Skepticism Defined

Religions > Atheism > Skepticism Defined

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 2 of 6

Topic:	Religions > Atheism
User:	"IKnowHimDoYou"
Date:	24 Apr 2004 10:46:42 AM
Object:	Skepticism Defined

Skepticism Defined
"Whenever we find someone saying that no one can know anything, it is only
natural to wonder whether[or how] the skeptic or atheist knows that".
Ronald Nash
This then means that skepticism and it's brother atheism are
self-defeating human philosophies.
.

User: "scott"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	26 Apr 2004 07:14:21 PM

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404261332.62189da2@posting.google.com...

"scott" <BySSpam@nonoSpam.com> wrote in message

news:<BKidnTEFn8Qt6RHdRVn-iQ@intertex.net>...

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404250937.17656c50@posting.google.com...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in message

news:<sNPic.12098$NG2.5551@edtnps84>...

To be fair here, you should note that talk.origins is a place made

those

who believe in evolution. Most of the site is based upon the faulty

premise

that evolution has occurred.

If evolution has not occurred, then where did all the different
ethnicites, i.e. black people, white people, asiatic people, etc. come
from? They can't all be descended from Adam and Eve, because that
would be evolution, and evolution is false, right?

--Billy

5 And Jehovah came down to see the city and the tower, which the

children of

men builded.
6 And Jehovah said, Behold, they are one people, and they have all one
language; and this is what they begin to do: and now nothing will be
withholden from them, which they purpose to do.
7 Come, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may

not

understand one another's speech.
8 So Jehovah scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the
earth: and they left off building the city.
9 Therefore was the name of it called Babel; because Jehovah did there
confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did Jehovah

scatter

them abroad upon the face of all the earth.
Gen 11:5-9 (ASV)

I wasn't talking about languages. I was talking about ethnic groups.
Why do Chinese people look different from African people, if there is
no evolution?

--Billy

Starting with Adam and Eve, humans would have had all the genes necessary
for a racially mixed population. Adam and Eve were created physically
perfect. The only thing needed for differences to appear was time and
environmental factors. This would have started with Adam, and then with Noah
and his family. As family groups were isolated because of language barriers,
the environmental factors allowed certain human traits to be expressed more
and more. Other genes were suppressed over time because they were not
favored.
The Bible tells about God confusing the languages at the tower of Babel
after the flood. The human gene pool is no larger and no different today
than it was in the beginning. When people were scattered into certain groups
because of the language barriers, certain groups of humans would be isolated
together. Over time, this would cause the increase of certain genes to be
used more, which would produce a larger population of dark skinned people,
light skinned people, etc.
http://www.thischristianlife.com/articles/wood0702a.html
The Bible talks about differences between national groups and language, but
the Bible doesn't speak about skin color. In truth, (Acts 17:26) states that
God made all nations of men "of one blood". The Bible is clear. We are all
one race... the human race.
When we start looking for the reasons for the different skin colors, we must
realize that none of us were there to witness these changes. Evolutionists
will tell us that if we really believe the Bible, we must always take things
by "faith" alone. But the creationist and the evolutionist are in the same
boat. None of us were there to witness the changes.
.

User: "walksalone"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	27 Apr 2004 04:36:41 AM

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:
A moment if I might Billy? TIA.

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404261332.62189da2@posting.google.com...

"scott" <BySSpam@nonoSpam.com> wrote in message

news:<BKidnTEFn8Qt6RHdRVn-iQ@intertex.net>...

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404250937.17656c50@posting.google.com...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in message

snip

I wasn't talking about languages. I was talking about ethnic groups.
Why do Chinese people look different from African people, if there is
no evolution?

--Billy

Starting with Adam and Eve, humans would have had all the genes necessary

So, then you contend & have evidence that there were no humans prior to
-400Gr.? That I would like to see, for I am sure some to the Sumerian
kings, & people would be dismayed to hear that.

for a racially mixed population. Adam and Eve were created physically
perfect. The only thing needed for differences to appear was time and

But Adam, according to Jewish mythology, was over 1000 feet tall. So, you
were saying?

environmental factors. This would have started with Adam, and then with Noah

Adam had everything, was set up by El, shrunk, & the race was on? That what
you are trying to say?

and his family. As family groups were isolated because of language barriers,

Family groups were united due to language barriers. Aramic was the base
language, not to mention there is no historical evidence for Adam. Now
Gilgames[h], yes, there is historical evidence.

the environmental factors allowed certain human traits to be expressed more

Which traits. We know the claimed universal flood was like the universal
fit, it wasn't & has never been.
Universal, another word for isn't.

and more. Other genes were suppressed over time because they were not
favored.

You are talking evolution, plain, ordinary evolution. No gods required.

The Bible tells about God confusing the languages at the tower of Babel

The grimorie claims many things, of which the majority lack evidence when
evidence should be available. No surprise, especially if you read it as a
tribal history of justification for its atrocities.

after the flood. The human gene pool is no larger and no different today
than it was in the beginning. When people were scattered into certain groups
because of the language barriers, certain groups of humans would be isolated

The hell it is not. Evolution has insured the gene pool is different. Now,
if you have evidence for your claim, say a scientific journal set of
articles, post it. Otherwise you are just another liar for the lad history
can not find.

together. Over time, this would cause the increase of certain genes to be
used more, which would produce a larger population of dark skinned people,
light skinned people, etc.

no, it would not. especially given the short period of time involved. But
being a bleater, you will never understand that simple fact.

http://www.thischristianlife.com/articles/wood0702a.html

Right, like science according to the grimorie is convincing to anyone that
has reading skills past the 4th grade level.

The Bible talks about differences between national groups and language, but

No, it claims that El stirred the bucket fro humans were about to breach
the heavenly canopy & become as gods. I take it you have not read the
grimorie yourself then?

the Bible doesn't speak about skin color. In truth, (Acts 17:26) states that
God made all nations of men "of one blood". The Bible is clear. We are all
one race... the human race.

Indeed we are,, with subsets. Now, if we could just get xians as a
worldwide group to accept that fact, what an improvement that would be
after 2000 years.

When we start looking for the reasons for the different skin colors, we must
realize that none of us were there to witness these changes. Evolutionists
will tell us that if we really believe the Bible, we must always take things
by "faith" alone. But the creationist and the evolutionist are in the same
boat. None of us were there to witness the changes.

For some things it is not necessary, the evidence has a trail. Your
grimorie, in spite of its trail of blood & foulness, has no trail of
evidence leading to El. Claims, why, yes, evidence, no.
walksalone who has to wonder, do xians read for comprehension, or the warm
feeling they get?
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	27 Apr 2004 04:56:10 AM

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:

Adam and Eve were created physically perfect.

But Adam, according to Jewish mythology, was over 1000 feet tall.

What's this?
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.

User: "walksalone"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	27 Apr 2004 05:49:44 AM

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 09:56:10 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:

Adam and Eve were created physically perfect.

But Adam, according to Jewish mythology, was over 1000 feet tall.

What's this?

Check your mail grasshopper, now.
walksalone who does have standard sources, & rarely shares them. After all,
if one is to lazy to do the research, one should not complain they do not
understand. Might be why most followers of myth s don't understand very
much according to them.
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	27 Apr 2004 07:53:22 AM

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:

Adam and Eve were created physically perfect.

But Adam, according to Jewish mythology, was over 1000 feet tall.

What's this?

Check your mail grasshopper, now.

I just did. Nothing from you has showed up yet.

walksalone who does have standard sources, & rarely shares them.
After all, if one is to lazy to do the research, one should not complain
they do not understand. Might be why most followers of myths don't
understand very much according to them.

I've read before about the Muslims believing Adam was 900 feet tall,
and thought maybe you had a Jewish story which tried to outdo
their story.
Anyway, I have another idea I'd like to discuss with you, so drop
me an email at elo@airmail.net.
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.

User: "walksalone"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	27 Apr 2004 08:21:43 AM

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 12:53:22 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:

Adam and Eve were created physically perfect.

But Adam, according to Jewish mythology, was over 1000 feet tall.

What's this?

Check your mail grasshopper, now.

I just did. Nothing from you has showed up yet.

I've read before about the Muslims believing Adam was 900 feet tall,
and thought maybe you had a Jewish story which tried to outdo
their story.

Anyway, I have another idea I'd like to discuss with you, so drop
me an email at elo@airmail.net.

Sent, prior sent around 5AM this date.
.

User: "Therion Ware"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	27 Apr 2004 08:48:25 AM

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 08:21:43 -0500 in alt.atheism, walksalone
(walksalone <spam@fcc.gov>) said, directing the reply to alt.atheism

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 12:53:22 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:

Adam and Eve were created physically perfect.

But Adam, according to Jewish mythology, was over 1000 feet tall.

What's this?

Check your mail grasshopper, now.

