On 3/16/2024 6:16 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> Whisper wrote:
>
>> I don't believe in god without evidence.  I do believe in natural
>> selection, but that doesn't answer my other question 'how did natural
>> selection start?'.
>
> As a hypothesis it started when Wallace and Darwin thought it up.
>
> It's like asking when did Maxwell's equations start.
>

With Carl Friedrich Gauss, Andre Marie Ampere and Michael Faraday, along
with many others!

Dawn

David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
news:2JednWdiGsks62r4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com:

> On 3/17/24 12:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>> news:ynWdncb1J6WduWr4nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
>>
>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-03-16 Г  21:32, Mitchell Holman a Г©critВ :
>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:B9mJN.578041$xHn7.27465@fx14.iad:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 5:50 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 20:58, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:UySdnTsgoMGt8Gn4nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 10:29, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 Г  08:38, Whisper a Г©critВ :
>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:65f2d76f$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/03/2024 12:47 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-12 Г  17:50, Skeeter a Г©crit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <usqf5b$g9dd$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kuakinar@videotron.ca says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't prove anything else. So where did it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just saying 'god' is not the answer.В  Where did
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> god come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did human intelligence come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An emerging property if a complex brain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did the brain come from.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Something must have created evolution?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Survival of the fittest, also known as natural selection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>>>>>>> Some say that there are no stupid questions. With your past
>>>>>>>>>> two posts, you have proven that to be wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Evolution is a natural process. Natural selection is another
>>>>>>>>>> natural process. NOTHING created any natural process. Natural
>>>>>>>>>> processes just happen.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just happen?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> В В В В В  Yes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What is you evidence for that?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> В В В В В  Geology, botany, paleontology,
>>>>>>>> microbiology, astronomy, climatology,
>>>>>>>> archeology, cosmology.............
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/a-brief-history-of-ear
>>>>>>>> th /
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is the only link which discusses the origin of life and
>>>>>>> possible evolution. Here is the first paragraph in that section:
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> Early life in the Archean and earlier is poorly documented in
>>>>>>> the fossil record. Based on chemical evidence and evolutionary
>>>>>>> theory, scientists propose this life would have been
>>>>>>> single-celled photosynthetic organisms, such as the
>>>>>>> cyanobacteria that created stromatolites. Cyanobacteria produced
>>>>>>> free oxygen in the atmosphere through photosynthesis.
>>>>>>> Cyanobacteria, archaea, and bacteria are
>>>>>>> prokaryotes—primitive organisms made of single cells that
>>>>>>> lack cell nuclei and other organelles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A whole bunch of words Hartung has never heard nor read before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Scientists propose". In other words, we don't yet know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And so you propose your "god of the gaps" fallacy to supply an
>>>>>> answer that you find comforting, but not necessarily right...and
>>>>>> probably wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> В В В В В  Hartung doesn't care if an answer is
>>>>> right or wrong, only that it is biblical.
>>>>>
>>>>> В В В В В  Because the Bible has never been
>>>>> disproved, you know.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Had anything in the Bible been disproved,
>>>>> you might have a point."
>>>>> David Hartung, Jan 10, 2012
>>>>
>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE been
>>>> disproved. Just one, but, a pretty big one :
>>>> When the Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city
>>>> surrounded by stone walls. It was a small village, barely more than
>>>> a hamlet, surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep wild animals and
>>>> wandering raiders at bay.
>>>
>>> Your source for this?
>>
>>
>> Like most "cities" in the area
>> Jericho was destroyed and rebuilt
>> over and over again. There is nothing
>> special about any "Joshus" attacking it.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jericho
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>
>>> Such as?
>>
>>
>> You really should read the
>> Bible sometime, Hartung.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> (2 Sam. 21:12);
>> When David was told what Aiah’s daughter Rizpah,
>> Saul’s concubine, had done,he went and took the
>> bones of Saul and his son Jonathan from the citizens
>> of Jabesh Gilead. They had stolen their bodies from
>> the public square at Beth Shan, where the Philistines
>> had hung them after they struck Saul down on Gilboa.
>>
>>
>> = Saul was killed by the Phillistines.
>>
>>
>>
>> (1 Sam.1:10)
>> "I happened to be on Mount Gilboa," the young
>> man said, "and there was Saul, leaning on his
>> spear, with the chariots and their drivers in
>> hot pursuit."He asked me, "Who are you?"
>> An Amalekite," I answered.
>> Then he said to me, "Stand here by me
>> and kill me! I’m in the throes of death,
>> but I’m still alive." So I stood beside
>> him and killed him, because I knew that
>> after he had fallen he could not survive.
>>
>>
>>
>> = Saul was killed by a young Amalekite
>>
>>
>>
>> (1 Sam. 31:4)
>> "Saul said to his armor-bearer, “Draw your sword
>> and run me through, or these uncircumcised fellows
>> will come and run me through and abuse me." But his
>> armor-bearer was terrified and would not do it; so
>> Saul took his own sword and fell on it.
>>
>>
>> = Saul killed himself.
>
> It would be a good idea for you to actually read the Bible instead of
> finding out of context, and incorrect quotes.
>
> Here is the text of 1 Sam.1:10
> https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Sam.1%3A10&version=NIV
> [...]
> 10 In her deep anguish Hannah prayed to the Lord, weeping bitterly.
> [...]
>
> You were likely referring to this:
> [...]
> 6 And the young man who told him said, “By chance I happened to be
> on Mount Gilboa, and there was Saul leaning on his spear, and behold,
> the chariots and the horsemen were close upon him. 7 And when he
> looked behind him, he saw me, and called to me. And I answered,
> ‘Here I am.’ 8 And he said to me, ‘Who are you?’ I answered
> him, ‘I am an Amalekite.’ 9 And he said to me, ‘Stand beside me
> and kill me, for anguish has seized me, and yet my life still
> lingers.’ 10 So I stood beside him and killed him, because I was
> sure that he could not live after he had fallen. And I took the crown
> that was on his head and the armlet that was on his arm, and I have
> brought them here to my lord.” [...]
>
> Which is part of a narrative in 2 Samuel 1 in which a young man lies
> thinking that he will gain favor with David.

Dawn Flood wrote:
> On 3/16/2024 6:11 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
>> Kualinar wrote:
>>>
>>> YOU are the one making a positive claim, so, YOU are the one with the
>>> burden of proof.
>>> I just don't accept your claim. I just don't believe in a god, any god.
>>
>> Once you know deMorgan, 'positive claim' is verbal diarrhea.
>>
>> The usual rule is proof of an assertion is on the person. The actual
>> rule is the burden of proof on whoever wants to change your mind.
>>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)
>
> Or, for those who do not wish to read the entire article:
>
> Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat – the burden of
> proof lies with the one who speaks, not the one who denies.
>
Proof is a non- existent commodity. One can believe God exist, or may
believe God does not exist. But it's all a matter of belief not proof.
It's belief Vs belief. So, it's a stale-mate!

Whisper wrote:
> On 17/03/2024 6:36 am, Rod Flanders wrote:
>> Whisper <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> On 16/03/2024 2:45 am, David Hartung wrote:

>>
>> Natural selection is seen so we know God invented it.
>
> Not sure why god would bother creating natural selection?

Indeed, especially since creation myth has
creatures and plants etc made by magic.

David Hartung wrote:
> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in

>>>
>>> Your source for this?
>>>
>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>
>>> Such as?
>>
>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>
> Doesn't work.

