E-mail Debate Continued, I guess... -_-

Really super tired of this kid. This may be the last one I post from him and may be the last one I bother to reply to because he is just way too damn thick. I'm sure you know the type. Anyway, here we go, one more time.

give me EVIDENCE that God doesn't EXIST

Logical fallacy, shifting the burden of proof. I cannot prove a negative. Prove to me that faeries don't exist. All I can say is there is no evidence for a god or for faeries and thus I see no reason to believe them. What I can do is show that the Bible is false and if that is the god you believe in, that is clearly a fairy tale and I have already given you evidence for why that is not true, so if you are too stupid to understand it, I don't know what else to give you.

I watched the video and I read every article you gave me. You gave me ONLY THEORIES

Fuck you. There you go with the "only theories" arguement again. I'm done. You're too stupid still to understand simple terminology. The word theory doesn't mean what you think it means. Theories are EXPLANATIONS for how things WORK. They are based on EVIDENCE. Therefore they are FACTS. If you cannot grasp this, then you're simply stupid. Here is a list of theories for you: Germ theory, atomic theory, the theory of gravity, the theory of evolution. These are all theories and they are all facts, or do you deny germs, atoms, and gravity as well as evolution? They're JUST theories after all, even though the fact that they are THEROIES and not HYPOTHESES means that they are FACTS. I have told you this OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Please explain to me why you don't understand this. Are you simple? What is your problem that you don't understand that "just theories" is not an arguement and just shows you to be a very, VERY ignorant person? If you have a problem with any of the evidence provided, please specify which peice of evidence you have a problem with, and disprove it.

I know you can't prove God deosn't exist, and I know that I can't absoluty prove that he does for that would remove the need for faith. (faith- belief that is not based on proof)

I know. Faith is the belief in something without evidence or despite evidence to the contrary. In your case it is the latter. Thus faith in your case is willful stupidity because evidence contradicts your beliefs yet you hold onto them. The Earth is round. Animals evolve. There is no god.

You have a large amount of faith in the theories of things un-proven. Like I believe in the Bible, You believe in Richard Dawkins, Darwin, etc.

If they are theories they are proven you dull little child. I don't believe in any person, I don't believe in anything. I don't HAVE to believe in anything because I have FACTS. Go to the Smithsonian. LOOK at the exhbits. READ the explainations. You can't deny ACTUAL PROOF. Look at anything I've sent you. Animals mutate and change over time and eventually speciation occurs. We have SEEN it occur. It is a FACT. You are denying reality. The Big Bang happened. The cosmic background radiation, the fact the planets are moving away from each other, the red shift of the universe, this PROVES it happened. That video showed you all the evidence. What, you don't even believe in math? He gave you the fucking math to prove it! What more do you want, you simple fucking child? I think even if I had a time machine and took you back to show you that you still wouldn't accept reality because you would rather hold on to childish things.

Just please hear me out,

Consider the possibility that there was a god, and you die. You stand before him and give an account of your life. The God asks you "Why should I let you in", what would you say?

I would ask why he didn't make himself clearly evident and how he expected me to believe in him based on a book of nonsense. Additionally, to quote Thomas Jefferson, "Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear." However, I am not the least bit concerned about your god, the god of the Bible, which is clearly just a man made fairy tale, and any god that might actually exist has not made his presence known to man in any way, so we might as well assume he does not exist, the same as we cannot be sure for a fact we are not simply brains in a jar being fed a computer simulation, but as we cannot prove that we are or are not and to ponder it adds nothing to our knowledge, we might as well assume the reality which we percieve is in fact reality. Since any sort of thing that might be called a god has in no way shown his presence to us, we might as well live our lives assuming one does not exist, just as I live my live based on the assumption that faeries do not exist.

Let me ask you,

What is love?

Chemical reactions in the brain evolved to help encourage procreation.

What is life?

Organisms that consume, defecate, and reproduce in some way.

What is death?

An organism's organs failing, its ability to do the things listed above being ceased. Death means different things for different species. For animals, it means the brain has ceased to function.

What is happiness?

Chemicals in the brain which cause pleasurable sensations. This effect can be stimulated in a variety of ways and can even be induced or inhibited artifically.

What is evil?

Subjective parameters which a society or individual considers to be detrimental to said society or individual.

What is truth?

Reality is truth.

What is purpose?

The reason for which something is done.

These are questions most Christians ask themselves, but I would like to know an athiests answer to them.

I am now asking you to educate me, and will admit you are an adult that probably knows more about this stuff than I do.

So please educate me, not on proving science, but disproving God.

I cannot disprove that there is not some magical being which hides from us, just like I cannot disprove that there are invisible faeries or any other mythical creature for which there is no proof, I can simply say there is no proof and that is enough to decide that they are not there until evidence is provided. You present a specific god and say he did this, this and this as recorded in the Bible. I can fact check those things, see that they are not true, and thus, that the Bible is a fictitious book, and thus the god in it must be a fictional character, just as I can do with any man made religion, and all religions are indeed man made.

