• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Proof of reincarnation

RichardR said:
Yes he was - a major inconsistency in the story.

Here are some other reasons why this does not "prove" reincarnation.
Click to expand...

this was a good debunking.

I feel sorry for this kid. He's probably going to grow up believing this is true because these memories formed at such an early age, I doubt he'll remember that he was lead into this by his over imaginitive family.

Still, at least for woo this is relatively harmless. It's not like denying your kid a blood transfusion, or not vaccinating them.

just so long as the kid doesn't form a cult or something.
 
Last edited:
gerg said:
From the same article "Evolution has been described as "fact and theory", "fact not theory", and "only a theory, not a fact". Conclusive? Give... me.. a... break!
Click to expand...

Evolution may well have been described in those terms. That doesn't make the descriptions right.
Evolution is a fact.
Take a break any time.
 
Resume said:
The theory of evolution explains the facts behind the hypothesis, the evidence, which is massive. In fact it is argued that evolution has more evidentiary weight than any other scientific theory.
Click to expand...
Despite centuries of digging, nobody has found any remains that prove it is possible for one species to turn into another. Now that, my friend, is telling..
 
gerg said:
Despite centuries of digging, nobody has found any remains that prove it is possible for one species to turn into another. Now that, my friend, is telling..
Click to expand...

My friend, you are incorrect in your understanding. Google transitional fossils and learn something.
 
Resume said:
My friend, you are incorrect in your understanding. Google transitional fossils and learn something.
Click to expand...
Fossil records don't demonstrate a complete chain of life from simple forms to complex. So zero points there my friend.
 
gerg said:
Despite centuries of digging, nobody has found any remains that prove it is possible for one species to turn into another. Now that, my friend, is telling..
Click to expand...

Further, it is clear you have never read any of the relevant literature. "Origin of Species" for starters, "Greatest Show on Earth" as a bookend, and all in-between. I'm suggesting a minimum scholarship so we may converse intelligently, on equal ground.
 
gerg said:
Fossil records don't demonstrate a complete chain of life from simple forms to complex. So zero points there my friend.
Click to expand...

And no points for you because you have no idea of what you are asking for.
 
Resume said:
Further, it is clear you have never read any of the relevant literature. "Origin of Species" for starters, "Greatest Show on Earth" as a bookend, and all in-between. I'm suggesting a minimum scholarship so we may converse intelligently, on equal ground.
Click to expand...
Believe me when I say your approach is no different to a bible basher telling me to go an read the Bible.
 
gerg said:
Johannes Kepler, Sir Isaac Newton, Louis Pasteur, Sir Joseph Lister, Werhner Von Braun, to name a few.
Click to expand...

none of those are currently ridiculing evolutionary theory, none of them have even heard of modern evolutionary theory, they are all dead and your argument is at the same time as dead as they are and very revealing about your own level of understanding

so what is it with you ?

God or the aliens did it huh

what a big waste of everyones time your posts in this thread are, full of ignorance and denial
:D
please keep it up so that the rest of us can rightfully feel superior

gerg said:
Believe me when I say your approach is no different to a bible basher telling me to go an read the Bible.
Click to expand...
thats a totally invalid argument, the bible is a book of faith and its adherents are expected to believe in it with no evidencial proof whereas Evolution is an observable fact of life
How can you even be so unthinking to compare the two. No one here is telling you to have faith in evolutionary theory, they are telling you to make yourself aware of the facts rather than carry on with obviously self imposed ignorance
can you actually tell the difference ?
everyone opposed to your ignorance can.
:D
 
Last edited:
gerg said:
Fossil records don't demonstrate a complete chain of life from simple forms to complex. So zero points there my friend.
Click to expand...

ok
explain this then
fossil-hominid-skulls-1.jpg

how did we get from the simple hominid on one end to the modern complex human on the other.

Want a clue
starts with an "E"
:p
 
Last edited:
gerg said:
Despite centuries of digging, nobody has found any remains that prove it is possible for one species to turn into another. Now that, my friend, is telling..
Click to expand...
You would find quite a few supporters for your point of view on the BBC CT (Christian Topic) message board. However, there are, fortunately, enough Science teachers and others who counter statements such as the one you make here. I sometimes recommend, unsuccessfully, I'm afraid, that they take a look at JREF....
 
gerg said:
Johannes Kepler, Sir Isaac Newton, Louis Pasteur, Sir Joseph Lister, Werhner Von Braun, to name a few.
Click to expand...
Just to show you how foolish you really are...

Newton died in 1727 and Darwin wasn't even born until 1809.
Darwin was only born almost 100 years after Newton died.

How on earth you expect to get Newton to show an opinion on the matter?!?

This is just to give you an example of how absurd your claims are and to show you that you have not even bothered doing the slightest bit of research on evolution, darwin or even Newton.

You expect us to learn from you what is fact and what is an opinion?
Word of advice, you are in a skeptic forum. Skeptics are not exactly known for taking in random bits of rubbish someone tells them without checking for evidence. You might actually want to try that approach to life sometime.

gerg said:
Fossil records don't demonstrate a complete chain of life from simple forms to complex. So zero points there my friend.
Click to expand...
If we were having a biblical discussion between a believer and a non-believer, you at the very least expect the non-believer to read the bible and educate himself on what the other side considers to be proper and not just hear some stuff people told him was in there.

For some reason, when it comes to the other way around, believers don't think they are requried to do the same.

You don't have any idea what evolution is, let alone its scientific validity. If you wish to make any form of intelctual debate, you should do some research first.
 
GrandMasterFox said:
If we were having a biblical discussion between a believer and a non-believer, you at the very least expect the non-believer to read the bible and educate himself on what the other side considers to be proper and not just hear some stuff people told him was in there.
Click to expand...

I would disagree with this.
First it would be necessary to establish that the bible was a valid source, before even bothering to read it.
 
If the discussion is about things that are said in the Bible, I don't think it's unreasonable for both sides to be familiar with it. Same thing here. gerg is putting out an opinion on something he knows nothing about. He is, of course, entitled to hold whatever opinions he wants, but if he wishes to put those opinions forth in public and have them taken seriously, he needs to demonstrate that there is some sound basis for them. So far he has not shown this, and indeed has shown he is interested only in denying evolution (see his quote mining of the Wiki article for proof of this).
 
GrandMasterFox said:
Just to show you how foolish you really are...

Newton died in 1727 and Darwin wasn't even born until 1809.
Darwin was only born almost 100 years after Newton died.

How on earth you expect to get Newton to show an opinion on the matter?!?
Click to expand...
Here's why you've proven to be the fool. The theory of evolution is not a modern idea. The ancient Greeks first proposed a form of it in the 7th century B.C. Darwin had no field. He wasn't even a scientist, let alone a knowledgeable biologist.
 
Marduk said:
none of those are currently ridiculing evolutionary theory, none of them have even heard of modern evolutionary theory, they are all dead and your argument is at the same time as dead as they are and very revealing about your own level of understanding

so what is it with you ?

God or the aliens did it huh

what a big waste of everyones time your posts in this thread are, full of ignorance and denial
:D
please keep it up so that the rest of us can rightfully feel superior


thats a totally invalid argument, the bible is a book of faith and its adherents are expected to believe in it with no evidencial proof whereas Evolution is an observable fact of life
How can you even be so unthinking to compare the two. No one here is telling you to have faith in evolutionary theory, they are telling you to make yourself aware of the facts rather than carry on with obviously self imposed ignorance
can you actually tell the difference ?
everyone opposed to your ignorance can.
:D
Click to expand...
Darwin said, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."

After well over a hundred years of intense scientific research and investigation, we can conclude that no-one has shown how the human eye could have come into existence by numerous, successive slight modifications.

By using Darwin's own criteria and viewing the other aspects of science that relate to evolution we can conclude that Darwin's theory has broken down. You carry on with your "superiority" delusions marduk. lmao
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom