Larcy Larc,
Since you are in a position to tell me what's true and false why don't you teach me. Oh wait, it's all grey so I guess it doesn't matter what 2 + 2 equals. All depends on how you interpret it, right?
Posts by Jason
-
175Do you want the real truth or not?
by Jason inon this website there seems to be so many lies and so little actual truth.
is this supposed to be a place to get answers or confuse the hell out of truth seekers?
well, for you seekers out there, if you find the truth on this site it'll be a major fluke.
-
-
-
50
Evolution Anyone???
by Steve Josef ini read alot of posts and it seems that though you all (or most) have left the kh, you still believe in a "father" or a "jesus" that created everything.
since i too and one that left the kh, i have delved into science and have come the conculsion that god does not exist in a spirit form, but is life itself.
the "creator" of all things is evolution.
-
-
Jason
Larcy Larc,
Actually I'm not taking a break from my research, just from you guys. Guess I went looking for something other than you in the wrong place.
And since your world isn't all black and white like mine I guess it shouldn't affect you to know what I believe. If it's all shades of grey it shouldn't bother you what I believe because hey, there are no absolutes right? What can any of us possibly know? How many others have the "real truth" other than me? Millions. You constantly put words in my mouth. You think that somewhere along the line I said that I knew everthing. You also seem to think that if someone doesn't believe everything I do they are "liars." But you are assuming these things and none of them are true. The truth can be distributed in varying portions. Even you know truth. It doesn't come out much since all you ever seem to want to do is critisize me for claims I never made. But I think it is impossible for someone not to know any truth at all. Some of us just have more than others. (This can be twisted to say I know more than anyone...especially you, Liar).The almighty...I mean, your humble servant, Jason.
-
175
Do you want the real truth or not?
by Jason inon this website there seems to be so many lies and so little actual truth.
is this supposed to be a place to get answers or confuse the hell out of truth seekers?
well, for you seekers out there, if you find the truth on this site it'll be a major fluke.
-
-
Jason
AGuest,
You seem to think I am a JW. I am not. I do have the Holy Spirit in me. But I am not Jesus Christ. I make mistakes. Lately I have not been walking in the Spirit as I usually do and that is probably the reason that the character of Christ doesn't shine through very well at all. Because you helped point this out to me and helped me realize that I am acting no different than anyone else I won't be posting much about anything until I have gotten right with God. Thanks.
-
175
Do you want the real truth or not?
by Jason inon this website there seems to be so many lies and so little actual truth.
is this supposed to be a place to get answers or confuse the hell out of truth seekers?
well, for you seekers out there, if you find the truth on this site it'll be a major fluke.
-
-
Jason
UO,
Actually there are such thing as witches. There are a few "witch" religions around the world who believe in spells and witchcraft. I know two people who are into this sort of thing. Whether you believe they can cast spells or not they believe they can. These are witches.
-
50
Evolution Anyone???
by Steve Josef ini read alot of posts and it seems that though you all (or most) have left the kh, you still believe in a "father" or a "jesus" that created everything.
since i too and one that left the kh, i have delved into science and have come the conculsion that god does not exist in a spirit form, but is life itself.
the "creator" of all things is evolution.
-
-
Jason
Evolution is the biggest lie of our time.
-
175
Do you want the real truth or not?
by Jason inon this website there seems to be so many lies and so little actual truth.
is this supposed to be a place to get answers or confuse the hell out of truth seekers?
well, for you seekers out there, if you find the truth on this site it'll be a major fluke.
-
-
Jason
RHW,
"You "know" you have the "truth" and anything that does not fit with your concept of "truth" is automatically a lie. Is this not correct?"
No, my dear, this is not correct. I said I knew the truth. I was telling the truth when I said this. But obviously when I said it you totally blew it out of proportion as if I had said "I know everything." By the truth i mean the truth about God. You forget I am not a borg following a mass collection because mommy and daddy taught me to. I came to Christ myself. I prayed to God to show me truth before I even believed He existed. He opened my eyes. On the contrary to your statement I think you believe that anything contrary to what you think is a lie. When someone shows me that I am wrong I admit it and change my mind. You want to overstate everything to prove a point with a completely biased and ignorant attitude toward something that you don't believe. But these overstated comments would never apply to your beliefs. Not even evolution. I have provided plenty of evidence against evolution. But it is ignored. Simply because you seem to be too afraid to put your beliefs to the test. About the calculations. I will do them myself. But unlike you when I calculate something I get all the facts beforehand. Take other things into consideration. Once I have gathered all of the facts I need (since I clearly need to learn about the majority of animals, how much they eat, etc, etc). I don't just assume things like this. I believe the Bible literally because all of the evidence supports it. Scientifically, archeologically, and circumstantially. It is also nice to know that all of you have your own little sect of friends.
