1001. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #43246 by BillySands on May 21, 2007 at 2:32 am

Devolved
Your new link yet again shows no evidence. This guy is prattling on about what he believes with no reasons give. You will need to up your game. Answer our questions before you post more bogus links. I may not not contine unless you do. Are you off dinosaur hunting then? No going down the museum an cheating now.

BaronOchs
I never realised that thread was so well read. I thought there were only about 4 people actually reading it. I think what we have clearly shown that it takes a lot of wishful thinking to claim that Ezekiel was actually a prophet. I think, and JC has shown convincingly that Ezekiel meant what he said, and it was not meant to be interpreted in anyother way. There are at least 2 points of time reference in that book: Ezekiel's 30th year and jehoichins captivity. Mark is trying to claim that they are all related, but the good historical and biblical evidence argues otherwise. So,the tyre prophecy failed and Ezekiel did not name Nebuchadnessar before he became king. He is no prophet. I think Mark is clutching at straws here, but unlike some, he certainly is no troll

Epeeist

Am I alone in thinking that their responses are almost Pavlovian?

What, you mean dribble?

1002. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #43181 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 4:12 pm

Cheers Baron, you can see why he is a literalist :-)

1003. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #43179 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 3:53 pm

Devolved, do you actually know how to form an arguement?
problems with NIV (by the way, I know they all have problems)

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/versions.html

http://www.trinitarianbiblesociety.org/site/articles/niv.asp#textprob

Strange that you forget to mention gen 1:24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [b] and over all the creatures that move along the ground." (Your beloved NIV)


Looks like god has finished his creation before man (unlike genesis 2. Oh what's that foot note you say?
Well, it only says that the actual hebrew has a different meaning [b] Genesis 1:26 Hebrew; Syriac all the wild animals - doh!

My qualifications are irrelevant to this debate. It's not my science against yours, but PhD scientists who disagree with your presuppositional biases. If you can't or won't critique them what conclusions can I draw? Dismissing them as fundamentalists really cuts no ice.

Ah, so you dont know enough to form an opinion of your own. What are you doing here then? You just accept the lies that you want to believe. There are more distinguished pro-evolution scientists than creationists. That however is no reason to believe them, but that seems to be your "logic". I find it a sad statement about your intellectual short commings that you dont even realise that these articles are being refuted. I find it bizarre that someone would even try to refute something they dont understand - and you clearly dont understand evolution!

Prove I have a presuppositional bias. I am defending evolution, and as far as I am concerned, god is not relevant to the evidence. It is sad that when faced with overwhwlming evidence that you just decide that we must have pre-suppositions. What is your evidence?
I keep telling you all it all take for me to renounce evolution. I like the truth, I'll be happy to be wrong - it is unlikely that i am considering the overwheming and self supporting evidence. I even gave you a few more options - are you on medication or suffered a recent head injury?

All you do is quote article after articlr that goes: evolution is wrong. We Will ignore all the evidence and concentrate on one unknown - what a retarded philosophy. Then when that unknown is demonstrated (eg HGT) you acknowledge it occurs then try to deny it by pretending that evolution works in a way that no evolutionist has ever suggested. You are full of straw men, and you dont understand why, because you have an agenda - you are pathetic and not interested in the truth.

I really like the lies that point mutations are in some way chaimed by evolutionists to introduce new genes. Funny though that all these articles agree that mutation and selection happens, so what they do is lie and attach a false claim to them - that they are evidence of the creation of new genes

Come on, ALX-4 truncation does that change anatomy or not? you dodge the question constantly.

What about opsin genes? cant you find some deceitful pseudo-scientific bollocks on a creation site yet?

What about that article on the resurrection? you said that would be relevant to you giving up christianity - not scared are you?

Where are those fossils? Oh that's right, you dont deal in evidence, and logic predisposed me againt moronic claims abot floods.

1004. Goodness without Godliness

Comment #43052 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 11:03 am

NJS I like both those arguements - homosexuality and sex before marriage. If something was truely wrong, it would be obvious, but these cant be shown to be bad if it is consentual. I'm embarrased to say that when I was a christian, it made me mildly homophobic

1005. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #43050 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 10:57 am

Ah, Devolved seems to be showing that he is backed into a corner : a professor of physics doesn't believe in evolution - what a pathetic comment! I've got a PhD in biochemistry. Have you? surely you should just bow to my authority, or bow to the greater number of top evolutionists vs creationists. What a sad position to hold - "hey everyone, I had a pet goldfish once, so I'm an authority on evolution" Epeeist, you're a physicist, ever heard of this "renowned scientist"?

So come on Billy where's your SCIENTIFIC response to this

I already gave it, (cant you read?) it says evolution occurs, as does horizontal gene transfer. The authors faced with this embarasing fact change the rules and say "ah, but the new information did not arise the way we want it to, so we can lie to ourselves".

What about the article I gave you????????

Here's a Christian response to Billy's 'problem':....

And also whishful thinking on your part. Are you then saying the bible is not perfect? wow!

[NIV the world's best selling translation], 'Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field …', the apparent disagreement with Genesis 1 disappears completely.

Wow, that's us told! No serious scholar holds the NIV to be a good translation. It is an apologetic work that glosses over problems. I'm afraid that your apology ignores the facts. The bible clearly tells us that in chapter 2 that all the animals were formed between adam and eve. here is another problem (KJV - ONE OF THE MORE RELIABLE TRANSLATIONS)
GEN1:20 "And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
Gen 2:" 19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. "

Do you believe Gen1:30 where everything is vegetarian? including lions and tigers and bears - oh my!


Where are those pesky dinosaurs? Tell you what, I'll make it easy for you, lets not restrict it to dinosaurs. How about cynodonts? or therapsids? or pterosaurs? or mosasaurs? or archaeopteryx or trilobites or amonites - there was a flood afterall?

