| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"MsAnthrope" |
| Date: |
03 Feb 2005 02:41:57 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Is Anyone Here an ADVENTIST?! |
In article <1107423912.431243.254020@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Orion7
says...
Don't you know evolution is a farce? You are obviously a product of the
brain washing which goes on in our Schools, Colleges and Universities.
I have seen the desperate lengths these Professors and Scientists go to
make people believe in evolution, even fabricating evidence to support
their unsupportable theories.
1st Rule of Creationism: Ignored evidence will go away
2nd Rule of Creationism: Interpret any challenge as personal insult
3rd Rule of Creationism: Claim evidence then quietly slip away
4th Rule of Creationism: Don't be confused by facts
5th Rule of Creationism: Insist that science ignores your proof
6th Rule of Creationism: Claim superiority for Christian education.
7th Rule of Creationism: Always appear to know more than you do.
8th Rule of Creationism: Shift the burden of proof to your critics.
9th Rule of Creationism: Lying for the Lord is okay.
10th Rule of Creationism: Never acknowledge your demonstrated errors
--
MsAnthrope
http://web.newsguy.com/rubyred
.
|
|
| User: "Orion7" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Anyone Here an ADVENTIST?! |
03 Feb 2005 03:06:50 PM |
|
|
1. Heidelberg Man - Built from a jaw bone that was conceded by many to
be quite human.
2. Nebraska Man - Scientifically built up from one tooth and later
found to be the tooth of an extinct pig.
3. Piltdown Man - The jawbone turned out to belong to a modern ape.
4. Peking Man - 500,000 years old. All evidence has disappeared.
5. Neanderthal Man - At the Int'l Congress of Zoology (1958) Dr. A. J.
E. Cave Said his examination showed that the famous Neanderthal
skeleton found in France over 50 years ago is that of an old man who
suffered from arthritis.
6. Cro-Magnon Man - One of the earliest and best established fossils is
at least equal in physique and brain capacity to modern man...so what's
the difference?
7. Modern Man - This genius thinks we came from a monkey.
8. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools - Romans 1:22
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian E. Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Anyone Here an ADVENTIST?! |
03 Feb 2005 11:05:40 PM |
|
|
In article <1107443210.925769.169100
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, Orion7 said...
[snip]
Jack Chick's chart in his "Big Daddy" tract -- the details of
which you cribbed without attribution -- was inaccurate even
when he first wrote it. The errors he repeated were exposed
decades ago.
It's obvious that you have little interest in truth, otherwise
you would have investigated Chick's claims. Even back before the
Internet made such research effortless, it took all of 30
minutes' foraging in a library to discover the facts about
Nebraska man, Peking man and the others listed in Chick's chart.
These days such information can be found at the click of a
mouse. Still, you remain ignorant as sin about biology, and that
evokes both pity and contempt.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew" |
|
| Title: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
03 Feb 2005 11:56:19 PM |
|
|
"Brian E. Clark" wrote in message news:MPG.1c6c784d98e3eadf989757@news.comcast.giganews.com...
Jack Chick's chart in his "Big Daddy" tract -- the details of
which you cribbed without attribution -- was inaccurate even
when he first wrote it. The errors he repeated were exposed
decades ago.
It's obvious that you have little interest in truth, otherwise
you would have investigated Chick's claims. Even back before the
Internet made such research effortless, it took all of 30
minutes' foraging in a library to discover the facts about
Nebraska man, Peking man and the others listed in Chick's chart.
These days such information can be found at the click of a
mouse. Still, you remain ignorant as sin about biology, and that
evokes both pity and contempt.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
Hey Brian - There are NO transitional fossil men! Those that were
presented as such, were later proven to be either fraud, hoax, ape,
or genuine man (or extinct pig as Nebraska man was proven to be).
Andrew
.
|
|
|
| User: "Iain" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 09:43:33 AM |
|
|
"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> wrote in message news:<36fs11F51ratvU1@individual.net>...
"Brian E. Clark" wrote in message news:MPG.1c6c784d98e3eadf989757@news.comcast.giganews.com...
Jack Chick's chart in his "Big Daddy" tract -- the details of
which you cribbed without attribution -- was inaccurate even
when he first wrote it. The errors he repeated were exposed
decades ago.
It's obvious that you have little interest in truth, otherwise
you would have investigated Chick's claims. Even back before the
Internet made such research effortless, it took all of 30
minutes' foraging in a library to discover the facts about
Nebraska man, Peking man and the others listed in Chick's chart.
