Evolution
OldGringo38
--
OldGringo38
Just West Of Nowhere
Enjoy Life And Live It To Its Fullest
Support Bacteria: They're the only culture some people have.
Meat Plow
> Is this all there is to it?
If man evolved from ape, why don't we see apes turning into men now?
--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse
OldGringo38
following tidbit of information:
> On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:49:06 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote:
>
>> Is this all there is to it?
>
> If man evolved from ape, why don't we see apes turning into men now?
>
>
>
now. :)
Mike Yetto
>On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:49:06 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote:
>> Is this all there is to it?
>If man evolved from ape, why don't we see apes turning into men now?
Humans did not evolve from apes. Humans are a species of ape
that evolved from ancestors common to other apes.
Straw-man sound bites do not provide much of an argument.
Mike "providing a link makes two new gaps" Yetto
--
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In practice they are not.
philo
> On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:49:06 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote:
>
>> Is this all there is to it?
>
> If man evolved from ape, why don't we see apes turning into men now?
>
>
>
man did NOT evolve from ape
it seems that 75% of people get this one wrong.
evolution states simply that man and ape had a common ancestor...
although on Usenet there is sufficient evidence to see man devolving to ape!
Meat Plow
pssssst....joke sarcasm flippancy etc....
Meat Plow
> Meat Plow <mhy...@yahoo.com> writes and having writ moves on.
>>On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:49:06 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote:
>
>>> Is this all there is to it?
>
>>If man evolved from ape, why don't we see apes turning into men now?
>
> Humans did not evolve from apes. Humans are a species of ape that
> evolved from ancestors common to other apes.
>
> Straw-man sound bites do not provide much of an argument.
>
> Mike "providing a link makes two new gaps" Yetto
pssssst joke, flippancy, sarcasm uhum <clears throat>
Grinder
Maybe you could identify your jokes in the future by making them funny?
§ñühw¤£f
Highly unlikely.
Jus Sayin[tm]
--
www.skepticalscience.com|www.youtube.com/officialpeta
cageprisoners.com|www.snuhwolf.9f.com|www.eyeonpalin.org
_____ ____ ____ __ /\_/\ __ _ ______ _____
/ __/ |/ / / / / // // . . \\ \ |\ | / __ \ \ \ __\
_\ \/ / /_/ / _ / \ / \ \| \| \ \_\ \ \__\ _\
/___/_/|_/\____/_//_/ \_@_/ \__|\__|\____/\____\_\
Meat Plow
My jokes require a certain amount of intellect to be be funny. Usually
around an IQ of 70.
HTH
Meat Plow
> Grinder wrote:
>> On 10/3/2010 9:33 AM, Meat Plow wrote:
>>> On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 08:50:28 -0500, philo wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/03/2010 08:17 AM, Meat Plow wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:49:06 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this all there is to it?
>>>>>
>>>>> If man evolved from ape, why don't we see apes turning into men now?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> man did NOT evolve from ape
>>>>
>>>> it seems that 75% of people get this one wrong.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> evolution states simply that man and ape had a common ancestor...
>>>>
>>>> although on Usenet there is sufficient evidence to see man devolving
>>>> to ape!
>>>
>>> pssssst....joke sarcasm flippancy etc....
>>
>> Maybe you could identify your jokes in the future by making them funny?
>
> Highly unlikely.
> Jus Sayin[tm]
Aw, attack of the Revenge Dweeb. How sweet.
Mike Yetto
There's the problem. Most of us have a much higher IQ.
Mike "but that wasn't twice as funny" Yetto
Mike Yetto
Please don't encourage the use of emoticons, making them clever
and/or funny should be the main method of identification.
Mike "or at least a bad pun" Yetto
Meat Plow
Starting at 70. But you already knew that.
Mike Yetto
>On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 09:43:23 -0400, Mike Yetto wrote:
>> Meat Plow <mhy...@yahoo.com> writes and having writ moves on.
>>>On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:49:06 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote:
>>
>>>> Is this all there is to it?
>>
>>>If man evolved from ape, why don't we see apes turning into men now?
>>
>> Humans did not evolve from apes. Humans are a species of ape that
>> evolved from ancestors common to other apes.
>>
>> Straw-man sound bites do not provide much of an argument.
>>
>> Mike "providing a link makes two new gaps" Yetto
>pssssst joke, flippancy, sarcasm uhum <clears throat>
It was a poor joke fifty years ago when it appeared in an Archie
comic. And it is just as spurious now as then.
Mike "not even hyenas would laugh at that" Yetto
Meat Plow
> Meat Plow <mhy...@yahoo.com> writes and having writ moves on.
>>On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 09:43:23 -0400, Mike Yetto wrote:
>
>>> Meat Plow <mhy...@yahoo.com> writes and having writ moves on.
>>>>On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:49:06 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Is this all there is to it?
>>>
>>>>If man evolved from ape, why don't we see apes turning into men now?
>>>
>>> Humans did not evolve from apes. Humans are a species of ape that
>>> evolved from ancestors common to other apes.
>>>
>>> Straw-man sound bites do not provide much of an argument.
>>>
>>> Mike "providing a link makes two new gaps" Yetto
>
>>pssssst joke, flippancy, sarcasm uhum <clears throat>
>
> It was a poor joke fifty years ago when it appeared in an Archie comic.
> And it is just as spurious now as then.
>
> Mike "not even hyenas would laugh at that" Yetto
Ok well you got something up your fucking ass you pisswitted prick. Feel
free to fuck off and not read my humorless jokes.
philo
yes
I make jokes like that too
and no one understands :)
Mike Yetto
>free to fuck off and not read my humorless jokes.
That's about as funny as anything else you've written.
Mike "jokes based on bogus factoids are just as bogus" Yetto
G. Morgan
>Maybe there was a limit? It seems to be working the other way around
>now. :)
dude... If you have not seen the movie "Idiocracy", go get it now! You will
laugh your ass off. It's about the de-evolution of our species. And it's a
Mike Judge film (al-la King Of The Hill, Bevis and Butthead). But the movie is
not animated.
G. Morgan
>man did NOT evolve from ape
>
>it seems that 75% of people get this one wrong.
>
>
>evolution states simply that man and ape had a common ancestor...
One walk through of the Museum of Natural Science in NYC will clear all that up!
I just went a month ago, pretty impressive.
>although on Usenet there is sufficient evidence to see man devolving to ape!
No doubt.
G. Morgan
>pssssst....joke sarcasm flippancy etc....
FWIW I thought it was funny. Never heard that one.
Grinder
I'll make a compromise with you. How about I find that your attempts to
assert that your original posting is funny is, in of itself, funny.
Whiskers
[...]
> My jokes require a certain amount of intellect to be be funny. Usually
> around an IQ of 70.
>
> HTH
Let us know if you acquire the intellect to make your jokes funny. (You
did rather ask for that!) <WEG>
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
Whiskers
> Meat Plow <mhy...@yahoo.com> writes and having writ moves on.
>>On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:49:06 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote:
>
>>> Is this all there is to it?
>
>>If man evolved from ape, why don't we see apes turning into men now?
Individuals never evolve. "Apes turning into men" would be metamorphosis,
if it were to happen at all.
> Humans did not evolve from apes. Humans are a species of ape
> that evolved from ancestors common to other apes.
>
> Straw-man sound bites do not provide much of an argument.
Are straw monkey sound bites infectious?
> Mike "providing a link makes two new gaps" Yetto
... and a missing link is just a gap between gaps in understanding ...
Brian Cryer
news:i89qjh$4de$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Is this all there is to it?
Did you read the Emporer's New Clothes at school? That about sums it up.
I'm Old Gregg
news:i8c62o$64j$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> "OldGringo38" <NoE...@ThisOldHouse.Con> wrote in message
> news:i89qjh$4de$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Is this all there is to it?
>
>
Did Blinky get it right.
Life Explained
On the first day, God created the cow. God said, "You must go to the field
with the farmer all day long and suffer under the sun, have calves and give
milk to support the farmer. I will give you a lifespan of 60 years." The cow
said, "That's kind of a tough life you want me to live for 60 years. Let me
have 20 and I'll give back the other 40."
And God agreed.
On the second day, God created the monkey. God said, "Entertain people, do
monkey tricks, make them laugh I'll give you a 20-year lifespan." The monkey
said, "How boring, monkey tricks for 20 years? I don't think so. Give me 10
years and I'll give you back the other 10."
God agreed again.
On the third day, God created the dog. God said, "Sit all day by the door of
your house and bark at anyone who comes in or walks past. I will give you a
lifespan of 20 years." The dog said, "That's too long to be barking. The
monkey gave you back 10, so that's what I'll do too, okay?"
God sighed - and agreed.
On the fourth day, God created man. God said, "Eat, sleep, play, have sex,
enjoy. Do nothing, just enjoy. I'll give you 20 years." Man said, "That
sounds great - but only 20 years? No way, man. Tell you what, I'll take the
20, and the 40 the cow gave back, and the 10 the monkey gave back and the 10
the dog gave back - that makes 80, okay?"
"Oh, all right," said God, "you've got a deal."