Lie. It works fine.

https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/

Here's the opening paragraph:

"It is a central dogma of all fundamental
Christians that the Bible is without error.
They teach this conclusion by “reasoning”
that god cannot be the author of false
meaning and he cannot lie. Is this true?
If written by a perfect being, then it must
not contradict itself, as a collection of
books written by different men at different
times over many centuries would be expected
to contradict each other."

Dawn Flood wrote:
> On 3/12/2024 1:41 AM, Richard Trickle wrote:
>> In <usokiq$3g7l$2@dont-email.me> Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3/11/2024 4:58 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
>>>> Kualinar wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-03-10 à 21:37, Siri Cruise a écrit :
>>>>>> Jon Brady wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Life was not created by "god." That's only a childish fair
>> tale.
>>>>>>>>> Where did the RNA come from?
>>>>>>>> Random mixing of molecules.
>>>>>>> Who created the molecules so they could do that, Rudy?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Experiments like Miller-Urey show that simple molecules can be
>>>>>> synthesised into complex molecules, some significant to terrestrial
>>>>>> life, with modest input energy like ultraviolet light or electric
>>>>>> discharges.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Additional experiments show some molecules have limitted abiotic
>>>>>> creation and longetivity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We mostly know how DNA is replicated using proteins.
>>>>>> RNA replication without proteins? That's what the news is about, an
>>>>>> example of replicating RNA without bootstrapping proteins.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We got theories to take us from models of early earth almost to
>> most
>>>>>> of the molecules of inefficient but possible life. Best on chance
>> and
>>>>>> organic chemistry without needing a god. It's rational for a person
>>>>>> to conclude we will be able to explain everything without a god.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's no evidence a god was not involved. It remains that it is
>> as
>>>>>> rational to believe in a creator god as to disbelieve.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It comes done to choice, an unforced choice, to believe or
>> disbelieve.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Adding a god does nothing but add complexity to the problem and
>> don't
>>>>> solve anything.
>>>>
>>>> Either a god added itself or no god. Your aesthetics are irrelevant.
>>>> Reality is what reality is, and we're whistling past the graveyard
>> with
>>>> all our theories and philosophies. Belief and disbelief are equally
>>>> rational.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Problem is that there are an infinite number of "beliefs" but really
>>> only one "disbelief".  As the "beliefs" contradict each other, at
>> least
>>> in some respects, they cannot all be true; how to choose?  On the
>> other
>>> hand, "disbelief" is at least falsifiable, which makes it more
>> rational
>>> than all the others, because "disbelief" opens itself up to being
>> proved
>>> wrong.
>>
>> or right as facts present themselves.
>
> Sure, let God, if He exists, instantaneously and fully heal an adult
> amputee, and then let's talk.
>
There are certain animals species that can replace missing parts if the
DNA information for the part is not turned off. In humans the
information (DNA) to build limbs is turned off after birth. There was a
drug that was known to turn off DNA for limbs. I had an aunt who took a
drug subscribed subscribed by her Dr several decades ago and gave birth
to a child without arms. Someday, hopefully a drug might be developed to
turn back on the part of the genetic code that expressed for limbs.

Random mutations can and does cause information loss, as in the case of
blind cave fish, certain birds species have lost the ability to fly.
Close relatives are discouraged from marrying. So, where the information
does not exist no functioning part can come into existence. Hogs can
never develop wings to fly, the monkey can never develop the mind
capable of designing and building a rocket ship, an automobile. In spite
of hypothesis, theories and claims to the contrary, fish can never
develop legs to run on land or wings to fly because the absence of
necessary information. According to information theory, expressed in
mathematical terms, what to comes down to is two conditions must be met
before information has value, transmission (transfer) and translation.
And this comes across as crucial.

Since information without the two (2) conditions is non-functional. And
it make sense, suppose you found a document written in a language
unknown by you and you just discarded it. But had you taken it to
someone to translate, it would have been translated to English it read
"pay to the bearer one million dollars in cash". Hopefully you would
see it through. This characterizes the information in a genome, it has
to be transmitted and translated. The three information, transmission
and translation has to appear historically at precisely the same time to
have any function.

>
> Dawn

Gronk wrote:
> "It is a central dogma of all fundamental
> Christians that the Bible is without error.

Are all christians fundamental?

Seriousd-mental?

'without error' is a poor choice of words. Deliberately chosen no
doubt to denigrate that 'fundamental' strawman.

--
Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

Gronk wrote on 18/3/24 3:21 pm:
> David Hartung wrote:
>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
>>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>
>>>>
>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>
>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>
>>>> Such as?
>>>
>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>>
>> Doesn't work.
>
> Lie. It works fine.
>
> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>
> Here's the opening paragraph:
>
> "It is a central dogma of all fundamental
> Christians that the Bible is without error.
> They teach this conclusion by “reasoning”
> that god cannot be the author of false
> meaning and he cannot lie. Is this true?
> If written by a perfect being, then it must
> not contradict itself, as a collection of
> books written by different men at different
> times over many centuries would be expected
> to contradict each other."
>
Gee Whiz!! I was just about to post similarly ,,,, about 3hr 15mins
after you!! ;-(
--
Daniel

On 18/03/2024 2:40 am, Kualinar wrote:
> Le 2024-03-17 à 06:37, Whisper a écrit :
>> On 17/03/2024 11:18 am, Maximus wrote:
>>> Whisper wrote:
>>>> On 16/03/2024 9:27 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 à 13:57, David Hartung a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't believe in god without evidence.  I do believe in natural
>>>> selection, but that doesn't answer my other question 'how did
>>>> natural selection start?'.
>>>
>>> so your question then is, how did life begin. science has
>>> progressively been trying to answer that. natural selection however
>>> is simply organism's response to their environment.
>>>
>>
>>
>> But why is the organism responding to the environment?  What caused
>> that ability/function?
>>
> You really sound like a tiddler asking Why ?

Well maybe if you provided some sensible answers I wouldn't have to.

On 3/17/24 23:21, Gronk wrote:
> David Hartung wrote:
>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
>>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>
>>>>
>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>
>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>
>>>> Such as?
>>>
>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>>
>> Doesn't work.
>
> Lie. It works fine.
>
> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>
> Here's the opening paragraph:
>
> "It is a central dogma of all fundamental
> Christians that the Bible is without error.
> They teach this conclusion by “reasoning”
> that god cannot be the author of false
> meaning and he cannot lie. Is this true?
> If written by a perfect being, then it must
> not contradict itself, as a collection of
> books written by different men at different
> times over many centuries would be expected
> to contradict each other."

Sorry, but citing that page is not an argument, the out of context quote
in the article simply demonstrates the author's ignorance of Christian
theology.

David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
news:BAadndpoqNUBomX4nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com:

> On 3/17/24 23:21, Gronk wrote:
>> David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
>>>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>>
>>>>> Such as?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>>>
>>> Doesn't work.
>>
>> Lie. It works fine.
>>
>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>>
>> Here's the opening paragraph:
>>
>> "It is a central dogma of all fundamental
>> Christians that the Bible is without error.
>> They teach this conclusion by “reasoning”
>> that god cannot be the author of false
>> meaning and he cannot lie. Is this true?
>> If written by a perfect being, then it must
>> not contradict itself, as a collection of
>> books written by different men at different
>> times over many centuries would be expected
>> to contradict each other."
>
> Sorry, but citing that page is not an argument, the out of context
quote
> in the article simply demonstrates the author's ignorance of Christian
> theology.
>
>

Even Christians cannot explain Christian theology.