Do you believe the earth is flat? the bible does say so afterall http://www.bibleandscience.com/bible/books/genesis/genesis1_circleearth.htm

What did you make of that ressurection link? let me guess - it must be wrong because you just know the truth - eh?
Why has joseph got 2 daddies? why is jesus decended from a moabite? they are not allowed in the congregation of god (neh. 13:1 any version)

Ryan we dont mind you going to mass - sounds like devolved might though - you obviously dont attent the right church - sounds like he is an irish protestant or something.

1006. Goodness without Godliness

Comment #42976 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 7:44 am

One thing I would like to hear is a theist argue that homosexuality is "evil" and not resort to justifying on god's say so. We can all demonstrate why murder, rape etc are wrong, but try as I might, I cant come up with a reason why homosexuality is moraly wrong. That's the problem with religion. It encourages hate without thought. Substitute homosexuality for catholicism, islam, moabite, palestinean, philistine etc and we see an intolerant pattern in those who claim to serve a moral law giver

1007. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42955 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 6:15 am

Devolved,
jesus did not return and judge the world 2000 years ago, and as for the resurrection, check this out by a former minister who saw the light http://ffrf.org/about/bybarker/rise.php

I think you need to believe I have a supposition. I am on record as to what it will take. so where are those dinosaurs? Can you actually even prove jesus rose from the dead in the first place? you cant even prove he existed, and you believe this incredible pagan derived myth?

By the way, that link actually says evolution occurs and shows that new genes are transferred. I ask you again, does mutation of ALX-4 change digit number or not - perhaps you cant find a CMI deception on the subject. What about the opsin article?

BTW evolution has nothing to do with me abandoning the lieof xianity, so i have no agenda - you do!

1008. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42947 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 6:09 am

Thanks ryan, but I live in Scotland.
Whether the account is meant to be literal or not, is a debate in itself, but devolved seems to be a literalist. Interestingly, one of the worlds leading critics of intelligent design (ken miller is a catholic) Behe himself does not rule out evolution either. He just invents the concept of irreducible complexity based on personal incredulity or ignorance.

1009. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42943 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 6:03 am

devolved, start talking talking sence then. oh look, i duplicated the word taking. Oops, Ive mutated it, and can use it for something else - oh, reminds me while you are taking that in, read about opsin gene evolution http://www.genome.org/cgi/content/full/9/7/629
knock yourself out dude

1010. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42930 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 5:51 am

Ryan,
there are problems in the order of creation. Gen 1 animals then people. Gen 2 adam, animals, eve (because god failed to provide a suitable animal companion. There are other problems.
I think that the stories are meantto be literal though, as jesus, paul, peter and god refer to them so.
I would contend that the universe is nice. Just ask the dinosaurs, then there is disease - prevalent in pre human fossils

wrote a longer response but accidentally deleted it :-(
Not sure about the wisdon of putting your email addresss up. There are spam scanners out there

1011. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42920 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 5:39 am

Do I fully understand why some prayer goes unanswered? No. Does that make Jesus a liar?

That an verses like matt 26: 64Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Jesus did not return 2000 years ago. How come his genealogies contradict, and contains a banned moabite ancestor. How come jeremiah's 70 year prophecy failed, as did ezekiels tyre prophecy. Why doe Micah 5:2 and the virgin birth prophecy not refer to jesus etc etc ...........

1012. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42916 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 5:27 am

Why do waste time on devolved?

Did you lie about evolution then? naughty boy! What your sad fundie brain does not want to comprehend is that your arguement that you need new genes to change body plan is totally false. simple mutations can do the job!
You really are struggling with your propaganda here - actually, I know a few evolution friendly christians that think you stupid literalists do more harm than good. i agree with them.
NOW, DOES ALX-4 MUTATION ALTER THE NUMBER OF CLAWS OR NOT?

Please tell me where the dinosaurs are.
tell me why pdeudogenes dont count. Your fundie propaganda could only say that they start with the assumption that all DNA must have a function - a clearly false and easily refuted statement by experimentation.

Let me reiterate, someone who will abandon evolution ifdinosaurs and humans are found together has no presuppositions - i am willing to be proven wrong - that doesnt enter your mentality
Just like your god, there is no evidence for fairies. Shoul I examine my alledged presuppositions on this?

BTW genesis 1 and 2 conteadict each other - 'nuff said!

1013. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #42910 by BillySands on May 20, 2007 at 5:06 am

Is there a reason it does not say Alexander the Great? Not famous enough for god to remember his name?

I think this is a very good point. mark is claiming (wrongly in our opinion) that God specifically names Nebuchadnessar before he was King. Why not Alexander or Titus by name?. It would be inconsistent of god to be vague when he was specific previously. The specific claims make the interpretive stuff more dubious. Even if Mark concedes that the prophecy was written after neb became king, we stil have a specific prophecy to cyrus that claims that he does not yet know god Isaiah 45:1-4
probably written by cyrus himself though

1014. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42703 by BillySands on May 19, 2007 at 5:18 am

Oh dear Devolved, I'm still laughing, but I couldn't resist a peek at what you had written. Lets get this straight, no evolutionist has ever claimed the valine 6 to glutamic acid change has ever been anything more than a beneficial mutation that has become fixed in malarious areas.
your penicillin quote is too pathetic to bother with.
You told us that you once believed in evolution. that was a lie - wasn't it! You dont know the first thing about it.

I have provided evidence and all you can say is that god always existed - how poor is your case!
You seem to like false statements about how you want evolution to work - remember the Alx-4 ass kicking that i gave your misrepersentations? or bithorax? or all the other mechanisms? You even responded saying that you knew nothing about converted and processed pseudogenes, but i was wrong - you are a sad fundie. I wish you no ill, but you really are deluded and i hope you sort that out one day - atheism has been good to me (unlike xianity) i hope you lose your repressive delusion and start living an intellectually and emotionally fulfilled life in a genuine pursuit of truth

have a nice life

oldskeptic
Never thought about that, but it makes sense

1015. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #42699 by BillySands on May 19, 2007 at 4:44 am

It definately is a team effort, and I am learning a lot from mark and JC about the bible, and my knowledge of astrophysics is improving too.