And this is why the first 20 years we eat, sleep, play, have sex, enjoy, and
do nothing; for the next 40 years we slave in the sun to support our family;
for the next 10 years we do monkey tricks to entertain the grandchildren;
and for the last 10 years we just sit on the porch and bark at everyone.
Blink the Shark
O.G.
OldGringo38
Mike Easter
> Meat Plow wrote:
>> OldGringo38 wrote:
>>
>>> Is this all there is to it?
>>
>
> no less, who still don't grasp the concept.
You people need to get with the program.
The old 'evolutionary theory' has been replaced by the newer/modern
evolutionary - neo-darwinian - synthesis.
Wikipedia has a nice article about it.
Realize that Darwin didn't know the first thing about DNA or genetics;
also realize that there was a lot of evolutionary thought /before/
Darwin, and a ton of 'evolution' - change - of scientific evolutionary
thought since then.
--
Mike Easter
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
OldGringo38 <NoE...@ThisOldHouse.Con> wrote:
>Is this all there is to it?
There is nothing called evolution of humans.
If anyone believes that monkeys turned into or evolved into humans then
I am selling you the Brooklyn bridge, real cheap.
Why don't they "evolve" into humans right now?
Where did these monkeys or apes come from?
Who controls all this?
I challenge anyone who comes up with a coherent answer to all this.
Barry OGrady
wrote:
>In article <i89qjh$4de$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
>OldGringo38 <NoE...@ThisOldHouse.Con> wrote:
>
>>Is this all there is to it?
>
>There is nothing called evolution of humans.
>If anyone believes that monkeys turned into or evolved into humans then
>I am selling you the Brooklyn bridge, real cheap.
If you believe you can sell the Brooklyn bridge you must be a
creationist.
>Why don't they "evolve" into humans right now?
>Where did these monkeys or apes come from?
>
>Who controls all this?
>I challenge anyone who comes up with a coherent answer to all this.
Until you can come up with an alternative that has vast amounts of
evidence its all we have.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 17:16:10 -0700, invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid
>wrote:
>
>>In article <i89qjh$4de$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
>>OldGringo38 <NoE...@ThisOldHouse.Con> wrote:
>>
>>>Is this all there is to it?
>>
>>There is nothing called evolution of humans.
>>If anyone believes that monkeys turned into or evolved into humans then
>>I am selling you the Brooklyn bridge, real cheap.
>
>If you believe you can sell the Brooklyn bridge you must be a
>creationist.
>
Blah blah blah.
Answer the questions.
Wait, you have no answer because you are confused.
What else is new with you evolutionists?
Wake me up when you and your likes are done selling sake oil...
>>Why don't they "evolve" into humans right now?
>>Where did these monkeys or apes come from?
>>
>>Who controls all this?
>>I challenge anyone who comes up with a coherent answer to all this.
>
>Until you can come up with an alternative that has vast amounts of
>evidence its all we have.
Yeah, evidence for the stupid who buy anything they see.
Answer the questions, since you know it all, genius.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
And I forgot to add.
Go get some education and look up the meaning of evidence in your
favorite dictionary.
But maybe you are so confused that you don't understand that evolution
is a THEORY and not a fact, therefore what you have is either made up,
or twisted in a pathetic attempt to prove a theory.
Barry OGrady
wrote:
>In article <edska6piuf977t5ss...@4ax.com>
>Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 17:16:10 -0700, invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <i89qjh$4de$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
>>>OldGringo38 <NoE...@ThisOldHouse.Con> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Is this all there is to it?
>>>
>>>There is nothing called evolution of humans.
>>>If anyone believes that monkeys turned into or evolved into humans then
>>>I am selling you the Brooklyn bridge, real cheap.
>>
>>If you believe you can sell the Brooklyn bridge you must be a
>>creationist.
>>
>
>Blah blah blah.
>Answer the questions.
>Wait, you have no answer because you are confused.
>
>What else is new with you evolutionists?
>Wake me up when you and your likes are done selling sake oil...
>
>
>>>Why don't they "evolve" into humans right now?
>>>Where did these monkeys or apes come from?
It seems you don't understand evolution.
>>>Who controls all this?
>>>I challenge anyone who comes up with a coherent answer to all this.
>>
>>Until you can come up with an alternative that has vast amounts of
>>evidence its all we have.
>
>Yeah, evidence for the stupid who buy anything they see.
>
>Answer the questions, since you know it all, genius.
I don't have the answers. Evolution does not attempt to explain the
origin of life, and a lot of Christians find the evidence for
evolution so compelling that they incorporate it into their God
beliefs.
Barry OGrady
wrote:
Why the anger? I'm just telling it like it is.
A lot of christians accept evolution.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 17:35:48 -0700, invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid
>wrote:
>
>>In article <edska6piuf977t5ss...@4ax.com>
>>Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 17:16:10 -0700, invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <i89qjh$4de$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
>>>>OldGringo38 <NoE...@ThisOldHouse.Con> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Is this all there is to it?
>>>>
>>>>There is nothing called evolution of humans.
>>>>If anyone believes that monkeys turned into or evolved into humans then
>>>>I am selling you the Brooklyn bridge, real cheap.
>>>
>>>If you believe you can sell the Brooklyn bridge you must be a
>>>creationist.
>>>
>>
>>Blah blah blah.
>>Answer the questions.
>>Wait, you have no answer because you are confused.
>>
>>What else is new with you evolutionists?
>>Wake me up when you and your likes are done selling sake oil...
>>
>>
>>>>Why don't they "evolve" into humans right now?
>>>>Where did these monkeys or apes come from?
>
>It seems you don't understand evolution.
>
Au contraire, mon cheri.
We already established that YOU don't understand any of this.
>>>>Who controls all this?
>>>>I challenge anyone who comes up with a coherent answer to all this.
>>>
>>>Until you can come up with an alternative that has vast amounts of
>>>evidence its all we have.
>>
>>Yeah, evidence for the stupid who buy anything they see.
>>
>>Answer the questions, since you know it all, genius.
>
>I don't have the answers.
Then shut your trap.
>Evolution does not attempt to explain the
>origin of life,
ROFL!
BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Really?
So you still sell the snake oil?
What does it try to do then? Explain how steam engines work?Who is
Dracula?The origin of Elmer Fudd?
http://www.allaboutscience.org/darwins-theory-of-evolution.htm
Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is
related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the
bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related.
Do you know or even understand what are you trying advocate?
Obviously not.
Like I said, you are too confused to even know what you are talking
about.
Boy you must feel stupid right now after being exposed like this.
>and a lot of Christians find the evidence for
>evolution so compelling that they incorporate it into their God
>beliefs.
Where did you read that? In the atheist encyclopedia of self hypnosis?
Dream on...
Yeah, I should take the word of someone who doesn't even understand what
he is trying to sell to others...
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>And I forgot to add.
>>Go get some education and look up the meaning of evidence in your
>>favorite dictionary.
>>But maybe you are so confused that you don't understand that evolution
>>is a THEORY and not a fact, therefore what you have is either made up,
>>or twisted in a pathetic attempt to prove a theory.
>
>Why the anger?
That is not anger, that is called getting tired of stupid people and
stereo types.
In fact you are the one who sounds angry, since you have no answers.
>I'm just telling it like it is.
Nah, you're just repeating ignorant stuff that you don't understand.
>A lot of christians accept evolution.
No Christian would accept that apes or anything else became humans.
Go read what Christianity says, and then get back to us.
You can claim to be a Christian, Jew, Buddhist, Seikh, Muslim, Mormon,
or even a Taoist, no one can prove that you are, and I can claim that I
am Albert Einstein. Prove me wrong.
Now go read about these things, son, you need to get some education
before you discuss things that you have no background in.
Barry OGrady
wrote:
Do you have the answers?
I can understand some people being skeptical about evolution but to be
opposed to the idea suggests you have been indoctrinated in some
religion.
What about you present your beliefs so I can make fun of them?
>>Evolution does not attempt to explain the
>>origin of life,
>
>ROFL!
>BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>
>Really?
>So you still sell the snake oil?
>What does it try to do then? Explain how steam engines work?Who is
>Dracula?The origin of Elmer Fudd?
>
>http://www.allaboutscience.org/darwins-theory-of-evolution.htm
>Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
>Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is
>related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the
>bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related.
Nothing there about the origin of life.
>Do you know or even understand what are you trying advocate?
>Obviously not.
>Like I said, you are too confused to even know what you are talking
>about.
>
>Boy you must feel stupid right now after being exposed like this.
>
>
>>and a lot of Christians find the evidence for
>>evolution so compelling that they incorporate it into their God
>>beliefs.
>
>Where did you read that? In the atheist encyclopedia of self hypnosis?
>Dream on...
The RCC Church accepts evolution, and a lot of Christians in the
newsgroups express a strong belief in evolution.
>Yeah, I should take the word of someone who doesn't even understand what
>he is trying to sell to others...
Look into it for yourself.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Yes.
>I can understand some people being skeptical about evolution
It is a hoax, and people like you fell for it.
Ahh, what can I say?
People also forward emails to ten others and really think that it will
bring them luck.
>but to be
>opposed to the idea suggests you have been indoctrinated in some
>religion.
That is not your business.
Just answer the questions, since you seem to know it all.
If you can't, then simply shut your trap and stop selling the snake oil
AKA the THEORY of evolution, because it cannot be proven.
>What about you present your beliefs so I can make fun of them?
You can make fun of them, and make a fool out of yourself in the
process, no one can stop you.
>>>Evolution does not attempt to explain the
>>>origin of life,
>>
>>ROFL!
>>BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>>BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>>BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>>
>>Really?
>>So you still sell the snake oil?
>>What does it try to do then? Explain how steam engines work?Who is
>>Dracula?The origin of Elmer Fudd?
>>
>>http://www.allaboutscience.org/darwins-theory-of-evolution.htm
>>Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
>>Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is
>>related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the
>>bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related.
>
>Nothing there about the origin of life.
>
Can you read plain ol' English, son?
"all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor"
That is not discussing the origin of life?
How about reading the footnotes of that article?
Footnotes:
Michael Behe, "Darwin's Black Box," 1996.
"Unlocking the Mystery of Life," documentary by Illustra Media, 2002.
That is also not discussing the origin of life?
Charles Darwin really did have advanced ideas about the origin of life
http://www.physorg.com/news175861437.html
>>Do you know or even understand what are you trying advocate?
>>Obviously not.
>>Like I said, you are too confused to even know what you are talking
>>about.
>>
>>Boy you must feel stupid right now after being exposed like this.
>>
>>
>>>and a lot of Christians find the evidence for
>>>evolution so compelling that they incorporate it into their God
>>>beliefs.
>>
>>Where did you read that? In the atheist encyclopedia of self hypnosis?
>>Dream on...
>
>The RCC Church accepts evolution, and a lot of Christians in the
>newsgroups express a strong belief in evolution.
>
Like I said, you can claim to be Christian, but that does not make you
one if you don't believe in its fundamentals.
>>Yeah, I should take the word of someone who doesn't even understand what
>>he is trying to sell to others...
>
>Look into it for yourself.
Thanks for admitting that you don't understand it.
Barry OGrady
wrote:
What is the purpose of the hoax?
>Ahh, what can I say?
>People also forward emails to ten others and really think that it will
>bring them luck.
>
>
>>but to be
>>opposed to the idea suggests you have been indoctrinated in some
>>religion.
>
>That is not your business.
There can be no other reason.
>Just answer the questions, since you seem to know it all.
>If you can't, then simply shut your trap and stop selling the snake oil
>AKA the THEORY of evolution, because it cannot be proven.
>
>
>>What about you present your beliefs so I can make fun of them?
>
>You can make fun of them, and make a fool out of yourself in the
>process, no one can stop you.
You can stop me by not presenting your beliefs.
>>>>Evolution does not attempt to explain the
>>>>origin of life,
>>>
>>>ROFL!
>>>BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>>>BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>>>BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>>>
>>>Really?
>>>So you still sell the snake oil?
>>>What does it try to do then? Explain how steam engines work?Who is
>>>Dracula?The origin of Elmer Fudd?
>>>
>>>http://www.allaboutscience.org/darwins-theory-of-evolution.htm
>>>Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
>>>Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is
>>>related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the
>>>bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related.
>>
>>Nothing there about the origin of life.
>>
>
>Can you read plain ol' English, son?
>
>"all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor"
>
>That is not discussing the origin of life?
No. It starts with a living entity.
>How about reading the footnotes of that article?
>Footnotes:
>
>Michael Behe, "Darwin's Black Box," 1996.
>"Unlocking the Mystery of Life," documentary by Illustra Media, 2002.
>
>That is also not discussing the origin of life?
>
>Charles Darwin really did have advanced ideas about the origin of life
>http://www.physorg.com/news175861437.html
The origin of life is a separate field. Evolution is about changes
over time.
>>>Do you know or even understand what are you trying advocate?
>>>Obviously not.
>>>Like I said, you are too confused to even know what you are talking
>>>about.
>>>
>>>Boy you must feel stupid right now after being exposed like this.
>>>
>>>
>>>>and a lot of Christians find the evidence for
>>>>evolution so compelling that they incorporate it into their God
>>>>beliefs.
>>>
>>>Where did you read that? In the atheist encyclopedia of self hypnosis?
>>>Dream on...
>>
>>The RCC Church accepts evolution, and a lot of Christians in the
>>newsgroups express a strong belief in evolution.
>>
>
>Like I said, you can claim to be Christian, but that does not make you
>one if you don't believe in its fundamentals.
OK.
>>>Yeah, I should take the word of someone who doesn't even understand what
>>>he is trying to sell to others...
>>
>>Look into it for yourself.
>
>Thanks for admitting that you don't understand it.
No need to take my word for it.
Mike Easter
> I challenge anyone who comes up with a coherent answer to all this.
This isn't an answer, just a brief timeline, say a survey/summary of
history and earth's biology, including major religions:
The universe is nearly 14 billion years old
Earth is about 4.5 billion.
The current eon of abundant life is about 450 million.
Mammals have dominated the last 65 million.
Some humanoid-hominids are as old as 5 million.
Current homosapiens, the only surviving homo species - anatomically
modern humans - are about 200,000 years old
Written history is about 6000 years
Religious, supernatural, and moral belief systems preceded written history
The oldest surviving monotheism Judaism started about 3000 years ago
Christianity began as a Jewish sect in the mid 1st century
Muhammed was born in 450 AD and Islamism followed
--
Mike Easter
Mike Easter
> invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>
>> I challenge anyone who comes up with a coherent answer to all this.
>
> This isn't an answer, just a brief timeline, say a survey/summary of
> history and earth's biology, including major religions:
One perspective of that is that as the earth and life on earth and then
man evolved from the conditions that preceded it, then such as a belief
in God was "created" by man to help him explain where it all came from
and why we should obey/follow moral values.
Men propagated religious beliefs and teaching as an exercise and
structure of power with a touch of humility to facilitate social order.
--
Mike Easter
G. Morgan
>
>What else is new with you evolutionists?
>Wake me up when you and your likes are done selling sake oil...
So according to your belief in creationism, you must also think humans have only
been on Earth for 6000 years and walked with the dinosaurs.
Read the research, instead of believing some bullshit fairy-tale book.
G. Morgan
>No Christian would accept that apes or anything else became humans.
>Go read what Christianity says, and then get back to us.
Yet they accept talking snakes, and one man building a boat big enough to carry
2 animals of every species. Even the biggest oil-tankers we have today could
not fit them all. I could go on and on.
Watch Bill Maher's "Religulous" and see his interview with a high-level Catholic
priest (right outside of the Vatican gates) who laughs at the fact people take
that shit literally.
G. Morgan
>Men propagated religious beliefs and teaching as an exercise and
>structure of power with a touch of humility to facilitate social order.
Man created religion as a form of control over other people. This was before
the governments of the world started to take over the job.
я黨wぃf
of<mvala69r90ke4iovc...@4ax.com>:
THOSE ARNT DINOSAURS...they're "Jesus lizards".
^_^
--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COaoYqkpkUA
cageprisoners.com|www.snuhwolf.9f.com|www.eyeonpalin.org
_____ ____ ____ __ /\_/\ __ _ ______ _____
/ __/ |/ / / / / // // . . \\ \ |\ | / __ \ \ \ __\
_\ \/ / /_/ / _ / \ / \ \| \| \ \_\ \ \__\ _\
/___/_/|_/\____/_//_/ \_@_/ \__|\__|\____/\____\_\
я黨wぃf
of<8gvg3...@mid.individual.net>:
Flying spaghetti monster says otherwise, bub.
Mike Easter
> Mike Easter
>> One perspective of that is that as the earth and life on earth and
> then
>> man evolved from the conditions that preceded it, then such as a
> belief
>> in God was "created" by man to help him explain where it all came from
>> and why we should obey/follow moral values.
Ugh! Look what you did to my citation! Ugly shortlines!
It should look like this:
>> One perspective of that is that as the earth and life on earth and
>> then man evolved from the conditions that preceded it, then such as
>> a belief in God was "created" by man to help him explain where it
>> all came from and why we should obey/follow moral values.
>> Men propagated religious beliefs and teaching as an exercise and
>> structure of power with a touch of humility to facilitate social
>> order.
> Flying spaghetti monster says otherwise, bub.
Ha! Somehow I had missed out on the 'Pastafararian' theory of creation.
Here's a nice writeup, including illustrations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster
Touched by his Noodly Appendage, FSM fish emblem, float for the summer
solstice parade.
Quite a movement.
--
Mike Easter
Aardvark
>>I can understand some people being skeptical about evolution
>
> It is a hoax, and people like you fell for it.
Jeesus H. fucking Christ!!!!!!!
> Ahh, what can I say?
You could say you're kidding.
> People also forward emails to ten others and really think that it will
> bring them luck.
Just like praying to the flying spaghetti monster or some magical sky
pixie will solve your problems, eh?
--
The rocket bombs which fell daily on London were probably fired by
the Government of Oceania itself, ’just to keep people frightened’.
This was an idea that had literally never occurred to him.
--- George Orwell, 1984
Jordon
> In article<jhska650a0cniausr...@4ax.com>
Let's see some of your evidence! Direct evidence. Not hearsay.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
Yeah, according to conspiracy theorists like yourself.
Don't look outside your window, THEY ARE COMING TO GET YOU!
