More Archaeological Confirmation of OT Events

I was rather impressed that he could fit so much jargon filled nonsense into a paragraph of pure nonsense. I think its a true gift.

 

Well gosharootie. Here I stand, arms akimbo, eyes closed, both halves of my brain tied behind my back, and right smack in the midst of three towers of atheist intellect; and not one of them can find the stones to get close enough to take a whack at me with a ten foot pole - or, for that matter, an eleven foot Lithuanian.

I say this sonofabitch oughta be stickied as a testament to the intellectual prowess of the stereotypical atheist. Waddya say, PF staff?

 

There are certain individuals that project negativity and anger to the point they are best avoided. Some are quite entertaining and worthy of reply in order to continue the show....you are not one of those. There are others who present themselves almost immediately and are quickly placed on ignore...you are not one of those either. You are that rarity of the obnoxious pseudo intellect but are making a good case for something else. You may as well go ahead and report me for typing truth you dislike.

 

intellectual legend in your own mind. But then what else to expect from somebody that actually thinks he's saying something of relevance when he spouts such idiotic word salad as this.

As for whacking you with a ten foot pole, I most definitely have no desire to do so, but it has nothing to do with my "stones" it has to do with my sense of mercy and compassion. Afterall you can't really help it.

 

There are many things in science we don't understand, particularly when things happened a couple of billion years ago, under circumstances we cannot even know and maybe not replicate.

 

'The assertion that human chimpanzee divergence is only 1% and subsequently the two species are 99% genetically identical was widely believed, but is now refuted by modern research that is able to look at entire genomes. It is now believed that the theory of 1% divergence only applies when looking at sequences that are aligned. After using resources not available in 1975, such as sequence data that is now available for multiple species, found multiple other aspects of the genome in humans and chimps that differ. This includes insertions and deletions as well as rearrangements and inversions of the genome. These genomic features help explain the changes that have occurred in humans since we last shared a common ancestor with chimps. The changes include around 35 million base-pair changes, 689 genes gained and 86 lost, the increase in brain mass, as well as the obvious ability to walk on two feet.

With this new information, scientists now believe that there is approximately a 3% divergence due to indels on top of the originally believed 1%.[2][3] Additionally, gene duplication and loss between the two species differs by 6.4%. There are also differences in the genetic networks and chromosome structure that make it difficult to quantify the relative change.[3]

 

Or it only proves that some people are willing to die for their beliefs. I would guess people have died for hundreds if not thousands of religions over the course of history.

 

That of course is totally illogical. I would bet there are thousands of works of fiction that actually contain some true facts.

 

So chimps made man in their own image?

 

Same ancestor - diverged paths. Evolving to adapt to different circumstances. Rather like the Horse whose nearest relatives and the Rhinocerus, Zebra and Tapir.

 

Then surely you serve the PF readership better to cast reasonble doubt on the credibility of such an "individual" by substantiating your claim about his faulty diction than you do by sniveling about said individual being mean and rotten.

The hell of it is, I know why I'm perceived as such by your ilk way better than you do.

Even if "winning by moderator" had ever been my style, that option is unavailable to yours truly in the present case.

Presumably those of, shall we say, a certain mentality find value in such vacuous gainsaying; but by now it should hardly need saying that I am not among them.

How very admirable, I'm sure. Happily, I am utterly unfettered by such "lofty" considerations, wherefore I cordially invite you to juxtapose your formidable intellect against my *****rdly [*] cogitative abilities

every

chance

you

get.



[*] Thank the retarded word filter for that one.

 

One presumes one's cognitive abilities are reflected in the articulation of their opinions.

Engaging in pretentious nonsense using big words that demonstrate a profound lack of understanding of the underlying scientific theory one is trying to rebut, certainly does create quite the reflection.

We can sneer away at each other ad infinitum but that will only serve to exercise our repartee skills, it sure as hell isn't going to advance your understanding of evolution.

 

The irony here is pretty thick, seeing you evince not the slightest understanding of the post you presume to criticize.

Actually it will also serve to cultivate frustration in the one who becomes obsessed with the task of humiliating the other.

Just a word to the wise, and to the unwise.

Seeing my understanding of it exceeds yours by at least a millionfold, I'm not worried.

 

And as I've said before the OT is far from Historically accurate. There was no mass Exodus of Hebrews from Egypt. The 'Israelites' - tribe of Israel - were already in Palestine. It was ruled by the Egyptians after the Battle of Megiddo - earlier. No-one destroyed Jericho. A natural earthquake did what it had done before - and since. There's no evidence that Jesus, the Jewish preacher, was born in Bethlehem Ephratah. The 2 nativity stories contradict themselves, Jewish law and Roman law of the time.

 

The irony is that you seem to think that your argument was actually legit. It seems you have no clue what the differences between eukaryotic and prokaryotic cells to suggest that since bacteria have short life cycles and have been around for a few billion years then we should have been able to "observe" the evolution from single cell non dna based life to multi cell dna/mitochondira based cells.

That argument is outrageously ignorant of the entire process of evolution.

No, if I truly wanted to humiliate you, I'd take an entirely different approach. But I get how you think others are obsessed with you.

I am not surprised that with such a ludicrous exaggeration of your "understanding" you've just demonstrated your lack thereof.[/QUOTE]

 

What has DNA got to do with the archaeology confirmation of the Bible?

 

zip.

 

I never said anything about that.

Heavens to Mergatroid, can't you people even carry out a semi-credible pretense of knowing what the hell you're talking about?

Lol, spoken with the voice of pseudoscientific authority, as we see above.

Yes.

Guess you forgot who started this conversation.

Not in the least, as anyone who recognizes the intellectual bankruptcy of the ToE as applied to Homo Sapiens understands it at least a million times better than the stereotypical atheist.

 

Well, for instance, recent studies proved that the Philistines were indeed a foreign people who settled in Canaan coming from Europe, not indigenous to the Middle East.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scie...eds-new-light-biblical-philistines-180972561/

 

[

We don't need DNA to tell us that. History does.

 

No. Philistines left no written texts. The article linked in my post clearly states that historians didn't know where did the Philistines originate.

 

But other nations did write. I get regular items from Smithsonian.Com. Read the last few paragraphs. The fact they had some DNA from southern Europe does not mean they originated there. Many peoples over history have moved from place to place and interbred with those they 'stay' with. According to the Bible they come from Crete. (Jeremiah, Amos)

 

Congratulations on a truly impressive response. Dunning Kruger, Projection, Backfire, and logical fallacy all wrapped up arrogant snot. that's some impressive density.

 

Get real, pretty much anything is impressive by comparison to the abject rhetorical slop artistry I was responding to.

Bad try.

 

How do you know that the Apostles existed?