When you were JWs couldn't you see that you were living a sick, twisted version of an actual truth?
I am not like you. I believed in evolution very strongly. I thought it was a fact. But I searched for truth and whether you believe me or not I know it. This, as I said, doesn't mean I know everything. One can never know everything.I never asked for a pat on the back either. I simply noted that you critisize where you can but when you come to an answer you can't refute the subject isn't mentioned again. You say you used to believe the same thing as me (pretty much). You weren't even close. I wasn't brain washed in a huge cult. I hardly ever even go to Church. As Christ teaches, Seek and you will find.
You have challenged me to do the calculations so I will. But I know it will take time. There are tons of things that must be taken into consideration when calculating an event such as this. But I think you are afraid of my challenge. I challenge you to do the same. Last time I said this all I got back was a "Why should I?" I think this is fear to find out that it is feasible. And I don't mean, "well, my horse could eat this much hay in one day if it was really hungry so let's times this by 16,000 and then..." Why can't you even be honest with yourselves?
And I haven't convinced myself that you are trying to promote your beliefs. I just pointed out that whether you tell me what you believe or not it is altogether obvious by what you say. And you believe that what you believe is true. Otherwise you wouldn't believe it.
About hay:"horses will refuse to eat it unless there is absolutely nothing else available." Interesting. It may have been a last resort near the end of the trip.
"I also know that hay distributors don't maintain stocks from year to year--it loses nutritional value after one season." How long is one season?
"Questions and facts prove nothing if you refuse to consider them."
Another interesting comment. Sounds like something I said. And I have considered your words but they don't stand up to scrutiny."Believe me, Jason, I was once in your position. I KNEW everything because I had the "truth" from the Bible, and no amount of factual evidence to the contrary could prove otherwise."
There is no factual evidence on the contrary. It is the other way around. The evidence FOR the Bible is what is overwhelming. Not the evidence against it.
"Similarly, believing that Noah could have managed to fit everything into the confines of the Ark, AND maintain it all for a year on the water and for who knows how long on Mt. Ararat while waiting for the water to subside and vegetation to grow, is naive in the extreme. Couldn't happen, Jason.....simply couldn't happen."
Who is naive? You simply overwhelm yourself by making it impossible in your own mind. Why won't you at least read Woodmorappe's book to see what he has to say? If it is bogus it won't make a difference. And he does provide alternatives for food immediately following the flood. I haven't recieved the book yet so I don't know what these are. And about evolution. Couldn't happen...simply couldn't happen.
"Your hypotheses so far are desperate attempts to explain away actual physical laws. Better to look at the facts first, then see if your "belief" fits, rather than trying to change factual evidence to fit your beliefs."
This in itself is a false statement. my attempt to explain are not desparate in the least. So show me the "physical laws." And I never change evidence to fit anything. Facts are facts.
If you think I am full of it why don't we discuss some beliefs you have that are contrary to mine. I don't wish to get off this topic but if you'd like we can see how well your beliefs stand against a good argument. We don't have to but it is a suggestion.
Jason.
-
175
Do you want the real truth or not?
by Jason inon this website there seems to be so many lies and so little actual truth.
is this supposed to be a place to get answers or confuse the hell out of truth seekers?
well, for you seekers out there, if you find the truth on this site it'll be a major fluke.
-
-
Jason
farkel,
Yes, it is true. Busts are much more exciting than arks but that is not the center of discussion at the moment. We will discuss busts later when the ark topic cools off a bit. So far I have provided no evidence whatsoever for the theory on the ark. Not even circumstancial evidence.
About the giant critter poop. Since you didn't notice the few times I mentioned slanted floors this cannot be a possibility.
