blankety blank

tore wrote:
I am not going to question your intelligence, or your knowledge. I don't necessarily disagree with what you presented. The problem is that are you placing the burden on others to disprove a theory. More importantly, 'a working definition of a scientific theory'. You cannot dispute the fact that some of facts are disputed by scientists. And, there are missing links, that they still need to find.

My actual question was why if the word evolution was not coined until the 18th-19th century to refer to things changing over time; why did it appear in a dictionary to have its root in around 1615?. And, it means 'the unrolling of a book', or 'an opening of what was rolled up'.

No one answered that question tore. Why? It appeared before the letter 'J' was added to the English alphabet, according to the sources I've seen. It appears to present a problem with King Iames. The research I found suggests that the letter appeared in use around 1630.

Mat 1:16 Iacob begat Ioseph, the husband of Marie, of who was borne Iesus, that is called Christe. Bishop's Bible 1568

Do you see how it could possibly have began a little earlier?

It looks like the Words changed over time from Greek to Latin to English in around 1611.

And, the letter J did not appear in any alphabet prior to the 14th century.

And, Jews believe that god created everything with the 22 Hebrew letters of the alphabet. I would think he would have given them a J, but, he didn't.

Yehuda becomes Judah. And, many scholars agree that Job is the oldest book in the Hebrew manuscripts. What about Joshua, Jacob, Judges, Jeremiah, Jezebel, Jehoshaphat, and not to mention Jehovah, Jonah, Joel?

'and the books were opened, and the judgment set'

This was the question. And, remember blasting someone for being completely off-topic, and, then he apologized to you profusely, and, gave you props and praise for your insightful posts? I don't remember the name, but, I remember the posts, and, I saw no reply from you. He said, no sweat. He forgave you.

Do you see how you could have addressed the walking on water issue? With evolution.

I am not bashing the books, or any religious folks. I am doing my best to attempt to put something together to vindicate the stories, and, present something to leave behind, because, they do need interpreted, and, I believe that was part of the plan. It's a mental progression, and, I believe the goal is to force man to contemplate, and, exercise his mind. I had to live it. And, if it's true literally, we are here for the long haul. Again, it is not my truth, it's your own picture show you are creating. And, that's even debatable.

And tore, we are coming back. It's an evolution thing. So, I will ask you what you think about how we might further evolve? Not, what science might spew, but, what you think. You're a biologist, why aren't you screaming fire? Because, if we aren't walking machines, we're walking corpses.

Did seek mention anything about grouping of quarks? And, how they might communicate? There is something to that Greg Braden lecture he linked.

I'll link it again. If you guys look at anything, just the first 15 minutes can teach you how to feel about others. It certainly reminded me. I had forgotten. It's worth the 15 minutes of your time folks. Might change you a bit. It did me.



Watch it batlord. How much do you want to bet?

I ain't playing stupid, or crazy anymore. It's time to get serious. I will not tolerate the one line smack any longer. You 'ready to rumble'? That's your first twin. I got a boat load.

Play nice son.