Who Built the Moon?

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
Ok, I just have a question. I understand that many people on this board are what might be considered "non-believers" in God. I just don't understand what seems to be the cause of the adamant distaste or hatred that these feelings produce. I mean, I believe in God and would like to think that I do have at least half a brain. To be honest, I suffered a head injury as a child and did lose part of my brain. I'm not sure of the exact percentages, but I think I have more that 50% left.

Anyway, even if I'm wrong and God doesn't exist, my belief provides me a couple things. It provides me with a belief that I can be together forever with my family, that my life on this earth has a meaning, and that it's not all over after I die. Personally, even if I'm wrong, it's a nice belief to live under. Makes the days much nicer anyway.

So, while I strongly encourage people to find what works for them, I guess I just don't understand the intolerable distaste for those that believe in God, or ID, or whatever. Even if we're wrong, it makes our lives much nicer. So just wondering if someone could explain that to me in terms a little nicer than "you don't have half a brain."

Sorry if this is a bit off topic.

I believe it is because people who are too religious tend push their beliefs off on others, whether they think they do or not....like gay marraige. I personally belief that somehow, somewhere there will be a day of reckoning for everybody, so it is not my job to sit in judgment.

 

[coomar]

tasteslikechicken is right

thats how the metre was originally defined by the french

it was changed to the light definition in the 80's as was mentioned

 

[dannybin1742]

i stopped taking you seriously right here:

even after I was saved.

how did you come up with this idea?

Over history we have digressed in our DNA not improved

you are way off base, any proof of that statement, or are you just spreading crap, and you are talking to a biochemist

a few questions

how old is the earth IYO?

IYO = in your opinion

how old is the universe IYO?

people die for various reasons, its just life get over it.

you people need to start worrying about making this life better and stop worrying about what happens when your heart stops beating

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
Ok, I just have a question. I understand that many people on this board are what might be considered "non-believers" in God. I just don't understand what seems to be the cause of the adamant distaste or hatred that these feelings produce. I mean, I believe in God and would like to think that I do have at least half a brain. To be honest, I suffered a head injury as a child and did lose part of my brain. I'm not sure of the exact percentages, but I think I have more that 50% left.

Anyway, even if I'm wrong and God doesn't exist, my belief provides me a couple things. It provides me with a belief that I can be together forever with my family, that my life on this earth has a meaning, and that it's not all over after I die. Personally, even if I'm wrong, it's a nice belief to live under. Makes the days much nicer anyway.

So, while I strongly encourage people to find what works for them, I guess I just don't understand the intolerable distaste for those that believe in God, or ID, or whatever. Even if we're wrong, it makes our lives much nicer. So just wondering if someone could explain that to me in terms a little nicer than "you don't have half a brain."

Sorry if this is a bit off topic.

I think 1EZ makes some good points but there are to me some others. In the first place people who are literalistic about the Bible and, for example, could never entertain the notion that a day could be a period or age or some such longer period of time show frighteningly discouraging traits, an ability to continue to believe in something that is patently absurd. They are in a sense an insult to everybody else's intelligence, so to speak. I say so to speak because although I think this reaction typical I do not think it wise. A wise person is not affected by what others think because he has no ego involved. What do you make of a person who is so blinded by a religious dogma that they will not see or change or adapt even if their belief were to cause people to die, like in the Inquisition. In short, religious people, fanatics if you will, are often frightening and even frighteningly dangerous.

Also, such people turn off more rational types who often look at them and laugh or cry and say to themselves these people are fools and so must their God be. Nothing like a maniac Christian to tell a saner mind you can keep that Christianity junk. The result is that the real bridge that Christ built to a different shore is wasted for these people. Their potential spiritual evolution is closed in that area in the West most open to them, the Christian Way and they may not look farther. Once bitten, twice shy, you know.

As to the evolution and God exists thingi, I would say that nothing can happen in the universe that is not a property of the universe, a mirror of it if you will, and it is in that way we are created in His Image, in my opinion. We are capable of Divine Love because Divine Love is capable of us. We evolved as Gods reflection. We manifest what the Universe IS IN BEING. But here, of course, I refer to being without ego, what you might call surrender. It is the self that is the resurrection.

Anyway, there is and can never be any science that casts doubt on the existence of God nor can the existence of God ever be proven. But an individual may die and be reborn and have an experience that others may not be able to understand. But that we CAN all have it is, I think, why we were forgiven.

 

[piasabird]

It seems to me that some people have been programmed to think a certain way. It is if their cultural beliefs and their preconceived notions define who they are and their existience and their way of life would be threatened if they should have to consider that what they have been told is not entirely true and is based on a false premise. The fact that no one would read a book like civilization one indicates a kind of close minded attitude not condusive to the use of one's own intellect and learning.

Intelligence the the ability to interpret data and extrapolate knowledge from that data or deal with a situation. The book was not written from the point of view of religion. I read most of the first chapter. It seems to me it is a record of a man's search for knowledge and possibly a way of approaching things that has been lost, actually a hidden technique for solving Engineering and mathematical problems from the size of the earth to architectural engineering.

Some people on this board are awfully colse minded that their entire life is consumed with a position on politcs that they have become programmed robots at the whim of media and their ideological masters.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Originally posted by: RichPLS
Observe the effects of weak DNA...Walk into any church...

Fixed.

 

[outriding]

Maybe we should ask these guys...


Image


Inignot: Hello, Carl, I am Inignot and this is Err.

Err: I am Err.

Inignot: We are Mooninites from the inner core of the moon.

Err: You said it right.

Inignot: Our race is hundred of years beyond yours.

Err: Man, you hear what he's saying?

Inignot: Some would say that the Earth is our moon.

Err: We're the moon.

Inignot: But that would belittle the name of our moon, which is: The Moon.

Err: Point is: we're at the center, not you.

Carl: No, the real point is: I don't give a damn.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Whaspe

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I haven't read the book, and I doubt I'd waste my time, but the review makes some odd comments, such as:

"The Metric system, which is now universally adopted across the world for scientific measurement, appears to have been created specifically to highlight the peculiarities of the Moon."

The metric system was created to define the distance from the equator to the North pole as 10 million meters. With such a relatively small measurement, I guess you can find all kinds of odd relationships when applied to large objects such as the sun, earth, and moon.

His thesis seems to rely on the positional relationship between he sun, earth, and moon as well. That's fine for now, but the distance between the earth and the moon is increasing at a steady rate of 3.8 centimeters a year. Additionally, the tidal interaction between the earth and moon is slowing the rotation of the earth down. So it seems this guy's calculations won't be valid in the long term future since some of the values are changing as we speak.

So good points TLC, however I'm curious about your claim (see bolded). Isn't the metric system part of the larger SI or Systeme International d'Unites? It was created for scientific purposes. The metre was defined in 1983 as the distance traveled by light in a vacuum during a time interval of 1/299792483 of a second. (had to look that up)

To go on a tangent here, I don't know why the US has held on so tightly to outdated units of measurement. is. the Fahrenheit scale was invented by taking a hot and cold substance and placing 100 units inbetween these values. In Fahrenheits experiments the coldest thing was ammonia in ice water, and the hottest thing was the stomach of a cow.

The meter was originally intended as the measurement I described previously. It was changed in the 80's to provide a more accurate, consistent, and stable measurement of a meter since gravitational (from the sun and moon) and rotational forces of the earth mean that the distance from the equator to the North pole is constantly in flux.

 

[MicroChrome]

Would be intersting to know if a billion years ago when the earth was spinning faster and the moon was much closer ... Do the numbers still add up?

I doubt it. Just lucky math is all at this point in time. I don't know about you... But I find it a bit sad how some bible thumper is drawing up conclusions from others work.

 

[judasmachine]

this thread brought to you by the Flat Earth Society. please disregard, as the "truths" presented here are improbable therefore do not exist.

 

[dannybin1742]

anyone read the onion article on intelligent gravity its a real spin off of what the ID argument is, simply hilarious.....

 

[imported_Pedro69]

Originally posted by: dannybin1742
anyone read the onion article on intelligent gravity its a real spin off of what the ID argument is, simply hilarious.....

I did, I spent half hour cleaning my LCD after reading it.