And the only explanation for getting rid of all the pee pee, as you pointed out so cleverly, would be to pull the plug at the bottom of the ark. There was also a high tech reverse flow system built in so no water could get in.
Oh! Good news. Discovery channel has a special on tomorrow night with evidence to support your theory that whales eat grass.
Jason.
-
175
Do you want the real truth or not?
by Jason inon this website there seems to be so many lies and so little actual truth.
is this supposed to be a place to get answers or confuse the hell out of truth seekers?
well, for you seekers out there, if you find the truth on this site it'll be a major fluke.
-
-
Jason
Ianao,
"The very "law" that defines "muck to human" is what you said was violated by inference of what it theorizes. But, I do understand that what you and I consider to be law in science are no doubt two different things."
Now THIS is a rediculous statement. Can you rewrite this in english? Probably not.
You said that what you and I consider scientific law are two different things. I was wonder just what you consider scientific law to be? You don't consider the second law of thermodynamics to be a law? Well, why don't we throw out the law of gravity too?
If you don't consider thermodynamics to be law then what do you consider scientific?Larc, for someone who wasn't there you seem pretty certain about how much work Noah could do in x amount of time. Obviously I can't answer every question in detail at the moment. To go through all the calculations you expect me to go through to answer your questions would take a rediculous amount of time. Since none of you seem to want to give J.Woodmorappe's book a chance I will be ordering a copy shortly. Then I can answer much more in depth.
"Shaky foundations lead to crumbling blah blah blah." You act like you think you're a pretty holy person. I am not chastising anyone for disagreeing. I am not whining about anything. I wouldn't be writing posts if I thought everyone would agree with me. But I never said anyone had to agree. I just don't understand why you have to be a prick about the whole thing. If it offends you too bad. But stop acting like you're better than me. And HOW is any "defending" me? They are defending their beliefs. Which they don't claim are true in the first place.
And yes, I DO understand that RHW doesn't believe I have the truth. What would you ask a stupid question like that? You think that because she doesn't believe me I should stop arguing. But you don't seem to want to turn the argument on her since I'm the enemy. In case you haven't realized it yet, she is arguing as well and neither do I believe her. She asks good questions but they don't prove anything. If you don't like the discussion no one said you have to stay.
It must make you feel good inside to say that I am always whining. But I haven't whined once. And when did it bother me that anyone was arguing? That is what I expect to happen.
I think you are the only one whining about anything. And what are you talking about? You asked if I am going to drop the discussion. Does it look like I'm going to back down? This discussion may continue until all of you give up. I never once said you and you pal RHW couldn't believe what you want. That doesn't mean what you believe is true and it doesn't mean I can't argue about it. You call yourselves ex-witnesses but you still think the same way. If anyone challenges your beliefs you get all rude and start putting people down. JWs act the same way. can't you see I'm not trying to start a fight. You have no reason to act hostile. All I want is to have a friendly discussion. But that's clearly not possible with people who have trouble being friendly.
And no, I don't need to be reminded about my previous posts. I know what I wrote.
And about everyone having to agree with me. As you said "Bullpucky." Whatever the hell that means. I already told you that I don't expect you to agree. I expect the same from you as I would expect from a JW. Actually hear what I am saying and at the least consider the possibility that it might be true. But I doubt you can do that. Just because you left KH doesn't mean you found truth. And you don't really seem to care if you ever do. If you don't look for it, you won't find it.
"In other words, you want to preach instead of discuss. Ok, fine. Please proceed to your nearest street corner and preach away."
I'm not sure what prescription of specs your reading through but obviously you made something up that had nothing to do with what I wrote.
"Looks to me like they feel YOU have been the one mislead."
Don't we all feel that way about each other? So what you're saying is if I feel THEY have been misled I am wrong. But if they think I have been misled, they are right. That's a narrow way to think.
Of course I am a fallable human being. I never said or even thought for a moment that I wasn't.
Jason.
-
175
Do you want the real truth or not?
by Jason inon this website there seems to be so many lies and so little actual truth.
is this supposed to be a place to get answers or confuse the hell out of truth seekers?
well, for you seekers out there, if you find the truth on this site it'll be a major fluke.