I agree with JC that we probably have enough to focus on in this debate, but thought I would throw my tuppence worth in about the law.

Jesus says that the law still stands
MAT 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Verse 19 is particularly telling in terms of Pauls contadictory teachings (often he contradicts himself. This has lead many to believe that paul is a multi author creation http://www.inu.net/skeptic/usedcar.html )


19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

jesus often says that the law must be followed

Matt 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?
21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

(I just noticed something whilst reading this chapter: 28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. What about Judas? surely he wouldn't have a throne in heaven)

Anyway, the laws that jesus obeys are pretty absurd - particularly one of the rape laws where a victim must marry her rapist, and her father recieves the compensation - lucky girl!
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/index.html

In respect to jesus vs paul, I am aware of at least one case in one of paul's misogyistic rants wher he offers his opinion, and not the word of god (JC may know more)
1 cor 7 Now, as to the things in your letter to me: It is good for a man to have nothing to do with a woman.
2 But because of the desires of the flesh, let every man have his wife, and every woman her husband.
3 Let the husband give to the wife what is right; and let the wife do the same to the husband.
4 The wife has not power over her body, but the husband; and in the same way the husband has not power over his body, but the wife.
5 Do not keep back from one another what is right, but only for a short time, and by agreement, so that you may give yourselves to prayer, and come together again; so that Satan may not get the better of you through your loss of self-control.
6 But this I say as my opinion, and not as an order of the Lord.

1016. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42541 by BillySands on May 18, 2007 at 11:05 am

Oh Devolved how ignorant are you?

"Ok, but just like in the case of penicillin resistant bacteria, you have a degenerative mutation that just so happens to be conducive to survival in that environment. If you take a closer look however, you will find that the mutation that results in penicillin resistant bacteria actually destroys a gene coding for a regulating enzyme that limits the amount of pennicilinase produced by the bacterium. Therefore, the mutation actually destroyed genetic information, although it happened to benefit the organism in that environment.

Show me where there is no new information above. It sounds like a straw man too

Sickle-cell anemia works on the exact same concept."

Another straw man! There is a single pint mutation in the haemoglobin gene that confers resistance to plasmodium infection. You seem to be argueing that evolution occurs here - mutation, selection and fixing desirable traits - thanks, but we all know evolution happends

That's natural selection at work but provides no support for evolution.

HA HAHAHAHHHA HA HA!!!!!!

"Natural selection involves merely the shuffling, rearrangement and degeneration of existing genetic information, whereas evolution requires encyclopaedic quantities of new information to be produced by unintelligent, natural processes—information coding for new types of organs, limbs, physiologies, etc."

See above, but with more HA HA HAs and some reparatory needle work to my sides thrown in.

What's the point discussing with someone who has such a disgustingly ingnorant desire to misunderstand the basics of natural selection?
The conversation goes like this

you: evolution does not occur (random quote with no evidence thrown in).

Us. yes it does: plenty of evidence provided and much time spent by us.

You: no it doesnt, random and irrelevant quote provided and no evidence yet again.

Us: more time spent, more evidence posted and your random quote trashed.

Repeating cycle of events

Eventually, you do a runner, which is very disrespectful to those of us who answer your no brainer posts

Billy Sands came up with some supposed examples of information increase but they all failed too.

No they didn't, and you did a runner - Headline: "man evolves into chicken"

I'm not going to waste any more time on you, but thanks for the laugh.

PS How's the dinosaur hunt? - and watch out for gay cowboys in the Hell's Creek formation

See devolved in action here:

http://richarddawkins.net/article,1034,Cataloguing-every-species-on-earth,Colin-Nickerson-the-Boston-Globe

and here
http://richarddawkins.net/article,912,Pope-abolishes-limbo,The-Daily-Telegraph-Waterstones

1017. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42530 by BillySands on May 18, 2007 at 10:41 am

Cheers Baron, so they dont need a justification. That figures.
I know a former christian who is a lesbian. Trying to be straight really depressed her. She recently got married to another lesbian. I asked her brother what he thought of that, and he said "compairing how clinically depressed she was a few years ago with how happy she is now, I'm really pleased for her". Contrast that with the Christian view - incidentally, most of her christian - so called - friends abandoned her when she came out

See Bizzaro is off with out answering.
It seems his only evidence for god is the fact he cant imagine or explain things

1018. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42485 by BillySands on May 18, 2007 at 9:31 am

Something I've been meaning to ask a god botherer for a while. Can you actuallyt justify why homosexuality is so evil without saying because god says so? I can justify why murder or rape is wrong without saying god says so. So, why is it wrong? What bad does it do?
And just to put your evil little theistic minds at ease, I am straight - I know how much you like to jump to conclusions and say non believers have an agenda.

1019. The Fastest-Growing Religion

Comment #42381 by BillySands on May 18, 2007 at 6:15 am

Uzi,
Did you see the docu-drama version of "touching the void". When Joe Simpsom is lying presumed dead in a crevase with a broken leg, he says that reaching out to God did not occur to him. I thought that was one in the eye for the "no atheists in foxholes" brigade.
There is something more satisfying about climbing when you realise there is no god there to reach out to in trouble. You get satisfaction from knowing that you got out of trouble yourself.