God CAN be seen:
"And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as
a man speaketh to his friend." (EXO 33:11)
"For I have seen God face to face, and my life
is preserved." (GEN 32:30)

vs...........

God CANNOT be seen:
"No man hath seen God at any time." (JOH 1:18)
"And he said, Thou canst not see my face; for
there shall no man see me and live." (EXO 33:20)
"Whom no man hath seen nor can see." (1TIM 6:16)

Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote in news:ut8l0l$1cbs$1@dont-
email.me:

> Gronk wrote:
>> "It is a central dogma of all fundamental
>> Christians that the Bible is without error.
>
> Are all christians fundamental?
>
> Seriousd-mental?
>
> 'without error' is a poor choice of words. Deliberately chosen no
> doubt to denigrate that 'fundamental' strawman.
>

Christians themselves claim
the "inerrancy" of the Bible.

https://www.bibles.net/topic/the-bible-is-true-and-without-error/

https://answersingenesis.org/is-the-bible-true/why-should-we-believe-in-
the-inerrancy-of-scripture/

https://www.namb.net/apologetics/resource/the-three-i-s-of-scripture-
inspired-interrant-infallible/

On 3/17/2024 4:04 PM, David Hartung wrote:
> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:B9mJN.578041$xHn7.27465@fx14.iad:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 5:50 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 20:58, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:UySdnTsgoMGt8Gn4nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 10:29, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 à 08:38, Whisper a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:65f2d76f$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/03/2024 12:47 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-12 à 17:50, Skeeter a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <usqf5b$g9dd$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kuakinar@videotron.ca says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't prove anything else. So where did it all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just saying 'god' is not the answer.  Where did god come
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did human intelligence come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An emerging property if a complex brain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did the brain come from.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Something must have created evolution?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Survival of the fittest, also known as natural selection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>>>>>>> Some say that there are no stupid questions. With your past two
>>>>>>>>>> posts, you have proven that to be wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Evolution is a natural process. Natural selection is another
>>>>>>>>>> natural process. NOTHING created any natural process. Natural
>>>>>>>>>> processes just happen.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just happen?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>       Yes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What is you evidence for that?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>       Geology, botany, paleontology,
>>>>>>>> microbiology, astronomy, climatology,
>>>>>>>> archeology, cosmology.............
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/a-brief-history-of-earth/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is the only link which discusses the origin of life and possible
>>>>>>> evolution. Here is the first paragraph in that section:
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> Early life in the Archean and earlier is poorly documented in the
>>>>>>> fossil record. Based on chemical evidence and evolutionary theory,
>>>>>>> scientists propose this life would have been single-celled
>>>>>>> photosynthetic organisms, such as the cyanobacteria that created
>>>>>>> stromatolites. Cyanobacteria produced free oxygen in the atmosphere
>>>>>>> through photosynthesis. Cyanobacteria, archaea, and bacteria are
>>>>>>> prokaryotes—primitive organisms made of single cells that lack cell
>>>>>>> nuclei and other organelles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A whole bunch of words Hartung has never heard nor read before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Scientists propose". In other words, we don't yet know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And so you propose your "god of the gaps" fallacy to supply an answer
>>>>>> that you find comforting, but not necessarily right...and probably
>>>>>> wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       Hartung doesn't care if an answer is
>>>>> right or wrong, only that it is biblical.
>>>>>
>>>>>       Because the Bible has never been
>>>>> disproved, you know.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Had anything in the Bible been disproved,
>>>>> you might have a point."
>>>>> David Hartung, Jan 10, 2012
>>>>
>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE been disproved.
>>>> Just one, but, a pretty big one :
>>>> When the Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city surrounded by
>>>> stone walls. It was a small village, barely more than a hamlet, surrounded
>>>> by a wooden palisade to keep wild animals and wandering raiders at bay.
>>>
>>> Your source for this?
>>>
>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>
>>> Such as?
>>
>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>
> Doesn't work.

It works fine.

On 3/18/2024 6:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> On 3/17/24 23:21, Gronk wrote:
>> David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
>>>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>>
>>>>> Such as?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>>>
>>> Doesn't work.
>>
>> Lie. It works fine.
>>
>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>>
>> Here's the opening paragraph:
>>
>> "It is a central dogma of all fundamental
>> Christians that the Bible is without error.
>> They teach this conclusion by “reasoning”
>> that god cannot be the author of false
>> meaning and he cannot lie. Is this true?
>> If written by a perfect being, then it must
>> not contradict itself, as a collection of
>> books written by different men at different
>> times over many centuries would be expected
>> to contradict each other."
>
> Sorry, but citing that page is not an argument,

Yes, it is.

> the out of context quote in the

*Fuck off* with this "out of context" bullshit. Full context is there.