My patience with you is just about done because the fact you still don't understand what a theory is even though I have explained it to you three times shows me that you are either not reading my message or have serious reading comprehension issues which I cannot help you with. Either way, this is my last attempt with you. I give you these directions: Re-read all my previous messages and if you have a problem with a specific issue, then refute it, don't just make claims that it isn't true. Rewatch or re-read all evidence I have presented you. If you have a problem with a specific peice of evidence, then refute it, don't just claim it is just a "theory" because it makes you seem VERY ignorant and your repetition of this line of thinking has exhausted my patience with you. If you send me one more thing which shows you are not reading what I am explaining to you, I shall stop writing because I am obviously wasting my time.

Justifications of harshness may not be unwarranted

But come the fuck on, one can only have so much patience with these idiots. Now, some people are going to throw out that tired ad hominum that "Ginrai, you're a teacher, HOW CAN YOU NOT BE PATIENT?" Well, two reasons: First, it's a lot easier to be patient with a child sitting in front of you and second, I've never told a child what a noun is and have them look me dead in the eye and go "Nah uh, some 4,000 year old book tells me different, so I don't believe you!" That should pretty well explain why I am harsh to people on the internet and will continue to be so. Anyway, I lost all patience with my e-mail debate, because I had already given him evidence of several things he brings up here, including transitional fossils, and he just blatantly ignored all of it and sent me this copy and paste garbage.

“let me tell you a story

"Once upon a time, billions of years ago, time and chance came together and magically created this entire universe. We have the Sun, the stars, the moon, and we have Earth with all the beautiful complexity of life, plants, animals, and intelligent humans." It's a beautiful story, and that's all it is. A story created by Charles Darwin. “

Charles Darwin, the biologist, came up with all that astronomy? That’s weird. And here I thought what he did was go and look at birds and like any person with common sense could see they shared a common ancestor and thus came up with the theory of evolution, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the universe and only explains how life diversifies. Can you please cite the source for where Darwin claims the universe is made via magic or where he talks about the universe at all? I know it isn’t in Origins. I think what you are doing here is just parroting LIES at me. Pathetic.

By the way, do you know how bad the odds are that your daddy would shoot sperm into your mommy and the sperm that just happened to become YOU got through? Pretty low odds, but it HAPPENED. As Lawurence Krauss said, in a universe this big and this old, the rare happens frequently. Life was bound to happen somewhere, and indeed, even if life were only a 1 in a billion chance, with a billion billion planets (there are at least that many), then life has happened a billion times in the universe. The odds become favorable when you’ve got a really big deck and a whole lot of time that you’ll get a Royal Flush.

“One scientist said that evolution is simply a fairy tale for adults, that evolution has done nothing to help the progress of science, but that it was utterly useless. “

No, the Bible is a fairy tale for adults. Evolution is real. I gave you several cites for which you can find evidence for it. You are now just throwing out logical fallacies. This whole thing is a straw man. A straw man you are just copying and pasting. This is childish and stupid of you. No credible scientist today, not even Christian ones (see Ken Miller) deny that evolution happens. Now, you have completely gone off on a tangent. You are making claims which you do not support. I am going to ignore you if you do not start bringing me evidence for your claims, because at this point you are just engaging in a poor game of rhetoric, because you don’t actually know how to debate and just throw out banal nonsense and logical fallacies and you are wasting my time.

“Charles Darwin wasn't even a scientist, but a theologian studying theology at Cambridge University. He became an ex-christian because he wanted to rationalize the universe with a magical fairy tale called evolution.

Many scientist like the idea of a godless "rational" society, so they set out to find evidence of evolution. But they couldn't find anything with solid evidence, so they created theories that attempted to rationalize something they can't explain.”

This starts off with an ad hominum fallacy, and moves into an outright lie. There is plenty of solid evidence for evolution and I know I have provided it to you, so now you are being WILLFULLY ignorant. You are being a little boy who says the Earth is flat and after being shot into space, still claims that, even when looking at a round Earth.

And I quote from Darwins own book "I was just a young man throwing out suggestions and qeuries and all that time thinking about how the universe came to be". Suggestions?..... he admitted that evolution was only a suggestion

http://www.evanwiggs.com/articles/reasons.html

Quote mine fallacy. Pathetic. I don’t even need to dignify things taken out of context.

Darwin also said "if evolution is true, there should be fossil records that show full transitional species". But there aren't. There is no complete fossil record linking fish to monkeys and monkeys to humans... only theories.

