| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Budikka666" |
| Date: |
19 Apr 2006 09:32:29 PM |
| Object: |
How a Mouse Became a Bat |
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/how_to_make_a_bat.php#more
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/bat_development.php#more
Budikka
.
|
|
| User: "Mindfucked" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Budikka Became a prat |
19 Apr 2006 09:44:09 PM |
|
|
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1145500349.134494.212400@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/how_to_make_a_bat.php#more
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/bat_development.php#more
Budikka
Do you recall when you became a prat? - when you:
Make the inference that a simple plural (meaning any number in excess of
one) infers or implies 'all'
Suggest that an abstract noun is a 'fact'
Suggest that the abstract noun in question is anything other than
a provisional understanding, subject to revision if and when a more cogent
understanding is arrived at.
Read and respond to what has been referred to as 'tedious equivocation'
Repeatedly lie about what has and has not said in earlier posts.
Embark on a pathetic ad hominem rant instead of focusing on the matter being
discussed.
Repeatedly applies pressure to his keyboard, despite previously pronuncing
such pressure to be a waste of effort.
Predicts that the other party in a discussion will 'run away' and then
promptly 'runs away' herself.
Cannot differentiate between an assertion of fact and an explicitly speaker
relative statement.
Repeatedly and stridently demands 'proof' from others yet cannot justify her
own half-assed statements.
Couldn't point out why, specifically, is saying:
"How is standing next to a nuclear missile about to detonate like
refusing to take the perceptual leap required to believe that because
something concievably or demonstrably could have occurred a certain
way, it did happen that way?"
Inconsistent with saying:
"evolution (which is an abstract noun) is a provisional
understanding, subject to revision if and when a more cogent understanding
is arrived at."?
A question she has been running from for several weeks, ever since the
question was asked in thread:
http://tinyurl.com/zueb3
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
19 Apr 2006 10:17:23 PM |
|
|
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1145500349.134494.212400@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/how_to_make_a_bat.php#more
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/bat_development.php#more
Budikka
Das Fleidermaus? Ack du lieber! :)
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Atheist ***** Extraordinaire
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Dawkins" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
19 Apr 2006 10:44:42 PM |
|
|
"Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in message
news:4aocq6FtjmiqU1@individual.net...
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1145500349.134494.212400@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/how_to_make_a_bat.php#more
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/bat_development.php#more
Budikka
Das Fleidermaus? Ack du lieber! :)
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Atheist ***** Extraordinaire
#1557
You militant atheists pretty much all work from the same script.
Although viewing yourselves as "free thinkers", you all have a Party Line
you follow rather closely.
It isn't difficult to anticipate your arguments on any
given point. Most intelligent religious individuals almost always can
correctly predict what
you'll say next.Interestingly, militant atheists get much of their beliefs
about "Christianity" from liberal Christians.
They'll pejoratively label all Christians as "Fundies",
then presumptively attack liberal theological concepts
they suppose us "Fundies" subscribe to !
Nearly all militant atheists are followers of the
religion of Scientism. Their priests wear white lab
coats. Their sacramental objects are the microscope,
the telescope, and the test tube. Blasphemy is to
deny the ultimate authority of science.
But the militant atheists -the ones who have devoted
their lives to refuting Christianity- are almost like the
demons ...who believe more firmly in God's existence
than do Christians !
It can unequivocally be stated that militant atheists are some
of the people who most solidly believe in God !
Ain't talking 'practical atheists' here ...those who don't
even think much about atheism. They're the true
atheists.
Professional atheists who've dedicated themselves
to eradicating the Lord do so because they hate Him.
They're the God-haters.
To which they'll invariably reply: 'How can we hate
something we don't believe in ?'.
Exactly ! It's their belief in God which drives them to
relentlessly attack Him.
Run of the mill, everyday 'practical atheists' don't
give God a second thought. They're the ones
I worry about.
Whereas militant atheists are fighting against the
innate knowledge of suppressed in their hearts.
As a militant atheist I can unequivocally state that there is no time in
your life that you
totally disbelieved in God. And -in fact- were driven to
work against the Lord by belief in Him !
It isn't that militant atheists don't believe God exists.
Instead: That they don't want God to exist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "sWITCHtower Willie" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 09:35:35 AM |
|
|
"Richard Dawkins" <Dawkins@InHell.com> wrote in message
news:PsD1g.53$k17.1411@news.uswest.net...
Professional atheists who've dedicated themselves
to eradicating the Lord do so because they hate Him.
Why would they hate something the don't believe in? Something they know
doesn't exist?
They're the God-haters.
Why do you fundies always fall back on this statement? I don't hate
Nebbishes or Shmoos - do you?
To which they'll invariably reply: 'How can we hate
something we don't believe in ?'.
Exactly ! It's their belief in God which drives them to
relentlessly attack Him.
And your Pastor or Priest told you this? Exposing something isn't attacking
it or do you call Det's and cops names for exposing criminals and criminal
activity?
Run of the mill, everyday 'practical atheists' don't
give God a second thought. They're the ones
I worry about.
Why? Because they're not known for killing people in the name of Allah or
your god?
Whereas militant atheists are fighting against the
innate knowledge of suppressed in their hearts.
As a militant atheist I can unequivocally state that there is no time in
your life that you
totally disbelieved in God.
Right! As small children they probably believed in this killer-god but soon
outgrew it just like their belief in Santa and the Easter bunny. But there
is a difference, Santa and the Bunny don't terrorize you with tales of
lakes-of-fire and hell if you don't kiss their behinds.
And -in fact- were driven to
work against the Lord by belief in Him !
It isn't that militant atheists don't believe God exists.
Instead: That they don't want God to exist.
Why would they CARE? You're spouting the typical fundy nonsense not to feel
foolish about believing in something with no more substance than Santa.
--
Willie........
Hellooooooo I will reprint it for you...."The Watchtower is not the
instrument of any man or any set of men...." In that case how did they get
the 1914 prediction flat wrong??? This statement is a clear indicator that
they are saying the WT is from GOD and no other. Where is the proof thet the
WT is God's instrument and not just the blatherings of men??? IT CAN'T BE
BOTH. Would a JW consider the bible to be the blatherings of men?? NO, it's
inspired by God himself they say. It isn't both, how can the WT be?
(Credit Derek)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian E. Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 07:47:05 PM |
|
|
In article <k_M1g.32304$Jk3.2702@bignews5.bellsouth.net>,
sWITCHtower Willie said...
They're the God-haters.
Why do you fundies always fall back on this statement?
Their quivers may be packed with arrows, but they're the same
five or six arrows endlessly duplicated.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tim K." |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
21 Apr 2006 09:31:17 PM |
|
|
"Richard Dawkins" <Dawkins@InHell.com> wrote in message
news:PsD1g.53$k17.1411@news.uswest.net...
You are such a moron.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sanitys little helper" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 07:11:37 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:44:42 -0700, Richard Dawkins wrote:
You militant atheists pretty much all work from the same script.
If Punxatawny Phil's tail fits....
--
Living your life by reading the Bible is a bit like cleaning your house by
reading the Sorcerer's Apprentice.
D Silverman FLAHN, SMLAHN
AA #2208, HB #6
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Goren" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
19 Apr 2006 11:56:52 PM |
|
|
Richard Dawkins wrote:
It isn't that militant atheists don't believe God exists.
Instead: That they don't want God to exist.
....and here in the cage to your right you can see the
latest addition to our collection here at The Living Museum
of Devolution, the laughable Limp ***** Dork. You can easily
recognize it by its incessantly repeated, plaintive--and always
irrelevant--babbling cries. The specimen you see before you has
been recorded as posting the /exact same/ meaningless drivel over
three times in less than a minute!
What's that, Sally? No, I'm afraid there's no sign that they'll be
going extinct any time soon, sad to say. You see, they've got some
unbelievably disgusting reproductive habits which are all to
effective. We'll leave the details for later--I'd hate to upset
your appetite right before lunch.
Next up, on your left, is the Revolting Raytard....
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: "SJAB1958" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 08:55:22 AM |
|
|
Budikka666 wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/how_to_make_a_bat.php#more
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/bat_development.php#more
Budikka
Funny how the creationists happily claim the fossil record is evidence
for a global flood, demand evidence of transitionals, but then ignore
the evidence of transitionals, yet leap at the fact that we havent
found a pre-bat transitional.
However I suspect the transitional, if and when it is found will have a
forepaw similar to that of the flying frog, see the photo at this link:
http://www.ecologyasia.com/verts/amphibians/wallace's_flying_frog.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "R. Pierce Butler" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
21 Apr 2006 10:57:10 AM |
|
|
"SJAB1958" <balfres@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1145541322.655659.171920
@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Budikka666 wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/how_to_make_a_bat.php#more
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/bat_development.php#more
Budikka
Funny how the creationists happily claim the fossil record is evidence
for a global flood, demand evidence of transitionals, but then ignore
the evidence of transitionals, yet leap at the fact that we havent
found a pre-bat transitional.
I have seen creationists claim the fossil record is:
A) placed there by god to test the faithful.
B) placed there by satan to confuse and bewilder.
C) a true record of the flood
I wonder how many other "explainations" there are.
pierce
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ReelMcKoi" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
19 Apr 2006 11:02:37 PM |
|
|
Budikka666 wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/how_to_make_a_bat.php#more
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/bat_development.php#more
Budikka
In part it states,
Here's an example where this insight is clarifying the evolution of an
organism: the fossil record of bats shows an abrupt appearance of
fairly sophisticated creatures with elongated digits, clearly capable
of gliding or powered flight, with no known intermediates. We expect
there were less fully flight-ready predecessors, but fossil
preservation is not kind to small, delicate boned animals. It's also
possible that the transitional period was fairly brief; it looks like
turning a paw into a long-fingered membranous wing may be a fairly
simple change on a molecular level.
Translation: We dont have a clue on transtionals for the Bat... lets
make one up, and up the ante on punc-eq. Eventually some will say this
is a fact.
.
|
|
|
| User: "¬Saba Gracile¬" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 07:03:18 AM |
|
|
"ReelMcKoi" <ReelMckoi@mailinator.com> skrev i melding
news:1145505757.368050.130470@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Budikka666 wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/how_to_make_a_bat.php#more
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/bat_development.php#more
Budikka
In part it states,
Here's an example where this insight is clarifying the evolution of an
organism: the fossil record of bats shows an abrupt appearance of
fairly sophisticated creatures with elongated digits, clearly capable
of gliding or powered flight, with no known intermediates. We expect
there were less fully flight-ready predecessors, but fossil
preservation is not kind to small, delicate boned animals. It's also
possible that the transitional period was fairly brief; it looks like
turning a paw into a long-fingered membranous wing may be a fairly
simple change on a molecular level.
Translation: We dont have a clue on transtionals for the Bat... lets
make one up, and up the ante on punc-eq. Eventually some will say this
is a fact.
Bang-on McKoi! This overgoes any sci.-fi I ever read, like a paw suddenly
turning into a batwing on a molecular level. Wow, wonder if even God could
do that?
Saba
Saba
.
|
|
|
| User: "Marie Calderone" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 01:38:04 PM |
|
|
"¬Saba Gracile¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:k9idnXyuLvMb5drZRVnzvA@telenor.com...
"ReelMcKoi" <ReelMckoi@mailinator.com> skrev i melding
news:1145505757.368050.130470@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
What does this have to do with ponds and fishkeeping?
Do you keep fish and aquariums in your home? Do you have a pond? If so, I'm
sure they would love to hear about them. If not, then please remove the
"rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc" NG from your replies to this cross-posted
thread.
Thanks
Meanwhile here are the FAQ's for your perusal.
rec.pond's FAQ are at:
http://www.geocities.com/justinm090/faq.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tekkamen" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 08:28:48 PM |
|
|
Marie Calderone wrote:
"=ACSaba Gracile=AC" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:k9idnXyuLvMb5drZRVnzvA@telenor.com...
"ReelMcKoi" <ReelMckoi@mailinator.com> skrev i melding
news:1145505757.368050.130470@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
What does this have to do with ponds and fishkeeping?
=20
Fish are evolved tadpoles! on topic now.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Prunefinger" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
21 Apr 2006 03:55:49 PM |
|
|
"Tekkamen" <javriol@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1145582928.571401.283070@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Marie Calderone wrote:
"¬Saba Gracile¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:k9idnXyuLvMb5drZRVnzvA@telenor.com...
"ReelMcKoi" <ReelMckoi@mailinator.com> skrev i melding
news:1145505757.368050.130470@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
What does this have to do with ponds and fishkeeping?
Fish are evolved tadpoles! on topic now.
Where on earth did you get this idea from? Or did you just make it up
on the spot?
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?B?0C7ULkM=?=" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
21 Apr 2006 06:52:48 PM |
|
|
"Rev. Prunefinger" <misleart@ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:pFb2g.74085$dW3.32537@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
"Tekkamen" <javriol@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1145582928.571401.283070@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Marie Calderone wrote:
"¬Saba Gracile¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:k9idnXyuLvMb5drZRVnzvA@telenor.com...
"ReelMcKoi" aka JABRIOL <ReelMckoi@mailinator.com> skrev i melding
news:1145505757.368050.130470@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
What does this have to do with ponds and fishkeeping?
Fish are evolved tadpoles! on topic now.
Where on earth did you get this idea from? Or did you just make it up
on the spot?
They learn this crazy stuff from the Watchtower magazines. :-(
--
DD......
Well, then, have I become YOUR enemy because I tell YOU the truth?
Galatians 4:16 NWT
http://quotes.watchtower.ca/
http://www.truthandgrace.com/Watchtower.htm
=======================================
-------------
Get FREE newsgroup access from http://www.cheap56k.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mindfucked" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
22 Apr 2006 01:19:33 PM |
|
|
"Ð.Ô.C" <Watch@Witchtower.com> wrote in message
news:1145663571.955881@hosting.ispresults.com...
"Rev. Prunefinger" <misleart@ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:pFb2g.74085$dW3.32537@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
"Tekkamen" <javriol@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1145582928.571401.283070@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Marie Calderone wrote:
"¬Saba Gracile¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:k9idnXyuLvMb5drZRVnzvA@telenor.com...
"ReelMcKoi" aka JABRIOL <ReelMckoi@mailinator.com> skrev i melding
news:1145505757.368050.130470@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
What does this have to do with ponds and fishkeeping?
Fish are evolved tadpoles! on topic now.
Where on earth did you get this idea from? Or did you just make it up
on the spot?
They learn this crazy stuff from the Watchtower magazines. :-(
And you have the quotes to prove it?
Please post them so that we can see that your assertion is true - for all we
know it could be another of your lies.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Danner *~" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 09:27:56 PM |
|
|
"Tekkamen" is Antonio L Santana aka jabriol aka Zod aka
ReelMcKoi<javriol@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1145582928.571401.283070@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...(also
impersonates Marie Calderone)
Have you seen this one all over the net about your net-stalking and
threatening the old granny from TN? Why do you want this old couple dead?
I think everyone knows by now that the Jehovah's Witness known as Jabriol
aka Zod aka ReelMcKoi (woman's name)
who is really Antonio L Santana of Camden NJ has been looking for someone to
go out to his victim's home and I quite Antonio, "slash her throat in the
middle of the night" or, and I quote him again, "suffocate her with a
plastic bag." He has claimed he was going to kill the pets "slowing and
painfully." He was given her address by another sociopathic JW who also
outed his own brother JW Mark S. Why he would want Mark or his family
attacked by net psychos is a mystery. This is truly a dangerous cult as
anyone who has been on these NGs awhile can see. Antonio wont rest until he
finds someone to kill or in some way silence his target victim. His brother
JWs on Usenet see nothing wrong with what he's doing and in fact are helping
him. The Watchtower calls this stalking, endangering and harassment
"Theocratic Warfare Strategy."
Danner*~
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Galen Hekhuis" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 07:59:14 AM |
|
|
Oh for Pete's sake. Bats aren't even rodents, they are in a class all by
themselves, Chiropteran. It's kind of like asking how a cat became a dog,
and then looking for some "transitional fossil."
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
Illiterate? Write for FREE help
.
|
|
|
| User: "sWITCHtower Willie" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 09:40:59 AM |
|
|
"Galen Hekhuis" <> wrote in message
news:7p0f42d1ga68hdcjdlnt85945o0m5nb76e@4ax.com...
Oh for Pete's sake. Bats aren't even rodents, they are in a class all by
themselves, Chiropteran. It's kind of like asking how a cat became a dog,
and then looking for some "transitional fossil."
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
Illiterate? Write for FREE help
Saba has no educational background to speak of that would allow her to
understand anything about evolution, science or biology. She refuses to
read anything but religious-creationist websites and literature. To LEARN
about evolution would blow her fantasy god right out of the water.
--
Willie......
Hellooooooo I will reprint it for you...."The Watchtower is not the
instrument of any man or any set of men...." In that case how did they get
the 1914 prediction flat wrong??? This statement is a clear indicator that
they are saying the WT is from GOD and no other. Where is the proof thet the
WT is God's instrument and not just the blatherings of men??? IT CAN'T BE
BOTH. Would a JW consider the bible to be the blatherings of men?? NO, it's
inspired by God himself they say. It isn't both, how can the WT be?
(Credit Derek)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "¬Saba Gracile¬" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 12:46:57 PM |
|
|
"sWITCHtower Willie" <witches@theSwitchTower.con> skrev i melding
news:o3N1g.32305$Jk3.23300@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"Galen Hekhuis" < > wrote in message
news:7p0f42d1ga68hdcjdlnt85945o0m5nb76e@4ax.com...
Oh for Pete's sake. Bats aren't even rodents, they are in a class all by
themselves, Chiropteran. It's kind of like asking how a cat became a dog,
and then looking for some "transitional fossil."
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
Illiterate? Write for FREE help
Saba has no educational background to speak of that would allow her to
understand anything about evolution, science or biology. She refuses to
read anything but religious-creationist websites and literature. To LEARN
about evolution would blow her fantasy god right out of the water.
--
I know enough, and I'm educated 5-6 years more after high school than you,
so why are you saying this, it's not ture. I have read enough from both sides of
the story, but I am not a sucker for elitists or scientists (who are elitists, whom
everybody should follow to save face), like some seem to need to do /you.
Saba
.
|
|
|
| User: "Danner *~" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
20 Apr 2006 09:25:38 PM |
|
|
"¬Saba Gracile¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:jL-dndy_3caPVNrZRVnzvA@telenor.com...
"sWITCHtower Willie" <witches@theSwitchTower.con> skrev i melding
news:o3N1g.32305$Jk3.23300@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7p0f42d1ga68hdcjdlnt85945o0m5nb76e@4ax.com...
Oh for Pete's sake. Bats aren't even rodents, they are in a class all
by
themselves, Chiropteran. It's kind of like asking how a cat became a
dog,
and then looking for some "transitional fossil."
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
ghekhuis@earthlink.net
Illiterate? Write for FREE help
Saba has no educational background to speak of that would allow her to
understand anything about evolution, science or biology. She refuses to
read anything but religious-creationist websites and literature. To
LEARN
about evolution would blow her fantasy god right out of the water.
--
I know enough, and I'm educated 5-6 years more after high school than you,
Then why are you so ignorant of evolution? You should have had this by the
time you were 24 years old, in Jr HS.
so why are you saying this, it's not ture.
It is true. You are clueless about evolution.
I have read enough from both sides of
the story,
No my dear, you have only read Creationist sites and literature.
but I am not a sucker for elitists or scientists (who are elitists, whom
everybody should follow to save face), like some seem to need to do /you.
No one follows scientists. This statement alone shows your ignorance on the
subject.
--
Danner*~
I submit that we are both atheist, I simply believe in one fewer
god than you. When you can understand why you dismiss all
other gods, then you will understand why I dismiss yours.
-Stephen F. Frost-
-=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=-
.
|
|
|
| User: "-¬Saba Gracile-¬" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
21 Apr 2006 01:10:18 PM |
|
|
"Danner *~" <no-troll@usenet.net> skrev i melding news:YnX1g.6100$t61.747@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
"¬Saba Gracile¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:jL-dndy_3caPVNrZRVnzvA@telenor.com...
"sWITCHtower Willie" <witches@theSwitchTower.con> skrev i melding
news:o3N1g.32305$Jk3.23300@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7p0f42d1ga68hdcjdlnt85945o0m5nb76e@4ax.com...
Oh for Pete's sake. Bats aren't even rodents, they are in a class all
by
themselves, Chiropteran. It's kind of like asking how a cat became a
dog,
and then looking for some "transitional fossil."
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
ghekhuis@earthlink.net
Illiterate? Write for FREE help
Saba has no educational background to speak of that would allow her to
understand anything about evolution, science or biology. She refuses to
read anything but religious-creationist websites and literature. To
LEARN
about evolution would blow her fantasy god right out of the water.
--
I know enough, and I'm educated 5-6 years more after high school than you,
Then why are you so ignorant of evolution? You should have had this by the
time you were 24 years old, in Jr HS.
I read JW material when I was 10, should I have taken that seriously too?
Don't forget, what seems the truth isn't always. Shouldn't have to tell you this
of all people.
so why are you saying this, it's not ture.
It is true. You are clueless about evolution.
I know plenty, but I have learned their belief to be wrong and unfunded, but
they're fundies about their religion.
I have read enough from both sides of
the story,
No my dear, you have only read Creationist sites and literature.
I haven't read much Creationists sites, believe me.
but I am not a sucker for elitists or scientists (who are elitists, whom
everybody should follow to save face), like some seem to need to do /you.
No one follows scientists. This statement alone shows your ignorance on the
subject.
Of course the public follows it, it is mandatory curriculum, you do know it's imposed
in schools even though over half of the parents disagrees about it. But scientism rules.
Saba
--
Danner*~
I submit that we are both atheist, I simply believe in one fewer
god than you. When you can understand why you dismiss all
other gods, then you will understand why I dismiss yours.
-Stephen F. Frost-
-=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=-
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?B?0C7ULkM=?=" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
21 Apr 2006 06:58:08 PM |
|
|
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:houdnapT156WvdTZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
"Danner *~" <no-troll@usenet.net> skrev i melding
news:YnX1g.6100$t61.747@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
No my dear, you have only read Creationist sites and literature.
I haven't read much Creationists sites, believe me.
The ones you recommended here were Creationist sites. What sites can you
recommend that are not related to Creation non-Science?
No one follows scientists. This statement alone shows your ignorance on
the
subject.
Of course the public follows it, it is mandatory curriculum,
Because it's SCIENCE - not religion, superstition and fantasy.
you do know it's imposed
in schools even though over half of the parents disagrees about it. But
scientism rules.
It's taught in schools because there is evidence for it - there is no
evidence of gods, goddesses, demons and magical creations. Do you expect
schools to teach myths, old fables and superstition? And whose would they
teach since there are 10,000 known gods out there?
--
DD.......
Wise men stare at the unknown, and boldly asks, WHY?
Others... fall on their hands and knees, and start mumbling...
(God did it! God did it!)
~ Thus Spake God's Creator ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~><> ><>
-------------
Get FREE newsgroup access from http://www.cheap56k.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "-¬Saba Gracile-¬" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
22 Apr 2006 05:02:07 AM |
|
|
"Ð.Ô.C" <Watch@Witchtower.com> skrev i melding news:1145663891.22924@hosting.ispresults.com...
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:houdnapT156WvdTZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
"Danner *~" <no-troll@usenet.net> skrev i melding
news:YnX1g.6100$t61.747@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
No my dear, you have only read Creationist sites and literature.
I haven't read much Creationists sites, believe me.
The ones you recommended here were Creationist sites. What sites can you recommend that are not
related to Creation non-Science?
What can you recommend that are not related to Evolusion-nonScience?
No one follows scientists. This statement alone shows your ignorance on the
subject.
Of course the public follows it, it is mandatory curriculum,
Because it's SCIENCE - not religion, superstition and fantasy.
Oh dear, I hope you read the probablility calculation of evolution, it's wishful thinking
and superstition, not fact.
you do know it's imposed
in schools even though over half of the parents disagrees about it. But scientism rules.
It's taught in schools because there is evidence for it - there is no evidence of gods, goddesses,
demons and magical creations. Do you expect schools to teach myths, old fables and superstition?
And whose would they teach since there are 10,000 known gods out there?
Once upon time they taught that Sun went around moon, and you would be
imprisoned if you believed otherwize (the bible knew this before Gelileo changed
this 'belief'). So fables is part of science, especially the evolusion-delusion.
S
--
DD.......
Wise men stare at the unknown, and boldly asks, WHY?
Others... fall on their hands and knees, and start mumbling...
(God did it! God did it!)
~ Thus Spake God's Creator ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~><> ><>
-------------
Get FREE newsgroup access from http://www.cheap56k.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Charli=EB?=" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
22 Apr 2006 08:36:43 AM |
|
|
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:poCdnbtx_-e_YtTZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
"Ð.Ô.C" <Watch@Witchtower.com> skrev i melding
news:1145663891.22924@hosting.ispresults.com...
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:houdnapT156WvdTZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
"Danner *~" <no-troll@usenet.net> skrev i melding
news:YnX1g.6100$t61.747@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
No my dear, you have only read Creationist sites and literature.
I haven't read much Creationists sites, believe me.
The ones you recommended here were Creationist sites. What sites can you
recommend that are not related to Creation non-Science?
What can you recommend that are not related to Evolusion-nonScience?
But science and evolution is what we're discussing and you're sending people
to a site that has nothing to do with science and all to do with religion
and superstition. A site that produced no scientific evidence of a
creation. Just Google Evolution and avoid the Creationist-Religion sites.
Ask for information on talk.origins, an excellent place to get information
what has nothing to do with religion.
No one follows scientists. This statement alone shows your ignorance
on the
subject.
Of course the public follows it, it is mandatory curriculum,
Because it's SCIENCE - not religion, superstition and fantasy.
Oh dear, I hope you read the probablility calculation of evolution, it's
wishful thinking
and superstition, not fact.
Again,... you sent people to a RELIGION-CREATIONIST site with NO scientific
evidence of a magical Creation. The calculation is meaningless without
EVIDENCE. Then you claim you don't read creationist sites.
you do know it's imposed
in schools even though over half of the parents disagrees about it. But
scientism rules.
It's taught in schools because there is evidence for it - there is no
evidence of gods, goddesses, demons and magical creations. Do you
expect schools to teach myths, old fables and superstition? And whose
would they teach since there are 10,000 known gods out there?
Once upon time they taught that Sun went around moon,
Who did?
and you would be
imprisoned if you believed otherwize (the bible knew this before Gelileo
changed
this 'belief').
The bible knew the sun went around the earth's moon?
So fables is part of science, especially the evolusion-delusion.
What fables? Science never claimed the sun went around the moon. I think
you're either incredibly dense or you're being totally dishonest. The bible
writers believed the earth had four corners. They had no clue the earth
went around the sun and the moon went around the earth.
--
CH.....
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
Fight for FREEDOM from religious tyranny!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "-¬Saba Gracile-¬" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
22 Apr 2006 09:42:11 AM |
|
|
"Charlië" <invalid@invalid.invalid> skrev i melding news:444a3177@usenet.zapto.org...
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:poCdnbtx_-e_YtTZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
"Ð.Ô.C" <Watch@Witchtower.com> skrev i melding news:1145663891.22924@hosting.ispresults.com...
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:houdnapT156WvdTZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
"Danner *~" <no-troll@usenet.net> skrev i melding
news:YnX1g.6100$t61.747@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
No my dear, you have only read Creationist sites and literature.
I haven't read much Creationists sites, believe me.
The ones you recommended here were Creationist sites. What sites can you recommend that are not
related to Creation non-Science?
What can you recommend that are not related to Evolusion-nonScience?
But science and evolution is what we're discussing and you're sending people to a site that has
nothing to do with science and all to do with religion and superstition. A site that produced no
scientific evidence of a creation. Just Google Evolution and avoid the Creationist-Religion
sites. Ask for information on talk.origins, an excellent place to get information what has nothing
to do with religion.
No one follows scientists. This statement alone shows your ignorance on the
subject.
Of course the public follows it, it is mandatory curriculum,
Because it's SCIENCE - not religion, superstition and fantasy.
Oh dear, I hope you read the probablility calculation of evolution, it's wishful thinking
and superstition, not fact.
Again,... you sent people to a RELIGION-CREATIONIST site with NO scientific evidence of a magical
Creation. The calculation is meaningless without EVIDENCE. Then you claim you don't read
creationist sites.
you do know it's imposed
in schools even though over half of the parents disagrees about it. But scientism rules.
It's taught in schools because there is evidence for it - there is no evidence of gods,
goddesses, demons and magical creations. Do you expect schools to teach myths, old fables and
superstition? And whose would they teach since there are 10,000 known gods out there?
Once upon time they taught that Sun went around moon,
Who did?
and you would be
imprisoned if you believed otherwize (the bible knew this before Gelileo changed
this 'belief').
The bible knew the sun went around the earth's moon?
So fables is part of science, especially the evolusion-delusion.
What fables? Science never claimed the sun went around the moon. I think you're either
incredibly dense or you're being totally dishonest. The bible writers believed the earth had four
corners. They had no clue the earth went around the sun and the moon went around the earth.
I think the dense one is you and the majority, throwing yourself into the latest trend line.
The bible knew the earth was round, and hanging in the big nothingness. Found out to
be the case later.
S
--
CH.....
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
Fight for FREEDOM from religious tyranny!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Saba Gracile Still Running |
23 Apr 2006 05:44:34 AM |
|
|
-=ACNo Sabe Nada-=AC lied (again):
I think the dense one is you and the majority, throwing yourself into the=
latest trend line.
The bible knew the earth was round, and hanging in the big nothingness. F=
ound out to
be the case later.
The Bible didn't know squat. The story of Genesis makes is crystally
clear that they hadn't the first clue as to how the solar system began
and how life came about upon Earth.
The fact that Joshua is reported to have told the sun to stand still
rather than told Earth to do so clearly indicates what the writers
thought - they thought the sun orbited the Earth.
The Earth does not "hang on nothing". The Biblical descriptions are
simply wrong.
Once again your profound incompetence is all you've conveyed here.
Still waiting on you producing even *one* shred of positive scientific
support for your creation.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "-¬Saba Gracile-¬" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
22 Apr 2006 09:32:52 AM |
|
|
"Charlië" <invalid@invalid.invalid> skrev i melding news:444a3177@usenet.zapto.org...
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:poCdnbtx_-e_YtTZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
"Ð.Ô.C" <Watch@Witchtower.com> skrev i melding news:1145663891.22924@hosting.ispresults.com...
"-¬Saba Gracile-¬" <veronisc@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:houdnapT156WvdTZ4p2dnA@telenor.com...
"Danner *~" <no-troll@usenet.net> skrev i melding
news:YnX1g.6100$t61.747@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
No my dear, you have only read Creationist sites and literature.
I haven't read much Creationists sites, believe me.
The ones you recommended here were Creationist sites. What sites can you recommend that are not
related to Creation non-Science?
What can you recommend that are not related to Evolusion-nonScience?
But science and evolution is what we're discussing and you're sending people to a site that has
nothing to do with science and all to do with religion and superstition. A site that produced no
scientific evidence of a creation. Just Google Evolution and avoid the Creationist-Religion
sites. Ask for information on talk.origins, an excellent place to get information what has nothing
to do with religion.
No one follows scientists. This statement alone shows your ignorance on the
subject.
Of course the public follows it, it is mandatory curriculum,
Because it's SCIENCE - not religion, superstition and fantasy.
Oh dear, I hope you read the probablility calculation of evolution, it's wishful thinking
and superstition, not fact.
Again,... you sent people to a RELIGION-CREATIONIST site with NO scientific evidence of a magical
Creation. The calculation is meaningless without EVIDENCE. Then you claim you don't read
creationist sites.
Even so, a mathematical probability that is set up can be easily disputed if it's not
right. I don't see them do that here.
S
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: How a Mouse Became a Bat |
23 Apr 2006 05:49:57 AM |
|
|
-=ACSaba Gracile-=AC wrote:
Even so, a mathematical probability that is set up can be easily disputed=
if it's not
right. I don't see them do that here.
Post your probablity right here. I'll take it down. Or you can keep
running.
BTW, if to has already taken it down in one of the below URLs, don't
waste any more of anyone's time with your pathetic and transparent
lies, okay?
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB010.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/default.htm
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo/probability.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB940_1.html
Still waiting on you posting even *one* shred of positive scientific
support for creation.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
