Discussion:
I like watching atheists make invalid arguments
(too old to reply)
Amazing Answers
2018-04-03 18:26:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
s***@gmail.com
2018-04-03 19:06:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
Or hey: creationists could be like Charles Jackson, who proudly announces
that he has four (4) (count `em, four!) degrees, unlike evolutionists
like PZ Myers, who has only a measly two!

Of course two of Jackson's are in education, none is a PhD (like Myers'),
but hey: he's got quantity!


But back to your claim -- I assume you have one or more examples of this
to show us, so that we can discuss them more specifically? "Plenty of references"
does sound intriguing.


Selene
Malte Runz
2018-04-03 19:48:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
Or hey: creationists could be like Charles Jackson, who proudly announces
that he has four (4) (count `em, four!) degrees, unlike evolutionists
like PZ Myers, who has only a measly two!
Of course two of Jackson's are in education, none is a PhD (like Myers'),
but hey: he's got quantity!
But back to your claim -- I assume you have one or more examples of this
to show us, so that we can discuss them more specifically? "Plenty of references"
does sound intriguing.
He's got nothing. He knows he has nothing, and he knows that we know
that he knows he has nothing. The only thing he has left is trying to
be as annoying as possible. Just look at the way he goes on and on
about Piltdown Man and Ernst Haeckel. Even his blanks are misfiring.
--
Malte Runz
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-03 19:42:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I like watching theists try to bend logic and science so they can try to rationalize their bullshit beliefs.

Perhaps, if theists didn't use dishonest arguments, lies, outdated science, mined quotes or their own ignorant misunderstanding of science they might be taken more seriously.

When theists can provide the same quality evidence and observation and testing that Science relies on, they wouldn't be seen as ridiculous.

Not that such things matter to the fake theists we get here, who are trolls first and religious second if at all.
Malte Runz
2018-04-03 19:45:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, ...
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold unevidenced
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen. Therefore Goddidit
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
... So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? ...
We do nothing but. You know I have linked to tons of material.
Material you refuse to look at if you have to click on a link, and if
there are footnotes, you us as an excuse for not addressing the
critique of the BS you post as "reasoning, science and plenty of
references".

But this projection of your own shortcomings is standard MO. My
question is, whether or not you realize that you're lying and if you
do, do you also realize that we know you're lying.
... Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
And if a creationist should do the same, we'd all listen. But until
that happens we will keep mocking you and your kind. Ian fucking
Juby... Ha!
--
Malte Runz
Amazing Answers
2018-04-03 20:27:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, ...
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold unevidenced
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen. Therefore Goddidit
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start on it's own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put, that life did not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This is simply just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of science simply do not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
Post by Malte Runz
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you find easy to contend with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no facts to back up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and we are expected to believe it because you say, and I quote, "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to study in an unusual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use reason) and I cannot accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an indicator of truth. I want to know what your reasons are and "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your laughing by stating, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my answer so why should I except yours? You claim to stand for science and reasoning, so provide it. And provide it now.
Post by Malte Runz
... So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? ...
We do nothing but. You know I have linked to tons of material.
Material you refuse to look at if you have to click on a link, and if
there are footnotes, you us as an excuse for not addressing the
critique of the BS you post as "reasoning, science and plenty of
references".
But this projection of your own shortcomings is standard MO. My
question is, whether or not you realize that you're lying and if you
do, do you also realize that we know you're lying.
... Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
And if a creationist should do the same, we'd all listen. But until
that happens we will keep mocking you and your kind. Ian fucking
Juby... Ha!
--
Malte Runz
s***@gmail.com
2018-04-03 21:26:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, ...
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold unevidenced
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen. Therefore Goddidit
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
+
Post by Amazing Answers
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start on it's own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put, that life did not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This is simply just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of science simply do not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.

Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring to, if you please,
and then tell us exactly how the concept of abiogenesis flouts them:





Selene
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you find easy to contend with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no facts to back up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and we are expected to believe it because you say, and I quote, "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to study in an unusual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use reason) and I cannot accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an indicator of truth. I want to know what your reasons are and "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your laughing by stating, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my answer so why should I except yours? You claim to stand for science and reasoning, so provide it. And provide it now.
Post by Malte Runz
... So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? ...
We do nothing but. You know I have linked to tons of material.
Material you refuse to look at if you have to click on a link, and if
there are footnotes, you us as an excuse for not addressing the
critique of the BS you post as "reasoning, science and plenty of
references".
But this projection of your own shortcomings is standard MO. My
question is, whether or not you realize that you're lying and if you
do, do you also realize that we know you're lying.
... Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
And if a creationist should do the same, we'd all listen. But until
that happens we will keep mocking you and your kind. Ian fucking
Juby... Ha!
--
Malte Runz
Amazing Answers
2018-04-03 21:37:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, ...
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold unevidenced
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen. Therefore Goddidit
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
+
Post by Amazing Answers
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start on it's own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put, that life did not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This is simply just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of science simply do not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring to, if you please,
Selene
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you find easy to contend with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no facts to back up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and we are expected to believe it because you say, and I quote, "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to study in an unusual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use reason) and I cannot accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an indicator of truth. I want to know what your reasons are and "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your laughing by stating, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my answer so why should I except yours? You claim to stand for science and reasoning, so provide it. And provide it now.
Simply put, magic on the level of Mary Poppins doesn't occur in nature. There has to be cognition involved.
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
... So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? ...
We do nothing but. You know I have linked to tons of material.
Material you refuse to look at if you have to click on a link, and if
there are footnotes, you us as an excuse for not addressing the
critique of the BS you post as "reasoning, science and plenty of
references".
But this projection of your own shortcomings is standard MO. My
question is, whether or not you realize that you're lying and if you
do, do you also realize that we know you're lying.
... Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
And if a creationist should do the same, we'd all listen. But until
that happens we will keep mocking you and your kind. Ian fucking
Juby... Ha!
--
Malte Runz
s***@gmail.com
2018-04-03 22:20:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, ...
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold unevidenced
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen. Therefore Goddidit
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
+
Post by Amazing Answers
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start on it's own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put, that life did not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This is simply just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of science simply do not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring to, if you please,
Selene
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you find easy to contend with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no facts to back up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and we are expected to believe it because you say, and I quote, "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to study in an unusual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use reason) and I cannot accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an indicator of truth. I want to know what your reasons are and "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your laughing by stating, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my answer so why should I except yours? You claim to stand for science and reasoning, so provide it. And provide it now.
+
Post by Amazing Answers
Simply put, magic on the level of Mary Poppins doesn't occur in nature. There has to be cognition involved.
I didn't ask you to put it simply. You will find that I can comprehend -- and discuss --
science at any level you want to pitch the discussion.

So I ask you again: you claim that abiogenesis would violates "laws of physics".
So let's have it: which laws, and in exactly what manner would those laws be broken:










Selene
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
... So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? ...
We do nothing but. You know I have linked to tons of material.
Material you refuse to look at if you have to click on a link, and if
there are footnotes, you us as an excuse for not addressing the
critique of the BS you post as "reasoning, science and plenty of
references".
But this projection of your own shortcomings is standard MO. My
question is, whether or not you realize that you're lying and if you
do, do you also realize that we know you're lying.
... Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
And if a creationist should do the same, we'd all listen. But until
that happens we will keep mocking you and your kind. Ian fucking
Juby... Ha!
--
Malte Runz
Gospel TT
2018-04-03 22:48:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:37:03 PM UTC-7, Amazing Answers
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:26:33 PM UTC-7,
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using
reasoning, =
science and plenty of references, ...
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold
unevidence=
d
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen. Therefore
Goddidi=
t
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
+
Post by Amazing Answers
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start
on it's=
own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put, that
life did=
not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This
is simply=
just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of science
simply do=
not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
Post by s***@gmail.com
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring
to, if y=
ou please,
Post by s***@gmail.com
Selene
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Amazing Answers
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often
the evo=
lutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you find easy
to cont=
end with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no facts
to back=
up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and we
are expect=
ed to believe it because you say, and I quote,
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahaha=
hahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to study in
an unus=
ual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use reason)
and I can=
not accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an
indicator of tru=
th. I want to know what your reasons are and
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahah=
ahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your
laughing by sta=
ting, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my answer so why
should I=
except yours? You claim to stand for science and reasoning, so
provide it=
. And provide it now.
+
Simply put, magic on the level of Mary Poppins doesn't occur in
nature. T=
here has to be cognition involved.
I didn't ask you to put it simply. You will find that I can
comprehend -- =
and discuss --
science at any level you want to pitch the discussion.
So I ask you again: you claim that abiogenesis would violates "laws
of phys=
ics".
So let's have it: which laws, and in exactly what manner would
those laws b=
He'd have to admit he's a liar.
hypatiab7
2018-04-03 23:55:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gospel TT
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:37:03 PM UTC-7, Amazing Answers
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:26:33 PM UTC-7,
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 1:27:59 PM UTC-7, Amazing Answers
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 12:45:12 PM UTC-7, Malte Runz
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using
reasoning, =
science and plenty of references, ...
Post by Malte Runz
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold
unevidence=
d
Post by Malte Runz
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen. Therefore
Goddidi=
t
Post by Malte Runz
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
+
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start
on it's=
own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put, that
life did=
not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This
is simply=
just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of science
simply do=
not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring
to, if y=
ou please,
and then tell us exactly how the concept of abiogenesis flouts
Selene
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Amazing Answers
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often
the evo=
lutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
Post by Malte Runz
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you find easy
to cont=
end with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no facts
to back=
up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and we
are expect=
ed to believe it because you say, and I quote,
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahaha=
hahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to study in
an unus=
ual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use reason)
and I can=
not accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an
indicator of tru=
th. I want to know what your reasons are and
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahah=
ahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your
laughing by sta=
ting, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my answer so why
should I=
except yours? You claim to stand for science and reasoning, so
provide it=
. And provide it now.
+
Simply put, magic on the level of Mary Poppins doesn't occur in
nature. T=
here has to be cognition involved.
I didn't ask you to put it simply. You will find that I can
comprehend -- =
and discuss --
science at any level you want to pitch the discussion.
So I ask you again: you claim that abiogenesis would violates "laws
of phys=
ics".
So let's have it: which laws, and in exactly what manner would
those laws b=
He'd have to admit he's a liar.
Whether he admits it or not, we KNOW artieJoe IS a liar. He doesn't know the difference between a disagreement and a lie. Now watch him dig up definitions
that prove me right. He'll post correct definitions, then he'll go on lying.
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-04 00:07:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Gospel TT
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:37:03 PM UTC-7, Amazing Answers
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:26:33 PM UTC-7,
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 1:27:59 PM UTC-7, Amazing Answers
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 12:45:12 PM UTC-7, Malte Runz
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using
reasoning, =
science and plenty of references, ...
Post by Malte Runz
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold
unevidence=
d
Post by Malte Runz
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen. Therefore
Goddidi=
t
Post by Malte Runz
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
+
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start
on it's=
own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put, that
life did=
not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This
is simply=
just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of science
simply do=
not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring
to, if y=
ou please,
and then tell us exactly how the concept of abiogenesis flouts
Selene
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Amazing Answers
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often
the evo=
lutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
Post by Malte Runz
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you find easy
to cont=
end with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no facts
to back=
up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and we
are expect=
ed to believe it because you say, and I quote,
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahaha=
hahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to study in
an unus=
ual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use reason)
and I can=
not accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an
indicator of tru=
th. I want to know what your reasons are and
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahah=
ahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your
laughing by sta=
ting, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my answer so why
should I=
except yours? You claim to stand for science and reasoning, so
provide it=
. And provide it now.
+
Simply put, magic on the level of Mary Poppins doesn't occur in
nature. T=
here has to be cognition involved.
I didn't ask you to put it simply. You will find that I can
comprehend -- =
and discuss --
science at any level you want to pitch the discussion.
So I ask you again: you claim that abiogenesis would violates "laws
of phys=
ics".
So let's have it: which laws, and in exactly what manner would
those laws b=
He'd have to admit he's a liar.
Whether he admits it or not, we KNOW artieJoe IS a liar.
You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, you retarded fruitcake..
Gospel TT
2018-04-04 00:58:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 15:20:09 -0700 (PDT),
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:37:03 PM UTC-7, Amazing
Answers
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:26:33 PM UTC-7,
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 1:27:59 PM UTC-7, Amazing Answers
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 12:45:12 PM UTC-7, Malte Runz
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing
Answers
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using
reasoning, =
science and plenty of references, ...
Post by Malte Runz
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold
unevidence=
d
Post by Malte Runz
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen. Therefore
Goddidi=
t
Post by Malte Runz
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
+
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start
on it's=
own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put, that
life did=
not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This
is simply=
just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of science
simply do=
not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are
referring
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
to, if y=
ou please,
and then tell us exactly how the concept of abiogenesis flouts
Selene
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Amazing Answers
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often
the evo=
lutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
Post by Malte Runz
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you find easy
to cont=
end with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no facts
to back=
up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and we
are expect=
ed to believe it because you say, and I quote,
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahaha=
hahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to study in
an unus=
ual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use reason)
and I can=
not accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an
indicator of tru=
th. I want to know what your reasons are and
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahah=
ahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your
laughing by sta=
ting, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my answer so why
should I=
except yours? You claim to stand for science and reasoning, so
provide it=
. And provide it now.
+
Simply put, magic on the level of Mary Poppins doesn't
occur in
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
nature. T=
here has to be cognition involved.
I didn't ask you to put it simply. You will find that I can
comprehend -- =
and discuss --
science at any level you want to pitch the discussion.
So I ask you again: you claim that abiogenesis would violates "laws
of phys=
ics".
So let's have it: which laws, and in exactly what manner
would
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
those laws b=
He'd have to admit he's a liar.
Whether he admits it or not, we KNOW artieJoe IS a liar.
You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, you retarded fruitcake..
she's smarter then you & she no's your a liar.
hypatiab7
2018-04-04 06:54:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Malte Runz
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 15:20:09 -0700 (PDT),
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:37:03 PM UTC-7, Amazing
Answers
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:26:33 PM UTC-7,
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 1:27:59 PM UTC-7, Amazing
Answers
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 12:45:12 PM UTC-7, Malte
Runz
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing
Answers
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument
using
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
reasoning, =
science and plenty of references, ...
Post by Malte Runz
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making
bold
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
unevidence=
d
Post by Malte Runz
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen.
Therefore
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
Goddidi=
t
Post by Malte Runz
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
+
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not
start
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
on it's=
own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put,
that
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
life did=
not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer.
This
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
is simply=
just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of
science
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
simply do=
not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are
referring
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
to, if y=
ou please,
and then tell us exactly how the concept of abiogenesis
flouts
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
Selene
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Amazing Answers
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree.
Often
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
the evo=
lutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
Post by Malte Runz
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian
Juby
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of
shit.
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you
find easy
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
to cont=
end with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no
facts
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
to back=
up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and
we
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
are expect=
ed to believe it because you say, and I quote,
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahaha=
hahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to
study in
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
an unus=
ual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use
reason)
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
and I can=
not accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an
indicator of tru=
th. I want to know what your reasons are and
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahah=
ahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your
laughing by sta=
ting, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my answer
so why
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
should I=
except yours? You claim to stand for science and reasoning,
so
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
provide it=
. And provide it now.
+
Simply put, magic on the level of Mary Poppins doesn't
occur in
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
nature. T=
here has to be cognition involved.
I didn't ask you to put it simply. You will find that I can
comprehend -- =
and discuss --
science at any level you want to pitch the discussion.
So I ask you again: you claim that abiogenesis would violates
"laws
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
of phys=
ics".
So let's have it: which laws, and in exactly what manner
would
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by hypatiab7
those laws b=
He'd have to admit he's a liar.
Whether he admits it or not, we KNOW artieJoe IS a liar.
You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, you retarded
fruitcake..
she's smarter then you & she no's your a liar.
Thank you, TT.
Gospel TT
2018-04-04 19:54:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 23:54:22 -0700 (PDT), hypatiab7
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
Post by v***@gmail.com
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 6:48:21 PM UTC-4, Gospel TT
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 15:20:09 -0700 (PDT),
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:37:03 PM UTC-7, Amazing
Answers
Post by v***@gmail.com
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:26:33 PM UTC-7,
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 1:27:59 PM UTC-7,
Amazing
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
Answers
Post by v***@gmail.com
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 12:45:12 PM UTC-7, Malte
Runz
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing
Answers
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument
using
Post by v***@gmail.com
reasoning, =
science and plenty of references, ...
Post by Malte Runz
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is
making
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
bold
Post by v***@gmail.com
unevidence=
d
Post by Malte Runz
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen.
Therefore
Post by v***@gmail.com
Goddidi=
t
Post by Malte Runz
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
+
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not
start
Post by v***@gmail.com
on it's=
own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put,
that
Post by v***@gmail.com
life did=
not start on its own without the assistance of an
engineer.
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
This
Post by v***@gmail.com
is simply=
just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of
science
Post by v***@gmail.com
simply do=
not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are
referring
Post by v***@gmail.com
to, if y=
ou please,
and then tell us exactly how the concept of
abiogenesis
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
flouts
Post by v***@gmail.com
Selene
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Amazing Answers
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree.
Often
Post by v***@gmail.com
the evo=
lutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
Post by Malte Runz
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian
Juby
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Malte Runz
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of
shit.
Post by v***@gmail.com
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you
find easy
Post by v***@gmail.com
to cont=
end with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing,
adding no
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
facts
Post by v***@gmail.com
to back=
up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and
we
Post by v***@gmail.com
are expect=
ed to believe it because you say, and I quote,
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahaha=
hahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to
study in
Post by v***@gmail.com
an unus=
ual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use
reason)
Post by v***@gmail.com
and I can=
not accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an
indicator of tru=
th. I want to know what your reasons are and
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahah=
ahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your
laughing by sta=
ting, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my
answer
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
so why
Post by v***@gmail.com
should I=
except yours? You claim to stand for science and
reasoning,
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
so
Post by v***@gmail.com
provide it=
. And provide it now.
+
Simply put, magic on the level of Mary Poppins doesn't
occur in
Post by v***@gmail.com
nature. T=
here has to be cognition involved.
I didn't ask you to put it simply. You will find that I can
comprehend -- =
and discuss --
science at any level you want to pitch the discussion.
So I ask you again: you claim that abiogenesis would
violates
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Malte Runz
"laws
Post by v***@gmail.com
of phys=
ics".
So let's have it: which laws, and in exactly what manner
would
Post by v***@gmail.com
those laws b=
He'd have to admit he's a liar.
Whether he admits it or not, we KNOW artieJoe IS a liar.
You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, you retarded
fruitcake..
she's smarter then you & she no's your a liar.
Thank you, TT.
Yw. :-)
Gospel TT
2018-04-04 00:56:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 16:55:22 -0700 (PDT), hypatiab7
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Gospel TT
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:37:03 PM UTC-7, Amazing Answers
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 2:26:33 PM UTC-7,
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 1:27:59 PM UTC-7, Amazing
Answers
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Gospel TT
On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 12:45:12 PM UTC-7, Malte Runz
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using
reasoning, =
science and plenty of references, ...
Post by Malte Runz
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold
unevidence=
d
Post by Malte Runz
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen.
Therefore
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Gospel TT
Goddidi=
t
Post by Malte Runz
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
+
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start
on it's=
own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put, that
life did=
not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This
is simply=
just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of
science
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Gospel TT
simply do=
not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are
referring
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Gospel TT
to, if y=
ou please,
and then tell us exactly how the concept of abiogenesis flouts
Selene
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Amazing Answers
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often
the evo=
lutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
Post by Malte Runz
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you find easy
to cont=
end with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no facts
to back=
up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and we
are expect=
ed to believe it because you say, and I quote,
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahaha=
hahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to
study in
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Gospel TT
an unus=
ual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use
reason)
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Gospel TT
and I can=
not accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an
indicator of tru=
th. I want to know what your reasons are and
"(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahah=
ahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your
laughing by sta=
ting, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my answer so why
should I=
except yours? You claim to stand for science and reasoning, so
provide it=
. And provide it now.
+
Simply put, magic on the level of Mary Poppins doesn't occur in
nature. T=
here has to be cognition involved.
I didn't ask you to put it simply. You will find that I can
comprehend -- =
and discuss --
science at any level you want to pitch the discussion.
So I ask you again: you claim that abiogenesis would violates "laws
of phys=
ics".
So let's have it: which laws, and in exactly what manner would
those laws b=
He'd have to admit he's a liar.
Whether he admits it or not, we KNOW artieJoe IS a liar. He doesn't
know the difference between a disagreement and a lie. Now watch him
dig up definitions
Post by hypatiab7
that prove me right. He'll post correct definitions, then he'll go on lying.
That's rite
s***@gmail.com
2018-04-04 20:02:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, ...
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold unevidenced
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen. Therefore Goddidit
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
+
Post by Amazing Answers
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start on it's own, without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put, that life did not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This is simply just a fact. The constraints of physics and the laws of science simply do not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring to, if you please,
Selene
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you find easy to contend with? Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no facts to back up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and we are expected to believe it because you say, and I quote, "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)". I'm a college graduate who also happened to study in an unusual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use reason) and I cannot accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an indicator of truth. I want to know what your reasons are and "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. What if I responded to your laughing by stating, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! You wouldn't accept my answer so why should I except yours? You claim to stand for science and reasoning, so provide it. And provide it now.
+
Post by Amazing Answers
Simply put, magic on the level of Mary Poppins doesn't occur in nature. There has to be cognition involved.
The subject line you chose for this thread is growing unintentionally more ironic the longer
you dodge this, you know.