There are fossil records you stupid, stupid little man. I dare you to prove there aren’t. Type transitional fossils into google. Try whale fossils, we have a beautiful set of them. It also seems like we find another human ancestor every other week, you complete simpleton. To deny transitional fossils is to deny reality.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC200.html A site which has plenty of transitional fossils. Whales, birds, HUMANS. Read it and stop being stupid. You have gone past my patience. You are a stupid little parrot who doesn’t want to learn.

I HAVE DEFINED THEORY FOR YOU, YOU KNOW NOTHING LITTLE SIMPLTTON! FUCK YOU IF YOU CAN’T UNDERSTAND PLAIN FUCKING ENGLISH AND REALIZE THAT A SCIENTIFIC THEORY IS NOT A GODDAMNED FUCKING GUESS! IT IS AN EXPLAINATION FOR A PHENOMENON BASED ON EVIDENCE! GRAVITY IS A THEORY! IF YOU THINK IT IS JUST A GUESS, I SUGGEST YOU TRY JUMPING OFF A BUILDING, YOU PATHETIC LITTLE RETARD! YOU KNOW NOTHING! HOW DARE YOU SEND ME SOMETHING SO TRITE AND BANAL AFTER I HAVE TRIED TO EDUCATE YOU! YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF! YOU HAD BETTER START TAKING YOUR EDUCATION SERIOUSLY AND TRYING TO LEARN ABOUT THE WORLD, OTHERWISE YOU WILL BE A COMPLETELY USELESS MEMBER OF THIS SPECIES AND I HOPE YOU DIE OFF WITHOUT BREEDING SO AS TO SAVE THE NEXT GENERATION!

“There isn't one full transitional fossil linking different species in existence, with proof at least.”

This is a lie. You are a liar. There’s no other rebuttal.

Darwin himeself said that "unless transitional forms could be found in fossils, evolution is worthless speculation"

-Charles Darwin,

This is because Darwin didn’t know anything about genes. We could actually prove evolution without fossils, and indeed, we DO, but the fact is there ARE fossils anyway. Lots of them. Fossils, however, are not the only evidence of evolution. Darwin was limited by the science of his time. We’ve come a long way in 200 years, moron.

'On the imperfection of the geological record', chapter X, The Origin of the Species, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1971, pp 292-293. -
Darwin made it clear that his theories were mere speculation and qeuries.

Quote mine again.

there I just disproved evolution with the words of Darwin himeself, the "inventor" of evolution.

No, you didn’t. You are PATHETIC. This was the stupidest thing anyone has ever sent me. It is full of lies and idiocy and all you have done is shown yourself to be a pathetic little parrot who is uninterested in the evidence, even when I SPOON FEED IT TO YOU! Do not talk to me again until you have educated yourself, I am tired of you. You are WRONG and any idiot could look at the evidence, realize they were wrong, and ADMIT it, but you’d rather childishly cling to a fairy tale.

I will now prove God scientifically

The first law of thermodynamics states that energy can't be created or destroyed.

Nothing can only create nothing. Before the universe began, something must have existed.

It's energy, energy is eternal. The 1st law of thermodynamics confirms that.

No beginning or uncreated and no end, that's the definition of "eternal".

You just said energy cannot be created or destroyed, therefore there was always energy, and matter comes from energy. You have just refuted yourself. Congratulations. Additionally, watch this video, it explains the origin of the universe. If you do not watch it, do not reply to me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo

You also can't claim that this energy always existed in the known universe because science has proven that the universe didn't always exist.

You just told me up there that it did. Watch the video, it explains everything.

Stephan Hawking has stated that time and the universe didn't always exist. www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/bot.html

THIS universe didn’t exist. All the stuff in the universe existed. It goes through a cycle. Watch the video. Oh, quote mine fallacy along with an appeal to authority.

This energy source that was present BEFORE the universe began had to have power beyond anything we can begin to imagine, considering it had to transfer it's energy onto the TRILLIONS of stars and BILLIONS of galaxies.

Okay, you keep going back and forth. First you said energy was always there. Then you said it wasn’t. Now you say it is? Which is it?

“A seperate eternal energy source that exists outside of the universe had to have supplied or transferred it's energy onto the universe (because we know the universe didn't always exist)”

Energy itself is eternal, and there is nothing “outside” the universe. Please prove that there is an outside the universe if you are going to make this claim. There is only existence and non-existence.

“It's not unreasonable to assume this enormous energy was the creator God”

It is extremely unreasonable and it this is also not an argument for your specific god, this could be ANY god, and if god were energy, god would be DETECTABLE and not “spiritual”. I explained this to you in my first message. It is clear you need to do a lot of reading, watching, and thinking before we can go any further. You are too uneducated and ignorant at this point to continue talking with. I might as well discuss with a two year old why there are no such thing as faeries.

Listen, we have reasonably two options to determine this powerful always existing energy.

It could be a dumb, unconscious, and vague energy source.

Energy is not conscious. If you think it is, do prove it.

“However this seems extremely illogical, considering we can observe complexity, order, and design throughout the entire universe.”

