| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Horny CockSucker" |
| Date: |
06 Jul 2005 11:57:04 AM |
| Object: |
EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
I have just proved that evolution could not have happened.
If evolution took took place then ugly women would not exist.
.
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
10 Jul 2005 07:36:26 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 23:21:29 GMT, DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com>
wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 16:03:15 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 19:13:40 -0400, Eric Brze <brze@no.spam.mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
God is a Spirit. To seek the physical existence of God is to seek an
idol.
So, all those Biblical descriptions of God as a physical being are
lies?
Depends.
Genesis 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the
garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves
from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.
There was never Adam and Eve. It's a story to convey important
spiritual meanings.
Perhaps you can talk to duke about this. I'm sure that you two would
have some excellent discussions. :-)
Not a problem for me. I discuss with people from both sides of aisle.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
10 Jul 2005 05:50:27 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 12:53:02 -0400, Eric Brze <brze@no.spam.mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 16:03:15 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 19:13:40 -0400, Eric Brze <brze@no.spam.mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
God is a Spirit. To seek the physical existence of God is to seek an
idol.
So, all those Biblical descriptions of God as a physical being are
lies?
Depends.
On what?
Genesis 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the
garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves
from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.
There was never Adam and Eve. It's a story to convey important
spiritual meanings.
Good, you're getting there. Now realize that everything in the Bible
is mistold histories, propaganda, and borrowed older myths and you'll
be one of us!
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
10 Jul 2005 07:31:16 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 22:50:27 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 12:53:02 -0400, Eric Brze <brze@no.spam.mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 16:03:15 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 19:13:40 -0400, Eric Brze <brze@no.spam.mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
God is a Spirit. To seek the physical existence of God is to seek an
idol.
So, all those Biblical descriptions of God as a physical being are
lies?
Depends.
On what?
The truth, of course.
Genesis 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the
garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves
from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.
There was never Adam and Eve. It's a story to convey important
spiritual meanings.
Good, you're getting there. Now realize that everything in the Bible
is mistold histories, propaganda, and borrowed older myths and you'll
be one of us!
Well, I never argue about all of the above, I only concentrate on the
spiritual meaning of the teaching, and the Bible is like a cakewalk to
me. What do you say? Care to join me to find out what I have found out
already?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "EB" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
08 Jul 2005 07:24:38 PM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 20:42:29 GMT, EB <nylicens@frontiernet.net> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 17:29:04 GMT, EB <nylicens@frontiernet.net> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 11:44:11 GMT, EB <nylicens@frontiernet.net> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:41:53 -0400, John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net>
wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 20:36:32 +0200, "Niels van der Linden"
<n.f.l.vanderlinden@student.utwente.nl> wrote:
I image all the creatures had a long walk, swim or fly to their destinations
around the globle where they can only live, including all their surrounding
animals and plants (which had the most trouble getting there).
It's a mystery that life continues to prosper after so many
catastrophic destructions that have happened on this planet.
But not so much of a mystery as it used to be.
Remember that the two main processes at work to during evolution are
imperfect reproduction and death.
There is no such process.
Death doesn't happen??
Death is not the same as life. It's the opposite of life.
Since everything dies, being alive means you will be dead.
Imperfect reproduction doesn't happen?? Maybe you
need a biology refresher course.
Imperfect beneficial reproduction doesn't happen. It's a wishful
thinking.
Yeh, I guess all those biologists and farmers don't have a clue. Maybe
this will help:
No, it won't help you. The fact the current genetic engineering is not
a natural random selection process but a highly skilled, strictly
conditioned, advanced biotechnology shows the "beneficial
reproduction" can not happen without the involvement of intelligence
to *force* it to happen.
You didn't read the report now did you?
I need you to speak it in your own words before I can comment on it. I
don't debate with report.
Benficial mutations happen. Just do a search on the genetics of corn,
just for one small example. The report details a European mutation
(probably spread from the selection of people by Black Death) that
allows them to be infected with HIV, yet not have symptoms.
It's just like water running bubbling down
stream. It may sometimes make a splash to wet the dry ground, but it
will never run up stream to irrigate the higher field unless there is
a force to cause it to do so. Beneficial genetic mutation and natural
selection is the work of highly concentrated intelligent force.
For which you can provide no evidence.
It's simple logic.
What causes the water to flow downhill? Ahh, do you mean to claim that
gravity is intelligent?
