AE BB DB Explorer

Search Terms (separate with commas, no spaces):

form_srcid: skeptic griggsy

form_srcid: skeptic griggsy

form_cmd: view_author

Your IP address is

View Author detected.

view author posts with search matches:

Retrieve source record and display it.


form_srcid: skeptic griggsy

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 = t2.member_id) WHERE MEMBER_NAME like 'skeptic griggsy%' and forum_view_threads LIKE '*' ORDER BY POST_DATE ASC


DB_result: Resource id #4

Date: 2006/11/27 06:57:07, Link
Author: skeptic griggsy
In the name of preserving morality, these people, in effect ,lie! And they misunderstand evolution period.

Date: 2006/11/27 07:28:29, Link
Author: skeptic griggsy
On arguments for God, Collins, Alister McGrath, Francisco Ayala and Kenneth Miller show incompetence ; on evolution they show competence . Faith leads them astray. :)    :angry:

Date: 2006/11/27 07:54:30, Link
Author: skeptic griggsy
Theistic evolution is an oxymoron, because it conflates natural selection [causalism] and telology .As Dr. Weisz notes:"End states are consequences, not foregone conclusions." Before that he notes""Causalism denies foreknowledge of terminal states,preordination,purposes ,goals and fixed fates." Therefore , there is an contradiction between causalism and telology such that theistic evolution is just obscurantism . Now to obviate that contradiction, theists such as Russell Stannard propose a two category classificatin of origins[ natural selection] or contingency and creation[teleoligy- God] or necessary being; but as Malcolm Diamond and Kai Nielsen note in their philosophy of religion books , that is a circular argument. Causalism does not need a divine intruder to work. That is just god of the gaps! :)    :angry:  :O

Date: 2007/11/23 09:00:33, Link
Author: skeptic griggsy
And William Dembski is a liar like Gish! ???

Date: 2007/11/25 14:06:33, Link
Author: skeptic griggsy
Gee,Emanuel, you sure like to be silly here as well at ST.Louis Skeptics! Galton was not responsible for Nazi eugenics.That was irrational as are your diatribes.
   Evolution does not lead to despair and moral turpitude.
   Remember how many of your kind get caught for moral turpitude?
   If such as you would read such as Lenny Flank honestly,you would fathom evolution instead of showing your inanity.
   This is valid name-calling as you do not provoke useful discussion whatsoever!
   Show where Kenny Flank is in error! Show where other evolutionists here are in error and @ Talk Origins.
    Now why think that liberal mothers would want to change the sexual orientation of their children as we are getting to be more tolerant of differences! I suppose that genectics are the key factor,but it is a non sequitur to think that mothers will want to change the orientation. Nor do I see homosexuals wanting homosexual children.
  One expects such blather from reactionaries! It,by the way ,would strengthen marriage by letting homosexuals marry each other.
 I conducted an imginary situation in thinking about being a bisexual. I can see why others might espouse our being so. I   don't find homosexuality or bisexuality terrible.It would just be mere taste to think so!
   We should work to encourage people to be their better selves.