Getting to the Bottom of Evolution

reply to post by itsthetooth

Well where you do you think Von daniken gets his ideas from? It's all straight from out of the bible.

Amazing. I've made the same point in the past -- that the work of Von Daniken is not an independent source from the Bible -- and you vehemently disagreed with me, saying that Von Daniken should be treated as an independent source. Why the sudden change of heart?

There are to many people involved in the making of the bible for it to be false.

Which is the exact reason for the inordinate number of self-contradictions contained within the Bible. You keep treating it like it's some kind of monolithic treatise expounding upon the actual events of the time when it's anything but. It's a cobbled together collection of disparate works, that often don't even agree with each other, written over a span of thousands of years, and not collected into a single "work" until hundreds of years after the events it claims to depict.

There are to many proven locations, as well as the tablets from the 10 commandments being found.

You obviously didn't read the five links you posted about the "tablets from the 10 commandments being found" back when you posted the links. I was hoping you'd make more a deal out of it so another example of your lack of reading comprehension could be provided. The five links you provided consist of the following:

-- One website selling a book, The Templars and the Ark of the Covenant, suggesting that the Templars brought the Ark of the Covenant to England, with no evidence that the tablets have been found.
-- One forum post, from "Paranormal Insights", talking about the book.
-- A "Jewish Humor Central" site which clearly states "We hope you enjoy this special Purim spoof from the Purim 2011 issue of The Kustanowitz Kronikle."
-- An article about the "Ten Commandments Scroll" being brought out for exhibition, not about finding the tablets.
-- An article about large stone tablets described as "three tablets each weigh several tons and measure about 5 by 10 feet", so clearly again not "tablets from the 10 commandments".

Do you actually read anything you cite as evidence for your claims, or do you just post a bunch of links and hope that no one reads them?

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by iterationzero

 

I'm sorry but you haven't presented anything that even slightly proves it to be false. Your the one making the claim that its false, now why and how is that.

For God's sake Tooth, reading threads in which people keep explaning the same things over and over to you becomes .... painful.

Screw it, lets play your game Tooth.

The Earth is actually the right thumb of a big dragon called "Draco."
I do not have evidence, but can you disapprove the existence of "Draco."? No, you cannot,
The Earth is Draco's right thumb.

Oh, and Humans. Humans are actually robots and Cranos, Draco's brother, invented invented these Human Robots to hurt to Draco's right thumb. Yes, we are nothing more than bugs living on Draco's right thumb!. I have no evidence, but you don't have evidence against it, thus it is true?

Oh, and your now going to compare and say "How are you comparing this nonsense with the Bible?"
Aren't Dragon's in the Bible?

Look, I just proved that dragon brothers called Draco and Cranos rule over all and even tho i have no evidence, Dragons are mentioned in the Bible and you cannot provide evidence against these Dragon rulers.

Awaiting your evidence against the Dragon Rulers!

reply to post by itsthetooth

It is true that on a rare occasion, a parent actually has something to do with teaching the young what to eat. But if you look into this a little more, you will see that its usually not the case. So the question remains, how do they know what to eat? How is it they also seem to know what not to eat.

Tooth, you are so insanely wrong.

The Mother in all mammal animals is fundamental in the diets of her young.

IT'S SO COMMON THAT, VIA EVOLUTION MAMMALS DEVELOP MILK FOR THEIR YOUNG NATURLY!
HOW CAN A PERSON SAY "THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO EAT SOME FOOD NOT ON THIS EARTH"...., WHEN CLEARLY NATURE HAS IT SO THAT THE MOTHER PRODUCES MILK FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.

reply to post by iterationzero

Amazing. I've made the same point in the past -- that the work of Von Daniken is not an independent source from the Bible -- and you vehemently disagreed with me, saying that Von Daniken should be treated as an independent source. Why the sudden change of heart?

Just because he gets his information from the bible doesn't mean he can't be listed as someone with an alternate view.

Which is the exact reason for the inordinate number of self-contradictions contained within the Bible. You keep treating it like it's some kind of monolithic treatise expounding upon the actual events of the time when it's anything but. It's a cobbled together collection of disparate works, that often don't even agree with each other, written over a span of thousands of years, and not collected into a single "work" until hundreds of years after the events it claims to depict.

And this proves what?

You obviously didn't read the five links you posted about the "tablets from the 10 commandments being found" back when you posted the links. I was hoping you'd make more a deal out of it so another example of your lack of reading comprehension could be provided. The five links you provided consist of the following:

-- One website selling a book, The Templars and the Ark of the Covenant, suggesting that the Templars brought the Ark of the Covenant to England, with no evidence that the tablets have been found.
-- One forum post, from "Paranormal Insights", talking about the book.
-- A "Jewish Humor Central" site which clearly states "We hope you enjoy this special Purim spoof from the Purim 2011 issue of The Kustanowitz Kronikle."
-- An article about the "Ten Commandments Scroll" being brought out for exhibition, not about finding the tablets.
-- An article about large stone tablets described as "three tablets each weigh several tons and measure about 5 by 10 feet", so clearly again not "tablets from the 10 commandments".

Do you actually read anything you cite as evidence for your claims, or do you just post a bunch of links and hope that no one reads them?

I looked at each of them, they all had information about the where abouts of the tablets.

reply to post by iterationzero

Although there was no evidence of any gold objects like the Ark of the Covenant, one thing was found that must have originally come from the ground excavated beside the water fountain. In the banks of the stream, a flat stone slab was discovered which was about an inch thick, a foot and a half long, and a foot wide. Made of sandstone, it was inscribed with what appeared to be thirteen separate symbols, cut into the stone to a depth of about a quarter of an inch. The slab had clearly been broken off from a longer piece as the one end was irregular and jagged. The other end, however, was smoother and had been deliberately rounded at the corners.

Tablet found

TABLETS FOUND IN RANSACKED EGYPT MUSEUM;
MAY BE ORIGINAL TEN COMMANDMENTS

Musium tablets

Ancient 10 commandment tablets found in Mexican desert!

New mexico

One of the stone tablets which were inscribed with the Ten Commandments may have been found in the center of England, according to a new book by British author Graham Phillips. His book The Templars and the Ark of the Covenant is published this month by Bear & Company of Vermont, USA.

England

NEW YORK (RNS) It is an irony of history that the Ten Commandments that Moses brought down from Mount Sinai on two stone tablets are found in their purest form on a strip of ancient parchment so delicate that it is hardly ever seen by the public.

Mount sinai

So as you can see, you are wrong. All of the link in fact suggest the finding of one or more tablets. Do you seriously not read the material before you make these claims?

reply to post by Confusion42

For God's sake Tooth, reading threads in which people keep explaning the same things over and over to you becomes .... painful.

Screw it, lets play your game Tooth.

The Earth is actually the right thumb of a big dragon called "Draco."
I do not have evidence, but can you disapprove the existence of "Draco."? No, you cannot,
The Earth is Draco's right thumb.

You lack insight, into the big picture. There is no way we can be from earth if our intended food isn't even here. There is no way we can be from earth if the bible tells us that earth is not our home.

Oh, and Humans. Humans are actually robots and Cranos, Draco's brother, invented invented these Human Robots to hurt to Draco's right thumb. Yes, we are nothing more than bugs living on Draco's right thumb!. I have no evidence, but you don't have evidence against it, thus it is true?

Well sure I do, why do we not see this right thumb from sattelite? How is it that they earth is round when we are on a large thumb?

Oh, and your now going to compare and say "How are you comparing this nonsense with the Bible?"
Aren't Dragon's in the Bible?

Well if they were, it would at least help your theory, but at least the bible agrees with intervention.

Look, I just proved that dragon brothers called Draco and Cranos rule over all and even tho i have no evidence, Dragons are mentioned in the Bible and you cannot provide evidence against these Dragon rulers

But dragons are not in the bible.

reply to post by Confusion42

Tooth, you are so insanely wrong.

The Mother in all mammal animals is fundamental in the diets of her young.