As for the evidence of beneficial genetic mutation,
that's your job.
Nope. That's been demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt. Any basic
biology text will have the information.
Science can not find the source of such force, that doesn't mean such
force is not needed.
Well, if it don't exist that pretty much is the definition that it's not
needed ;-)
Actually, you should have realized how powerless science is. It can
see the work of God, but can never find God himself.
And this is a problem...?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
09 Jul 2005 03:47:22 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 00:24:38 GMT, EB <nylicens@frontiernet.net> wrote:
Death is not the same as life. It's the opposite of life.
Since everything dies, being alive means you will be dead.
Still the dead can not speak for the living.
snip
I need you to speak it in your own words before I can comment on it. I
don't debate with report.
Benficial mutations happen.
I never deny that. I only pointed out it would be the work of God if
indeed it was proven to be the beneficial mutation. BTW, the word
beneficial mutation is an oxymoron.
Just do a search on the genetics of corn,
just for one small example. The report details a European mutation
(probably spread from the selection of people by Black Death) that
allows them to be infected with HIV, yet not have symptoms.
It's just like water running bubbling down
stream. It may sometimes make a splash to wet the dry ground, but it
will never run up stream to irrigate the higher field unless there is
a force to cause it to do so. Beneficial genetic mutation and natural
selection is the work of highly concentrated intelligent force.
For which you can provide no evidence.
It's simple logic.
What causes the water to flow downhill? Ahh, do you mean to claim that
gravity is intelligent?
I was talking about the causes for the water to flow uphill not
downhill.
As for the evidence of beneficial genetic mutation,
that's your job.
Nope. That's been demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt. Any basic
biology text will have the information.
So? Life itself is the result of "beneficial genetic mutation".
Genetic structure is the building block of life, and God is the
designer and worker.
Science can not find the source of such force, that doesn't mean such
force is not needed.
Well, if it don't exist that pretty much is the definition that it's not
needed ;-)
Actually, you should have realized how powerless science is. It can
see the work of God, but can never find God himself.
And this is a problem...?
Of course. This is the problem why we disagree with each other.
Science has kept you from seeing the creator by focusing only on the
created.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mephisto" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
11 Jul 2005 11:23:24 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 15:18:37 -0400, Eric Brze <brze@no.spam.mail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 17:29:04 GMT, EB <nylicens@frontiernet.net> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 11:44:11 GMT, EB <nylicens@frontiernet.net> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:41:53 -0400, John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net>
wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 20:36:32 +0200, "Niels van der Linden"
<n.f.l.vanderlinden@student.utwente.nl> wrote:
I image all the creatures had a long walk, swim or fly to their destinations
around the globle where they can only live, including all their surrounding
animals and plants (which had the most trouble getting there).
It's a mystery that life continues to prosper after so many
catastrophic destructions that have happened on this planet.
But not so much of a mystery as it used to be.
Remember that the two main processes at work to during evolution are
imperfect reproduction and death.
There is no such process.
Death doesn't happen??
Death is not the same as life. It's the opposite of life.
Imperfect reproduction doesn't happen?? Maybe you
need a biology refresher course.
Imperfect beneficial reproduction doesn't happen. It's a wishful
thinking.
Yeh, I guess all those biologists and farmers don't have a clue. Maybe
this will help:
No, it won't help you. The fact the current genetic engineering is not
a natural random selection process but a highly skilled, strictly
conditioned, advanced biotechnology shows the "beneficial
reproduction" can not happen without the involvement of intelligence
to *force* it to happen. It's just like water running bubbling down
stream. It may sometimes make a splash to wet the dry ground, but it
will never run up stream to irrigate the higher field unless there is
a force to cause it to do so. Beneficial genetic mutation and natural
selection is the work of highly concentrated intelligent force.
Science can not find the source of such force, that doesn't mean such
force is not needed.
This is a wildly inaccurate representation.
Your argument is based on the idea that only an intelligence can
ensure that genetic mutations are beneficial and not detrimental. That
in itself is true. In reality however, detrimental genetic mutations
do occur. That invalidates the necessity for an intelligent
controller. In fact, it provides very clear evidence that there is no
intelligent controller. If there were, the mutations would not take
place at the same rate that would occur naturally (which they do), and
presumably intelligence would avoid detrimental mutations. All of the
evidence of genetics points to a complete lack of any intelligent
interference.
