13 May 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhat nonsense. That's like saying -
it matters little, Darwins theory is older than that.
Nottingham Forest is the best football team in Europe!!!!
When pressed on what you're talking about, you bring out a 1979 football encyclopedia as proof of your claim.
But that's 30 years old, it's now 2011!!!!
We're in the 21st Century now Rob, it's time to come and join us!!!! 🙂
13 May 11
Originally posted by Proper Knoban excellent analogy, Brian Cloughs legacy lives on, in managers like Martin O'Neill and Paul Lambert who worked under O'Neill, the same with Darwinism, the theory is essentially the same as when Darwin first made it up, err i mean thought it up. But that does of course not address any of the points that the article made, does it.
What nonsense. That's like saying -
Nottingham Forest is the best football team in Europe!!!!
When pressed on what you're talking about, you bring out a 1979 football encyclopedia as proof of your claim.
But that's 30 years old, it's now 2011!!!!
We're in the 21st Century now Rob, it's time to come and join us!!!! 🙂
13 May 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou seriously think an article that misrepresents people is beautifully crafted?! Well that says a lot about you and your organisation don't you think?!
I think the article is beautifully crafted and clearly demonstrates why the fossil record shows incontrovertible evidence for creationism. You can always beg to differ.
At some point in the future i'm going to deliberately misquote something published by The Watchtower. I can guarantee you, you'll be singing a different tune then.
I'm off out. Enjoy your evening.
13 May 11
Originally posted by Proper Knobbut i dont think that it misrepresented the author at all, thats your opinion. Sure have a good time and remember to eat carrots, its good for the eyes, helps you see in the dark.
You seriously think an article that misrepresents people is beautifully crafted?! Well that says a lot about you and your organisation don't you think?!
At some point in the future i'm going to deliberately misquote something published by The Watchtower. I can guarantee you, you'll be singing a different tune then.
I'm off out. Enjoy your evening.
13 May 11
6 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut it is a somewhat vacuous claim to say that creationists have 'interpreted the same scientific data' if the only thing they've done with it is decided it's too hard to understand, and then concluded God did it instead.
as has been explained to you ultra materialists, creationism is simply the interpretation
of THE SAME scientific data, making your statement, well, dare i say, inaccurate, which
for a mathematician, must be a gross sin. repeat 10 lord of the ring verses while
facing north as penance!
Indeed, following the creationist account entails zero effort, you simply say goddidit, shout that science is wrong (without understanding in sufficient detail *what* one thinks is wrong; i.e. you have pillocks like Ray Comfort who feel they've debunked evolution on the grounds that evolution suggests the existence of a frickin Crocoduck! - NO IT DOESN'T!!!), and then hide under the ever-warming shelter that Bible => God => Bible => God => ... => God when asked to substantiate your position.
The Bible takes zero effort to 'understand',
It takes a lot of effort to suppress the tedium, and feeling of toddler like patronisation...too much effort for me - but that\'s another matter
Though I admire the metal gymnastics the fundamentalist must perform to suppress the wtf??? factor when dealing with contradictions - trying to comprehend the dizzy heights of double-think for that effort is beyond my meagre talents.
you merely read that Bible says God did X by some sort of God-magic, blindly agree that God did X, and hurraaaaayyyy!!! You now know *everything* about how X was done. ;]
13 May 11
Originally posted by Proper KnobYep, if you can believe all life came from non-living material without a plan,
Says the man who thinks humans lived alongside T-Rex's in a big boat.
purpose, or design being involved, without thinking that is strange, my
beliefs about the Ark are no different in my opinion.
Kelly
13 May 11
Originally posted by KellyJayAre you not aware of the hundreds of societies from all over the planet that have stories that are all describing some type of catastrophic fllood in their forfathers past? Way too many and coincidental for it not to have happened and that would lend to the flood actually happening and of the arks existance.
Yep, if you can believe all life came from non-living material without a plan,
purpose, or design being involved, without thinking that is strange, my
beliefs about the Ark are no different in my opinion.
Kelly
We've discussed this before and there was much evidence to prove that. That info is found on the easily internet.
13 May 11
2 edits
Originally posted by Agergyou have obviously absolutely no idea what you are havering on about, too hard? many creationists are scientists, indeed some a professors of molecular biology, professors of physics, making your argument rather ludicrous, indeed, its been one of the atheists most consistent and yet utterly unfounded statements, 'creationist dont know what they are talking about'. Do you think professor Michael Behe knows what he is talking about when he discusses biological systems or did his professorship fall from the sky by being dropped by a Golden Eagle. The Bible takes zero effort to understand? that has to be one of the most stupid statements i think i have read on this forum, you dont know anything about the Bible, who wrote it, when it was written, why it was written, you are so utterly deviod of understanding in that regard you should simply shut your mouth lest you degenerate into even more heaps of foamy nothingness. This posts of your is a disgrace, i have had many an excellent discussion with the atheists, but you do yourselves no favours with posts like that one, same old same old, get a new routine for goodness sake, this post is below the creationists and theists who frequent these forums.
But it is a somewhat vacuous claim to say that creationists have 'interpreted the same scientific data' if the only thing they've done with it is decided it's too hard to understand, and then concluded God did it instead.
Indeed, following the creationist account entails zero effort, you simply say goddidit, shout that science is wrong (without understanding hat God did X, and hurraaaaayyyy!!! You now know *everything* about how X was done. ;]
13 May 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieLol....You make me laugh. Thanks for making my day buddy.. 🙂
you have obviously absolutely no idea what you are havering on about, too hard? many creationists are scientists, indeed some a professors of molecular biology, professors of physics, making your argument rather ludicrous, indeed, its been one of the atheists most consistent and yet utterly unfounded statements, 'creationist dont know what they are ...[text shortened]... for goodness sake, this post is below the creationists and theists who frequent these forums.
13 May 11
8 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBehe...Behe!!? So he's a scientist, a scientist who was warped his way of lthinking on this matter, and trained himself in the misapplication of his education to the 5th degree of ***kery in order that he doesn't lose his precious faith. He's then inspired the otherwise rational but hopelessy deluded fundies that his argument is sound, and without any efforts on their part believe their faith is substantiated. Indeed how much independent thought have *you* given to the concept of evolution other than "Bible is right - Evolution contradicts Bible - must go on interwebs to see what other fundies say"?
you have obviously absolutely no idea what you are havering on about, too hard? many creationists are scientists, indeed some a professors of molecular biology, professors of physics, making your argument rather ludicrous, indeed, its been one of the atheists most consistent and yet utterly unfounded statements, 'creationist dont know what they are for goodness sake, this post is below the creationists and theists who frequent these forums.
Here's one for you if you want to play the *appeal to authority* fallacy: there are a hell of a load more scientists, philosophers, mathematicians/ logicians who are either moderate theists, agnostics or atheists that think creationism is utter crap!
As for the Bible, I stand by what I said. You read Genesis and it says God created the world in 6 days...you then go away with full and comprehensive knowledge about how the earth and us came to be (in a magic garden with talking snakes of course) - the difficulty is perhaps driving out the rational thought which plagues the conviction of the sane who hear an inner voice from time to time whisper
"...something isn't right..."
The Bible makes simple claims that are easy for children to digest and consign to memory. The only effort comes from fending off the rabid claws of logic and common sense ;]
13 May 11
Originally posted by galveston75Yep aware of those.
Are you not aware of the hundreds of societies from all over the planet that have stories that are all describing some type of catastrophic fllood in their forfathers past? Way too many and coincidental for it not to have happened and that would lend to the flood actually happening and of the arks existance.
We've discussed this before and there was much evidence to prove that. That info is found on the easily internet.
Kelly
14 May 11
4 edits
Originally posted by Agerglook at this tattered, dog eared post of yours, its a nonsense, first of all you claim
Behe...Behe!!? So he's a scientist, a scientist who was warped his way of lthinking on this matter, and trained himself in the misapplication of his education to the 5th degree of ***kery in order that he doesn't lose his precious faith. He's then inspired the otherwise rational but hopelessy deluded fundies that his argument is sound, and without any efforts ry. The only effort comes from fending off the rabid claws of logic and common sense ;]
that creationists are ignorant, then when its pointed out that many are academics,
you now state that appeals to authority are null and void, and then, this is the funny
part, try to demonstrate how many other learned individuals think naught of the
bible and that proves its untrustworthy? well if that's not an appeal to authority after
you just decried it, then i dont know what is. You need your bum felt.
you state that the Bible account states that the cosmos was made in a literal six day
period, yet, because you have put no effort forth, you are unable to tell why it
should be understood that a 'day', must be a literal twenty four hour period in the
context of scripture, for clearly there are many instances when it is not. You need
your bum felt.
rational thought? like the superrnatural can be governed or subject to rational
thought? bum felt for you my man.
you are correct, something isn't right, i post an article demonstrating why the fossil
record does not support the evolutionary hypothesis and you whine on about this
thing and that thing, address the actual content of the post, if you will, bum felt for
you.
14 May 11
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMight respond to the rest of this later but for now, the *appeal to authorty* served merely to cheapen yours and show it's a poor debating tool. Behe might be learned, but he misapplies his knowledge when it comes to evolution in the vain hope of keeping his creationist interpretation of the Bible alive. He does many laypersons like yourself and other fundies a great disservice.
look at this tattered, dog eared post of yours, its a nonsense, first of all you claim
that creationists are ignorant, then when its pointed out that many are academics,
you now state that appeals to authority are null and void, and then, this is the funny
part, try to demonstrate how many other learned individuals think naught of the
bible a ing and that thing, address the actual content of the post, if you will, bum felt for
you.
14 May 11
Originally posted by AgergBehe is da man! hes Noobsters hero, dont you know!
Might respond to the rest of this later but for now, the *appeal to authorty* served merely to cheapen yours and show it's a poor debating tool. Behe might be learned, but he misapplies his knowledge when it comes to evolution in the vain hope of keeping his faith in the Bible alive. He does many laypersons like yourself and other fundies a great disservice.