Silkroad Online Forums

as far as the Genesis story, as it were. if you consider that not every day, HAS to be consecutive, but rather work is done on day X to set certain aspects of terraforming into motion.

after that aspect has been accomplished, another day of working to set the next step into motion and so forth.


take the mythical, ethral, mystical perspective out of it and just look at it from a scientific perspective. the genesis story gives a perfect example of how to terraform a planet. that book is suggested to be several thousand years old, almost as old as the book of job. no matter how old the book really is, think about this. how did any ancient man determine the exact process that would be required to take a planet that is chaotic and without propper form, and then make it into a working "living" life baring machine if you will? genesis 1:1 the begining is likely the bang that many call big. after how ever long it took for the rapid expansion of the universe to settle some is when this planet began to be terraformed, hence day one. the chaotic earth settle and an atmosphere was in development. a propper rotation was established seperating day and night, the rotation lead to the begining of weather patterns, and a development of our "poles." this drew the water into the atmosphere (giving way for the celestial bodies to shine on the earth and give way for seasons and times) and the poles exposing dry land for the formation of flora, after the establishment of flora, the fauna began to develop.
there are a great number of scientists even ones that teach evolution that point out that our existance doesnt appear as gradual as it does sudden and out of no where.

say what you will of the genesis epic it is still a prestine example of terraforming a planet.

as far as the Genesis story, as it were. if you consider that not every day, HAS to be consecutive, but rather work is done on day X to set certain aspects of terraforming into motion.

after that aspect has been accomplished, another day of working to set the next step into motion and so forth.


take the mythical, ethral, mystical perspective out of it and just look at it from a scientific perspective. the genesis story gives a perfect example of how to terraform a planet. that book is suggested to be several thousand years old, almost as old as the book of job. no matter how old the book really is, think about this. how did any ancient man determine the exact process that would be required to take a planet that is chaotic and without propper form, and then make it into a working "living" life baring machine if you will? genesis 1:1 the begining is likely the bang that many call big. after how ever long it took for the rapid expansion of the universe to settle some is when this planet began to be terraformed, hence day one. the chaotic earth settle and an atmosphere was in development. a propper rotation was established seperating day and night, the rotation lead to the begining of weather patterns, and a development of our "poles." this drew the water into the atmosphere (giving way for the celestial bodies to shine on the earth and give way for seasons and times) and the poles exposing dry land for the formation of flora, after the establishment of flora, the fauna began to develop.
there are a great number of scientists even ones that teach evolution that point out that our existance doesnt appear as gradual as it does sudden and out of no where.

say what you will of the genesis epic it is still a prestine example of terraforming a planet.

there are a great number of scientists even ones that teach evolution that point out that our existance doesnt appear as gradual as it does sudden and out of no where.

:/ You haven't watched any of the videos I posted. There may in fact be a few, very few, scientists who believe that..if a scientist is what you want to call them... But they are not the norm and are not taken seriously.

Here's something interesting from Genesis:

Day 1: Light, day and night.
.
.
Day 4: Sun, Moon, Stars !!?!!
the atmosphere was made clear to see the remaining celestal bodies that they may be used for seasons and so forth, im prettty sure i made that clear in my post.
.
Day 7: God is tired from all his work... wut?
no he simply stoped this specific work on that day, and marked it thusly. the resting was given for examples sake, not necessity. when jesus was confronted for working on the sabbath he further explains that he and his father dont cease from working ever, but this specific situation was given for mans sake. mostly symbolic.

“Have you not known? Have you not heard, that the everlasting God, YHWH, the Creator of the ends of the earth, faints not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.”

Isaiah 40:28

Christ was challenged on this and answered His critics:

“And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day. But Jesus answered them, ‘My Father works hitherto, and I work.’”

John 5:16–17

well, thats it. his blog is the end all. sorry to have wasted your time homie.

just dropping by....

I like the teapot theory better.

If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

Why would God let himself to be exposed by the scientists or believer? Isn't it automatically means that humans would lose their free will? If it's that easy, how could he be a power God?

Doesn't God's omnisciences sort of negate that anyway? Also, quantum physics would have us believe we don't truly have free will anyway.

either that is true or God actually invented quantum physic to fool us

He has invented lots of things to fool us..lol.

Putting those damn fossils in the ground to throw us off!! DNA sequencing! Q&M! Science! He's a trickster.

there is no such thing as free will, its all cause and effect.

?

he's referencing the the philosophic argument on free will ie Determinism and everything else thats not...

Cause and Effect( Determinism) meaning that everything is linked to the actions of something before it...you may think that choosing to buy strawberry milk was an action of your own free will but it might actually be because you developed a liking for strawberries because you are genetically inclined to enjoy their flavor which means that the act of you deciding to choose strawberry milk over chocolate was actually not because of your choice but because of former events that took place far out of your control...

the other school of thought being that you actually do have free will and you choose strawberry milk because thats what you wanted and it had nothing to do with past events or experiences...

this seem extremely offtopic though..better off making a separate thread about it if yo want to open this bag of tricks...

We know what caused the catastrophe in Haiti. It was the bumping and grinding of the Caribbean Plate rubbing up against the North American Plate: a force of nature, sin-free and indifferent to sin, unpremeditated, unmotivated, supremely unconcerned with human affairs or human misery.

The religious mind, however, hubristically appropriates the blind happenings of physics for petty moralistic purposes. As with the Indonesian tsunami, which was blamed on loose sexual morals in tourist nightclubs; as with Hurricane Katrina, which was attributed to divine revenge on the entire city of New Orleans for organising a gay rally; and as with other disasters going back to the famous Lisbon earthquake and beyond, so Haiti’s tragedy must be payback for human “sin”.

The Rev Pat Robertson, infamous American televangelist, sees the hand of God in the earthquake, wreaking terrible retribution for a 1791 pact that the Haitians made with the Devil, to help to rid them of their French masters. 1791? Ah, but don’t forget “I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me”.

Needless to say, milder-mannered faith-heads fell over themselves to disown Robertson, just as they disowned those other pastors, evangelists, missionaries and mullahs at the time of the earlier disasters.

What hypocrisy. Loathsome as Robertson’s views undoubtedly are, he is the Christian who stands squarely in the Christian tradition. The agonised theodiceans who see suffering as an intractable “mystery”, or who see God in the help, money and goodwill that is now flooding into Haiti, or (most nauseating of all) who claim to see God “suffering on the cross” in the ruins of Port-au-Prince, those faux-anguished hypocrites are denying the centrepiece of their own theology. It is the obnoxious Pat Robertson who is the true Christian here.

Where was God in Noah’s flood? He was systematically drowning the entire world, animal as well as human, as punishment for “sin”. Where was God when Sodom and Gomorrah were consumed with fire and brimstone? He was deliberately barbecuing the citizenry, lock, stock and barrel, as punishment for “sin”.

“Oh but that’s the Old Testament. No one believes those stories literally any more. The New Testament is all about love.” Dear modern, enlightened, theologically sophisticated, gentle Christian, you cannot be serious. Your entire religion is founded on an obsession with “sin”, with punishment and with atonement. Where do you find the effrontery to condemn Pat Robertson, you who have signed up to the odious doctrine that the central purpose of Jesus’s incarnation was to have himself tortured as a scapegoat for the “sins” of all mankind, past, present and future, beginning with the “sin” of Adam, who (as any modern theologian well knows) never even existed?

Yes, I know you hate the word “scapegoat” (with good reason, because it is a barbaric idea) but what other word would you use? The only respect in which “scapegoat” falls short as a perfect epitome of Christian theology is that the Christian atonement is even more unpleasant. The goat of Jewish tradition was merely driven into the wilderness with its cargo of symbolic sin. Jesus was supposedly tortured and executed to atone for sins that, any rational person might protest, he had it in his power simply to forgive, without the agony. Among all the ideas ever to occur to a nasty human mind (Paul’s of course), the Christian “atonement” would win a prize for pointless futility as well as moral depravity.

Even without the stark heartlessness of Pat Robertson, tragedies like Haiti are meat and drink to the theological mind. To quote the president of one theological seminary, writing in the On Faith blog of the Washington Post: “The earthquake in Haiti, like every other earthly disaster, reminds us that creation groans under the weight of sin and the judgment of God. This is true for every cell in our bodies, even as it is for the crust of the earth at every point on the globe.”

You nice, middle-of-the-road theologians and clergymen, be-frocked and bleating in your pulpits, you disclaim Pat Robertson's suggestion that the Haitians are paying for a pact with the Devil. But you worship a god-man who — as you tell your congregations, even if you don’t believe it yourself — “cast out devils”. You even believe (or you don’t disabuse your flock when they believe) that Jesus cured a madman by causing the “devils” in him to fly into a herd of pigs and stampede them over a cliff. Charming story, well calculated to uplift and inspire the Sunday School and the Infant Bible Class.

Robertson may spout evil nonsense, but he is a mere amateur at that game. Just read your own New Testament. Pat Robertson is true to it. But you?

Educated apologist, how dare you weep Christian tears, when your entire theology is one long celebration of suffering: suffering as payback for “sin” — or suffering as “atonement” for it? You may weep for Haiti where Pat Robertson does not, but at least, in his hick, sub-Palinesque ignorance, he holds up an honest mirror to the ugliness of Christian theology. You are nothing but a whited sepulchre.

Richard Dawkins’s latest book is The Greatest Show on Earth. His charitable foundation, RDFRS, is co-ordinating Non-Believers Giving Aid (NBGA)(givingaid.richarddawkins.net)

Looks like someone felt like getting there post count up.

WITH REGARD TO TEACHING EVOLUTION OR CREATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

In a nutshell, this is what I believe:

1. Origin studies, (whether Creation or evolution) and the idea of "millions of years" does not belong in the science classroom because these are not testable, repeatable or observable; they are philosophical and accepted by faith.

2. If evolution is taught in school, students should be taught the truth about it and the scientific data surrounding it. Ideas that were once championed by evolutionists are no longer valid, much like the false science behind man-made global warming. Students deserve the truth.

Guy running for school board in Wisconsin.

We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die because they?re never going to be born. The potential people who could have been here in my place, but who will in fact never see the light of day outnumber the sand grains of the Sahara. Certainly some of those unborn ghosts include greater poets than Keats, Scientists greater than Newton. We know this because the set of possible people allowed by our DNA so massively outnumbers the set of actual people. In the teeth of these stupefying odds, it is you and I, in our ordinariness, that are here. We, privileged few, who won the lottery of birth against all odds, how dare we whine at our inevitable return to that prior state for which the vast majority have never stirred.

Don't you ever laugh as a hearse goes by,
for you may be the next to die.
They wrap you up in a big white sheet,
And cover you up from your head down to your feet.
They put you in a big black box,
And cover you up with dirt and rocks.
All goes well for about a week,
And then your coffin begins to leak.
The worms crawl in, the worms crawl out,
The worms play pinochle* on your snout.
They eat your eyes, they eat your nose,
They eat the jelly between your toes.
A big green worm with rolling eyes,
Crawls in your stomach and out your eyes.
Your stomach turns a slimy green,
And pus pours out like whipping cream.
You spread it out on a slice of bread,
And that's what you eat when you are dead.