I just did. Nothing from you has showed up yet.

I've read before about the Muslims believing Adam was 900 feet tall,
and thought maybe you had a Jewish story which tried to outdo
their story.

Anyway, I have another idea I'd like to discuss with you, so drop
me an email at elo@airmail.net.

Sent, prior sent around 5AM this date.

Oh go to bed. And if you don't have one, I may be in a position - as
it were - to make a suggestion!
--
"Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You."
- Attrib: Pauline Reage.
Inexpensive VHS & other video to CD/DVD conversion?
See: <http://www.Video2CD.com>. 35.00 gets your video on DVD.
all posts to this email address are automatically deleted without being read.
** atheist poster child #1 ** #442.
.

User: "walksalone"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	27 Apr 2004 02:58:27 PM

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 14:48:25 +0100, Therion Ware wrote:

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 08:21:43 -0500 in alt.atheism, walksalone
(walksalone <spam@fcc.gov>) said, directing the reply to alt.atheism

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 12:53:22 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:

snip

I've read before about the Muslims believing Adam was 900 feet tall,
and thought maybe you had a Jewish story which tried to outdo
their story.

Anyway, I have another idea I'd like to discuss with you, so drop
me an email at elo@airmail.net.

Sent, prior sent around 5AM this date.

Oh go to bed. And if you don't have one, I may be in a position - as
it were - to make a suggestion!

Considering some of your reported places you like to sleep in, & the
interesting times that have been generated by them, I'm not sure Elroy
could stand to follow your suggestions, as it were.
Or have you given up couches?
walksalone who is not so sure he would want to follow Therion's suggestions
this time.
.

User: "Therion Ware"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	27 Apr 2004 09:58:52 PM

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 14:58:27 -0500 in alt.atheism, walksalone
(walksalone <spam@fcc.gov>) said, directing the reply to alt.atheism

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 14:48:25 +0100, Therion Ware wrote:

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 08:21:43 -0500 in alt.atheism, walksalone
(walksalone <spam@fcc.gov>) said, directing the reply to alt.atheism

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 12:53:22 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:

snip

I've read before about the Muslims believing Adam was 900 feet tall,
and thought maybe you had a Jewish story which tried to outdo
their story.

Anyway, I have another idea I'd like to discuss with you, so drop
me an email at elo@airmail.net.

Sent, prior sent around 5AM this date.

Oh go to bed. And if you don't have one, I may be in a position - as
it were - to make a suggestion!

I can't even look at a couch these days without wincing.

walksalone who is not so sure he would want to follow Therion's suggestions
this time.

--
"Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You."
- Attrib: Pauline Reage.
Inexpensive VHS & other video to CD/DVD conversion?
See: <http://www.Video2CD.com>. 35.00 gets your video on DVD.
all posts to this email address are automatically deleted without being read.
** atheist poster child #1 ** #442.
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	27 Apr 2004 09:05:37 PM

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 12:53:22 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:

Adam and Eve were created physically perfect.

But Adam, according to Jewish mythology, was over 1000 feet tall.

What's this?

Check your mail grasshopper, now.

I just did. Nothing from you has showed up yet.

Sent, prior sent around 5AM this date.

Still nothing. Are you sending any kind of attachments in your email?
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.

User: "walksalone"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	28 Apr 2004 08:50:44 PM

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 02:05:37 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 12:53:22 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:

Adam and Eve were created physically perfect.

But Adam, according to Jewish mythology, was over 1000 feet tall.

What's this?

Check your mail grasshopper, now.

I just did. Nothing from you has showed up yet.

I've read before about the Muslims believing Adam was 900 feet tall,
and thought maybe you had a Jewish story which tried to outdo
their story.

Anyway, I have another idea I'd like to discuss with you, so drop
me an email at elo@airmail.net.

Sent, prior sent around 5AM this date.

Still nothing. Are you sending any kind of attachments in your email?

Nope, but I will see if I can't send them out via a mail program, instead
of a news/mail program.
walksalone who doesn't know where the mail went, it has not been returned &
supposedly accepted for delivery..
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	29 Apr 2004 05:22:20 AM

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 02:05:37 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 12:53:22 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:

Adam and Eve were created physically perfect.

But Adam, according to Jewish mythology, was over 1000 feet tall.

What's this?

Check your mail grasshopper, now.

I just did. Nothing from you has showed up yet.

Sent, prior sent around 5AM this date.

Still nothing. Are you sending any kind of attachments in your email?

I think it might be a problem on my end. I tried sending myself an
email and it didn't make it through either. I have some pretty hefty
filtering going on, including a filter which rejects any attachments
larger than 20K or so. That's why I asked if you tried to attach
anything.
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.

User: "walksalone"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	29 Apr 2004 08:05:59 PM

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 10:22:20 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 02:05:37 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 12:53:22 GMT, Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis wrote:

walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in alt.atheism

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:14:21 -0500, scott wrote:

Adam and Eve were created physically perfect.

But Adam, according to Jewish mythology, was over 1000 feet tall.

What's this?

Check your mail grasshopper, now.

I just did. Nothing from you has showed up yet.

I've read before about the Muslims believing Adam was 900 feet tall,
and thought maybe you had a Jewish story which tried to outdo
their story.

Anyway, I have another idea I'd like to discuss with you, so drop
me an email at elo@airmail.net.

Sent, prior sent around 5AM this date.

Still nothing. Are you sending any kind of attachments in your email?

Nope, but I will see if I can't send them out via a mail program, instead
of a news/mail program.

walksalone who doesn't know where the mail went, it has not been returned &
supposedly accepted for delivery..

I only do text of compressed text attachments.
As to the problem on your end, could be. if you recall that I am not baawa
& cast a wide net, you might be able to kite me. Try it, & I will respond
here as well as by Email if it makes it.
walksalone who really hates it when a news server goes sucky.
.

User: "Raymond E. Griffith"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	26 Apr 2004 09:23:38 PM

in article jcGdnZBMSqFBOBDdRVn-tA@intertex.net, scott at
BySSpam@nonoSpam.com wrote on 4/26/04 8:14 PM:

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404261332.62189da2@posting.google.com...

"scott" <BySSpam@nonoSpam.com> wrote in message

news:<BKidnTEFn8Qt6RHdRVn-iQ@intertex.net>...

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404250937.17656c50@posting.google.com...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in message

news:<sNPic.12098$NG2.5551@edtnps84>...

To be fair here, you should note that talk.origins is a place made

those

who believe in evolution. Most of the site is based upon the faulty

premise

that evolution has occurred.

5 And Jehovah came down to see the city and the tower, which the

children of

not

scatter

them abroad upon the face of all the earth.
Gen 11:5-9 (ASV)

I wasn't talking about languages. I was talking about ethnic groups.
Why do Chinese people look different from African people, if there is
no evolution?

--Billy

Starting with Adam and Eve, humans would have had all the genes necessary
for a racially mixed population.

The contention that Adam, Eve, or Noah & sons were somehow more "genetically
rich" than people of today is an argument without any substance. There is
nothing to suggest that people lose genetic material as time progresses.
In point of fact, we know where genetic diversity comes from. It comes from
imperfect replication. Let's see -- along with the mix of genetic material
from the parents are additions, deletions, insertions, and transpositions of
genetics

Adam and Eve were created physically
perfect.

This is not even Scripturally in evidence! Where do you get off pushing as
dogma something even the Scripture itself does not assert?

The only thing needed for differences to appear was time and
environmental factors.

Time and environmental factors? Sounds like an admission of evolution to me!
Of course, the fundamentalists tend to borrow the key concepts they can no
longer refute, while still blasting the name (i.e., "evolution").
Environmental factors (i.e. "natural selection") tend to eliminate traits
that are disadvantageous within that particular environment.

This would have started with Adam, and then with Noah
and his family. As family groups were isolated because of language barriers,
the environmental factors allowed certain human traits to be expressed more
and more. Other genes were suppressed over time because they were not
favored.

"Not favored" -- in other words, you are a direct supporter of natural
selection! You even use Darwinian language! Wow!

The Bible tells about God confusing the languages at the tower of Babel
after the flood.

Something that linguistics today has definitely disproved. There is no
evidence of such an event. On the contrary, we have definite proof of
language derivations going back for thousands of years earlier than the
point where the tower of Babel was supposed to have happened.

The human gene pool is no larger and no different today
than it was in the beginning.

So you didn't mean what you said earlier? Genes being suppressed?
Environmental factors? Of course, the fact that we have billions of people
instead of two makes no difference?
Then again, if what you say is true, then God created Adam and Eve with
Tay-Sachs, sickle-cell, and other genetic disorders.

When people were scattered into certain groups
because of the language barriers, certain groups of humans would be isolated
together. Over time, this would cause the increase of certain genes to be
used more, which would produce a larger population of dark skinned people,
light skinned people, etc.

http://www.thischristianlife.com/articles/wood0702a.html

The Bible talks about differences between national groups and language, but
the Bible doesn't speak about skin color. In truth, (Acts 17:26) states that
God made all nations of men "of one blood". The Bible is clear. We are all
one race... the human race.

Well finally! Something I can agree with! We are all one race -- and it is
time that Christians have finally realized this. It has taken Christianity a
long time to catch up to science. Why not too many years ago I heard
preaching in a fundamentalist church that God had separated the races and
that interracial dating and marriage was wrong. Why there are still churches
and organizations that preach that Blacks are inferior -- and they base
their claim on poorly understood and badly explained Scriptures!

Oh I just *love* the fundamentalist mantra that if you didn't actually *see*
it, you can't *know* what happened! Throw out forensic science, folks!
Conviction for rape? Should never happen under their philosophy if the face
wasn't seen! A fatal car wreck unseen by anyone else? No one could possibly
find out how it occurred. After all, no one witnessed it (the fact that the
brake lines were cut wouldn't make a difference, now would it!).
Of course, these are silly examples -- but the creationist objection to
scientific methodology is just that silly. We have evidence in plenty as to
the changes that have happened! They are literally everywhere. We have
evidence in plenty as to the changes that are occurring today. We have
evidence that is undeniable (except to the mentally infirm) of how those
changes have occurred. This is demonstrated in the fact that we are now able
to treat genetic diseases -- and even fix some of them.
The creationist mentality appears to be able to operate only under the
grossest of generalities. However, the handling of specifics is beyond its
grasp. The specifics are important. And the specifics not only support the
theory of evolution, they only make sense when seen in that light. Where the
creationist has disjointed and unexplainable "factoids" (except for
"Goddidit"), the scientist sees physical phenomena as explainable by
physical processes.
And as a Christian, I see nothing wrong with allowing the world/universe we
live in provide its own evidences.
Regards,
Raymond E. Griffith

User: "scott"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	27 Apr 2004 08:27:04 AM

"Raymond E. Griffith" <tiffirgrReverse@ctc.net> wrote in message
news:BCB33C69.458878%tiffirgrReverse@ctc.net...

in article jcGdnZBMSqFBOBDdRVn-tA@intertex.net, scott at
BySSpam@nonoSpam.com wrote on 4/26/04 8:14 PM:

The creationist mentality appears to be able to operate only under the
grossest of generalities.>
Raymond E. Griffith

Raymond your hate for God shows. I was trying to answer a question for a
guy and found some interesting input.
I put a link in for it. it was not my words, but I agreed with some of it.
You atheist get so upset, so easy.
.

User: "Raymond E. Griffith"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	29 Apr 2004 10:53:11 AM

"scott" <BySSpam@nonoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:mYCdnd7Zi847whPdRVn-hw@intertex.net...

"Raymond E. Griffith" <tiffirgrReverse@ctc.net> wrote in message
news:BCB33C69.458878%tiffirgrReverse@ctc.net...

Raymond your hate for God shows.

Hatred for God? Did you read the entire reply? Or do you simply cut and
paste as it suits you?
I noted that I am a Christian. What I *do* hate is ignorance, and I hate it
that those who call themselves Christians are so willing to speak from
ignorance as if they were speaking the mind of God.
What *you* have shown is your inability to answer any of the objections to
your specious arguments. It appears that you could not answer the objections
with facts, so you had to resort to the time-honored fundamentalist tactic
of demonizing your opponent.
Where was hatred for God shown by pointing out that your assertion that Adam
and Eve were created physically perfect was not asserted by Scripture? If
they needed to eat, and especially to eat of the Tree of Life in order to
live forever, then was this "perfection"? And how do you translate that to
make the assumption that Adam and Eve were somehow endowed with more genetic
material than the rest of humanity? Or, where was hatred for God
demonstrated by pointing out that there is no linguistic support for the
tower of Babel? One is not required to read the Bible literally in all
places -- you yourself certainly do not do so! Or where was hatred for God
demonstrated in pointing out your egregious errors in genetics? Or pointing
out to you that you were actually espousing Darwinian Natural Selection in
some of your statements? Or that your argument would be the same as accusing
God of creating Adam and Eve with inherent diseases?

I was trying to answer a question for a
guy and found some interesting input.
I put a link in for it. it was not my words, but I agreed with some of

it.

You atheist get so upset, so easy.

Not an atheist at all. I am a Christian. I happen to believe that if you are
a Christian, you should behave like one -- not like an idiot who opens his
mouth and proves his lack of knowledge.
By their unwillingness to learn, their utter imperative to speak all their
mind (a "fool", by the Biblical definition!) despite the lack of substance
abiding therein, and their stubborn disobedience to the very virtues they
claim to uphold, Christians have themselves done more damage to the cause of
Christ than all the atheists in the world.
And by challenging your lack of knowledge, I do not challenge Christ or
shake my fist at God, but I hope to turn you to be a better servant of the
One to Whom you claim to belong.
Regards,
Raymond E. Griffith
.

User: "Christopher A. Lee"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	27 Apr 2004 05:25:27 PM

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 08:27:04 -0500, "scott" <BySSpam@nonoSpam.com>
wrote:

"Raymond E. Griffith" <tiffirgrReverse@ctc.net> wrote in message
news:BCB33C69.458878%tiffirgrReverse@ctc.net...

Raymond your hate for God shows.

What "hate for God", liar?

I was trying to answer a question for a
guy and found some interesting input.

No you weren't - you were just being deliberately stupid.

I put a link in for it. it was not my words, but I agreed with some of it.
You atheist get so upset, so easy.

Only with liars, idiots and those who force their religion where it
neither wanted nor needed.
.

User: "JISTASKKIN"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	25 Apr 2004 03:14:17 PM

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404250937.17656c50@posting.google.com...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in message

news:<sNPic.12098$NG2.5551@edtnps84>...

To be fair here, you should note that talk.origins is a place made by

those

who believe in evolution. Most of the site is based upon the faulty

premise

that evolution has occurred.

Actually that would be variation. And that is scientific and repeatable and
observable. However, to make the huge leap in faith and logic to say that
variation within species can turn one kind on animal into another is a false
religious notion called evolution.

--Billy

User: "Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	25 Apr 2004 07:40:06 PM

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:t_Uic.13289$NG2.11683@edtnps84:

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404250937.17656c50@posting.google.com...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in message

news:<sNPic.12098$NG2.5551@edtnps84>...

To be fair here, you should note that talk.origins is a place made
by

those

who believe in evolution. Most of the site is based upon the faulty

premise

that evolution has occurred.

If evolution has not occurred, then where did all the different
ethnicites, i.e. black people, white people, asiatic people, etc.
come from? They can't all be descended from Adam and Eve, because
that would be evolution, and evolution is false, right?

Actually that would be variation. And that is scientific and
repeatable and observable. However, to make the huge leap in faith
and logic to say that variation within species can turn one kind on
animal into another is a false religious notion called evolution.

Dead on arrival. Two individuals (Adam & Eve) can not have sufficient
Alelles to account for what is observed in the human population.
Klazmon.

--Billy

User: "JISTASKKIN"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	25 Apr 2004 08:46:17 PM

"Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th" <Llanzlan@Llurdiaxorb.net> wrote in message
news:Xns94D780DF2CE86LlanzlanLlurdiaxorbn@203.97.37.6...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:t_Uic.13289$NG2.11683@edtnps84:

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404250937.17656c50@posting.google.com...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in message

news:<sNPic.12098$NG2.5551@edtnps84>...

To be fair here, you should note that talk.origins is a place made
by

those

who believe in evolution. Most of the site is based upon the faulty

premise

that evolution has occurred.

If evolution has not occurred, then where did all the different
ethnicites, i.e. black people, white people, asiatic people, etc.
come from? They can't all be descended from Adam and Eve, because
that would be evolution, and evolution is false, right?

Actually that would be variation. And that is scientific and
repeatable and observable. However, to make the huge leap in faith
and logic to say that variation within species can turn one kind on
animal into another is a false religious notion called evolution.

Dead on arrival. Two individuals (Adam & Eve) can not have sufficient
Alelles to account for what is observed in the human population.

And a pre-biotic soup would have even fewer.
http://www.trueorigin.org/originoflife.asp

Klazmon.

--Billy

User: "Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	25 Apr 2004 09:19:42 PM

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:JRZic.13077$en3.12332@edtnps89:

"Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th" <Llanzlan@Llurdiaxorb.net> wrote in
message news:Xns94D780DF2CE86LlanzlanLlurdiaxorbn@203.97.37.6...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:t_Uic.13289$NG2.11683@edtnps84:

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404250937.17656c50@posting.google.com...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in message

news:<sNPic.12098$NG2.5551@edtnps84>...

To be fair here, you should note that talk.origins is a place
made by

those

who believe in evolution. Most of the site is based upon the
faulty

premise

that evolution has occurred.

If evolution has not occurred, then where did all the different
ethnicites, i.e. black people, white people, asiatic people, etc.
come from? They can't all be descended from Adam and Eve, because
that would be evolution, and evolution is false, right?

Actually that would be variation. And that is scientific and
repeatable and observable. However, to make the huge leap in faith
and logic to say that variation within species can turn one kind on
animal into another is a false religious notion called evolution.

Dead on arrival. Two individuals (Adam & Eve) can not have sufficient
Alelles to account for what is observed in the human population.

And a pre-biotic soup would have even fewer.
http://www.trueorigin.org/originoflife.asp

New Alelles come about through mutation and duplication. It's kind of
funny that you quote Well's site. Do you realise he's a Mooney?
Klazman.

Klazmon.

--Billy

User: "JISTASKKIN"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	25 Apr 2004 09:57:59 PM

"Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th" <Llanzlan@Llurdiaxorb.net> wrote in message
news:Xns94D791C178C7BLlanzlanLlurdiaxorbn@203.97.37.6...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:JRZic.13077$en3.12332@edtnps89:

"Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th" <Llanzlan@Llurdiaxorb.net> wrote in
message news:Xns94D780DF2CE86LlanzlanLlurdiaxorbn@203.97.37.6...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:t_Uic.13289$NG2.11683@edtnps84:

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404250937.17656c50@posting.google.com...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in message

news:<sNPic.12098$NG2.5551@edtnps84>...

To be fair here, you should note that talk.origins is a place
made by

those

who believe in evolution. Most of the site is based upon the
faulty

premise

that evolution has occurred.

If evolution has not occurred, then where did all the different
ethnicites, i.e. black people, white people, asiatic people, etc.
come from? They can't all be descended from Adam and Eve, because
that would be evolution, and evolution is false, right?

Actually that would be variation. And that is scientific and
repeatable and observable. However, to make the huge leap in faith
and logic to say that variation within species can turn one kind on
animal into another is a false religious notion called evolution.

Dead on arrival. Two individuals (Adam & Eve) can not have sufficient
Alelles to account for what is observed in the human population.

And a pre-biotic soup would have even fewer.
http://www.trueorigin.org/originoflife.asp

New Alelles come about through mutation and duplication.

And what is the mechanism responsible for that?
It's kind of

funny that you quote Well's site. Do you realise he's a Mooney?

Klazman.

Klazmon.

--Billy

User: "Fred Stone"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	25 Apr 2004 10:15:00 PM

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:XU_ic.13288$en3.4821@edtnps89:

"Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th" <Llanzlan@Llurdiaxorb.net> wrote in
message news:Xns94D791C178C7BLlanzlanLlurdiaxorbn@203.97.37.6...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:JRZic.13077$en3.12332@edtnps89:

"Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th" <Llanzlan@Llurdiaxorb.net> wrote in
message news:Xns94D780DF2CE86LlanzlanLlurdiaxorbn@203.97.37.6...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:t_Uic.13289$NG2.11683@edtnps84:

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404250937.17656c50@posting.google.com...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in message

news:<sNPic.12098$NG2.5551@edtnps84>...

To be fair here, you should note that talk.origins is a place
made by

those

who believe in evolution. Most of the site is based upon the
faulty

premise

that evolution has occurred.

If evolution has not occurred, then where did all the different
ethnicites, i.e. black people, white people, asiatic people,
etc. come from? They can't all be descended from Adam and Eve,
because that would be evolution, and evolution is false, right?

Actually that would be variation. And that is scientific and
repeatable and observable. However, to make the huge leap in
faith and logic to say that variation within species can turn
one kind on animal into another is a false religious notion
called evolution.

Dead on arrival. Two individuals (Adam & Eve) can not have
suffficient Alelles to account for what is observed in the human
population.

And a pre-biotic soup would have even fewer.
http://www.trueorigin.org/originoflife.asp

New Alelles come about through mutation and duplication.

And what is the mechanism responsible for that?

Errors in duplication. Mutagenic chemicals, ionizing radiation, lack of
specific nutrients, environmental stress, gene expression itself, there
are lots of causes.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Cthulhu for President! Why vote for a lesser evil?
.

User: "JISTASKKIN"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	25 Apr 2004 10:41:20 PM

"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94D6EC8B23DADfstone69@207.69.154.206...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:XU_ic.13288$en3.4821@edtnps89:

"Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th" <Llanzlan@Llurdiaxorb.net> wrote in
message news:Xns94D791C178C7BLlanzlanLlurdiaxorbn@203.97.37.6...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:JRZic.13077$en3.12332@edtnps89:

"Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th" <Llanzlan@Llurdiaxorb.net> wrote in
message news:Xns94D780DF2CE86LlanzlanLlurdiaxorbn@203.97.37.6...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:t_Uic.13289$NG2.11683@edtnps84:

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404250937.17656c50@posting.google.com...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in message

news:<sNPic.12098$NG2.5551@edtnps84>...

To be fair here, you should note that talk.origins is a place
made by

those

who believe in evolution. Most of the site is based upon the
faulty

premise

that evolution has occurred.

If evolution has not occurred, then where did all the different
ethnicites, i.e. black people, white people, asiatic people,
etc. come from? They can't all be descended from Adam and Eve,
because that would be evolution, and evolution is false, right?

Actually that would be variation. And that is scientific and
repeatable and observable. However, to make the huge leap in
faith and logic to say that variation within species can turn
one kind on animal into another is a false religious notion
called evolution.

Dead on arrival. Two individuals (Adam & Eve) can not have
suffficient Alelles to account for what is observed in the human
population.

And a pre-biotic soup would have even fewer.
http://www.trueorigin.org/originoflife.asp

New Alelles come about through mutation and duplication.

And what is the mechanism responsible for that?

Errors in duplication.

And when exactly do errors make anything better? I have done a lot of
programming my time and have yet to see an error that made a piece of
software run better.
Mutagenic chemicals, ionizing radiation, lack of

specific nutrients, environmental stress, gene expression itself, there
are lots of causes.

All those end in genetic information decreasing or remaining the same, just
a different combination that results in a variation of the species. Nothing
more.

--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Cthulhu for President! Why vote for a lesser evil?

User: "Fred Stone"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	26 Apr 2004 07:18:04 AM

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:Ax%ic.13304$en3.7317@edtnps89:

"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94D6EC8B23DADfstone69@207.69.154.206...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:XU_ic.13288$en3.4821@edtnps89:

"Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th" <Llanzlan@Llurdiaxorb.net> wrote in
message news:Xns94D791C178C7BLlanzlanLlurdiaxorbn@203.97.37.6...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:JRZic.13077$en3.12332@edtnps89:

"Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th" <Llanzlan@Llurdiaxorb.net> wrote in
message news:Xns94D780DF2CE86LlanzlanLlurdiaxorbn@203.97.37.6...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in
news:t_Uic.13289$NG2.11683@edtnps84:

"Billy Goat" <ericvonl@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6bd3c70a.0404250937.17656c50@posting.google.com...

"JISTASKKIN" <try_not@here.com> wrote in message

news:<sNPic.12098$NG2.5551@edtnps84>...

To be fair here, you should note that talk.origins is a
place made by

those

who believe in evolution. Most of the site is based upon
the faulty

premise

that evolution has occurred.

If evolution has not occurred, then where did all the
different ethnicites, i.e. black people, white people,
asiatic people, etc. come from? They can't all be descended
from Adam and Eve, because that would be evolution, and
evolution is false, right?

Actually that would be variation. And that is scientific and
repeatable and observable. However, to make the huge leap in
faith and logic to say that variation within species can turn
one kind on animal into another is a false religious notion
called evolution.

Dead on arrival. Two individuals (Adam & Eve) can not have
suffficient Alelles to account for what is observed in the
human population.

And a pre-biotic soup would have even fewer.
http://www.trueorigin.org/originoflife.asp

New Alelles come about through mutation and duplication.

And what is the mechanism responsible for that?

Errors in duplication.

And when exactly do errors make anything better?

When they result in an increased chance of survival.

I have done a lot of
programming my time and have yet to see an error that made a piece of
software run better.

Software is too fragile. The genetic code has been evolving for billions
of years.

Mutagenic chemicals, ionizing radiation, lack of

specific nutrients, environmental stress, gene expression itself,
there are lots of causes.

All those end in genetic information decreasing or remaining the same,
just a different combination that results in a variation of the
species. Nothing more.

No, some of them can result in adding information in the form of an
additional chromosome which can then vary independantly of the
"original" (or the whole set can be duplicated, see tetraploidy).
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Cthulhu for President! Why vote for a lesser evil?
.

User: "Llanzlan Klazmon The 15th"
Title: Re: Skepticism Defined	26 Apr 2004 12:00:55 AM