These days such information can be found at the click of a
mouse. Still, you remain ignorant as sin about biology, and that
evokes both pity and contempt.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
Hey Brian - There are NO transitional fossil men!
Transitional between what and what???? ALL fossils of parents are transitional!
~Iain
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
06 Feb 2005 04:41:13 AM |
|
|
On 4 Feb 2005 01:43:33 -0800, (Iain) wrote:
"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> wrote in message news:<36fs11F51ratvU1@individual.net>...
"Brian E. Clark" wrote in message news:MPG.1c6c784d98e3eadf989757@news.comcast.giganews.com...
Jack Chick's chart in his "Big Daddy" tract -- the details of
which you cribbed without attribution -- was inaccurate even
when he first wrote it. The errors he repeated were exposed
decades ago.
It's obvious that you have little interest in truth, otherwise
you would have investigated Chick's claims. Even back before the
Internet made such research effortless, it took all of 30
minutes' foraging in a library to discover the facts about
Nebraska man, Peking man and the others listed in Chick's chart.
These days such information can be found at the click of a
mouse. Still, you remain ignorant as sin about biology, and that
evokes both pity and contempt.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
Hey Brian - There are NO transitional fossil men!
Transitional between what and what???? ALL fossils of parents are transitional!
Cretins like Andrew and Orion are a hefty and very common cancer in
the US.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "snex" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
03 Feb 2005 11:59:30 PM |
|
|
Andrew wrote:
"Brian E. Clark" wrote in message
news:MPG.1c6c784d98e3eadf989757@news.comcast.giganews.com...
Jack Chick's chart in his "Big Daddy" tract -- the details of
which you cribbed without attribution -- was inaccurate even
when he first wrote it. The errors he repeated were exposed
decades ago.
It's obvious that you have little interest in truth, otherwise
you would have investigated Chick's claims. Even back before the
Internet made such research effortless, it took all of 30
minutes' foraging in a library to discover the facts about
Nebraska man, Peking man and the others listed in Chick's chart.
These days such information can be found at the click of a
mouse. Still, you remain ignorant as sin about biology, and that
evokes both pity and contempt.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
Hey Brian - There are NO transitional fossil men! Those that were
presented as such, were later proven to be either fraud, hoax, ape,
or genuine man (or extinct pig as Nebraska man was proven to be).
Andrew
so much for getting your science from chick tracts. he neglected to
mention any of the fossils found here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/specimen.html
maybe you think that they are either all ape or all human, but for any
particular fossil, i can find you creationists that disagree on which.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 12:50:23 AM |
|
|
In alt.atheism on Thu, 3 Feb 2005 15:56:19 -0800, "Andrew"
<andrew.321remov@usa.net> let us all know that:
"Brian E. Clark" wrote in message news:MPG.1c6c784d98e3eadf989757@news.comcast.giganews.com...
Jack Chick's chart in his "Big Daddy" tract -- the details of
which you cribbed without attribution -- was inaccurate even
when he first wrote it. The errors he repeated were exposed
decades ago.
It's obvious that you have little interest in truth, otherwise
you would have investigated Chick's claims. Even back before the
Internet made such research effortless, it took all of 30
minutes' foraging in a library to discover the facts about
Nebraska man, Peking man and the others listed in Chick's chart.
These days such information can be found at the click of a
mouse. Still, you remain ignorant as sin about biology, and that
evokes both pity and contempt.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
Hey Brian - There are NO transitional fossil men! Those that were
presented as such, were later proven to be either fraud, hoax, ape,
or genuine man (or extinct pig as Nebraska man was proven to be).
OK, you're completely stupid. Stop using your computer, since you
are clearly too stupid to have one.
And there's no evidence of creation, actually. Whatever has been
presented has been either proven to be a fraud (the bible) or a hoax
(such as the Paluxy River *****).
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Orion7" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 01:02:38 AM |
|
|
Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant Creation!
http://www.halos.com/reports/ex-nihilo-1998-fingerprints-of-creation.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 08:49:23 PM |
|
|
On 3 Feb 2005 17:02:38 -0800, "Orion7" <gary.zw@gmail.com> wrote:
Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant Creation!
http://www.halos.com/reports/ex-nihilo-1998-fingerprints-of-creation.htm
I read the article, but I am rather puzzled. How do you tell the difference
between polonium halos, and those caused by the decay of any other radio active
element, uranium, or radium, for example?
Other geologists seem unable to tell the difference.
