Alan F's flaming arguments and insults

by Rex 61 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  nicolaou

  Why are YEC's singled out for such well articulated lampooning? Aren't any creationists (let's just call tham all EC's) guilty of gross errors in reasoning and deduction? Doesn't all the recent critical attention on YEC's at least appear to lend some credence to 'sensible' creationists like our 'Brooklyn Buddies'?

  They can appear reasonable when they make statements like this;

  ***

  g02 6/8 p. 10 Reconciling Science and Religion ***

  For example, when we understand that the Bible uses the term "day" to represent various periods of time, we see that the account of the six creative days in Genesis need not conflict with the scientific conclusion that the age of the earth is about four and a half billion years.

  But of course they'll always shoot themselves in the foot at some point so maybe I shouldn't be too concerned;

  *** it-1 p. 459 Chronology ***

  While modern historians would extend the period of human habitation on the earth much farther back than 4026 B.C.E., the facts are decidedly against the position they maintain.
• 

  tetrapod.sapien

  absolutely nic, you are right. the war is far from over.

  YECs are more of a hobby. like sitting ducks. just choose a point, and blow it away. LOL

  TS
• 

  stillajwexelder

  While modern historians would extend the period of human habitation on the earth much farther back than 4026 B.C.E., the facts are decidedly against the position they maintain.??

  What about the Colorado river carving out the Grand Canyon by erosion over a few hundred million years?
• 

  Seeker4

  Oh, boy. Haven't been at this site for a week or so, and then I stumbled onto this discussion.

  Have to come down on AlanF's side here. When I first met AlanF on the old H2O site, I really wanted to believe that the Bible was God's word, that there was a God, that there was a reason to believe in a hope for the future based on religion.

  Alas, it was not to be. Alan's presentation of actual evidence was a major factor in my reassessing EVERYTHING I had been taught to believe as a JW. I'm sorry, Rex, but your pathetic arguments here have just reaffirmed what I came to realize - Bible beaters and YECs just don't have anything of substance to present. And, they also seem to have serious trouble with writing and spelling English.

  Go figure....

  S4
• 

  zagor

  What about the Colorado river carving out the Grand Canyon by erosion over a few hundred million years?

  That's why I find some arguments in Forbidden Archeology book intriguing as it seems that man has been around for at least several million years and not only last 100.000. For example how to explain modern looking footprints along with trilobites old at least 3 million years??!!??
• 

  rem

  Forbidden Archaeology doesn't have many modern sources for data. Most of it comes from the 19th and early 20th centuries. The author has never sent his "findings" in to any respected peer reviewed journals. He's basically a crackpot trying to prove his religion and interpreting any anomalous finding into evidence of his presuppositions.
  
  A pretty good review of the book can be found here:
  
  http://www.ramtops.co.uk/tarzia.html
  
  No, man has not been around for hundreds of millions of years. There are simpler explanations for such things. One really simple explanation is that early geologists (and sometimes amateur geologists) simply misinterpreted the data.
  
  Cheers,
  
  rem
• 

  zagor

  I didn't say findings, but arguments. IF footprint has been found in the same layer with trilobites it has little to do with what he personally believes. In any case thanks for the the link I'll check it out
• 

  AlanF

  Shining One wrote:

  : What's the point of responding to insults and slander? It's a lose/lose situation.

  You never respond substantively to anything. That's the only reason it's a lose/lose situation for you. You'd find that if you behaved honestly -- by dealing with the actual evidence presented -- all of it, not just selected cherry picks -- you wouldn't get insulted.

  : I think I see why you insist on any real debating (off this site) with those who are your equals or better. You would not have the fans here to cheer you on and pile on. This is your home turf. The bunch here has had plenty of liberal-think to imbibe on.

  I don't need any cheering on by anyone to debate about this stuff. I certainly didn't need it when putting together the material that helped Seeker4 and hundreds of others to see Watchtower nonsense for what it is. I want to keep any debate on this forum because it's the only place where a lot of ex-JWs come and can get a good look at how silly most YEC arguments are. A lot of people on this forum just wouldn't bother to go somewhere else.

  In that vein, as soon as I complete a bit more research, I'm going to post a thorough debunking of that link to Henry Morris' silly article that you posted in another thread. Don't run away just yet.

  zagor wrote:

  : For example how to explain modern looking footprints along with trilobites old at least 3 million years??!!??

  The watchword is "modern looking footprints". Forbidden Archaeology's writeup on this has been thoroughly debunked, and with a bit of research you can find online information about it. The point is that what the authors claim is a footprint is not that at all. It's just an odd formation in the sandstone that happens to look something like a footprint, much like some clouds look like Richard Nixon.

  AlanF
• 

  zagor

  The watchword is "modern looking footprints". Forbidden Archaeology's writeup on this has been thoroughly debunked, and with a bit of research you can find online information about it. The point is that what the authors claim is a footprint is not that at all. It's just an odd formation in the sandstone that happens to look something like a footprint, much like some clouds look like Richard Nixon.

  Right.
  Thank you Alan for putting it so eloquently . I'm certainly not an archeologist so I wouldn't know, it is hard enough to keep in step with my own field of expertise without venturing into someone else's. All I can do is to try being informed about other fields to the best of what my circumstances would allow.
  I believe that there are people who are equally well informed about archeology, biology, astronomy, various branches of engineering, medicine, physics and mathematics.
  I certainly am not one of those natural geniuses. So if I stumbled upon a 'wrong book' as some of you are suggesting I suppose I could be forgiven for it. I found arguments in the book interesting as a casual reader not as an expert archeologist. On the other hand few people here are expert archeologists anyway and this is not such kind of a forum. So if I commented on this subject it was meant to be in that sort of a context.
  Likwise, I respect other people's opinions regardless of what they are and unless they are deliberatly trying to offend me I try to give respect in return. And I do think that people on this forum should treat each other with a bit more respect. This partuclar thread is a typical example what can happen when people do not respect each other. Thats my 0.02 cents.
• 

  Shining One

  Hi Seeker,
  I am not a very good typist and I do not know how to use many of the features here. I hope that you do not stoop to that level.
  I grieve for your total loss of faith but that is indeed your choice. Please do make an earnest effort to investigate what you now consider 'gospel'. As ex-JW, we all have replaced our belief systems at least once. You know the drill if you have read the ways that cults operate.
  We came out of a religious system deliberately designed to ensnare us until physical, regarless of what happened along the way. The WBTS systematically tried to destroy all of our beliefs in orthodxy, or prevent us from the beliefs in the first place. We have all seen them use any resource at hand so that when we say, "who can we go away to", Christianity is the last choice one would make.
  They skillfully used a combinations of Biblical truths to tell extensive lies; ideas and partial quotes from liberal, naturalist theologians; portrayed the Evil One in such a superstitious and comical way that none leaving would believe he even exists. This is the genius of his ultimate lie: how can one believe in God when there really is no devil?
  Look into C.S. Lewis' "Screwtape Letters". Thanks and take care.
  R.