Selene
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
... So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? ...
We do nothing but. You know I have linked to tons of material.
Material you refuse to look at if you have to click on a link, and if
there are footnotes, you us as an excuse for not addressing the
critique of the BS you post as "reasoning, science and plenty of
references".
But this projection of your own shortcomings is standard MO. My
question is, whether or not you realize that you're lying and if you
do, do you also realize that we know you're lying.
... Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
And if a creationist should do the same, we'd all listen. But until
that happens we will keep mocking you and your kind. Ian fucking
Juby... Ha!
--
Malte Runz
Brian E. Clark
2018-04-03 22:02:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <101799f4-beb4-4c14-87d4-
***@googlegroups.com>, ***@gmail.com
says...
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start on
it's own, without the assistance of an engineer [...]
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring to,
if you please, and then tell us exactly how the concept of abiogenesis
I'm just as curious for him to list the laws of physics
which stipulate that an engineer is required for some
outcome to result.

What, for instance, are the SI units of "engineer"? (One
daVinci?)
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
Peter Pan
2018-04-06 22:53:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Brian E. Clark
In article <101799f4-beb4-4c14-87d4-
says...
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start on
it's own, without the assistance of an engineer [...]
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring to,
if you please, and then tell us exactly how the concept of abiogenesis
I'm just as curious for him to list the laws of physics
which stipulate that an engineer is required for some
outcome to result.
What, for instance, are the SI units of "engineer"? (One
daVinci?)
We've been told by aaa/Niunian that the 2nd law of
"thermal dynamics" requires intelligence to create
complexity, therefore proving again that abiogenesis is
impossible. aaa was unable to specify the unit or
dimensions of "intelligence".

In another thread AmazingAss reveals that "faith can be
quantized", which would be, I suppose, in units of
stupidity. Then we could invent and define SI units for
faith and its reciprocal, intelligence, as

Asstroid^-1 = microHawking

or, one A of stupidity is equivalent to, and the inverse
of, one uH of intelligence.
Gospel TT
2018-04-06 23:30:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Brian E. Clark
In article <101799f4-beb4-4c14-87d4-
says...
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start on
it's own, without the assistance of an engineer [...]
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring to,
if you please, and then tell us exactly how the concept of
abiogenesis
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Brian E. Clark
I'm just as curious for him to list the laws of physics
which stipulate that an engineer is required for some
outcome to result.
What, for instance, are the SI units of "engineer"? (One
daVinci?)
We've been told by aaa/Niunian that the 2nd law of
"thermal dynamics" requires intelligence to create
complexity, therefore proving again that abiogenesis is
impossible. aaa was unable to specify the unit or
dimensions of "intelligence".
In another thread AmazingAss reveals that "faith can be
quantized", which would be, I suppose, in units of
stupidity. Then we could invent and define SI units for
faith and its reciprocal, intelligence, as
Asstroid^-1 = microHawking
or, one A of stupidity is equivalent to, and the inverse
of, one uH of intelligence.
LOLOLOL!! Excellent! :-)
Ted
2018-04-06 23:37:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Brian E. Clark
In article <101799f4-beb4-4c14-87d4-
says...
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start on
it's own, without the assistance of an engineer [...]
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring to,
if you please, and then tell us exactly how the concept of abiogenesis
I'm just as curious for him to list the laws of physics
which stipulate that an engineer is required for some
outcome to result.
What, for instance, are the SI units of "engineer"? (One
daVinci?)
We've been told by aaa/Niunian that the 2nd law of
"thermal dynamics" requires intelligence to create
complexity, therefore proving again that abiogenesis is
impossible. aaa was unable to specify the unit or
dimensions of "intelligence".
In another thread AmazingAss reveals that "faith can be
quantized", which would be, I suppose, in units of
stupidity. Then we could invent and define SI units for
faith and its reciprocal, intelligence, as
Asstroid^-1 = microHawking
or, one A of stupidity is equivalent to, and the inverse
of, one uH of intelligence.
Thank you, Peter. This gives us a method of ranking the fuckwits here. :)
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-06 23:43:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
We've been told by aaa/Niunian that the 2nd law of
"thermal dynamics" requires intelligence to create
complexity, therefore proving again that abiogenesis is
impossible. aaa was unable to specify the unit or
dimensions of "intelligence".