--
Puck Greenman
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
Plonked by Rob Duncan
January 27th
Na bister 500,000
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "snex" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 01:16:17 AM |
|
|
Orion7 wrote:
Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant Creation!
http://www.halos.com/reports/ex-nihilo-1998-fingerprints-of-creation.htm
nice try: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 02:26:25 AM |
|
|
"snex" wrote in message news:1107479777.845756.186120@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Orion7 wrote:
Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant Creation!
http://www.halos.com/reports/ex-nihilo-1998-fingerprints-of-creation.htm
nice try: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html
"Trying to prove a religious premise is itself an act of faith, not science."
~ Thomas A. Baillieul (from above site)
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
~ Andrew
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gill" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
06 Feb 2005 05:44:28 PM |
|
|
"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> wrote in news:36g4qfF51lm4fU1
@individual.net:
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
<shrug>
Since our best evidence points exactly to that - except, of course, BB
cosmology doesn't claim "nothing" - what is your bland assertion but a
crass lie?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
06 Feb 2005 08:35:34 PM |
|
|
"Eric Gill" wrote in message news:Xns95F577733BBC9ericvgillyahoocom@63.223.5.254...
"Andrew" wrote in news:36g4qfF51lm4fU1
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
<shrug>
.... BB cosmology doesn't claim "nothing"....
Oh, that's right...it was from something smaller than ---------> . <---------
Seems like it would take a whole lot of 'faith' for anyone to believe this hoax.
Andrew
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
06 Feb 2005 09:43:35 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism on Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:35:34 -0800, "Andrew"
<andrew.321remov@usa.net> let us all know that:
"Eric Gill" wrote in message news:Xns95F577733BBC9ericvgillyahoocom@63.223.5.254...
"Andrew" wrote in news:36g4qfF51lm4fU1
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
<shrug>
.... BB cosmology doesn't claim "nothing"....
Oh, that's right...it was from something smaller than ---------> . <---------
Seems like it would take a whole lot of 'faith' for anyone to believe this hoax.
Oh, are you still trolling with your hoax?
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
08 Feb 2005 09:23:44 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 21:43:35 GMT, Don Kresch
<ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote:
In alt.atheism on Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:35:34 -0800, "Andrew"
<andrew.321remov@usa.net> let us all know that:
"Eric Gill" wrote in message news:Xns95F577733BBC9ericvgillyahoocom@63.223.5.254...
"Andrew" wrote in news:36g4qfF51lm4fU1
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
<shrug>
.... BB cosmology doesn't claim "nothing"....
Oh, that's right...it was from something smaller than ---------> . <---------
Seems like it would take a whole lot of 'faith' for anyone to believe this hoax.
Oh, are you still trolling with your hoax?
Drooling you mean, Andrew isn't intelligent enough to troll.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
06 Feb 2005 11:50:10 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:35:34 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Eric Gill" wrote in message news:Xns95F577733BBC9ericvgillyahoocom@63.223.5.254...
"Andrew" wrote in news:36g4qfF51lm4fU1
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
.... BB cosmology doesn't claim "nothing"....
Oh, that's right...it was from something smaller than ---------> . <---------
No, it was from the quantum foam. That has no size.
--
I cannot conceive of a god who rewards and punishes his creatures
or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither
can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives
its physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egotism,
cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eter-
nity of life and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the exist-
ing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a
portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in
nature.
- Albert Einstein, as quoted in _Billions and Billions_, Carl Sagan.
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
08 Feb 2005 09:26:24 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 23:50:10 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:35:34 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
said in alt.atheism:
"Eric Gill" wrote in message news:Xns95F577733BBC9ericvgillyahoocom@63.223.5.254...
"Andrew" wrote in news:36g4qfF51lm4fU1
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
.... BB cosmology doesn't claim "nothing"....
Oh, that's right...it was from something smaller than ---------> . <---------
No, it was from the quantum foam. That has no size.
Hmmm.....quantum beer, best hops right to it to find out if it will
barley foam or not.....
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
06 Feb 2005 09:09:12 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:35:34 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
wrote:
"Eric Gill" wrote in message news:Xns95F577733BBC9ericvgillyahoocom@63.223.5.254...
"Andrew" wrote in news:36g4qfF51lm4fU1
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
<shrug>
.... BB cosmology doesn't claim "nothing"....
Oh, that's right...it was from something smaller than ---------> . <---------
Seems like it would take a whole lot of 'faith' for anyone to believe this hoax.
Andrew, you've already amply demonstrated that the sum total of your
knowledge of BB and evolutionary theory put together would fit on one
side of a Post-It Note with room left for you to sign your work.
There's no need to prove it further. Why beat a dead horse?
Andrew
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
06 Feb 2005 11:51:15 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 21:09:12 GMT, John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> said
in alt.atheism:
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:35:34 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
wrote:
Oh, that's right...it was from something smaller than ---------> . <---------
Seems like it would take a whole lot of 'faith' for anyone to believe this hoax.
Andrew, you've already amply demonstrated that the sum total of your
knowledge of BB and evolutionary theory put together would fit on one
side of a Post-It Note with room left for you to sign your work.
There's no need to prove it further. Why beat a dead horse?
It would actually fit on the dot he posted up above, and leave a lot
of blank space.
--
"Creationists are the best evidence we have that there is no intelligent design."
-Josef Balluch
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
08 Feb 2005 09:22:51 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 23:51:15 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 21:09:12 GMT, John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> said
in alt.atheism:
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:35:34 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
wrote:
Oh, that's right...it was from something smaller than ---------> . <---------
Seems like it would take a whole lot of 'faith' for anyone to believe this hoax.
Andrew, you've already amply demonstrated that the sum total of your
knowledge of BB and evolutionary theory put together would fit on one
side of a Post-It Note with room left for you to sign your work.
There's no need to prove it further. Why beat a dead horse?
It would actually fit on the dot he posted up above, and leave a lot
of blank space.
In large font.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
10 Feb 2005 12:01:01 AM |
|
|
Eric Gill wrote:
"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> wrote in news:36g4qfF51lm4fU1
@individual.net:
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
<shrug>
Since our best evidence points exactly to that - except, of course,
BB
cosmology doesn't claim "nothing" - what is your bland assertion but
a
crass lie?
It is a convenient partisan distortion of the reality, aka a
straw man. Another point is that science doesn't "try to
prove" anything and indeed doesn't prove anything. Your
correspondent also implies another straw man: that either
something is proven or else is taken on faith. A false
dichotomy.
It's interesting that he considers accusing others of doing
what he does--to believe in things based on faith--is an insult,
especially since that is exactly how others take it.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "snex" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 02:49:17 AM |
|
|
Andrew wrote:
"snex" wrote in message
news:1107479777.845756.186120@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Orion7 wrote:
Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant Creation!
http://www.halos.com/reports/ex-nihilo-1998-fingerprints-of-creation.htm
nice try: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html
"Trying to prove a religious premise is itself an act of faith, not
science."
~ Thomas A. Baillieul (from above site)
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
~ Andrew
what does that have to do with polonium haloes? or do you admit to
abandoning that argument?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 03:20:06 AM |
|
|
"snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote in message news:1107485357.293526.207980@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Andrew wrote:
"snex" wrote in message
news:1107479777.845756.186120@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Orion7 wrote:
Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant Creation!
http://www.halos.com/reports/ex-nihilo-1998-fingerprints-of-creation.htm
nice try: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html
"Trying to prove a religious premise is itself an act of faith, not science."
~ Thomas A. Baillieul (from above site)
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
~ Andrew
what does that have to do with polonium haloes? or do you admit to
abandoning that argument?
Ask Mr.Baillieul who made the statement I commented on..and while you're
at it, ask him what navels on Adam or Eve have to do with polonium haloes.
Andrew
.
|
|
|
| User: "snex" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 03:37:04 AM |
|
|
Andrew wrote:
"snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1107485357.293526.207980@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Andrew wrote:
"snex" wrote in message
news:1107479777.845756.186120@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Orion7 wrote:
Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant
Creation!
http://www.halos.com/reports/ex-nihilo-1998-fingerprints-of-creation.htm
nice try: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html
"Trying to prove a religious premise is itself an act of faith,
not science."
~ Thomas A. Baillieul (from above site)
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
~ Andrew
what does that have to do with polonium haloes? or do you admit to
abandoning that argument?
Ask Mr.Baillieul who made the statement I commented on..and while
you're
at it, ask him what navels on Adam or Eve have to do with polonium
haloes.
Andrew
considering ive given you the scientific explanation for the haloes, no
faith is necessary. haloes only form in granite that is above uranium
deposits. what does mr baillieul have to say about that?
.
|
|
|
| User: "sanguinevikings" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 07:57:53 AM |
|
|
snex wrote:
Andrew wrote:
"snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1107485357.293526.207980@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Andrew wrote:
"snex" wrote in message
news:1107479777.845756.186120@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Orion7 wrote:
Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant
Creation!
http://www.halos.com/reports/ex-nihilo-1998-fingerprints-of-creation.htm
nice try: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html
"Trying to prove a religious premise is itself an act of faith,
not science."
~ Thomas A. Baillieul (from above site)
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
~ Andrew
what does that have to do with polonium haloes? or do you admit to
abandoning that argument?
Ask Mr.Baillieul who made the statement I commented on..and while
you're
at it, ask him what navels on Adam or Eve have to do with polonium
haloes.
Andrew
considering ive given you the scientific explanation for the haloes, no
faith is necessary. haloes only form in granite that is above uranium
deposits. what does mr baillieul have to say about that?
He hasn't got a clue. If he can't get his own clue he should try
standing on shoulders other than those of pygmies.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "sanguinevikings" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 07:54:16 AM |
|
|
Andrew wrote:
"snex" wrote in message news:1107479777.845756.186120@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Orion7 wrote:
Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant Creation!
http://www.halos.com/reports/ex-nihilo-1998-fingerprints-of-creation.htm
nice try: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html
"Trying to prove a religious premise is itself an act of faith, not science."
~ Thomas A. Baillieul (from above site)
Trying to prove that life came from nonliving chemicals which
came from a primeval explosion which came from nothing..
is an act of *faith*, not science.
~ Andrew
Vanity *is* one of the seven deadly sins.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "chibiabos" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
05 Feb 2005 12:21:07 AM |
|
|
In article <36fs11F51ratvU1@individual.net>, Andrew
<andrew.321remov@usa.net> wrote:
Hey Brian - There are NO transitional fossil men!
Yes, there are. Go look in the mirror.
-chib
--
Member of SMASH
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor
(email: change out to in)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Brian E. Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 03:34:51 AM |
|
|
In article <36fs11F51ratvU1@individual.net>, Andrew said...
Hey Brian - There are NO transitional fossil men!
The hoax must be extraordinarily thorough, then, because there
seem to have been quite a few transitional hominids and
prehominids.
Those that were presented as such, were later proven
to be either fraud, hoax, ape, or genuine man
This is becoming futile: First, you obviously haven't bothered
to acquaint yourself with even the basics of human evolution.
Second, I get a headache conversing with someone whose utter
lack of knowledge about a discipline presents no impediment to
his confident denunciation of that discipline.
(or extinct pig as Nebraska man was proven to be).
You are proving to be extremely gullible. Jack Chick is a not a
reputable source for scientific information.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
08 Feb 2005 09:27:28 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 13:09:40 +0800, bob young
<alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote:
"Brian E. Clark" wrote:
In article <36fs11F51ratvU1@individual.net>, Andrew said...
Hey Brian - There are NO transitional fossil men!
The hoax must be extraordinarily thorough, then, because there
seem to have been quite a few transitional hominids and
prehominids.
Those that were presented as such, were later proven
to be either fraud, hoax, ape, or genuine man
This is becoming futile: First, you obviously haven't bothered
to acquaint yourself with even the basics of human evolution.
Second, I get a headache conversing with someone whose utter
lack of knowledge about a discipline presents no impediment to
his confident denunciation of that discipline.
(or extinct pig as Nebraska man was proven to be).
You are proving to be extremely gullible. Jack Chick is a not a
reputable source for scientific information.
Aaaaah, but he is 'a straw to cling to' and that's what
creationists long for, that elusive 'straw'!
Cretinists suck on straw only because Jesus' holy rod isn't available.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: There Are No Transitional Fossil Men |
04 Feb 2005 08:24:29 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 15:56:19 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
wrote:
"Brian E. Clark" wrote in message news:MPG.1c6c784d98e3eadf989757@news.comcast.giganews.com...
Jack Chick's chart in his "Big Daddy" tract -- the details of
which you cribbed without attribution -- was inaccurate even
when he first wrote it. The errors he repeated were exposed
decades ago.
It's obvious that you have little interest in truth, otherwise
you would have investigated Chick's claims. Even back before the
Internet made such research effortless, it took all of 30
minutes' foraging in a library to discover the facts about
Nebraska man, Peking man and the others listed in Chick's chart.
These days such information can be found at the click of a
mouse. Still, you remain ignorant as sin about biology, and that
evokes both pity and contempt.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
Hey Brian - There are NO transitional fossil men!
There's no brain in your head either.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