On 3/17/24 20:41, Mitchell Holman wrote:
> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
> news:2JednWdiGsks62r4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com:
>
>> On 3/17/24 12:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>> news:ynWdncb1J6WduWr4nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
>>>
>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>> Le 2024-03-16 Г  21:32, Mitchell Holman a Г©critВ :
>>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>>>>> news:B9mJN.578041$xHn7.27465@fx14.iad:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 5:50 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 20:58, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> news:UySdnTsgoMGt8Gn4nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 10:29, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 Г  08:38, Whisper a Г©critВ :
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:65f2d76f$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/03/2024 12:47 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-12 Г  17:50, Skeeter a Г©crit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <usqf5b$g9dd$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kuakinar@videotron.ca says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't prove anything else. So where did it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just saying 'god' is not the answer.В  Where did
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> god come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did human intelligence come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An emerging property if a complex brain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did the brain come from.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Something must have created evolution?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Survival of the fittest, also known as natural selection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>>>>>>>> Some say that there are no stupid questions. With your past
>>>>>>>>>>> two posts, you have proven that to be wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution is a natural process. Natural selection is another
>>>>>>>>>>> natural process. NOTHING created any natural process. Natural
>>>>>>>>>>> processes just happen.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Just happen?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> В В В В В  Yes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What is you evidence for that?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> В В В В В  Geology, botany, paleontology,
>>>>>>>>> microbiology, astronomy, climatology,
>>>>>>>>> archeology, cosmology.............
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/a-brief-history-of-ear
>>>>>>>>> th /
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is the only link which discusses the origin of life and
>>>>>>>> possible evolution. Here is the first paragraph in that section:
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>> Early life in the Archean and earlier is poorly documented in
>>>>>>>> the fossil record. Based on chemical evidence and evolutionary
>>>>>>>> theory, scientists propose this life would have been
>>>>>>>> single-celled photosynthetic organisms, such as the
>>>>>>>> cyanobacteria that created stromatolites. Cyanobacteria produced
>>>>>>>> free oxygen in the atmosphere through photosynthesis.
>>>>>>>> Cyanobacteria, archaea, and bacteria are
>>>>>>>> prokaryotes—primitive organisms made of single cells that
>>>>>>>> lack cell nuclei and other organelles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A whole bunch of words Hartung has never heard nor read before.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Scientists propose". In other words, we don't yet know.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And so you propose your "god of the gaps" fallacy to supply an
>>>>>>> answer that you find comforting, but not necessarily right...and
>>>>>>> probably wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> В В В В В  Hartung doesn't care if an answer is
>>>>>> right or wrong, only that it is biblical.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> В В В В В  Because the Bible has never been
>>>>>> disproved, you know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Had anything in the Bible been disproved,
>>>>>> you might have a point."
>>>>>> David Hartung, Jan 10, 2012
>>>>>
>>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE been
>>>>> disproved. Just one, but, a pretty big one :
>>>>> When the Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city
>>>>> surrounded by stone walls. It was a small village, barely more than
>>>>> a hamlet, surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep wild animals and
>>>>> wandering raiders at bay.
>>>>
>>>> Your source for this?
>>>
>>>
>>> Like most "cities" in the area
>>> Jericho was destroyed and rebuilt
>>> over and over again. There is nothing
>>> special about any "Joshus" attacking it.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jericho
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>
>>>> Such as?
>>>
>>>
>>> You really should read the
>>> Bible sometime, Hartung.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (2 Sam. 21:12);
>>> When David was told what Aiah’s daughter Rizpah,
>>> Saul’s concubine, had done,he went and took the
>>> bones of Saul and his son Jonathan from the citizens
>>> of Jabesh Gilead. They had stolen their bodies from
>>> the public square at Beth Shan, where the Philistines
>>> had hung them after they struck Saul down on Gilboa.
>>>
>>>
>>> = Saul was killed by the Phillistines.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (1 Sam.1:10)
>>> "I happened to be on Mount Gilboa," the young
>>> man said, "and there was Saul, leaning on his
>>> spear, with the chariots and their drivers in
>>> hot pursuit."He asked me, "Who are you?"
>>> An Amalekite," I answered.
>>> Then he said to me, "Stand here by me
>>> and kill me! I’m in the throes of death,
>>> but I’m still alive." So I stood beside
>>> him and killed him, because I knew that
>>> after he had fallen he could not survive.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> = Saul was killed by a young Amalekite
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (1 Sam. 31:4)
>>> "Saul said to his armor-bearer, “Draw your sword
>>> and run me through, or these uncircumcised fellows
>>> will come and run me through and abuse me." But his
>>> armor-bearer was terrified and would not do it; so
>>> Saul took his own sword and fell on it.
>>>
>>>
>>> = Saul killed himself.
>>
>> It would be a good idea for you to actually read the Bible instead of
>> finding out of context, and incorrect quotes.
>>
>> Here is the text of 1 Sam.1:10
>> https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Sam.1%3A10&version=NIV
>> [...]
>> 10 In her deep anguish Hannah prayed to the Lord, weeping bitterly.
>> [...]
>>
>> You were likely referring to this:
>> [...]
>> 6 And the young man who told him said, “By chance I happened to be
>> on Mount Gilboa, and there was Saul leaning on his spear, and behold,
>> the chariots and the horsemen were close upon him. 7 And when he
>> looked behind him, he saw me, and called to me. And I answered,
>> ‘Here I am.’ 8 And he said to me, ‘Who are you?’ I answered
>> him, ‘I am an Amalekite.’ 9 And he said to me, ‘Stand beside me
>> and kill me, for anguish has seized me, and yet my life still
>> lingers.’ 10 So I stood beside him and killed him, because I was
>> sure that he could not live after he had fallen. And I took the crown
>> that was on his head and the armlet that was on his arm, and I have
>> brought them here to my lord.” [...]
>>
>> Which is part of a narrative in 2 Samuel 1 in which a young man lies
>> thinking that he will gain favor with David.
>
>
> vs......
>
>
> Philistines killed Saul
>
> David went and took the bones of
> Saul and the bones of his son
> Jonathan from the men of Jabesh-
> gilead, who had stolen them from
> the public square of Beth-shan,
> where the Philistines had hanged
> them, on the day the Philistines
> killed Saul on Gilboa.
> 2 Samuel 21:12
> https://biblehub.com/2_samuel/21-12.htm
>
>
> vs.........
>
>
> Saul kills himself.
>
> Saul said to his armor-bearer,
> "Draw your sword and run me through,
> or these uncircumcised fellows will
> come and run me through and abuse me."
> But his armor-bearer was terrified and
> would not do it; so Saul took his own
> sword and fell on it.
> 1 Samuel 31:4
> https://biblehub.com/1_samuel/31-4.htm
>
>
>
> No contradictions, Hartung?

Le 2024-03-17 à 23:21, Ron Dean a écrit :
> Dawn Flood wrote:
>> On 3/16/2024 6:11 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
>>> Kualinar wrote:
>>>>
>>>> YOU are the one making a positive claim, so, YOU are the one with
>>>> the burden of proof.
>>>> I just don't accept your claim. I just don't believe in a god, any god.
>>>
>>> Once you know deMorgan, 'positive claim' is verbal diarrhea.
>>>
>>> The usual rule is proof of an assertion is on the person. The actual
>>> rule is the burden of proof on whoever wants to change your mind.
>>>
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)
>>
>> Or, for those who do not wish to read the entire article:
>>
>> Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat – the burden of
>> proof lies with the one who speaks, not the one who denies.
> >
> Proof is a non- existent commodity. One can believe God exist, or may
> believe God does not exist. But it's all a matter of belief not proof.
> It's belief Vs belief. So, it's a stale-mate!

You got that wrong.

Theism is the POSITIVE claim that there is a god.
Atheism is the LACK of belief in a god. Atheism DO NOT claim that there
is no god. Contrary to the claims of apologists and many preachers, only
the gnostic atheists, a very small minority of atheists, do claim the
non-existence of a god.

The positive claim imply the burden of proof.
The lack of belief is NOT a claim, no, there is nothing to prove, hence,
NO burden of proof.

Le 2024-03-18 à 03:47, Whisper a écrit :
> On 18/03/2024 2:40 am, Kualinar wrote:
>> Le 2024-03-17 à 06:37, Whisper a écrit :
>>> On 17/03/2024 11:18 am, Maximus wrote:
>>>> Whisper wrote:
>>>>> On 16/03/2024 9:27 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 à 13:57, David Hartung a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't believe in god without evidence.  I do believe in natural
>>>>> selection, but that doesn't answer my other question 'how did
>>>>> natural selection start?'.
>>>>
>>>> so your question then is, how did life begin. science has
>>>> progressively been trying to answer that. natural selection however
>>>> is simply organism's response to their environment.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> But why is the organism responding to the environment?  What caused
>>> that ability/function?
>>>
>> You really sound like a tiddler asking Why ?
>
>
> Well maybe if you provided some sensible answers I wouldn't have to.
Why would I even try to provide a sensible answer when I know that you
won't accept it as a sensible answer ?
You have been provided with several factual answers. You rejected them all.

Once again, you sound like a toddler endlessly asking «Why ?» after
every answer.