IT'S SO COMMON THAT, VIA EVOLUTION MAMMALS DEVELOP MILK FOR THEIR YOUNG NATURLY!
HOW CAN A PERSON SAY "THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO EAT SOME FOOD NOT ON THIS EARTH"...., WHEN CLEARLY NATURE HAS IT SO THAT THE MOTHER PRODUCES MILK FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.

All the more reason that it proves we are not from here.

Your basically saying that because mammals depend on learning rather than on instinct, its proof we are all where we belong. The problem is that we are all exposed to this at the same time, so its all we see, and all we know. There is no proof that learning over instinct is natural.

reply to post by itsthetooth

I looked at each of them, they all had information about the where abouts of the tablets.

So the tablets were found in Egypt, England, and the Southwestern US. Yes, all of those are absolutely reliable sources. You just don't seem to understand that claiming to have information about the location of the original tablets inscribed with the ten commandments isn't the same as actually having information about the location.

Either that or you still haven't actually read them, except to do a quick search for the word "tablet" and hope that no one else would read them. And one of the sites you keep linking to is a humor site and makes a point of stating that the article is a spoof. You're actually pushing into the territory of having negative credibility -- that someone is more likely to believe the exact opposite of what you claim, just because it's you that claimed it.

reply to post by iterationzero

So the tablets were found in Egypt, England, and the Southwestern US. Yes, all of those are absolutely reliable sources. You just don't seem to understand that claiming to have information about the location of the original tablets inscribed with the ten commandments isn't the same as actually having information about the location.

I never said that it does. I see now you have changed your story from the links supposedly not providing any infomation about found tablets, to them not being realiable. If you used the same biased scrutiny when looking at evolution, you would see its a crock.

Either that or you still haven't actually read them, except to do a quick search for the word "tablet" and hope that no one else would read them. And one of the sites you keep linking to is a humor site and makes a point of stating that the article is a spoof. You're actually pushing into the territory of having negative credibility -- that someone is more likely to believe the exact opposite of what you claim, just because it's you that claimed it.

ALL of the link state the obvious fact that tablets have been found. I think what appears to be more of a question is if they are in fact the tablets of the ten commandments. There doesn't seem to be any question as to the validity of finding the tablets, or the location.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Confusion42

 

For God's sake Tooth, reading threads in which people keep explaning the same things over and over to you becomes .... painful.

Screw it, lets play your game Tooth.

The Earth is actually the right thumb of a big dragon called "Draco."
I do not have evidence, but can you disapprove the existence of "Draco."? No, you cannot,
The Earth is Draco's right thumb.

You lack insight, into the big picture. There is no way we can be from earth if our intended food isn't even here. There is no way we can be from earth if the bible tells us that earth is not our home.

Oh, and Humans. Humans are actually robots and Cranos, Draco's brother, invented invented these Human Robots to hurt to Draco's right thumb. Yes, we are nothing more than bugs living on Draco's right thumb!. I have no evidence, but you don't have evidence against it, thus it is true?

Well sure I do, why do we not see this right thumb from sattelite? How is it that they earth is round when we are on a large thumb?

Oh, and your now going to compare and say "How are you comparing this nonsense with the Bible?"
Aren't Dragon's in the Bible?

Well if they were, it would at least help your theory, but at least the bible agrees with intervention.

Look, I just proved that dragon brothers called Draco and Cranos rule over all and even tho i have no evidence, Dragons are mentioned in the Bible and you cannot provide evidence against these Dragon rulers

But dragons are not in the bible.

MY RESPONSES BELOW TO EACH OF YOUR QUOTES.

You lack insight, into the big picture. There is no way we can be from earth if our intended food isn't even here. There is no way we can be from earth if the bible tells us that earth is not our home.

The Bible Mentions Dragons!

You have not provided evidence against Dragon Rulers Draco and Cronos and thus it is true.

Well sure I do, why do we not see this right thumb from sattelite? How is it that they earth is round when we are on a large thumb?

Draco made the Earth so that from our point of view, we don't see any thumbs at all.

the Earth is not 100% round, looking at my thumb indeed it can be an Earth; This is Dragon rulers here their thumbs are the shape of Earth.

And more importantly, you have not produced evidence against Dragon Rulers thus it is true.

Well if they were, it would at least help your theory, but at least the bible agrees with intervention.

Dragons are mentioned in the Bible. People confuse Dragon's with Dinoasuars.

Again, you have not produced evidence against Dragon Rulers, thus it is true.

But dragons are not in the bible.

Creatures breathing fire are the Biblical Records of Dragon's. You have not produced evidence against Dragon Rulers, thus it is true.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Confusion42

 

Tooth, you are so insanely wrong.

The Mother in all mammal animals is fundamental in the diets of her young.

IT'S SO COMMON THAT, VIA EVOLUTION MAMMALS DEVELOP MILK FOR THEIR YOUNG NATURLY!
HOW CAN A PERSON SAY "THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO EAT SOME FOOD NOT ON THIS EARTH"...., WHEN CLEARLY NATURE HAS IT SO THAT THE MOTHER PRODUCES MILK FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.

All the more reason that it proves we are not from here.

Your basically saying that because mammals depend on learning rather than on instinct, its proof we are all where we belong. The problem is that we are all exposed to this at the same time, so its all we see, and all we know. There is no proof that learning over instinct is natural.

One of your debating problem's is trying to re-phrase people's words. Here is a perfect example of not only re-phrasing, not only mis-quoting, but also lack of understanding.


My point is that mammal females produce milk specifically after they give Birth. How can somebody say the Babies intended food is NOT their mothers milk!?!?!?

reply to post by Confusion42

The Bible Mentions Dragons!

You have not provided evidence against Dragon Rulers Draco and Cronos and thus it is true.

first off I haven't read those sections to figure out what the dragons is all about. What I can tell you is that there is no proof they are the very dragons that explain in todays time. Things of this nature need to be looked at closely to make sure we are understanding them correctly.

The word "dinosaur" was not invented until 1841. It could not be used by early translators of the Bible. For example, the King James Version translation was completed in 1611, over 200 years before the word "dinosaur" was created.

Dinosaurs

So if your getting this mental image of a dragon that we claim to know of in todays terms, its most likely off.

Draco made the Earth so that from our point of view, we don't see any thumbs at all.

the Earth is not 100% round, looking at my thumb indeed it can be an Earth; This is Dragon rulers here their thumbs are the shape of Earth.

And more importantly, you have not produced evidence against Dragon Rulers thus it is true.

And if you had anything to support your claims, like Target food, and intervention does, it would be something to look at.

When the Bible talks about dragons, it is talking about what we now call dinosaurs

I'm going to go with that, it looks correct.

Dragons are mentioned in the Bible. People confuse Dragon's with Dinoasuars.

Again, you have not produced evidence against Dragon Rulers, thus it is true.

Where is your proof of confusion, it sounds like your the only one confused. I'm finding a link thats claiming it is in fact referring to a dinosuar.

Creatures breathing fire are the Biblical Records of Dragon's. You have not produced evidence against Dragon Rulers, thus it is true.

Fire breathing could be hot breath, bad breath, or even poisioness breath, there are tons of possibilities but I'm sure your stuck on the commercialized version of a fire breathing dragon.

reply to post by Confusion42

One of your debating problem's is trying to re-phrase people's words. Here is a perfect example of not only re-phrasing, not only mis-quoting, but also lack of understanding.


My point is that mammal females produce milk specifically after they give Birth. How can somebody say the Babies intended food is NOT their mothers milk!?!?!?

I never said that.

It's highly probable that we are suppose to drink breast milk as babies. Thats not to automatically include cows milk however. There is no connection between us and cows except for the connections that we build upon.

Aside, if your referring to what we are suppose to eat in general, I doubt that we are suppose to consume breast milk for all of our life, and even if we were suppose to the supply, of the mother would have to get her nutrients from somewhere to keep up the supply.

None of which do we have. Mothers manufacture milk for babies, and in fact that supply will keep going for as long as she is tapped. The problem is that its such a calcium burden on the mother that if she doesn't take prenatle vitamins, her teeth will fall out. This is still yet another clue that we don't have the proper nutrients here to support ourselves.