-
-
Jason
Ianao,
My statement wasn't rediculous at all. My question about defending something you don't believe is true is valid. I never started "screaming" anything. It doesn't matter who started the discussion or how. The statements made in the middle matter too. If RHW doesn't claim to know the truth yet argues thing as though they are truth then she seems to believe they are true. Questions about anything are fine. But I don't see why people have to be so snarly about it. I do see that how I started the discussion and some of the things I said would piss people off. I made a mistake and we're past that now. I don't need to be reminded every second post of what I originally wrote. But thanks for your input.
You told me to get over the fact that no one will agree with me 100%. I don't expect anyone to. I do expect someone who claims they want to learn to at least consider my statements. And consider the fact that it is POSSIBLE they have been misled. I can do the same. But we can all do it in a respectful and polite environment.
I post many arguments. I think it is strange that a few of them are criticized but no one ever says, Hey that's not a bad point. Anyway, I'm just babbling.
Jason.
-
175
Do you want the real truth or not?
by Jason inon this website there seems to be so many lies and so little actual truth.
is this supposed to be a place to get answers or confuse the hell out of truth seekers?
well, for you seekers out there, if you find the truth on this site it'll be a major fluke.
-
-
Jason
RedhorseWoman,
I never said grain was a SUBSTITUE for hay. I said hay wasn't the only thing Noah would have used to feed the animals. And maybe you haven't noticed but grass isn't the only thing herbivores eat. If it was they would be called Grassivores. And how do you know how "poor" the grain was 4500 years ago? It isn't nutritionally adequate if that's all you feed the animals. But that wouldn't be all he fed them. They probably would have had lots of concentrated food. The cattle would have been fed mainly on grain. But it could have been different for each animal. For the two horses I'm sure they wouldn't have had any problem providing the necessary diet. If horses and other species can't figure out when they are full then Noah could simply have had a schedule for feeding those animals everyday. And he could feed the other animals that wouldn't over-eat every few days. You keep talking like every animal on the ark is exactly the same as a horse or that there were many horses. This wasn't the case.
-"Herbivores fed almost totally on grain will not only be anemic, but they will also colic and die."
If you are going to make this claim please provide some evidence. How much actual grain would you have to feed an animal to kill it? Does this rula apply to every species of herbivore or just your horses?
-"Grain also takes up a lot of space--and just like hay, it will lose it's nutritional value after a short time and be totally worthless. It also becomes easily contaminated by rodent droppings and grain moth larvae--making it unsuitable for forage."
Okay. Exactly how long does it take for grain and hay to lose their nutrition. And don't give me the fastest time ever recorded. What causes it to lose nutrition? Taking up a lot of space on the ark is not a problem is you look at the emense size of it. There also doesn't need to be any rodents in the hay or moth larvae. The way you talk about these things it would seem near impossible just keep a farm. How do you do it? How do you keep the forage from becoming unnutritious? Do you just throw away the hay that the horses don't eat?
-"You also stated that the cages/stalls would not have to be cleaned every day. WRONGO!! Animals standing in their own waste will become very ill very quickly. This includes even small animals in cages. We're talking wood floors here, Jason. Wood absorbs urine very easily. Urine not only rots wood fairly quickly, but the ammonia from the urine soaked into a wood floor will cause severe lung damage within a short time."
You said that stalls have to be cleaned every day. WRONGO!! Like I said, with deep bedding added a stall can sometimes be left for months without being changed. If the straw or sawdust bedding absobed the urine then not much of it would reach the would. On the ark they probably used VERY DEEP bedding. This also reduces the smell. There would also have been good air circulation.You say urine rots wood very quickly. How quick? I guess urine would completely rot an entire ship in just a year. I guess it's not possible after all. You keep saying "very quickly" "in a VERY short time." Why don't you give some actual times for these things. Very quickly can mean anywhere from one day to one year in this case.
Yes, for super healthy comfortable animals on a well kept farm the bedding SHOULD (key word) be changed every day. But we are not talking about whether or not the animals would be comfortable. This I said previously, this was an emergency situation where survival was the task. Not being comfortable. And the bedding didn't HAVE to be straw. It may have been saw dust. It may have been a mixture. But being very thick it would absorb a lot of urine and could thus go without changing for an extended period. I also mentioned slanted floors.
And I mentioned before that some cages sould have been stacked on top of each other. But this isn't even necessary. There would be plenty of room if they were all side by side.
