MAGA NPC (AN AN0NYM0US TEMPLATE)

. . . and own property in your own name. . .

This is so true!

So you're saying there's a downside.

b-b-but liberals disable comments!

us hillbilly redneck red state red hat orange man maga guys want to not let woman leave the home ain't that right bois?...bois?...huh ig not then. mm oh well

It's good that you're not, but many are

yk I've never met any conservative that said that but ok

I've heard plenty of conservative say that it's a woman's role to raise children at home, not pursue a career

if that's what God's calling them to do. There's no law against them working, but it is the man's job to provide and protect.

"if that's what God's calling them to do"

And what if God doesn't exist but men are telling women that that's what they're supposed to do?

"it is the man's job to provide and protect"

According to whom?

""it is the man's job to provide and protect"

According to whom?"

Everything from women's enlarged mammary glands and buttocks to pair bonding when the tendency with other great apes is one or a few males dominating a troop females to offspring who are pretty helpless for years to the greater strength and quickness to defend exhibited by males...

Human offspring spend far longer time growing up and being dependent on their parents, and that wouldn't be possible without a male having a reason to bond with a female and providing food for them, chiefly animals they hunted for. Even with orangutans, which are solitary, the makes aren't involved in bringing up baby,,,

Not saying this is because of a Judean God, but it is the evolutionary norm of the human species.

God?.....see this is about where we go awry. I'm a man of science, and I've looked at the evidence for and against Christianity. There's far more evidence to support it, so that's what I believe in. Have you heard of deductive reasoning? Do you know what it means? If not, then I'd be happy to tell you, but I don't want to waste your time and mine if you're not interested.

"I'm a man of science, and I've looked at the evidence for and against Christianity. There's far more evidence to support it, so that's what I believe in"

What scientific evidence convinced you that Christianity is true?

"Have you heard of deductive reasoning?"

Yes

"Do you know what it means?"

I have a fairly good idea, but what is your understanding of it?

No reply option below.

I searched "Jesus salt" as if something would turn up here, AND IT DID!

huh....

That was to OM's reply

ok so you know that the principle is to take something that is true and build a ladder that continues with each previous finding right? well, I've looked at a lot of evidence. the data supporting uniformitarianism is desperately scarce, and scientists are still digging for a substantial intermediate link. things like fossil graveyards, dynamo vs rapid decay theory, and even the amount of salt in the oceans all seem to support a young earth and a biblical worldview. if you say, "Darwin's finches!" then I'll say adaptation/microevolution, both are accepted terms. there is a large difference between genes being altered in reproduction and genes being added. come at me with volcanology and super volcanoes and I have a more than adequate answer lying within some of the nuances of the Flood. if you try homologous structures, then I'll kindly point out that indeed, there are similar biological characteristics between many species bone mechanics, but that's even more reason to believe that their Maker had a good plan and stuck with it. the geological column seems to have dinosaurs existing mainly in the jurassic, triassic, and cretaceous periods, so how do we have cave paintings of dinosaurs? how did humans "evolve" a sense of musical appreciation? of art? these are things that evolution would not have given to us. so, that's the evidence. or most of it. I could come up with some more given some more time I'm sure. alright, so I've proven to myself God exists. now, using deductive reasoning, I prove the Bible is true. then, I must accept what is within it, even when it comes to the hard stuff, like loving my neighbor as myself. there you go. this took a while.

Just some table salt Yahweh left for the Judeans out in Windsor, Canada in case the Dead Sea was running a little short...

really? that's the only argument you have for me? a paragraph of fact after fact and you give me this? come come, I expected more! @octavia got anything to add?

Years of research? What, you think we've not seen this list here before? Ask Octavia.

Again, and pay attention, evolution IS, by definition, evolution, regardless if you label it "macro" or "micro." Genes are created all the time, or would it take a trip to Maury to determine you're not a clone of your mother?

So yes, exactly, salt in mines, so why isn't it in the ocean anymore? That IS the question.

you're not understanding me are you. for a cat to become a dog or vice versa there are genes that would have to be added to the ones inherent to reproduction. I'm not saying genes being duplicated and passed on in meiosis. I'm saying genes that would be added, such as a gene for whiskers.

why is there an ocean at all? where did all this matter come from? whatever happened to matter cannot be created or destroyed? (a natural law I may add.)

Argument? What argument? I have no argument for you. I deal in facts.
You posted fiction, a standard list based on Sunday School YouTube videos made for European pagans who forget that teeny little fact that if Yahweh is real, he came only to the Jews (and Canaanites before them) and not to you.

But here's another salt mine for you, this one in Belarus.
Lemme guess, while this one was evaporating underground after the great flood, Noah stood atop throwing in different food dyes every so often so Yahweh can later test your faith and confuse you further as to why the oceans aren't as salty as they should be, when clearly there's a crap ton of salt deposits just waiting for us to literally piss them out into the seven seas on our broad green four cornered flat Earth?
Maybe while waiting the gazillions of years it took for all those layers to dry out, he went off to return kangaroos to Australia and puffins to the Artic?

btw, "microevolution" is, by definition, evolution. Punctuated equilibrium was a nice idea, but not a realistic one. That it turns out evolution can be observed within our lifetimes sure debunked anti-Scopes faux debunking, but I must have missed the chapter in Genesis where the GodS sayeth that "yay the DNA shall changedeth upon the creatures of the earth Adam so nameth, but onlyeth witheth a limitedeth time allotment."
Don't work like that. It either ain't, or it is. Basic "kinda pregnant" argument,,,

lol. that's my first response. great, another salt mine. first, I need you to explain to me why YOU think this opposes my argument. and obviously I'm the only one here who's taken the time to read up on the other person's argument, as I probably said some things even you didn't know were supposedly supporting evolution. and actually there's a big difference between macro and micro. macro implies that genes are created, which we haven't actually seen happen. micro implies that genes are kept/altered, which has been shown. so yeah, salt in mines. awesome. why isn't it in the ocean? anyways, hopefully if you actually read why all those things that I've accumulated over my years of research are true and support my case you'd understand. until you do or have a more open mind there's not much I can do.

Yes, I am not understanding you. A cat cannot become a dog or vice versa, just ask a hyena.

Dogs and cats and hyenas have whiskers.

Why is there an ocean at all? So the Gods can give Adam a hard time when he had to go name all those deep ocean critters.

Reply to OM:

"bearyingbunnies

I'll just address your last point first, since that's the only one that seems to have enough intellectual merit to be worth replying to. first of all, assuming that the Bible is true like you said, and there is a being that spoke a universe into existence, I'd say He must be pretty powerful. but we're gonna ignore His direct instructions to us?! also just fyi carbon dating is as reliable as an electric car without coal mines. and as a general reply to the rest, that's not worth my time to work with that. if you'd like specific answers to specific parts then I'll oblige. but most of that's so ridiculous I can't even."

And you're wondering why I didn't read, never mind, address, your pre-fabricated list of robotic ignorance-hewn nothings that can't disprove reality?

Yahweh's instructions are pretty simple: Jewish men who obey the Commandments will have productive fields, a faithful wife, and most of their children will be healthy and survive. That's it.
Now unless you eat Kosher except on Saturdays when you can't eat, gather sticks, or use the toilet unless you want to get stoned to death and also follow all them other rules, you're kinda missing your own point.

actually believe it or not the commandments He gave and the commandments the Pharisees set in place are quite different.

False.
Stop lying and for GOD'S sake, READ the Bible.

lol. true actually. the Talmud has a bunch of stuff that the Jews follow to this day, but God never actually commanded. Yeshua said that the Pharisees had placed themselves in Moses' seat. and he repeatedly broke THEIR laws, and insulted them. so the food laws? still in place. the laws about hand washing? not in place.

Hence why traditionally women weren't allowed to own property or vote or work outside the home, basically were property?

So there's a lot to unpack, so I'll try to address each point briefly

"the data supporting uniformitarianism is desperately scarce"

The data for uniformitarianism is plentiful. That's why scientists can measure the rate of things like seafloor spreading, the erosion of Niagara Falls, lunar recession, etc

"scientists are still digging for a substantial intermediate link"

We have many intermediate forms across many different types of animals. Reptiles, birds, horses, early mammals, primates, humans, fish, etc etc

"things like fossil graveyards, dynamo vs rapid decay theory, and even the amount of salt in the oceans all seem to support a young earth and a biblical worldview"

It was Christian scientists who first started to realize that wasn't the case

"if you say, "Darwin's finches!" then I'll say adaptation/microevolution, both are accepted terms"

Microevolution is a way for creationists to accept some evolution while denying the rest. It's like saying someone can walk across the street but they can't walk across the country. The mechanism is the same for both.

"there is a large difference between genes being altered in reproduction and genes being added"

Genes have been altered, and they've also been added

"come at me with volcanology..."

The story of Noah's flood doesn't explain vulcanology at all, and many fields of science directly contradict the idea of a global flood less than 5000 years ago.

"if you try homologous structures..."

Except that's an unfalsifiable claim. I could just as easily say it was intelligently designed by magic pixies. How would you prove me wrong?

"the geological column seems to have dinosaurs existing mainly in the jurassic, triassic, and cretaceous periods, so how do we have cave paintings of dinosaurs?"

We don't

"how did humans "evolve" a sense of musical appreciation? of art?"

Not sure

"these are things that evolution would not have given to us"

How did you determine that?

"alright, so I've proven to myself God exists. now, using deductive reasoning, I prove the Bible is true"

None of the things you listed are proof of any god, let alone the specific god of the Bible. You're making a huge leap of logic to get from "intelligent design" to "specifically Yahweh"

"then, I must accept what is within it, even when it comes to the hard stuff"

Assuming for the sake of argument that it could be proven that the Bible is from a god. Who says we have to listen to, obey, or care what that god says?

I'll just address your last point first, since that's the only one that seems to have enough intellectual merit to be worth replying to. first of all, assuming that the Bible is true like you said, and there is a being that spoke a universe into existence, I'd say He must be pretty powerful. but we're gonna ignore His direct instructions to us?! also just fyi carbon dating is as reliable as an electric car without coal mines. and as a general reply to the rest, that's not worth my time to work with that. if you'd like specific answers to specific parts then I'll oblige. but most of that's so ridiculous I can't even.

You treat people with respect and address them point by point and this is what happens.