Run, run, run, hide, hide, hide, everything you see today is a lie, it
is the Matrix!
Next....
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>
>>
>>What else is new with you evolutionists?
>>Wake me up when you and your likes are done selling sake oil...
>
>
>So according to your belief in creationism, you must also think humans have only
>been on Earth for 6000 years and walked with the dinosaurs.
Huh?
What religion is that?Where does it say that humans are only 6000 years
old?
Yet another self claimed expert who can't read properly.
>Read the research,
What research?
The retarded nonsense that you get fed?
That is for your likes to believe.
>instead of believing some bullshit fairy-tale book.
I agree, the evolution theory is all that.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>
>>No Christian would accept that apes or anything else became humans.
>>Go read what Christianity says, and then get back to us.
>
>
>Yet they accept talking snakes,
Can you disprove what happened in that verse?
Do you have 100% proof of historic evidence, archeological evidence of
eye witness to say otherwise?
If not, then you should shut your trap.
>and one man building a boat big enough to carry
>2 animals of every species.
Yet another logic impaired atheist. Your type must be growing on trees
these days.
In those days, human physical capabilities were superior to what they
are now, men were bigger, taller, stronger, and it is not exactly
impossible task given enough time.
>Even the biggest oil-tankers we have today could
>not fit them all.
According to whom?
You?
What are your scientific, historic, and theological studies credentials?
What species EXACTLY were put in the Ark?
Go ahead, run to google, and let's see if you figure out why you are
looking foolish, again.
>I could go on and on.
And continue to make a fool out of yourself.
Don't let me or anyone stop you.
You're willing to believe that apes turn into humans?
Feel free to live in denial and foolishness.
Of course a typical response from your like is "I don't know, I don't
have the answer, but I know you are wrong", and stuff like that.
>Watch Bill Maher's "Religulous" and see his interview with a high-level Catholic
>priest (right outside of the Vatican gates) who laughs at the fact people take
>that shit literally.
Only idiots believe anything that someone like Bill Maher does or says.
But I guess you are like him.
Now answer the question, what makes the world go?
Where did this all come from?
Even if we take your laughable theory of evolution, which has yet to be
proven or even credible, where did the initial species that this theory
claim that we all evolved from to what we are today, came from?
Here is a free clue, even your hero, Bill Maher, in one of his shows,
when confronted with similar question, responded that he agrees that
there must "some sort of power" behind all this.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Jordon <jordon@REMOVE~THISmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>Let's see some of your evidence! Direct evidence. Not hearsay.
Once you or anyone else answers my questions and provides the evidence
that he or she has, I will give you want you want of evidence.
You say that religions are lying?
You are the doubter, and the accuser, therefore the burden of proof is
on YOU.
No?
You have NOTHING?
Yep, thought so.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>I can understand some people being skeptical about evolution
>>
>>It is a hoax, and people like you fell for it.
>
>What is the purpose of the hoax?
The same purpose as occupying other lands, killing, stealing, ...etc.
The same purpose as disobeying laws, being rebellious.
The same purpose as scams and hoaxes you see today, seeking fame and
attention.
But maybe you need the simplest facts explained to you.
>>Ahh, what can I say?
>>People also forward emails to ten others and really think that it will
>>bring them luck.
>>
>>
>>>but to be
>>>opposed to the idea suggests you have been indoctrinated in some
>>>religion.
>>
>>That is not your business.
>
>There can be no other reason.
Once again.
That is not your business.
>>Just answer the questions, since you seem to know it all.
LOL!
Go read them again, son.
And stop being silly.
>>How about reading the footnotes of that article?
>>Footnotes:
>>
>>Michael Behe, "Darwin's Black Box," 1996.
>>"Unlocking the Mystery of Life," documentary by Illustra Media, 2002.
>>
>>That is also not discussing the origin of life?
>>
>>Charles Darwin really did have advanced ideas about the origin of life
>>http://www.physorg.com/news175861437.html
>
>The origin of life is a separate field.
No it is not.
>Evolution is about changes over time.
Read the links, and the references that you were given.
At least get a clue in what you argue about.
>>>>Yeah, I should take the word of someone who doesn't even understand what
>>>>he is trying to sell to others...
>>>
>>>Look into it for yourself.
>>
>>Thanks for admitting that you don't understand it.
>
>No need to take my word for it.
Don't worry, I won't
You need to get yourself educated in these things, once you are ready,
get back to me and we can continue this discussion.
Barry OGrady
wrote:
>In article <hrbla6ld2ng7t0h2f...@4ax.com>
>G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>
>>Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Men propagated religious beliefs and teaching as an exercise and
>>>structure of power with a touch of humility to facilitate social order.
>>
>>Man created religion as a form of control over other people. This was before
>>the governments of the world started to take over the job.
>
>Yeah, according to conspiracy theorists like yourself.
It really happened that way.
>Don't look outside your window, THEY ARE COMING TO GET YOU!
>Run, run, run, hide, hide, hide, everything you see today is a lie, it
>is the Matrix!
Sounds like you have a conspiracy theory.
Barry OGrady
wrote:
And Christians fall for it.
You are in the minority.
Mike Yetto
>>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>What else is new with you evolutionists?
>>>Wake me up when you and your likes are done selling sake oil...
>>
>>
>>So according to your belief in creationism, you must also think humans have only
>>been on Earth for 6000 years and walked with the dinosaurs.
>Huh?
>What religion is that?Where does it say that humans are only 6000 years
>old?
Check out the credo of young Earth creationists. The belief that
everything was created either 6,000 or 10,000 years ago is their
greates internal controversy.
>Yet another self claimed expert who can't read properly.
>>Read the research,
>What research?
>The retarded nonsense that you get fed?
>That is for your likes to believe.
>>instead of believing some bullshit fairy-tale book.
>I agree, the evolution theory is all that.
When used in a scientific context Theory is quite different from
theory.
Mike "don't forget to feed your crocoduck" Yetto
--
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In practice they are not.
Barry OGrady
wrote:
You must be trolling. Nobody is as stupid as you make out.
Jordon
> In article<i8fegj$san$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
> Jordon<jordon@REMOVE~THISmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>> Let's see some of your evidence! Direct evidence. Not hearsay.
>
> Once you or anyone else answers my questions and provides the evidence
> that he or she has, I will give you want you want of evidence.
Any evidence presented would be met with denial. There's tons of
out there.
> You say that religions are lying?
Yep. And you use the word in plural? Is the Hindu religion lying?
Shinto? How about Islam?
> You are the doubter, and the accuser, therefore the burden of proof is
> on YOU.
You can't prove anything in that that book of yours?
G. Morgan
>In article <l7bla61j01vnghre4...@4ax.com>
>G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>
>>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>>
>>>No Christian would accept that apes or anything else became humans.
>>>Go read what Christianity says, and then get back to us.
>>
>>
>>Yet they accept talking snakes,
>
>Can you disprove what happened in that verse?
Don't have to. Snakes can't talk.
>Do you have 100% proof of historic evidence, archeological evidence of
>eye witness to say otherwise?
>If not, then you should shut your trap.
I have 99% evidence. Go to the Museum of Natural Science in NYC. The proof is
right there in fossils.
Can you "prove" your God exists? Of course not.
>
>>and one man building a boat big enough to carry
>>2 animals of every species.
>
>Yet another logic impaired atheist. Your type must be growing on trees
>these days.
Quite the contrary. I am thinking logically, and rationally. You are basing
your beliefs on blind faith and whatever church has brainwashed you.
>In those days, human physical capabilities were superior to what they
>are now, men were bigger, taller, stronger, and it is not exactly
>impossible task given enough time.
BZZZZZ..... Wrong! Men were smaller then. I'm not going to do you research for
you.
>
>>Even the biggest oil-tankers we have today could
>>not fit them all.
>
>According to whom?
>You?
There was a documentary series about the Ark on Discovery Channel. That's where
I learned that. They did the research.
>What are your scientific, historic, and theological studies credentials?
What are yours? I took many courses in college related to history and science.
I never attended the seminary.
>What species EXACTLY were put in the Ark?
According to the Bible, all of them.
"2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and
two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven of
every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive
throughout the earth"
Scientists estimate that would be about 45,000 animals.
Length 300 cubits 516.25 ft (157.35 m)
Width (Beam) 50 cubits 86 ft (26.2 m)
Height 30 cubits51.6 ft (15.7 m)
Is a huge ship to build from wood. And since it supposedly took Noah 150 years
to build it is ridiculous in itself.
Noah was 600 years old! Yeah...
>Go ahead, run to google, and let's see if you figure out why you are
>looking foolish, again.
No, it's people like you who take the Bible literally that look foolish.
>>I could go on and on.
>
>And continue to make a fool out of yourself.
>Don't let me or anyone stop you.
Thanks, but I don't need your permission.
>You're willing to believe that apes turn into humans?
No, read what was already told to you by others. Apes and Humans evolved from
different forks of the same tree.
>Feel free to live in denial and foolishness.
I am a realist. It is you that sounds foolish to me.
>Of course a typical response from your like is "I don't know, I don't
>have the answer, but I know you are wrong", and stuff like that.
Yet you offer no evidence of your beliefs. There is tons of evidence that
supports the evolution theory.
>>Watch Bill Maher's "Religulous" and see his interview with a high-level Catholic
>>priest (right outside of the Vatican gates) who laughs at the fact people take
>>that shit literally.
>
>Only idiots believe anything that someone like Bill Maher does or says.
That's a pretty sweeping statement. Have you watched his show? How do you know
you disagree with *everything* he says?
>But I guess you are like him.
I am. I'm a free-thinker, and rational. I also think marijuana should be
decriminalized, just like him.
>Now answer the question, what makes the world go?
On what plane? An object in motion stays in motion until another force is
applied.
>Where did this all come from?
The Big-Bang is the best current theory. The Big-Bang came from God I reckon.
>Even if we take your laughable theory of evolution, which has yet to be
>proven or even credible, where did the initial species that this theory
>claim that we all evolved from to what we are today, came from?
They could have come from outer space, microbes that hitched a ride on a
meteorite.
>Here is a free clue, even your hero, Bill Maher, in one of his shows,
>when confronted with similar question, responded that he agrees that
>there must "some sort of power" behind all this.
Same here. He's a self-proclaimed atheist. I'm not. I believe there is a
Higher-Power out there, somewhere.
What I detest is religion. It's man-made, and has been nothing but trouble. All
it does is divide people, based on books written very recently considering the
time humans have occupied Earth.
Are you one of those who think dinosaurs and humans lived together, and it all
started 6000 years ago?
G. Morgan
>What religion is that?
Christianity.
>Where does it say that humans are only 6000 years
>old?
Here's one:
http://www.missiontoamerica.org/genesis/six-thousand-years.html
G. Morgan
>Mike "don't forget to feed your crocoduck" Yetto
lol...
G. Morgan
>>Man created religion as a form of control over other people. This was before
>>the governments of the world started to take over the job.
>
>Yeah, according to conspiracy theorists like yourself.
>Don't look outside your window, THEY ARE COMING TO GET YOU!
>Run, run, run, hide, hide, hide, everything you see today is a lie, it
>is the Matrix!
No, it's the Crusaders. They forced Christianity on people, if they did not
accept it they were killed. That is fact.
Brian Cryer
news:mvala69r90ke4iovc...@4ax.com...
> invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>
>>
>>What else is new with you evolutionists?
>>Wake me up when you and your likes are done selling sake oil...
>
> So according to your belief in creationism, you must also think humans
> have only
> been on Earth for 6000 years and walked with the dinosaurs.
If you did any research you would know that dinosaurs pop up in folklore all
around the world. Google for it, you should find lots of links -
http://www.examiner.com/creationism-in-national/dinosaurs-ancient-folklore
is one of the first which came up for me. Although clearly it is an area of
contention, there is supporting evidence for it.
The only reason to adamantly hold that humans and dinosaurs didn't walk the
earth together is because of religious faith. Me, I prefer to keep an open
mind.
> Read the research, instead of believing some bullshit fairy-tale book.
I agree, perhaps you should.
--
Brian Cryer
http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian
§ñühw¤£f
--
www.skepticalscience.com|www.youtube.com/officialpeta
G. Morgan
>If you did any research you would know that dinosaurs pop up in folklore all
>around the world. Google for it, you should find lots of links -
>http://www.examiner.com/creationism-in-national/dinosaurs-ancient-folklore
>is one of the first which came up for me. Although clearly it is an area of
>contention, there is supporting evidence for it.
>
>The only reason to adamantly hold that humans and dinosaurs didn't walk the
>earth together is because of religious faith. Me, I prefer to keep an open
>mind.
>"there is supporting evidence for it."
Show me some. Go ahead and try.
There is zero evidence that humans and dinosaurs ever co-existed. The dinosaurs
were destroyed 65 million years ago, along with 99% of every mammal species.
Humans as we know them are only 30,000-200,000 years old, depending on how you
define the human(iod).
We have a technology called carbon-dating, that's how we know the ages of these
fossils. But you already knew that, you're just trolling.
G. Morgan
>> No, it's the Crusaders. They forced Christianity on people, if they did not
>> accept it they were killed. That is fact.
>>
>And people who bomb abortion clinics are xtian.
Yeah, kinda goes against their own Commandments when they kill doctors who have
performed abortions. Hypocrites they are.
Brian Cryer
> "Brian Cryer" <not....@localhost.invalid> wrote:
>
>>If you did any research you would know that dinosaurs pop up in folklore
>>all
>>around the world. Google for it, you should find lots of links -
>>http://www.examiner.com/creationism-in-national/dinosaurs-ancient-folklore
>>is one of the first which came up for me. Although clearly it is an area
>>of
>>contention, there is supporting evidence for it.
>>
>>The only reason to adamantly hold that humans and dinosaurs didn't walk
>>the
>>earth together is because of religious faith. Me, I prefer to keep an open
>>mind.
>
>>"there is supporting evidence for it."
> Show me some. Go ahead and try.
I did. You should re-read my post.
> There is zero evidence that humans and dinosaurs ever co-existed. The
> dinosaurs
> were destroyed 65 million years ago, along with 99% of every mammal
> species.
> Humans as we know them are only 30,000-200,000 years old, depending on how
> you
> define the human(iod).
>
> We have a technology called carbon-dating, that's how we know the ages of
> these
> fossils. But you already knew that, you're just trolling.
LOL!
Its a shame how ignorant most people are about dating techniques, I suppose
its because it helps underpin their religion so they accept figures on faith
without question.
Yes, I know about carbon dating. I also know that it can't be used to
support the dates you claim.
In the case of carbon dating its worth you doing your homework. I suggest
you start by researching the limits of carbon dating, i.e. how far back it
can date things, as well as the assumptions behind it and how reliable it
is. (I find it fascinating for example how different dating techniques can
yield wildly different dates for the same thing.) For example carbon dating
cannot be used for anything beyond 60 thousand years, and many regard that
figure as far too high, and I've often seen half or quarter of that age
limit quoted.
The following links may help you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating,
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/carbon-dating-accuracy.html,
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/carbondating.html.
The last of those links is quite interesting (IMO).
G. Morgan
>>>"there is supporting evidence for it."
>> Show me some. Go ahead and try.
>
>I did. You should re-read my post.
This one: Message-ID: <i8c62o$64j$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
????? No, I did not read that book, "Emporer's New Clothes".
>> There is zero evidence that humans and dinosaurs ever co-existed. The
>> dinosaurs
<snip my stuff>
>
>LOL!
>
>Its a shame how ignorant most people are about dating techniques, I suppose
>its because it helps underpin their religion so they accept figures on faith
>without question.
Quite the contrary. I have no religion, I have spirituality. If I did I'd
probably be a Pagan, worshiping nature.
Religion is the cause of all the turmoil on Earth now between people. It's a
divider, not a uniter.
>Yes, I know about carbon dating. I also know that it can't be used to
>support the dates you claim.
>In the case of carbon dating its worth you doing your homework. I suggest
>you start by researching the limits of carbon dating, i.e. how far back it
>can date things, as well as the assumptions behind it and how reliable it
>is. (I find it fascinating for example how different dating techniques can
>yield wildly different dates for the same thing.) For example carbon dating
>cannot be used for anything beyond 60 thousand years, and many regard that
>figure as far too high, and I've often seen half or quarter of that age
>limit quoted.
I stand corrected, thanks for that. There are other methods for dating, such as
soil core samples and the like.
I can't believe I'm arguing this with you. Dinosaurs and humans never
co-existed. Please post a link (not the biased one on Angelfire) that explains
your scientific evidence.
<snip links>
>The last of those links is quite interesting (IMO).
Pure biased opinion by that author.
OldGringo38
the following tidbit of information:
> Is this all there is to it?
relative named Lucy http://www.selamta.net/Lucy.htm and you favor Oprah
Winfrey
http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/53500/Oprah-Winfrey-Mugshot-53706.jpg
or Michael Jackson
http://images.paraorkut.com/img/pics/animations/m/michael_jackson-3401.gif
in appearance then it is most likely that you evolved from the Monkey.
On the other hand if you have a very distant relative maned Jesus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus and you favor Jude Law
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000179/ or Sarah Brightman
http://www.sarah-brightman.com/ in appearance, chances are that you were
part of God's creation of of Man. Like they say at Fox News, I report,
you decide. :)
--
OldGringo38
Just West Of Nowhere
Enjoy Life And Live It To Its Fullest
Support Bacteria: They're the only culture some people have.
Brian Cryer
> "Brian Cryer" <not....@localhost.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>"there is supporting evidence for it."
>>> Show me some. Go ahead and try.
>>
>>I did. You should re-read my post.
>
> This one: Message-ID: <i8c62o$64j$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
> ????? No, I did not read that book, "Emporer's New Clothes".
No. It was in my first reply to you.
The link I originally posted, and there are plenty of others, was simply a
reference to dinosaurs poping up in folklore all over the world. The link
was
http://www.examiner.com/creationism-in-national/dinosaurs-ancient-folklore
Another related one - look at
http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/v8i9f.htm, I haven't read all the
text but jump down to the bottom of the article and skim back until you hit
the last picture on the page under the title of "Inca Burial Stones". On the
basis that a picture is worth a thousand words, you should find it
interesting.
