| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Budikka666" |
| Date: |
04 Oct 2005 04:58:48 PM |
| Object: |
"Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/09/30/birdflu.drugs.reut/index.html
reveals speciation (a new strain) in the bird flu virus:
"A strain of the H5N1 bird flu virus that may unleash the next global
flu pandemic is showing resistance to Tamiflu, the antiviral drug that
countries around the world are now stockpiling to fend off the looming
threat."
Speciation is an example of so-called macroevolution.
Meanwhile, we're all waiting on Disaster Dave to discuss these examples
instead of running away as he has consistently done since he opened the
"macroevolution" thread on August 31st this year!
He claims there is no macroevolution but he cannot even define what it
is! In fact it is nothing more than microevolution over an extended
period of time - evolution at the species level and above, which has
been thoroughly documented by scientists.
He cannot scientifically define "kind" (nor can any other creationist
in the world), yet he has the hypocrisy to insist there's no way one
"kind" can change into another over time!
He claims that there's no way one "kind" can change into another over
time, yet neither he nor any other creationist in the world can even
begin to define a mechanism which prevents it!
He claims he understands science when every message he posts clearly
demonstrates that he does not!
He claims there's no "proof" of evolution when the truth is that
there's no science paper ever been published that claims absolute,
eternal, irrefutable proof of anything.
He reads only media reports of scientific discoveries containing loose
talk and shorthand from scientists and the media, and then proclaims by
fiat that these are certified scientific truths that he will knock
over, instead of actually having the honesty and integrity to read the
scientific material itself, instead of swallowing the media reports.
He claims there's no proof of evolution yet will not even help others
to help *him* by having the common decency to define precisely what he
will accept as proof!
Budikka - never put a Disaster Dave where thinking is required.
.
|
|
| User: "Pastor Aaron" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
05 Oct 2005 02:28:07 PM |
|
|
On 4-Oct-2005, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Speciation is an example of so-called macroevolution.
As with most debates, the faulty definition of terms becomes a great
obstacle that often can not be overcome.
Creationists have been told that macroevolution is defined as something akin
to the “missing link” or a jump in evolution of which nether have been
directly and scientifically observed.
Evolutionists define macroevolution much more loosely, and it continues to
“evolve” to combat its use by Creationists.
The fact of the matter is that as soon as a Creationist picks a term to
argue, the Evolutionist decides to re-define the term, thus making it
impossible to “prove” anything.
A real debate is based upon solid, well-defined, terms, but an argument does
not require anything but passion. Usually an argument is won by whoever has
the most to say, not by who has the most facts.
--
Pastor Aaron
Agape Place Ministries
www.agapeplace.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
06 Oct 2005 01:43:52 PM |
|
|
Pastor Aaron wrote:
On 4-Oct-2005, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Speciation is an example of so-called macroevolution.
As with most debates, the faulty definition of terms becomes a great
obstacle that often can not be overcome.
Creationists have been told that macroevolution is defined as something a=
kin
to the "missing link" or a jump in evolution of which nether have been
directly and scientifically observed.
So, creationists define macro evolution as something that has not been
obeserved. Therefore, everything that is observed is not macroevolution
Would that be an accurate summation?
Evolutionists define macroevolution much more loosely, and it continues to
"evolve" to combat its use by Creationists.
I was not aware that "evolutionists" (I assume you mean biologists who
think that evolution of the species by way not natural selection is the
most likely explanation of the diversity of life on Earth) ever spoke
of "macroevolution". I always thought that "macroevolution" was a term
made up by creationists who used it to define "any sort of evolution
that we dont like", or "evolution between kinds", which given the free
and unprecise defintion of a "kind" is much the same thing.
The fact of the matter is that as soon as a Creationist picks a term to
argue, the Evolutionist decides to re-define the term, thus making it
impossible to "prove" anything.
OK.. here is the challenge. Please find a defintion of "macro
evolution" that is not:
a) circular
b) begging the question
If you do it, then I will happily offer to pay the charity of your
choice =A310
A real debate is based upon solid, well-defined, terms, but an argument d=
oes
not require anything but passion. Usually an argument is won by whoever h=
as
the most to say, not by who has the most facts.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "magilla" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
06 Oct 2005 10:47:44 PM |
|
|
Pastor Aaron wrote:
On 4-Oct-2005, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Speciation is an example of so-called macroevolution.