David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
news:1KCdnQgwsvsM12X4nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com:

> On 3/17/24 20:41, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>> news:2JednWdiGsks62r4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com:
>>
>>> On 3/17/24 12:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>> news:ynWdncb1J6WduWr4nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-03-16 Г  21:32, Mitchell Holman a Г©critВ :
>>>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:B9mJN.578041$xHn7.27465@fx14.iad:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 5:50 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 20:58, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:UySdnTsgoMGt8Gn4nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 10:29, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 Г  08:38, Whisper a Г©critВ :
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:65f2d76f$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/03/2024 12:47 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-12 Г  17:50, Skeeter a Г©crit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <usqf5b$g9dd$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kuakinar@videotron.ca says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't prove anything else. So where did it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just saying 'god' is not the answer.В  Where did
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> god come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did human intelligence come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An emerging property if a complex brain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did the brain come from.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Something must have created evolution?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Survival of the fittest, also known as natural selection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Some say that there are no stupid questions. With your past
>>>>>>>>>>>> two posts, you have proven that to be wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution is a natural process. Natural selection is another
>>>>>>>>>>>> natural process. NOTHING created any natural process.
Natural
>>>>>>>>>>>> processes just happen.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just happen?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> В В В В В  Yes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What is you evidence for that?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> В В В В В  Geology, botany, paleontology,
>>>>>>>>>> microbiology, astronomy, climatology,
>>>>>>>>>> archeology, cosmology.............
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/a-brief-history-of-
ear
>>>>>>>>>> th /
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is the only link which discusses the origin of life and
>>>>>>>>> possible evolution. Here is the first paragraph in that
section:
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>> Early life in the Archean and earlier is poorly documented in
>>>>>>>>> the fossil record. Based on chemical evidence and evolutionary
>>>>>>>>> theory, scientists propose this life would have been
>>>>>>>>> single-celled photosynthetic organisms, such as the
>>>>>>>>> cyanobacteria that created stromatolites. Cyanobacteria
produced
>>>>>>>>> free oxygen in the atmosphere through photosynthesis.
>>>>>>>>> Cyanobacteria, archaea, and bacteria are
>>>>>>>>> prokaryotes—primitive organisms made of single cells that
>>>>>>>>> lack cell nuclei and other organelles.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A whole bunch of words Hartung has never heard nor read before.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Scientists propose". In other words, we don't yet know.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And so you propose your "god of the gaps" fallacy to supply an
>>>>>>>> answer that you find comforting, but not necessarily right...and
>>>>>>>> probably wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> В В В В В  Hartung doesn't care if an answer is
>>>>>>> right or wrong, only that it is biblical.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> В В В В В  Because the Bible has never been
>>>>>>> disproved, you know.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Had anything in the Bible been disproved,
>>>>>>> you might have a point."
>>>>>>> David Hartung, Jan 10, 2012
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE been
>>>>>> disproved. Just one, but, a pretty big one :
>>>>>> When the Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city
>>>>>> surrounded by stone walls. It was a small village, barely more
than
>>>>>> a hamlet, surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep wild animals and
>>>>>> wandering raiders at bay.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Like most "cities" in the area
>>>> Jericho was destroyed and rebuilt
>>>> over and over again. There is nothing
>>>> special about any "Joshus" attacking it.
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jericho
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>>
>>>>> Such as?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You really should read the
>>>> Bible sometime, Hartung.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (2 Sam. 21:12);
>>>> When David was told what Aiah’s daughter Rizpah,
>>>> Saul’s concubine, had done,he went and took the
>>>> bones of Saul and his son Jonathan from the citizens
>>>> of Jabesh Gilead. They had stolen their bodies from
>>>> the public square at Beth Shan, where the Philistines
>>>> had hung them after they struck Saul down on Gilboa.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> = Saul was killed by the Phillistines.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (1 Sam.1:10)
>>>> "I happened to be on Mount Gilboa," the young
>>>> man said, "and there was Saul, leaning on his
>>>> spear, with the chariots and their drivers in
>>>> hot pursuit."He asked me, "Who are you?"
>>>> An Amalekite," I answered.
>>>> Then he said to me, "Stand here by me
>>>> and kill me! I’m in the throes of death,
>>>> but I’m still alive." So I stood beside
>>>> him and killed him, because I knew that
>>>> after he had fallen he could not survive.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> = Saul was killed by a young Amalekite
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (1 Sam. 31:4)
>>>> "Saul said to his armor-bearer, “Draw your sword
>>>> and run me through, or these uncircumcised fellows
>>>> will come and run me through and abuse me." But his
>>>> armor-bearer was terrified and would not do it; so
>>>> Saul took his own sword and fell on it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> = Saul killed himself.
>>>
>>> It would be a good idea for you to actually read the Bible instead of
>>> finding out of context, and incorrect quotes.
>>>
>>> Here is the text of 1 Sam.1:10
>>> https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Sam.1%3A10&version=NIV
>>> [...]
>>> 10 In her deep anguish Hannah prayed to the Lord, weeping bitterly.
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> You were likely referring to this:
>>> [...]
>>> 6 And the young man who told him said, “By chance I happened to be
>>> on Mount Gilboa, and there was Saul leaning on his spear, and behold,
>>> the chariots and the horsemen were close upon him. 7 And when he
>>> looked behind him, he saw me, and called to me. And I answered,
>>> ‘Here I am.’ 8 And he said to me, ‘Who are you?’ I answered
>>> him, ‘I am an Amalekite.’ 9 And he said to me, ‘Stand beside me
>>> and kill me, for anguish has seized me, and yet my life still
>>> lingers.’ 10 So I stood beside him and killed him, because I was
>>> sure that he could not live after he had fallen. And I took the crown
>>> that was on his head and the armlet that was on his arm, and I have
>>> brought them here to my lord.” [...]
>>>
>>> Which is part of a narrative in 2 Samuel 1 in which a young man lies
>>> thinking that he will gain favor with David.
>>
>>
>> vs......
>>
>>
>> Philistines killed Saul
>>
>> David went and took the bones of
>> Saul and the bones of his son
>> Jonathan from the men of Jabesh-
>> gilead, who had stolen them from
>> the public square of Beth-shan,
>> where the Philistines had hanged
>> them, on the day the Philistines
>> killed Saul on Gilboa.
>> 2 Samuel 21:12
>> https://biblehub.com/2_samuel/21-12.htm
>>
>>
>> vs.........
>>
>>
>> Saul kills himself.
>>
>> Saul said to his armor-bearer,
>> "Draw your sword and run me through,
>> or these uncircumcised fellows will
>> come and run me through and abuse me."
>> But his armor-bearer was terrified and
>> would not do it; so Saul took his own
>> sword and fell on it.
>> 1 Samuel 31:4
>> https://biblehub.com/1_samuel/31-4.htm
>>
>>
>>
>> No contradictions, Hartung?
>
> None, if you were to read the entire passage instead of using Google to
> cherry pick verses out of context, you would realize this.
>
>

Click here to read the complete article

Le 2024-03-17 à 13:10, David Hartung a écrit :
> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>> news:B9mJN.578041$xHn7.27465@fx14.iad:
>>>
>>>> On 3/16/2024 5:50 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 3/15/24 20:58, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>>>> news:UySdnTsgoMGt8Gn4nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 10:29, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 à 08:38, Whisper a écrit :
>>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:65f2d76f$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/03/2024 12:47 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-12 à 17:50, Skeeter a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <usqf5b$g9dd$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> kuakinar@videotron.ca says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't prove anything else. So where did it all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just saying 'god' is not the answer.  Where did god come
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did human intelligence come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An emerging property if a complex brain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did the brain come from.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Something must have created evolution?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Survival of the fittest, also known as natural selection.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>>>>> Some say that there are no stupid questions. With your past two
>>>>>>>> posts, you have proven that to be wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Evolution is a natural process. Natural selection is another
>>>>>>>> natural process. NOTHING created any natural process. Natural
>>>>>>>> processes just happen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just happen?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       Yes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is you evidence for that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       Geology, botany, paleontology,
>>>>>> microbiology, astronomy, climatology,
>>>>>> archeology, cosmology.............
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/a-brief-history-of-earth/
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the only link which discusses the origin of life and possible
>>>>> evolution. Here is the first paragraph in that section:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> Early life in the Archean and earlier is poorly documented in the
>>>>> fossil record. Based on chemical evidence and evolutionary theory,
>>>>> scientists propose this life would have been single-celled
>>>>> photosynthetic organisms, such as the cyanobacteria that created
>>>>> stromatolites. Cyanobacteria produced free oxygen in the atmosphere
>>>>> through photosynthesis. Cyanobacteria, archaea, and bacteria are
>>>>> prokaryotes—primitive organisms made of single cells that lack cell
>>>>> nuclei and other organelles.
>>>>
>>>> A whole bunch of words Hartung has never heard nor read before.
>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>> "Scientists propose". In other words, we don't yet know.
>>>>
>>>> And so you propose your "god of the gaps" fallacy to supply an answer
>>>> that you find comforting, but not necessarily right...and probably
>>>> wrong.
>>>>
>>>
>>>       Hartung doesn't care if an answer is
>>> right or wrong, only that it is biblical.
>>>
>>>       Because the Bible has never been
>>> disproved, you know.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Had anything in the Bible been disproved,
>>> you might have a point."
>>> David Hartung, Jan 10, 2012
>>
>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE been disproved.
>> Just one, but, a pretty big one :
>> When the Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city surrounded
>> by stone walls. It was a small village, barely more than a hamlet,
>> surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep wild animals and wandering
>> raiders at bay.
>
> Your source for this?
>
>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>
> Such as?
>
Just two out of THOUSANDS :

Did Mary and Joseph had to travel to Bethlehem or did they already
resided in Bethlehem ? Both are found in the Nativity story.

Did they had to flee to Egypt when Jesus was still a baby, or when Jesus
was 5 years old ? Also from Nativity.

Those are two mutually exclusive versions of the exact same story.

Then, there are all of those contradictions between Genesis 1 and
Genesis 2...

From various books :
Does the son be held responsible for the wrong doing of the father for 7
generations or should he NEVER be held responsible for the inequity of
the father ? BOTH are found in the bible.

Le 2024-03-18 à 10:07, David Hartung a écrit :
> On 3/17/24 20:41, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>> news:2JednWdiGsks62r4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com:
>>
>>> On 3/17/24 12:31, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>> news:ynWdncb1J6WduWr4nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-03-16 Г  21:32, Mitchell Holman a Г©critВ :
>>>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:B9mJN.578041$xHn7.27465@fx14.iad:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 5:50 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 20:58, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:UySdnTsgoMGt8Gn4nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 10:29, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 Г  08:38, Whisper a Г©critВ :
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:65f2d76f$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/03/2024 12:47 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-12 Г  17:50, Skeeter a Г©crit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <usqf5b$g9dd$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kuakinar@videotron.ca says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't prove anything else. So where did it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just saying 'god' is not the answer.В  Where did
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> god come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did human intelligence come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An emerging property if a complex brain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did the brain come from.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Something must have created evolution?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Survival of the fittest, also known as natural selection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Some say that there are no stupid questions. With your past
>>>>>>>>>>>> two posts, you have proven that to be wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution is a natural process. Natural selection is another
>>>>>>>>>>>> natural process. NOTHING created any natural process. Natural
>>>>>>>>>>>> processes just happen.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just happen?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> В В В В В  Yes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What is you evidence for that?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> В В В В В  Geology, botany, paleontology,
>>>>>>>>>> microbiology, astronomy, climatology,
>>>>>>>>>> archeology, cosmology.............
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/a-brief-history-of-ear
>>>>>>>>>> th /
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is the only link which discusses the origin of life and
>>>>>>>>> possible evolution. Here is the first paragraph in that section:
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>> Early life in the Archean and earlier is poorly documented in
>>>>>>>>> the fossil record. Based on chemical evidence and evolutionary
>>>>>>>>> theory, scientists propose this life would have been
>>>>>>>>> single-celled photosynthetic organisms, such as the
>>>>>>>>> cyanobacteria that created stromatolites. Cyanobacteria produced
>>>>>>>>> free oxygen in the atmosphere through photosynthesis.
>>>>>>>>> Cyanobacteria, archaea, and bacteria are
>>>>>>>>> prokaryotes—primitive organisms made of single cells that
>>>>>>>>> lack cell nuclei and other organelles.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A whole bunch of words Hartung has never heard nor read before.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Scientists propose". In other words, we don't yet know.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And so you propose your "god of the gaps" fallacy to supply an
>>>>>>>> answer that you find comforting, but not necessarily right...and
>>>>>>>> probably wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> В В В В В  Hartung doesn't care if an answer is
>>>>>>> right or wrong, only that it is biblical.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> В В В В В  Because the Bible has never been
>>>>>>> disproved, you know.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Had anything in the Bible been disproved,
>>>>>>> you might have a point."
>>>>>>> David Hartung, Jan 10, 2012
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE been
>>>>>> disproved. Just one, but, a pretty big one :
>>>>>> When the Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city
>>>>>> surrounded by stone walls. It was a small village, barely more than
>>>>>> a hamlet, surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep wild animals and
>>>>>> wandering raiders at bay.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your source for this?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>       Like most "cities" in the area
>>>> Jericho was destroyed and rebuilt
>>>> over and over again. There is nothing
>>>> special about any "Joshus" attacking it.
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jericho
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>>>
>>>>> Such as?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        You really should read the
>>>> Bible sometime, Hartung.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (2 Sam. 21:12);
>>>> When David was told what Aiah’s daughter Rizpah,
>>>> Saul’s concubine, had done,he went and took the
>>>> bones of Saul and his son Jonathan from the citizens
>>>> of Jabesh Gilead. They had stolen their bodies from
>>>> the public square at Beth Shan, where the Philistines
>>>> had hung them after they struck Saul down on Gilboa.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>       = Saul was killed by the Phillistines.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (1 Sam.1:10)
>>>> "I happened to be on Mount Gilboa," the young
>>>> man said, "and there was Saul, leaning on his
>>>> spear, with the chariots and their drivers in
>>>> hot pursuit."He asked me, "Who are you?"
>>>> An Amalekite," I answered.
>>>> Then he said to me, "Stand here by me
>>>> and kill me! I’m in the throes of death,
>>>> but I’m still alive." So I stood beside
>>>> him and killed him, because I knew that
>>>> after he had fallen he could not survive.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>       = Saul was killed by a young Amalekite
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (1 Sam. 31:4)
>>>> "Saul said to his armor-bearer, “Draw your sword
>>>> and run me through, or these uncircumcised fellows
>>>> will come and run me through and abuse me." But his
>>>> armor-bearer was terrified and would not do it; so
>>>> Saul took his own sword and fell on it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>       = Saul killed himself.
>>>
>>> It would be a good idea for you to actually read the Bible instead of
>>> finding out of context, and incorrect quotes.
>>>
>>> Here is the text of 1 Sam.1:10
>>> https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Sam.1%3A10&version=NIV
>>> [...]
>>> 10 In her deep anguish Hannah prayed to the Lord, weeping bitterly.
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> You were likely referring to this:
>>> [...]
>>> 6 And the young man who told him said, “By chance I happened to be
>>> on Mount Gilboa, and there was Saul leaning on his spear, and behold,
>>> the chariots and the horsemen were close upon him. 7 And when he
>>> looked behind him, he saw me, and called to me. And I answered,
>>> ‘Here I am.’ 8 And he said to me, ‘Who are you?’ I answered
>>> him, ‘I am an Amalekite.’ 9 And he said to me, ‘Stand beside me
>>> and kill me, for anguish has seized me, and yet my life still
>>> lingers.’ 10 So I stood beside him and killed him, because I was
>>> sure that he could not live after he had fallen. And I took the crown
>>> that was on his head and the armlet that was on his arm, and I have
>>> brought them here to my lord.” [...]
>>>
>>> Which is part of a narrative in 2 Samuel 1 in which a young man lies
>>> thinking that he will gain favor with David.
>>
>>        vs......
>>
>>
>> Philistines killed Saul
>>
>> David went and took the bones of
>> Saul and the bones of his son
>> Jonathan from the men of Jabesh-
>> gilead, who had stolen them from
>> the public square of Beth-shan,
>> where the Philistines had hanged
>> them, on the day the Philistines
>> killed Saul on Gilboa.
>> 2 Samuel 21:12
>> https://biblehub.com/2_samuel/21-12.htm
>>
>>
>>        vs.........
>>
>>
>>      Saul kills himself.
>>
>> Saul said to his armor-bearer,
>> "Draw your sword and run me through,
>> or these uncircumcised fellows will
>> come and run me through and abuse me."
>> But his armor-bearer was terrified and
>> would not do it; so Saul took his own
>> sword and fell on it.
>> 1 Samuel 31:4
>> https://biblehub.com/1_samuel/31-4.htm
>>
>>
>>
>>     No contradictions, Hartung?
>
> None, if you were to read the entire passage instead of using Google to
> cherry pick verses out of context, you would realize this.
>
Those are genuine contradictions. Those quotes are long enough and self
contained. You can't accept that you are presented with any
contradictions found in the bible, as that demonstrate that the bible is
not perfect, and you can't accept that.
You need to keep on believing that the bible is the word of god, and the
word of god must be infallible. The infallible word of god can't contain
any contradiction, so, you can't accept any of the contradictions that
the bible DO contain.