Lets not forget, many Churches here are now pubs too - and lots of alcohol may just get you in the right frame of mind to hear the command of god telling you to follow old people around the supermarket and put condoms in their trollies when they are not looking

1020. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #42324 by BillySands on May 18, 2007 at 4:15 am

The metro (Scottish version) http://www.metro.co.uk
It's a free paper for commuters with an audience of over 1 million
Dont think they publish their letters page online. I think they have a forum that I never visit, so I dont know if there is any on going stuff there. I wrote a letter today challenging someone (that I know) to open debate, so lets see if it gets published and covered. I'm becoming quite evangelical :-)

1021. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42322 by BillySands on May 18, 2007 at 4:09 am

Cheers Philip,
People like devolved often ignore what challenges them. That's why he constantly does a runner.

Mark is the only Christian who comes on this site and tries to present something positive. Everyone else just uses arguements of incredulity or ignornce as evidence of God. Some just assune from the outset that god exists unless you can prove otherwise.
I think Mark and JC are trying to see who can write the biggest post at the moment - The atheist is of course winning :-)

1022. Jerry Falwell's Hit Parade

Comment #42295 by BillySands on May 18, 2007 at 3:23 am

In my opinion, the Antichrist will be a counterfeit of the true Christ, which means that he will be male and Jewish, since Jesus was male and Jewish."

And Not to mention Homosexual

Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all. Daniel 11:37

So I guess Jesus must have been a male jew who occasionally drove up bournville boulevard.

For those who dont know, Devolved is a masochist. He keeps coming on and gets the shit kicked out of him, then does a runner without answering questions. Have fun with him guys.

By the way, hows the Dinosaur hunting comming on?
How did Noah stop the termites eating the ark? surely they must have had more than just 2 , or an ant eater would mae the go extinct.
How did noah and familt manage to harbour all human pathogens, and not turn to mush.
Forgive me for wanting answers, but I think it is important. Maybe Bizzaro can help you.

1023. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #42278 by BillySands on May 18, 2007 at 2:43 am

Can't hang around and chat today, but thought Lee would like this. I've kickstarted a debate in a news paper that is challenging god. It has been running for about three weeks now. Some letters are serious, and some are funny. Noah came up a few days ago, and someone wrote this today:
"What were Noah's last words? A:"Who brought those perishing termites on board?""

1024. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #41929 by BillySands on May 17, 2007 at 10:06 am

Prove God doesn't exist…

And what would satisfy you that he didn't? Are you saying that you believe because you cant disprove it? So do you believe in Allah, Santa claus and pink fairies? You cant disprove them. It suggests that you take god's existence as given. I would want some positive evidence.

Your right, I apologise, both God and Jesus asked to be tested, but Jesus was also asked to be tested by the Pharisees with a miracle and he refused saying "I will not give this generation any such sign." Mark 8:11-13

cop out. Perhaps he couldn't do any

If he showed them a miracle would they proclaim he was God, no! Their hearts were not wanting or willing to believe even if he had shown them a thousand miracles!

You see, this is the kind of presupposition that annoys me - there must be something wrong with me because I saw no miracles - how the hell would you know? It annoys me even more because I really wanted to keep my faith at the time (by any chance are you thinking right now that I didn't want it bad enough?)

By the way they had witnessed Jesus' miracles before this, the healing of a mans deformed hand none the less Mark 3:1-6

Allegedly, according to a man writing decades after his death, and who never met him

Is that what it would take to convince you, a miracle?

Yep, but I guess he couldn't be bothered.

Even if I gave you your sister's middle name, you wouldn't believe God told me, you'd try to justify it somehow.

More supposition - eh?

What do many christians believe about atheists? I work for an atheist, I have friends that would call themselves atheists, please tell me what I believe about them.

I think your suppositions make it clear - and you probably think they are going to hell.

I think your presuming things now. I genuinely want to see your point of view so instead of attacking me,

Well dont equate Darwiun with the christian KKK or the religious Hitler - or make suppositions about people you dont know

please make clear your beliefs.

I see so evidence of a god!

Maybe start by answering the question I keep asking you. How did it all begin then? If it wasn't God, what was it?

I did! and I'll repeat ignorance is not evidence of god!.

I don't understand why you have to throw out other peoples theories or beliefs when you haven't come to a conclusion yourself.

Because I want to know the truth, and I conclude there is no evidence of god. You have provided none, you seem to believe because you cant be proved wrong. That's like me saying that I dont believe because I cant be proved wrong. The difference though is I have evaluated the so called evidence and it is no evidence at all. I seek to deal in what's plausible, and not pin my view on the fact it cant be disproven.

What if Allah is real?


2: The Cow
2:1 Alif. Lam. Mim.
2:2 This is the Scripture whereof there is no doubt, a guidance unto those who ward off (evil).
2:3 Who believe in the Unseen, and establish worship, and spend of that We have bestowed upon them;
2:4 And who believe in that which is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) and that which was revealed before thee, and are certain of the Hereafter.
2:5 These depend on guidance from their Lord. These are the successful.
2:6 As for the Disbelievers, Whether thou warn them or thou warn them not it is all one for them; they believe not.

2:7 Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom.

1025. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #41871 by BillySands on May 17, 2007 at 8:23 am

William,

What another bizzare statement from Robertson. You can only imagine that he is trying to undermine any credibility theologians had. Long may he keep spouting pish and looking silly. I presume his alterego Knox is a form of worship of John Knox, who married a girl a third his age and helped in the murder of Cardinal David Beaton. Dont think Dawkins would consider this guy a role model - oops a morally superior atheist. How can that be?

Did his letter ever get published? If not, then despite what he thinks, the reason is because it is pish!
David
Here is a little letter I sent into the metro in response to a slack jawed fundie supporter of the Scottish Christian party. and it got published!

