| Quote (someotherguy @ Sep. 16 2009,15:28) |
| Oh shit. Heddle just said something nice about the Welsh. This will not end well. |
All's welsh that ends welsh.
form_srcid: Stanton
form_cmd: view_author
Your IP address is 38.107.191.96
View Author detected.
view author posts:
Retrieve source record and display it.
form_author:
form_srcid: Stanton
q: SELECT AUTHOR, MEMBER_NAME, IP_ADDR, POST_DATE, TOPIC_ID, t1.FORUM_ID, POST, POST_ID, FORUM_VIEW_THREADS from ib_forum_posts AS t1 LEFT JOIN (ib_member_profiles AS t2, ib_forum_info AS t3) ON (t1.forum_id = t3.forum_id AND t1.author = t2.member_id) WHERE MEMBER_NAME like 'Stanton%' and forum_view_threads LIKE '*' ORDER BY POST_DATE ASC
DB_err:
DB_result: Resource id #4
| Date: 2008/02/27 15:40:38, Link 71.107.7.252 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Panspermia is regarded as a scientific hypothesis because it builds on the observed facts that a) water and organic molecules are found in outer space, b) spores of bacteria and fungi are capable of surviving intact in outer space-like conditions (whether or not they can remain viable has yet to be seen), and c) bacteria, fungi and other microorganisms are capable of living and thriving in Mars-like conditions, and then proposes that life, or certain lineages of organisms on Earth are descended from life and or organic molecules from outer space. Panspermia can not progress beyond the hypothetical stage because no "alien" lifeform has been found and recognized with which to compare indigenous lifeforms with. Intelligent Design proposes that, because biological systems are complicated, biological systems could not have appeared or evolved without the assistance of an "intelligent designer" that is beyond the scrutiny of mere mortal scientists. Having said this, Intelligent Design proponents have been extremely hesitant to demonstrate how one can go about detecting "design." Dembski alleges that his "Explanatory Filter" can detect design, but, he leaves very much to be desired, given as how he has never actually demonstrated how to detect design with his filter in a genuine organism. Behe's idea of "irreducible complexity" has been repeatedly killed and butchered by the fact that all of the biological systems he labeled as being "irreducibly complex," including the vertebrate immune system, the blood-clotting cascade, and the eukaryote and bacterial flagella have all had their evolutionary histories discovered, as well as how the details of the mechanics of each system relate to related details in other biological systems, i.e., in that echinoderms have a similar immune system to chordates, or that the proteases used in blood clotting are the same proteases used in digestion, or even the documentation of the evolutionary history of the genes that produce the "antifreeze" glycoproteins in Antarctic icefish, or the appearance of the 2 versions of nylonase. Then there is the fact that all Intelligent Design proponents have been extraordinarily hesitant in either explaining how Intelligent Design "theory" would help contribute to Science, or even how Intelligent Design "theory" is even science. |
| Date: 2008/03/25 19:13:58, Link 71.107.7.252 |
| Author: Stanton |
| Charles Darwin and a baby rhesus macaque are the mother and father of Adolf Hitler? |
| Date: 2009/09/14 19:36:53, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
You mean, as in, a Christian being anyone who accepts Jesus Christ as being their (spiritual) Lord and Savior, the one who will bring him/her salvation? |
| Date: 2009/09/15 13:42:37, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Are you sure that they aren't arguing over being like Jesus, rather than arguing over being Jesus? |
| Date: 2009/09/15 13:49:33, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
This is not the worst debate ever: The worst debate ever was the time this one guy attempted to convince me that the Bible was right because 1) no one could have ever survived an explosion as big as the Big Bang, and 2) recent scientific discoveries (which the gentleman never bothered to specify) were proving the accuracy of the Bible left and right. Either that, or when this other guy told me that God was going to send me to Hell to suffer for all eternity because I apparently didn't think like him, or because I offered to tutor him when he was whining about how hard the Biology professor was. |
| Date: 2009/09/15 20:15:31, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Cthullhu will awaken, have itself a glass of warm something or other, then go back to sleep, or worse yet, Carol Burnett will finally admit she isn't a natural redhead before FL will actually produce evidence for the incompatibility between Christianity and evilution. |
| Date: 2009/09/16 01:18:33, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
I want to point out some things concerning the situation 1) Notice how FL ignores the actual reason that caused Charles Darwin's crisis of faith: the death of his daughter due to disease. 2) Notice also how FL ignores deadman's inquiry concerning the Pope being a Christian who has had absolutely no qualms about accepting Jesus as his savior, as well as accepting evolution as a fact. 3) And notice how FL never advocates abandoning the use of the numerous products made possible through evolution or through any sciences that utilize evolutionary biology and or its offshoots, products like antibiotics, vaccines, petroleum products, dinosaur-themed products, food made from domesticated plants and animals, or the keeping, raising and breeding of domesticated plants and animals. The last time I brought this to FL's attention, he had the moronic, hypocritical gall to claim that because these things were actually the products of microevolution, it was perfectly okay to reject evolution while still using such products without fearing for their immortal souls. |
| Date: 2009/09/16 01:33:37, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
That is because the sole purpose of FL being here is to preach at us, not to discuss anything, not to debate anything, and most definitely not to speak the truth about anything. |
| Date: 2009/09/16 09:53:40, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
FL is a hypocrite even when it comes to taking the Bible literally. One thread where this came up, he essentially said it was alright not to kill people who disobey the many, many laws in the Book of Deuteronomy that demand death as punishment, i.e., eating milk with meat, eating shellfish, eating pork, wearing fabrics of mixed thread, working on Saturday, being a fussy or unruly child, etc. If he were a genuine Biblical literalist, he would be making demands that goat breeders breed striped goats by showing the copulating animals striped sticks, in addition to demanding death to people who violate the laws of Deuteronomy. |
| Date: 2009/09/16 10:18:44, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
FL is either lying out of his piehole when he claims that Darwin was being an evil racist bigot in Descent of Man, as he's obviously relying solely upon the patently false anecdotes of other creationists, or he really did read Descent of Man, and the very idea that Charles Darwin had the unmitigated gall to assume that blacks and whites (and pretty much every single other ethnic group Mr Darwin came in contact with) were all the same species apparently fills FL with quaking anger. |
| Date: 2009/09/16 15:52:10, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
All's welsh that ends welsh. |
| Date: 2009/09/16 19:02:35, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
You notice how FL has also refused to touch the point about how the Pope has no problems reconciling his faith with the fact of evolution, too? |
| Date: 2009/09/16 20:58:14, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
FL refuses to address the actual topic of this debate specifically because he is not here to debate: he is here to preach at us so he can convert us to his own peculiar sect of Christianity, whereupon he will then return to his own flock so he can strut about how he entered a (cyber)den of evil pagans and single-handedly vanquished the lot of them in order to score more brownie points for Jesus. |
| Date: 2009/09/17 10:58:31, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
Let us recap, shall we? FL's argument is that evolution is incompatible with Christianity because the description/explanation of evolution's mechanism specifically excludes direct intervention from God. Of course, FL then fails to explain why all other sciences, which, too, do not involve the direct intervention of God as descriptions/explanations, are not incompatible with Christianity, nor does he explain why, if evolution and evolutionary biology are incompatible with his version of Christianity, he also insists on using products of evolutionary biology on a daily basis. And, more importantly, there is the fact that FL's dilemma is false, given as how the vast majority of Christians have no problems reconciling the fact of evolution with their faith: after all, FL refuses to explain on this thread how the Pope can be a Christian while still accept the facts of evolution. I'm also morbidly curious to see what halfbaked excuse FL will dredge up to justify the teaching of Intelligent Design in science classrooms, even though Intelligent Design proponents have already confessed that it was never intended to be any sort of science or even alternative explanation, AND that it's been legally ruled as being nothing more than religious propaganda. |
| Date: 2009/09/17 11:09:25, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
The words "hypocritical" and "inconsistent" come to mind to describe your response to Someotherguy's question, actually. |
| Date: 2009/09/17 11:12:21, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
|
| Date: 2009/09/18 10:34:17, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
So, FL, are you saying that the Pope is a spiritually damaged atheist because he accepts evolution as a fact and sees no problems reconciling such fact with his faith? |
| Date: 2009/09/18 10:54:12, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||
[quote=FloydLee,Sep. 18 2009,10:25]
Yet, you still don't explain how exposing children to the very worst science education programs in the country will help strengthen them spiritually. I mean, you have to be aware that Texas and Louisiana have the poorest test scores specifically because their educational programs were made more Creationist-friendly. |
| Date: 2009/09/18 11:02:21, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Then he's a very peculiar Catholic if he refuses to admit that the last 2 Popes issued very clear statements about how evolution was perfectly compatible with being a Christian. |
| Date: 2009/09/18 13:06:48, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Pope Benedict would beg to differ with your claims, FL http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19956961/ Or, are you saying that the Pope is lying? |
| Date: 2009/09/18 13:09:11, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
That is because FL is not here to present an argument, and he is not here to debate: he is here to preach at us in a vain attempt to convert us horrible pagan heathen atheist sorcerers to his version of Christianity. |
| Date: 2009/09/18 17:53:20, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Please explain to us how acceptance of evolution has eroded and corroded Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul. |
| Date: 2009/09/19 21:19:34, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Given as how FL is reluctant and or unwilling to back up his claim that accepting evolution corrodes/erodes one's faith by explaining how the faith of the current and previous Popes eroded/corroded because they accepted evolution, FL will never attempt to address your arguments, Dale. |
| Date: 2009/09/21 14:51:50, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
How does all of this mewling word-lawyering, cherry-picked testimonials, and quotemining are supposed to convince us that evolution is incompatible with Christianity when the current and previous Popes have demonstrated that they have had no problems reconciling faith with the acceptance of evolution? Are you saying that your definition of Christianity, which apparently excludes Roman Catholics, including Popes Benedict and John Paul is the one true Christianity? Or are you saying that the Pope is the only Christian alive who has the sole privilege of reconciling evolution and faith in Jesus Christ? |
| Date: 2009/09/21 15:20:22, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
| My prediction is that FL is going to spend the next two to three dozen comments harping on how his so-called 4 points demonstrate the incompatibility between evolution and Christianity, even though he continues to evade everyone's counter-points, as well as ignoring the fact that the Pope is a walking, talking, benedicting refutation of all four of FL's points. |
| Date: 2009/09/21 15:25:42, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
According to FL's innuendo, any Christian who has the satanic gall to accept the fact of evolution while accepting salvation from Jesus Christ, and who isn't the Pope, are either deluded fake Christians, or are evil atheistic Pagan sorcerers pretending to be Christians in order to ensnare and devour the unwary among the True Christians (T). |
| Date: 2009/09/21 15:39:14, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
No, according to FL, any Christian, of any denomination, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Unitarian, Baptist, Episcopalian, or even Epulopiscium, who isn't the Pope, but who accepts the fact of evolution, isn't actually a Christian. Either that, or FL is apparently too polite to admit that he thinks that the Pope isn't a Christian. |
| Date: 2009/09/21 15:42:50, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Undoubtedly. |
| Date: 2009/09/21 16:04:07, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
What "science" has Intelligent Design put out in the past couple of decades? |
| Date: 2009/09/21 16:23:23, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Then how come you refuse to explain why the Pope contradicts all four points you've made? Are you saying that the Pope is an exception to your rules, or are you saying that the Pope isn't a True Christian? |
| Date: 2009/09/21 17:09:38, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||
It appears that your definition of Christianity is incompatible with the Pope's definition of Christianity. |
| Date: 2009/09/21 17:13:45, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Yep, expectations were set at zero, and FL limbos right under them, exactly like the scientific achievements of Intelligent Design for the past 2 decades. |
| Date: 2009/09/21 17:27:04, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
You want we should start moving on to discussing how and why FL's insistence that Intelligent Design is epic fail? |
| Date: 2009/09/22 09:28:00, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
You must be a sad person, FL. I mean, you wail and moan about how your faith is threatened by biological reality, and now you tell us that you follow the dictations of an atheist you've quotemined over what you can and can't believe. I mean, why can't your faith be as robust as, say, the Pope? And yes, we automatically assume that you're quotemining because we know you long enough to have learned that if you're not lying, you're either quotemining or you're purposefully misrepresenting whoever or whatever it is you're mentioning, be it a science textbook or the Bible, or whatever. |
| Date: 2009/09/22 09:59:53, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
So, tell us of God's majesty when He annihilated all life on Earth that could not be stuffed into Noah's Ark simply because humans were too noisy and too naughty. Or, tell us of God's kindness when He sent those she-bears to kill children. |
| Date: 2009/09/22 10:01:19, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
| Anyone else notice how FL is too cowardly to acknowledge that the Pope continues to contradicts FL's so-called points? |
| Date: 2009/09/22 10:16:09, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Then how come numerous Christians, SUCH AS POPE BENEDICT, don't listen to these people whom you're misrepresenting into saying that Christianity and Evolution are incompatible? Unless you can explain how the Pope can get away with ignoring your pathetic points, you have to realize that you're nothing but a bag of mean spirited hot air. |
| Date: 2009/09/22 11:36:00, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
So, in other words, you're claiming that you know Christianity better than the Pope? Why haven't you excommunicated the Pope yet, then? |
| Date: 2009/09/22 12:22:28, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
|
| Date: 2009/09/22 13:51:56, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||
But the problem is, my dear, that the fear that one is unable to frighten and or bully others into thinking exactly the way that one wants them to think, for whatever logical or illogical reason, drives many people to do odd, and sometimes repugnant things. |
| Date: 2009/09/22 14:40:39, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
So we have FL boasting about how his points 1 through 4 about how evolution is allegedly incompatible with Christianity, are some sort of sacrosanct, divinely inspired holy laws, yet, can not be bothered to explain why literally millions of Christians, including Pope Benedict, ignore these 4 points. And as for FL's so-called 5th point, well, he has a very warped definition of "cruel," if it includes tigers eating sambar deer, internal parasites and tongue isopods, yet, not includes cursing all life to suffer and die as a direct result of the first pair of humans' disobedience, the utter annihilation of all life that couldn't be fit into Noah's Ark simply because the humans were naughty, or divine commandments to slaughter the enemies of Israel, their families, neighbors and livestock, save for their enemies' underage, virgin daughters, who were to be made into the Israelite soldiers' sex slaves. |
| Date: 2009/09/22 14:45:12, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
So explain to us why the Pope still hasn't gotten your memo about the insidiously pernicious effects of accepting the fact of evolution. |
| Date: 2009/09/22 15:02:05, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
The fact remains, FL, that there are millions of Christians who have no trouble reconciling the acceptance of evolution with Christianity, including the Pope. Then there is also the fact that none of the "evolutionists" (sic) you've cherrypicked are the official spokespeople of evolutionary biology or science, and you are a conniving, lying fool to suggest otherwise. Or, can you explain why, according to your logic, the Pope isn't a Christian because he heeds neither your proclamations, nor the proclamations of the atheists and scientists you've quotemined? |
| Date: 2009/09/22 17:29:57, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
So, tell us, FL, if there was a global flood 4000 years ago as described in the Bible, why is there no evidence of it? How were the Pyramids built if they were constructed at a time where the population was 8? Why do all of the ancient cities of Mesopotamia, or any other civilization from 4000 years ago, show no sign of being obliterated by a global flood? Tell us, why doesn't the Pope care about your moronic points? Why do you think that a tiger eating a deer is cruel and horrible, but not divinely mandated genocide and child rape? |
| Date: 2009/09/22 17:35:21, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
I provided a URL mentioning the Pope saying that it was nonsense to believe in Young Earth Creationism and a literal reading of the Bible earlier in this thread. It's not my fault you're too tangled up in your smarm and stupidity to have noticed it, and that you're too busy being an arrogant jerk to admit that the Pope accepts both evolution and faith in Jesus Christ. |
| Date: 2009/09/22 17:38:54, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Yes, especially since FL thinks that carnivores, old age and parasites are terrible, evil and cruel, but divinely mandated genocide, murder and child rape are perfectly acceptable. |
| Date: 2009/09/22 18:03:12, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
That's because FL's goal here is not to debate, but to preach at us.
|
| Date: 2009/09/22 20:06:58, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Of course: the fear of God's hateful, all-consuming wrath is what allegedly keeps people turning into hyper-sexual God-hating, anti-social deviants who obsess about how to apply evolutionary biology towards inappropriate behavior. On the other hand, using the excuse that you're either doing it for God, or that God told you to do it is a blank check to do whatever you want, be it lying, slandering, manipulating, bullying or murder. I mean, granted, Jesus made a big song and dance about how He will deny salvation to anyone who does any evil in His name, but, if you say you're doing whatever it is for God and or Jesus, who gives a withering fig over what He said? |
| Date: 2009/09/22 20:34:02, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
And preach. |
| Date: 2009/09/22 20:42:35, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Hence the term "invincible ignorance" |
| Date: 2009/09/23 00:52:46, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Unfortunately, FL demonstrates that he does not give a flying fig tree about what Jesus said if Jesus contradicts what FL is preaching. |
| Date: 2009/09/23 10:24:33, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
Firstly, you fail to point out specifically where the Pope was demanding that evolution must be denied in order to be a Christian, and you fail to point out specifically where the Pope was demanding that the Book of Genesis must be read literally, and you also fail to point out where the Pope was demanding that a True Christian must follow the five points you pulled out of your arse in order to be a True Christian. We bring up the Pope to counter your pathetic and ridiculous points, FL, because he is an example of a Christian who finds no need to deny evolution to maintain his faith in God. In fact, FL, you haven't produced a single example of a Christian who is a better Christian because he holds the Bible to be the ultimate authority on literally everything to the point of denying reality and accusing other Christians who don't hold to sola scriptura to be wrong and broken. That, and if being a True Christian means not only denying reality, but to also be like you, a smug, gossiping liar who apparently takes arrogant pride that his word has less value than soiled toilet paper, millions of Christians would sooner become soulless apostates than to be like you. |
| Date: 2009/09/23 18:15:16, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
| So then how come you refuse to address the problem of how you appear to consider the concepts of predation, old age, and internal parasites to be worse than divinely mandated genocide, divinely commanded murder, and using child slaves as a reward for either behaviors? |
| Date: 2009/09/23 18:16:14, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
FL does, but, he's the only person to think so. |
| Date: 2009/09/23 18:31:59, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
According to FL's logic, because FL was taught to hate, fear and despise evolution, the Pope doesn't believe in evolution, despite statements to the direct contrary. |
| Date: 2009/09/23 23:53:15, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||
It's rather ironic, then, given as how the primary reason FL gave for despising President Obama was that the President had no intention of outlawing homosexuality.
One would have better luck convincing stones to weep tears than try and educate someone who takes enormous pride in being invincibly ignorant as a creationist. |
| Date: 2009/09/23 23:55:22, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
And apparently, FL finds examples of nature not being nice to be horrific abominations, while, all of the various unpleasant things documented in the Bible, from murder, genocide, rape, etc, etc, are apparently hunky dory. |
| Date: 2009/09/24 18:20:20, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Unlikely: FL's defense of his claim that Intelligent Design is supposedly a-okay to teach in a science classroom is going to be even more pathetic than the idiocy he's regurgitated now. Or, to reword it: a snowball tossed into the flaming fords of the Phlegethon in Hades has better survival odds. I mean, FL harped on and on and on about how he had this "three plank theory" that explained how Intelligent Design was scientific and nonreligious for years, but, he never seemed to be able to get around to explaining what it was. Among other things, Intelligent Design was determined in court to be nothing but dressed up religious propaganda, and has no legitimate or legal place in a science classroom. There was one time when FL made an impassioned plea that evolution was a religion, and that science classrooms were apparently the churches of "evolutionists" (sic). Even if such a ridiculous claim was true, you still couldn't teach Intelligent Design in a science classroom, as last I heard, in the US, it's illegal to demand that the religious propaganda of one religion be taught in the church of a different and or rival religion. And then there's the problem how the founders of the Intelligent Design freely admit that Intelligent Design was never intended to be a science, or even be an attempt at providing alternative explanations beyond the token |
| Date: 2009/09/25 12:09:20, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
No, FL, the Theory of Evolution describes how life changes with each successive generation, and describes the mechanisms that cause these changes, as well as describes the results of these changes. Only perfidious, forked tongued piety shysters, like yourself, FL, would imply that a definitive understanding of abiogenesis is vital to understanding and explaining observed examples of evolution, from fruit flies and antibiotic resistant bacteria to wild flowers and fossil lineages. |
| Date: 2009/09/25 16:00:57, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
The fact of the matter remains that On the Origin of Species is about how speciation occurs as according to Charles Darwin's notes and observations. Yes, Darwin touches upon the subject of abiogenesis, but, the problems are that a) it's quite obvious to the honest reader that he's simply speculating, b) the honest observer will also note that scientists studying abiogenesis have come a long, long, long, long way since Darwin's mental meanderings about a "warm pond," c) Darwin's speculation on abiogenesis have little bearing on the rest of his book, and served only as a suggestion or idea of the origin of the common ancestor to all life, d) On the Origin of Species is not some sort of magical holy book that is supposed to be worshiped by biologists. Even so, it's quite clear, FL, that you have absolutely no intention of reading even a single word from On the Origin of Species or any other book on any topic remotely to do with biology without the intent to quotemine for Jesus for the utterly irrational fear that God will punish you for your visual blasphemy by sending a pair of irate eagles to peck out your eyes. |
| Date: 2009/09/26 13:11:38, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Such as disapproving of someone/something versus protesting to have him/her/it burn in Hell for ever and ever and ever for offending their sensibilities? |
| Date: 2009/09/26 18:04:44, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Actually, evolution as anyone, scientists, the Pope, or even Jesus, defines it is incompatible with FL's personal interpretation of Christianity. And then there's how FL refuses to admit that his personal reasons for claiming evolution is incompatible with Christianity would not only excommunicate the Pope and the majority of Christians, but render all other sciences incompatible with Christianity, too. Those, and FL conflates his own personal view and opinof Christianity, along with his own personal view on literally anything with fact and or mainstream opinion. And yes, it's time we should move on. |
| Date: 2009/09/26 21:30:02, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Once FL demonstrates to us how demanding that we revert back to a Biblical perspective on Biology in this modern day and time would not only drive a stake through the heart of science, but of modern medicine (what with the Bible shaming the ill and suffering who lack the faith to trust God to instantly and miraculously heal them), too, he's going to tell us how Intelligent Design is hunkydory to teach in science classrooms instead of actual science. And we all remember FL's non-schtick about the "three planks," right? |
| Date: 2009/09/27 10:38:12, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||||
It's not a matter of overlapping magisteria, FL was brainwashed a long time ago to think that evolution was of the devil, and was taught to denounce it no matter what, even if it means lying, slandering, misrepresenting, or putting words into the mouths of other people, including the Pope and corpses. Then there's the problem of how FL is a hypocrite, in that he thinks it's okay to denounce something and imply it's some sort of soul-eating monster, and yet, still think it's peachy keen to continue using any and all of its products. I mean, even if we put aside the fact that Creationism, as a "science" is so barren so as to make the fig tree Jesus withered out of spite look like a cornucopia with a trunk, for FL to denounce evolution with his stupid, catty innuendo, and his idiotic points, and yet, not advocate the ban of its products is hypocrisy, pure and simple. It's akin to a fire and brimstone rabbi who preaches and screeches at his flock about how even thinking of straying from kosher laws will turn one into a super-whore, complete with flashing neon genitals and exploding breasts, while, the rabbi, himself, spends most of his time screaming and shouting in restaurants about how the cook didn't put enough cheese on his lobster-stuffed pork chops. |
| Date: 2009/09/27 14:32:10, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
He stared at "tard-zero," and has been able to work his way down to "jerk-negative sixty." At his current rate, FL will probably hit the bottom of the Russian oil reserves by next month. |
| Date: 2009/09/27 15:24:58, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
He'll be back, and he's gonna pretend that no one was able to out-argue him, acting like a smug jerk in the process. |
| Date: 2009/09/27 17:12:27, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
I know, but Lou says it better. |
| Date: 2009/09/29 00:11:20, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Who on earth would want to remain friends with an invincibly stupid, holier than thou snob who thinks he knows better than the Pope and has no compunctions about lying and misrepresenting other people, and is quick to accuse others of lying and or misrepresenting in order to cover his own ass? |
| Date: 2009/09/29 10:20:05, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
| So the best explanation FL can provide to explain why so many Christians, including the last two Popes, have absolutely no conflict with accepting the facts of evolution is a big whiny fit about how they're some how afraid to discuss their faith with secular people? Obviously, it didn't occur to FL that some people don't feel it necessary to find faith and salvation in ancient absurdities. |
| Date: 2009/09/29 14:53:45, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
Lying and quotemining what the Popes have said. How unoriginal FL. |
| Date: 2009/09/30 11:00:05, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Perhaps if FL is too cowardly to explain how many people were on Earth during 2500 BC, and how they were able to build the Pyramids and all other structures dating from that time, perhaps FL would like to explain why, if Creationism is so superior to Evolutionary Biology, then how come a) Louisiana, Texas, and Florida, states that mandate the teaching of Creationism in science classes, have education systems that rank the very worst in the entire system, b) why is Intelligent Design worth teaching in a science classroom, instead of actual science, even though all Intelligent Design proponents have no desire to do actual science, and c) where is all the evidence that points to a Young Earth and Intelligent Design? |
| Date: 2009/09/30 11:02:00, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
| I also noticed that FL is too cowardly to explain why all the bad things in nature, i.e., predation, internal parasites and old age, are supposed to be worse than the various bad things mentioned in the Bible, including divinely ordained murder, genocide, and rewarding soldiers with child-slaves. |
| Date: 2009/09/30 15:03:00, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
| Who uses "Darwinism" as a synonym for Modern Evolutionary Biology besides Creationists and other reality denying anti-science proponents? |
| Date: 2009/09/30 18:09:14, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
| So FL is saying that because Darwin's explanation of how life changes over generations no longer requires GODDIDITACCORDINGTOTHEBIBLE, it's evil, as according to FL's quotemine of Mayr. |
| Date: 2009/09/30 18:41:19, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Your denial does not excuse the fact that people have provided quotes and references that contradict every single one of your fallacious claims. To say of nothing of pointing out your grotesque, smarm infested hypocrisy or your blatant quotemining.. |
| Date: 2009/09/30 18:42:42, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
FL would either ignore you, claim that the quote doesn't matter because it contradicts his claims, or accuse you of lying. |
| Date: 2009/09/30 19:32:46, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Phyllis Diller once said,
|
| Date: 2009/09/30 20:27:16, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
You do must realize that different types of rocks have different rates of erosion, right? I mean, you must be made aware that sandstone, shale and slate erode much much more slowly than freshly lain volcanic ash. |
| Date: 2009/09/30 22:28:50, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
What sort of nitwit would bully us into thinking that descent with modification is both impossible and evil, while simultaneously expect us to assume that all terrestrial animals originated from survivors at Mt Ararat 4 thousand years ago? |
| Date: 2009/09/30 23:13:42, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||
I mean, does FL honestly believe that koalas and wombats were able to make it to Australia before gazelles and tigers could, or that one of the very first things Noah and his family did after the Flood was to trek to Egypt and build the Pyramids and the Sphinx? Or, are these little absurdities the sort of "pathetic levels of detail" FL ignores while demanding that we swallow his religious claptrap? |
| Date: 2009/10/01 09:37:29, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
|
Actually, I would ask readers to carefully look at that specific paragraph. So far we've just been talking about Mayr WRT the first two incompatibilities, but Mayr just reinforced the thirdincompatibility with those comments. [/quote] If depriving "Man" of his status as "being made in the image of God" is such a terrible thing done by Evolution, FL, then please explain why, historically, Christians have not cared about this particular tenet when Christians have promoted slavery, murder, torture, horrifying racial, religious and sexual inequalities against other people, even other Christians? So, why weren't Christians remembering that the Jews, Muslims, gays, lesbians, asians, africans and other Christians that they bullied, murdered, tortured, raped, stole from, disenfranchised, sold into slavery, and or cannibalized were also "made in the image of God"? For you to whine about how evolution deprives humans of their special status due to a special technicality that Christians have historically either ignored or found loopholes to avoid makes you a sanctimonious hypocrite. But, I doubt that you'd have the courage or backbone to address this, FL.
And yet you still refuse to understand that Mayr is not saying people can not accept evolution and be Christians, not matter how much you quotemine and deny. Or can you tell us who invested Mayr with the power to meddle with other people's faith and spirituality without permission? |
| Date: 2009/10/01 09:39:10, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
8 to 16 |
| Date: 2009/10/01 09:48:43, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||||
And it was the death of Annie Darwin, as well as the idea that his father, and several of his friends, would all burn in Hell forever and ever and ever simply because they were no longer Christians, irregardless of any good works they did, that caused Charles Darwin's faith to waver, not his research, contrary to the lie that thousands upon thousands of creationists repeat time and time again. BTW, Charles Darwin became an agnostic, not an atheist. |
| Date: 2009/10/01 10:46:19, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
It was Bishop James Ussher who, in 1650, came up with the idea that the world was 6000 years old. Can you provide a source of St Augustine saying that the world was 6000 years old? |
| Date: 2009/10/01 10:48:19, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Or, perhaps you should revise the relevant Wikipedia articles to mention how Bishop Ussher stole St Augustine's idea? |
| Date: 2009/10/01 12:07:02, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
Let me rescind my previous comment and replace it with this: Why does FL think that St Augustine supports his argument that faith in Jesus Christ is only possible if one adheres to a literal interpretation of Genesis in grotesque contrast to the current evidence, AND that Jesus Christ never said He would reject anyone who didn't read Genesis literally? I mean, FL is aware that St Augustine did argue about how inherently pernicious it is to use faith in God to protect ridiculous ideas? I mean, that's like arguing that Jesus wants us to steal from, cheat, lie to and murder anyone who disagrees with us. |
| Date: 2009/10/01 14:43:52, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
FL does not care one wit that St Augustine was a biblical literalist or not, all he cares about is quotemining and distorting what others have said in order to support his own ridiculous, fallacious claims. |
| Date: 2009/10/01 15:34:08, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
So, FL is saying that either we have to believe that God magically and mysteriously poofed everything, including people, plants and fake evidence, into existence 6,000 years ago, or we're automatically godless heathens who automatically reject Jesus. And yet, FL thinks the Christians against him here have weak faith. |
| Date: 2009/10/01 16:53:27, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
No. Isn't the whole point of your ridiculous "five points of incompatibility between Evolution and Christianity" about how the only way to be a Christian is to believe in a God who magically and mysteriously poofed the whole world and everything in it into existence as according to a literal reading of the mistranslation of the Book of Genesis or else, even though Jesus gave very different reasons for denying people Salvation? |
| Date: 2009/10/01 17:29:28, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||
Why do you care if Robin was an atheist or not, FL? Is your own faith in God and Jesus so frail that it's threatened by other people's beliefs or lack thereof? That is, besides the fact that (biological) reality also threatens your frail faith? |
| Date: 2009/10/01 20:08:52, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
You think Austin is a reliable source? Then explain why he deliberately sent the wrong sorts of rocks to the laboratories specifically in order to get inaccurate readings. If Austin is correct about his claims, then why did he have to resort to using underhanded methods to support himself? |
| Date: 2009/10/01 21:40:18, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
Why would we except helium to escape from a type of rock that is nonporous? And why would we expect your arguments to get better when you insist on repeating lies and distortions from known liars? |
| Date: 2009/10/01 22:45:23, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||||
If helium atoms are so small that they can pass through any substance, how come we have helium-filled balloons (not to mention the tanks of helium that are used to fill them in the first place)? I mean, are you that stupid to assume that I'm that stupid to not know what helium-filled balloons are filled with? That, and if all the helium that's produced on Earth automatically escapes into the atmosphere upon creation, then how come we have a relatively burgeoning helium gas industry?
I'm slandering: I'm stating the obvious. So, explain to me why I should not point out that Austin isn't a liar if he had to resort to blatant manipulation to support his claims, and explain to me why I should not call you a liar because you not only insist on claiming that Austin is a reliable source, but resort to distortion, and repeating Creationist lies? I mean, if anything, according to your moronic attempt at snarky smarminess with your comments about helium, I would suspect that you're not only extraordinarily dishonest, but rather dim and an incompetent judge of intelligence, too. |
| Date: 2009/10/01 22:47:40, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Not to mention that biogeography would point to all terrestrial life originating from Mount Ararat. Of course, creationists routinely [fail to bother to explain why biogeography actually does not suggest that all terrestrial life originated from Mount Ararat. |
| Date: 2009/10/01 22:51:05, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Once when the topic of the laws of Deuteronomy were brought up, FL said he prefers excommunication over execution. That is, when he could be bothered to be reminded that the Book of Deuteronomy existed, that is. |
| Date: 2009/10/02 00:21:23, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
I don't think so, given as how FL apparently gives more weight to the opinions of atheists than theists concerning matters of his faith, which he then foists onto other theists in order to browbeat them into thinking exactly like he does. |
| Date: 2009/10/02 09:21:14, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
That's because the ultimate purpose of Intelligent Design is a convoluted plot to illegitimately obtain a veneer of scientific legitimacy for the Bible, so it can become and remain the science textbook, as well as the law and history textbook of the land, forever and ever, until Judgment Day. You'd know that if you read the Wedge Document. |
| Date: 2009/10/02 12:03:10, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Yet, you refuse to explain how the Pope is able to accept both evolution, and his faith in Jesus Christ in direct spite of your five inane points. That is, refuse to explain beyond lying about what he's said, as well as quotemining and misrepresenting him. |
| Date: 2009/10/02 12:37:35, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
For your fifth alleged incompatibility, why do you think that things like predation, internal parasites or old age are terrible, horrible things that conflict with the Love of God, when the Bible mentions numerous terrible, horrible things done either by God, or done as per the commands of God, including total annihilation of life on Earth simply for the sin of humans, numerous murders, and genocide of entire nations, save for the virgin daughters who were taken as child slaves to reward the Jewish army? Your continued silence suggests that you are either too cowardly to discuss this, or perhaps that you think things like genocide, murder or child slavery are good things when done on God's behalf. |
| Date: 2009/10/02 12:40:53, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Explain to us why you don't think that God is a necessary requirement for explaining the science of how water flows downhill, yet, think that God, or more precisely, GODPOOFEDIT is the only explanation necessary, under pain of eternal torment at the hands of God, for explaining the origin and diversity of life? |
| Date: 2009/10/02 12:43:54, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
You mean like how FL claimed to know the exact location where the Garden of Eden was, then tried to imply that I was insane when I asked why no one has ever found anything at that location to suggest that it was the Garden of Eden in the first place? |
| Date: 2009/10/02 13:03:25, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
If that were the case, then we might as well lock the thread. |
| Date: 2009/10/02 19:59:56, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
So then, why don't you cut out the smarm and explain why evolution allegedly denies that humans are made in the image of God is a problem when Christians, themselves, have historically either ignored the fact that humans are made in the image of God, or have denied that particular groups of humans are made in the image of God in order to visit all manner of atrocities on their fellow humans, including disenfranchisement, pogroms, racism, slavery and genocide? |
| Date: 2009/10/02 20:53:02, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
That's because FL is here solely to preach at us with lies and distortions about how the only path to God is through believing that God magically and mysteriously poof everything and everyone on Earth into existence in grotesque contrast to the evidence, not to discuss anything, let alone discuss anything in a truthful manner. |
| Date: 2009/10/02 22:43:45, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
There, fixed for you, sweetie. |
| Date: 2009/10/03 09:16:56, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
| If Heddle honestly thought that FL was going to respond to his criticisms of FL's inane points in a thoughtful (and we're not even going to pretend that FL can respond honestly) manner, I own some Nevada beachfront property he'd be dying to acquire. |
| Date: 2009/10/03 13:20:30, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Clay is not a mineral: it is a kind of sediment formed from fine grains of various different minerals, very water-absorbent, and showing a huge range of plasticity (malleableness) depending on the moisture content. |
| Date: 2009/10/03 14:38:26, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||||
Hypocritically, FL sees no conflict between Christianity and Meteorology, even though Meteorology does not posit God as an explanation for any weather-related phenomena, let alone positing God as the penultimate explanation for all weather-related phenomena, and that FL apparently sees nothing horrible and conflicting about the fact that millions upon millions of people suffer horrifying hardships and or death directly due to weather-related phenomena every year (i.e., drought, tornadoes, floods, storms, hurricanes). |
| Date: 2009/10/03 20:21:44, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
FL's response to all of the examples of Christians who have no conflict between their faith and accepting the reality of evolution has been to either pretend that such Christians never existed, or lie and quotemine them as claiming that they do have conflict between their faith and accepting the reality of evolution. Says alot about FL's own faith if he has to resort to such underhanded and despicable tactics to support his own claims. |
| Date: 2009/10/03 20:27:59, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
The fact of the matter stands, Scienthuse, is that you made fallacious statements, and what little efforts you made to support these fallacious statements were to appeal to the authority of known liars, or accuse us of slander when we pointed out that you and your authorities were lying. Claiming that the duties of real life preclude and or prevent you from answering our questions and rebuttals to your fallacious claims will not win any sympathy from us, especially since you obviously appear to have more than enough time to whine about our tone, as well as accuse us of slander when we dissect your claims for bullshit content. |
| Date: 2009/10/04 11:33:54, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
| So what personal studies lead you to assume that chert can be "rapidly" deposited from 40 days and 40 nights of magic rain? |
| Date: 2009/10/04 23:00:19, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||
Actually, the line of reason is why do you consider evolution to be cruel and evil when God is depicted in the Bible doing cruel and evil acts, or commanding people to be cruel and evil? You refuse to realize that evolutionary biology is descriptive, not proscriptive or prescriptive. If Creationism is true, and evolution false because it's horrible to conceive that predation, internal parasites and old age are a part of the natural world, you're still going to explain why we have such things occurring. As for Creationism's explanation for everything not nice in the world... You suppose you could explain why God loves all of us if He's also punishing every single living thing with pain and death for the actions of the first two humans?
So please explain to us why the current Pope does not buy your line of argument. |
| Date: 2009/10/04 23:33:49, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Are you a vegan, FL? I mean, with the way you eagerly bring up your alleged fifth point of incompatibility like an old war scar, one would get the idea that you find the idea of eating meat to be incompatible with Christianity, or at least, makes you nauseous with anxiety. |
| Date: 2009/10/04 23:42:22, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
Essentially, Scienthuse's argument boils down to "yes, Austin and Morris are right about how limestone can magically solidify, then be eroded because of a magical flood, and you should take a chill pill because you get mean in the way you get impatient with my inane non-responses!" And this also fails to explain how there can be several fossil reefs preserved within the Grand Canyon, nor how the various layers of igneous rock were also magically lain down then eroded in a magical flood lasting 40 days and 40 nights. |
| Date: 2009/10/04 23:49:33, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Likewise, if Christianity is incompatible with the idea that there is cruelty in nature, then inserting evolution as a scapegoat is invalid logic, as well. |
| Date: 2009/10/05 08:09:46, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
As was stated to you earlier, repeatedly, the Christians on this site do not want or need your approval of their current state of faith and or spirituality, especially since you've done nothing to earn such a right, and the only thing you'll do is ridicule them for not being like you. |
| Date: 2009/10/05 08:11:50, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Yet you've never answered it. In fact, you've repeatedly lied that Pope Benedict issued contradictory statements.
a) Deadman is being honest, b) you first. |
| Date: 2009/10/06 12:58:26, Link 76.246.143.113 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Please explain why it is necessary to have a definitive understanding of abiogenesis before one can understand examples of evolution. In other words, FL, tell us why we have to know exactly how life began before we can study bacteria, fruitflies, fossils, or understand how to breed orchids, dogs, cats, fish, sunflowers or vegetables. Oh, wait, you can't because you're lying through your orifices yet again. |
| Date: 2009/10/06 13:03:50, Link 76.246.143.113 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
Maybe we think your points are irrelevant because your so-called attempts to explain why you think the Pope lied about accepting evolution is to make up lies and become unbearably smug while wandering off topic, or that you've supported all of your other claims with lies, quote-mines, or nonsensical logic, like how for your fifth inane point of how it's an abomination for tigers to eat deer, or for tapeworms to exist, though humans have been given divine licence to do whatever they please with plants and animals, including eating, torturing, or simply pleasure-killing them as necessary. |
| Date: 2009/10/06 13:06:37, Link 76.246.143.113 | ||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||
You honestly, honest to goodness, thought that FL would be above quotemining you? Hahahahahaha, if that's so, I have some Nevada beach property to sell you. Plus, I think you mean "fight-for-fantasy." (I was going to "I think you mean "flight-of-fantasy," but....) |
| Date: 2009/10/06 13:08:18, Link 76.246.143.113 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
And yet, you haven't actually tried to address them beyond saying that the Pope agrees with you, while ignoring that the Pope has made numerous statements repeatedly contradicting your claim of incompatibility. |
| Date: 2009/10/06 13:09:31, Link 76.246.143.113 | ||||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||||
While you're waiting for FL to address this, I recommend you take up a hobby: like knitting afghans for Clydesdales or piano cozies. |
| Date: 2009/10/06 13:16:01, Link 76.246.143.113 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Go easy on FL: it's not his fault that he neither knows or cares that his Lies for Jesus are not the same as actual evidence. |
| Date: 2009/10/06 13:40:13, Link 76.246.143.113 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
The Pope will out himself as a reptilian space alien before FL will provide actual evidence to support himself. |
| Date: 2009/10/06 21:39:28, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Why should the Pope care about Rosenhouse's opinions? Why would you expect that the Pope's faith was as weak and shallow as your faith that you have to take the otherwise unwanted advice of meddling atheists to figure out your relationship with God? |
| Date: 2009/10/06 21:42:32, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Weren't the Pharisees doing something very, very similar that got Jesus so pissed off that Our Savior threw a temper tantrum in the Temple? |
| Date: 2009/10/07 07:58:27, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Define how one can do tests, rely on observations or even make logical explanations in a science that uses appeals to the supernatural as explanations. Oh, wait, you can't, and that's why the Intelligent Design movement has both done absolutely nothing in the last 2 to 3 decades since it was conceived, and why the higher-ups in the Intelligent Design movement have confessed that Intelligent Design was intended to be nothing more than a Trojan Horse for Creationism and Jesus, and was never to be an alternative to Evolution(ary Biology) in the first place. |
| Date: 2009/10/07 08:01:06, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||
You mean like the !Kung? |
| Date: 2009/10/07 21:01:23, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
You're new around these parts, aren't you kid? |
| Date: 2009/10/07 21:04:17, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
He never will. |
| Date: 2009/10/08 13:52:59, Link 76.246.143.113 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
Well, technically, you can discuss evolution without mentioning deep time if you're talking about recent examples of evolution, i.e., the development of new breeds of domesticated animals, new biological innovations among agricultural pests, etc. On the other hand, when you move on to more esoteric and or touchy matters like the interrelationships of big taxa and or fossil taxa (i.e., birds vs reptiles, or ammonites, etc), then the acceptance of deep time is automatic. |
| Date: 2009/10/08 20:58:52, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
|
Among other things, it was pointed out that there were three reefs, composed of very different organisms, stacked within the stratum of the Grand Canyon, with no species from one reef found within any of the others, nor fossils of any modern day reef-dwelling organism found within any of them. How is your explanation supposed to imply that there was one reef buried? Furthermore, even if there was one reef, how does your explain demonstrate that the whole structure was formed, and then eroded within the same flood that lasted 40 days and 40 nights? I mean, you do realize that the limestone, shale, gneiss and granites of the Grand Canyon are profoundly different than the loosely consolidated ash of Mt St Helens, right? As for the crinoids: when they're found intact, that means they were buried quickly, because of a storm, not a flood. A catastrophic flood would suggest a great deal of violent turbation, something that would not lend to preserving intact crinoids. Also, you fail to explain how a catastrophic flood would not only bury a reef with great violence, yet, be also able to preserve footprints, as well. As for your whining about cancerous hate, well, it seems very odd that you would whine about being so busy with your real life, yet, find plenty of time to piss and moan about us being assholes, even though you, yourself, have demonstrated that you're an even bigger Asshole for Jesus. |
| Date: 2009/10/08 21:09:16, Link 71.107.19.55 |
| Author: Stanton |
| One more thing, why would there be dolomite in the Grand Canyon, if dolomite can not be formed or deposited in a flood? |
| Date: 2009/10/08 21:15:41, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
The tests and skeletons of echinoderms, except sand dollars, do indeed tend to disarticulate very quickly due to decomposition of the connecting tissue: we see this in both fossil and modern species. On the other hand, this doesn't mean that the intact crinoids prove that the Grand Canyon was lain down in a magic flood. Echinoderm tests and skeletons will also quickly disarticulate when exposed to violent forces, such as turbulence caused by a (magic) flood. |
| Date: 2009/10/08 21:54:30, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
You should be bushwhacked with a gorse bush for suggesting something so utterly obscene. |
| Date: 2009/10/08 23:02:34, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||
| Author: Stanton | ||
I suppose so. I used to laugh at similar such things and situations when I was a child, but, I was forced to grow out of it, as my mother kept lecturing me, "De-de, stop staking the slugs on pine needles for the ants. It's not a nice hobby to have." |
| Date: 2009/10/08 23:03:51, Link 71.107.19.55 | ||||||
| Author: Stanton | ||||||
You mean, along the lines of "Ahah! The jig is up!" "And gone!" |
=====