SpaghettiSawUs

Pazinnnnnng.
Posting privs!! I can now enjoy full conversational facilities while too joining the crowd of onlookers for this soon-to-be-completed trainwreck of purely AFDavian proportions. Big thanks to IIDB for such an excellent arena.
Cheers
Spags

ericmurphy

Dave thinks they were intended to be taken as history; he's said so quite specifically. He agrees that snakes don't talk now, but that doesn't, according to Dave, exclude the possibility they may have talked in the past.

What were you saying about children?

VoxRat

I just want to second that, and make sure this absurdity is not allowed to pass un-remarked upon in the Formal Debate.

lpetrich

afdave's claims are so full of holes.

Let's see...

So if one believes that Genesis is allegorical, one is therefore not a True Xian?

Much more stable than afdave seems to believe, contrary to the impression that one might get from reports on cutting-edge research.

I wonder what items afdave considers questionable in that book.

Animals differ greatly in intelligence. And no species other than ours has shown a capability of generating sentences, as opposed to learning individual symbols.

The same can be said of a whole bestiary of imaginary entities.

If you cannot prove that Bertrand Russell's interplanetary teapot does not exist, does that mean that it does?



Whatever those might be.

Completely legitimate. Since afdave does not believe in the gods of every religion but his, we can be justified in going one god further.

The "god of the gaps" is a poor explanation.

Most living things have come from other living things -- reproduction is hard to call a fundamental mystery. Or does gawd poof each individual organism into existence?

Eyes and limbs don't get poofed into existence.

Eyes are elaborations of eyespots, collections of light-sensitive cells. And fancy limbs are elaborations of simple limbs.


Josh McDowell? Don't make me laugh.

Demonstrably false. Humanity was illiterate before about 3000 BCE, and writing only gradually spread from the places where it was invented.

However, the archeology doesn't exactly support the alleged historicity of Genesis.

There are good reasons to consider them legendary.

Enuma Elish -> Genesis 1 and 2

Dilmun -> Eden
Temptation seals, Adapa -> Fall

Sumerian King List with long-lived kings -> Long-lived patriarchs

Bullshit. Different flood legends say different things, and Flood Geology was thoroughly discredited when Charles Darwin was a boy.

And the existence of Troy demonstrates the existence of the Greek gods, right?

Common ancient Middle-Eastern practices -- too common to date the patriarchal narratives with.

Demonstrably false. Camel bones start becoming abundant in archeological sites only in the first millennium BCE.

I wonder where afdave gets his apologetic bullshit from.

Lixma

Answers in Genesis. You know, the bastion of intellectual inquiry where....

Occam's Aftershave

About 60% is direct C&P from AIG, 30% C&P from from ICR, 5% C&P from Walt Brown, and the other roughly 5 % is Dave randomly Googling for "evil atheist evolution disproven"

About 0.1% is Dave having an original thought. It doesn't happen often but when it does (see Dave's Portuguese moment) it's a doozy :Cheeky:

ck1

Actually, mitochondrial DNA has been isolated and sequenced from at least 3 and possibly as many as 8 Neanderthal specimens. This DNA is small, abundant and much easier than nuclear DNA to isolate from poor quality material.

More recently (2006) Svante Paabo and Ed Rubin used a novel sequencing approach and were able to isolate and sequence segments of nuclear DNA from Neanderthal - the initial report was 65Kb. There is a Neanderthal genomic sequencing project underway that aims to add substantially to what has already been reported.

And while dinosaur DNA has not (yet) been sequenced, dinosaur proteins have been sequenced very recently:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...ubmed_RVDocSum

ck1

Here is a report on the announcement of the Neanderthal genome sequencing project last year at which time they had completed a million bases:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0720105836.htm

Chuck Rightmire

You really know Dave, but I do have a correction. Given the details of Moses' life as we have been given it, then he existed after writing had been invented in some form or the other. The Egyptians had it quite early and apparently they got it from the Sumerians who had it by 2000 BCE, long before Moses appeared. And Abraham came from Sumer, according to Biblical accounts so he was not only familiar with the Sumerian stories such as the flood and the story of Cain who was killed by Abel (under a different name) and was worshipped by the Hebrews at least until the time of Jeremiah. Somehow, Genesis doesn't have to fit the details, but it is pretty plain where its account must have originated and before Abraham hit the dusty trail with his sheep.

SpaghettiSawUs

Thus *proving* Dave is right and that genesis is factual since this mtDNA should have completely degraded now because Dave said so.

Dave says "probably" eleven times in his post, all of which he uses as bases from which to derive conclusions. The problem is that, to Dave, there is no "probably" about his conclusions, because they match with the truth that Dave already knows. And who says Dave doesn't understand consilience?