Your theory also ignores the fact that most mutations have no effect
on phenotype at all. More evidence that they occur naturally, and are
not being controlled.
If you're going to make claims about genetic mutation, you need to
learn some basic facts. The majority of mutations are *not*
beneficial.
Mephisto
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
11 Jul 2005 11:02:48 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:23:24 +0100, Mephisto <mephisto@go.away> wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 15:18:37 -0400, Eric Brze <brze@no.spam.mail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 17:29:04 GMT, EB <nylicens@frontiernet.net> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 11:44:11 GMT, EB <nylicens@frontiernet.net> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:41:53 -0400, John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net>
wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 20:36:32 +0200, "Niels van der Linden"
<n.f.l.vanderlinden@student.utwente.nl> wrote:
I image all the creatures had a long walk, swim or fly to their destinations
around the globle where they can only live, including all their surrounding
animals and plants (which had the most trouble getting there).
It's a mystery that life continues to prosper after so many
catastrophic destructions that have happened on this planet.
But not so much of a mystery as it used to be.
Remember that the two main processes at work to during evolution are
imperfect reproduction and death.
There is no such process.
Death doesn't happen??
Death is not the same as life. It's the opposite of life.
Imperfect reproduction doesn't happen?? Maybe you
need a biology refresher course.
Imperfect beneficial reproduction doesn't happen. It's a wishful
thinking.
Yeh, I guess all those biologists and farmers don't have a clue. Maybe
this will help:
No, it won't help you. The fact the current genetic engineering is not
a natural random selection process but a highly skilled, strictly
conditioned, advanced biotechnology shows the "beneficial
reproduction" can not happen without the involvement of intelligence
to *force* it to happen. It's just like water running bubbling down
stream. It may sometimes make a splash to wet the dry ground, but it
will never run up stream to irrigate the higher field unless there is
a force to cause it to do so. Beneficial genetic mutation and natural
selection is the work of highly concentrated intelligent force.
Science can not find the source of such force, that doesn't mean such
force is not needed.
This is a wildly inaccurate representation.
Your argument is based on the idea that only an intelligence can
ensure that genetic mutations are beneficial and not detrimental. That
in itself is true. In reality however, detrimental genetic mutations
do occur. That invalidates the necessity for an intelligent
controller. In fact, it provides very clear evidence that there is no
intelligent controller. If there were, the mutations would not take
place at the same rate that would occur naturally (which they do), and
presumably intelligence would avoid detrimental mutations. All of the
evidence of genetics points to a complete lack of any intelligent
interference.
That's because the process of creation is not happening at this time.
In the past 5000 years, life has been on the cycle of destruction
instead of construction. That is why science can only observe the
detrimental genetic mutations, and beneficial genetic mutation is rare
to find.
Your theory also ignores the fact that most mutations have no effect
on phenotype at all. More evidence that they occur naturally, and are
not being controlled.
Because the building was designed strong, the small amount of
crippling in the wall wont matter much to the main structure of the
building. That only proves the designer of the building is a good
engineer.
If you're going to make claims about genetic mutation, you need to
learn some basic facts. The majority of mutations are *not*
beneficial.
In this world of evil, that is certainly true. In the next world of
good, it will not be true anymore.
Mephisto
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
08 Jul 2005 07:33:20 AM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:41:53 -0400, John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net>
wrote:
(snip)
Remember that the two main processes at work to during evolution are
imperfect reproduction and death.
There is no such process.
That was a list of two processes. The evidence is clear that both of
them happen.
Life is always created at the micro cellular
level as perfect organism right from the beginning.
Were you there at the beginning? What micro cellular life have you
witnessed being created?
The disruption from the natural environment will inevitably
cause genetic deterioration to the original gene structure.
But after each catastrophic natural/unnatural disaster,
life always manages to restore its original perfection.
There is no perfection in life.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
08 Jul 2005 11:38:59 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 08:33:20 -0400, John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net>
wrote:
Were you there at the beginning?
Yes, and no. You will never know. :-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ordog" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
07 Jul 2005 06:38:12 AM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 01:32:21 +0200, "Niels van der Linden"
<n.f.l.vanderlinden@student.utwente.nl> wrote:
While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, [..]
