Where the heck are dinosaurs in the bible?!

Sound · Oct 7th 2010, 11:18pm

artizhay wrote:

Well, considering one person cannot positive rep or negative rep the same person without first repping 10 other people, not one single person "spammed" you with rep, even though you may think that is the case. So, technically, multiple people negative repped you, and generally a large portion of people do not negative rep someone without due cause. Therefore, I can deduce that you are referring to the general population of TeenHut.

I've only been reped 5 times total...2 were good.

Jjplane · Oct 8th 2010, 12:50am

LuklaAdvocate wrote:

Define irony: when somebody annoyingly whines about a sarcastic post, sarcastically.

Wasn't whining, was just using sarcasm- like you did- to point out the uselessness of your post. Yes, my sarcastic posts were also pointless for this thread because they did not contribute to the conversation.

Sababah · Oct 8th 2010, 12:51am

Where the heck are dinosaurs in the bible?!

According to the christians' N.T - its the jews.

LuklaAdvocate · Oct 8th 2010, 12:59am

Jjplane wrote:

Wasn't whining, was just using sarcasm- like you did- to point out the uselessness of your post. Yes, my sarcastic posts were also pointless for this thread because they did not contribute to the conversation.

Which part of my post was useless, exactly? Satire is a highly effective tool when dealing with blatantly inane fallacies, such as the one's those two utilized.

You were honestly expecting a full blown analytical response to somebody who says, "god exists to everyone that believes in him, which therefore means he's there?" Be serious.

Bravo on admitting to your hypocrisy. Too bad my satire actually had an intention, whereas yours was just vacuous.

Jjplane · Oct 8th 2010, 1:31am

LuklaAdvocate wrote:

Which part of my post was useless, exactly? Satire is a highly effective tool when dealing with blatantly inane fallacies, such as the one's those two utilized.

You were honestly expecting a full blown analytical response to somebody who says, "god exists to everyone that believes in him, which therefore means he's there?" Be serious.

Bravo on admitting to your hypocrisy. Too bad my satire actually had an intention, whereas yours was just vacuous.

What effect did your beloved satire produce exactly? You made it clear that you disagreed-- but what else have you accomplished? Do you expect us to be in awe of your lofty theories and expansive vocabulary? I have no quarrels with expressing disagreement, however your medium for disagreeing is satire-- it is rude and unnecessary. There are plenty of other ways to express your disagreement AND contribute to the conversation. You could have said "well I disagree because..." etc. Merely insulting the other person's intelligence gets us absolutely nowhere except that now people will see you as a conceited, sarcastic jerk and ignore your opinion completely. Perhaps that was the intention behind your satire?

LuklaAdvocate · Oct 8th 2010, 2:54am

Jjplane wrote:

What effect did your beloved satire produce exactly?

Do you even know what satire is?

Jjplane wrote:

You made it clear that you disagreed-- but what else have you accomplished?

I'll ask it again, since you ignored my question the first time. Were you honestly expecting me to waste a good 15 min. chunk of my time on somebody who uses preschool logic such as, "god exists to everyone that believes in him, which therefore means he's there?"

Jjplane wrote:

Do you expect us to be in awe of your lofty theories and expansive vocabulary? I have no quarrels with expressing disagreement, however your medium for disagreeing is satire-- it is rude and unnecessary.

What theories, and what expansive vocabulary? When did I mention anything regarding a theory? And pardon me for straying away from mundane diction. If you're attending college, you might want to get over that grievance real quick.

No, my medium for expressing disagreement depends on the person. When somebody uses elementary logic, I'm not going to waste my time explaining basic high school philosophy and logic. That's furthered by the fact that when I've dealt with such people in the past, they don't stick to rationality in their posts.

Oh definitely. Satire, which has been used for thousands of years by some of the greatest philosophers known to man, is rude and unnecessary.
You've seen one post of mine, and jump the conclusion that my argumentative medium is satire? Seriously?

Jjplane wrote:

You could have said "well I disagree because..." etc. Merely insulting the other person's intelligence gets us absolutely nowhere except that now people will see you as a conceited, sarcastic jerk and ignore your opinion completely. Perhaps that was the intention behind your satire?

Satire doesn't insult a person's intelligence as a whole, unless it's your desired intention to do so. I don't recall insulting his intelligence; I recall lampooning the logic he used.

You should really worry about how people will see your generalizing posts as opposed to worrying about how people will see me.

When you have over 1800 posts on this forum, you get a pretty good idea of when to use satire against somebody, and then when to use a more judicious method of argument. In the case of my particular quote, the latter would have been a complete waste of time. For example, you'll soon realize that arguing analytically with this guy, in the post you quoted, will be an uphill and pointless endeavor on your part: teenhut.net/1062515553-post39.html

Jjplane · Oct 8th 2010, 3:10am

I really do get tired of arguing, especially when it's clear that there will be no decisive outcome. I'm not bashing the use of satire, merely this particular instance. I'm not generalizing you based on one post, I'm only talking about that one post. Personally I don't like to say things that could insult other people, I like it when everyone is happy. You seem to be more direct in criticizing, which isn't a bad thing, just different from my normal approach. No I don't expect you to spend 15 minutes writing why you disagree, but it doesn't take 15 minutes to write a reply that isn't perceived as rude or sarcastic. You don't have to exhaust every thought you have on the issue, just get your main point across. Maybe satire was the best choice for those situations, maybe not. I guess you ultimately have to decide if it's more effective to use satire or a fuller explanation. Anyways I think I'll leave it at that. No hard feelings, but I'm really not in the mood to argue anymore. I guess we can agree to disagree

LuklaAdvocate · Oct 8th 2010, 3:22am

Sababah wrote:

According to the christians' N.T - its the jews.

Wait...did I just read you right? The NT says the dinosaurs were the Jews? Huh? Do you have anything amicable to say in favor of Christianity?

Jjplane wrote:

I really do get tired of arguing, especially when it's clear that there will be no decisive outcome. I'm not bashing the use of satire, merely this particular instance. I'm not generalizing you based on one post, I'm only talking about that one post. Personally I don't like to say things that could insult other people, I like it when everyone is happy. You seem to be more direct in criticizing, which isn't a bad thing, just different from my normal approach. No I don't expect you to spend 15 minutes writing why you disagree, but it doesn't take 15 minutes to write a reply that isn't perceived as rude or sarcastic. You don't have to exhaust every thought you have on the issue, just get your main point across. Maybe satire was the best choice for those situations, maybe not. I guess you ultimately have to decide if it's more effective to use satire or a fuller explanation. Anyways I think I'll leave it at that. No hard feelings, but I'm really not in the mood to argue anymore. I guess we can agree to disagree

Satire can be used as a full explanation. You ever watch The Daily Show? The entire show is based off of satire, and it's actually more informative and acute than many of the major news networks.

In this particular instance, a more elaborate use of satire (or any tactic for that matter) simply wasn't worth it.

artizhay · Oct 8th 2010, 3:51am

Jjplane wrote:

I really do get tired of arguing, especially when it's clear that there will be no decisive outcome. I'm not bashing the use of satire, merely this particular instance. I'm not generalizing you based on one post, I'm only talking about that one post. Personally I don't like to say things that could insult other people, I like it when everyone is happy. You seem to be more direct in criticizing, which isn't a bad thing, just different from my normal approach. No I don't expect you to spend 15 minutes writing why you disagree, but it doesn't take 15 minutes to write a reply that isn't perceived as rude or sarcastic. You don't have to exhaust every thought you have on the issue, just get your main point across. Maybe satire was the best choice for those situations, maybe not. I guess you ultimately have to decide if it's more effective to use satire or a fuller explanation. Anyways I think I'll leave it at that. No hard feelings, but I'm really not in the mood to argue anymore. I guess we can agree to disagree

He does not need to use in-depth analytical strategies to prove that your post presented an utterly useless observation. If the answer was really as simple as "God exists if we say he does," would there be endless debates on the issue?

Satire is used to point out obvious fallacies. Have you not read 1984? Amusing Ourselves to Death? Animal Farm? Authors, writers, and persuasive essayists use satire to effectively reveal the lesser intelligence in ideas, theories, and opinions.

I could just as easily say, "I believe in flying tarantulas as big as airplanes that carry crying hippos from Japan to Africa, so therefore, they must exist." You would scoff at me, would you not? Yet, I am saying that they must exist because someone says they strongly believe in them. Yes, the idea seems completely ridiculous to you, but that is how God is in the minds of some atheists. They believe God is a fairy tale, and would not the example I just provided exist only in a fairy tale?

Jjplane · Oct 8th 2010, 4:19am

artizhay wrote:

He does not need to use in-depth analytical strategies to prove that your post presented an utterly useless observation. If the answer was really as simple as "God exists if we say he does," would there be endless debates on the issue?

Satire is used to point out obvious fallacies. Have you not read 1984? Amusing Ourselves to Death? Animal Farm? Authors, writers, and persuasive essayists use satire to effectively reveal the lesser intelligence in ideas, theories, and opinions.

I could just as easily say, "I believe in flying tarantulas as big as airplanes that carry crying hippos from Japan to Africa, so therefore, they must exist." You would scoff at me, would you not? Yet, I am saying that they must exist because someone says they strongly believe in them. Yes, the idea seems completely ridiculous to you, but that is how God is in the minds of some atheists. They believe God is a fairy tale, and would not the example I just provided exist only in a fairy tale?

I wanted to stop arguing

well I never said I agreed with the statement "we believe in God so he does exist" because I agree, that's ridiculous. I also agree that satire can be effective in pointing out flaws. The only disagreement I have is that after he pointed out the obvious flaw he made no other response. Anyone could logically see the faults in that person's argument- satire wasn't even necessary there, but since he chose to use it he could've taken a few extra seconds to say what his opinion was. It seems rude to me to pop in with a comment pointing out the stupidity of a comment and then leave it at that. But as I said before i don't like arguing I just wanna get along :p

artizhay · Oct 8th 2010, 4:23am

Jjplane wrote:

I wanted to stop arguing well I never said I agreed with the statement "we believe in God so he does exist" because I agree, that's ridiculous. I also agree that satire can be effective in pointing out flaws. The only disagreement I have is that after he pointed out the obvious flaw he made no other response. Anyone could logically see the faults in that person's argument- satire wasn't even necessary there, but since he chose to use it he could've taken a few extra seconds to say what his opinion was. It seems rude to me to pop in with a comment pointing out the stupidity of a comment and then leave it at that. But as I said before i don't like arguing I just wanna get along :p

The satire was all that was needed to state his position. Authors don't write follow-up novels to explain their satire.

But okay. *hands you spice cake cupcake he made the other day* Lol.

Sababah · Oct 8th 2010, 9:45am

LuklaAdvocate wrote:

Wait...did I just read you right? The NT says the dinosaurs were the Jews? Huh?

Isn't it the NT theme that they refused to adapt to a changed concept of god?

Do you have anything amicable to say in favor of Christianity?

Perhaps I should start a thread one day about 'what really happened'. As a way of enlightenment for the seekers.

LuklaAdvocate · Oct 8th 2010, 5:38pm

Sababah wrote:

Isn't it the NT theme that they refused to adapt to a changed concept of god?

I certainly wouldn't call that the main theme.

And what does that have to do with dinosaurs?

Sababah wrote:

Perhaps I should start a thread one day about 'what really happened'. As a way of enlightenment for the seekers.

Yeah you do that.

Corrupt · Oct 8th 2010, 9:59pm

In all honesty, I used to be a Christian. I used to be the little boy that sat near the front and soaked in every word the preacher said. The little boy that thought cursing would land you a spot in hell, etc. So, when I say that I no longer belief in religion, I have been there and done that. In my opinion, religion was created simply to give people hope for death. If you "know" you are going to heaven, or somewhere similar when you die, it's a bit less scary. Same if you know you are going to hell, or a place similar. Simply because you know where you are going. As opposed to not knowing what happens after death, which people feel different ways about. Frankly, I do not wish to know.

Now, back to the topic at hand. You can argue about there not being enough time for god to have create dinosaurs if you look at the days as actual days. However, if you look at it through scientific fact, our universe was formed via the Big Bang and even after that, it took many millions of years for there to be life on earth. For, it had to produce oxygen, bacteria, etc. Thus, technically, the bible would have to mean years on a larger scale. You also have to look at historical events and landmarks if you wish to prove the bible true. For instance, the great flood would explain the former existence of Pangaea.

Either way, religion is belief. Thus, if you belief there in your religion, then for you, it is true. However, for the people that do not belief, it isn't. If you do not have 100% faith in your religion, then there is not religion to be had. Yeah, I kinda rambled..But I love religious discussions.

Vice · Oct 9th 2010, 4:27am

If dinosaurs were smarter than humans, how come they haven't explored the galaxy yet?

SMOKE. · Oct 9th 2010, 4:36am

Aleksandr wrote:

If dinosaurs were smarter than humans, how come they haven't explored the galaxy yet?

They didn't fuck up their home planet either.. just sayin'

Tomb · Oct 9th 2010, 7:36am

Aleksandr wrote:

If dinosaurs were smarter than humans, how come they haven't explored the galaxy yet?

Intellectually, we are superior to dinosaurs.
Physically, we couldn't do shit against them in the wild (if they did still exist).
Velociraptors, for example, were among the smartest dinosaurs that ever existed. Their intelligence proved extremely effective for hunting prey. Are they as smart as the Jurassic Park book and film say they are? I doubt it. Hell, Jurassic Park does not even give an accurate representation of velociraptors (real raptors had feathers and were about the size of a turkey).

johncross23 · Oct 9th 2010, 7:52am

lizards we have now are dinasaurs before.. they shrink bcause of a shrinking machine gun.. Lol..

amiiX · Oct 12th 2010, 6:50pm

Because the Bible is fiction :')
I'm not having a go at religion here, but seriously, the Bible? It's the 21st Century People... Though, the Bible and dinosaurs didn't occur at the same time, but technically they should have been present at "Creation" :B

xyz123456 · Oct 13th 2010, 7:06am

Just a question...why are many people so easily trolled when it comes to religious discussions? I realise most of us aren't religious, including myself, but it seems like a lot of you flip the fuck out at the very mention of biblical/scriptural material as if just hearing the term "Bible" gives you hemorrhoids. What did Christianity ever do to you?

"...the Bible..."
"LOLOLOL GOD DOESN'T EXIST RELIGION IS FUCKTARDED BIBLE = BULLSHIT IF U BELIEVE IT UR A FUCKING DUMBASS LOLOLOL."

I'm not religious either, but damn. lrn2haveanopenmind.

Also, as I can't be bothered to read back through the thread to see if this has already been mentioned...the word "dinosaur" doesn't appear in the Bible for the same reason the word "Internet" doesn't appear in the Bible...the term wasn't coined at the time the Bible was written. Someone in the 1840s thought it up after fossils of some never-before-seen creatures were discovered, and they needed a name.

Also, just as a side note...I'm not entirely certain that modern humans and dinosaurs never crossed paths. There's a clear reason why many cultures have "dragon" myths and legends...in my opinion, the concept of large reptilian creatures didn't come out of nowhere. As for the "6 literal Creation days," I don't know or care about that. But....given the fact that neither the Christians, nor the scientists favoring the "humans came along blahblah-number of years after the dinosaurs went extinct" view were actually there to observe the creatures while living, I don't think either crowd are really qualified to definitively say, "THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED, AND HERE'S WHEN." You weren't there, you're just guessing it up.

Yeah.

Share

Tags