As with most debates, the faulty definition of terms becomes a great
obstacle that often can not be overcome.
Creationists have been told that macroevolution is defined as something akin
to the "missing link" or a jump in evolution of which nether have been
directly and scientifically observed.
Evolutionists define macroevolution much more loosely, and it continues to
"evolve" to combat its use by Creationists.
The fact of the matter is that as soon as a Creationist picks a term to
argue, the Evolutionist decides to re-define the term, thus making it
impossible to "prove" anything.
That is an out and out lie. As a biologist, I tell you that
macroevolution has one and only meaning to biologists: evolution at the
species level and above. Don't lie for your god- he doesn't appreciate
it.
Chris
A real debate is based upon solid, well-defined, terms, but an argument does
not require anything but passion. Usually an argument is won by whoever has
the most to say, not by who has the most facts.
--
Pastor Aaron
Agape Place Ministries
www.agapeplace.org
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Khubla" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
05 Oct 2005 04:27:18 PM |
|
|
You are correct regarding the "most facts" however it must be said that
evolution is a fact. You can ignore reality but it doesn't go away so
wouldn't you and all of us be better off by accepting facts however it may
go against our taught beliefs and convictions? It takes a strong person to
admit he has been wrong. I can see no benefit to the church, and indeed
much harm down the road in denying evolution and other scientific facts.
Your sole purpose is because your so called holy books says something else.
In case you didn't see this post today please read:
news:1128495180.739663.96420@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
"Pastor Aaron" <abm@agapeplace.org> wrote in message
news:aPV0f.5$Bj5.0@fe08.phx...
On 4-Oct-2005, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Speciation is an example of so-called macroevolution.
As with most debates, the faulty definition of terms becomes a great
obstacle that often can not be overcome.
Creationists have been told that macroevolution is defined as something
akin
to the "missing link" or a jump in evolution of which nether have been
directly and scientifically observed.
Evolutionists define macroevolution much more loosely, and it continues to
"evolve" to combat its use by Creationists.
The fact of the matter is that as soon as a Creationist picks a term to
argue, the Evolutionist decides to re-define the term, thus making it
impossible to "prove" anything.
A real debate is based upon solid, well-defined, terms, but an argument
does
not require anything but passion. Usually an argument is won by whoever
has
the most to say, not by who has the most facts.
--
Pastor Aaron
Agape Place Ministries
www.agapeplace.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "John P. Boatwright" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
09 Oct 2005 12:51:43 AM |
|
|
Khubla wrote:
You are correct regarding the "most facts" however it must be said that
evolution is a fact.
Since you claim "evolution is a fact", you will
obviously have no problem answering this:
1. Start with no man, and no woman.
2. Tell me how a male or female baby shows up.
Put your answer here:
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Thanks in advance for admitting that you don't know
the answer, and your admission that evolution is
not a fact, but is instead a religion, where thousands
of gods are promoted, by some random collection of
evolutionists making them up willy nilly as they
go along... claiming they're right, and anyone
disagreeing is wrong... claiming they know how the
creation formed, while rejecting the source of said
creation.
God specifically said that the creatures do NOT
form themselves, and your worshipping of creatures
rather than the creator... is wrong.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Proof God described the planet density profile
BEFORE science did:
http://home.teleport.com/~salad/4god/density.htm
(see the 2 graphs, obviously God was right in Genesis)
Mirror site at: http://For-God.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Knight" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
09 Oct 2005 09:15:00 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 05:51:43 GMT, "John P. Boatwright"
<name@For-God.net> wrote:
Khubla wrote:
You are correct regarding the "most facts" however it must be said that
evolution is a fact.
Since you claim "evolution is a fact", you will
obviously have no problem answering this:
1. Start with no man, and no woman.
2. Tell me how a male or female baby shows up.
What a fucking moron!
Babies!
