Nàh. Religion requires a system of belief shared by multiple people. Mickiel is more theosophical than religious. Or, I suppose,we could say he has an ideopistology. It is certainly not a religion, science, or knowledge.
Well that’s close enough; thank you.
I’m a bit different than that, I really believe what I do; and it would require " Convincing" evidence to alter my views.
The same as it would require to alter you’re views; why you think I am any different than you in that area;
is beyond me.
Peace
And I thank you for acknowledging that what you have is neither science nor knowledge.
WRONG.
You don’t calculate the end date of your generation as the year you die; you calculate it as the year you stop reproducing (GENERating offspring, get it? That’s why they call it a GENERation).
I acknowledged no such thing, its just something that you want to believe in your head.
Judging by the capitalization of the word wrong, you really want and desire me to be wrong so bad. I can sense that. During those biblical times generations were calculated by interpretations now in various ways; some use 40 years, others 100 years, and the bible varies from time to time and uses different methods; I use two methods; from the birth of a child to the birth of that child’s first child, and the death of the patriarch.
Those are the two methods I use.
(bolding mine) To which you replied:
If I believe it, it’s because you said it.
Religion, yes. As in rules and observances of religious people.
Religious is just having a belief in gods.
I guess you can be religious without having a religion.
I said its close; but keep digging, keep trying, keep looking for that loophole of fault that you so sorely need.
You said your done with thread; I responded to that by saying, Sure!
Welcome back to thread.
I’m done with your nonsense, yes.
Welcome to thread, was primordial man conscious? Have you ever seen an earth of conscious people, live thousands of years and leave no record of civilized advancement?
I haven’t.
Then what exactly did you mean by “It was close” when he said “It is certainly not a religion, science, or knowledge.”?
Chauvet Cave features art from 30-32,000 BCE. How do you square that with your notion of a circa 20,000 BCE Adam event?
“Primordial Man” is a religious/philosophical term, not a scientific term.
To be fair, one might imagine a scientist* from 150 years ago using such a term.
*Using the term loosely, of course, since what constituted a “scientist” 150 years ago is quite different from today.
Nobody here needs to you be wrong. We’re just here to fight ignorance; not our fault that your “theory” is a target rich environment.
he got the religion part right, and that’s closer.
So are you going to ask me to define closer?
Are you then suggesting that no one here is ignorant?