vincentML
Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
Cancer – I said; “why is it that this “designed by the Creator” problem, which seems ubiquitous now, was almost unheard of a hundred years ago?” And you say in answer; “mankind did not have the tools to diagnose the illness”. Honestly, in the 20th century (a hundred years ago) “mankind did not have the tools to diagnose the illness”?
Ah yes, I will admit I was wrong. Cancer was first described in 1600 BCE.
Several types of cancer were described by Hippocrates. Hippocrates (ca. 460 BC – ca. 370 BC) described several kinds of cancer, referring to them by the term karkinos (carcinos), the Greek word for crab or crayfish, as well as carcinoma.[2] This comes from the appearance of the cut surface of a solid malignant tumour, with "the veins stretched on all sides as the animal the crab has its feet, whence it derives its name".[3] Since it was against Greek tradition to open the body, Hippocrates only described and made drawings of outwardly visible tumors on the skin, nose, and breasts. Treatment was based on the humor theory of four bodily fluids (black and yellow bile, blood, and phlegm). According to the patient's humor, treatment consisted of diet, blood-letting, and/or laxatives. Celsus (ca. 25 BC - 50 AD) translated karkinos into cancer, the Latin word for crab or crayfish.
Then, in the 18th and 19th Century The first cause of cancer was identified by British surgeon Percivall Pott, who discovered in 1775 that cancer of the scrotum was a common disease among chimney sweeps. The work of other individual physicians led to various insights, but when physicians started working together they could draw firmer conclusions.
With the widespread use of the microscope in the 18th century, it was discovered that the 'cancer poison' eventually spreads from the primary tumor through the lymph nodes to other sites ("metastasis"). This view of the disease was first formulated by the English surgeon Campbell De Morgan between 1871 and 1874.[6]
So, yes, I was wrong. Your argument was that cancer was almost unheard of 100 years ago, so the disease could not be pinned on God. I thought you knew what you were talking about. But, you didn't. Cancer has a long history. Man's awareness of it has a long history. And we can thank God for the pain and suffering he imposed on mankind. Just a cruel, miserable bastard he is. No doubt about it.
quote:
Floods – I basically said mankind knows what floods are and where they happen so don’t build your house in a flood plain. Your answer; “it is just absurd to believe that people would build their farms on arid land.” Yeah, right, flood plains are thousands of miles wide so you have to build your house thousands of miles away, in the desert, to be out of the flood plain, now who is being absurd?
Jesus, Miles, let's have a little intellectual honesty here. You completely ignored the coastal floods from hurricanes and tsunamis I mentioned. I take it you agree we can hold God responsible for those erratic catastrophes. Again, God is an evil, cruel, merciless, bastard.
quote:
Also, you didn’t even acknowledge what I said about the destruction of wetlands and the building of dikes and levees.
As for hurricanes, the destruction of New Orleans by Katrina has been acknowledged to be more of a man made disaster than a “natural” one.
Bullshit, Miles. Show me anywhere in #563 you made any such comments.
quote:
Radiation – You didn’t say what kind of radiation and I even said; “I’m not sure which radiation you are thinking of” and then I took a guess. Your reply; “Radiation from Chernobyl, you're trying to be funny, are you not?” Since you brought it up; doesn’t that sound a little “condescending” to you?
But since you “straightened me out”, that you were talking about the sun’s radiation and that mean old God didn’t do anything to help us out on that but I seem to recall that we use to have an ozone layer that protected us from that, oh wait a minute, didn’t mankind put a big hole in it with fluorocarbons.
Well yeah, Miles, we were talking about the Design of Nature. Remember? Why would you even consider radiation from nuclear plants. Good grief, I'll bet kids in third grade general science know that nuclear plants are not natural. Let's at least pretend we know what the topic is, Miles.
More Miles bullshit. Melanoma were well known before the 20th Century when we supposedly blew a hole in the ozone layer. And Oh, Miles wasn't aware of radiation coming at us from space. Must have been a woeful school you attended. Rene Laenec was the first to distinguish melanoma as a disease separate from others in 1804, with the term melanose. In 1820, William Norris was the first to observed the heterogenic nature of some melanoma tumors. The term melanoma was introduced in 1838 by Sir Robert Carswell.
quote:
As for all this; "In all of the above it is clear that these are not man-made disasters that are predictable. Not at all. They are gifts from the abundance of your God. Do not try to lay such tragic events onto the shoulders of man. It is just inexplicable that toddlers and tiny babies should die in such great disasters if your God is so damn benevolent which obviously he is not. How you can worship or acknowledge such an evil deity is beyond comprehension."
Really, this is what you've come to?
This is not what I have come to; it is what you chose to ignore, it is the reality of the design. If you believe the universe was created by design you are obliged to confront the truth of the dark, evil, and murderous characteristics of the Designer. It is all there, so plain and obvious for anyone to see. Open your eyes.
< Message edited by vincentML -- 8/8/2017 6:22:41 AM >
_____________________________
vML
Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.
|
RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread