You can not be surprised that people does not take parapsychology as science. It had been proven hoax to many time for people to give credit for.

Thats why people will not treat you seriously - because of early XX century and many charlatains that cheated people blind. By the way, the Bible had forbidden witchcraft of necromancy, of speaking, dealing and invoking spirits. So I am not sure how do you prove God by proving things he forbidden but nevermind.


That words are so hypocritical coming from you.

You yourself are the proof of God existance. He told that he will send strong delusions.

Evolutionist claims that the Bible does not say the truth, yet every birth on this earth, by any living creature is a proof of his word. Evolutionist had found none proof to the contrary.

How you judge you will be judged the same. Do you think the God is laughable? God will have the last laugh, if he decided that.

You are laughable, when God allowed you to discover that human is closest in dna similiarities with the pig.  Hows your theory can explain that? It can not - you have strong delusions and are made a joke.



You say everything is driven by matter, every reaction is mass related. God has send strong delusions on you, becuase your scientific equations are full of patches, constants that "must be" because your equations would not be right. Some miracle made believe constants. You are all so much believing in your mass driven world that you will believe and create lies to hide it. Like different constant of the speed of light every 20 years or so. And that not within a statistical error of 5%, but its multitude of quantity. So it was not an error.

God can have a good laugh when your equations is wrong by 95% percent of mass (or more) you have to invent, like stupid dark matter and dark energy, that noone had ever seen for your equations to be even remotely true.

Yes you nitpick on electric universe theory that they made some slight error.... You have a strong delusion because your whole mass driven world is 95% false and only 5% correct. Even after a whole book of patches how to make wrong theory right.

You know what is 5% in statistic? Statistical error. Congratulations that your predictibility is so low as it can be a statistical error that you guessed wrong or right.

You believe more than anyone else on your things that noone ever had seen and noone ever will, yet you hypocriticly claim that someone else is not to be credited because they believe.



And then you hypocriticly says, that bible believers are a joke. Thats a very strong delusions there.

Think again if your claims is not just hypocritical hot air.

And you should understand that there is no scientific theory that is proven right. There are thoeries that are not proven wrong. You can not have certainity with any thoery that its true. Thats not science.



There are not yet enough of hypothesis builded up to make a scientific theory of God. But many of the thesis in the books are not proven to be wrong.

Scientists, even those from evolution and big bang or whatever are validating a God thesis (the bible). Scientific theory is based on making a right hypothesis and try to prove its wrong. Its doable to prove its wrong. You have the God thesis that you can easily make into hypothesis, that are falisifiable. The more they try to prove the God thesis is wrong, and they fail to do so, the stronger its validity is.

That is called validating by trying to falsify something. You validate God by falsifying your atheistic possitions that are the opposite. Its like saying - that man is not dead, therefore he is alive.

So thank you for proving God.

Ok that one might be wrong. That was not my meme. I had not put much thought into it. Ok. Some people at the creationism camp are also wrong. Difference between me and you is that I can admitt it.

I am stupid that I gave that meme. Forget about it. I don't want to talk about it. You have established ground how to find in your little pseudo scientific swampy. It can take ages, months and years of a silly word games between me and you.

My bad. I admitt I should not go into this shaddy ground. Of philosophical word game.

Its just a general picture of things. I know that evolutionists spends all day thinking about the asnwers for "yes but...". I regret of talking about your butts.

Its just a meme that gives general idea how things are and how evolutionists make "butts" out of it. I know you can say that some brilliant author have discovered a 3rd gender, or something similiar. Pun intended.

Violation does not mean something is contradicting its just not fitting to well with all those facts.


A question if God has done x y or z. Thats a hypothesis. If not proven wrong that hypothesis is correct. One can assume how something is done, but for things to be logical one must assume if its factual that something is made, and if its factual that someone that made it can exist. The process of "how it was done" does not have to be true for a statement to be correct.

For example - God created a life. How have he made it, does not change the status of statement whether its true or not.

Thats an ontological definition of truth. You mix epistemological "how it was made" way of defining the truth and accuse the ontologist that they do not claim to know "how it was made".

I can answer, that you it does not matter "how do you think it was made", because there are evidences it could not be done how you claim it is. Such a counter argument is pig having 98% of human dna.

Thats an error for a creationist to use epistomological arguments to refute evolutionist. Evolutionist will just use their terminology and confuse the poor creationist by his "but".

Epistomological (evolutionist) can claim that something cannot exist because of how something is done, he cannot claim wrong argument that ontologist does not know how something was done. Ontologist does not claim to know (creationist), he is only interested what exist. And the fact that pigs are way closer related to humans than monkeys is ontological claim that it does not matter how something is done, as long as its highly unlikely that it is done like evolutionist claim it happened.

For example if you would say that in the last 1000 years 100 kinds became extinct and 1 had come to being. That would be a counter argument to what actualy the creationist claim is their truth. Their truth is that there was no single new kind of animal that came into existance (the key word) after the creation. And the existance and classification of this kind is easily defined (it can breed only with its kind).

we will know the answer after we die. if truth there was hell and heaven the time we has die. so it truth. if not. i dont know either how to say it. scary and deep inside me are scared to wait that time come.fuhh. to find the answer. we will know it someday.

The point is not to prove GOD but to provide scientific evidence, the kind which speaks for itself because it is empirical. Why not consider the wisdom of GOD could have spoken instructions in other texts? What if you found written content that indicates a divine source, would you discard any such books if they are not in the mainstream? Why not consider the contents of the Phoenix Journals as divine communication meant to instruct mankind? In my opinion the content of this material explains Bible teaching much better than Bible alone. As for parapsychology I think the papers by Cunningham are very important and the trans-survival hypothesis website has a good view of the parapsychology material.

To ''disprove'' something, you would need to prove it first. You simply do not understand what it means to prove something. You are basically saying that I can claim anything and it's true unless you are able to prove me wrong, it doesn't work like that. ''God have said what did he create and how does it recreate itself'' How do you know? How do you know God has said any of that? Can you prove how animals are generated from nothing? Or instantly which is what god supposedly did? ''If you prove that the existence of animals is driven by different principles'' Well so far I don't think anyone has seen an animal appear from nowhere, so I guess I disproved god?

How do you know that I am not talking about GOD? Simply because your Bible tells you so? Then you are just following authority and not doing your own thinking.

You are wrong about that.

The law of biogenesis says that "life cannot come from non-life", yet abiogenesis is part and parcel of evolutionary theory because there is no other way to explain the origin of life than from "non-life".

The Improbability of Abiogenesis:
https://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/abiogenesis.html

Abiogenesis is falsifiable with these statistics, there has to be an additional factor that caused the impossible transformation.

Since you did not answer my question, I have another one:

Is the Bible fit for worship?

So how is it that the atheist can recognize evil in the Bible but the fundamentalist Christian cannot?