still waiting to hear about wooley Jesus. From either of you.

I'd also like to point out that, from a purely physiological point of view, owr bodies are very badly designed. If they were made from scratch by God then why did he give us a spine designed for something that moves about on all four limbs, or at least spends most of it's time stooping/bent forwards as depicted in pictures of neanderthal? Also why are our hips designed as if our legs should be roughly perpendicular to our torso? Why do we have an apendix? Why do we have teeth which would indicate an omnivour, and yet not the speed, strength or agility need to be an eficient hunter? Along with the previous point, why don't we have the necessary enzimes to properly digest red meat?

and why do we share 99% of our DNA with chimpanzees?


Doesn't matter. These people begin with the single assumption that the Bible is 'True'. Thinking people start with the single assumption that we can learn through investigation.

And dna with baboons an all

*looks at her name tag.. *.. Ooh yeah... should have remembered that!

Me meaning her?? Im male

Me meaning Me.. I was talking to the Lilith reply.. and was commenting on my name... sorry..

okay