[Joo (Quarantined)]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

They'd never find anything to disagree on!

Well, hypothetically speaking then.

[Remy Lebeau]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Why don't you debate Mr. Wash? Last time I checked he never lost one either. You can debate him about anything really, doesn't have to be religious. I'm just curious as to who would win...

That would be like the Son disagreeing with the Father while the Holy Spirit turned His back on both of them. Impossible!!! True Christians are united just like the Trinity, even if like the Trinity, sometimes to unsaved heathen it doesn't seem like it.

And you're the joo who hates negroidials so much that you absolutely refused to post anything positive about their "culture" and accomplishments. Your racist stench offends me. Tread lightly, Joo. I don't want you spewing racist propaganda in this thread too.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Why don't you debate Mr. Wash? Last time I checked he never lost one either. You can debate him about anything really, doesn't have to be religious. I'm just curious as to who would win...

Boy, we are not here to provide entertainment for you. Brother Wash and Brother Remy are fine specimens of Manly True Christian Men to be sure. They are physically, mentally and spiritually superior to you. But be that as it may, we are not here to stage gladiator movies for you to fantasize about while diddling yourself.

We are here to celebrate the Holy Word of God, and rebuking unsaved perverts like you is not a spectator sport. You should be curious about Jesus, instead of trying to turn Christian against Christian.

[Joo (Quarantined)]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

You should be curious about Jesus, instead of trying to turn Christian against Christian.

I'm not trying to turn Christian against Christian. That's why I said the debate didn't have to be religious. They could debate on what flavor of ice cream is the best for all I care.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

I'm not trying to turn Christian against Christian. That's why I said the debate didn't have to be religious. They could debate on what flavor of ice cream is the best for all I care.

Are you really that thick? Brother Wash and Brother Remy are both True Christian Men. If they took opposing positions in a debate, that would by definition mean that it could be described as "Christian against Christian", irregardless of the topic being debated.

I repeat, we are not here for your purile entertainment.

I think I'll start penalizing you 5 points every time you ask a stupid question and waste my time.



You'll be banned in no time if you keep it up.

[Joo (Quarantined)]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Are you really that thick? Brother Wash and Brother Remy are both True Christian Men. If they took opposing positions in a debate, that would by definition mean that it could be described as "Christian against Christian", irregardless of the topic being debated.

I repeat, we are not here for your purile entertainment.

I think I'll start penalizing you 5 points every time you ask a stupid question and waste my time.



You'll be banned in no time if you keep it up.

If you wish to be that anal about it, then yes it could be called Christian against Christian. Though I don't really see how a difference of opinions on something as trivial as ice cream flavors would be a blow to them, you or your Church.

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Dated at what age? 30 billion years? 3 billion years? 22 million? Your so-called scientist have so many dates that it is simply ridiculous. And where do they pull these numbers from anyway? All methods they use require the ASSUMPTION of the original amounts of elements within the studied material. Without a time machine to go back and verify the original element composition of the tested materials their conclusion are purely theoretical - mere theories. Your blind belief in these mortal human beings is extremely unintelligent even for a woman.

The age of the world is accepted by scientists to be about 4.5 billion years. And I don't 'blindly believe', especially as there have been incidents like the infamous piltdown man. However, seeing as some objects have been dated and dated using carbon where possible and radiometric, the latter of which is quite reliable, carbon-dating too if enough of the carbon remains however, as you should know, carbon-14 breaks down comparatively quickly....anyway, things have been dated by such methods enough to procure a consistent result.

There is not one single piece of evidence to support your so-called scientists' "billion years" theories. As I have show above your so-called evidence is nothing but theoretical heresay.

Oh, so the many carefully dated and categorized PHYSICAL fossils and remains of animal and plant remains do not count as evidence I suppose? What do you think they are, illusions?