~~~I imagine a fish who's fins evolved into legs through genetic variation
and natural selection~~~
Bingo!
http://www.calacademy.org/science_now/images/coelac1.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelacanth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobe-finned_fish
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammal
Let's try again:
~~~I imagine an all-mighty creator of all who takes care of everyone so that
no-one is suffering and everybody is happy~~~
Damnit. Didn't work...
How about try to imagine this picture.
Imagine, in the beginning while the newly formed planet Earth is still
in a state of constant volcano eruptions and unending storms. The
entire planet was literally a pond of DNA soup. From that same pond of
DNA soup, almost altogether rises all life forms. While the
temperature of the "soup" is cooling down, more complicated species
continue to emerge until the "soup" finally dries up.
No "evolution" is required, we all belong to one big family. IOW, fish
is not our ancestor, it's our next of kin which happens to live in the
sea.
It is more likely that there was a RNA soup first. The first life forms
must have been Extremophiles followed by the rest as conditions slowly
changed on the surface. During that time God was vacationing in an
other Universe!
Ordog
"Beware of the man whose God is in the skies." Bernard Shaw
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
07 Jul 2005 07:01:55 AM |
|
|
On 7 Jul 2005 04:38:12 -0700, "Ordog" <odbok001@sneakemail.com> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 01:32:21 +0200, "Niels van der Linden"
<n.f.l.vanderlinden@student.utwente.nl> wrote:
While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, [..]
~~~I imagine a fish who's fins evolved into legs through genetic variation
and natural selection~~~
Bingo!
http://www.calacademy.org/science_now/images/coelac1.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelacanth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobe-finned_fish
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammal
Let's try again:
~~~I imagine an all-mighty creator of all who takes care of everyone so that
no-one is suffering and everybody is happy~~~
Damnit. Didn't work...
How about try to imagine this picture.
Imagine, in the beginning while the newly formed planet Earth is still
in a state of constant volcano eruptions and unending storms. The
entire planet was literally a pond of DNA soup. From that same pond of
DNA soup, almost altogether rises all life forms. While the
temperature of the "soup" is cooling down, more complicated species
continue to emerge until the "soup" finally dries up.
No "evolution" is required, we all belong to one big family. IOW, fish
is not our ancestor, it's our next of kin which happens to live in the
sea.
It is more likely that there was a RNA soup first. The first life forms
must have been Extremophiles followed by the rest as conditions slowly
changed on the surface. During that time God was vacationing in an
other Universe!
I don't have to care about the details, and it's only an imaginary
picture anyway. But the spirit of God is definitely involved since the
creation of DNA/RNA and the formation of all different species
*directly* from the pond of DNA soup is a process that requires
extraordinary intelligence that is beyond human comprehension.
Ordog
"Beware of the man whose God is in the skies." Bernard Shaw
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
06 Jul 2005 06:19:08 PM |
|
|
fred wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to confirming
evolution concepts with respect to things that also had to be confirmed
at the molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Evidently, English is not your first language. Care to try that again?
This time, use the Queen's English. ;-)
You're right! I changed a word!
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to proving evolution
concepts with respect to things that also had to be confirmed at the
molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Except that atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. Atheism
doesn't presume evolution, nor does evolution presume atheism.
Oops!
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "fred" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
06 Jul 2005 07:38:51 PM |
|
|
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to confirming
evolution concepts with respect to things that also had to be confirmed
at the molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Evidently, English is not your first language. Care to try that again?
This time, use the Queen's English. ;-)
You're right! I changed a word!
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to proving evolution
concepts with respect to things that also had to be confirmed at the
molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Except that atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. Atheism
doesn't presume evolution, nor does evolution presume atheism.
Great, atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. :^)
SHOW ME where I stated that atheism and evolution are the same entity.
Otherwise, you are evidently reading things into what I stated, but so
what?
The reason that I mentioned atheists and evolutionists in the same
breath is because certain people who identify with these groups are
known for their informal, unscientific belief that there is no God.
Oops!
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
06 Jul 2005 07:45:36 PM |
|
|
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1120696731.903921.230560@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to confirming
evolution concepts with respect to things that also had to be
confirmed
at the molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Evidently, English is not your first language. Care to try that again?
This time, use the Queen's English. ;-)
You're right! I changed a word!
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to proving evolution
concepts with respect to things that also had to be confirmed at the
molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Except that atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. Atheism
doesn't presume evolution, nor does evolution presume atheism.
