Page 2 of 5

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:31 pm
by marduk
you just can't stand the competition? Darwinists are like that.
so are Gods
:lol:

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:33 pm
by oldarchystudent
Genesis Veracity wrote:Hey archy, Guest asked for a book which covers 5 or 6 ancient civilizations in one volume, does that sound like that's from someone who is a novice?

Therefore, why don't you let Guest make-up his/her own mind, most people don't need your guidance regarding their judgments about information, or you just can't stand the competition? Darwinists are like that.
The book I mentioned covers a lot of civilizations in a scientifically sound manner. The book you recommend takes Atlantis as a fact, which it is not. You made your recommendation, I made mine.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:51 pm
by Guest
Hey archy
let's avoid confusion here. i have been known as archaeologist, arch, and archie. i will give up the name 'archie' if all the others agree not to call me that and refer to the new guy.

okay.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:54 pm
by Guest
Once again, you missed the point, I don't know if you're dense or goofy.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:57 pm
by Guest
New archy, you're head is so far down a hole, you wouldn't see the evidence 'cause it's so dark down there, you obvioulsy can't be taken seriously, that's what happens when you dodge the issues, makes you look foolish.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:57 pm
by oldarchystudent
archaeologist wrote:
Hey archy
let's avoid confusion here. i have been known as archaeologist, arch, and archie. i will give up the name 'archie' if all the others agree not to call me that and refer to the new guy.

okay.
I'd like to avoid that confusion too. I'm Jim. OAS - whatever you prefer.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:00 pm
by Minimalist
archaeologist wrote:
Hey archy
let's avoid confusion here. i have been known as archaeologist, arch, and archie. i will give up the name 'archie' if all the others agree not to call me that and refer to the new guy.

okay.

You are unique, Arch.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:00 pm
by oldarchystudent
Genesis Veracity wrote:New archy, you're head is so far down a hole, you wouldn't see the evidence 'cause it's so dark down there, you obvioulsy can't be taken seriously, that's what happens when you dodge the issues, makes you look foolish.
I've been on this board for a whole 4 hours and made somebody mad at me already. A record.

I'm not seeing any evidence. I'm seeing pseudo science, unsustantiated claims and one mythology being used to prop up another mythology, neither one being based in any verifiable fact. The issue is that your worldview is based on myth and I don't subscribe to those stories. The geologic, fossil and historic records all go against you on this. But I'm sure you will sell a lot of books - von Daniken did. People like this stuff.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:04 pm
by Guest
Oas, you have no rebuttals, very instructive about you're modus operandi.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:06 pm
by Guest
I've been on this board for a whole 4 hours and made somebody mad at me already. A record
you have to learn to take g.v. with a grain of salt.

i would like a complimentery copy also, will you send one to korea G.V.?

good books to read: authors--Hoffmeier, McRay, Currid & Kitchen to name a few.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:09 pm
by oldarchystudent
Genesis Veracity wrote:Oas, you have no rebuttals, very instructive about you're modus operandi.
OK - here's a rebuttal - there is no evidence of 400,000 years of civilization. There is no evidence that the ice age ended 1,500 years ago. There is plenty of evidence that civilization arose with the establishment of agriculture at the end of the last ice age, a period known to geologists as the Holocene, around 10,000 BP.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:09 pm
by Guest
Sure archae, I'll send you one.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:13 pm
by oldarchystudent
archaeologist wrote:
you have to learn to take g.v. with a grain of salt.
Actually I find him amusing. I can understand where you are coming from, as you base your beliefs on a particular book. I don't agree but I understand it. GV on the other hand seems to have cobbled together a whole range of religion, myths, erroneous data and blended them into a hypothesis. Not sure how, but he did it.

But it is late and I should get to bed. Archy I will look forward to debating you some more.

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:18 pm
by Guest
Aos, you need to learn to read for comprehension, I didn't say the Ice Age ended 1500 years ago, and I didn't say that I think civilization goes back 400,000 years (or 432,000 years), and you have not rebutted any of the evidence which I've presented for the time of the end of the Ice Age, so that's three strikes, yourrrrrrrrrrr out!

Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:26 pm
by Minimalist
Hoffmeier, McRay, Currid & Kitchen to name a few.

Bible thumping jackasses without a shard of proof among them!