John, Fundamentalist atheist? Were you up all night thinking up that response? I dont object to anyone having a faith. What I do object to is religious fanatics who devalue life, freedom and intellectual pursuit. I object to anyone who would impose their ways on others because some God who is about as real as a flying eight legged sulphur breathing unicorn says so. People like you make Steven Weinberg's words so true :"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.
Since you hold the Bible is such authority, here is a quote especially for you: "Only a simpleton believes everything they are told" (Proverbs 14:15)

Oh yeah, and you ding bats are being made to look stupid in it too. Some muppet even wrote in recently to say evolution was impossible because of the second law of thermodynamics. Wow, he got slaughtered, and creationists were shown for the fools they are

1026. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #41815 by BillySands on May 17, 2007 at 5:58 am

JC :"we're not worthy!"
That's JCS of course :-)

1027. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #41799 by BillySands on May 17, 2007 at 4:51 am

Hi Mark

If 24:1 had said Nebuchadnezzar was King of Babylon at that date, I would be forced to admit defeat. But that name is not there, it just mentions "the king of Babylon". There were of course kings of Babylon for a long time before Nebuchadnezzar – see Isa 39:1 for a much earlier one, way back in the time of king Hezekiah and the prophet Isaiah. So your point is not proved in that respect.

I know there have been many babylonian kings before Neb, but the point is that there are no other accounts of a Babylonian campaign around that time, and Neb's fits the bill perfectly.

You are also wrong in the interpretation you give for the words that are in that verse. I don't know if you're quoting from some published version, or whether it's your own reading of it, but it's rather odd either way! In the KJV we read "the king of Babylon set himself against Jerusalem this same day." A concordance or the Online Bible (OLB) reveals that the word translated "set himself" is rendered in a range of ways in the KJV. Here is the list as reported by the OLB:

lay 18, uphold 9, put 5, lean 3, stay 3, sustained 3, holden up 1, borne up 1, established 1, stand fast 1, lieth hard 1, rested 1, set 1.

The NIV says that he begun his siege, as does the NSAB. The NLT says he is attacking. Although, I was interpreting the verse. The point is that this clearly points to Nebuchadnezzar's siege in the 9th year. If you can point to another siege, then you can strengthen your case. And I haven't agreed that the KJV is the best translaton. You admit yourself that it contains difficulties.

First, I think you have a small error in your arithmetic (we all make them!): I reckon the "27th year" would actually be 595 or 596 BC, not 590, if we take the end of Zedekiah's 11 year reign and the conclusion of the siege of Jerusalem to have occurred in 586 BC. Anyway, let's not worry about that (it makes the gap greater, not less, so your case seems, if anything, stronger).

Just seeing if you were awake :-)

The point you are forgetting here is that Ezekiel is a prophet. In just the same way that God at one point said to Abraham, "unto thy seed will I give this land"........I know that might sound a bit of a glib answer, but describing yet future things as certain, or complete, is entirely in keeping with the nature of Biblical prophecy!

Firstly, I am not convinced that Abraham existed, but that is for another day. You don't really have a case here. It is quite clear that the battle has been fought and that no plunder was taken. You have not proven your case here, and it seems more like a special appeal

A bit like saying that Isaiah meant virgin in 7:14, when he actually uses the real word for virgin at least 4 times elsewhere
But you imply that only one Hebrew word could be the "real" and exclusive word for virgin. Why must that be so? The Inuit apparently have several different words for "snow" (at least 4), depending on context, while we only have one. Judging by the way Rebekah is described in Genesis 24:16 (using your so-called "real word"), it might be argued - though I don't particularly do so, myself - that that word is if anything less definite in conveying the sense than the one Isaiah uses in 7:14 – else why add the extra qualification that is given concerning her?

I think a better explanation of word usage here is the possibility that Isaiah is a multi author book. The real problem with this "prophecy" though is context.

1028. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #41792 by BillySands on May 17, 2007 at 3:46 am

William
After reading about the 10 reasons, I thought I would go and refute them. It appears the site is now heavily moderated, and from previous experience, Robertson removes what he does not like. I presume this is because we make them doubt.

1029. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #41635 by BillySands on May 16, 2007 at 12:37 pm

I see pewkatchoo knows a pure bawbag and fud when he sees one :-)

1030. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #41632 by BillySands on May 16, 2007 at 12:22 pm

Mark,
As well as the problem I have already mentioned about relating dates to the 30th (and I still stand by that), there are others.
We agree the 30th year is 593 BCE. by your reckoning, the 9th year of 24:1 would be 614 BCE. However, this chapter tells us that the King of babylon is starting his attack on jerusalem (24:2). This was actually 588 BCE - or as mentioned above, Zedekiah's 9th year.
In 29:17, the 27th year is 590BCE by your reconing. The chapter talks of the campain against tyre in the perfect tense (and other problems have already been touched upon). This however did not take place until i571 BCE, So the dating is not compatible. You can not use 1:1 to date events in the book.

I don't follow that. The book is clearly not set out in chronlogical order, so your saying "he is starting off" doesn't help. Just follow the sequence:

I was just wondering what your position was on this. However, it does introduce another problem though. What evidence do you have that these prophecies were then written before the event. After all, by your reckoning of time, the oldest events appear first in the book. Suggesting the more recent events were written at a later date

I agree it sounds like it - I guess you are noticing that the English word "broken" comes in both Ezekiel 26:2 and 1 Kings 24:4. The problem with that "likeness" or apparent connection, is that (as a concordance or the OLB will show), the corresponding Hebrew words for "broken" in the two passages are quite different - unlike the solid link between 1:1 and 26:1, they don't make a connection.

Why not? they are both translated as broken. It sounds like an apologists trick to me. A bit like saying that Isaiah meant virgin in 7:14, when he actually uses the real word for virgin at least 4 times elsewhere

1031. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #41614 by BillySands on May 16, 2007 at 11:54 am

USA_limey,
For me, I realised that I was actively in denial and lying to myself over problems of christianity. This liberates you and allows you to grasp reason. You then see what a load of bullshit the bible really is

1032. Television evangelist Falwell dies at 73

Comment #41521 by BillySands on May 16, 2007 at 8:27 am

Very good post, Smithnya. "Respecting the dead" is not the point, here. In this case, the dead is not worthy of respect. The point is that as athiests we need to rise above the hate-mongering of our opponents. And we cannot do that by being hate-mongerers ourselves.