 

[dannybin1742]

FYI, MRnutz has been pming me, this guy is brainwashed, check this out:

(cut and pasted from pm, i'll post everything, keep in mind i never pmed him to start with, i simply responded to this thread)


first message he sent me:

dannybin1742, I just went through the posts in the thread I started. I normally don't reply in these threads b/c no matter what I say it gets blown way out of proportion and most ppl here just deviate to pages of name-calling. Also, I could care less about trying win an argument on AT forums. If that's even possible...

But I did find your response interesting:

quote:
you people need to start worrying about making this life better and stop worrying about what happens when your heart stops beating


I've accepted the free gift of salvation through Jesus Christ and am going to Heaven. So what makes you think I am worried about dying in this world?



BTW, here's an interesting site that polls articles that support Creationism. These are some interesting articles:
Rapid Petrification of Wood
Evidence for a Young World

My reply:

quote:
I've accepted the free gift of salvation through Jesus Christ and am going to Heaven. So what makes you think I am worried about dying in this world?



because you are obvioulsy wearing your faith on your shirt like a medal, keep it to yourrself and stop trying to try and destory logical though process by perpetuating theorys that are not based on proof or any kind of evidence

science is based off of a testable hypothesis, creation is not, therefore creation is not science can never be considered it

all scientific evidence points toward the earth being more than 4billion years old, just because you find .001% of the scientific comunity that doesn't agreee withit doesn't mean it isn't correct, or very close to being correct, no one will ever know for sure how old the earth is to the exact year or even 10k years, but they can finger a date within 100-200m years based off of evidence



how old to you beleive the earth is?


how long have humans walked the earth?


were there any other species of human or relatives of humans living around the same time as humans?

his reply:

Wow... you really do get fired up about this subject... Yes, I do wear my faith. That is what I have been commanded to do by Jesus in Mark Mark 13:10. But if you are trying to say that I am judging you or trying to say I am better than you, then you're wrong. It's not my place to judge, God has already passed judgment on everyone that has not accepted salvation through Christ (judged). Anyway, you seem like a smart guy so I'm guessing you actually "read and analyze" scientific papers which means you're not like the rest of the CNN-feed country that assumes whatever they hear is true.

So I will answer your questions....

how old to you beleive the earth is?
Approximately 6,000 years old. Regardless of what you beliefs are, this article makes some great arguments: link.
The billions and millions of years arguments based on what we find on Earth seem to be too sporadic in dates and accuracy. Besides, God created all so there is no reason that He didn't create the universe, including Earth, in it's past state 6 millenium ago... a state that was ready to support life.


how long have humans walked the earth?
Since Day 6. (- And, yes, I know that there are articles noting discoveries of human remains that possibly date back from 9.000 years to 190,000 years to 320,000 years. - So I'm basing my history on the literal historical records. People were designed to be social so I'll follow the writings.)

were there any other species of human or relatives of humans living around the same time as humans?
Great question, since Adam and Eve were the original people in the world. And their first children were Cain and Abel then was that end of the story?... Well Cain killed Abel and then left to live with the people in the land of Nod. So who were these people?



END_______________


Now tell me this guy is not brainwashed crazy, he sounds just like this administration, you could show them all the evidence in the world that the sky is blue, but they will argue with until they are blue in the face telling you its red

it amazes me that somone like mrnutz can consider themselves living in reality

by his convictions we should negate all biology, all chemistry, all physics, and all quantum mechanics, he has yet to show any shred of evidence that supports the bible's claims of creation

mind boggling

 

[MrNutz]

dannybin1742, I hope you're proud of yourself b/c you posted our PMs in this thread. Especially how you like calling me "brainwashed crazy" b/c I haven't adopted your point of view.

As I stated in the last PM I just sent you, I have referenced several articles that affirm my beliefs and asked you to look at the literary historical trail with an unbiased view. Whereas you haven't even hinted to what your "absolute evidence" is.

If this whole thing is about winning a silly argument, then guess what?... You win, you have come up with most degrading replies and have shown superior intellect!

- Feel better now?

 

[sourceninja]

God created all so there is no reason that He didn't create the universe, including Earth, in it's past state 6 millenium ago... a state that was ready to support life.

Hate to break it to ya, but god created the earth 37 seconds ago. All your memorys, jesus, etc were all made up by him and never really happened.

Prove me wrong.