The universe only seems designed to you because you have the mind of a child. It is highly chaotic and full of destruction. Things that are natural can look designed. IE, the face on Mars looks like a carving, but nothing carved it except the UNCONCIOUS, DUMB WIND!

“We can see beautiful design in life, planets, and everything natural in this universe. It's impossible to consider chance gets the credit for the beauty and pure awesomeness (for lack of a better word) of this universe.

The most logical answer is that an intelligent mind, or God created everything

If you can't agree to this logic then your stubborn, unreasonable, and don't want to belive in facts. That there is a God and he loves you beyond imagining.”

You have no logic, little guy. Just logical fallacies. You don’t have any facts either, just lies. You are so pathetic it makes me angry and sad at the same time that the education system has failed you so, but I think you are one of those kids who does not WANT to learn, because I have tried to teach you, and you have ignored me. Go back to my original message, read it, read what I have sent you, look at the fossils, listen to Laurence Krauss teach you about the universe, and then come back and talk to me.

“Belive me my friend, God is real, not just because of the evidence, but because I have experienced the true joys and happiness of his love.”

You and every pagan, Hindu, Muslim, Jew, and random cultist since someone decided, “Hrmmm, I can’t figure out why it rains. Must be a god!”

E-mail Debate!

Alright, started an e-mail debate with someone NOT from youtube. You'd think that'd mean they were smart, right? No, of course not. In any case, I sent him the usual refute of Genesis, which I have updated recently, a little, and might post in a bit, but you all should know the gist of it, and if not, scroll on back to find it. Here is his, errr, "refute":

“you didn't prove anything at all

you just argued that evolution and darwinism is true and the bible is false with no scientific proof, with "theories" like evolution.”

Evolution IS true, no matter if you like it or not. The evidence is out there, and I chose not to spoon feed you because you're an adult and you should be able to research for yourself. As you apparently cannot, open up, here comes the airplane: http://talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ Nothing I said was not true. If you feel it is not, then refute what I said.

“Also you must understand that most of the bible is symbolic however Genesis is litteral in the fact that God is the only truely logical explanation for how this universe came to be. “

You find it logical there were plants before there was a sun? I think you need to check your logic then. Genesis doesn't even acknowledge there is a universe; it only deals with the solar system because that is as much as the limited desert dwellers that wrote Genesis could see. Genesis is so obviously wrong that to claim it is the only logical explanation just shows that you really have no education whatsoever. I explained to you point by point why Genesis was wrong, and you have done nothing to refute anything I said, so I assume you would rather just dodge the points. Debate fail.

“And on afurther note, it takes about 2000 years for things to fossilize, not millions, look it up.”

The process of fossilization can actually be quicker than that. What is your point? It doesn’t matter how quickly it takes for something to fossilize, but WHEN it fossilized. This point is completely irrelevant to the conversation, and it in no way addresses anything I said.

“Light was created and luminesed off god himself.”

Ummmmm… I must be psychic, because I actually refuted this in the original message, but I guess you were too stupid to read it. I’ll address it again, since you’re obviously slow. Here is what I originally said, which addresses the your “refute”: What, is god making himself glow? That'd mean he actually existed and was giving off something, rather than being entirely "spiritual"(code word Christians use for something that doesn't exist but they want to make people think it does by wrapping it in childish mystery) and what would the point of him glowing BE? What, omnipotent god can't make stuff without light?

Let me be clearer though, since you just don’t quite get that light isn’t some magical thing but actually an existing phenomenon which can be tested, measured, and observed, something you claim god cannot be. If god IS LIGHT, then he is made of PHOTONS and I will need you to present these PHOTONS and show me how they are SENTIENT and capable of creating MATTER.

“Birds, fish, dinosaurs, wolly mamoths, and humans all lived at the same time, but they were all killed in the great flood, oh and there is evidence of a flood that covered the entire earth for a short period of time in the soil layers.”

First off, in Genesis, it says that birds and fish predate land animals, which I told you, so you apparently can’t read what I wrote or what the Bible actually says, but we’ve already established your lack of ability. It is easy for you to prove this. Show me a bird fossil or a whale fossil that PREDATES land animals. You obviously cannot, because birds and whales both evolved from land animals.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2C-3PjNGok

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NB46sz5eoZg

Additionally, it is absolutely ridiculous to claim there was a global flood. There are so many problems with this idiotic notion, that it’s hard to know where to begin because you’d think anyone with common fucking sense would realize that. Here is a site that sums it up: http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/noahs_ark.html

“Dinosaurs and what not went extinct because of the changed enviroment of the earth after the flood.”

There was no flood. Dinosaurs went extinct because of global climate change or they evolved into other species.

“All this water that covered the earth went deep under ground, and there is evidence of that to.”

There still isn’t enough water to cover the whole Earth, and water doesn’t just magically go into the ground. Do you not understand what the water cycle is?

“vegetation was able to grow fast because of the amount of fresh water left over and a protective cloud layer was destroyed allowing large amounts of solar energy to touch the surface.”

Clouds do not block out solar radiation, you complete fucking moron. The Earth’s magnetic field does. The salt water would have completely DESTROYED the soil of the Earth, nothing would be able to grow. Additionally, an abundance fresh water does not equal plants growing faster. You are just making up complete and utter bullshit here. Please do not use any more Kent Hovind. He is a LIAR. Stop listening to him, or if you are going to listen to him, look up why he’s wrong before posting it here, because I don’t have the patience for parrots who are too stupid to look at the validity of fraudulent felon’s claims.

“and please forgive me if i don't fully understand the GREATEST mystery of this universe.”

You are not forgiven for claiming things which have no basis in reality or fact. You are equally not forgiven for lacking the basic knowledge one would learn in a high school science class. You are definitely not forgiven for parroting the lies of idiotic creationists. I don’t accept claims unless there is evidence to back them up. I’ll give you an example: String theory is a scientific theory which I DO not accept as the origin of the universe because I do not see enough evidence for it, even though there are many scientists who think it must be. Actually, I in fact changed my mind (a little, anyway) about how the universe got started and what it looks like, because of this lecture: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo

“oh and before you start giving me crap about my email, i got it many years ago before i was like you an athiest and turned to faith”

I don’t give a shit about your e-mail, and your blatant ignorance is plenty enough to insult you with. Additionally, you may have been an “atheist”, but you were obviously not a critical thinker and still are not.

"I don't have to know the Torah to be Christian!"

Alright, I've been arguing with a really, really dumb person. I'll spare you all his parroting of creationist nonsense (he uses the bacteria flagellum arguement. Super fail.), but I thought I'd share with you his very, VERY poor understanding of his own religion. Below is my opening statement to him, which comes from my new refutation of the Bible.

You may also want to look up why, according to the Torah, Jesus is not the messiah. Claiming that he didn't have to accomplish all of the things he was supposed to because he is going to have a second coming all of a sudden(this is never mentioned in the Torah) is just the writers of the Gospels making up shit to make their very implausible story seem to make sense, but if you don't accept the Mormons making shit up afterwards, I don't see why you accept the NT making shit up. Think about it from a Jewish perspective. Some guys come along and say they have this story that is supposed to be YOUR hero who will do all these great things. But then he doesn't. And you say, "Well, then he obviously isn't our hero then", but they say, "Uhhhh, wait... He gets another chance... He'll... come back from the dead and do all that stuff... eventually! Yeah, that's it!" What would you say to that? Considering that in the NT Jesus fails to live up to the prophecies of the messiah+he seems to be more like a pagan demigod like Horus or Mithra, we can dismiss the New Testament as false, and considering the Torah is about as accurate in history and science as The Iliad, we can safely dismiss it. So you can now either pick a random new god, or realize that all of the gods are made up by men, are nothing but myths, and live a rational life that embraces reality. Or you can continue to be willfully stupid. Your choice.

I am not Jewish, and had not actually heard of the Torah before now. I see no reason to go by what they say. Also, which prophecies did Jesus not fulfill?

You... are Christian but don't know the Torah? It's the first five books of the Old Testament, you idiot. Okay, now you have clearly shown that you A. Know nothing about science and B. Know nothing about your OWN RELIGION. You fail so hard. Your religion comes OUT OF THE JEWISH RELIGION! How can you not know this? Other than simple prophecies such as riding into Jerusalem on a donkey, pretty much he didn't accomplish any of the things he was supposed to. He is not of the seed of David since the writers of the Gospels, or perhaps the editors of the Gospel, made Jesus as much like a pagan demigod as they could to make him more impressive to the pagans of the time, hence the virgin birth (virgin birth=no seed of David) and all the various miracles that had been previously done in other mythologies. He never reigned as king. He did not rebuild any temple. He did not redeem the Jews. He did not fill the world with the knowledge of god and make them recognize the wrongs they did to Isreal. He didn't even manage to fulfill the prophecies written in the NEW Testament, namely that he would return during the lifetimes of some of his original followers. Again, the second coming is not a Jewish idea, and remember that you are basing the fact that there is such a thing as a messiah in the first place on a Jewish idea. The second coming was written in as a pathetic attempt to explain why Jesus failed to do what he was supposed to. You can't just change prophecies after the fact to try and refit them when they don't work, because otherwise they aren't prophecies. Please learn something about science and the history of your own religion before responding, as you have very much embarrassed yourself here.

I don't have to know what the Torah is to be Christian. Incidentally, it's nice to see that you can't think for yourself. (e.g., quoting Wikipedia, a source which can be edited by practically anyone who feels like it.)