In another thread AmazingAss reveals that "faith can be
quantized", which would be, I suppose, in units of
stupidity. Then we could invent and define SI units for
faith and its reciprocal, intelligence, as

Asstroid^-1 = microHawking

or, one A of stupidity is equivalent to, and the inverse
of, one uH of intelligence.
__________________________

How low can these twits go?
Smiler
2018-04-08 02:59:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start on
it's own, without the assistance of an engineer [...]
You know, that's a bit vague. As in Andrew-level vague.
Outline specifically which "laws of physics" you are referring to,
if you please, and then tell us exactly how the concept of
I'm just as curious for him to list the laws of physics which stipulate
that an engineer is required for some outcome to result.
What, for instance, are the SI units of "engineer"? (One daVinci?)
We've been told by aaa/Niunian that the 2nd law of "thermal dynamics"
requires intelligence to create complexity, therefore proving again that
abiogenesis is impossible. aaa was unable to specify the unit or
dimensions of "intelligence".
In another thread AmazingAss reveals that "faith can be quantized",
which would be, I suppose, in units of stupidity. Then we could invent
and define SI units for faith and its reciprocal, intelligence, as
Asstroid^-1 = microHawking
Asstroid^-1 = picoHawking. Get your units right!
or, one A of stupidity is equivalent to, and the inverse of, one uH of
intelligence.
Except that A is used for the Angstrom and H is used for the Henry (the unit of inductance).
The Hawking could be the Hw and the Arsetroll could be the Ao.
--
Smiler, The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made
to exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Malte Runz
2018-04-03 21:53:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 13:27:56 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, ...
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold unevidenced
statements like 'We know evolution cannot happen. Therefore Goddidit
is the only logical answer'. Your guys suck!
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start on it's own, ...
Please, use "reasoning, science and plenty of references".

You're doing precisely what I accuse you, and creationists in general,
of doing. Present bold, unevidenced assertions as proven facts. Don't
you see it?
... without the assistance of an engineer, it's simply put, that life did not start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This is simply just a fact. ...
Called it! I swear I had not read this far when I wrote the above.
The constraints of physics and the laws of science simply do not allow for the a self-actualizing biosystem.
You continue to spew unevidenced blah, blah, blah. It is not "simply
just a fact" that unaided abiogenesis cannot happen. Try this on for
size:

'It is simply just a fact that there are no gods. Therefore all
religions are false.'

And no, I'm not serious. I'd never use the same, flawed logic you use.
Post by Malte Runz
... the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. ...
I don't need a degree to be able to realize the Ian Juby
(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa) is full of shit.
Then prove it to us. What did Ian Juby say that you find easy to contend with? ...
He believes the Flood happened, right? He also believes the Universe
was created by an omnipotent deity in a week. He believes all the
layers you see in the Grand Canyon were formed in a single event. He
believes the stories about magic in the Bible are all true. You know,
all the idiotic, unscientific, unevidenced religious crap you also
believe. All you get from Juby is confirmation that you're right, and,
sure, you'll go to Heaven one day.

But you're welcome to quote Juby here, and I'll address specific
claims. But don't expect me to watch hours and hours of his youtube
stuff. Give me a specific item to play with.
... Otherwise you sound like you're bluffing, adding no facts to back up your claim. Not one fact . Nada. You made an opinion and we are expected to believe it because you say, and I quote, "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)". ...
Opinions are not to be believed, just registered. And I'm pretty sure
you now know how I feel about Juby. Mission accomplished.
... I'm a college graduate who also happened to study in an unusual Christian college youth group (that trained us to use reason) and I cannot accept "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" as an indicator of truth. ...
It was never meant to be. But you want me to accept "... life did not
start on its own without the assistance of an engineer. This is
simply just a fact." You know I don't accept your facts as a fact, but
you didn't find it necessary to make "an argument using reasoning,
science and plenty of references". You never do.
... I want to know what your reasons are and "(hahahaaaaahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaaaaa)" doesn't provide it. ...
I laugh at 'Professor Juby' because he pretends to believe in things
that are not true, and he tries to convince others that they are. Like
'T. rex was vegetarian'. God damned! Do you understand how wrong that
is, and how easy it is to show that it is wrong? Juby does, but he is
lying to you, kiddo, and that's how he makes a living. Juby, Geller,
Comfort, Ham... they're leaches and I loathe them all.
... What if I responded to your laughing by stating, urgagurgagooooha-ha!!! ...
That would be perfectly all right. You'd make as much sense as you
usually do.
You wouldn't accept my answer so why should I except yours? ...
I know you never do. Whether I supply you with links, quotes and
explanations, or laugh out loud and long, none of it leaves a mark.
'Piltdown man was a fraaaaaaaud!', or, in one word:
"urgagurgagooooha-ha"
... You claim to stand for science and reasoning, so provide it. And provide it now.
Or else? I know, you get a lot of reactions to your posts, and nobody
expects you to respond to it all. But it is quite telling that when
you do choose to reply to one of my posts, you choose the simple ones.
The 'ha ha posts' and never, never ever my posts where I make "an
argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references". Those you
always ignore and prefer to go looking for somebody who'll play the
'you're emotional, no you're emotional, no you're emotional, ook ook
monkey donkey game'. (You know who you are, and I wish you'd stop.)
--
Malte Runz
Davej
2018-04-03 22:09:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using
reasoning, science and plenty of references, ...
Where? When? Who? All your guys are doing is making bold
unevidenced statements like 'We know evolution cannot
happen. Therefore Goddidit is the only logical answer'.
Your guys suck!
When the laws of physics stipulates that life could not start
on it's own, without the assistance of an engineer...
The "laws of physics" are still being discovered. You have no clue
what they are. Your imaginary friend bends them on a whim.
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-03 21:20:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
I would not call anything they say an "argument."
Perhaps "tirade" or "tantrum" would be more appropriate.
Malte Runz
2018-04-03 22:02:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
I would not call anything they say an "argument."
Perhaps "tirade" or "tantrum" would be more appropriate.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
EVIDENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOU CAN'T READ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30

Like that?
--
Malte Runz
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-03 22:30:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Malte Runz
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
I would not call anything they say an "argument."
Perhaps "tirade" or "tantrum" would be more appropriate.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
EVIDENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOU CAN'T READ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30
Like that?
Go back to your remedial English class. You haven't learned shit.
Gospel TT
2018-04-03 22:49:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Malte Runz
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using
reasoning, scie=
Post by Amazing Answers
nce and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have
a degre=
Post by Amazing Answers
e. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one
wonders as =
Post by Amazing Answers
to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and
deal wit=
Post by Amazing Answers
h the creationist's references instead of pointing out something
that has n=
Post by Amazing Answers
o relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their
own. If a =
Post by Amazing Answers
dog came along reasoning, using science and using references
perhaps the ev=
Post by Amazing Answers
olutionist will respond properly.
Post by Malte Runz
Post by v***@gmail.com
I would not call anything they say an "argument."
Perhaps "tirade" or "tantrum" would be more appropriate.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
EVIDENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOU CAN'T READ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28
,2=
Post by Amazing Answers
9,30
Post by Malte Runz
Like that?
Go back to your remedial English class. You haven't learned shit.
You need to relax.
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-04 07:14:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Go back to your remedial English class. You haven't learned shit.
_______________

THAT'S A LIE.

We all learned shit.
It's what you like on your pizza.
Malte Runz
2018-04-04 19:13:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Malte Runz
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
I would not call anything they say an "argument."
Perhaps "tirade" or "tantrum" would be more appropriate.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
EVIDENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOU CAN'T READ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30
Like that?
Go back to your remedial English class. You haven't learned shit.
Snappy comebacks never were your long suite.

And by the way YOU CAN'T COUNT!!!!!!!!!!!!
--
Malte Runz
Yap Honghor
2018-04-03 23:43:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
I would not call anything they say an "argument."
Perhaps "tirade" or "tantrum" would be more appropriate.
And you call creationism having argument or scientific methods to prove there was a creator????????

Where?
MarkA
2018-04-03 21:30:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning,
science and plenty of references,
A Creationist made an argument using reasoning, science, and plenty of
references, and I missed it? Damn! That probably won't happen again for
like another 100 years, if ever!
--
MarkA

Believing with 100% certainty does not mean you've found truth. It
means you've stopped looking for it. -- Bill Flavell
Malte Runz
2018-04-03 22:05:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MarkA
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning,
science and plenty of references,
A Creationist made an argument using reasoning, science, and plenty of
references, and I missed it? ...
#Metoo
Post by MarkA
... Damn! That probably won't happen again for
like another 100 years, if ever!
Just like Jesus.
--
Malte Runz
Davej
2018-04-03 21:56:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument...
...and then we find out he has a fake degree from an online
Bible college?
Amazing Answers
2018-04-03 22:09:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Davej
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument...
...and then we find out he has a fake degree from an online
Bible college?
I'll judge a man by what he says rather than his credentials. An oft quoted item coming from engineers is that often the most inept people have doctorates coming from universities. I recall one class I took at a jr college where it was unusual if you had a doctor teaching a class. And this man was highly lauded as such, and also was one of the worst teachers I ever had at the college.
Yap Honghor
2018-04-03 23:47:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Davej
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument...
...and then we find out he has a fake degree from an online
Bible college?
I'll judge a man by what he says rather than his credentials. An oft quoted item coming from engineers is that often the most inept people have doctorates coming from universities. I recall one class I took at a jr college where it was unusual if you had a doctor teaching a class. And this man was highly lauded as such, and also was one of the worst teachers I ever had at the college.
A donkey can judge?
You tell that as a joke for us to laugh, right?
Davej
2018-04-04 19:33:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Davej
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument...
...and then we find out he has a fake degree from an online
Bible college?
I'll judge a man by what he says rather than his credentials.
Really? So if I have fake credentials and I present them to you
that doesn't seem strange?
Post by Amazing Answers
...the most inept people have doctorates...
So then is he pretending to be inept?
Siri Cruise
2018-04-04 20:12:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Davej
...and then we find out he has a fake degree from an online
Bible college?
I'll judge a man by what he says rather than his credentials.
Where can I get a cheap DD? I think it would be fun to pretend to be impressive
by calling myself a doctor.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-04 21:01:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Where can I get a cheap DD? I think it would be fun to pretend to be impressive
by calling myself a doctor.
_________________

Try the FSM website.
Www.venganza.org.
Peter Pan
2018-04-09 10:29:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Siri Cruise
Where can I get a cheap DD? I think it would be fun to pretend to be impressive
by calling myself a doctor.
_________________
Try the FSM website.
Www.venganza.org.
And leave us not forget www.subgenius.com !
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-09 22:04:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Siri Cruise
Where can I get a cheap DD? I think it would be fun to pretend to be impressive
by calling myself a doctor.
_________________
Try the FSM website.
Www.venganza.org.
And leave us not forget www.subgenius.com !
Fucking splinters.

v***@gmail.com
2018-04-05 02:56:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Davej
...and then we find out he has a fake degree from an online
Bible college?
I'll judge a man by what he says rather than his credentials.
Where can I get a cheap DD? I think it would be fun to pretend to be impressive
by calling myself a doctor.
--
That's what the law calls fraud. Some states have laws which specifically
penalize impersonating a physician. You wouldn't like jail.
Kevrob
2018-04-05 15:14:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Davej
...and then we find out he has a fake degree from an online
Bible college?
I'll judge a man by what he says rather than his credentials.
Where can I get a cheap DD? I think it would be fun to pretend to be impressive
by calling myself a doctor.
--
That's what the law calls fraud. Some states have laws which specifically
penalize impersonating a physician. You wouldn't like jail.
DD is "doctor of divinity," as in "The Rev Dr So-and-So."

If you want an even easier gut route to the "Dr" title,
try for "Doctor of Ministry."

Kevin R
Don Martin
2018-04-05 21:51:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Davej
...and then we find out he has a fake degree from an online
Bible college?
I'll judge a man by what he says rather than his credentials.
Where can I get a cheap DD? I think it would be fun to pretend to be impressive
by calling myself a doctor.
--
That's what the law calls fraud. Some states have laws which specifically
penalize impersonating a physician. You wouldn't like jail.
DD is "doctor of divinity," as in "The Rev Dr So-and-So."
If you want an even easier gut route to the "Dr" title,
try for "Doctor of Ministry."
A young theologian named Fiddle,
Refused to accept his degree:
"It's bad enough being called Fiddle,
"Without being Fiddle, DD!"

(not original, but recalled from ages past)
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Amazing Answers
2018-04-05 04:16:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Davej
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Davej
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument...
...and then we find out he has a fake degree from an online
Bible college?
I'll judge a man by what he says rather than his credentials.
Really? So if I have fake credentials and I present them to you
that doesn't seem strange?
Post by Amazing Answers
...the most inept people have doctorates...
So then is he pretending to be inept?
I would think that if you presented a fake doctorate that you evidently thought you were qualified for that doctorate. In that case I would consider what you have to say and decide if it's any good.
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-05 06:08:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I would think that if you presented a fake doctorate that you evidently thought you were qualified for that doctorate. In that case I would consider what you have to say and decide if it's any good.
_______________

The problem is the people with the proper education say he's a loon.

Being a young earth creationist is all the evidence one needs in order to figure he's a loon.

He's also part of some creation science group which makes 2 strikes against him.

He has no credentials and that's 3 strikes.
Amazing Answers
2018-04-05 06:33:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
I would think that if you presented a fake doctorate that you evidently thought you were qualified for that doctorate. In that case I would consider what you have to say and decide if it's any good.
_______________
The problem is the people with the proper education say he's a loon.
Being a young earth creationist is all the evidence one needs in order to figure he's a loon.
He's also part of some creation science group which makes 2 strikes against him.
He has no credentials and that's 3 strikes.
Dude. Education? Let's take a look at this, reporting from my own experience.

You are usually assigned a general textbook. But that's not all. Maybe another book, as well, and a couple of other stuff you have to read. Then, you are assigned papers. We're talking one class. You have to read maybe two chapters in that text before the next class. So if you have Tues and Thursday classes, all your reading has to be done in those couple of days. But that's not all. We're only talking about one class! So if you have six classes you have all that reading to do. Papers. You have to select a topic. By the time you've scouted around, utilizing valuable time, you come up with empty and realized that you have nothing to fill your paper with and it's too late to change topics. But all said and done, how many books and papers have you actually read before you get your diploma? With time constraints you can't provide quality reading time, nor can you cover all the ground you want to. All said, the amount of material you have studied is .0000000000000001 % of everything that is out there. And that's a liberal figure.


College is a joke. I learn more, waste less time, watching Youtube instruction videos. I learn more studying subject matter that I'm interested in. The papers you get assigned to are usually your teacher's subject of interest. I also get more done praying and then researching than by just looking. Then you have the problem of the limitations of your library catalog and the time it takes for ordered papers to come in. Of course with the internet it's easier to do research these days, but not so when I was at the University.
Greywolf
2018-04-05 06:46:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
I would think that if you presented a fake doctorate that you evidently thought you were qualified for that doctorate. In that case I would consider what you have to say and decide if it's any good.
_______________
The problem is the people with the proper education say he's a loon.
Being a young earth creationist is all the evidence one needs in order to figure he's a loon.
He's also part of some creation science group which makes 2 strikes against him.
He has no credentials and that's 3 strikes.
Dude. Education? Let's take a look at this, reporting from my own experience.
You are usually assigned a general textbook. But that's not all. Maybe another book, as well, and a couple of other stuff you have to read. Then, you are assigned papers. We're talking one class. You have to read maybe two chapters in that text before the next class. So if you have Tues and Thursday classes, all your reading has to be done in those couple of days. But that's not all. We're only talking about one class! So if you have six classes you have all that reading to do. Papers. You have to select a topic. By the time you've scouted around, utilizing valuable time, you come up with empty and realized that you have nothing to fill your paper with and it's too late to change topics. But all said and done, how many books and papers have you actually read before you get your diploma? With time constraints you can't provide quality reading time, nor can you cover all the ground you want to. All said, the amount of material you have studied is .0000000000000001 % of everything that is out there. And that's a liberal figure.
College is a joke. I learn more, waste less time, watching Youtube instruction videos. I learn more studying subject matter that I'm interested in. The papers you get assigned to are usually your teacher's subject of interest. I also get more done praying and then researching than by just looking. Then you have the problem of the limitations of your library catalog and the time it takes for ordered papers to come in. Of course with the internet it's easier to do research these days, but not so when I was at the University.
_________

Hey! Aren't you that Christian dude who lied about discussing the Garden of Eden story in depth with me?

Why you sure are!

What happened? Don't mess around *this* post when you've got some serious atheist refutin' to do!

You seem amazed at why an atheist would be an atheist. Well, sit your ass down and respond to my Garden of Eden piece--in depth!

What's the matter? Can't refute it?
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-05 06:55:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Well, sit your ass down and respond to my Garden of Eden piece--in depth!

What's the matter? Can't refute it?
________________

Assroid: Must not read...might have facts and logic and stuff.
Make Assroid look dum.

Assroid only pawn in game of bullshit.
Kit
2018-04-05 14:51:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
I would think that if you presented a fake doctorate that you evidently thought you were qualified for that doctorate. In that case I would consider what you have to say and decide if it's any good.
_______________
The problem is the people with the proper education say he's a loon.
Being a young earth creationist is all the evidence one needs in order to figure he's a loon.
He's also part of some creation science group which makes 2 strikes against him.
He has no credentials and that's 3 strikes.
Dude. Education? Let's take a look at this, reporting from my own experience.
You are usually assigned a general textbook. But that's not all. Maybe another book, as well, and a couple of other stuff you have to read. Then, you are assigned papers. We're talking one class. You have to read maybe two chapters in that text before the next class. So if you have Tues and Thursday classes, all your reading has to be done in those couple of days. But that's not all. We're only talking about one class! So if you have six classes you have all that reading to do. Papers. You have to select a topic. By the time you've scouted around, utilizing valuable time, you come up with empty and realized that you have nothing to fill your paper with and it's too late to change topics. But all said and done, how many books and papers have you actually read before you get your diploma? With time constraints you can't provide quality reading time, nor can you cover all the ground you want to. All said, the amount of material you have studied is .0000000000000001 % of everything that is out there. And that's a liberal figure.
College is a joke. I learn more, waste less time, > watching Youtube instruction videos.
If the something in the YouTube video you have a question about, how do you ask the video to clarify the matter?
Post by Amazing Answers
I learn more studying subject matter that I'm
interested in.
Fair enough.
Post by Amazing Answers
The papers you get assigned to are usually your
teacher's subject of interest.
Actually, they usually are germane to the subject you are studying.
Post by Amazing Answers
I also get more done praying and then researching than
by just looking.
How much do you get done by praying alone?
Post by Amazing Answers
Then you have the problem of the limitations of your
library catalog and the time it takes for ordered
papers to come in. Of course with the internet it's
easier to do research these days, but not so when I was
at the University.
There always have been sufficient resources to do thorough research.

-- Kit
Kevrob
2018-04-05 15:22:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kit
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
I would think that if you presented a fake doctorate that you evidently thought you were qualified for that doctorate. In that case I would consider what you have to say and decide if it's any good.
_______________
The problem is the people with the proper education say he's a loon.
Being a young earth creationist is all the evidence one needs in order to figure he's a loon.
He's also part of some creation science group which makes 2 strikes against him.
He has no credentials and that's 3 strikes.
Dude. Education? Let's take a look at this, reporting from my own experience.
You are usually assigned a general textbook. But that's not all. Maybe another book, as well, and a couple of other stuff you have to read. Then, you are assigned papers. We're talking one class. You have to read maybe two chapters in that text before the next class. So if you have Tues and Thursday classes, all your reading has to be done in those couple of days. But that's not all. We're only talking about one class! So if you have six classes you have all that reading to do. Papers. You have to select a topic. By the time you've scouted around, utilizing valuable time, you come up with empty and realized that you have nothing to fill your paper with and it's too late to change topics. But all said and done, how many books and papers have you actually read before you get your diploma? With time constraints you can't provide quality reading time, nor can you cover all the ground you want to. All said, the amount of material you have studied is .0000000000000001 % of everything that is out there. And that's a liberal figure.
College is a joke. I learn more, waste less time, > watching Youtube instruction videos.
If the something in the YouTube video you have a question about, how do you ask the video to clarify the matter?
Post by Amazing Answers
I learn more studying subject matter that I'm
interested in.
Fair enough.
Post by Amazing Answers
The papers you get assigned to are usually your
teacher's subject of interest.
Actually, they usually are germane to the subject you are studying.
Course materials at the various levels are usually approved by
state bureacracy, for elementary and secondary public schools,
and/or by the local school boards. In private schools there are
standards set by accrediting institutions. At the collegiate
undergraduate level in the US, required texts for a section have to
get the approval of the department chair, or relevant committee.
Instructors and professors have to submit a syllabus for approval.
The course may be a pre-requisite for a more advanced course in the
department, and neglecting to cover certain material might be a
serious lack, when the student is expected to know it later.
Post by Kit
Post by Amazing Answers
I also get more done praying and then researching than
by just looking.
The praying is superfluous, except, perhaps as motivation by
self-delusion.
Post by Kit
How much do you get done by praying alone?
Post by Amazing Answers
Then you have the problem of the limitations of your
library catalog and the time it takes for ordered
papers to come in. Of course with the internet it's
easier to do research these days, but not so when I was
at the University.
Are you another alumnus of Unca Bubba's Bait Shop and Bible College?
Post by Kit
There always have been sufficient resources to do thorough research.
Doing original research is the tough row to hoe, and that's
what Phd candidates have to do.

Kevin R
Amazing Answers
2018-04-05 15:31:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by Kit
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
I would think that if you presented a fake doctorate that you evidently thought you were qualified for that doctorate. In that case I would consider what you have to say and decide if it's any good.
_______________
The problem is the people with the proper education say he's a loon.
Being a young earth creationist is all the evidence one needs in order to figure he's a loon.
He's also part of some creation science group which makes 2 strikes against him.
He has no credentials and that's 3 strikes.
Dude. Education? Let's take a look at this, reporting from my own experience.
You are usually assigned a general textbook. But that's not all. Maybe another book, as well, and a couple of other stuff you have to read. Then, you are assigned papers. We're talking one class. You have to read maybe two chapters in that text before the next class. So if you have Tues and Thursday classes, all your reading has to be done in those couple of days. But that's not all. We're only talking about one class! So if you have six classes you have all that reading to do. Papers. You have to select a topic. By the time you've scouted around, utilizing valuable time, you come up with empty and realized that you have nothing to fill your paper with and it's too late to change topics. But all said and done, how many books and papers have you actually read before you get your diploma? With time constraints you can't provide quality reading time, nor can you cover all the ground you want to. All said, the amount of material you have studied is .0000000000000001 % of everything that is out there. And that's a liberal figure.
College is a joke. I learn more, waste less time, > watching Youtube instruction videos.
If the something in the YouTube video you have a question about, how do you ask the video to clarify the matter?
Post by Amazing Answers
I learn more studying subject matter that I'm
interested in.
Fair enough.
Post by Amazing Answers
The papers you get assigned to are usually your
teacher's subject of interest.
Actually, they usually are germane to the subject you are studying.
Course materials at the various levels are usually approved by
state bureacracy, for elementary and secondary public schools,
and/or by the local school boards. In private schools there are
standards set by accrediting institutions. At the collegiate
undergraduate level in the US, required texts for a section have to
get the approval of the department chair, or relevant committee.
Instructors and professors have to submit a syllabus for approval.
The course may be a pre-requisite for a more advanced course in the
department, and neglecting to cover certain material might be a
serious lack, when the student is expected to know it later.
Post by Kit
Post by Amazing Answers
I also get more done praying and then researching than
by just looking.
The praying is superfluous, except, perhaps as motivation by
self-delusion.
Post by Kit
How much do you get done by praying alone?
Post by Amazing Answers
Then you have the problem of the limitations of your
library catalog and the time it takes for ordered
papers to come in. Of course with the internet it's
easier to do research these days, but not so when I was
at the University.
Are you another alumnus of Unca Bubba's Bait Shop and Bible College?
Post by Kit
There always have been sufficient resources to do thorough research.
Doing original research is the tough row to hoe, and that's
what Phd candidates have to do.
Kevin R
Went to the University library and prayed. I had this impression and went in that direction. Looked at the shelves and saw Scientific American magazine volumes. Had this impression to look during the time Piltdown Man was found. There it was, the two page spread.
Greywolf
2018-04-05 15:54:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Kevrob
Post by Kit
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
I would think that if you presented a fake doctorate that you evidently thought you were qualified for that doctorate. In that case I would consider what you have to say and decide if it's any good.
_______________
The problem is the people with the proper education say he's a loon.
Being a young earth creationist is all the evidence one needs in order to figure he's a loon.
He's also part of some creation science group which makes 2 strikes against him.
He has no credentials and that's 3 strikes.
Dude. Education? Let's take a look at this, reporting from my own experience.
You are usually assigned a general textbook. But that's not all. Maybe another book, as well, and a couple of other stuff you have to read. Then, you are assigned papers. We're talking one class. You have to read maybe two chapters in that text before the next class. So if you have Tues and Thursday classes, all your reading has to be done in those couple of days. But that's not all. We're only talking about one class! So if you have six classes you have all that reading to do. Papers. You have to select a topic. By the time you've scouted around, utilizing valuable time, you come up with empty and realized that you have nothing to fill your paper with and it's too late to change topics. But all said and done, how many books and papers have you actually read before you get your diploma? With time constraints you can't provide quality reading time, nor can you cover all the ground you want to. All said, the amount of material you have studied is .0000000000000001 % of everything that is out there. And that's a liberal figure.
College is a joke. I learn more, waste less time, > watching Youtube instruction videos.
If the something in the YouTube video you have a question about, how do you ask the video to clarify the matter?
Post by Amazing Answers
I learn more studying subject matter that I'm
interested in.
Fair enough.
Post by Amazing Answers
The papers you get assigned to are usually your
teacher's subject of interest.
Actually, they usually are germane to the subject you are studying.
Course materials at the various levels are usually approved by
state bureacracy, for elementary and secondary public schools,
and/or by the local school boards. In private schools there are
standards set by accrediting institutions. At the collegiate
undergraduate level in the US, required texts for a section have to
get the approval of the department chair, or relevant committee.
Instructors and professors have to submit a syllabus for approval.
The course may be a pre-requisite for a more advanced course in the
department, and neglecting to cover certain material might be a
serious lack, when the student is expected to know it later.
Post by Kit
Post by Amazing Answers
I also get more done praying and then researching than
by just looking.
The praying is superfluous, except, perhaps as motivation by
self-delusion.
Post by Kit
How much do you get done by praying alone?
Post by Amazing Answers
Then you have the problem of the limitations of your
library catalog and the time it takes for ordered
papers to come in. Of course with the internet it's
easier to do research these days, but not so when I was
at the University.
Are you another alumnus of Unca Bubba's Bait Shop and Bible College?
Post by Kit
There always have been sufficient resources to do thorough research.
Doing original research is the tough row to hoe, and that's
what Phd candidates have to do.
Kevin R
Went to the University library and prayed. I had this impression and went in that direction. Looked at the shelves and saw Scientific American magazine volumes. Had this impression to look during the time Piltdown Man was found. There it was, the two page spread.
___________

While you were in "University Library," did you read up on the Garden of Eden story in Genesis too?

You know, the one you claim you and I have discussed right here in alt.atheism.

I think you made that up, that you flat-out lied.

C'mon, prove this atheist wrong. If you can't, at least gracefully admit you lied and show viewers of alt.atheism some real class.

Or is it that you're devoid any? Go ahead and refuse to tackle the Garden of Eden story, or provide a rational explanation as to why you won't address it.

Admit it, you're only here to annoy and antagonize atheists, you prick.

If I'm wrong, just say so.
s***@gmail.com
2018-04-06 03:25:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
I would think that if you presented a fake doctorate that you evidently thought you were qualified for that doctorate. In that case I would consider what you have to say and decide if it's any good.
_______________
The problem is the people with the proper education say he's a loon.
Being a young earth creationist is all the evidence one needs in order to figure he's a loon.
He's also part of some creation science group which makes 2 strikes against him.
He has no credentials and that's 3 strikes.
Dude. Education? Let's take a look at this, reporting from my own experience.
You are usually assigned a general textbook. But that's not all. Maybe another book, as well, and a couple of other stuff you have to read. Then, you are assigned papers. We're talking one class. You have to read maybe two chapters in that text before the next class. So if you have Tues and Thursday classes, all your reading has to be done in those couple of days. But that's not all. We're only talking about one class! So if you have six classes you have all that reading to do. Papers. You have to select a topic. By the time you've scouted around, utilizing valuable time, you come up with empty and realized that you have nothing to fill your paper with and it's too late to change topics. But all said and done, how many books and papers have you actually read before you get your diploma? With time constraints you can't provide quality reading time, nor can you cover all the ground you want to. All said, the amount of material you have studied is .0000000000000001 % of everything that is out there. And that's a liberal figure.
+
Post by Amazing Answers
College is a joke. I learn more, waste less time, watching Youtube instruction videos. I learn more studying subject matter that I'm interested in. The papers you get assigned to are usually your teacher's subject of interest. I also get more done praying and then researching than by just looking. Then you have the problem of the limitations of your library catalog and the time it takes for ordered papers to come in. Of course with the internet it's easier to do research these days, but not so when I was at the University.
Well, I can now understand why I'll never get my questions answered about
which "laws of physics" abiogenesis allegedly violates.


Selene
Gospel TT
2018-04-06 17:55:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
I would think that if you presented a fake doctorate that you
evidently=
Post by Amazing Answers
thought you were qualified for that doctorate. In that case I
would consid=
Post by Amazing Answers
er what you have to say and decide if it's any good.
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
_______________
The problem is the people with the proper education say he's a loon.
Being a young earth creationist is all the evidence one needs
in order =
Post by Amazing Answers
to figure he's a loon.
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
He's also part of some creation science group which makes 2
strikes aga=
Post by Amazing Answers
inst him.
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
He has no credentials and that's 3 strikes.
Dude. Education? Let's take a look at this, reporting from my
own expe=
Post by Amazing Answers
rience.
Post by Amazing Answers
You are usually assigned a general textbook. But that's not all.
Maybe =
Post by Amazing Answers
another book, as well, and a couple of other stuff you have to
read. Then,=
Post by Amazing Answers
you are assigned papers. We're talking one class. You have to
read maybe =
Post by Amazing Answers
two chapters in that text before the next class. So if you have
Tues and Th=
Post by Amazing Answers
ursday classes, all your reading has to be done in those couple of
days. =
Post by Amazing Answers
But that's not all. We're only talking about one class! So if you
have si=
Post by Amazing Answers
x classes you have all that reading to do. Papers. You have to
select a t=
Post by Amazing Answers
opic. By the time you've scouted around, utilizing valuable time,
you come=
Post by Amazing Answers
up with empty and realized that you have nothing to fill your
paper with a=
Post by Amazing Answers
nd it's too late to change topics. But all said and done, how many
books a=
Post by Amazing Answers
nd papers have you actually read before you get your diploma? With
time co=
Post by Amazing Answers
nstraints you can't provide quality reading time, nor can you cover
all the=
Post by Amazing Answers
ground you want to. All said, the amount of material you have
studied is =
Post by Amazing Answers
.0000000000000001 % of everything that is out there. And that's a
liberal f=
Post by Amazing Answers
igure.
+
Post by Amazing Answers
College is a joke. I learn more, waste less time, watching
Youtube inst=
Post by Amazing Answers
ruction videos. I learn more studying subject matter that I'm
interested i=
Post by Amazing Answers
n. The papers you get assigned to are usually your teacher's
subject of int=
Post by Amazing Answers
erest. I also get more done praying and then researching than by
just look=
Post by Amazing Answers
ing. Then you have the problem of the limitations of your library
catalog =
Post by Amazing Answers
and the time it takes for ordered papers to come in. Of course
with the in=
Post by Amazing Answers
ternet it's easier to do research these days, but not so when I was
at the =
Post by Amazing Answers
University.
Well, I can now understand why I'll never get my questions answered
about=
Post by Amazing Answers
which "laws of physics" abiogenesis allegedly violates.
Selene
LOLOLOL!!!!1
%
2018-04-06 18:24:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gospel TT
On Wednesday, April 4, 2018 at 11:33:05 PM UTC-7, Amazing Answers
On Wednesday, April 4, 2018 at 11:08:55 PM UTC-7, Cloud Hobbit
Post by Amazing Answers
I would think that if you presented a fake doctorate that you
evidently=
 thought you were qualified for that doctorate. In that case I
would consid=
er what you have to say and decide if it's any good. > > _______________
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Cloud Hobbit
The problem is the people with the proper education say he's a
loon.
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Being a young earth creationist is all the evidence one needs
in order =
to figure he's a loon.
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Cloud Hobbit
He's also part of some creation science group which makes 2
strikes aga=
inst him.
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Cloud Hobbit
He has no credentials and that's 3 strikes.
Dude.  Education?   Let's take a look at this, reporting from my
own expe=
rience. > > You are usually assigned a general textbook.  But that's
not all.
Maybe =
another book, as well, and a couple of other stuff you have to
read.  Then,=
 you are assigned papers.  We're talking one class. You have to
read maybe =
two chapters in that text before the next class. So if you have
Tues and Th=
ursday classes, all your reading has to be done in those couple of
days.   =
But that's not all.   We're only talking about one class! So if you
have si=
x classes you have all that reading to do.   Papers. You have to
select a t=
opic.  By the time you've scouted around, utilizing valuable time,
you come=
 up with empty and realized that you have nothing to fill your
paper with a=
nd it's too late to change topics.  But all said and done, how many
books a=
nd papers have you actually read before you get your diploma?  With
time co=
nstraints you can't provide quality reading time, nor can you cover
all the=
 ground you want to.  All said, the amount of material you have
studied is =
.0000000000000001 % of everything that is out there. And that's a
liberal f=
igure.
+
Post by Amazing Answers
College is a joke.   I learn more, waste less time, watching
Youtube inst=
ruction videos.  I learn more studying subject matter that I'm
interested i=
n. The papers you get assigned to are usually your teacher's
subject of int=
erest. I also get more done praying and then researching than by
just look=
ing.  Then you have the problem of the limitations of your library
catalog =
and the time it takes for ordered papers to come in.  Of course
with the in=
ternet it's easier to do research these days, but not so when I was
at the =
University.
Well, I can now understand why I'll never get my questions answered
about=
which "laws of physics" abiogenesis allegedly violates.
Selene
LOLOLOL!!!!1
no
Malte Runz
2018-04-04 19:34:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 15:09:13 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
Post by Davej
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument...
...and then we find out he has a fake degree from an online
Bible college?
I'll judge a man by what he says rather than his credentials. ...
So when Juby claims that T. rex was vegetarian we should trust his
words, ignoring that the guy has no credentials to make such a call?
Of course an education makes all the difference in such cases.
... An oft quoted item coming from engineers is that often the most inept people have doctorates coming from universities. I recall one class I took at a jr college where it was unusual if you had a doctor teaching a class. And this man was highly lauded as such, and also was one of the worst teachers I ever had at the college.
You'd be an absolutely terrible teacher because most of the time you
simply make up stuff when you need an explanation.
--
Malte Runz
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-04 20:56:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I'll judge a man by what he says rather than his credentials. An oft quoted item coming from engineers is that often the most inept people have doctorates coming from universities. I recall one class I took at a jr college where it was unusual if you had a doctor teaching a class. And this man was highly lauded as such, and also was one of the worst teachers I ever had at the college.
__________________

Lots of people who are good at something are not good at teaching that thing.
Yap Honghor
2018-04-03 23:41:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
Scientific Creationism using words to con people, never anything being scientific or facts!

