[Jenni111]

Originally Posted by Rev. Jim Osborne

Hmmph! You're just a girl. What do you know?

Sorry dollface, why don't you leave the science discussions to us educated men. Meanwhile, don't you have a pie to bake?

Sorry, Reverend.

[David Goldman]

Originally Posted by Jenni111

When they say space is curved, it means it's curved toward an object. This goes along with the black hole theory. It states that instead of curving towards an object, you can go straight to it. Think of moving towards an object as a half circle. You can take the long way, or move outside of space and take the short route.

That's kind of my point Jenni, but I was trying to make it in a nice way

How can you "triangulate" on a curved surface? A triangle is by definition 3 "straight" lines.

Either their theory of curved space is wrong, or they can't triangulate. They can't have it both ways

[Rev. Jim Osborne]

Originally Posted by Jenni111

Sorry, Reverend.

That's okay, dear. I didn't mean to be harsh. I was just looking out for your Salvation®. I don't want you straying from the Lord by getting seduced by the evilness of Science. The Bible tells us very clearly what a woman's role should be...

Titus 2:3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;
Titus 2:4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,
Titus 2:5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

[Christiansoldier]

You have to admit though Reverend, she is pretty() smart for a 17 year old.

[Rev. Jim Osborne]

I think it would be more accurate to say "smart mouthed". Although I do think Jenni would make a great candidate for my Ladies of the Lord program. Have you signed up yet, Jenni? I would love to come to British Columbia to meet you. Whistler is one of my favorite places to go skiing.

[Glendora Christianson]

As a parent, I'd like to ask the atheist science teacher if he or she is a homosexual. If the answer is yes, I'd surely report them to the PTA and the local police!

[Christiansoldier]

Originally Posted by Rev. Jim Osborne

I think it would be more accurate to say "smart mouthed". Although I do think Jenni would make a great candidate for my Ladies of the Lord program. Have you signed up yet, Jenni? I would love to come to British Columbia to meet you. Whistler is one of my favorite places to go skiing.

Jenni is 17 unfortunately

Reverend it seems you have been inviting a lot of underaged girls around here.

[David Goldman]

Originally Posted by Christiansoldier

Jenni is 17 unfortunately

Reverend it seems you have been inviting a lot of underaged girls around here.

"Underage" is a tricky phrase, and the age of consent in Canada is 16, so such terminology doesn't really apply here. Also, you might be misinterpreting the concept of "babes in Christ".

[Christiansoldier]

Originally Posted by David (not a Jew)

"Underage" is a tricky phrase, and the age of consent in Canada is 16, so such terminology doesn't really apply here. Also, you might be misinterpreting the concept of "babes in Christ".

Nah don't worry, I side with the Reverend on everything. And if he is going to a hotel in America, then the rules of America apply and she is 17 and not 18 and is therefore not the age of consent.

[Rev. Jim Osborne]

I think I have made it very clear that the Ladies of the Lord ministry is only for women age 18-24. Jenni will just have to wait, but I fear she may be led astray further by Satan in the meantime.

[Professor Bessemer]

I cannot believe I missed this thread! My secretary Teddy is going to here about this at our morning meeting tomorrow, I can assure you of that.

If the Reverend does not mind I would like to get this thread back on topic and make a few points about the flawed thinking of almost all secular scientists. There seem to be quite a few Biblical skeptics that have found this thread, so most of this information is for them.

Almost all secular science rests on several false assumptions. One of which involves incredibly misunderstood time scales. As the Bible states, the Earth is just over 6,000 years old. This single fact disproves nearly every aspect of secular geology, paleontology, and astrophysics! It also proves invalid vast amounts of the secular archeological, biological, climatological, and geophysical canons of so called "knowledge".

For instance, when these secularists talk about evolution, they always mention that it took "millions of years". Really? Well that is patently impossible on a planet that is only 6,000 years old! Even a child could understand this simple fact.

Another basic assumption of secular science that is completely wrong is Chaos Theory. This rather complex theory is used by secularists to explain that randomness does not in fact exist. We Scientheists know the world is not random, because God is in control 100% of the time. You see, even secular scientists are uncomfortable with the concept of Random Action, so they invented Chaos theory to make themselves feel better. Really gentlemen, would it not simply be easier to accept the existence of an all powerful God that to believe a theory that includes ridiculous corollaries like The Butterfly Effect and Quantum Entanglement?

The final major stumbling block that all secular scientists seem to have in common that keeps them from accepting the truths of Creationism I call Intellectual Hubris. This is the peculiar affliction of the secularists that manifests itself in the mistrust of obvious answers and an almost pathological need to disprove answers that are already widely accepted.

If they would just sit down, grab a King James Bible, read it cover to cover and simply accept everything that it contains, there would be no great rift between the world of Science and the world of Faith!

[H. Montague Worthington]

If I ever met a so-called "science" teacher, I would only have ONE question for them: "Why do you hate America?"

[Klownox]

Originally Posted by Rev. Jim Osborne

If women were not created from Adam's rib, why is it that men have one fewer rib than women?

They dont. lrn2 anatomy

Yes, they do.

http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/u...4;t=000583;p=1

[Professor Bessemer]

Please do not spam our forum with links to your own pornographical website pages. I did not click on the link of course, as I am not some sort of newby to these World Wide Webs. But it is no doubt a virus infested hellhole of depravity and nudeness.

No True Christian™ would have any reason whatsoever to click on that ungodly link.

[Grant]

Do you call yourself a scientist? maybe an attempt to "infiltrate" on science territory?

And i saw you are saying that the Earth is 6000 years old. What? It is demonstrated with REAL proofs that its about 4.600 miliions of years old. What proof do you have of it being only 6.000 years old? I mean, any other real and probable proof than the King James bible.

[Grant]

Sorry for the double post.

That link does not contain any sort of nudity or depravity. Its just a forum. It does not contain viruses. Click on it, you wont go hell for that.

[Johnnyboy]

Originally Posted by Oniros

Sorry for the double post.

That link does not contain any sort of nudity or depravity. Its just a forum. It does not contain viruses. Click on it, you wont go hell for that.

Friend,

Kindly head over to the intro forum and tell us about yourself. Most polite people do that before they jump head first into a thread. Remember, this is a Christian Forum, manners and proper grammar are appreciated.

God Bless,

[Bobby-Joe]

Originally Posted by Oniros

Do you call yourself a scientist? maybe an attempt to "infiltrate" on science territory?

And i saw you are saying that the Earth is 6000 years old. What? It is demonstrated with REAL proofs that its about 4.600 miliions of years old. What proof do you have of it being only 6.000 years old? I mean, any other real and probable proof than the King James bible.

Friend

We have an eye witness account. You have an interpretation of some rocks and some old Indian bones. Now who should a reasonable person believe?

[Grant]

Originally Posted by Bobby-Joe

Friend

We have an eye witness account. You have an interpretation of some rocks and some old Indian bones. Now who should a reasonable person believe?

"some rocks and some old Indian bones."
what?----->http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth (safe link)
Earth age investigation is much wider than some rocks and some indian bones.

Who is your eye-witness account? Jesus? the Bible? I mean any proof that is not faith based.

[Bobby-Joe]

Originally Posted by Oniros

"some rocks and some old Indian bones."
what?----->http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth (safe link)
Earth age investigation is much wider than some rocks and some indian bones.

Who is your eye-witness account? Jesus? the Bible? I mean any proof that is not faith based.

Wikipedia is a tool of liberal propaganda. Pleased use and fair and balanced source to quote like Conservapedia.

Also do not see how The Bible is an invalid account. Since it was written over 2,000 years makes it primary source information.