You don't have to know the Torah to be Christian? Are you simply retarded? Okay then, please explain to me where you get the concept of the messiah (psst, it comes from the Torah, idiot) and on what grounds you claim Jesus is the messiah (psst, all the requirements come from the Torah. And Jesus FAILED them). Additionally, since you really don't get it, the Torah is the first five books of the Old Testament. Without it, you have NO basis for your beliefs because one leads into the other. You can't claim the New Testament is true and the Old Testament is not. You have no concept of your own religion or its history. Did you really not know before now that your religion is nothing more than a cult that arouse out of Judaism? Just as Mormonism is a cult that arouse out of Christianity. Your religion is a fanfiction.

I can think for myself. You asked me what prophecies Jesus didn't fulfill so I gave you a source for what he didn't fulfill. Do you think that citing sources is not thinking for yourself? Are you in middle school? Have you never done a fucking research paper? You are, quite simply, an idiot. Wikipedia is a source for quick information and to claim it isn't usually accurate is just idiotic. Wikipedia isn't just written on by anyone, there are checks and balances in place. How about you do some research yourself and provide citations rather than just say "Read this guy, he's right, even though he has no proof, I just take his word that he's right because he loves Jesus like I do!"


"Your religion comes OUT OF THE JEWISH RELIGION!"
Is this fact or imagination?

Jesus was a JEW YOU DUMB MOTHERFUCKER! The Torah is the FIRST FIVE BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT! The concept of the messiah is a JEWISH CONCEPT! The prophecies that determine who the messiah is come from THE TORAH! This is a FACT and you are a complete and utter retard.

By the way, I simply did not know that the the first five books of the Old Testament are known as the Torah. I have always known of them as the first five books of the Old Testament. Is this a crime? Attacking me for this is blatantly rude and baseless.

You profess to be a Christian and yet you don't know your own fucking religion's history. Yes, that makes you a very stupid person. You don't even know what you are arguing. It isn't rude because you have been condescending to me this whole time and yet it is clear you know absolutely NOTHING. How about you just admit you know nothing, stop calling yourself a "Christian" and go learn about the world and religions before you decide to make claims for which you cannot back up.

Ice Evaporates=Genesis Real?

Hao keeps claiming that this is coming from Kent Hovind. I haven't seen Kent Hovind make this exact claim so if anyone knows where he does, please let me know.


"The real issue is that could God be issuing a request to which another entity heard and responded. The answer is yes. The second issue to which I addressed is that if there is light, what could be the source of that light. And I answered that. God and his Spirit. I also explained in one of my board comments, that this also explained why the Spirit moved upon the face of the waters."

If you are claiming that there is ANOTHER entity, then this is polytheism, because I'm assuming that other entity is another god. Why does your omnipotent god need to make requests of something? This does not make sense. You are contradicting your own book of nonsense and just making things up to suit you. Have you started some weird offshoot of Christianity? Did you find all this stuff on a golden plate in the woods? There is no separation of god and the spirit. God IS a spirit, aka, not real. You can't say god is... one thing and also has a spirit. What the fuck are you defining god as if not a spirit?

"Does this make for sound physics? It does. The Spirit needs to move upon the face of the waters (it would ice in deep space), in order to give efficient and sufficient heat to melt the ice. Secondly, this clearly explains why the waters separated from the earth and created a firmament. The water evaporated went above, away from the light source. This also explains why Light and darkness on the earth came to be. The water that was intermingled with the matter separated and let the matter congeal together, thus sealing off the light. Creating a sphere to which light could only be seen on one side and not the other."

Does... two gods, one of which is spiritual and one of which is undefined make for sound physics? Uhhhh, no. No it doesn't. Needs to move on the faces of the waters, ice in deep space? What in the fuck are you talking about? The Bible starts out with there being NOTHING and god creating EVERYTHING step by step. Do you think that people did not understand what ice was? If they meant ice, then they would have said ICE. Earth was not made of ice. It was made of the remnants of matter thrown off by the sun as it was birthed. Earth was made in fire, not in ice.

It's like you can't even read your own book. Why am I even arguing about this with you? What exactly is your highest degree? You seriously lack reading comprehension skills.

Let's go over this slowly for the very slow kid you are.

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

See, created the heavens and the earth. No magic light. No other being. Still with us? (There's only one of me. See how I referred to myself in the plural but there's only one of me? Novel, right?)

2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Okay, the Earth is formless and empty. This means there is just the water. God is hovering over the waters because he's about to make some land on the water. Some flat land. Because the Bible is geocentric, flat Earth book.

3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

God didn't unveil any light. It does not say god parted the clouds and there was a light, because there AREN'T ANY CLOUDS YET! What are clouds, genius? Water vapor. And according to the Bible, it didn't fucking rain until the flood. There is nothing about ice. You claiming it is talking about ice is nothing but you making things up. That is NOT WHAT IT SAYS and it is not what SCIENCE SAYS HAPPENED, so therefore, your arguement is based on nothing but your IMAGINATION. No, it said god said let there be light, he spoke it into being like he spoke the heavens and the earth into being. Through magic. Not physics.


What I'm pointing out is that it's a coherant story because nothing contradicts the science.

FACT 1. Light creates heat.
FACT 2. A light source was place near the waters. READ SCRIPTURE.
FACT 3. Heat melts Ice.
FACT 4. Water in space is ice.
FACT 5. When water gets heated it separates from matter and goes up.
FACT 6. Gravity would pulls in matter.

... I... explained to you... that... the Earth... was made... by the leftover... matter... from... the... sun... This... is... the... science... Therefore... you... are... contradicting... the... science. Do... you... understand? SUN. Then EARTH. Not MAGIC LIGHT FROM NOWHERE, EARTH, THEN SUN. Do you... get it... now?

I just read you the scripture. Nothing about melting. Nothing about ice. YOU read it, retard. It's like you think Earth is made out of melted ice or something. It is not.

All these are scientifically accurate statements.
Second concerning the events as they occurred.

See above. No they aren't. If a fucking sun was by the Earth, it would destroy it. Water would evaporate. Not melt. Evaporate.

FACT 1. The sequence of events as described in Genesis matches what the scenario that I described.

Yes, it matches the scenario you made the fuck up. It does not match known science. I can make up a sequence of events to match the Norse creation myth. If I do that, will you accept it? If not, why not? At least they knew enough to know that TREES COME AFTER THE FUCKING SUN! Listen, Jimmy, you are just making things up. Prove to me the Earth was made out of ice that melted. Just offer me some scientific evidence for what you are saying is true.

FACT 2. The spirit of God was told to let there be light, and scripture tells us that the water separated after this happened, not before.

Yeah, he claims that he put some of the water up into the sky and some of it still on the "Earth". Still living in Atlantis. Water isn't just up in the sky. There is no sky dome, Jimmy. There are no windows.

So the events as stated in scripture match science and how evaporation works, and the scenario as I described.

... It doesn't match science... It isn't talking about evaporation... Think about it, Jimmy. Ancient man looks up at sky. Sky blue. Water blue. Sky must be water with invisible dome holding it back until god opens windows to let water down for rain. This is a myth. Do you understand what a myth is? It is ancient man's attempt to make sense of a world he didn't understand. We now UNDERSTAND. Put the fairy tales away. Learn the REALITY. Using your flawed logic and misunderstanding of science, I can come up with something to justify any creation myth, but you wouldn't accept it, would you? And why not? Because it is built on a false premise that there is this other god existing and doing things and that it contradicts what we know to have actually happened. You are ad hoc reasoning like an insane person.

... So there's god and there's a spirit of god? WTF is god then?

Here he actually claims that there are two magical entities doing different things. He backs up his claim with scripture he misinterprets and my patience wears thin.

"Take the time to read my statements carefully, OK. Don't be quick to respond."

Maybe YOU should re-read MY post because I already explained that the story you are concocting is not how the solar system formed.

"God said, "let there be light."

If God was alone he could have just made the light. He didn't have to say anything.

This implies another being was there. There was, the Spirit of God."

Wow... You are just super making up things now. I mean, how do you want me to respond when you are just intent on making shit up? Here, I'll do it. You're wrong. Faeries made everything. Believe in the faerie king or you go to faerie hell. Do not ask me for proof of this. Don't even ask me to point out to you where this is written in my holy texts, because it isn't there. I'm just going to make up my own fanfiction version of a religion and try and mingle it with what I think is a scientific explanation, but it really isn't since I have no proof and it contradicts the scientific evidence already on record. Your arguement is based on a FALSE PREMISE. It does NOT make sense. How can you claim there is god and a spirit of god? Are you claiming that one god is physical and the other one is not? This is NOT in the Bible. You are making shit up. It's ridiculous.

"Let there be light" means, LET the light be there. Which implies the light was there but was hid in a veil of cloud. So the cloud was removed and the light was allowed.

*L* No... It does not imply that. Why do you think there are clouds? Clouds from where? Of what? Don't answer, because if you tell me what the clouds are, you are just going to be MAKING IT UP, because it isn't IN THE BIBLE.

"Put forth the light would be exact or give it light."

That's not what it says, Jimmy.

"Say for example, if a boy was in the possession of a couple, and was under restraint, the words, "let the boy go" implies the boy wants to be released or is aiming to be released. However, if the boy doesn't want to be released, then the statement, "let the boy go" isn't appropriate. You have a series of bargaining where the boy is asked if he will come with them, first."


"So this "let there be light" means something is hindering the light."

I have a degree in English. Do you really want to argue semantics with me? Let can also mean to cause or to make, which is CLEARLY what is meant in the Bible, since god is CREATING THINGS. Are you claiming that along with god there is some magic light source beyond some clouds, and after god made the sun, said light source vanished? And you think this makes logical sense?