Great, atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. :^)
SHOW ME where I stated that atheism and evolution are the same entity.
Otherwise, you are evidently reading things into what I stated, but so
what?
The reason that I mentioned atheists and evolutionists in the same
breath is because certain people who identify with these groups are
known for their informal, unscientific belief that there is no God.
There is nothing informal about it Fred, there is no god. Not yours or the
Muslims or the Hindu's nor any other religions god. They don't exist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Horny CockSucker" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
07 Jul 2005 01:51:26 PM |
|
|
There is nothing informal about it Fred, there is no god. Not yours or the
Muslims or the Hindu's nor any other religions god. They don't exist.
READ GENESIS. Genesis will tell you that there is one God and this God
created heaven and earth. Any information you may have heard about
evolution are lies fabricated cleverly by Satan. Read the bible and you
won't go far wrong.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "fred" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
06 Jul 2005 10:22:42 PM |
|
|
Tom wrote:
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1120696731.903921.230560@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to confirming
evolution concepts with respect to things that also had to be
confirmed
at the molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Evidently, English is not your first language. Care to try that again?
This time, use the Queen's English. ;-)
You're right! I changed a word!
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to proving evolution
concepts with respect to things that also had to be confirmed at the
molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Except that atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. Atheism
doesn't presume evolution, nor does evolution presume atheism.
Great, atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. :^)
SHOW ME where I stated that atheism and evolution are the same entity.
Otherwise, you are evidently reading things into what I stated, but so
what?
The reason that I mentioned atheists and evolutionists in the same
breath is because certain people who identify with these groups are
known for their informal, unscientific belief that there is no God.
There is nothing informal about it Fred, there is no god. Not yours or the
Muslims or the Hindu's nor any other religions god. They don't exist.
Hey there Tom. Thank you for your opinion about God.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
06 Jul 2005 10:29:56 PM |
|
|
fred wrote:
Tom wrote:
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1120696731.903921.230560@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to confirming
evolution concepts with respect to things that also had to be
confirmed
at the molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Evidently, English is not your first language. Care to try that again?
This time, use the Queen's English. ;-)
You're right! I changed a word!
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to proving evolution
concepts with respect to things that also had to be confirmed at the
molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Except that atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. Atheism
doesn't presume evolution, nor does evolution presume atheism.
Great, atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. :^)
SHOW ME where I stated that atheism and evolution are the same entity.
Otherwise, you are evidently reading things into what I stated, but so
what?
The reason that I mentioned atheists and evolutionists in the same
breath is because certain people who identify with these groups are
known for their informal, unscientific belief that there is no God.
There is nothing informal about it Fred, there is no god. Not yours or the
Muslims or the Hindu's nor any other religions god. They don't exist.
Hey there Tom. Thank you for your opinion about God.
It's not an opinion.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "fred" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
07 Jul 2005 12:31:36 PM |
|
|
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
Tom wrote:
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1120696731.903921.230560@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to confirming
evolution concepts with respect to things that also had to be
confirmed
at the molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Evidently, English is not your first language. Care to try that again?
This time, use the Queen's English. ;-)
You're right! I changed a word!
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to proving evolution
concepts with respect to things that also had to be confirmed at the
molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Except that atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. Atheism
doesn't presume evolution, nor does evolution presume atheism.
Great, atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. :^)
SHOW ME where I stated that atheism and evolution are the same entity.
Otherwise, you are evidently reading things into what I stated, but so
what?
The reason that I mentioned atheists and evolutionists in the same
breath is because certain people who identify with these groups are
known for their informal, unscientific belief that there is no God.
There is nothing informal about it Fred, there is no god. Not yours or the
Muslims or the Hindu's nor any other religions god. They don't exist.
Hey there Tom. Thank you for your opinion about God.
It's not an opinion.
Thank you for your opinion about your opinion.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Niels van der Linden" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
06 Jul 2005 08:05:12 PM |
|
|
The reason that I mentioned atheists and evolutionists in the same
breath is because certain people who identify with these groups are
known for their informal, unscientific belief that there is no God.
Faith has nothing to do with evidence, that's why it's called faith. If
there were evidence, no faith would be required. That's the whole 'quest'.
If you think you believe because of evidence, then you're no true believer.
Also the Bible is no evidence, and you know it, but it shouldn't even be
brought into the picture, because faith doesn't rely on evidence.