Le 2024-03-17 à 19:04, David Hartung a écrit :
> On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
>> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
>>>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
>>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:B9mJN.578041$xHn7.27465@fx14.iad:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 5:50 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 20:58, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:UySdnTsgoMGt8Gn4nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 10:29, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 à 08:38, Whisper a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:65f2d76f$1@news.ausics.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/03/2024 12:47 am, Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-12 à 17:50, Skeeter a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <usqf5b$g9dd$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kuakinar@videotron.ca says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't prove anything else. So where did it all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just saying 'god' is not the answer.  Where did god come
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did human intelligence come from?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An emerging property if a complex brain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did the brain come from.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Something must have created evolution?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Survival of the fittest, also known as natural selection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
>>>>>>>>>> Some say that there are no stupid questions. With your past two
>>>>>>>>>> posts, you have proven that to be wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Evolution is a natural process. Natural selection is another
>>>>>>>>>> natural process. NOTHING created any natural process. Natural
>>>>>>>>>> processes just happen.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just happen?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>       Yes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What is you evidence for that?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>       Geology, botany, paleontology,
>>>>>>>> microbiology, astronomy, climatology,
>>>>>>>> archeology, cosmology.............
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/a-brief-history-of-earth/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is the only link which discusses the origin of life and
>>>>>>> possible
>>>>>>> evolution. Here is the first paragraph in that section:
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> Early life in the Archean and earlier is poorly documented in the
>>>>>>> fossil record. Based on chemical evidence and evolutionary theory,
>>>>>>> scientists propose this life would have been single-celled
>>>>>>> photosynthetic organisms, such as the cyanobacteria that created
>>>>>>> stromatolites. Cyanobacteria produced free oxygen in the atmosphere
>>>>>>> through photosynthesis. Cyanobacteria, archaea, and bacteria are
>>>>>>> prokaryotes—primitive organisms made of single cells that lack cell
>>>>>>> nuclei and other organelles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A whole bunch of words Hartung has never heard nor read before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Scientists propose". In other words, we don't yet know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And so you propose your "god of the gaps" fallacy to supply an answer
>>>>>> that you find comforting, but not necessarily right...and probably
>>>>>> wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       Hartung doesn't care if an answer is
>>>>> right or wrong, only that it is biblical.
>>>>>
>>>>>       Because the Bible has never been
>>>>> disproved, you know.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Had anything in the Bible been disproved,
>>>>> you might have a point."
>>>>> David Hartung, Jan 10, 2012
>>>>
>>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE been
>>>> disproved.
>>>> Just one, but, a pretty big one :
>>>> When the Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city
>>>> surrounded by stone walls. It was a small village, barely more than
>>>> a hamlet, surrounded by a wooden palisade to keep wild animals and
>>>> wandering raiders at bay.
>>>
>>> Your source for this?
>>>
>>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
>>>
>>> Such as?
>>
>> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
>
> Doesn't work.
>
That link DO work.

Le 2024-03-18 à 01:53, Ron Dean a écrit :
> Dawn Flood wrote:
>> On 3/12/2024 1:41 AM, Richard Trickle wrote:
>>> In <usokiq$3g7l$2@dont-email.me> Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/11/2024 4:58 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
>>>>> Kualinar wrote:
>>>>>> Le 2024-03-10 à 21:37, Siri Cruise a écrit :
>>>>>>> Jon Brady wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Life was not created by "god." That's only a childish fair
>>> tale.
>>>>>>>>>> Where did the RNA come from?
>>>>>>>>> Random mixing of molecules.
>>>>>>>> Who created the molecules so they could do that, Rudy?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Experiments like Miller-Urey show that simple molecules can be
>>>>>>> synthesised into complex molecules, some significant to terrestrial
>>>>>>> life, with modest input energy like ultraviolet light or electric
>>>>>>> discharges.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Additional experiments show some molecules have limitted abiotic
>>>>>>> creation and longetivity.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We mostly know how DNA is replicated using proteins.
>>>>>>> RNA replication without proteins? That's what the news is about, an
>>>>>>> example of replicating RNA without bootstrapping proteins.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We got theories to take us from models of early earth almost to
>>> most
>>>>>>> of the molecules of inefficient but possible life. Best on chance
>>> and
>>>>>>> organic chemistry without needing a god. It's rational for a person
>>>>>>> to conclude we will be able to explain everything without a god.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's no evidence a god was not involved. It remains that it is
>>> as
>>>>>>> rational to believe in a creator god as to disbelieve.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It comes done to choice, an unforced choice, to believe or
>>> disbelieve.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adding a god does nothing but add complexity to the problem and
>>> don't
>>>>>> solve anything.
>>>>>
>>>>> Either a god added itself or no god. Your aesthetics are irrelevant.
>>>>> Reality is what reality is, and we're whistling past the graveyard
>>> with
>>>>> all our theories and philosophies. Belief and disbelief are equally
>>>>> rational.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Problem is that there are an infinite number of "beliefs" but really
>>>> only one "disbelief".  As the "beliefs" contradict each other, at
>>> least
>>>> in some respects, they cannot all be true; how to choose?  On the
>>> other
>>>> hand, "disbelief" is at least falsifiable, which makes it more
>>> rational
>>>> than all the others, because "disbelief" opens itself up to being
>>> proved
>>>> wrong.
>>>
>>> or right as facts present themselves.
>>
>> Sure, let God, if He exists, instantaneously and fully heal an adult
>> amputee, and then let's talk.
>>
> There are certain animals species that can replace missing parts if the
> DNA information for the part is not turned off. In humans the
> information (DNA) to build limbs is turned off after birth.  There was a
> drug that was known to turn off DNA for limbs. I had an aunt who took a
> drug subscribed subscribed by her Dr  several decades ago and gave birth
> to a child without arms. Someday, hopefully a drug might be developed to
> turn back on the part of the genetic code that expressed for limbs.
>
> Random mutations can and does cause information loss, as in the case of
> blind cave fish, certain birds species have lost the ability to fly.
> Close relatives are discouraged from marrying. So, where the information
> does not exist no functioning part can come into existence. Hogs can
> never develop wings to fly,  the monkey can never develop the mind
> capable of designing and building a rocket ship, an automobile. In spite
> of hypothesis,  theories and claims to the contrary,  fish can never
> develop legs to run on land or wings to fly because the absence of
> necessary information. According to information theory, expressed in
> mathematical terms, what to comes down to is two conditions must be met
> before information has value, transmission (transfer) and translation.
> And this comes across as crucial.
>
> Since information without the two (2) conditions is non-functional. And
> it make sense, suppose you found a document written in a language
> unknown by you and you just discarded it. But had you  taken  it to
> someone to translate,  it would have been translated to English it read
> "pay to the bearer  one million dollars in cash". Hopefully you would
> see it through. This characterizes the information in a genome, it has
> to be transmitted and translated. The three information, transmission
> and translation has to appear historically at precisely the same time to
> have any function.
>
>
>>
>> Dawn
>
Yes, mutations CAN result in the loss of DNA parts and functionality,
NOT information as DNA DO NOT contain information. DNA is NOT information.
BUT
Mutations can also change part of the DNA.
Mutations certainly can ADD segments of DNA by insertion and replication.