Each planet is made with a balance, of everything. This includes food for every species, and a limitation of sickness and illness. This balance projects the best growth for all species and life in general at least for the species that are suppose to be there.

You throw in species that don't belong together, like what has happened here on earth, and you have a big problem. You have a colapse of the balance with most species dying. Oddly enough we are headed into the 6th largest extinction with a loss of 99% of all life. So now your question is probably going to be, how can I prove that planets are suppose to be in a balance and that there is suppose to be food for everyone. Simple, its the ONLY way it can work. In case there is any confusion at this point, its only because your holding earth as a prime example of how things are suppose to be, just like the scientists are, and your wrong. Our planet is NOT in balance and its NOT working which is why we are having a colapse of the balance.

I never said that.

Your whole premise regarding Target Food involves human; HELLO????

Are you now revoking your (debunked, unsubstainsiated) "Target Food" theory?

It's highly probable that we are suppose to drink breast milk as babies. Thats not to automatically include cows milk however. There is no connection between us and cows except for the connections that we build upon.

Ok, you now just admitting that we (humans) are supposed to drink "break milk" as babies (hope you where referring to mother's milk).

Nobody is talking about cows here except you. Why would you try to de-rail the conversation?

We are talking about the milk female mammals produce for their offspring.

Aside, if your referring to what we are suppose to eat in general, I doubt that we are suppose to consume breast milk for all of our life, and even if we were suppose to the supply, of the mother would have to get her nutrients from somewhere to keep up the supply.

Nobody is talking about consuming breast milk for all our lifes.

Your last statement makes no sense.

Mothers get the nutrients from the environment; Food! From Earth!

I wont debate the fact that female mothers produce milk for their offspring.
that's a fact lol.

The fact that it happens (and is wittnessed on a mass scale), the fact that milk is produced, DOES mean that the mother DOES get the nutrients she needs from here environment, here on Earth.

None of which do we have. Mothers manufacture milk for babies, and in fact that supply will keep going for as long as she is tapped. The problem is that its such a calcium burden on the mother that if she doesn't take prenatle vitamins, her teeth will fall out. This is still yet another clue that we don't have the proper nutrients here to support ourselves.

None of which do we have??!?!??!?!!?!?
Wowsers....

Prenatle vitamins, teeth fallig out.... huh?

Am at a loss for words

Oh dear

Each planet is made with a balance, of everything. This includes food for every species, and a limitation of sickness and illness. This balance projects the best growth for all species and life in general at least for the species that are suppose to be there.

What are you talking about??!??!?!

You throw in species that don't belong together, like what has happened here on earth, and you have a big problem. You have a colapse of the balance with most species dying. Oddly enough we are headed into the 6th largest extinction with a loss of 99% of all life. So now your question is probably going to be, how can I prove that planets are suppose to be in a balance and that there is suppose to be food for everyone. Simple, its the ONLY way it can work. In case there is any confusion at this point, its only because your holding earth as a prime example of how things are suppose to be, just like the scientists are, and your wrong. Our planet is NOT in balance and its NOT working which is why we are having a colapse of the balance.

Your premise simply makes no sense.

Please take a day, go to the zoo, go to the Ocean, get out and observe things.

reply to post by itsthetooth

And itsthetooth's lies just keep piling up...

I never said that it does.

Here's what you said in this post:

There are to many proven locations, as well as the tablets from the 10 commandments being found.

(Emphasis mine.)

You are clearly claiming that the tablets that Moses supposedly carried down from Mt. Sinai have been found. You then provided five links which included three different locations, including one from a self-proclaimed spoof article and one describing three tablets each weighing several tons. Now you're backtracking and saying that:

ALL of the link state the obvious fact that tablets have been found. I think what appears to be more of a question is if they are in fact the tablets of the ten commandments. There doesn't seem to be any question as to the validity of finding the tablets, or the location.