Ha ha ha
You ignorant *****. Single celled life divided until one of them
shared DNA and it became evolutionary beneficial for the organism to
survive better than the rest.
Even a three year old atheist knows that, Fuckface.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
www.sonic.net/~wooly
Stick Boy died on the cross whining to Daddy, 'You forsake me!
Waaaaaaaaaa!'
.
|
|
|
| User: "John P. Boatwright" |
|
| Title: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
30 Oct 2005 03:01:11 AM |
|
|
Steve Knight wrote:
On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 05:51:43 GMT, "John P. Boatwright"
<name@For-God.net> wrote:
Khubla wrote:
You are correct regarding the "most facts" however it must be said that
evolution is a fact.
Since you claim "evolution is a fact", you will
obviously have no problem answering this:
1. Start with no man, and no woman.
2. Tell me how a male or female baby shows up.
What a fucking moron!
Answer the question Stevey.
Babies!
Ha ha ha
Ya right.
I'm not joking Stevey boy, answer up.
Without a male or female adult, how do you get a baby?
You ignorant *****. Single celled life divided until one of them
shared DNA and it became evolutionary beneficial for the organism to
survive better than the rest.
ha ha ha...
So these single cells wander around together and make babies?
ha ha ha...
Get a grip Stevey.
Even a three year old atheist knows that, Fuckface.
You don't don't know beans about how to get a baby
with only evolution... 'cuz there's no way for a baby
to show up without already having said male and female
adults around to "put in the order" for said baby.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Proof God described the planet density profile
BEFORE science did:
http://home.teleport.com/~salad/4god/density.htm
(see the 2 graphs, obviously God was right in Genesis)
Mirror site at: http://For-God.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
30 Oct 2005 10:02:01 AM |
|
|
John P. Boatwright wrote:
Even a three year old atheist knows that, Fuckface.
You don't don't know beans about how to get a baby
with only evolution... 'cuz there's no way for a baby
to show up without already having said male and female
adults around to "put in the order" for said baby.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Nominated for "idiot of the month".
--
"To his friend a man a friend shall prove,
And gifts with gifts requite;
But men shall mocking with mockery answer,
And fraud with falsehood meet."
(The Poetic Edda)
Must have been written with fundies in mind...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
30 Oct 2005 02:00:47 PM |
|
|
Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian wrote:
John P. Boatwright wrote:
Even a three year old atheist knows that, Fuckface.
You don't don't know beans about how to get a baby
with only evolution... 'cuz there's no way for a baby
to show up without already having said male and female
adults around to "put in the order" for said baby.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Nominated for "idiot of the month".
I don't think you can be nominated for a lessor award.
Boatwrong has been one of the idiots of the decade for quite a while.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
30 Oct 2005 06:10:55 PM |
|
|
In article <PD99f.11173$Zv5.11067@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>,
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian wrote:
John P. Boatwright wrote:
Even a three year old atheist knows that, Fuckface.
You don't don't know beans about how to get a baby
with only evolution... 'cuz there's no way for a baby
to show up without already having said male and female
adults around to "put in the order" for said baby.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Nominated for "idiot of the month".
I don't think you can be nominated for a lessor award.
Boatwrong has been one of the idiots of the decade for quite a while.
I think that he deserves a lifetime achievement award.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
30 Oct 2005 06:25:01 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:10:55 -0800, in alt.atheism
johac <jhachm@ixpres.remove.com> wrote in
<jhachm-96F9B8.16105530102005@news.giganews.com>:
In article <PD99f.11173$Zv5.11067@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>,
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian wrote:
John P. Boatwright wrote:
Even a three year old atheist knows that, Fuckface.
You don't don't know beans about how to get a baby
with only evolution... 'cuz there's no way for a baby
to show up without already having said male and female
adults around to "put in the order" for said baby.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Nominated for "idiot of the month".
I don't think you can be nominated for a lessor award.
Boatwrong has been one of the idiots of the decade for quite a while.
I think that he deserves a lifetime achievement award.
That is an most unusual way to use the word 'achievement'.