 

[dannybin1742]

Hate to break it to ya, but god created the earth 37 seconds ago. All your memorys, jesus, etc were all made up by him and never really happened.

my point exactly, he has no evidence to prove that you are incorrect, all he can say is, the bible said so, or god did it, and not even need any proof to back it up


and mrnutz (nice name) i mearly posted your pms because i never wanted you to pm me in the first place, and its extremely important for posters on this thread to see how much of a fundamentalist you are

what amases me is that you want me to take an unbiased look at what you beleive how can i do that with these sources:



References

Scheffler, H. and Elsasser, H., Physics of the Galaxy and Interstellar Matter, Springer-Verlag (1987) Berlin, pp. 352-353, 401-413.

D. Zaritsky, H-W. Rix, and M. Rieke, Inner spiral structure of the galaxy M51, Nature 364:313-315 (July 22, 1993).

Davies, K., Distribution of supernova remnants in the galaxy, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism, vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (1994), Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 175-184, order from http://www.icc03.org/proceedings.htm.

Steidl, P. F., Planets, comets, and asteroids, Design and Origins in Astronomy, pp. 73-106, G. Mulfinger, ed., Creation Research Society Books (1983), order from http://www.creationresearch.org/.

Whipple, F. L., Background of modern comet theory, Nature 263:15-19 (2 September 1976). Levison, H. F. et al. See also: The mass disruption of Oort Cloud comets, Science 296:2212-2215 (21 June 2002).

Milliman, John D. and James P. M. Syvitski, Geomorphic/tectonic control of sediment discharge to the ocean: the importance of small mountainous rivers, The Journal of Geology, vol. 100, pp. 525-544 (1992).

Hay, W. W., et al., Mass/age distribution and composition of sediments on the ocean floor and the global rate of sediment subduction, Journal of Geophysical Research, 93(B12):14,933-14,940 (10 December 1988).

Meybeck, M., Concentrations des eaux fluviales en elements majeurs et apports en solution aux oceans, Revue de Géologie Dynamique et de Géographie Physique 21(3):215 (1979).

Sayles, F. L. and P. C. Mangelsdorf, Cation-exchange characteristics of Amazon River suspended sediment and its reaction with seawater, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 43:767-779 (1979).

Austin, S. A. and D. R. Humphreys, The sea's missing salt: a dilemma for evolutionists, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Creationism, vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (1991), Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 17-33, order from http://www.icc03.org/proceedings.htm.

Nevins, S., [Austin, S. A.], Evolution: the oceans say no!, Impact No. 8 (Nov. 1973) Institute for Creation Research.

Humphreys, D. R., The earth's magnetic field is still losing energy, Creation Research Society Quarterly, 39(1):3-13, June 2002. http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/39/39_1/GeoMag.htm.

Humphreys, D. R., Reversals of the earth's magnetic field during the Genesis flood, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Creationism, vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (1986), Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 113-126, out of print but contact http://www.icc03.org/proceedings.htm for help in locating copies.

Coe, R. S., M. Prévot, and P. Camps, New evidence for extraordinarily rapid change of the geomagnetic field during a reversal, Nature 374:687-92 (20 April 1995).

Humphreys, D. R., Physical mechanism for reversals of the earth's magnetic field during the flood, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Creationism, vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (1991), Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 129-142, order from http://www.icc03.org/proceedings.htm.

Austin, S. A. and J. D. Morris, Tight folds and clastic dikes as evidence for rapid deposition and deformation of two very thick stratigraphic sequences, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Creationism, vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (1986), Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 113-126, out of print, contact http://www.icc03.org/proceedings.htm for help in locating copies.

Gibbons A., Calibrating the mitochondrial clock, Science 279:28-29 (2 Jan-uary 1998).
Cherfas, J., Ancient DNA: still busy after death, Science 253:1354-1356 (20 September 1991).

Cano, R. J., H. N. Poinar, N. J. Pieniazek, A. Acra, and G. O. Poinar, Jr. Amplification and sequencing of DNA from a 120-135-million-year-old weevil, Nature 363:536-8 (10 June 1993).

Krings, M., A. Stone, R. W. Schmitz, H. Krainitzki, M. Stoneking, and S. Pääbo, Neandertal DNA sequences and the origin of modern humans, Cell 90:19-30 (Jul 11, 1997).

Lindahl, T, Unlocking nature's ancient secrets, Nature 413:358-359 (27 September 2001).

Vreeland, R. H.,W. D. Rosenzweig, and D. W. Powers, Isolation of a 250 million-year-old halotolerant bacterium from a primary salt crystal, Nature 407:897-900 (19 October 2000).

Schweitzer, M., J. L. Wittmeyer, J. R. Horner, and J. K. Toporski, Soft-Tissue vessels and cellular preservation in Tyrannosaurus rex, Science 207:1952-1955 (25 March 2005).

Gentry, R. V., Radioactive halos, Annual Review of Nuclear Science 23:347-362 (1973).

Gentry, R. V. , W. H. Christie, D. H. Smith, J. F. Emery, S. A. Reynolds, R. Walker, S. S. Christy, and P. A. Gentry, Radiohalos in coalified wood: new evidence relating to time of uranium introduction and coalification, Science 194:315-318 (15 October 1976).

Gentry, R. V., Radiohalos in a radiochronological and cosmological perspective, Science 184:62-66 (5 April 1974).

Snelling, A. A. and M. H. Armitage, Radiohalos?a tale of three granitic plutons, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Creationism, vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (2003), Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 243-267, order from http://www.icc03.org/proceedings.htm. Also archived on the ICR website at ICCRADIOHALOS-AASandMA.pdf.

Gentry, R. V., G. L. Glish, and E. H. McBay, Differential helium retention in zircons: implications for nuclear waste containment, Geophysical Research Letters 9(10):1129-1130 (October 1982).

Humphreys, D. R, et al., Helium diffusion age of 6,000 years supports accelerated nuclear decay, Creation Research Society Quarterly 41(1):1-16 (June 2004). See archived article on following page of the CRS website: http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/41/41_1/Helium.htm.

Baumgardner, J. R., et al., Measurable 14C in fossilized organic materials: confirming the young earth creation-flood model, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Creationism, vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (2003), Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 127-142. Archived at http://www.icr.org/pdf/research/RATE_ICC_Baumgardner.pdf. See poster presented to American Geophysical Union, Dec. 2003, AGUC-14_Poster_Baumgardner.pdf.

McDougall, I., F. H. Brown, and J. G. Fleagle, Stratigraphic placement and age of modern humans from Kibish, Ethiopia, Nature 433(7027):733-736 (17 February 2005).

Deevey, E. S., The human population, Scientific American 203:194-204 (September 1960).

Marshack, A., Exploring the mind of Ice Age man, National Geographic 147:64-89 (January 1975).

Dritt, J. O., Man's earliest beginnings: discrepancies in evolutionary timetables, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Creationism, vol. II, Creation Science Fellowship (1991), Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 73-78, order from http://www.icc03.org/proceedings.htm.

*Dr. Humphreys is an Associate Professor of Physics at ICR.

so let me see, every single claim the author makes is backed up by papers from creation science (which is an oxymoron in itself), and any supporting evidence is cherry picked from nature and science papers, which i have browsed through some of them, because i have access through my university, and what they are cherry picking are simple questions posed by the results of the research, thats all they are

questions or lack of evidence on a subject cannot be used as evidence for another theory.

so let me paraphrase what your icr guy argues........ because evolutionary and biological scientists cannot answer question A then god must have done it, most humans have the ability to think intuatively, you are an example of what happens when the logic is completely thrown out the window

 

[azazyel]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

* There was a single global language on Earth
* A single female was a common ancestor to all living humans
* Angels bred with human women to create The Watchers, giant half-human beings
* The oral tradition of Freemasonry records real events
.

About the Author
Christopher Knight has a degree in advertising and graphic design and is the managing director of a marketing and advertising agency. In 1976 he became a Freemason. "


Sounds like a credible researcher to me!

That's strait from the Book of Enoch which the freemason's think they have one of the pillars that Enoch wrote the secrets of Heaven on.

 

[MrNutz]

dannybin1742, I already said "I give up." You won the argument.

So could you please look past your wealth of knowledge and diversity to actually read some of the articles on the site before you judge how incorrect they are? (Maybe even try to read them objectionally and unbiased.)

In any case, you forgot to send me some information on that absolute evidence that discredits GOD.

So this is officially my last post in this thread. (Refer to the first line of this post for the reason why.) I truly give up with you guys. You've called me an extremist and fundamentalist, but everything you've said to me has categorized you in those exact terms.

From the next post forward, you may continue to rant and rave about how crazy I am and how superior your finite knowledge of the universe is to GOD's. The last thing I want to do is interrupt your back-patting session.

But if you really want to discredit me, then follow the instructions in the second link in my sig. If you can do that without laughing or scoffing with an "I'm better than this" attitude, then you will understand.

 

[azazyel]

MrNutz

Wow just wow. This author is well, I would put him under Dan Brown in my list of authors who suck. I mean Uriel's machine is just a rip off of the Manna Machine that people think helped the Israelites cross the desert. The flood and Angels mating with women, like I said that's from the Book of Enoch which a good Christian shouldn't be reading as the Church has deemed it fake (even though parts were found in the Dead Sea Scrolls). If you want to learn more about the book of Enoch feel free to google my name. If you actually pick up books like these I would really recommend reading Foucault's Pendulum. Umberto Eco pretty much discredits most of these types of theories.

 

[sunzt]

LOL you all are idiots. I build the moon, duh.

 

[Bitek]

Originally posted by: dannybin1742

Hate to break it to ya, but god created the earth 37 seconds ago. All your memorys, jesus, etc were all made up by him and never really happened.

my point exactly, he has no evidence to prove that you are incorrect, all he can say is, the bible said so, or god did it, and not even need any proof to back it up


and mrnutz (nice name) i mearly posted your pms because i never wanted you to pm me in the first place, and its extremely important for posters on this thread to see how much of a fundamentalist you are

Dude you shouldn't post a PM conversation here. Its not cool to lure someone into a private converation, then post everything publically. It would be one thing if he just sent you a PM to harass or call you out ( Something like 'hey duchebag atheist, ...' )
You continued the conversation, so you should keep it private.

Why is it important for us to see you embarrass him? It just makes you look bad. He's entitled to his beliefs whatever they are, he's not forcing us to listen to them. You shold do the right thing and edit it out.

 

[dannybin1742]

In any case, you forgot to send me some information on that absolute evidence that discredits GOD.

take a course in quantum mechanics, evolutionary biology, and biochemistry then you will understand why there isn't a magical being controlling everything and creating everything.


i read your links, they have nothing to do with how the earth was created, and offer no proof that the earth is 6k years old, referencing the icr is like using the bible as your reference in a research paper, it just doesn't cut it in the academic community,

i never claimed to be the all powerful know it all, but i have taken enough reality base science courses to understand that larger picture of how we have come to be

laws of probability (the basis for quantum mechanics), chemical environments, and electical potential led to the eventual formation of life here, laws of classical physics led to the formation of planet which has been mathematically shown again and again, but you people don't seem to care.

the probability of random numbers to be similar is statistically low, but not impossible

i don't understand why you can't just say, you know what, the earth is really old 4+ billion years, that consensus among scientists, maybe the bible is wrong.

the bible was written by man, how do you know the writer didn't make it up because he didn't know?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: dannybin1742
anyone read the onion article on intelligent gravity its a real spin off of what the ID argument is, simply hilarious.....

Yeah. It was titled "Intelligent Falling." What a hilarious sendup. I'm still chuckling about it.

 

[Staples]

According to Nova that aired on Tuesday, it came from a huge rock that hit earth and shattered of to create the moon.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: The Scientist
I'll use the equation from ID to prove to you that you cannot possibly exist, since the likelyhood of you existing is less than the world being brought into existance without a guiding hand.

Specifically, the chances of the exact dna combination being you developing from the number of combinations within thousands of years is less than you getting wet when it rains, but you getting wet when it rains, the chances of those h2o molecules hitting your body is smaller than the equated probablility of the ID equation.


IOW, If you believe in ID, then you have to accept that you DEFINENTLY do not exist, and you'll have to accept that you won't get wet if you go out in the rain.

ID is a sham, anyone with half a brain can understand that.

yep, the chances that your two parents meet, and that a specific egg, and a specific sperm out of trillions probably wasted on tissues and such are astronomical. theres basically no chance u can exist