Facts, in #science, are explained by theories. BSc. in #Evolution-ary Biology. Science teacher. #Atheist since birth. #Veteran

United States
Joined March 2009
Our tectonic plates float on magma, if the earth "stood still" the friction would be spectacular.
1
4
15
There isn't enough water on Earth to flood it entirely to a height of 15 cubits over the mountaintops. We checked.
1
2
10
Evidence needs to be measured, not interpreted. Any information that can change based on subjective interpretation is an opinion, not a fact.
1
1
1
16
Good grief! It's a huge problem. What's more likely: the laws of physics are suspended to allow your Bronze Age fairy tale to be true, or the Bronze Age men who wrote the bible had no idea how anything worked?
1
1
6
35
You have no idea how much heat we are talking about here.
1
1
2
26
Explain the "misrepresentations" instead of changing the subject to a non-sequitur. You won't because there are no misrepresentations.
1
3
25
Profile: "father of five" I hope it's not too late. Jesus called the Pharisees hypocrites for not following the laws in their Tanakh. The writer of Mark 7 probably got this notion from Ex 21:15, Ex 21:17, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-22...
1
4
31
SciP(h)er retweeted
If there was actual data to support the existence of god, I would accept that. But there are no such data
1
1
26
SciP(h)er retweeted
Except that there are zero data that god even exists, let alone is all powerful
1
3
22
SciP(h)er retweeted
There is evidence of course, just that it is interpreted differently by you all because you have a different starting point, one that rejects God out of the gate.
3
1
33
Then how do you explain the reality that no global flood appears in the geological record?
3
33
You're digging your hole very deep. Suggesting just how you manage to take the likes of AiG seriously. No rigorous discipline can operate off information distortion, and that would apply even to gods
1
1
3
31
SciP(h)er retweeted
It is impossible to interpret "there has never been enough water on earth for a flood that covers mountains" in any other way. So you are denying data that shows a global flood didn't happen
2
1
2
44
SciP(h)er retweeted
You can deny it but they are pseudoscience. This is why their "research" is never published in legitimate scientific journals. You can decide for yourself if lying is wrong (sometimes it isn't) but propagating scientific misinformation is at best contrary to improving society
2
1
1
34