If Boatwright were a boatwright, his boats would have no ability to
carry cargo or passengers and have no ability to move in any direction
other than down.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
01 Nov 2005 12:12:12 AM |
|
|
In article <isoam11l0a3o2gb8fggpv9ulfkfmeclf9c@4ax.com>,
David Jensen <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:10:55 -0800, in alt.atheism
johac <jhachm@ixpres.remove.com> wrote in
<jhachm-96F9B8.16105530102005@news.giganews.com>:
In article <PD99f.11173$Zv5.11067@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>,
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian wrote:
John P. Boatwright wrote:
Even a three year old atheist knows that, Fuckface.
You don't don't know beans about how to get a baby
with only evolution... 'cuz there's no way for a baby
to show up without already having said male and female
adults around to "put in the order" for said baby.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Nominated for "idiot of the month".
I don't think you can be nominated for a lessor award.
Boatwrong has been one of the idiots of the decade for quite a while.
I think that he deserves a lifetime achievement award.
That is an most unusual way to use the word 'achievement'.
If Boatwright were a boatwright, his boats would have no ability to
carry cargo or passengers and have no ability to move in any direction
other than down.
Achievement only in the negative sense, e.g. " The worst of the worst of
the worst"
I saw one of his boats once. It called a sieve.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
30 Oct 2005 10:34:18 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 18:25:01 -0600, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:10:55 -0800, in alt.atheism
johac <jhachm@ixpres.remove.com> wrote in
<jhachm-96F9B8.16105530102005@news.giganews.com>:
In article <PD99f.11173$Zv5.11067@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>,
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian wrote:
John P. Boatwright wrote:
Even a three year old atheist knows that, Fuckface.
You don't don't know beans about how to get a baby
with only evolution... 'cuz there's no way for a baby
to show up without already having said male and female
adults around to "put in the order" for said baby.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Nominated for "idiot of the month".
I don't think you can be nominated for a lessor award.
Boatwrong has been one of the idiots of the decade for quite a while.
I think that he deserves a lifetime achievement award.
That is an most unusual way to use the word 'achievement'.
He has single handedly advanced the cause of atheism more than any
person I can think of.
That is an 'achievement' in anyones terms.
If Boatwright were a boatwright, his boats would have no ability to
carry cargo or passengers and have no ability to move in any direction
other than down.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
30 Oct 2005 08:17:26 PM |
|
|
Mike Painter wrote:
Nominated for "idiot of the month".
I don't think you can be nominated for a lessor award.
Boatwrong has been one of the idiots of the decade for quite a while.
I already supposed that much ;)
--
"To his friend a man a friend shall prove,
And gifts with gifts requite;
But men shall mocking with mockery answer,
And fraud with falsehood meet."
(The Poetic Edda)
Must have been written with fundies in mind...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
30 Oct 2005 12:53:09 PM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet John P. Boatwright (name@For-
God.net) made the light shine upon us with this:
You ignorant *****. Single celled life divided until one of them
shared DNA and it became evolutionary beneficial for the organism to
survive better than the rest.
ha ha ha...
So these single cells wander around together and make babies?
You'll never understand evolution with that bible pasted to your forehead.
But you don't want to understand it, do you? Evolution, reality, takes
away your baby jeezuz, your eternal salvation, your immortality. As if you
ever *really* had any of these things in the first place. You fucked up
fundies cannot differentiate between fantasy and reality, and you want your
fantasy life soooooo bad you're willing to deny reality to believe in it.
It's sad, really.
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
----
"The world is only 5-6 thousand years old does not mean the planet
earth is only 5-6 thousand years old. There have been many worlds
created and destroyed on this planet. The creation of the planet is
described in Genesis 1. The creation of the world is described in
Genesis 2. Two different kind of creations." --Eric Brze
.
|
|
|
| User: "John P. Boatwright" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
12 Nov 2005 05:35:35 AM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote:
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet John P. Boatwright (name@For-
God.net) made the light shine upon us with this:
You ignorant *****. Single celled life divided until one of them
shared DNA and it became evolutionary beneficial for the organism to
survive better than the rest.
ha ha ha...
So these single cells wander around together and make babies?
You'll never understand evolution with that bible pasted to your forehead.
I said it before, I'll say it again, if you insist evolution is
doing it all, then explain this:
* start with no male or female
* make a baby
Your claim is that evolution can do it... explain away.
But you don't want to understand it, do you?
So you can't explain it... and claim evolution is doing
it through "magic".
Fine, your "evolution does it all" is bunk.
Evolution, reality, takes
away your baby jeezuz, your eternal salvation, your immortality. As if you
ever *really* had any of these things in the first place. You fucked up
fundies cannot differentiate between fantasy and reality, and you want your
fantasy life soooooo bad you're willing to deny reality to believe in it.
It's sad, really.
You're the one claiming you can answer the question, and then
promtly ignored it.
So much for evolution doing anything at all.
Evolution is a WORTHLESS WILD GUESS.
Prove otherwise.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Proof God described the planet density profile
BEFORE science did:
http://home.teleport.com/~salad/4god/density.htm
(see the 2 graphs, obviously God was right in Genesis)
Mirror site at: http://For-God.net
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
----
"The world is only 5-6 thousand years old does not mean the planet
earth is only 5-6 thousand years old. There have been many worlds
created and destroyed on this planet. The creation of the planet is
described in Genesis 1. The creation of the world is described in
Genesis 2. Two different kind of creations." --Eric Brze
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
12 Nov 2005 07:34:45 AM |
|
|
John P. Boatwright <name@For-God.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Vic wrote:
Evolution, reality, takes away your baby jeezuz, your eternal salvation,
your immortality. As if you ever *really* had any of these things in the
first place. You fucked up fundies cannot differentiate between fantasy
and reality, and you want your fantasy life soooooo bad you're willing
to deny reality to believe in it. It's sad, really.
You're the one claiming you can answer the question, and then
promtly ignored it.
Do you actually believe people die because death entered your god's
creation through the sin of Adam and Eve?
Yes or no.
Evolution answers that question just fine. We die because we're
animals, not because of some curse of sin that the priests made up.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
12 Nov 2005 08:03:04 AM |
|
|
John P. Boatwright wrote:
I said it before, I'll say it again, if you insist evolution is
doing it all, then explain this:
* start with no male or female
* make a baby
Your claim is that evolution can do it... explain away.
Evolution is a fact. The Theory of Evolution is the only supported
scientific theory which explains that fact. Every test the theory has
ever been put to, it has passed with flying colors. The evidence for
this is in 150 years of peer-reviewed papers published in refereed
science journals the world over by people of all nationalities and all
faiths. You've been told this repeatedly but are apparently too
fundamentally stupid to grasp it. If you want to find out how the
Theory of Evolution answers your question, go read that 150 years'
worth of accumulated evidence. It really is that simple.
615 examples supportive of macroevolution (with more to come):
Example 1: http://tinyurl.com/dxqjc
Example 2: http://tinyurl.com/d4376
Example 3: http://tinyurl.com/d5vqm
Example 4: http://tinyurl.com/dmbxj
Example 5: http://tinyurl.com/cy7r7
Example 6: http://tinyurl.com/dj9sh
Example 7: http://tinyurl.com/aplxu
Example 8: http://tinyurl.com/clpsx
Examples 9-539: http://tinyurl.com/cy9m2
Example 540: http://tinyurl.com/dsjku
Example 541: http://tinyurl.com/bhxw2
Example 542: http://tinyurl.com/77tyl
Example 543: http://tinyurl.com/bpdqm
Example 544: http://tinyurl.com/czsdq
Example 545: http://tinyurl.com/9qnrc
Example 546: http://tinyurl.com/dxg8s
Example 547: http://tinyurl.com/88kch
Example 548: http://tinyurl.com/88kch (shared with 547 thread)
Example 549: http://tinyurl.com/ccw8y
Example 550: http://tinyurl.com/7cxsz
Example 551: http://tinyurl.com/74o4q
Examples 552-577: http://tinyurl.com/7u8lv
Example 578: http://tinyurl.com/9xo8o
Example 579: http://tinyurl.com/avzzk
Example 580: http://tinyurl.com/7segx
Example 581: http://tinyurl.com/8c8od
Example 582: http://tinyurl.com/9voan
Example 583: http://tinyurl.com/76zao (misnumbered as 582)
Example 584: http://tinyurl.com/crzmz
Example 585: http://tinyurl.com/exagp
Examples 586-590: http://tinyurl.com/c4pea
Example 591: http://tinyurl.com/9aveh
Example 592: http://tinyurl.com/d2vmd
Example 593: http://tinyurl.com/dsg6z
Example 594: http://tinyurl.com/75rdt
Example 595: http://tinyurl.com/ak3oo
Example 596: http://tinyurl.com/anqh5
Example 597: http://tinyurl.com/89zjr
Example 598: http://tinyurl.com/9s6cq
Example 599: http://tinyurl.com/7oorv
Example 600: http://tinyurl.com/cujkx
Examples 601-608: http://tinyurl.com/bnflb
Examples 609-615: http://tinyurl.com/9pl7b
"Five Questions Evolutionists Would Rather Dodge" are not dodged at:
http://tinyurl.com/8d77u
And 10 questions creationists would rather dodge are dodged at:
http://tinyurl.com/7lvwr
John Boatwright's Lies documented here:
http://tinyurl.com/d5beb
http://tinyurl.com/9zqo9
http://tinyurl.com/bx7dn
http://tinyurl.com/beqs7
http://tinyurl.com/73lnw
http://tinyurl.com/9wg2r
http://tinyurl.com/8z2dd
http://tinyurl.com/96vzm
http://tinyurl.com/e2edb
http://tinyurl.com/cmrts
Budikka
boatwright, n. a manufacturer of empty vessels
john, n. a receptacle commonly full of *****
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific question, that they avoid like the plague. Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
14 Nov 2005 11:20:14 AM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet John P. Boatwright (name@For-
God.net) made the light shine upon us with this:
* start with no male or female
* make a baby
Your claim is that evolution can do it... explain away.
Start with no nouns and no verbs.
Make a language.
Oh, I forgot, you loonies think all human language came from a building
somewhere in the middle east.
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
----
"GARGOYLES, PSYCHICS, EVERYTHING UNGODLY, GET THE HELL OUT OF MY
HOUSE, IN JESUS NAME I PRAY. THE DARK SIDE, SHE's NOT A CHRISTIAN,
SHE'S DARK-SIDED, SHE'S DARK-SIDED, THIS IS MY HOUSE, I WANT MY GOD
AND I WANT MY FAMILY. I AM A GOD WARRIOR SHE'S A SPIRITUAL WARRIOR,
SHE WAS THROWN IN THE PITS, OH NO THE HORRORS"
Ain't Christianity great?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: Notice how atheists never answer the question... a very specific |
14 Nov 2005 07:35:13 PM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote:
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet John P. Boatwright (name@For-
God.net) made the light shine upon us with this:
* start with no male or female
* make a baby
Your claim is that evolution can do it... explain away.
Start with no nouns and no verbs.
Make a language.
Oh, I forgot, you loonies think all human language came from a building
somewhere in the middle east.
===>Was that when a scared deity, worried that people will build
a tower to reach all the way to his throne, decided to confuse their
language?
In fact the story itself is a joke, based on a "confusion" of the name
of an ancient ruin (BAB EL: Gate of [the god] EL) with the
Hebrew "balal" which means "confusion."
It suggests that the story was probably written after the exile
in Babylon, where the Jews may have learned about the ruins
of that ancient building. Archaeologists have discovered that the
Babylonians had great towers called "ziggurats", built in a circular fashion
with a staircase leading to the top, where they found written the signs of
the zodiac. -- L.
SEE:
http://www.zum.de/whkmla/sat/wb/ant/earlyciv/sites.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Aaron" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
05 Oct 2005 06:24:03 PM |
|
|
On 5-Oct-2005, "Khubla" <khubla@adelphia.net> wrote:
it must be said that evolution is a fact.
Professor Albert Fleishman, professor of comparative anatomy at Earlangan
university, said: "the theory of evolution suffers from grave defects, which
are becoming more and more apparent as time advances. It can no longer
square with practical scientific knowledge, nor does it suffice for our
theoretical grasp of the facts. The Darwinian theory of decent has not a
single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of
scientific re-search, but purely the product of imagination."
I can see no benefit to the church, and indeed
much harm down the road in denying evolution and other scientific facts.
Your sole purpose is because your so called holy books says something
else.
You assume my beliefs, you assume I go to church or read a holy book. I was
speaking on the topic of macroevolution, not religion. It seems that you are
more interested in pointing out assumed traits than participating in a
debate.
--
Pastor Aaron
Agape Place Ministries
www.agapeplace.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
06 Oct 2005 01:34:58 PM |
|
|
Pastor Aaron wrote:
On 5-Oct-2005, "Khubla" <khubla@adelphia.net> wrote:
it must be said that evolution is a fact.
Professor Albert Fleishman, professor of comparative anatomy at Earlangan
university, said: "the theory of evolution suffers from grave defects, which
are becoming more and more apparent as time advances. It can no longer
square with practical scientific knowledge, nor does it suffice for our
theoretical grasp of the facts. The Darwinian theory of decent has not a
single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of
scientific re-search, but purely the product of imagination."
Given that he is totally wrong here, I wonder why he said it. Does
Earlangan University have especially low standards? Is it a religious
institution that requires people to accept Creationism? they seem the
most likely explanations for the ignrance displayed (unbless the quote
is made up of course)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "James" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
05 Oct 2005 11:38:25 PM |
|
|
Pastor Aaron wrote:
On 5-Oct-2005, "Khubla" <khubla@adelphia.net> wrote:
it must be said that evolution is a fact.
Professor Albert Fleishman, professor of comparative anatomy at Earlangan
university, said: "the theory of evolution suffers from grave defects, which
are becoming more and more apparent as time advances. It can no longer
square with practical scientific knowledge, nor does it suffice for our
theoretical grasp of the facts. The Darwinian theory of decent has not a
single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of
scientific re-search, but purely the product of imagination."
Quotations are easy to find, easy to take out of context, and easy to
have their worth overestimated. Albert Fleishman is an outspoken critic
of evolution (which is his right), but is in a very minute minority on
this issue. While his opinion shouldn't be disregarded because it is
controversial, its value shouldn't be taken out of context because it's
a sole cry against a cacophany.
This quotation you've offered is also very much overused in
creationist/ID propaganda, as a quick Google search will indicate. It
seems very much like the zealots have been desperately looking for a
person with a scientific education to back their argument, and this is
one of the only ones they've found.
I can see no benefit to the church, and indeed
much harm down the road in denying evolution and other scientific facts.
Your sole purpose is because your so called holy books says something
else.
You assume my beliefs, you assume I go to church or read a holy book. I was
speaking on the topic of macroevolution, not religion. It seems that you are
more interested in pointing out assumed traits than participating in a
debate.
The vast majority of creationist/ID proponents conform to a very rigid
stereotype, and many people that participate in debates with them become
accustomed to assuming this. I believe it is a forgivable offense.
--
James B
aa #944
"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence."
-David Hume
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
06 Oct 2005 03:59:03 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:27:18 -0400, "Khubla"
<khubla@adelphia.net> spake thusly:
You should not top post. It is rude.
You are correct regarding the "most facts" however
it must be said that evolution is a fact.
Microevolution is a fact. Macroevolution is a fantasy.
You can ignore reality but it doesn't go away
What the reality that you're ignoring is, that there
isn't one shred of proof for macroevolution and
yet, you claim it is a fact.
It takes a strong person to admit he has been wrong.
Then you must not be strong.
--
Pastor Dave
1st Century Church of Christ
"The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree;
he shall grow like a cedar in Lebanon. Those that
are planted in the house of Jehovah shall flourish
in the courts of our God." - Psalm 92:12-13
.
|
|
|
| User: "James" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
06 Oct 2005 10:41:06 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:27:18 -0400, "Khubla"
<khubla@adelphia.net> spake thusly:
You should not top post. It is rude.
You are correct regarding the "most facts" however
it must be said that evolution is a fact.
Microevolution is a fact. Macroevolution is a fantasy.
Knowing that species are not static and that changes accumulate over
time, the rational conclusion would be that these modifications could
result in eventual varied descent. Instead, you go off on some sort of
mystical tangent that starts by erecting a glass wall between a concept
that is a logical extension of something you already accept.
Fascinating, really.
You can ignore reality but it doesn't go away
What the reality that you're ignoring is, that there
isn't one shred of proof for macroevolution and
yet, you claim it is a fact.
Reams of evidence, Dave. Reams. You have absolutely no excuse for your
continuted ignorance of evolution outside of pigheaded malice and
cognitive dissonance.
It takes a strong person to admit he has been wrong.
Then you must not be strong.
You and Jesus against the world, eh? Leave your religion where your
book says you should and leave the science to someone capable of it.
--
James B
aa #944
"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence."
-David Hume
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "magilla" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
06 Oct 2005 10:49:22 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:27:18 -0400, "Khubla"
<khubla@adelphia.net> spake thusly:
You should not top post. It is rude.
You are correct regarding the "most facts" however
it must be said that evolution is a fact.
Microevolution is a fact. Macroevolution is a fantasy.
Spartina anglica.
Admit you're wrong.
Chris
You can ignore reality but it doesn't go away
What the reality that you're ignoring is, that there
isn't one shred of proof for macroevolution and
yet, you claim it is a fact.
It takes a strong person to admit he has been wrong.
Then you must not be strong.
--
Pastor Dave
1st Century Church of Christ
"The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree;
he shall grow like a cedar in Lebanon. Those that
are planted in the house of Jehovah shall flourish
in the courts of our God." - Psalm 92:12-13
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
06 Oct 2005 01:45:15 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:27:18 -0400, "Khubla"
<khubla@adelphia.net> spake thusly:
You should not top post. It is rude.
You are correct regarding the "most facts" however
it must be said that evolution is a fact.
Microevolution is a fact. Macroevolution is a fantasy.
What is macro evolution? Please could you define it in a non circular
and testable way?
.
|
|
|
| User: "John P. Boatwright" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
09 Oct 2005 12:43:49 AM |
|
|
wrote:
What is macro evolution? Please could you define it in a non circular
and testable way?
Start with no man, or woman.
Tell me how a male, or female baby shows up.
Tell me here:
--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
Thanks for admitting you don't know, and that
evolutionists are promoting a religion, in advance.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Proof God described the planet density profile
BEFORE science did:
http://home.teleport.com/~salad/4god/density.htm
(see the 2 graphs, obviously God was right in Genesis)
Mirror site at: http://For-God.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
10 Oct 2005 01:55:50 PM |
|
|
"John P. Boatwright" wrote:
Donalbain@gmail.com wrote:
What is macro evolution? Please could you define it in a non circular
and testable way?
Start with no man, or woman.
Tell me how a male, or female baby shows up.
Tell me here:
--------------------------------------------------
Go to any maternity ward, or ask any mother.
They will tell you, they "show up" through the mom's
vagina, just like other mammals.
Unless they are born by Caesarian operation.
--------------------------------------------------
Thanks for admitting you don't know, and that
evolutionists are promoting a religion, in advance.
===>What an idiotic comment! -- L.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: "Macroevolution" (Keep Running Pastor Dave) - Example 540 |
09 Oct 2005 05:45:14 AM |
|
|
John P. Boatwright wrote:
Donalbain@gmail.com wrote:
What is macro evolution? Please could you define it in a non circular
and testable way?
Start with no man, or woman.
Tell me how a male, or female baby shows up.
Tell me here:
--------------------------------------------------
Random mutations in pre-human organisms (some form of primate), which
lead to differential fitness within populations, leading to a change in
allele frequency within the populations. Then with differing selection
pressures, eventually you will end up with speciation, with one branch
of the family leading to what we now call human beings.
--------------------------------------------------
Thanks for admitting you don't know, and that
evolutionists are promoting a religion, in advance.
I didnt admit that.
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