You sound like you think atheism is a religion. It is not. I am glad there is one less like him in the world. I can understand why some folk feel anger towards him. Perhaps you should bear in mind that atheists feel hurt too!

What do you say Bizarro? Is he burning in hell?

1033. Television evangelist Falwell dies at 73

Comment #41506 by BillySands on May 16, 2007 at 7:57 am

LibraryRef
Some guy called JC gave me the answers to their exam questions, so it should be easy to pass. Bizzaro has no excuses now.

Q1: Who made the universe?
A: God
Q2: Where did life come from?
A: God made it
Q3: What are fossils?
A: The work of the devil
Q4: Who is Richard Dawkins?
A: The dark one who makes fossils in his basement and scatters them with magic fairy dust to decieve true bilievers. He is Satan incarnate
Q6: What shape is the earth?
A: Flat - the way god likes it!
Q7 Is schroedingers cat alive or dead?
A: Dont know, but god does, so that's good enough for me

1034. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #41449 by BillySands on May 16, 2007 at 6:16 am

Del (there are some tips on making your posts clearer just above you as you type)

You say evolution is the result of human existence – end of story! Then you research to find out the ins and outs or gaps of your findings and beliefs.

No! may I suggest you read some of Dawkin's books. Human existance is the result of evolution. The "belief" is based on evidence and testing. Not faith!

When you were a christian, did you ever see any miracles or anything out of the ordinary physically change, that could not be medically proven how it happened? It sounds like a certain prayer wasn't answered by your strong convictions that prayer does not work! I am truly sorry if this is true.

I did not see any miracles! And I dont believe anyone has. It always seems to happen to the friend of a friend of a friend's milknan's baby sitter. You would be wrong about a specific prayer. None were answered. Big one, small ones, personal ones, ones to make others believe. It is very annoying when a christian says something like that. The assumption is that there must be something wrong with the apostate.

I'm sure with the right research and experiments I could tell you, especially with technology today!  But on a serious note, prayer is not to satisfy ourselves or to test God.

Sounds like a cop out to me. Your comment is unbiblical as well. Jesus tells you to love god with your heart and mind, Jesus lets Thomas test him, and god even encourages Ahaz to test him in the virgin birth non prophecy. So, your god expects us to believe without providing any proof - that is absurd! I suggest you watch kissing hank's ass on you tube to see how absurd.

This is why these sacrificial laws are not needed anymore and we are to live by Jesus' command of 'Love one another, as I have loved you' John 13:34

Does the verse say that deformed people are not good enough for this ritual or not? Have you read the OT - especially joshua? That is not a loving god! And I definately am an Atheist - another annoying presupposition!

Where does this anger towards me or people like me come from Billy? A chemical reaction to my words maybe… or something deeper within us?

Another annoying presupposition! My money is on the neurochemistry! I don't feel challenged by anything you say and I am comfortable with myself - despite what many christians need to believe about atheists.

What would convince you that you were wrong?

I asked first! Please answer.

I am very open to questioning my beliefs but I can't deny the proof that I've seen – miracles. Can you? And please don't misquote me either, I have never said that all my prayers have been answered but I'm okay with that for we both seem to agree that you don't need 100% accuracy to believe something is the truth – evolution for

Like I say what miracles? People often interpret the slightest thing as a miracle - like finding 10p in the street - because they want to believe it is one. Now, dont take this personally. I dont know you, but do amputees grow legs every day, or do people lie? If I dont see it, it's not evidence! Then you seem to have covered your bases there - Dont test god! You have effectively cocooned yourself from the need to test, becuse if you actually studied the effectiveness of prayer, you would conclude it fails.

The hypothesis that thee is a designer falls down because by the same logic, he needs a designer - and so on. To claim that the has always existed is a shift from reason and a bias shift infavour of your own beliefs. It is neither consistent or honest reasoning, and by the special appealling of this position, it stops becoming science and blind faith. In so doing, you are effectivly saying that the only evidence you have for a designer is that you cant explain something. Science has a good track record at explaining the gaps god once occupied. You are labelling your ignorance god, or have I missed something?

1035. Television evangelist Falwell dies at 73

Comment #41381 by BillySands on May 16, 2007 at 3:41 am

Bizzaro said:

And yes, Liberty is fully accredited. I don't see why you all have a problem with the school. Sure, it's a Christian school but I fail to see what bearing this has on the acedemic aspect.

Oh the juicy irony! Of course if it teaches young earth creationism, then that is an obvious problem.
I'm reminded of the video, where a Liberty U physics professor asked Dawkins what evidence he would need to believe that dinosaur fossils were only a few thousand years old.
Basic Radiochemistry for f**k sake! and this guy is a professor of physics

1036. Statement of Concern about Impact of AIG's Creation 'Museum'

Comment #40949 by BillySands on May 15, 2007 at 8:37 am

Looks like the Russians are more intelligent than many Americans
http://www.darwin.museum.ru/eng/

1037. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #40937 by BillySands on May 15, 2007 at 8:17 am

D'Arcy,

So where is this evidence of Jesus, apart from Christian sources? The Roman census of 4AD? The Turin Shroud? The Dorking Bones?

Interesting you bring up the census of Quirinius (think it was actually 6 CE from memory).