That is how the society view your creationism!
More like selling snake oil to believers...
Amazing Answers
2018-04-04 07:04:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
Scientific Creationism using words to con people, never anything being scientific or facts!
That is how the society view your creationism!
More like selling snake oil to believers...
Snake oil? All you have added to this discussion is forced ridicule. Complete nonsense. So don't talk about snake oil if snake oil is all you have to give.
Malte Runz
2018-04-04 19:50:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 4 Apr 2018 00:04:42 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
Scientific Creationism using words to con people, never anything being scientific or facts!
That is how the society view your creationism!
More like selling snake oil to believers...
Snake oil? All you have added to this discussion is forced ridicule. Complete nonsense. So don't talk about snake oil if snake oil is all you have to give.
The only reason you object to the use of the term "snake oil" is your
legendary ignorance on most things scientific.

Juby telling you that T. rex was not a meat eater is a perfect
example. He lies, you buy it, you never register it happened.
--
Malte Runz
Siri Cruise
2018-04-04 20:09:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Malte Runz
Juby telling you that T. rex was not a meat eater is a perfect
example. He lies, you buy it, you never register it happened.
Given its teeth and jaws are adapted for meat eating, even if it had been
created a herbivore, it was created anticipating it would become a carnivore.

So the fix was in from the beginning.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
Malte Runz
2018-04-04 21:41:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Malte Runz
Juby telling you that T. rex was not a meat eater is a perfect
example. He lies, you buy it, you never register it happened.
Given its teeth and jaws are adapted for meat eating, even if it had been
created a herbivore, it was created anticipating it would become a carnivore.
So the fix was in from the beginning.
Exactly. It devolved into a meat eater by losing genetic information
caused by the Fall... a mere 40 days after Creation.
--
Malte Runz
Don Martin
2018-04-05 21:51:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 04 Apr 2018 23:41:12 +0200, Malte Runz
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Malte Runz
Juby telling you that T. rex was not a meat eater is a perfect
example. He lies, you buy it, you never register it happened.
Given its teeth and jaws are adapted for meat eating, even if it had been
created a herbivore, it was created anticipating it would become a carnivore.
So the fix was in from the beginning.
Exactly. It devolved into a meat eater by losing genetic information
caused by the Fall... a mere 40 days after Creation.
Supercharged Evolution! God is Great!
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Smiler
2018-04-08 03:12:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Siri Cruise
Juby telling you that T. rex was not a meat eater is a perfect example.
He lies, you buy it, you never register it happened.
Given its teeth and jaws are adapted for meat eating, even if it had
been created a herbivore, it was created anticipating it would become a
carnivore.
So the fix was in from the beginning.
It chewed the cud with *those* teeth????
--
Smiler, The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made
to exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Gospel TT
2018-04-08 03:30:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by Siri Cruise
Juby telling you that T. rex was not a meat eater is a perfect example.
He lies, you buy it, you never register it happened.
Given its teeth and jaws are adapted for meat eating, even if it had
been created a herbivore, it was created anticipating it would become a
carnivore.
So the fix was in from the beginning.
It chewed the cud with *those* teeth????
They was lot's skinnier back in them day's.
Smiler
2018-04-09 01:21:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Smiler
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Malte Runz
Juby telling you that T. rex was not a meat eater is a perfect
example.
Post by Smiler
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Malte Runz
He lies, you buy it, you never register it happened.
Given its teeth and jaws are adapted for meat eating, even if it
had
Post by Smiler
Post by Siri Cruise
been created a herbivore, it was created anticipating it would
become a
Post by Smiler
Post by Siri Cruise
carnivore.
So the fix was in from the beginning.
It chewed the cud with *those* teeth????
They was lot's skinnier back in them day's.
Did you see it yourself, or did your cousin tell you?
--
Smiler, The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made
to exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Gospel TT
2018-04-09 04:58:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by Malte Runz
Post by Smiler
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Malte Runz
Juby telling you that T. rex was not a meat eater is a perfect
example.
Post by Smiler
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Malte Runz
He lies, you buy it, you never register it happened.
Given its teeth and jaws are adapted for meat eating, even if it
had
Post by Smiler
Post by Siri Cruise
been created a herbivore, it was created anticipating it would
become a
Post by Smiler
Post by Siri Cruise
carnivore.
So the fix was in from the beginning.
It chewed the cud with *those* teeth????
They was lot's skinnier back in them day's.
Did you see it yourself, or did your cousin tell you?
I don't got no cousin's that are old enough cause that was when my
great uncle was a kid & he's the one that told me. He was a lion
tamer then cause it was so easy cause lion's back then was only
little brown furry creature's with long nose's that ate ant's.
Kevrob
2018-04-09 05:16:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Gospel TT
Post by Smiler
Did you see it yourself, or did your cousin tell you?
I don't got no cousin's that are old enough cause that was when my
great uncle was a kid & he's the one that told me. He was a lion
tamer then cause it was so easy cause lion's back then was only
little brown furry creature's with long nose's that ate ant's.
Who was your uncle, Johnny Hart?

Kevin R
Gospel TT
2018-04-09 05:42:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by Gospel TT
Post by Smiler
Did you see it yourself, or did your cousin tell you?
I don't got no cousin's that are old enough cause that was when my
great uncle was a kid & he's the one that told me. He was a lion
tamer then cause it was so easy cause lion's back then was only
little brown furry creature's with long nose's that ate ant's.
Who was your uncle, Johnny Hart?
Kevin R
No but they was good friend's & he was Hart's inspiration. He was an
accountant before he became a lion tamer & that's when they met.
Yap Honghor
2018-04-05 08:44:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the evolutionist will respond properly.
Scientific Creationism using words to con people, never anything being scientific or facts!
That is how the society view your creationism!
More like selling snake oil to believers...
Snake oil? All you have added to this discussion is forced ridicule. Complete nonsense. So don't talk about snake oil if snake oil is all you have to give.
What else is a donkey capable to sell, apart from snake oil????
While snake oil may have certain small value, you have not really been trained well enough to be a professional salesman.
Mitchell Holman
2018-04-04 02:35:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist
There is nothing scientific about creationism.

That is why you ran away when I asked for proof
of the creationist "lab experiments" you cited.
Post by Amazing Answers
makes an argument using reasoning,
science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't
have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either.
So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter
reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead
of pointing out something that has no relevance?
Evolutionists don't need "counter reasoning"
since they have FACTS on their side.




Evolution observed


http://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/02/evolution-in-real-time/

http://discovermagazine.com/2015/march/19-life-in-the-fast-lane

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-42103058
Malte Runz
2018-04-04 20:06:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 03 Apr 2018 21:35:03 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist
There is nothing scientific about creationism.
That is why you ran away when I asked for proof
of the creationist "lab experiments" you cited.
Give him a break. There are so many to pick from, making it simply
impossible to choose.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Amazing Answers
makes an argument using reasoning,
science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't
have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either.
So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter
reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead
of pointing out something that has no relevance?
Evolutionists don't need "counter reasoning"
since they have FACTS on their side.
Evolution observed
http://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/02/evolution-in-real-time/
http://discovermagazine.com/2015/march/19-life-in-the-fast-lane
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-42103058
It's no use. Assroid suffers from Factofobia. The evidence resisting
strain.
--
Malte Runz
Tim
2018-04-04 07:43:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument using reasoning, science and plenty of references, the evolutionist says he doesn't have a degree. Often the evolutionist doesn't have a degree either. So one wonders as to why the evolutionist doesn't use counter reasoning, science and deal with the creationist's references instead of pointing out something that has no relevance? Reasoning, science and references stand on their own. If a dog came along reasoning, using science and using references perhaps the >evolutionist will respond properly.
How is pointing out an appeal to authority an invalid argument. You don't know what a valid argument is. Stop pretending, fake Christian.
b***@m.nu
2018-04-04 11:36:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
Post by Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist makes an argument
That is an oxymoron "Scientific Creationist", there is no such thing.
So from that view a "Scientific Creationist" can not make an argument
because they don't even actually exist, so whatever gobblygoop you
said after those 7 words was just fluff to make yourself feel
important. In your next life please by all means spend more time in
school.
John Locke
2018-04-04 20:22:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist....
...no you don't..."scientific creationist" is an oxymoron. Those are
conflicting terms...there's no such animal and there's nothing
scientific about a creationist.
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-05 02:53:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Malte Runz
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:26:39 -0700 (PDT), Amazing Answers
After a Scientific Creationist....
...no you don't..."scientific creationist" is an oxymoron.
....and you are just a plain moron.
Loading...