*Any acknowledgement of evidence is a forfeit of faith*
However:
Since faith is evidence-less, it's arbitrary. No two theists have the same
image of 'God' in their minds. This is not a surprise, because if 'God'
would actually speak to them, that would be evidence (evidence grounded in
subjective experience). Because of this we know that faith is completely
'unidirectional', and because of this an image of 'God' has to be made-up,
and all claims of speaking 'God's' will are completely up to the person, and
subsequently are arbitrary at most but more often than not egocentric,
corrupt, immoral and destructive.
--
Niels
Atheist #2237
"The thing that saved me was Upanishads; Hinduism. Where you have
practically the same mythology [as Roman Catholicism], but it has been
intellectually interpreted. Say, already in the 9th century BC the Hindus
realized that all the deities are projections of psychological powers and
they are within you not out there [points away]."
-Joseph Campbell in The Hero's Journey
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
06 Jul 2005 07:46:58 PM |
|
|
fred wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to confirming
evolution concepts with respect to things that also had to be confirmed
at the molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Evidently, English is not your first language. Care to try that again?
This time, use the Queen's English. ;-)
You're right! I changed a word!
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to proving evolution
concepts with respect to things that also had to be confirmed at the
molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Except that atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. Atheism
doesn't presume evolution, nor does evolution presume atheism.
Great, atheism and evolution are two disparate entities. :^)
SHOW ME where I stated that atheism and evolution are the same entity.
Otherwise, you are evidently reading things into what I stated, but so
what?
"You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists."
In the same breath usually means that you equate the two. If you did
not mean to equate them, then I apologize.
The reason that I mentioned atheists and evolutionists in the same
breath is because certain people who identify with these groups are
known for their informal, unscientific belief that there is no God.
Nope. "No god" is not an informal, unscientific belief. "God",
however, is. "Irreducible complexity" is not scientific.
Oops!
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
09 Jul 2005 04:00:34 AM |
|
|
fred wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
fred wrote:
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity.
"Irreducible complexity" is a myth involving lies about bombadier
beetles and what not.
The thing most impressive about the process is that there is no such
irreducible complexity.
~Iain
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "EB" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
07 Jul 2005 07:45:38 AM |
|
|
fred wrote:
You forgot to note that atheists and so called evolution scientists
have also fallen on their faces with respect to being able to address
the hard, scientific question of irreducible complexity. While
atheists and evolutionists were using their imaginations to draw
pictures of fish growing legs and crawling out of the water, they
evidently forgot to do their homework with respect to confirming
evolution concepts with respect to things that also had to be confirmed
at the molecular level where cell chemistry is concerned. Oops!
Gee, you must have missed this 443 page college text:
http://www.sinauer.com/detail.php?id=2666
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "SheBlewHimDidYouBlowHim" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
11 Jul 2005 07:07:37 PM |
|
|
it is true that evolution didn't give us such wisdom as
"don't plow with an ox and a donkey together".
Deuteronomy 22:10 and 11
10 Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together. 11 Do not wear
clothes of wool and linen woven together
Thanks god, where the hell would we be without those words of wisdom. I can
see how a supreme being would want to pass this wisdom on.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
11 Jul 2005 10:08:08 PM |
|
|
"SheBlewHimDidYouBlowHim" <killgod@killgod.com> wrote in message
news:dRDAe.1995$oZ.1304@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
it is true that evolution didn't give us such wisdom as
"don't plow with an ox and a donkey together".
Deuteronomy 22:10 and 11
10 Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together. 11 Do not wear
clothes of wool and linen woven together
Thanks god, where the hell would we be without those words of wisdom. I
can see how a supreme being would want to pass this wisdom on.
Just because you are too stupid to understand it doesn;t make *it* stupid.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
12 Jul 2005 12:31:02 AM |
|
|
Susan Cohen wrote:
"SheBlewHimDidYouBlowHim" <killgod@killgod.com> wrote in message
news:dRDAe.1995$oZ.1304@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
it is true that evolution didn't give us such wisdom as
"don't plow with an ox and a donkey together".
Deuteronomy 22:10 and 11
10 Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together. 11 Do not wear
clothes of wool and linen woven together
Thanks god, where the hell would we be without those words of wisdom. I
can see how a supreme being would want to pass this wisdom on.
Just because you are too stupid to understand it doesn;t make *it* stupid.
OK Sue, so I'm waiting for your explanation, and whilst you are at it,
explain these as well:
5:7 And if he be not able to bring a lamb, then he shall bring for his
trespass, which he hath committed, two turtledoves, or two young
pigeons, unto the LORD; one for a sin offering, and the other for a
burnt offering.
5:8 And he shall bring them unto the priest, who shall offer that which
is for the sin offering first, and wring off his head from his neck,
but shall not divide it asunder
15:16 And if any man's seed of copulation go out from him, then he
shall wash all his flesh in water, and be unclean until the even.
15:17 And every garment, and every skin, whereon is the seed of
copulation, shall be washed with water, and be unclean until the even.
15:19 And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be
blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her
shall be unclean until the even.
YOU SEE THESE SIMPLE PRIMITIVES THOUGHT THAT PROCREATION AS DETERMINED BY THE
EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS WAS SOME KIND OF SIN. HOW STUPID CAN THEY GET!
19:19 Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender
with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed:
neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.
19:27 Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou
mar the corners of thy beard.
19:28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor
print any marks upon you: I am the LORD
19:30 Ye shall keep my sabbaths, and reverence my sanctuary: I am the
LORD.
23:12 And ye shall offer that day when ye wave the sheaf an he lamb
without blemish of the first year for a burnt offering unto the LORD.
23:13 And the meat offering thereof shall be two tenth deals of fine
flour mingled with oil, an offering made by fire unto the LORD for a
sweet savour : and the drink offering thereof shall be of wine, the
fourth part of .......
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "goozlefotz" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
16 Jul 2005 03:36:36 PM |
|
|
bob young wrote:
15:16 And if any man's seed of copulation go out from him, then he
shall wash all his flesh in water, and be unclean until the even.
15:17 And every garment, and every skin, whereon is the seed of
copulation, shall be washed with water, and be unclean until the even.
Gee, I had that happen too many times to count and I never obeyed those
rules. Am I going to go to hell? Seeing as I enjoyed it, I guess it
was worth it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "ריעין ברתון/Riain Barton" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
16 Jul 2005 06:44:33 PM |
|
|
1. There is no Hell -- Judaism is not about scaring people into their
traditions.
2. Unless you are Jewish then these laws do not apply to you.
3. They only apply to Jews when they are planning on entering the Beit
Ha-Mikdash [Temple]. And since there is no Temple...
4. Although most Jews follow some of these laws without knowing it...
Most men take a shower first thing in the morning. And more traditional
Jews will not only shower but also go to a Mikveh [Ritual Pool] every
morning.
"goozlefotz" <granteer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1121546196.842935.195020@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
:
:
: bob young wrote:
: >
: > 15:16 And if any man's seed of copulation go out from him, then he
: > shall wash all his flesh in water, and be unclean until the even.
: >
: > 15:17 And every garment, and every skin, whereon is the seed of
: > copulation, shall be washed with water, and be unclean until the
even.
: >
: Gee, I had that happen too many times to count and I never obeyed
those
: rules. Am I going to go to hell? Seeing as I enjoyed it, I guess it
: was worth it.
:
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "cactus" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
16 Jul 2005 11:24:36 PM |
|
|
goozlefotz wrote:
bob young wrote:
15:16 And if any man's seed of copulation go out from him, then he
shall wash all his flesh in water, and be unclean until the even.
15:17 And every garment, and every skin, whereon is the seed of
copulation, shall be washed with water, and be unclean until the even.
Gee, I had that happen too many times to count and I never obeyed those
rules. Am I going to go to hell? Seeing as I enjoyed it, I guess it
was worth it.
What's hell?
.
|
|
|
| User: "El Bleacho" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
16 Jul 2005 11:30:55 PM |
|
|
cactus wrote:
What's hell?
Being within 100 feet of my college sweetheart.
--
_____________________
I am hung like Einstein;
and as smart as a horse!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: EVOLUTION DISPROVED. |
06 Jul 2005 03:39:48 PM |
|
|
on 06 Jul 2005 in alt.atheism, dear sweet Horny *****
(hsdi123@xyz.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
I have just proved that evolution could not have happened.
If evolution took took place then ugly women would not exist.
I find your lack of ALLCAPS disturbing.
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
http://home.comcast.net/~vickman/
______________
'03 XVS650A
'04 XVS1100
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