It says that you are talking out of your arse. YOU do not dictate to ME, or ANYONE ELSE, what is more probable, possible, or what has more or less support. You have already shown a clear bias against logic and reason. You prefer blind belief in fallible mortal homosexual men while I recognize the words of the CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE. GLORY!!!

I'm sorry, but you are the only one talking out your ass if you say that biblical creationism has more to support it than the physical proof that the earth is much older than that.

Van Hellbound, you know I have never lost a debate and I've defeated you in debate on plenty of occasions. Do you really want to be made a fool of again?

You jumping up and down in a fairish imitation of our apelike ancestors screeching 'me win!! Me win because ME say so!!' isn't you winning, it's you being dogmatic.

[Unsaved and Loving It]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

You'll be banned in no time if you keep it up.

How many times have you said that now? According to the search tool, about 60 times, give or take a few. And that's only since the upgrade to vBulletin.

Ya, don't say you're gonna blow it up, if ya ain't gonna light the fuse, Zeke

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

How many times have you said that now? According to the search tool, about 60 times, give or take a few. And that's only since the upgrade to vBulletin.

Ya, don't say you're gonna blow it up, if ya ain't gonna light the fuse, Zeke

Son, it is my Christian duty to rebuke the savage unsaved trash who come stomping in here, demanding special rights and privileges all the while persecuting us True Christians. Your count is quite low.

Anytime you'd like to volunteer to be "blown up", just say the word, fool.

[Remy Lebeau]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

The age of the world is accepted by scientists to be about 4.5 billion years.

That's a bold faced lie and you know it. They poop out numbers from 12 billion down to 3 billion.

And I don't 'blindly believe', especially as there have been incidents like the infamous piltdown man.

Are you a geologist? If not, then you blindly believe whatever they tell you because you don't have the ability to verify their supposed findings for yourself.

However, seeing as some objects have been dated and dated using carbon where possible and radiometric, the latter of which is quite reliable, carbon-dating too if enough of the carbon remains however, as you should know, carbon-14 breaks down comparatively quickly....anyway, things have been dated by such methods enough to procure a consistent result.

Too many assumptions have to be made to buy into that carbon dating crapfest. Without that time machine to verify the original amount of a given element you have no case. Who knows what factors entered into play throughout time that could have effected the samples.

Oh, so the many carefully dated and categorized PHYSICAL fossils and remains of animal and plant remains do not count as evidence I suppose? What do you think they are, illusions?

None of them are over 6000 years old so it doesn't matter to me.

I'm sorry, but you are the only one talking out your ass if you say that biblical creationism has more to support it than the physical proof that the earth is much older than that.

There is no physical proof that the world is over 6000 years old. All evidence points to 6000ish. You need to read your Bible, heathen. Woman was deceived by satan to begin with and here you are again being deceived and damning yourself, your dogs, your sissy husband, and any future children you might have to Hell right along with you.

You jumping up and down in a fairish imitation of our apelike ancestors screeching 'me win!! Me win because ME say so!!' isn't you winning, it's you being dogmatic.

I'm not an Australian so I don't have any Neanderthal(aka aboriginal) ancestors who are apelike. It has got to suck being a convict and a caveman.

[Unsaved and Loving It]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Neanderthal(aka aboriginal)

I can see this board is just full of love

[Virginia Day Templeton]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

That's what they are. Would it be "loving" to say that Sir Isaac Newton was a tar baby? According to your logic, it would.

[Remy Lebeau]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

I can see this board is just full of love

Are you blind, boy?

It's like the Neanderthal heifer is looking in a mirror!!!

Can you tell the difference between and ???

Didn't think so!!!!

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Do you HAVE to reply in the original quote box??? Would it be so hard to add a couple extra tags?

That's a bold faced lie and you know it. They poop out numbers from 12 billion down to 3 billion.

Nope, that's pretty much the accepted approximation of the Earth's age.

Are you a geologist? If not, then you blindly believe whatever they tell you because you don't have the ability to verify their supposed findings for yourself.

One does not need to be a geologist. You can watch, step by step, things being dated. Dinosaur bones etc. A basic understanding of the process will enable you to understand and see it for yourself.

Too many assumptions have to be made to buy into that carbon dating crapfest. Without that time machine to verify the original amount of a given element you have no case. Who knows what factors entered into play throughout time that could have effected the samples.

Factors, shmactors. Carbon dating may not be foolproof but you can't, I notice, say anything about radiometric dating. Why? Because you can't say anything. Radiometric dating is very reliable. And it is used to date older things, older things which don't have carbon-14 in them to date anymore.
Read the works of a man named Brent G. Dalrymple, he explains quite well about radiometric dating,and which is one of the most reliable parts of science.
Compare all the statistics of radiometric dating, it IS reliable.

None of them are over 6000 years old so it doesn't matter to me.

See above about radiometric dating.

There is no physical proof that the world is over 6000 years old. All evidence points to 6000ish. You need to read your Bible, heathen. Woman was deceived by satan to begin with and here you are again being deceived and damning yourself, your dogs, your sissy husband, and any future children you might have to Hell right along with you.

LOL!
See what I said above about fossils and evidence and dating. When they were handing out common sense, were you ordering a milkshake?

I'm not an Australian so I don't have any Neanderthal(aka aboriginal) ancestors who are apelike. It has got to suck being a convict and a caveman.

Sorry, dude, but we're all descended from apelike creatures.

[Remy Lebeau]

Re: Bible (TRUE) Age of Earth

Do you HAVE to reply in the original quote box??? Would it be so hard to add a couple extra tags?

If your feeble little female brain cannot handle the sensory overload of my posts then maybe you should take a nap before you die. It isn't healthy for the inferior mind of a woman to attempt to keep up with a man.

Nope, that's pretty much the accepted approximation of the Earth's age.

One does not need to be a geologist. You can watch, step by step, things being dated. Dinosaur bones etc. A basic understanding of the process will enable you to understand and see it for yourself.

Silly, woman, you don't know what you are watching. What do you see? Some fancy lights flashing? A computer generated chart? Some beeping noises? You have got to be the most gullible and feeble minded wench I've ever had the misfortune to encounter.

Factors, shmactors. Carbon dating may not be foolproof but you can't, I notice, say anything about radiometric dating. Why? Because you can't say anything. Radiometric dating is very reliable. And it is used to date older things, older things which don't have carbon-14 in them to date anymore.

Of course I CAN. You seem to think that just by making wild claims your idiotic so-called science will be true. As if you can nag your way to victory. Typical female.

"Radiometric dating (often called radioactive dating) is a technique used to date materials based on a knowledge of the decay rates of naturally occurring isotopes, and the current abundances."

Radiometric or carbon: It's all fallible and depends on making gross assumptions. I get my information from the Creator of the Universe Himself. Information that is infallible.

Read the works of a man named Brent G. Dalrymple, he explains quite well about radiometric dating,and which is one of the most reliable parts of science.

Not interested in reading some sodomite's works. Who knows what kind of demons are in those pages.

Compare all the statistics of radiometric dating, it IS reliable.

Reliably wrong. Consistently being wrong does not make something right. God Almighty makes it clear in His Holy Words that the universe is 6000ish years old. Could you imagine building a house 20 years ago and some scientist shows up claiming the house is 3 trillion years old because of some goofball test? Clearly, whatever data said scientist retrieved would HAVE to indicate 20 years. Pulling out numbers like 3 trillion would have to be an error on the part of the fallible man.

See above about radiometric dating.

See what I said above about fossils and evidence and dating. When they were handing out common sense, were you ordering a milkshake?

It's common sense to believe in anything some stranger tells you no matter how ridiculous? That's how Eve got in so much trouble over that apple in the first place. When will you simple minded females learn your lesson?

Sorry, dude, but we're all descended from apelike creatures.

I'm aware that all Austrailians are descended from criminals and neaderthals. That has not been desputed.