No, that's not what you were claiming. You were making a very direct and clear claim that "the tablets from the 10 commandments" had been found, in spite of that fact that you had no evidence to support it when you made the claim and then failed on a profound level to find any evidence that supported it after the fact.

And now you're lying about what you said, even though it's there for everyone to look back on and read for themselves. You didn't say "tablets that had a copy of the ten commandments inscribed on them" or "a scroll that is believed to be the oldest surviving copy of the ten commandments" or even "tablets that might have been the original ten commandments". You said "the tablets from the 10 commandments" had been found. Now you're trying to weasel out of it.

reply to post by iterationzero


Dude! The ten commandments tablet is in the title of the article. Why would they refer to it, if it hasn't been found?

This tooth guy is either hilarious or ridiculous. I'm still trying to figure out which one. His version of evidence is funny. He'll dismiss an entire scientific paper because of the word "hypothesis", yet reads one title word of an article and automatically assumes it to be true with no scrutiny whatsoever.

www.imdb.com...

Hey look! I just proved the Incredible Hulk is real!

reply to post by Confusion42

Your whole premise regarding Target Food involves human; HELLO????

I don't understand, I mean it involves intervention, which happens to involve humans but thats not a required part of target food. Now target food has been identified in humans as well, or at least the lack of.

Are you now revoking your (debunked, unsubstainsiated) "Target Food" theory?

No I'm just saying that how mammels feed thier young has nothing to do with it either way.

Ok, you now just admitting that we (humans) are supposed to drink "break milk" as babies (hope you where referring to mother's milk).

Nobody is talking about cows here except you. Why would you try to de-rail the conversation?

We are talking about the milk female mammals produce for their offspring.

Sure, I'm all for it, but like I allready said, you can't live on it forever.

Nobody is talking about consuming breast milk for all our lifes.

So now your admitting there must be some form of food after breast milk.

Your last statement makes no sense.

Mothers get the nutrients from the environment; Food! From Earth!

I wont debate the fact that female mothers produce milk for their offspring.
that's a fact lol.

The fact that it happens (and is wittnessed on a mass scale), the fact that milk is produced, DOES mean that the mother DOES get the nutrients she needs from here environment, here on Earth.

Ok but those nutrients aren't here, or at least if they are, our scientists don't know about them. Why do you think womens teeth fall out if they don't take prenatle supplements?

There is something missing in the grand picture of things.

None of which do we have??!?!??!?!!?!?
Wowsers....

Prenatle vitamins, teeth fallig out.... huh?

Am at a loss for words

Oh dear

I'm not exeggerating, a mother will lose some teeth in the stages of breast feeding if she isn't taking supplements. The fact is that whatever natural resource is suppose to be here to prevent this from happening, is not here.

What are you talking about??!??!?!

I'm talking about planets in general that house life.

Your premise simply makes no sense.

Please take a day, go to the zoo, go to the Ocean, get out and observe things.

A zoo is an excellent example. Look at how we have to cage and isolate animals from each other or they will destory each other.

reply to post by iterationzero

And now you're lying about what you said, even though it's there for everyone to look back on and read for themselves. You didn't say "tablets that had a copy of the ten commandments inscribed on them" or "a scroll that is believed to be the oldest surviving copy of the ten commandments" or even "tablets that might have been the original ten commandments". You said "the tablets from the 10 commandments" had been found. Now you're trying to weasel out of it.

Not at all. no one ever said that one of them can't be correct.

reply to post by Barcs

Dude! The ten commandments tablet is in the title of the article. Why would they refer to it, if it hasn't been found?

Ya itereo, why would they refer to it if it hasn't been found?

This tooth guy is either hilarious or ridiculous. I'm still trying to figure out which one. His version of evidence is funny. He'll dismiss an entire scientific paper because of the word "hypothesis", yet reads one title word of an article and automatically assumes it to be true with no scrutiny whatsoever.

So what are you saying, the title of something is never an accurate description of the article it represents?

reply to post by itsthetooth


I don't want to derail the other debate here with others :-)

If you put your stamina towards good things, they shall come

*Why try proving fiction with fiction when their is so many interesting facts w/ evidence?