-"How could anyone possibly "show you that there is no record of it"? Do you honestly think that there would be historical records stating, "we have not seen a dinosaur, therefore, they are not here?" If there is NO record of a dinosaur, it is usually because that dinosaur was NOT there."
My point exactly. If you can't prove there is no record of it why do you say it with such confidence?
-"And once again, I challenge your modern sightings as proof that dinosaurs were on the Ark. I have repeatedly asked you why there have been no verifiable "sightings" recorded in the 4000-some-odd years prior to 1405 since their supposedly debarkation from the Ark."
You assume that because I mention a siting in 1405 that that is the only siting in 4000 years. There would have been tons of sightings. And I already said I am currently studying these sightings and I will post a message on that topic alone as soon as I get a chance to read up on it.
-"We're not talking about 16,000 horses. However, we ARE including animals such as Aurochs, Elephants, Mastodons, T-Rex, Triceratops, Brachiosaurus, Duck-billed dinosaurs, Rhinos, Hippos, Cattle, Giraffes, Wildebeasts, etc. All of these animals far outweigh horses, and ALL of these animals would require MORE bedding and feed than the horses."
We are talking about all of these animals which outweigh horses. But like I said, even the biggest animals were once small animals. Are you saying that it would be out of the question for Noah to take young animals instead of full grown animals. This would make more sense because they would take up less space, eat less food, and have plenty of time to repopulate after the flood so that they didn't become extinct too fast.
-"Do you keep it and eat it after a year or two? Let's try a little experiment, okay? Go buy a bag of potatoes and stick them in a closet for 10 years....then try eating them."
We're not talking about a ten year old bag of potatoes. We're talking about hay. I asked you earlier, exactly how long does it take for hay and grain to go bad or be unedible? Give me the facts.
-"Once again--how did these things survive submersion for over a year?"First off, who cares HOW they survived? The important thing is that they DID survive. Tell me, how does a ship survive underwater for a hundred years. Give me some reasons why nothing could survive the flood. I already gave you an example of neandertal artifacts that were found buried under the black sea. So burial is one way. Others may have been kept in air pockets in caves. Some could have survived under water for a year. Why wouldn't they? Exactly what artifacts are we discussing here?
-"Well, obviously from the comments you've received, your guru hasn't answered ALL the questions. I still want to know how Noah managed to get sufficient land for haying and get all of it cut, cured and loaded within a couple of weeks of departure. Hundred-year-old hay just doesn't cut it, Jason, so stop using THAT argument. Grain is also a very labor intensive commodity. Processing all this animal feed in a couple of weeks would required one HELL of a workforce."
How do "the comments I've recieved" show that "my guru" hasn't answered all the questions? You don't make any sense, RedhorseWoman. So far not one person who has mad a comment to me has actuallt read the book to see his answers. So just because you don't know his answer means there isn't one? And I didn't say he spent 100 years cutting hay. I said he had a hundred years to build the ark and get organized.He may have gathered hay and other food over a period of a few months. He could have then fed the animals with the oldest food first so it wouldn't have time to go bad. We don't know how much time he spent or if he had any hired help. Yes, it would have taked a lot of hard work. But it is not impossible. And whether or not people thought he was crazy, he still probably had friends and family who would have helped him. Some may have thought he was crazy but that doesn't mean they won't work for money, food, a place to stay, etc.
-"Have you read "Chariots of the Gods"? This book lays out some very good "proofs" that aliens built the pyramids. Does this mean that it is true? Do YOU believe that book, Jason? After all, the author answers all the arguments presented to him. Actually, he could probably prove that Noah's Ark was actually a spaceship."
Boy, you really got me that time. Tell me some of the "proofs" that aliens built the pyramids. If you believe that it is possible for a puddle of muck to transform into a human being over millions of years going against the laws of science then perhaps this alien book isn't so far fetched. The author may answer the questions but he does not prove these answers. Proof is undeniable evidence. Don't be so insulting. Just because I don't believe the same thing as you doesn't make your belief more valid or less rediculous. You just see from a different angle. Your tone toward me is obviously hostile. Isn't that right, RedhorseWoman? Were not talking about aliens here are we Redhorsewoman? Stick to the subject. Once again. If you don't know the truth then why do you try so hard to defend it?
Jason.