When a functionality get turned off, that part of the DNA is still
there, unchanged.

Remember that when we interpret something AS information, it don't mean
that it IS information.

In article <7KXJN.121780$GX69.40629@fx46.iad>, NoBody@nowhere.corn
says...
>
> On 3/17/2024 4:04 PM, David Hartung wrote:
> > On 3/17/24 12:34, NoBody wrote:
> >> On 3/17/2024 10:10 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> >>> On 3/17/24 10:50, Kualinar wrote:
> >>>> Le 2024-03-16 à 21:32, Mitchell Holman a écrit :
> >>>>> Max Boot <max.boot@lathymes.com> wrote in
> >>>>> news:B9mJN.578041$xHn7.27465@fx14.iad:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 3/16/2024 5:50 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 3/15/24 20:58, Mitchell Holman wrote:
> >>>>>>>> David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>>> news:UySdnTsgoMGt8Gn4nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 10:29, Kualinar wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-15 à 08:38, Whisper a écrit :
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 15/03/2024 7:13 am, Scout wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Whisper" <whisper@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>>> news:65f2d76f$1@news.ausics.net...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/03/2024 12:47 am, Kualinar wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 2024-03-12 à 17:50, Skeeter a écrit :
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <usqf5b$g9dd$1@dont-email.me>,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kuakinar@videotron.ca says...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't prove anything else. So where did it all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> come from?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just saying 'god' is not the answer.  Where did god come
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did human intelligence come from?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An emerging property if a complex brain.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did the brain come from.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evolution.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Something must have created evolution?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Survival of the fittest, also known as natural selection.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but what created natural selection?
> >>>>>>>>>> Some say that there are no stupid questions. With your past two
> >>>>>>>>>> posts, you have proven that to be wrong.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Evolution is a natural process. Natural selection is another
> >>>>>>>>>> natural process. NOTHING created any natural process. Natural
> >>>>>>>>>> processes just happen.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Just happen?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>       Yes.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> What is you evidence for that?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>       Geology, botany, paleontology,
> >>>>>>>> microbiology, astronomy, climatology,
> >>>>>>>> archeology, cosmology.............
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/a-brief-history-of-earth/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This is the only link which discusses the origin of life and possible
> >>>>>>> evolution. Here is the first paragraph in that section:
> >>>>>>> [...]
> >>>>>>> Early life in the Archean and earlier is poorly documented in the
> >>>>>>> fossil record. Based on chemical evidence and evolutionary theory,
> >>>>>>> scientists propose this life would have been single-celled
> >>>>>>> photosynthetic organisms, such as the cyanobacteria that created
> >>>>>>> stromatolites. Cyanobacteria produced free oxygen in the atmosphere
> >>>>>>> through photosynthesis. Cyanobacteria, archaea, and bacteria are
> >>>>>>> prokaryotes?primitive organisms made of single cells that lack cell
> >>>>>>> nuclei and other organelles.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> A whole bunch of words Hartung has never heard nor read before.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [...]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Scientists propose". In other words, we don't yet know.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And so you propose your "god of the gaps" fallacy to supply an answer
> >>>>>> that you find comforting, but not necessarily right...and probably
> >>>>>> wrong.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>       Hartung doesn't care if an answer is
> >>>>> right or wrong, only that it is biblical.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>       Because the Bible has never been
> >>>>> disproved, you know.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Had anything in the Bible been disproved,
> >>>>> you might have a point."
> >>>>> David Hartung, Jan 10, 2012
> >>>>
> >>>> Well... There ARE so many things from the bible that HAVE been disproved.
> >>>> Just one, but, a pretty big one :
> >>>> When the Israelite came upon Jericho, it was NOT a big city surrounded by
> >>>> stone walls. It was a small village, barely more than a hamlet, surrounded
> >>>> by a wooden palisade to keep wild animals and wandering raiders at bay.
> >>>
> >>> Your source for this?
> >>>
> >>>> Then, there are the 1000's of internal contradictions...
> >>>
> >>> Such as?
> >>
> >> https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblicalcontrudictions/
> >
> > Doesn't work.
>
> It works fine.

Nope, bad link.

Kualinar wrote:
> Why would I even try to provide a sensible answer when I know that
> you won't accept it as a sensible answer ?

If you want to claim greater intellect, show greater intellect.
Stop peeing on your own toeses. You don't have answer, but if you
do, give a correct answer.

Information is not some nebulous cloudiness. It is studied in
information theory, thermodynamics, math of analysis.

At the very least stop using the trick of subjective definitions
of 'information' used to sneak your presuppositions into the argument.

--
Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

Mitchell Holman wrote:
> Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote in news:ut8l0l$1cbs$1@dont-
> email.me:
>
>> Gronk wrote:
>>> "It is a central dogma of all fundamental
>>> Christians that the Bible is without error.
>>
>> Are all christians fundamental?
>>
>> Seriousd-mental?
>>
>> 'without error' is a poor choice of words. Deliberately chosen no
>> doubt to denigrate that 'fundamental' strawman.
>>
>
>
> Christians themselves claim
> the "inerrancy" of the Bible.

How do they define 'inerrant' and how do you? There's a
significant phrase you're avoiding for what I have to assume is
using it defeats your message of doom.

Hint: Are Aesop fables true stories or do they have nothing to do
with human behaviour?

--
Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed