| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Budikka666" |
| Date: |
15 Apr 2006 08:01:26 PM |
| Object: |
Another "Missing Link" Hominid Found |
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7086/abs/nature04629.html
and
tinyurl.com/z7uu7
The creationists are being pushed further and further into the darkest
corners with their god of the gaps "argument". One wonders if
eventually they'll go >*poof*< and simply disappear. Hope springs
eternal.
Budikka
.
|
|
| User: "-¬Saba Gracile-¬" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
22 Apr 2006 06:02:27 AM |
|
|
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> skrev i melding news:Mvednd_Eg-JfT9XZnZ2dnUVZ8sydnZ2d@bt.com...
"Mindfucked" <mindfucked@bulldoghome.com> wrote in message news:e2aglt$vva$1@emma.aioe.org...
"Michael Gray" <fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in message
news:v8hg42hiu0nbb7ge5rs67qndi8lgvcqmaa@4ax.com...
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it is
designed and also comes with software and all the programs
necessary for it's particular function fully functioning in all
its glory, would you ask where the human who made it can be
found? You wouldn't even assume that it wasn't a designer of it
somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god could
create
a whole Universe how come he couldn't write his own scrolls? Why did
he
need humans to do it for him?
--
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or feather or
whatever
they used back then) and that would be so much easier? I think not.
Saba
Hahahahahahaha!
Your god can create the universe and all life within it (according to you
god botherers) but writing stuff down is beyond him/her/it?
Of course appearing in person seems to be beyond him/her/it.
And her gods seem to have appalling judgement when choosing followers!
They have a strict cutoff point where no-one with an IQ of more than
5.7 is allowed in.
Proof - references?
LOL!
Proof? Read Saba "my god would of needed a really big pen to write things down" Gracille's posts
Yeah like I would *really* think he'd need a big pen. I am the one taliking about
other dimensions of existance and I would'nt have to point to meathead explanations
like that unless it was meant for meatheads to imagine.
Saba
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mindfucked" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
21 Apr 2006 02:52:03 PM |
|
|
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:Mvednd_Eg-JfT9XZnZ2dnUVZ8sydnZ2d@bt.com...
"Mindfucked" <mindfucked@bulldoghome.com> wrote in message
news:e2aglt$vva$1@emma.aioe.org...
"Michael Gray" <fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in message
news:v8hg42hiu0nbb7ge5rs67qndi8lgvcqmaa@4ax.com...
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it is
designed and also comes with software and all the programs
necessary for it's particular function fully functioning in all
its glory, would you ask where the human who made it can be
found? You wouldn't even assume that it wasn't a designer of it
somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god could
create
a whole Universe how come he couldn't write his own scrolls? Why
did
he
need humans to do it for him?
--
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or feather
or
whatever
they used back then) and that would be so much easier? I think not.
Saba
Hahahahahahaha!
Your god can create the universe and all life within it (according to
you
god botherers) but writing stuff down is beyond him/her/it?
Of course appearing in person seems to be beyond him/her/it.
And her gods seem to have appalling judgement when choosing followers!
They have a strict cutoff point where no-one with an IQ of more than
5.7 is allowed in.
Proof - references?
LOL!
Proof? Read Saba "my god would of needed a really big pen to write things
down" Gracille's posts
If she doesn't know the size of his hands it would be quite silly. In
Saba's defence; whenever I have seen portrayals of 'the hands of god' they
have always been quite large - it's logical then that a god with big hands
would need a correspondingly large pen to hold in them - Don't you think?
On that basis, I see no reason whatsoever to suspect that Saba has a low IQ.
It's her imaginary god; if she wants an imaginary god with large hands, then
so be it - who am I to argue?
.
|
|
|
| User: "-¬Saba Gracile-¬" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
22 Apr 2006 06:04:27 AM |
|
|
"Mindfucked" <mindfucked@bulldoghome.com> skrev i melding news:e2bd38$t8f$1@emma.aioe.org...
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:Mvednd_Eg-JfT9XZnZ2dnUVZ8sydnZ2d@bt.com...
"Mindfucked" <mindfucked@bulldoghome.com> wrote in message
news:e2aglt$vva$1@emma.aioe.org...
"Michael Gray" <fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in message
news:v8hg42hiu0nbb7ge5rs67qndi8lgvcqmaa@4ax.com...
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it is
designed and also comes with software and all the programs
necessary for it's particular function fully functioning in all
its glory, would you ask where the human who made it can be
found? You wouldn't even assume that it wasn't a designer of it
somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god could
create
a whole Universe how come he couldn't write his own scrolls? Why
did
he
need humans to do it for him?
--
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or feather
or
whatever
they used back then) and that would be so much easier? I think not.
Saba
Hahahahahahaha!
Your god can create the universe and all life within it (according to
you
god botherers) but writing stuff down is beyond him/her/it?
Of course appearing in person seems to be beyond him/her/it.
And her gods seem to have appalling judgement when choosing followers!
They have a strict cutoff point where no-one with an IQ of more than
5.7 is allowed in.
Proof - references?
LOL!
Proof? Read Saba "my god would of needed a really big pen to write things
down" Gracille's posts
If she doesn't know the size of his hands it would be quite silly. In
Saba's defence; whenever I have seen portrayals of 'the hands of god' they
have always been quite large - it's logical then that a god with big hands
would need a correspondingly large pen to hold in them - Don't you think?
On that basis, I see no reason whatsoever to suspect that Saba has a low IQ.
It's way above average, on different tets. *brag*
It's her imaginary god; if she wants an imaginary god with large hands, then
so be it - who am I to argue?
I didn't need an imaginary god, it's just that it's the best explanation so far for
the systems of intelligent creation that actually exists, proof in their very own existance.
Saba
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mindfucked" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
22 Apr 2006 02:46:46 PM |
|
|
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:4NWdnSe6qpkhkNfZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
On that basis, I see no reason whatsoever to suspect that Saba has a low
IQ.
It's way above average, on different tets. *brag*
What do tests show other than the ability to pass tests?
It's her imaginary god; if she wants an imaginary god with large hands,
then
so be it - who am I to argue?
I didn't need an imaginary god, it's just that it's the best explanation
so far for
the systems of intelligent creation that actually exists, proof in their
very own existance.
Your wholehearted belief in that assumption proves nothing other than what
perceptual framework you consistently adopt to consider these kinds of
questions in relation to.
.
|
|
|
| User: "-¬Saba Gracile-¬" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
23 Apr 2006 01:18:59 PM |
|
|
"Mindfucked" <mindfucked@bulldoghome.com> skrev i melding news:e2e1qv$722$1@emma.aioe.org...
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:4NWdnSe6qpkhkNfZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
On that basis, I see no reason whatsoever to suspect that Saba has a low
IQ.
It's way above average, on different tets. *brag*
What do tests show other than the ability to pass tests?
correct.. an IQ test only tests how good you are at that specific psychometric test.
That's why high all mighty scientists can be stupid idiots in a hundred other ways.
It's her imaginary god; if she wants an imaginary god with large hands,
then
so be it - who am I to argue?
I didn't need an imaginary god, it's just that it's the best explanation
so far for
the systems of intelligent creation that actually exists, proof in their
very own existance.
Your wholehearted belief in that assumption proves nothing other than what
perceptual framework you consistently adopt to consider these kinds of
questions in relation to.
best explanation, I said. BEST.
Saba
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
24 Apr 2006 08:11:51 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 20:18:59 +0200, in alt.atheism , "-¬Saba
Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> in
<arSdnTDRSpGFWNbZ4p2dnA@telenor.com> wrote:
"Mindfucked" <mindfucked@bulldoghome.com> skrev i melding news:e2e1qv$722$1@emma.aioe.org...
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:4NWdnSe6qpkhkNfZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
On that basis, I see no reason whatsoever to suspect that Saba has a low
IQ.
It's way above average, on different tets. *brag*
What do tests show other than the ability to pass tests?
correct.. an IQ test only tests how good you are at that specific psychometric test.
That's why high all mighty scientists can be stupid idiots in a hundred other ways.
Why, for that matter, do you think they necessarily have high IQs? A
good scientist may well be stupid in other ways (thought I suspect you
might have trouble finding a way that John von Neumann was stupid). In
fact, it does not matter at all about the person that is the
scientist, discuss the work instead.
[snip]
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mindfucked" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
24 Apr 2006 12:58:54 PM |
|
|
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:hhjp42p2ock0f98bv9uaf0kv3hujt8hs2v@4ax.com...
On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 20:18:59 +0200, in alt.atheism , "-¬Saba
Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> in
<arSdnTDRSpGFWNbZ4p2dnA@telenor.com> wrote:
"Mindfucked" <mindfucked@bulldoghome.com> skrev i melding
news:e2e1qv$722$1@emma.aioe.org...
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:4NWdnSe6qpkhkNfZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
On that basis, I see no reason whatsoever to suspect that Saba has a
low
IQ.
It's way above average, on different tets. *brag*
What do tests show other than the ability to pass tests?
correct.. an IQ test only tests how good you are at that specific
psychometric test.
That's why high all mighty scientists can be stupid idiots in a hundred
other ways.
Why, for that matter, do you think they necessarily have high IQs? A
good scientist may well be stupid in other ways (thought I suspect you
might have trouble finding a way that John von Neumann was stupid). In
fact, it does not matter at all about the person that is the
scientist, discuss the work instead.
I tried to make a similar point to Mr Gray - concerning judging posts by
their content rather than the writer - I was slapped down for it.
I expect you will escape similar censure.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
21 Apr 2006 09:58:34 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 12:47:02 +0100, "Mindfucked"
<mindfucked@bulldoghome.com> wrote:
- Refer: <e2aglt$vva$1@emma.aioe.org>
"Michael Gray" <fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in message
news:v8hg42hiu0nbb7ge5rs67qndi8lgvcqmaa@4ax.com...
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it is
designed and also comes with software and all the programs
necessary for it's particular function fully functioning in all
its glory, would you ask where the human who made it can be
found? You wouldn't even assume that it wasn't a designer of it
somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god could
create
a whole Universe how come he couldn't write his own scrolls? Why did
he
need humans to do it for him?
--
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or feather or
whatever
they used back then) and that would be so much easier? I think not.
Saba
Hahahahahahaha!
Your god can create the universe and all life within it (according to you
god botherers) but writing stuff down is beyond him/her/it?
Of course appearing in person seems to be beyond him/her/it.
And her gods seem to have appalling judgement when choosing followers!
They have a strict cutoff point where no-one with an IQ of more than
5.7 is allowed in.
Proof - references?
LOL!
There go another 5 irony meters!
--
Michael Gray.
Founding Member and Doorman,
Earthquack's 666 Club.
EAC Trainee Inquisitor.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Goren" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence forID? |
20 Apr 2006 10:09:48 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
kathryn wrote:
?Saba Gracile? wrote:
My 2 ¢ wrote:
Ben Goren wrote:
?Saba Gracile? wrote:
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it
is designed and also comes with software and all the
programs necessary for it's particular function fully
functioning in all its glory, would you ask where the human
who made it can be found? You wouldn't even assume that it
wasn't a designer of it somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god
could create a whole Universe how come he couldn't write his
own scrolls? Why did he need humans to do it for him?
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or
feather or whatever they used back then) and that would be so
much easier? I think not.
Hahahahahahaha!
Your god can create the universe and all life within it
(according to you god botherers) but writing stuff down is
beyond him/her/it? Of course appearing in person seems to be
beyond him/her/it.
And her gods seem to have appalling judgement when choosing
followers! They have a strict cutoff point where no-one with an
IQ of more than 5.7 is allowed in.
Is that metric or Imperial?
Cheers,
b&
--
EAC Memographer
BAAWA Knight of Blasphemy
``All but God can prove this sentence true.''
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
21 Apr 2006 12:02:19 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 20:09:48 -0700, Ben Goren <ben@trumpetpower.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <q0vlh3-llm.ln1@reiche.trumpetpower.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
kathryn wrote:
?Saba Gracile? wrote:
My 2 ¢ wrote:
Ben Goren wrote:
?Saba Gracile? wrote:
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it
is designed and also comes with software and all the
programs necessary for it's particular function fully
functioning in all its glory, would you ask where the human
who made it can be found? You wouldn't even assume that it
wasn't a designer of it somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god
could create a whole Universe how come he couldn't write his
own scrolls? Why did he need humans to do it for him?
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or
feather or whatever they used back then) and that would be so
much easier? I think not.
Hahahahahahaha!
Your god can create the universe and all life within it
(according to you god botherers) but writing stuff down is
beyond him/her/it? Of course appearing in person seems to be
beyond him/her/it.
And her gods seem to have appalling judgement when choosing
followers! They have a strict cutoff point where no-one with an
IQ of more than 5.7 is allowed in.
Is that metric or Imperial?
Yes, it is.
--
Michael Gray.
Founding Member and Doorman,
Earthquack's 666 Club.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?My_2_=A2?=" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
18 Apr 2006 02:42:43 PM |
|
|
"¬ Saba Gracile¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:ufmdnT2pdsL9u9jZRVnzvA@telenor.com...
"My 2 ¢" <invalid@invalid.invalid> skrev i melding
news:1145376130.385057@hosting.ispresults.com...
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god could create
a whole Universe how come he couldn't write his own scrolls? Why did he
need humans to do it for him?
--
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or feather or
whatever
they used back then) and that would be so much easier? I think not.
Saba
What would be so hard about creating a feather and ink when you can create a
whole Universe?
--
2c
On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 05:56:15 -0600, (Boydette) wrote:
What its like to be "mind controlled"all your life???? I thought this
was a support group for people damaged by the JWs teachings??......I am
a classic example...learn from me....Boydette
===================================
-------------
Get FREE newsgroup access from http://www.cheap56k.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
18 Apr 2006 07:47:04 PM |
|
|
My 2 =A2 wrote:
"=AC Saba Gracile=AC" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:ufmdnT2pdsL9u9jZRVnzvA@telenor.com...
"My 2 =A2" <invalid@invalid.invalid> skrev i melding
news:1145376130.385057@hosting.ispresults.com...
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god could crea=
te
a whole Universe how come he couldn't write his own scrolls? Why did =
he
need humans to do it for him?
--
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or feather or
whatever
they used back then) and that would be so much easier? I think not.
Saba
What would be so hard about creating a feather and ink when you can creat=
e a
whole Universe?
It's not ink he's missing, it's "think"!
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
18 Apr 2006 07:34:46 PM |
|
|
=AC Saba Gracile=AC wrote:
"My 2 =A2" <invalid@invalid.invalid> skrev i melding news:1145376130.3850=
57@hosting.ispresults.com...
"Ben Goren" <ben@trumpetpower.com> wrote in message news:cdafh3-rv7.ln1=
@reiche.trumpetpower.com...
=AC Saba Gracile=AC wrote:
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it is
designed and also comes with software and all the programs
necessary for it's particular function fully functioning in all
its glory, would you ask where the human who made it can be
found? You wouldn't even assume that it wasn't a designer of it
somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god could creat=
e a whole Universe how come
he couldn't write his own scrolls? Why did he need humans to do it for=
him?
--
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or feather or wh=
atever
they used back then) and that would be so much easier? I think not.
Those last three words pretty much define you and your ilk, don't they?
Do you know what makes me laugh my ***** off about you creationists? Let
me share it with you. It's that you have the blind, unthinking gall to
claim (without a shred of published science to support you) that your
god is magnificent and only he could have "designed" nature, then you
turn right around and give de facto admission after admission that he's
the most incompetent, hamfisted, brain-dead, clueless designer ever to
create.
Your message here is a case in point. Humans erected the pyramids.
Around the same time as the Great pyramid was constructed, primitive
humans (even by Egyptian standards) erected Stonehenge.
Those monuments still stand today and speak to us. We may not always
understand what they say, but even at that, they still tell us there
was an intelligence and a purpose to the work which no human can
pervert.
What idiots like you would have us believe is that there is a perfect,
omnisicent, omnipotent god who had all eternity in which to work and
infinite reosurces upon which to call, and the best he could do with
all of that is what we see. And then you would have us believe that
this god of yours couldn't even find a permanent and unequivocal way to
let us know a single reliable thing about him or his purpose without
letting humans ***** it up.
Uh-huh. Yeah. Right.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "¬ Saba Gracile¬" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
19 Apr 2006 04:16:28 AM |
|
|
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> skrev i melding
news:1145406886.109603.104050@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
"My 2 ¢" <invalid@invalid.invalid> skrev i melding
news:1145376130.385057@hosting.ispresults.com...
"Ben Goren" <ben@trumpetpower.com> wrote in message
news:cdafh3-rv7.ln1@reiche.trumpetpower.com...
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it is
designed and also comes with software and all the programs
necessary for it's particular function fully functioning in all
its glory, would you ask where the human who made it can be
found? You wouldn't even assume that it wasn't a designer of it
somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god could create a whole Universe how
come
he couldn't write his own scrolls? Why did he need humans to do it for him?
--
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or feather or whatever
they used back then) and that would be so much easier? I think not.
Those last three words pretty much define you and your ilk, don't they?
-->it was kind of a joke which went over your head. If he wrote the bible himself
in 10 seconds, would anybody believe in it more? no, but he connects with humans
in what he did, that's one important factor that you missed.
Do you know what makes me laugh my ***** off about you creationists? Let
me share it with you. It's that you have the blind, unthinking gall to
claim (without a shred of published science to support you) that your
god is magnificent and only he could have "designed" nature, then you
turn right around and give de facto admission after admission that he's
the most incompetent, hamfisted, brain-dead, clueless designer ever to
create.
-->brain-dead? He designed the brain, that makes him a rocket scientist in my eyes.
Your message here is a case in point. Humans erected the pyramids.
Around the same time as the Great pyramid was constructed, primitive
humans (even by Egyptian standards) erected Stonehenge.
--->*clap clap* That proves God's inexistance? Nobody knows how those
stones where put there, neither does scientists believe that some of the most advanced
crop circles are made by man (what ever that implies). We have a 3D understanding
of the world from our senses. That doesn't mean that is all there is. It's just that we can't
experience it. There could be other life forms, beings, and they could be close as
the air we breathe, but we don't see it. In a 1000 years, the scientists will laugh at
themselves for being so narrow minded. And you would laugh at your super scepticism
if you could.
Those monuments still stand today and speak to us. We may not always
understand what they say, but even at that, they still tell us there
was an intelligence and a purpose to the work which no human can
pervert.
---> So what's your point, about these things? You believe in some stones, fantastic as
they are, but not in a creation of intelligence? Yes, we have perverted a great deal, that
doesn't mean that there wasn't a devine purpose without the pervertion to begin with. Why
does one thing rule out another for you guys? Isn't it possible to have more than one
thought in ones head at a time?
What idiots like you would have us believe is that there is a perfect,
omnisicent, omnipotent god who had all eternity in which to work and
infinite reosurces upon which to call, and the best he could do with
all of that is what we see. And then you would have us believe that
this god of yours couldn't even find a permanent and unequivocal way to
let us know a single reliable thing about him or his purpose without
letting humans ***** it up.
--->If he came down and showed you his miracles, you would say it's a natural phenomenon
or that you were dreaming. I don't believe in a creator just after a second of bliss or something
like you seem to think. It's more of a tiresome and thoughtful calculation process, that this in
fact
must be the cause of everything. A mind that wanted differenct spieces as their own artforms in
flesh. This is what evidence agree with, so why not?
Humans with free will have screwed up all they can, and then it's up to the creator to come
show how it should be, and now we will have the reasons we need to agree. He would never
force his will on us, as we would still doubt our freedom if he did. What would you do if you
were God, force everybody to do what he wants or make them realize that his ways are probably the
best idea?
Uh-huh. Yeah. Right.
---uh huh yea back at you.
Saba
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
19 Apr 2006 07:06:15 PM |
|
|
=AC Saba Gracile=AC wrote:
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> skrev i melding
news:1145406886.109603.104050@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
=AC Saba Gracile=AC wrote:
"My 2 =A2" <invalid@invalid.invalid> skrev i melding
news:1145376130.385057@hosting.ispresults.com...
"Ben Goren" <ben@trumpetpower.com> wrote in message
news:cdafh3-rv7.ln1@reiche.trumpetpower.com...
=AC Saba Gracile=AC wrote:
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it is
designed and also comes with software and all the programs
necessary for it's particular function fully functioning in all
its glory, would you ask where the human who made it can be
found? You wouldn't even assume that it wasn't a designer of it
somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god could cre=
ate a whole Universe how
come
he couldn't write his own scrolls? Why did he need humans to do it f=
or him?
--
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or feather or =
whatever
they used back then) and that would be so much easier? I think not.
Those last three words pretty much define you and your ilk, don't they?
-->it was kind of a joke which went over your head.
I never addressed your joke, I addressed your inability to think
outside the box you've jammed yourself into. But at least I addressed
what you wrote. That's more than you have the guts to do vis-a-vis
what I write.
If he wrote the bible himself
in 10 seconds, would anybody believe in it more? no, but he connects with=
humans
in what he did, that's one important factor that you missed.
Once again, we have dumb-*****-ertion from you. **WHICH PART OF WHERE IS
YOUR EVIDENCE** is it that's over your reading and comprehension level?
Clearly you've either not intelligently read what I wrote or been
unable to comprehend it. Which is it?
Do you know what makes me laugh my ***** off about you creationists? Let
me share it with you. It's that you have the blind, unthinking gall to
claim (without a shred of published science to support you) that your
god is magnificent and only he could have "designed" nature, then you
turn right around and give de facto admission after admission that he's
the most incompetent, hamfisted, brain-dead, clueless designer ever to
create.
-->brain-dead? He designed the brain, that makes him a rocket scientist i=
n my eyes.
Once again, we have dumb-*****-ertion from you. **WHICH PART OF WHERE IS
YOUR EVIDENCE** is it that's over your reading and comprehension level?
Your message here is a case in point. Humans erected the pyramids.
Around the same time as the Great pyramid was constructed, primitive
humans (even by Egyptian standards) erected Stonehenge.
--->*clap clap* That proves God's inexistance? Nobody knows how those
stones where put there,
Yes they do, dimwit. We even know where they came from. Try Ancient
History 101.
neither does scientists
And take Grammar for Retards 101 while you're at it.
believe that some of the most advanced
crop circles are made by man (what ever that implies). We have a 3D under=
standing
of the world from our senses. That doesn't mean that is all there is.
We know for a fact that isn't all there is, dimwit. Try Theoretical
Physics 101
It's just that we can't
experience it. There could be other life forms, beings, and they could be=
close as
the air we breathe, but we don't see it.
Oh there is so much that you don't see, but here you are making
unsupported grade-school debating society assertions again. Nowhere
can you support a single thing you blindly claim. If you can't see
what's wrong with your position, you seriously need to get back into
therapy. Seriously. I'm not joking here.
In a 1000 years, the scientists will laugh at
themselves for being so narrow minded. And you would laugh at your super =
scepticism
if you could.
I'm much to busy laughing at your juvenile unsupported idiotic
assertions. Unsupported is what you are, which is as hilarious as it
is ironic given your claims of a loving, supportive god.
Those monuments still stand today and speak to us. We may not always
understand what they say, but even at that, they still tell us there
was an intelligence and a purpose to the work which no human can
pervert.
---> So what's your point, about these things?
Read what I wrote, imbecile. I explained it all as simply as I can
without using baby-talk to you.
You believe in some stones, fantastic as
they are, but not in a creation of intelligence?
The stones exist. They meant something. They have carried a message
from their creator down to us five or six thousand years later. They
came down to us in their original state, near damnit is to swearing.
So once again, for the educationally sub-normal among us, let me state
it in simple-syllable words so even **YOU** can grasp it: **THE POINT I
MADE WAS THAT IF HUMANS CAN DO THIS WHY CAN'T YOUR GOD GET A CLEAR
MESSAGE TO US, MORON?** - a message unperverted by humans.
Yes, we have perverted a great deal, that
doesn't mean that there wasn't a devine purpose without the pervertion to=
begin with.
And your evidence for this is? Oh! That's right! You have zero
evidence! All you have is childish fairytales that you're so desperate
for everyone else to believe. You cannot even state for a fact what
this putative purpose was, let alone establish that some god ordained
it.
There isn't a single thing you posted here that I could not substitute
"aliens" for "God" and have it just as "valid" as it was when you typed
it. I could substitute "humans from the future" for "aliens" or "god"
and have it say the same thing. What criteria do you have to make the
claim that it is a god rather than aliens or humans from the future or
simply nature that got us where we are today?
/FX: sound of crickets chirping/
I thought so.
Why
does one thing rule out another for you guys?
You're saying that reality shouldn't rule out whacko fairytales? Why
is *that* not a surprise?
Isn't it possible to have more than one
thought in ones head at a time?
Apparently not for you, as your inane blathering in this message has
proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.
What idiots like you would have us believe is that there is a perfect,
omnisicent, omnipotent god who had all eternity in which to work and
infinite reosurces upon which to call, and the best he could do with
all of that is what we see. And then you would have us believe that
this god of yours couldn't even find a permanent and unequivocal way to
let us know a single reliable thing about him or his purpose without
letting humans ***** it up.
--->If he came down and showed you his miracles, you would say it's a nat=
ural phenomenon
If who came down? What miracles? What scientifically valid
**EVIDENCE** do you have that there is a god who can work miracles?
Which part of this is it that's just not penetrating your skull?
Because if you cannot offer a shred of evidence, then you might just as
well be claiming that Winnie-the-Pooh did it all as claim that god did
it, because you can offer an equal amount of support for either claim
(i.e. none).
or that you were dreaming. I don't believe in a creator just after a seco=
nd of bliss or something
like you seem to think.
There is no creator, period - unless you care to prove me wrong with
scientifically valid evidence. Can you do so? I thought not. So quit
blathering about this assinine myth and start supporting your claims.
It's more of a tiresome and thoughtful calculation process,
Nothing that you did is.
that this in
fact
must be the cause of everything. A mind that wanted differenct spieces a=
s their own artforms in
flesh. This is what evidence agree with, so why not?
What evidence supports this claim? Are you going to keep making
ridiculous claims and providing not a shred of evidence? Because if
you are, then I'm going to ridicule you in the harshest possible ways.
Humans with free will have screwed up all they can, and then it's up to t=
he creator to come
show how it should be,
Evidence? None.
and now we will have the reasons we need to agree. He would never
force his will on us,
Evidence? None. According to the Bible he already **DID** force his
will on us, so you're now a liar.
as we would still doubt our freedom if he did. What would you do if you
were God,
Take care of what I created instead of letting it go to Hell. I'd love
my children and talk to them frequently in ways they could not possibly
mistake. Not one of them would ever feel loneliness, helplessness or
despair.
force everybody to do what he wants or make them realize that his ways ar=
e probably the
best idea?
That's what your god does is we pretend there is one and look at the
evidence.
So enough of your mindless stupidity. Post your evidence for this god
- your scientific support for your claims - or shut-the-*****-up with
your infantile blather.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "¬Saba Gracile¬" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
20 Apr 2006 05:17:06 AM |
|
|
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> skrev i melding
news:1145491575.675546.310560@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> skrev i melding
news:1145406886.109603.104050@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
"My 2 ¢" <invalid@invalid.invalid> skrev i melding
news:1145376130.385057@hosting.ispresults.com...
"Ben Goren" <ben@trumpetpower.com> wrote in message
news:cdafh3-rv7.ln1@reiche.trumpetpower.com...
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it is
designed and also comes with software and all the programs
necessary for it's particular function fully functioning in all
its glory, would you ask where the human who made it can be
found? You wouldn't even assume that it wasn't a designer of it
somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god could create a whole Universe how
come
he couldn't write his own scrolls? Why did he need humans to do it for him?
--
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or feather or whatever
they used back then) and that would be so much easier? I think not.
Those last three words pretty much define you and your ilk, don't they?
-->it was kind of a joke which went over your head.
I never addressed your joke, I addressed your inability to think
outside the box you've jammed yourself into. But at least I addressed
what you wrote. That's more than you have the guts to do vis-a-vis
what I write.
-->you mean the box where every living thing stems from some living thing that there
is no proof of, just speculations from imaginative minds?
If he wrote the bible himself
in 10 seconds, would anybody believe in it more? no, but he connects with humans
in what he did, that's one important factor that you missed.
Once again, we have dumb-*****-ertion from you. **WHICH PART OF WHERE IS
YOUR EVIDENCE** is it that's over your reading and comprehension level?
Clearly you've either not intelligently read what I wrote or been
unable to comprehend it. Which is it?
--->take the first living organism that you see in front of you and look at it. There's
the evidence.
Do you know what makes me laugh my ***** off about you creationists? Let
me share it with you. It's that you have the blind, unthinking gall to
claim (without a shred of published science to support you) that your
god is magnificent and only he could have "designed" nature, then you
turn right around and give de facto admission after admission that he's
the most incompetent, hamfisted, brain-dead, clueless designer ever to
create.
-->brain-dead? He designed the brain, that makes him a rocket scientist in my eyes.
Once again, we have dumb-*****-ertion from you. **WHICH PART OF WHERE IS
YOUR EVIDENCE** is it that's over your reading and comprehension level?
Your message here is a case in point. Humans erected the pyramids.
Around the same time as the Great pyramid was constructed, primitive
humans (even by Egyptian standards) erected Stonehenge.
--->*clap clap* That proves God's inexistance? Nobody knows how those
stones where put there,
Yes they do, dimwit. We even know where they came from. Try Ancient
History 101.
-->last I read, nobody REALLY knew, but I guess what you evolutionists do is
just imagine something and then it's true!
neither does scientists
And take Grammar for Retards 101 while you're at it.
--ZZZ
believe that some of the most advanced
crop circles are made by man (what ever that implies). We have a 3D understanding
of the world from our senses. That doesn't mean that is all there is.
We know for a fact that isn't all there is, dimwit. Try Theoretical
Physics 101
--->well congratulations, you've exceeded your petty little pin head mind!
It's just that we can't
experience it. There could be other life forms, beings, and they could be close as
the air we breathe, but we don't see it.
Oh there is so much that you don't see, but here you are making
unsupported grade-school debating society assertions again. Nowhere
can you support a single thing you blindly claim. If you can't see
what's wrong with your position, you seriously need to get back into
therapy. Seriously. I'm not joking here.
---> I could give a calculation directly of other dimensions and what happens
in hyperdimensions etc, but what a waste of energy. So I wont.
In a 1000 years, the scientists will laugh at
themselves for being so narrow minded. And you would laugh at your super scepticism
if you could.
I'm much to busy laughing at your juvenile unsupported idiotic
assertions. Unsupported is what you are, which is as hilarious as it
is ironic given your claims of a loving, supportive god.
-zzz
Those monuments still stand today and speak to us. We may not always
understand what they say, but even at that, they still tell us there
was an intelligence and a purpose to the work which no human can
pervert.
---> So what's your point, about these things?
Read what I wrote, imbecile. I explained it all as simply as I can
without using baby-talk to you.
You believe in some stones, fantastic as
they are, but not in a creation of intelligence?
The stones exist. They meant something. They have carried a message
from their creator down to us five or six thousand years later. They
came down to us in their original state, near damnit is to swearing.
So once again, for the educationally sub-normal among us, let me state
it in simple-syllable words so even **YOU** can grasp it: **THE POINT I
MADE WAS THAT IF HUMANS CAN DO THIS WHY CAN'T YOUR GOD GET A CLEAR
MESSAGE TO US, MORON?** - a message unperverted by humans.
--->So, stones means something (whoah, deep), and people with biotechnological
matter like gello for brains can make one laugh, cry, experience, think, philosophise,
be in love, hate, be conflicted, find new ideas, etc etc. And that doesn't MEAN something
to you ? Splendid reasonning. Stones you defend with your life, but humans with their souls are
just well oh, there, for no reason at all.
Saba
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
20 Apr 2006 08:08:26 PM |
|
|
=ACNo Sabe Nada=AC blindly blathered:
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> skrev i melding
I never addressed your joke, I addressed your inability to think
outside the box you've jammed yourself into. But at least I addressed
what you wrote. That's more than you have the guts to do vis-a-vis
what I write.
-->you mean the box where every living thing stems from some living thing=
that there
is no proof of, just speculations from imaginative minds?
Which part of 150 years of solid science published world-wide by people
of all faiths is above your kindergarten reading level?
If he wrote the bible himself
in 10 seconds, would anybody believe in it more? no, but he connects wi=
th humans
in what he did, that's one important factor that you missed.
Once again, we have dumb-*****-ertion from you. **WHICH PART OF WHERE IS
YOUR EVIDENCE** is it that's over your reading and comprehension level?
Clearly you've either not intelligently read what I wrote or been
unable to comprehend it. Which is it?
--->take the first living organism that you see in front of you and look =
at it. There's
the evidence.
No, you choose the organism, and please do enthrall us with your
erudition and provide the **SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT** for the claim for
design you just made. Because unless you are a biologist, a
paleontologist, a geneticist, a biochemist, or something along those
lines, your unsupported opinion is useless.
Do you know what makes me laugh my ***** off about you creationists? Let
me share it with you. It's that you have the blind, unthinking gall to
claim (without a shred of published science to support you) that your
god is magnificent and only he could have "designed" nature, then you
turn right around and give de facto admission after admission that he's
the most incompetent, hamfisted, brain-dead, clueless designer ever to
create.
-->brain-dead? He designed the brain, that makes him a rocket scientist=
in my eyes.
Once again, we have dumb-*****-ertion from you. **WHICH PART OF WHERE IS
YOUR EVIDENCE** is it that's over your reading and comprehension level?
Your message here is a case in point. Humans erected the pyramids.
Around the same time as the Great pyramid was constructed, primitive
humans (even by Egyptian standards) erected Stonehenge.
--->*clap clap* That proves God's inexistance? Nobody knows how those
stones where put there,
Yes they do, dimwit. We even know where they came from. Try Ancient
History 101.
-->last I read, nobody REALLY knew, but I guess what you evolutionists do=
is
just imagine something and then it's true!
Another example of your empty-headedness rising to the top. If this is
the best you can do, you're flushed. Now which part of **SUPPORT YOUR
CLAIMS WITH EVIDENCE** is it that just isn;t getting lodged in that
aerogel brain of yours?
neither does scientists
And take Grammar for Retards 101 while you're at it.
--ZZZ
That's why you didn't learn it the first time(s) - you slept through it
like you're sleeping through the rest of your life, dreaming that
you're awake.
believe that some of the most advanced
crop circles are made by man (what ever that implies). We have a 3D und=
erstanding
of the world from our senses. That doesn't mean that is all there is.
We know for a fact that isn't all there is, dimwit. Try Theoretical
Physics 101
--->well congratulations, you've exceeded your petty little pin head mind!
It's just that we can't
experience it. There could be other life forms, beings, and they could =
be close as
the air we breathe, but we don't see it.
Oh there is so much that you don't see, but here you are making
unsupported grade-school debating society assertions again. Nowhere
can you support a single thing you blindly claim. If you can't see
what's wrong with your position, you seriously need to get back into
therapy. Seriously. I'm not joking here.
---> I could give a calculation directly of other dimensions and what hap=
pens
in hyperdimensions etc, but what a waste of energy. So I wont.
Then it's just another of your pathetic, childish lies, isn't it?
In a 1000 years, the scientists will laugh at
themselves for being so narrow minded. And you would laugh at your supe=
r scepticism
if you could.
I'm much to busy laughing at your juvenile unsupported idiotic
assertions. Unsupported is what you are, which is as hilarious as it
is ironic given your claims of a loving, supportive god.
-zzz
Those monuments still stand today and speak to us. We may not always
understand what they say, but even at that, they still tell us there
was an intelligence and a purpose to the work which no human can
pervert.
---> So what's your point, about these things?
If you're truly this monumentally retarded, it's not worth trying to
explain it a third time.
Read what I wrote, imbecile. I explained it all as simply as I can
without using baby-talk to you.
You believe in some stones, fantastic as
they are, but not in a creation of intelligence?
The stones exist. They meant something. They have carried a message
from their creator down to us five or six thousand years later. They
came down to us in their original state, near damnit is to swearing.
So once again, for the educationally sub-normal among us, let me state
it in simple-syllable words so even **YOU** can grasp it: **THE POINT I
MADE WAS THAT IF HUMANS CAN DO THIS WHY CAN'T YOUR GOD GET A CLEAR
MESSAGE TO US, MORON?** - a message unperverted by humans.
--->So, stones means something (whoah, deep), and people with biotechnolo=
gical
matter like gello for brains can make one laugh, cry, experience, think, =
philosophise,
be in love, hate, be conflicted, find new ideas, etc etc. And that doesn'=
t MEAN something
to you ? Splendid reasonning. Stones you defend with your life, but human=
s with their souls are
just well oh, there, for no reason at all.
Saba
Thanks for comfirming once again that your brain is indeed somewhere
north of lead on the density scale.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mindfucked" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
19 Apr 2006 08:52:57 PM |
|
|
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1145491575.675546.310560@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
So enough of your mindless stupidity. Post your evidence for this god
- your scientific support for your claims - or shut-the-*****-up with
your infantile blather.
Now who doesn't realize that there are different cultures - different
minds...
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Goren" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence forID? |
19 Apr 2006 10:18:54 AM |
|
|
Please learn how to properly attribute your quotations. You've
fucked up this thread up rather badly. I've tried to clean it
up...but no guarantees I got it right....
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
Budikka666 wrote:
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
My 2 ¢ wrote:
Ben Goren wrote:
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it
is designed and also comes with software and all the
programs necessary for it's particular function fully
functioning in all its glory, would you ask where the human
who made it can be found? You wouldn't even assume that it
wasn't a designer of it somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god
could create a whole Universe how come he couldn't write his
own scrolls? Why did he need humans to do it for him? --
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or
feather or whatever they used back then) and that would be so
much easier? I think not.
Those last three words pretty much define you and your ilk,
don't they?
it was kind of a joke which went over your head. If he wrote the
bible himself in 10 seconds, would anybody believe in it more?
no, but he connects with humans in what he did, that's one
important factor that you missed.
Dude...the Bible is some of the worst and worngest fiction ever
set to paper--/and/ it's just about the most IMmoral document ever
authored. I mean, come on! An all-loving superdude who plays
Jedi mind tricks on a hapless victim just to give himself an
excuse to murder hundreds of thousands of describedly-innocent
children? Infinite torture for 99% of humanity for failing to give
his son a good enough rim job? And that's not to mention all the
God-ordered genocides, mass rapes, cannibalism, infanticides,
slavery, and more.
Do you know what makes me laugh my ***** off about you
creationists? Let me share it with you. It's that you have
the blind, unthinking gall to claim (without a shred of
published science to support you) that your god is magnificent
and only he could have "designed" nature, then you turn right
around and give de facto admission after admission that he's
the most incompetent, hamfisted, brain-dead, clueless designer
ever to create.
brain-dead? He designed the brain, that makes him a rocket
scientist in my eyes.
And you typed that with a straight face? Rocket scientists doing
biochemical engineering?
Your message here is a case in point. Humans erected the
pyramids. Around the same time as the Great pyramid was
constructed, primitive humans (even by Egyptian standards)
erected Stonehenge.
*clap clap* That proves God's inexistance? Nobody knows how
those stones where put there,
<sigh>
The weren't ``put'' /anywhere./ They simply /are./
neither does scientists believe that some of the most advanced
crop circles are made by man (what ever that implies).
It implies that you're an illogical fuckwit who'll swallow
whatever some fast-talking con artist shoves down your throat. The
crop circles have been so well demonstrated to be public guerrilla
art (including the artists's own statements) that it's not even
funny.
We have a 3D understanding of the world from our senses. That
doesn't mean that is all there is. It's just that we can't
experience it. There could be other life forms, beings, and they
could be close as the air we breathe, but we don't see it.
Never heard of yeast? Oh, that's right. I bet you think it's some
grain angel that makes bread rise.
In a 1000 years, the scientists will laugh at themselves for
being so narrow minded. And you would laugh at your super
scepticism if you could.
Well, in that case, you shouldn't have even the slightest trouble
offering up some evidence to back your superstitious idiocy.
You know how, a couple thousand years later, you think the ancient
Egyptians were absolute morons for believing in Ra and Set and
Horus? Well, that's /exactly/ the same kind of moron /you/
are for still believing in YHWH, Ha-Satan, and Kristos--the
then-contemporary nearly perfectly parallel challengers to the
Egyptian old guard.
Those monuments still stand today and speak to us. We may not
always understand what they say, but even at that, they still
tell us there was an intelligence and a purpose to the work
which no human can pervert.
So what's your point, about these things? You believe in some
stones, fantastic as they are, but not in a creation of
intelligence? Yes, we have perverted a great deal, that doesn't
mean that there wasn't a devine purpose without the pervertion
to begin with. Why does one thing rule out another for you guys?
Because only perfection can come from perfection. If your
invisible friend were perfect, his creation would have been
perfect. That includes, of course, perfect safeguards against his
perfect creation corrupting itself.
By admitting that humans have perverted your favorite faerie's
well-laid plans, you unequivocally demonstrate that it's powerless
in the face of the feeble flailings of its own fabrication.
Isn't it possible to have more than one thought in ones head at
a time?
In your case, I'd settle for just one.
What idiots like you would have us believe is that there is a
perfect, omnisicent, omnipotent god who had all eternity in
which to work and infinite reosurces upon which to call, and
the best he could do with all of that is what we see. And then
you would have us believe that this god of yours couldn't even
find a permanent and unequivocal way to let us know a single
reliable thing about him or his purpose without letting humans
***** it up.
If he came down and showed you his miracles, you would say it's
a natural phenomenon or that you were dreaming.
But that's a moot point, isn't it? He never even tries. You'd have
us believe that, mere hundreds of generations ago, miracles were
happening all over the place--talking snakes and shrubbery, dudes
walking on water, other dudes walking under water. Yet today? All
we get is photographic toast. Big whoop.
I don't believe in a creator just after a second of bliss or
something like you seem to think. It's more of a tiresome and
thoughtful calculation process, that this in fact must be the
cause of everything. A mind that wanted differenct spieces as
their own artforms in flesh. This is what evidence agree with,
so why not?
What is this ``evidence'' of which you speak? You've yet to offer
any.
Humans with free will have screwed up all they can, and then
it's up to the creator to come show how it should be, and now we
will have the reasons we need to agree. He would never force his
will on us, as we would still doubt our freedom if he did. What
would you do if you were God, force everybody to do what he
wants or make them realize that his ways are probably the best
idea?
Well, duh. I'd create beings that both had free will yet never did
anything evil. You know, like how you say your god is--in its own
image, and all that? And we /know/ that you think that's possible,
because that's exactly how you describe people once they get to
the Heaven-land amazement park.
So what the ***** is your god waiting for? What's with all this
***** he's inflicting on us in the mean time? If he wants
everybody to be ``perfect'' with him in Heaven, why not just
``make it so''?
Oh, right. I forgot--sorry. Your god is nothing more than the
verbal cape your handlers keep waving in front of you to distract
you while they fleece you of all your money.
Cheers,
b&
--
EAC Memographer
BAAWA Knight of Blasphemy
``All but God can prove this sentence true.''
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "¬Saba Gracile¬" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
19 Apr 2006 12:04:28 PM |
|
|
"Ben Goren" <ben@trumpetpower.com> skrev i melding news:001ih3-g78.ln1@reiche.trumpetpower.com...
--snip--
Well, duh. I'd create beings that both had free will yet never did
anything evil.
that just shows what a dufus you are. Case closed.
S
You know, like how you say your god is--in its own
image, and all that? And we /know/ that you think that's possible,
because that's exactly how you describe people once they get to
the Heaven-land amazement park.
So what the ***** is your god waiting for? What's with all this
***** he's inflicting on us in the mean time? If he wants
everybody to be ``perfect'' with him in Heaven, why not just
``make it so''?
Stop complaining to me, he made humans to have them do as they wish
otherwize there'd just be a bunch of well functioning animals running around
right?
Oh, right. I forgot--sorry. Your god is nothing more than the
verbal cape your handlers keep waving in front of you to distract
you while they fleece you of all your money.
my money is not your concern, you can relax totally on that issue.
Saba
Cheers,
b&
--
EAC Memographer
BAAWA Knight of Blasphemy
``All but God can prove this sentence true.''
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Goren" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence forID? |
19 Apr 2006 02:29:46 PM |
|
|
¬Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
Ben Goren wrote:
Well, duh. I'd create beings that both had free will yet never
did anything evil.
that just shows what a dufus you are. Case closed.
Well, gee. I guess that means you must worship the Great Dufus
Himself. You know? The one who has free will but never does
anything evil? The one who magically makes all his *****-licking
buddies just like him as soon as they kick the bucket?
You know, like how you say your god is--in its own image, and
all that? And we /know/ that you think that's possible, because
that's exactly how you describe people once they get to the
Heaven-land amazement park.
So what the ***** is your god waiting for? What's with all this
***** he's inflicting on us in the mean time? If he wants
everybody to be ``perfect'' with him in Heaven, why not just
``make it so''?
Stop complaining to me, he made humans to have them do as they
wish otherwize there'd just be a bunch of well functioning
animals running around right?
Then I guess The Great Dufus and all those reanimated corpses in
Heaven are just a bunch of well-functioning animals running
around. Right?
Oh, right. I forgot--sorry. Your god is nothing more than the
verbal cape your handlers keep waving in front of you to
distract you while they fleece you of all your money.
my money is not your concern, you can relax totally on that
issue.
Except, of course, that your money pays for some of the nastiest
***** on the planet. I can so totally relax as the Christian
Rightards do their damndest to unleash the Armageddon you're
paying them to create....
Cheers,
b&
--
EAC Memographer
BAAWA Knight of Blasphemy
``All but God can prove this sentence true.''
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "¬Saba Gracile¬" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence for ID? |
19 Apr 2006 11:57:22 AM |
|
|
"Ben Goren" <ben@trumpetpower.com> skrev i melding news:001ih3-g78.ln1@reiche.trumpetpower.com...
Please learn how to properly attribute your quotations. You've
fucked up this thread up rather badly. I've tried to clean it
up...but no guarantees I got it right....
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
Budikka666 wrote:
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
My 2 ¢ wrote:
Ben Goren wrote:
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it
is designed and also comes with software and all the
programs necessary for it's particular function fully
functioning in all its glory, would you ask where the human
who made it can be found? You wouldn't even assume that it
wasn't a designer of it somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god
could create a whole Universe how come he couldn't write his
own scrolls? Why did he need humans to do it for him? --
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or
feather or whatever they used back then) and that would be so
much easier? I think not.
Those last three words pretty much define you and your ilk,
don't they?
it was kind of a joke which went over your head. If he wrote the
bible himself in 10 seconds, would anybody believe in it more?
no, but he connects with humans in what he did, that's one
important factor that you missed.
Dude...the Bible is some of the worst and worngest fiction ever
set to paper--/and/ it's just about the most IMmoral document ever
authored. I mean, come on! An all-loving superdude who plays
Jedi mind tricks on a hapless victim just to give himself an
excuse to murder hundreds of thousands of describedly-innocent
children? Infinite torture for 99% of humanity for failing to give
his son a good enough rim job? And that's not to mention all the
God-ordered genocides, mass rapes, cannibalism, infanticides,
slavery, and more.
So? you're an ancestor from some apes because of this?
Do you know what makes me laugh my ***** off about you
creationists? Let me share it with you. It's that you have
the blind, unthinking gall to claim (without a shred of
published science to support you) that your god is magnificent
and only he could have "designed" nature, then you turn right
around and give de facto admission after admission that he's
the most incompetent, hamfisted, brain-dead, clueless designer
ever to create.
brain-dead? He designed the brain, that makes him a rocket
scientist in my eyes.
And you typed that with a straight face? Rocket scientists doing
biochemical engineering?
If you don't know the term 'rocket scientist' as an ironic speaking of a
very clever person, then I'm sorry for you.
Your message here is a case in point. Humans erected the
pyramids. Around the same time as the Great pyramid was
constructed, primitive humans (even by Egyptian standards)
erected Stonehenge.
*clap clap* That proves God's inexistance? Nobody knows how
those stones where put there,
<sigh>
The weren't ``put'' /anywhere./ They simply /are./
watev
neither does scientists believe that some of the most advanced
crop circles are made by man (what ever that implies).
It implies that you're an illogical fuckwit who'll swallow
whatever some fast-talking con artist shoves down your throat. The
crop circles have been so well demonstrated to be public guerrilla
art (including the artists's own statements) that it's not even
funny.
I thought so too, definetely made by humans, with some rope and
wooden pieces. Then I saw this program, and I know one shouldn't believe
in ***** on TV, but genuine researchers said it couldn't have happened over
just half an hour by humans (like witnessed by tourists flying over and coming
back, 20 min later there was this complicated formation). They have been made
over 4 hours in darkness, and there was no people there. The complex patterns
were able to be done by many people, but it took 8-9 hours. And then there's some
metal on the sides of the pattern, showing advanced ways of the 'doers'.. and magnetic
stuff measured there, and the way they bend (like they've been
boiled or microwaved) in stead of being stumped on by feet. They hadn't cracked.
The crops were growing faster when their seeds had been magnetized like in the crop-
circles, a knowledge they're using to the fullest because of that. Sigh.. I hate writing this
much for a geek like you. But there was more, and I was baffled when I saw massive
rashes (or blood gatherings) come and go on camera when a person raised her hands
up and down towards the ground they litterally changed, and dissapeared, and came
back again when she lowered her hands. It was freaky.
Then there was this 6bit code.. well, only a computer scientist was able to decipher it
and there was a message.
Well! that's just ONE weird thing in this world. I don't have time for this ***** I have
3 papers left to do this semester. Bye!
SAba
We have a 3D understanding of the world from our senses. That
doesn't mean that is all there is. It's just that we can't
experience it. There could be other life forms, beings, and they
could be close as the air we breathe, but we don't see it.
Never heard of yeast? Oh, that's right. I bet you think it's some
grain angel that makes bread rise.
In a 1000 years, the scientists will laugh at themselves for
being so narrow minded. And you would laugh at your super
scepticism if you could.
Well, in that case, you shouldn't have even the slightest trouble
offering up some evidence to back your superstitious idiocy.
You know how, a couple thousand years later, you think the ancient
Egyptians were absolute morons for believing in Ra and Set and
Horus? Well, that's /exactly/ the same kind of moron /you/
are for still believing in YHWH, Ha-Satan, and Kristos--the
then-contemporary nearly perfectly parallel challengers to the
Egyptian old guard.
Those monuments still stand today and speak to us. We may not
always understand what they say, but even at that, they still
tell us there was an intelligence and a purpose to the work
which no human can pervert.
So what's your point, about these things? You believe in some
stones, fantastic as they are, but not in a creation of
intelligence? Yes, we have perverted a great deal, that doesn't
mean that there wasn't a devine purpose without the pervertion
to begin with. Why does one thing rule out another for you guys?
Because only perfection can come from perfection. If your
invisible friend were perfect, his creation would have been
perfect. That includes, of course, perfect safeguards against his
perfect creation corrupting itself.
By admitting that humans have perverted your favorite faerie's
well-laid plans, you unequivocally demonstrate that it's powerless
in the face of the feeble flailings of its own fabrication.
Isn't it possible to have more than one thought in ones head at
a time?
In your case, I'd settle for just one.
What idiots like you would have us believe is that there is a
perfect, omnisicent, omnipotent god who had all eternity in
which to work and infinite reosurces upon which to call, and
the best he could do with all of that is what we see. And then
you would have us believe that this god of yours couldn't even
find a permanent and unequivocal way to let us know a single
reliable thing about him or his purpose without letting humans
***** it up.
If he came down and showed you his miracles, you would say it's
a natural phenomenon or that you were dreaming.
But that's a moot point, isn't it? He never even tries. You'd have
us believe that, mere hundreds of generations ago, miracles were
happening all over the place--talking snakes and shrubbery, dudes
walking on water, other dudes walking under water. Yet today? All
we get is photographic toast. Big whoop.
I don't believe in a creator just after a second of bliss or
something like you seem to think. It's more of a tiresome and
thoughtful calculation process, that this in fact must be the
cause of everything. A mind that wanted differenct spieces as
their own artforms in flesh. This is what evidence agree with,
so why not?
What is this ``evidence'' of which you speak? You've yet to offer
any.
Humans with free will have screwed up all they can, and then
it's up to the creator to come show how it should be, and now we
will have the reasons we need to agree. He would never force his
will on us, as we would still doubt our freedom if he did. What
would you do if you were God, force everybody to do what he
wants or make them realize that his ways are probably the best
idea?
Well, duh. I'd create beings that both had free will yet never did
anything evil. You know, like how you say your god is--in its own
image, and all that? And we /know/ that you think that's possible,
because that's exactly how you describe people once they get to
the Heaven-land amazement park.
So what the ***** is your god waiting for? What's with all this
***** he's inflicting on us in the mean time? If he wants
everybody to be ``perfect'' with him in Heaven, why not just
``make it so''?
Oh, right. I forgot--sorry. Your god is nothing more than the
verbal cape your handlers keep waving in front of you to distract
you while they fleece you of all your money.
Cheers,
b&
--
EAC Memographer
BAAWA Knight of Blasphemy
``All but God can prove this sentence true.''
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Goren" |
|
| Title: Re: Creation Challenge: Where is Positive Scientific Evidence forID? |
19 Apr 2006 02:25:16 PM |
|
|
¬Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
Ben Goren wrote:
Budikka666 wrote:
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
My 2 ¢ wrote:
Ben Goren wrote:
¬ Saba Gracile¬ wrote:
If one takes a computer and looks inside it how neatly it
is designed and also comes with software and all the
programs necessary for it's particular function fully
functioning in all its glory, would you ask where the
human who made it can be found? You wouldn't even assume
that it wasn't a designer of it somewhere.
So who designed your god?
None of them will answer my questions either. If their god
could create a whole Universe how come he couldn't write
his own scrolls? Why did he need humans to do it for him?
--
Ok, that would be easy, he'd just need a monumental pen (or
feather or whatever they used back then) and that would be
so much easier? I think not.
Those last three words pretty much define you and your ilk,
don't they?
it was kind of a joke which went over your head. If he wrote
the bible himself in 10 seconds, would anybody believe in it
more? no, but he connects with humans in what he did, tha | | | | | |