"Since we know that God emits light and hides himself in a cloud, that means that logically speaking a cloud is being used to hide the light."

We "know" that? Prove it. Again, if god emits light, he must be some type of energy and is therefore natural, testable, and provable, but you claim he is not, because if he was, he wouldn't be able to hide so well. God hides himself in clouds? Come on... This is such a childish notion that most Christians wouldn't even accept it. They don't think god is literally living up in the sky, because we realize that above the sky there is more stuff, not a dome, not waters, and not heaven, but the rest of the universe. The Bible doesn't even realize there IS a universe, it is a book about a tiny, flat little place floating on some waters with some lights in the sky, and above that, magic happy fun time land.

"It's logically consistent."

... No... it isn't...

My claim is that God said "let there be light" meaning that it was spoken so that another entity could respond to the words. And there was another entity there, as it says in verse26, God said, "let us make...." so there was another entity there. And when God made man, evidently it was a work of cooperation between at least two entities."

Your claim is not supported by ANYTHING though. Not by the Bible OR science, thus you FAIL. It is supported only by a STORY that YOU made up. Okay, we have three options. A. Mistranslation. B. You are a polytheist. C. Use of the royal "us", but still referring to one person. Since god is supposed to be a king, it makes sense that it is the last one. This is supported by the fact that in verse 27, it mentions man is made in "HIS" image, not "THEIR" image. Again, don't argue semantics with me. You will fail.

God doesn't make light. He just reveals it. Don't ask from where.

It's been awhile, I know. I was enjoying just not doing much of anything, but now work is back so I guess I'll do THIS too. Fuckers. I haven't had that many creationists with anything interesting to say, but finally a kook did come along. I sent him my usual thing on Genesis, you know what it is, so I won't bore you with it. What I will bore you with is his tedious rambling about my problem with the light coming from nowhere before there was a sun and melting some ice which somehow to him proves Genesis is real, while throwing in some random polytheism for good measure. Part two in a moment where he makes the bad mistake of telling me I am not reading his inane arguments "carefully".

"First off you claimed that Genesis was illogical, that the light mentioned was created first. You couldn't see the logic in that.

First of all it says, "let there be light." Doesn't say create light. It means that the light was allowed to pass through the cloud. The cloud that surrounded God as mentioned in the book of Exodus."

This is complete and total bullshit. If there was already light, then god isn't DOING anything. If he isn't creating anything, then he isn't god. If everything was already here, then you have just rendered your own god moot. What the fuck cloud are you talking about? This:

"And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night: He took not away the pillar of the cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people."

That has NOTHING to do with the creation story. Your arguement is a complete non sequinter. Do you really know anything about debate at all? I explained to you and sent you a video on how the solar system came into being. Light doesn't just "happen", there has to be a SOURCE. At the point we are at in the Bible, there is no SOURCE OF LIGHT because the SUN hasn't been created. If you CLAIM it is god, well then, that means god is not just spiritual, but is actually some sort of energy which emits things, and is therefore testable and identifiable and exists in this universe, and is natural and is therefore, by your definition of a supernatural god that just does things with magic, not god.


"It also said that the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters and for what reason I ask? Just to be there or to put heat to the waters? Why just mention the waters? When the waters were vaporized it allowed the soil, rocks and sediment to fall on it's own gravitational weight."

Didn't you mention something about Thunderfoot not responding to all arguments in his videos? Way to super ignore the bulk of my message, hypocrite. Anyway, this is sort of the point. The people thought that the world was just this thing on the waters, floating. The sun and stars were just lights in this dome in the sky. Above the dome? More water. (Opens windows in the sky to let in water for the flood, remember?) Basically, your god is Aquaman and Earth is Atlantis. You are going outside of the text of the Bible and outside of known science and just MAKING THINGS UP. Kent Hovind would be so proud, I'm sure.

In the passages you are reading from, essentially you have the universe which is just water. Think if you are an ancient man making shit up. Things look flat to you. You see water seems to go on forever. You make up this story where everything is this water and your god magically put some dirt on top of it and put some lights in the roof of the sky, and etc, etc. That is where your story comes from. Ancient man making shit up to explain a world they knew nothing about, and you, like a child, accept this fairy tale and try to apply reason to ignorance. What separates your idiotic creation story from other creation stories, other than your special pleading fallacy? At least the Norse knew enough to know that plants should come AFTER the sun, your religion can't even get THAT right. It is the fail and you are the super fail for believing in a fairy tale and you are the super duper fail for saying you are some debate master when you don't know the first thing about constructing a reasonable arguement. Please, close your channel, go learn science and rhetoric, then come back when you are worthy of talking to me. Again, I invite you, if you are not too cowardly, to come debate this in person at http://www.secularchat.com