The Bible reveals the truth about Christmas!

There are some that take that position - that existence is only found in the physical realm. There are also those that don't take that position, for which many atheists apparently fall into, according to one of your fellow posters.

Went to a bookstore yesterday and the "New & Hot" section had books called The Evolution of God or Evolution of Religion. atheism is N'style yo.

First of all, stop saying 'evolutionists'. There's no such thing.

Wow. It is astonishing how many wrong/dumb things you packed into such a compact statement. First of all, it is a fact, regardless of how much you refuse to admit it. If you ask any credible physicist/geologist/archeologist/other scientist, they will confirm it. The mere fact that you mention Carbon dating in the context of the age of the earth immediately makes it painfully obvious that you don't have the slightest clue of what you're talking about. Carbon 14 has a half-life of 5730 years, so it is completely useless in dating things on the scale of billions of years. The age of the earth has been established using different radioactive isotopes, such as potassium. And contrary to what completely unqualified creationist idiots may tell you, this is an incredibly accurate means of dating materials. There's a number of different isotopes that can be used, and all of them provide an identical estimate for the age of the earth, 4.6 billion years. Of course, radiometric dating is just one of many means establishing the age of the universe. The simple fact that, when you look at the sky and see light from galaxies and stars billions of light years away immediately destroys any credibility the Bible may have held (at least in its more literal interpretation), since light travels at a finite speed. Regardless, this is a fact, and if you don't accept it, you are an idiot, or someone who's had the misfortune of having his brain addled by others at an early age.

Looks like you completely neglected to read my previous post. I couldn't give the slightest fuck what the Bible says, unless you first demonstrate that it is in some way relevant to reality. Nothing written in the Bible itself can confirm its own validity since that would be circular reasoning. Pause and just consider for a moment that the Bible has no relevance to reality. Just consider it for one instant. Then the foundation for all the work of these 'experts' you speak of is gone, and they are merely wasting their time in utter nonsense. Unless you can show that the foundation of their work is solid, I couldn't care less what any Biblical expert has to tell me.

Not really, because the scientific method is the only reliable means of obtaining any sort of accurate knowledge about the universe known to humans. The reason it is so accurate is because it is self-correcting, as exemplified by your mention of the Michelson-Morley experiment. Ultimately, the incorrect model (aether) was discarded as evidence overwhelmingly showed that electromagnetic radiation is capable of propagating through the vacuum. Thus, that which was incorrect was discarded, and we were one step towards better understanding our universe. Religion has no such mechanism; it merely works in reverse, pretending to know all the answers, and desperately seeking evidence in the real world to back up its claims, while simultaneously discarding or ignoring evidence that opposes its claims. This is something you are quite blatantly doing in this thread by attempting to assert that we don't really know the age of the earth, or that evolution is just as valid a theory as creationism (and neither of these statements are true).

As someone who has taken more undergraduate and graduate level thermodynamics courses than a typical physicist, I can assure you that you don't seem to really know what entropy is (which is the case for most Creationists), and everything you are saying is utter nonsense. Nothing about evolution violates the 2nd law, in spite of the frequent assertions of Creationists (who fancy themselves learned experts on the 2nd law, but are incapable of telling you what the first or third laws are without referencing Wikipedia).

The irony of it all is that the only reaction i have about your stupidity is "Jesus christ that is a moron"

what would jesus do?

he would call for an immediate lobotomy

Ahem. Again why you're quite the idiot.

Science can ONLY deal with the natural. If it is not observable, it cannot be tested, and it cannot be proven(as far as we know to that point). Hence why gods/ghosts/demons/black people with jobs can't even qualify as a hypothesis, because they don't actually exist in any verifiable state.

This is why theories have so much weight behind them. In SCIENCE, the word is essentially synonymous with fact. It has withstood a mountain of tests, scrutiny, and peer review. As far as the world is known today, our theories are facts. And don't ever fucking misunderstand that shit again. Just because in pop culture, it's cool to use "theory" to mean "my bullshit idea", doesn't mean that when used in academia, that's what it means.

It's not that people who believe in evolution are atheists, or that atheism has anything to do with belief in evolution. Why? Because evolution IS. The end, there is -no- question as to whether or not it occurs. Now, Darwin's theory of the mechanism by which evolution occurs(natural selection) may be debatable. But, it too has withstood decades and decades of scrutiny and tests. As far as Christians go? They're free to believe in a god if they wish, power to them despite the god of the Bible being an impossible being... But "belief" in evolution? Sorry, you don't get to pick and choose whether things exist.

Pick a different topic; you're a fish out of water with this one.

but the Bible does have relevance to reality and it is impossible to imagine one without the other

god you're dumb.

Three points of evidence that this guy is trollin'.
A. He made his account with his title or sub-name being 'keep your mind open'. I sincerely doubt that anybody coming here for actual discussion would not do such a thing unless he foresaw conflict. Or in this case intended it. Kaleidoscope fits this theme. Even if he is a very silly person who believes these claims, his overzealous attempt to defend it is the vein of trolling because he's surely figured out that these arguments are futile in this venue with these people.
B. He continually points to ridiculously flawed evidence and poorly made fringe-looking websites that nobody in their right mind would use as a source in a legitimate argument. Did I read right that one of his videos was from 'the men who stare at goats'? His example of Adamic comes from one dude named David Cohen. The argument stated makes the claim that many people call it this. It is not so. Baseless claims like this are signs of poor argumentation or hastily researched trolling material.
C. Responding to every single religion pigeon? Really?

This is clearly trolling bros.

If I didn't previously have the misfortune of meeting people with these exact views IRL, I would definitely think he's a troll.

If he's a troll, then responding to each religion pigeon and putting citations in his posts are strokes of brilliance.

Dude, it's pointless to argue God on this forums.

ok but why did he put the pathogens in pork, and then make it tasty? is he trying to trick us into killing ourselves?

wouldn't it make more sense to make the pork taste bad if it has bad stuff inside it? you know, like rotting meat?

i'm shopping for religions at the moment, and right now i can tell you that the bhuddists and zoroastrians are doing a much better sell.

Arguing -A- god, and doing so honestly is vastly different from proselytizing your bogus and demonstrably false one.

Trolling only works when you don't get supremely shut down by a superior troll.