Wee flea has been challenged on this before. The problem is that this date conflicts with that of Matthew, who places the birth of Jesus at some time around 4 BCE. So if luke is right, Matthew is wrong, and the slaughter of the innocents is an impossibility - not suprising really, because the virgin birth and bethelehem prophecies are totally contrived.
Wee flea said that there was some archaeological evidence that Quirinius was govenor arount 4BCE. However, it turns out that this "evidence" is a nameless and dateless inscription. After this was pointed out, he just clammed up - and this guy is supposed to be doing a PhD in history.
For those who are interested, here is a lengthy article on the problem http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/quirinius.html

1038. Christopher Hitchens Explains It All for You: Move over, Sam Harris; another atheist wants the pulpit

Comment #40915 by BillySands on May 15, 2007 at 7:45 am

that the project's leader, Francis Collins, has made his Christian commitment quite public.

Yes, apparently he saw a frozen waterfall and converted - I'd keep quiet about this if I was him.

Hitchens admires Socrates' claim to be certain only of his own ignorance. The reader wishes that Hitchens would exchange admiration for emulation.

In other words, we are right and atheists are wrong. What stupidity!

1039. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #40870 by BillySands on May 15, 2007 at 6:09 am

Del, as a former Christian, I can definately say that prayer does not work! All you are doing is propogating unsubstantiated annecdotes not evidence. I am willing to let you demonstrate the futility of prayer and ask you to tell me my sister's middle name - of course, you will fail!
ID does stop people asking. By definition, the answer is God did it - end of story!

These rules were for the priests only, being examples of the spotless sacrificial lamb. But Christianity accepts all who are open because of Gods blood sacrifice through Christ (1 Peter 1:18-19)

I dont want to hear excuses, it still degrades deformed people. What is worse, the bible tells us thad god forms people in the womb: Psalms 139:13.

but he was far from the christian faith that stands on Jesus' command, "Love your neighbours as yourself"

Which contradicts the OT god. I prefer the words of Confucious, written 500 years earlier "force not on others that which you would not chose for yourself".

Forgive me if I am wrong, but I dont believe (especially with your Darwin=atheism rant) that you really do have an open mind. What would convince you that you were wrong?

1040. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #40840 by BillySands on May 15, 2007 at 4:42 am

Good Question Mark - although, thae parasites are a big p[roblem too. Anyway, off the top of my head - I will follow this up later though. Dinosaurs are not just lizards - they differ in many significant ways - anatomically an and physiologically (from evidence.) We find lots of nests, and we can work out the size of the adults from the number and size of the eggs and from the spacings between nests (a lot has been done on this with Maiasaurs). Sometimes we find (adult size) foot prints too. We even have an adult (full size) Oviraptor fossil incubating it's eggs. There are also juvenile features associated with young dinosaurs, such as unfused bones or narrow pelvises, so we can work out that the dinosaurs need to be near adult size to breed. I'm sure there will be a lot more evidence if we care to look.
However, dinosaurs and humans are separated by 65 million years

1041. How dare you call me a fundamentalist

Comment #40825 by BillySands on May 15, 2007 at 4:18 am

wee free

When you define faith, aka Dawkins, as belief in spite of the evidence, rather than because of it, you are setting up a straw man that no intelligent Christian would agree with.

Well David, we keep asking for your best evidence, and you never reply. You never present any, so you do fit that description. I personally would still like to know how you can believe in spite of the virgin birth non prophecy. That is fundamentalism. Dawkins will give up evolution if yoy can find humans and dinosaurs fossilised together. Do you really expect us to take your bitter accusations against Dawkins seriously. Tell me Daviid, do you think all atheists are fundamentalists, or are you just a very silly boy?

1042. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #40796 by BillySands on May 15, 2007 at 2:33 am

Hi Mark, been v busy the last few week, but I'll try and get to the library today and get some info on the location of ancient tyre.

BTW where did noah put a pair of 100 tonne Argentinasaurus and a pair of 70 tonne Brachiosaurs? Abd how did he keep allthe carnivores food from going off? Every species of parasite and virus must have been living in every animal on the ark. Given that I could probably rattle off about 50 human parasites off the top of my head (my first degree is in Parasitology), then Noah and family must have been very ill indeed - infact dead because of anemia, cerebral ischemia, liver failure, perforated intestines, immnmodeficiency and sepsis to name but a few, and lets not forget the flesh (and brain eating maggots). Anyway, just something for you to ponder just now :-)
I also find these discussions useful, and do become more convinced the bible is wrong. But it's good we can do it respectfully

1043. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #40518 by BillySands on May 14, 2007 at 11:54 am

Hey Devolved
That was totally predictable! Infact, you just won me a mars bar in a bet.
One important difference though, the quote i gave holds true whatever. Yours - not suprisingly is an unsubstantiated claim.

Why do you keep running off to mummy when the going gets tough?

1044. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #40437 by BillySands on May 14, 2007 at 9:44 am

Here is one nice bible passage on the worth of deformed people:
In Lev. 21:16-23 God said to Moses, "Say to Aaron: 'For the generations to come none of your descendants who has a defect may come near to offer the food of his God. No man who has any defect may come near: no man who is blind or lame, disfigured or deformed; no man with a crippled foot or hand, or who is hunchbacked or dwarfed, or who has any eye defect, or who has festering or running sores or damaged testicles. No descendant of Aaron the priest who has any defect is to come near to present the offerings made to the Lord by fire. He has a defect.... because of this defect, he must not go near the curtain or approach the altar, and so desecrate my sanctuary...."

1045. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #40395 by BillySands on May 14, 2007 at 8:26 am

Del
I think you forgot to take your pills (are you devolved in disguise? or did you just happen to sign up today by chance?) Actually, were the KKK not founded by Scottish protestant immigramts? and Hitler was religious!
Strange that many theists accept evolution - that kind of pisses on your assertion that evolution=atheism. Search this site for the Ken Miller video that attacks ID if you want proof!

Perhaps you can educate us - in your own words about what is actually wrong with evolution, and why believing in God is scientific?

So let the children explore both sides and give them room to decide.

Do you agree that children should also be taught Islam on an equal footing with christianity, so that they can decide for themselves?
Surely disclaimers should also be read out at school assemblies and RE classes stating that there is no evidence that prayer works, or that no one has actually seen god, so the bible should be read with an open mind with respect to its authority - well do you?

1046. Christians and atheists start a calmer dialogue

Comment #40384 by BillySands on May 14, 2007 at 8:15 am

It appears to me that Mehta is looking for something to believe in while it seems, to me at least, that Henderson is just using him and the neopagans as a market research tool to find more succesful ways to delude more people.

I agree. I doubt any of these evangelists are really entertaining the possibility that they are wrong.
Also, how do you explain an "atheist belief system" other than saying that you don't believe in god

1047. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #40251 by BillySands on May 14, 2007 at 3:09 am

Billy Sands is a sparring partner. He specialises in silly and pointless jibes about wanting to find human and dinosaur fossils together even though there are only just over 2100 dinosaur skeletons worldwide.

I can understand why a YEC would think the need for evidence is silly - because the bible just tells them the way it is. Here's a wee gem of biblical wisdom for you: Prov 14:15 "only a simpleton believes everything they are told"

Now, where did you get that silly number from? Even if that number were accurate, I presume that it refers to complete Skeletons. The incomplete ones, including single bones and teeth must run into MILLIONS.

Maybe you would care to tell us why - in your own words just why Tiktaalik is irrelevant - just so we know that you are not just repeating what you have been told. Let us know you have seriously investidated the subject.
I find it unlikely because you say things like this

Billy you ask me, "I'll ask you again. By your reasoning, do analagous structures argue for more than one creator?"

The PBS website definition:
analogous structures: Structures in different species that look alike or perform similar functions (e.g., the wings of butterflies and the wings of birds) that have evolved but do not develop from similar groups of tissues, and that have not evolved from similar structures known to be shared by common ancestors.

The Bible is clear that there is only one God who created different kinds of living creatures separately. There's no reason why the one God should not use common design principles in differently created kinds. So by my reasoning the answer is no.

I actually wonder if Devolved works for CMI

1048. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #40170 by BillySands on May 13, 2007 at 1:50 pm

Mark I'll do my best to make my next post the one that you crave. But for now. There is no direct link between Ez1:1-2 and ex 26:1. The thirtieth year is very open to interpretation, and as I have mentioned could also be his 30th year. Would it also be rasonable to assume that if he is starting off the book in his 30th year, then Ez 26 was then written after the event - if we assume the 11th year is in the same time reference scheme (My NLT says the 12th year - no wonder I dont belive :-) )
Here is a more viable explanation. The 11th year refers to the 11th year of the captivity - essentially zedekiah's 11th year, Now read 2 kings 25: 1And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came, he, and all his host, against Jerusalem, and pitched against it; and they built forts against it round about.

2And the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of king Zedekiah.

3And on the ninth day of the fourth month the famine prevailed in the city, and there was no bread for the people of the land.

4And the city was broken up, and all the men of war fled by night by the way of the gate between two walls, which is by the king's garden: (now the Chaldees were against the city round about:) and the king went the way toward the plain. "
now does that not sound very like what the Tyreans were saying about jerusalem?

1049. The Case Against Intelligent Design: The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Comment #40132 by BillySands on May 13, 2007 at 8:50 am

A few of us have come across devolved on a few threads. He likes to give links, ignore responses and then do a runner http://richarddawkins.net/article,1034,Cataloguing-every-species-on-earth,Colin-Nickerson-the-Boston-Globe
http://richarddawkins.net/article,912,Pope-abolishes-limbo,The-Daily-Telegraph-Waterstones
So I wouldn't take him too seriously

There have been many examples of apparent irreducible complexity and most (if not all) have been refuted. But it would only take one true example to be found to kill natural selection as the only mechanism of biological change, hence it is the creationist's Holy Grail, and like the Holy Grail (or at least its supernatural properties) it is mythical.

I'm of the opinion that you can never demonstrate true irreducible complexity anyway. Its history has been steeped in agenda and labelling our (more truthfully the theists) ignorance IC. Even if we couldn't explain something, it is no proof that it is designed.

Devolved How's the dinosaur hunting going?

1050. Cataloguing every species on earth

Comment #40089 by BillySands on May 13, 2007 at 4:23 am

Robert
I think he is going to bugger off again.

Then there are a number of distinct ash layers that run horizontally through the coal. If the vegetation had grown in a swamp, these distinct ash layers would not be there. After each volcanic eruption, the volcanic texture of the ash would have been obliterated when the swamp plants recolonized the ash, turning it into soil. Not only is there no soil, but the vegetation found in the coal is not the kind that grows in swamps today.

What? am I on crazy pills and have missed something here? Nope, the jar is unopened, it must be devolved taking them. The plant growing in swamps 300 million years ago are not the same as those around today - shockaroony!!! That's evolution for you. Here are some nice plants "growing" with roots in situ from the coal baring rocks near Glasgow

http://www.hmag.gla.ac.uk/Neil/FossilGrove/index.html

Notice how the little troll ignores the fact you often get coral reefs sandwitched between coal deposits.

So it's pretty unlikely that human and dinosaur fossils would appear together.

Oh this is just getting silly. By his model, the flood created sedimentary rock miles deep all over the world (there must have been some really high mountains then - high enough for jesus to see all the kindgdom of the flat world from (matt 4)). Yet he acknowleges that marine sediments are different from terrestial ones - wow! So land animals are found in land deposits and marine ones in marine deposits - and nothing mixed - fascinating!
Someone sends me a PM if he returns or pops up elsewhwere.
In case you do return, see what I said on the limbo thread about challenging CMI