hooberus

Joined

• started 119 topics
• posted 2,517 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by hooberus

• 
  86

  Carbon Dating

  by Wolfgirl in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sorry, i don't have time to search the site right now.

  this bloody french isp is rubbish, and i keep getting dropped when i try anything that takes more than 10 seconds.

  has the society ever come up with any intelligent reasoning to counter the ages that carbon dating/science has given to various artifacts, i.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  rem said: "creationism was proven false"

  So rem, when was creation falsified?
• 
  86

  Carbon Dating

  by Wolfgirl in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sorry, i don't have time to search the site right now.

  this bloody french isp is rubbish, and i keep getting dropped when i try anything that takes more than 10 seconds.

  has the society ever come up with any intelligent reasoning to counter the ages that carbon dating/science has given to various artifacts, i.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  There seems to be a double standard. We are to automatically discount the views of creationists because they come to the evidence with a bias that creation is right. Yet we are not to do the same with regard to textbooks, research papers, etc. of evolutionists even though they approach the evidence with the pre-conception that macro-evolution is right.
• 
  86

  Carbon Dating

  by Wolfgirl in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sorry, i don't have time to search the site right now.

  this bloody french isp is rubbish, and i keep getting dropped when i try anything that takes more than 10 seconds.

  has the society ever come up with any intelligent reasoning to counter the ages that carbon dating/science has given to various artifacts, i.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  So hawkaw should I also discount the works of athiests like Dawkins (and many more), because they have already concluded that evolution is a "fact" and will not swith off that conclusion before they start their work? Also since my textbook assumes that evolution is a "fact" then proceeds to interpret history through this "fact" shouldn't I discount not only the incorrect statement about evolution being a "fact" but also the entire book and all its contents. This is the standard you want me to use with regard to the CRS.

  Instead of automatically discounting the views of scientists who have come to a certain conclusion, I like to look at views from both sides and make my own determination. Please answer my above question.
• 
  86

  Carbon Dating

  by Wolfgirl in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sorry, i don't have time to search the site right now.

  this bloody french isp is rubbish, and i keep getting dropped when i try anything that takes more than 10 seconds.

  has the society ever come up with any intelligent reasoning to counter the ages that carbon dating/science has given to various artifacts, i.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  hawkaw,

  Just because I have come to believe in creation does not mean that I am "trapped in a box" anymore than someone who has come to believe in macro-evolution.

  I can think critically, I have read information from BOTH sides of the creation/evolution issue. I have more "pro-evolution" books in my house than "creationist" books. Just because I have come to a different conclusion than you doesn't mean that I am blinded by religious mis-guidance. I think that people should examine the facts from both models of origins. I at least try to understand the evolutionary viewpoint when I read their publications. My beliefs are no more dogmatic than rems. Read the first line of rems last post where the idea that we came from fish is stated dogmatically as a "fact". My historical geology textbook presents macro-evolution as a "fact" them proceeds to interpret geologic history through the "lens" of this "fact". This is no different than interpreting historical geology through the "lens" of creation. I do try to understand both models and am not a part of a tolatarian religious organization which forces me to believe in the biblical model of origins.

  Edited by - hooberus on 25 October 2002 13:19:45
• 
  86

  Carbon Dating

  by Wolfgirl in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sorry, i don't have time to search the site right now.

  this bloody french isp is rubbish, and i keep getting dropped when i try anything that takes more than 10 seconds.

  has the society ever come up with any intelligent reasoning to counter the ages that carbon dating/science has given to various artifacts, i.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  I was never a JW,
• 
  86

  Carbon Dating

  by Wolfgirl in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sorry, i don't have time to search the site right now.

  this bloody french isp is rubbish, and i keep getting dropped when i try anything that takes more than 10 seconds.

  has the society ever come up with any intelligent reasoning to counter the ages that carbon dating/science has given to various artifacts, i.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  hawkaw you seem to be intelligent and know well the scientific method.

  A. Seriously, should the idea that we came from fish be presented as:

  1. a hypothesis

  2. a scientific theory

  3. a fact

  B. Which of these 3 does your historical geology textbook present it as being?
• 
  64

  Please convince me I'm wrong!

  by StinkyPantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  since i have stopped attending the meetings, i have had a loss of faith in god.

  i consider myself an agnostic teetering on being a full blown atheist.

  while in school this last semester i have been taking courses that emphasize evolution.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  sorry, I think rem might be a he . . . my appologies

  he thinks he came from fish
• 
  86

  Carbon Dating

  by Wolfgirl in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sorry, i don't have time to search the site right now.

  this bloody french isp is rubbish, and i keep getting dropped when i try anything that takes more than 10 seconds.

  has the society ever come up with any intelligent reasoning to counter the ages that carbon dating/science has given to various artifacts, i.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  I think the theory about us coming from fish is more like geoscience fiction.
• 
  155

  Evolution or creation?

  by haujobbz in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  if i had to answer this i suppose i would say im not sure which one i believe, i have always wondered why the universe is so huge and always wondered what its role is and how it affects us.. im always fascinated when i look up at the sky and think to myself i feel so small in such a huge universe a sought of cold isolated feeling is what i experience and then i think, i wonder why this planet came to support life after all it was supposedly all happened by chance.. dont get me wrong im no scientist but i think i need more convincing regarding evolution.. can anyone help regarding these questions

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  Yes, rem is a "rational folk" who doesn't believe in "myths"

  So what does she believe . . . that her great-grandparents are FISH.

  see the end of the "Carbon Dating" post under beliefs, doctines,and practices!
• 
  64

  Please convince me I'm wrong!

  by StinkyPantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  since i have stopped attending the meetings, i have had a loss of faith in god.

  i consider myself an agnostic teetering on being a full blown atheist.

  while in school this last semester i have been taking courses that emphasize evolution.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  please read the last part of the post which rem refers to.

  rem admits that her grandparents are . . .fish