Ben Carson: Egyptian Pyramids Built For Grain Storage, Not By Aliens Or As Tombs

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-05-2015, 07:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Where did I say that?

Simply said there is more proof that pyramids could have been used to store grain than there is that aliens from outer space built them. 

. . . because you have seen the Pyramids, but not aliens.  

We all know the deal; you didn't say that, whatever "that" is. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-06-2015, 02:49 PM)GMDino Wrote: Yep.

http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/11/06/carson-slams-cnn-for-questions-about-his-youth/




Probably get a huge surge in the polls now!  

Quote:he said the incidents were private and that’s why others weren’t aware of them

The stabbing incident is in Carson's book because Carson included the incident.  How private could it be?  :crazy:

[Benton]

(11-06-2015, 02:49 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Well, there were Habiru tribes at the time, but they were a very general, widespread group, not to be confused with the biblical Hebrews; in fact most modern scholars do not link the Habiru to the Hebrews at all.

Levantine mercenaries who shared no ethnicity or religion and predate the kingdom of Judah are not Jews, nor Israelites, nor even Hebrews yet. And even if one wanted to presume (and it is a big presumption) that those are the same peoples who eventually became the Hebrew Jews and therefore they "count", we are talking about an absolutely minute group of them becoming indentured servants in Egypt; nowhere near the million-plus required for anything like the classical Exodus account to be true.

I'm a long way removed from a history class, but they weren't the same. Canaanite references (not necessary Biblical, but actual tablets from the time period) existed by 2500 BC. They were, according to their claims, direct descendants of Noah. Amorites, likewise, have outside references made about them around 2500 BC, with their establishments already established by then... so they would have had to existed at least a century or two before then. The Kish/Sumerians were around before 3100 BC. Cuniform references to the Habiru don't make them synonymous with the Semitic tribes or those using the Semitic languages.

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 02:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No he wasn't.

That was a lie.

Yes, it was revealed today that this was a fabrication. most likely just makes him a better candidate to combat Hillary in the General election.

WTS, I've never been a fan of Carson for President; I've just always taken exception with the storyline that he is stupid.

[GMDino]

(11-06-2015, 03:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Yes, it was revealed today that this was a fabrication. most likely just makes him a better candidate to combat Hillary in the General election.

WTS, I've never been a fan of Carson for President; I've just always taken exception with the storyline that he is stupid.

So its okay with you if he's shown to be a liar...just not shown to be stupid.  

[GodHatesBengals]

(11-06-2015, 03:18 PM)Benton Wrote: I'm a long way removed from a history class, but they weren't the same. Canaanite references (not necessary Biblical, but actual tablets from the time period) existed by 2500 BC. They were, according to their claims, direct descendants of Noah. Amorites, likewise, have outside references made about them around 2500 BC, with their establishments already established by then... so they would have had to existed at least a century or two before then. The Kish/Sumerians were around before 3100 BC. Cuniform references to the Habiru don't make them synonymous with the Semitic tribes or those using the Semitic languages.

Yeah, we agree that the Habiru were not the Hebrews.

I can't find anything about any tablets or other non-biblical sources where the Canaanites identified themselves as descendants of Noah.

As for various other Semitic peoples (Canaanites, Amorites, etc), these are not synonymous with Hebrews/Jews. The Hebrews are all Semitic, but not all Semites were Hebrews.

[GodHatesBengals]

(11-06-2015, 03:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Yes, it was revealed today that this was a fabrication. most likely just makes him a better candidate to combat Hillary in the General election.

WTS, I've never been a fan of Carson for President; I've just always taken exception with the storyline that he is stupid.

He gets called stupid for saying things that you agree with, so of course you take exception. The problem is that you have never succeeded in showing people that any of the stupid things he says aren't stupid, despite your greatest efforts.

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 03:25 PM)GMDino Wrote: So its okay with you if he's shown to be a liar...just not shown to be stupid.  

Of course it is not Ok to be a liar.

Who are you currently supporting for President?

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 03:51 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: He gets called stupid for saying things that you agree with, so of course you take exception. The problem is that you have never succeeded in showing people that any of the stupid things he says aren't stupid, despite your greatest efforts.

There are a great number of things that I disagree with a SDA on; however, I don't consider him stupid because of his religious beliefs.

[GodHatesBengals]

(11-06-2015, 05:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There are a great number of things that I disagree with a SDA on; however, I don't consider him stupid because of his religious beliefs.

Right. Well count me in as somebody who has no problem considering people who reject reality stupid, whether the reason is religious or not.

Btw, as a non-SDA, you are probably hellbound in Carson's view.

[fredtoast]

(11-06-2015, 05:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  however, I don't consider him stupid because of his religious beliefs.

Even though he says you are going to hell because you worship on Sunday?

You don't think that is stupid?

Or do you just exempt religious beliefs from all discussion of a persons intelligence?

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 05:36 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Even though he says you are going to hell because you worship on Sunday?

You don't think that is stupid?

Or do you just exempt religious beliefs from all discussion of a persons intelligence?

As I said there are things we disagree with, I disagree with many things other religions believe in as well. I also disagree that the belief that life came from nothing and man evolved from a fish that learned to breath air, walk, climb trees, ect... is silly. However, I don't consider someone stupid solely because they believe it happened.

[GMDino]

(11-06-2015, 05:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course it is not Ok to be a liar.

Who are you currently supporting for President?

Not a damn one of them right now!  

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-06-2015, 05:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There are a great number of things that I disagree with a SDA on; however, I don't consider him stupid because of his religious beliefs.

(11-02-2015, 03:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I agree 100%; however, should they be called a racist in a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with racisim? I would still strive to say they are displaying a racist nature instead of the imflamitory "You're a racist". 

Look, no one is calling Ben Carson stupid.  It's just many of us think Ben Carson is displaying a stupid nature.  Repeatedly.

[BmorePat87]

Did someone honestly try to defend this by saying "it's more believable than aliens!"?

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 07:24 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Did someone honestly try to defend this by saying "it's more believable than aliens!"?

Defend what?

[BmorePat87]

(11-06-2015, 07:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Defend what?

[Devils Advocate]

(11-06-2015, 01:38 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes they were.

Prove it. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-06-2015, 07:35 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote:

Yeah, because whatever it is you think bfine said he is defending, he didn't say that.

[JustWinBaby]

Hopefully this is the beginning of the end for Carson. Debate moderators need to give him his wish and let him talk more. Fingers crossed his supporters don't move to Trump.

Would love to see Carson fire a classic line "look, have I really told more lies than Trump or Carly?"