>>> There is zero evidence that humans and dinosaurs ever co-existed. The
>>> dinosaurs
> <snip my stuff>
>>
>>LOL!
>>
>>Its a shame how ignorant most people are about dating techniques, I
>>suppose
>>its because it helps underpin their religion so they accept figures on
>>faith
>>without question.
>
> Quite the contrary. I have no religion, I have spirituality. If I did
> I'd
> probably be a Pagan, worshiping nature.
>
> Religion is the cause of all the turmoil on Earth now between people.
> It's a
> divider, not a uniter.
Ok, you have "spirituality" not "religion". I'd call that religion. Although
perhaps "faith" or "philosophy" might be better.
>>Yes, I know about carbon dating. I also know that it can't be used to
>>support the dates you claim.
>
>>In the case of carbon dating its worth you doing your homework. I suggest
>>you start by researching the limits of carbon dating, i.e. how far back it
>>can date things, as well as the assumptions behind it and how reliable it
>>is. (I find it fascinating for example how different dating techniques can
>>yield wildly different dates for the same thing.) For example carbon
>>dating
>>cannot be used for anything beyond 60 thousand years, and many regard that
>>figure as far too high, and I've often seen half or quarter of that age
>>limit quoted.
>
> I stand corrected, thanks for that. There are other methods for dating,
> such as
> soil core samples and the like.
Yes. Its a fascinating area.
> I can't believe I'm arguing this with you. Dinosaurs and humans never
> co-existed. Please post a link (not the biased one on Angelfire) that
> explains
> your scientific evidence.
> <snip links>
>
>>The last of those links is quite interesting (IMO).
>
> Pure biased opinion by that author.
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/carbondating.html
Clearly you didn't read it did you? or is it just your "religion" that holds
you back?
Carbon dating showing that the bone of a dinosaur came back with ages of
almost 10 thousand years and 16 thousand years. That's fact. The only reason
you choose to ignore it is that it doesn't fit with your "religion" (or
"spirituality" to use your word).
Its interesting that different dating techniques can produce such wildly
different dates. These aren't normally reported on because (i.) typically
only one dating technique is used (its expensive after all and most people
have blind faith in the results), and (ii.) where different dating
techniques are used it seems common practise to take the date which fits in
best with the researchers preconceeved ideas. It shows how unreliable many
dating techniques are - which you would already understand if you followed
my suggestion of looking into the assumptions behind the various dating
technqiues.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 19:47:42 -0700, invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid
>wrote:
>
>>In article <hrbla6ld2ng7t0h2f...@4ax.com>
>>G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Men propagated religious beliefs and teaching as an exercise and
>>>>structure of power with a touch of humility to facilitate social order.
>>>
>>>Man created religion as a form of control over other people. This was before
>>>the governments of the world started to take over the job.
>>
>>Yeah, according to conspiracy theorists like yourself.
>
>It really happened that way.
According to you.
History and archeological evidence made you look foolish, again.
>>Don't look outside your window, THEY ARE COMING TO GET YOU!
>>Run, run, run, hide, hide, hide, everything you see today is a lie, it
>>is the Matrix!
>
>Sounds like you have a conspiracy theory.
Said the one who posted the above nonsense.
nva...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
What minority?
You just take couple of misguided people who claim that they are
Christians and think the rest of the world are like that?
You don't even have any numbers to back up your claim, how do you reach
the conclusion that I am in the minority?
Yep, you lied again, how typical of atheists, lying and false propaganda
run in your blood.
Now let's put an end to *another* foolish claim/fantasy of you.
Basic belief of Christianity is stated right in the very fist book of
the Bible, the book of Genesis.
26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and
let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of
the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every
creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he
him; male and female created he them.
Does this look to you as "Man evolved from [insert your latest
imagination here]"?
Now this is the Bible, the book that Christians and Jews believe in, how
can you say that someone who believes that Man evolved from another form
of life is a Christian or Jew?
It doesn't matter if you say that you are a Christian and then disagree
with its basics.
I can say that I am atheist and then I say that I believe in God, does
that make me an atheist?
By that same flawed logic of yours, atheists fall for it, you are in the
minority!
See how foolish and uninformed you look right now?
Bottom line, no one Christian or Jew denies that there is development or
evolution within the same species, no one is denying that humans changed
over the years grew smaller became more vulnerable to disease, ...etc.
But no Christian or Jew who is a true believer, not a confused one, or
claiming that to give them bad name would ever agree with the snake oil
aka humans evolved from some any other forms of life.
Go get some education and some training in common sense.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Mike Yetto <mye...@nycap.invalid> wrote:
>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid <invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid> writes and having writ moves on.
>>In article <mvala69r90ke4iovc...@4ax.com>
>>G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>
>>>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>What else is new with you evolutionists?
>>>>Wake me up when you and your likes are done selling sake oil...
>>>
>>>
>>>So according to your belief in creationism, you must also think humans have only
>>>been on Earth for 6000 years and walked with the dinosaurs.
>
>>Huh?
>>What religion is that?Where does it say that humans are only 6000 years
>>old?
>
>Check out the credo of young Earth creationists. The belief that
>everything was created either 6,000 or 10,000 years ago is their
>greates internal controversy.
>
Congratulations, you know how to search in google.
Yet another stupidity. That was based on one man's OPINION, specifically
bishop Ussher who listed what was mentioned about lives of SOME of the
Biblical figures, some of the confused and the uneducated (yourself
included, apparently) took this literally, and assume that this came
from the Bible itself.
Again, where does in the Bible EXACTLY says that everything was created
"6,000 or 10,000 years ago"?
So couple of confused people thought so, it suddenly became a Biblical
fact?
Just how many times you atheists need to be told that you need to read
what you attack before attacking it and look completely foolish and
uninformed, as usual?
The Bible is listing the GENERATIONS of the early humans, and that is
NOT the age of the Earth.
If you read Genesis 1:1-2 word by word, it is clearly showing:
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of
the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the
waters.
It is clear that at first, the earth was formless and void. Then, God
began creating the Earth into a circle. So, how can people conclude that
our Earth is only about 6000 years old? When the Earth was formless, it
that means it is older than 6000 years old. Don't you think so?
Also, the oldest Dinosaur evidence found today is around 230 Million
years old, and what does the Bible say about that?
Genesis 1:21:
God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves,
with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird
after its kind; and God saw that it was good.
It tells us that God created the great sea monsters.
Genesis 1:25:
God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after
their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and
God saw that it was good.
Have you also read the word of the beasts of the earth? So, what does
that mean? Dinosaurs and others existed on Earth according to the Bible.
Dinosaurs are referred to in several Bible books. The book of Job
describes two dinosaurs. One is described in chapter 40 starting at
verse 15, and the other in chapter 41 starting at verse 1. I think you
will agree that 1� chapters about dinosaurs is a lot -- since most
people do not even realize that they are mentioned in the Bible.
(Actually reading the Bible would help, though.)
So does that still say that the Earth is 6000 years old? If you agree
with modern science today, then you agree that Dinosaurs existed
hundreds of millions of years ago.
That is just for starters.
Then the theory that the Bible says the Earth is 6000 years old falls
apart, and in fact is nothing but a desperate attempt by some to hold
the words of one Bishop who didn't do his homework as a fact mentioned
in the Bible.
>>Yet another self claimed expert who can't read properly.
>
>
>>>Read the research,
>
>>What research?
>>The retarded nonsense that you get fed?
>>That is for your likes to believe.
>
>>>instead of believing some bullshit fairy-tale book.
>
>>I agree, the evolution theory is all that.
>
>When used in a scientific context Theory is quite different from
>theory.
Sure, your so-called science is NOT real science, it is a theory and you
atheist claim it science.
Wake me up when you can PROVE that there is no God, and when you can
PROVE that he did not create man.
After that, wake me up when you can explain where did that "inferior
form of life" that you claim "man evolved from" came from and how.
Best of luck to you in your research, you gonna need it, and you'll end
up still failing to meet this simple challenge to prove that your theory
has any credibility.
>Mike "don't forget to feed your crocoduck" Yetto
That should be
Mike "As uninformed and as confused as any atheist out there" Yetto.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Barry OGrady <god_fre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Typical atheist.
When faced with facts, resorts to accusations and personal attacks.
Look in the mirror, and you'll see a troll.
I am not the one posting outrageously unfounded accusations and theories
form his wild imagination, you are.
>Nobody is as stupid as you make out.
See above.
Speaking of stupidity, I am not the one who says to others:
"There is no God, man evolved from some sort of inferior life, yeah,
Darwin said so, and I can't explain the origin of life and in fact have
no clue about it, but I know that there is not God, I am smart, yeah,
that is science, I am cool too"
You do.
Read my posts and yours, and you can tell who is the stupid one here,
but unfortunately since you have no code of morals and ethics, you can't
tell the difference and think that you can just throw nonsense and
others should believe you, just because you say so.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>
>>In article <l7bla61j01vnghre4...@4ax.com>
>>G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>>
>>>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>>>
>>>>No Christian would accept that apes or anything else became humans.
>>>>Go read what Christianity says, and then get back to us.
>>>
>>>
>>>Yet they accept talking snakes,
>>
>>Can you disprove what happened in that verse?
>
>Don't have to. Snakes can't talk.
Now, and you still can't prove that it didn't happen at that time.
Funny thing is, you try to make others look like they believe in things
that are unreal and didn't happen, yet you and your type believe in
things like karma, re-incarnation, ghosts, haunted houses, parallel
universes, aliens, psychic powers, horoscopes, summoning,fortune
cookies, ....etc.
Just how many people out there make a living convincing you and your
likes that they can see the future and the past and claim that they are
psychics?
Just how many people out there like you believe in horoscopes and
similar nonsense?
Of course you will suddenly become an angel and claim that you don't
believe in all that, which we all know is a lie.
>>Do you have 100% proof of historic evidence, archeological evidence of
>>eye witness to say otherwise?
>>If not, then you should shut your trap.
>
>I have 99% evidence.
You have yet to come up with 0.0000000000000001% of any sort of any
evidence to back up your claims and theories.
>Go to the Museum of Natural Science in NYC.
Why would that be needed?
Can't you come up with one of those "99% evidence"?
Obviously not.
>The proof is right there in fossils.
Where?
Where does it show that there is no God?
Since you say that it is there, obviously you can post a picture that
shows this "proof" that there is no God, no?
Yep, you lied again, there is no such proof.
>Can you "prove" your God exists?
I can, and did over the years.
People much smarter than what ever you can even dream to be could not
prove me or other wrong, yet decided to either just dismiss the facts,
run away and drop the subject, or resort to personal attacks.
what makes you think that you are any different from all those who are
living in denial?
You're no better than the rest.
>Of course not.
Wishful thinking.
But that's all you got, wishful thinking, theories, lies, twisting of
science, selective reading, false propaganda, ...etc.
>>>and one man building a boat big enough to carry
>>>2 animals of every species.
>>
>>Yet another logic impaired atheist. Your type must be growing on trees
>>these days.
>
>Quite the contrary.
Only if you say so.
Facts disagree with you.
>I am thinking logically, and rationally.
Thanks for the laugh.
That made my day.
Contrary to what you atheists would like to convince yourselves and
others, logic and rationality cannot co-exists with atheism.
>You are basing your beliefs on blind faith
Incorrect.
Try again.
>and whatever church has brainwashed you.
Incorrect.
Try again.
I don't even go to any church.
And speaking of being brainwashed, I am not the one who claims to know
it all, and claims that God does not exist yet cannot explain how life
started and where did all these planets, stars, galaxies, ....etc come
from.
Also restoring to the old worn out conspiracy theories make you look
even dumber than what we originally thought
Nice try though.
>>In those days, human physical capabilities were superior to what they
>>are now, men were bigger, taller, stronger, and it is not exactly
>>impossible task given enough time.
>
>BZZZZZ..... Wrong! Men were smaller then. I'm not going to do you research for
>you.
Thanks for the laugh.
(Isn't this fun?Watching yet another atheist shooting himself in the
foot, trying to look smart?Where else can we get such free
entertainment?)
OK, I suggest you read the following, before next time you open your
mouth.
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/anthropologists-reveal-modern-man-wimpy-man/story?id=9216053
Watch the video attached to the article.
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/08/22/earliest-human-ethiopia.html
Pearson said another, later fossil was also recently found. It too
belonged to a "moderately tall -- around 5'9" -- and slender
individual."
And since you are so fond of museums let's see you discredit these
evidence
http://www.sydhav.no/giants/lovelock.htm
http://paraspiracy.com/home/?p=1574
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/830123/posts
Had enough, or need more?
Try again, when you have a clue.
>>>Even the biggest oil-tankers we have today could
>>>not fit them all.
>>
>>According to whom?
>>You?
>
>There was a documentary series about the Ark on Discovery Channel. That's where
>I learned that. They did the research.
>
Ahh, the same old "I don't have a clue, I just read it somewhere", how
typical.
>>What are your scientific, historic, and theological studies credentials?
>
>What are yours?
1. YOU made the claim, not me.
2. See above, you were given several references.
>I took many courses in college related to history and science.
You sure did...
Either you are lying, which is not exactly news, coming from atheists,
or that education was lost on you.
>I never attended the seminary.
Blah blah blah.
>>What species EXACTLY were put in the Ark?
>
>According to the Bible, all of them.
>
>"2 Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and
>two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven of
>every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive
>throughout the earth"
So now you believe in the Bible?
You are confused, just few lines before this you were dismissing it.
>Scientists estimate that would be about 45,000 animals.
>
>Length 300 cubits 516.25 ft (157.35 m)
>Width (Beam) 50 cubits 86 ft (26.2 m)
>Height 30 cubits51.6 ft (15.7 m)
>
That "would be", is an estimation, young man, not a statement of facts.
>Is a huge ship to build from wood. And since it supposedly took Noah 150 years
>to build it is ridiculous in itself.
Ridiculous because YOU think so?
That's not a scientific fact, and you certainly don't qualify to make
that assessment.
>Noah was 600 years old! Yeah...
And you still can't prove that he wasn't.
Yeah indeed.
>>Go ahead, run to google, and let's see if you figure out why you are
>>looking foolish, again.
>
>No,
Yes.
You ran to google, or do you really think that you can convince me or
anyone else that you have the Bible memorized?
Try again.
>it's people like you who take the Bible literally that look foolish.
I don't take the Bible literally, it is you and your type of fools who
do so.
For example, Jesus said:
Matthew 5
29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from
thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should
perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
Do you *honestly* think that we take the Bible literally and pluck our
eyes out and or cut one hand?
Do you even understand what the word "literally" means?
Obviously not.
There are teachings, scientific, historical and other accounts in the
Bible, while it is not a scientific or history book, but it has accurate
accounts of them.
It is you and your type of the confused who try to tell us how to read,
what to read and where, and try to force us to live our lives like yours
in confusion and denial, and you think that you know how to read the
Bible better than us.
>>>I could go on and on.
>>
>>And continue to make a fool out of yourself.
>>Don't let me or anyone stop you.
>
>Thanks,
You're welcome.
>but I don't need your permission.
True, you don't need my permission to make a fool out of yourself, you
got me on this. ;-)
>>You're willing to believe that apes turn into humans?
>
>No,
Yes, apparently you do.
>read what was already told to you by others. Apes and Humans evolved from
>different forks of the same tree.
>
You are willing to believe that humans evolved from an inferior form of
life, which you can't explain where it came from.
Clue: Do not take things literally, didn't you already accuse me of
doing so?
Look in the mirror before you give advice/
>>Feel free to live in denial and foolishness.
>
>I am a realist.
Only if you convince yourself.
You are what is generally known as a confused self hypnotizing person.
>It is you that sounds foolish to me.
To you.
For the people who live in confusion and denial, truth always sounds
foolish to them.
That is not exactly news.
>>Of course a typical response from your like is "I don't know, I don't
>>have the answer, but I know you are wrong", and stuff like that.
>
>Yet you offer no evidence of your beliefs.
Evidence was offered tons of times, yet dismissed by you and others.
The fact is, even if God appeared to you and told you that you are
incorrect, you will still deny his existence.
But you will learn, and I sure hope before it is too late.
>There is tons of evidence that
>supports the evolution theory.
>
There is none.
There are twisting of facts, misleading, propaganda, false science.
That's all you evolutionists have.
>>>Watch Bill Maher's "Religulous" and see his interview with a high-level Catholic
>>>priest (right outside of the Vatican gates) who laughs at the fact people take
>>>that shit literally.
>>
>>Only idiots believe anything that someone like Bill Maher does or says.
>
>That's a pretty sweeping statement.
No, actually right on target.
>Have you watched his show?
Yes.
Unlike you, I don't worship him when watching his shows.
> How do you know you disagree with *everything* he says?
What do you mean how?
He is a known bigot, while going after others claiming that they are
bigots.
That shows his hypocrisy too.
He claims that all religions are false, while failed to prove it.
His blunders when talking about history are on record.
His unpatriotic acts are on record too.
It helps if you educate yourself and do some research before you idolize
a human, and a classless ignorant one to begin with.
>>But I guess you are like him.
>
>I am.
Yeah, it is obvious, you know that saying, birds of feather....
> I'm a free-thinker,
LOL.
Yeah, keep on convincing yourself.
> and rational.
Sure, by living in denial, being confused, having no answers to what you
claim to be facts, no solid knowledge, and prejudiced, that is called
"rational" in your world.
Don't let me interrupt your fantasies and dreams buddy, go back to
sleep.
>I also think marijuana should be decriminalized, just like him.
Yeah, so that you and him can get high at will.
And thousands of innocent lives destroyed too.
Yeah, how about legalizing pedophilia, rape, and mass murder too?
You know, the favorite sports of atheists?
(Insert your worn out Catholic priest come back here)
And you call yourself rational.
Sure....
>>Now answer the question, what makes the world go?
>
>On what plane? An object in motion stays in motion until another force is
>applied.
>
Nice copy paste job.
Answer the question instead of dancing.
What makes the world go?
Or let me spell this down to your level, what makes that object go in
motion and stay in motion? Who designed all this?
Still waiting for an answer.
>>Where did this all come from?
>
>The Big-Bang is the best current theory.
Nice, in the context of you claiming to be rational, and know it all,
and "have 99% proof", you use words like "best", "current" and "theory",
really convincing, don't you agree?
Look up the definition of the word "theory" in your favorite dictionary,
and after that, look up the definition of the word "fact" and let us,
the rest of the stupid people here who bow to your superior knowledge if
you see those two being synonymous or have same meaning.
Still confused?
But hey, let me play your game.
Why did the Big-Bang happen? Who did it?Why?
Where did the material, let's call them ingredients for the sake of the
argument here, come from?
I am still waiting for the answer, and the proof.
You call it Big-Bang which is obviously driven by some force and
happened for a reason, so basically you call creation and God different
names.
>The Big-Bang came from God I reckon.
>
About the only rational thing you said in this whole thread, but I am
sure that this was sarcasm.
>>Even if we take your laughable theory of evolution, which has yet to be
>>proven or even credible, where did the initial species that this theory
>>claim that we all evolved from to what we are today, came from?
>
>They could have come from outer space, microbes that hitched a ride on a
>meteorite.
Ahh, they "could" but no explanation huh?
OK, let's play your game again, when you say they cam from outer space
they must have existed there, so what was the origin of that? Who
created them?
Why that doesn't happen now?
I am still waiting for the answer, and the proof.
>>Here is a free clue, even your hero, Bill Maher, in one of his shows,
>>when confronted with similar question, responded that he agrees that
>>there must "some sort of power" behind all this.
>
>Same here.
Huh?
*scratches head*
So you switched personalities now?
All this time you are arguing AGAINST the existence of God.
>He's a self-proclaimed atheist.
And an ignorant one too.
Not to mention a hypocrite.
>I'm not.
You sure act like one, and as usual you disagree on the name.
>I believe there is a
>Higher-Power out there, somewhere.
>
Huh?
*scratches head*
>What I detest is religion.
You actually dismiss God AND religion.
Look at your arguments.
>It's man-made,
What religion is that?
The problem with people like you, is that you make claims and dismiss
stuff that you have yet to read or have a clue about.
>and has been nothing but trouble.
Yeah, and let me guess, you gonna claim that all murders are religious
based, right?
Careful, that claim has been destroyed with scientific,historic and
other evidence.
>All it does is divide people,
Really?
That means you don't understand religion, or actually not real religions
anyway.
It is atheism, agnosticism, materialism, ..etc that divide people spread
mischief, bigotry, justifies killing and crushing of others because of
what they believe in.
You are confused as usual.
Shall I post, for example evidence of families torn apart because of
unbelief and atheism?
You will not like those numbers, and will probably resort either to
personal attacks, claim conspiracy, run away dropping the subject
altogether, or just dismiss them as non reliable.
In short, anything but admitting that you are wrong, as usual.
>based on books written very recently considering the
>time humans have occupied Earth.
>
ROFL.
Please don't stop your rants, I am having a blast reading your
incredible twisting of facts.
>Are you one of those who think dinosaurs and humans lived together, and it all
>started 6000 years ago?
No, and neither does Christianity or Judaism for that mater.
That is nowhere in the Bible, it is just your twisted and
misinterpretation of things based on the theories of some uninformed
confused humans like you.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Jordon <jordon@REMOVE~THISmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>> In article<i8fegj$san$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
>> Jordon<jordon@REMOVE~THISmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Let's see some of your evidence! Direct evidence. Not hearsay.
>>
>> Once you or anyone else answers my questions and provides the evidence
>> that he or she has, I will give you want you want of evidence.
>
>Any evidence presented would be met with denial.
You mean like you atheists denying all the evidence that religions
present?
Yeah, you are the one to talk about evidence.
>There's tons of
>out there.
Like what?
Go ahead and list some.
>> You say that religions are lying?
>
>Yep. And you use the word in plural? Is the Hindu religion lying?
>Shinto? How about Islam?
I meant religions, not cults, not paganism.
Religions that believe in God, ONE creator, not several deities.
Get your facts straight.
>> You are the doubter, and the accuser, therefore the burden of proof is
>> on YOU.
>
>You can't prove anything in that that book of yours?
I can, but you'll dismiss anything explained to you.
And here is a free clue for you, my confused friend, "that that" book is
not mine.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>
>>>Man created religion as a form of control over other people. This was before
>>>the governments of the world started to take over the job.
>>
>>Yeah, according to conspiracy theorists like yourself.
>>Don't look outside your window, THEY ARE COMING TO GET YOU!
>>Run, run, run, hide, hide, hide, everything you see today is a lie, it
>>is the Matrix!
>
>
>No, it's the Crusaders.
Huh?
Another example of how ignorant people can be when it comes to facts,
history and religion.
>They forced Christianity on people,
Huh?
Do you know the history of crusades?
They started AFTER Christianity existed, you ignorant man.
In fact almost 1100 years after Christianity was widely spread in ALL
over the world, except north America.
>if they did not accept it they were killed.
Incorrect as usual.
While it was a bad decision and against the basics of Christianity,
which no real Christian supports, your revisionist history will not go
without giving you the proper education that you seem sorely lacking.
Crusades started to recapture land and religious properties like
churches that were occupied and captured by muslims and pagans.
Those actions started as early as 850 AD, Christianity was well spread
by that time, my ignorant friend.
>That is fact.
You, obviously, have a problem understanding the meaning of basic and
common words.
This is a good example.
Conspiracy theories, innuendo, twisted history, and lies are not facts,
at least not on earth and in real life, but we have already established
that you have trouble grasping all this.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>
>>What religion is that?
>
>Christianity.
>
Nonsense.
There is no such thing in Christianity.
>>Where does it say that humans are only 6000 years
>>old?
>
>Here's one:
>http://www.missiontoamerica.org/genesis/six-thousand-years.html
That's one man's PERSONAL interpretation, and it is wrong.
I ask again, where is that in the Bible?
Show me that.
And NOT your or anyone else's interpretation.
And I already explained this in a previous post.
I suggest that you read it, and stop hanging on straws.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
Hypocrisy is everywhere, and does not know religion or anything else.
You can claim that these people who bombed abortion clinics (which those
numbers pale compared to the murders that atheists have committed
throughout history), are Christians, the fact remains that they are not,
even if they claimed to be.
Christianity is not a status, nor inheritance that you obtain by being
born from Christian parents, nor only saying you are.
Christianity is a way of life that you need to live by to become one.
You use violence, you automatically can't be considered a Christian.
End of the story.
Those who bombed abortion clinics are as Christians as you are.
That says it all.
Speaking of hypocrisy, atheists are the last one to whine about that,
they should look at the staggering numbers of murders throughout
history, and then come back to discuss this.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>But you already knew that, you're just trolling.
You seem to be bent on calling anyone who proves that you are mistaken
as a troll.
Sounds like insecurity to me, you are hiding behind personal attacks.
Grow up already.
Mike Yetto
>PROVE that he did not create man.
I do not make the claim that a god exists, or doesn't exist. If
you wish to present proof that one does, then do so. Proof of
the existence of a god would put that god into the realm of
science and knowledge and take faith and belief out of the
picture. Where would religion be then?
>After that, wake me up when you can explain where did that "inferior
>form of life" that you claim "man evolved from" came from and how.
Regardless of the extent of mankind's knowledge of the origin of
life, unexplained does not equal untrue. And to shoot down your
next straw-man, it does not equal true either.
>Best of luck to you in your research, you gonna need it, and you'll end
>up still failing to meet this simple challenge to prove that your theory
>has any credibility.
To what theory of mine are you referring?
>>Mike "don't forget to feed your crocoduck" Yetto
>That should be
>Mike "As uninformed and as confused as any atheist out there" Yetto.
When did I say I am an atheist? I am not confused just because
your straw-man is confused.
Mike "too much of a skeptic to be an atheist" Yetto
OldGringo38
world will come together, and all will be well.
--
OldGringo38
Just West Of Nowhere
Enjoy Life And Live It To Its Fullest
Support Bacteria: They Are The Only Culture Some People Have
§ñühw¤£f
TEH WOLF GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111111!!!!!!!!!
:)
§ñühw¤£f
I saw yer mom in the Bible...she had an AMAZING bush.
Word.
OldGringo38
OldGringo38
following tidbit of information:
> invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>> In article <66lta612ocpvve0bq...@4ax.com> G. Morgan
>> <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But you already knew that, you're just trolling.
>>
>> You seem to be bent on calling anyone who proves that you are mistaken
>> as a troll.
>>
>> Sounds like insecurity to me, you are hiding behind personal attacks.
>> Grow up already.
>
> I saw yer mom in the Bible...she had an AMAZING bush.
>
> Word.
>
G. Morgan
>or resort to personal attacks.
Which is what you just did. Did I call you names or insult you?
I win. You resorted to personal attacks, which according to you is an
end-game.
G. Morgan
>Speaking of hypocrisy, atheists are the last one to whine about that,
>they should look at the staggering numbers of murders throughout
>history, and then come back to discuss this.
Ha! Most murders throughout history had something to do with one or both sides
proclaiming God wants that.
§nühw¤£f
following:
> On 10/28/2010 10:25 AM Just to please that super-ego, ���hw��f wrote
> the
> following tidbit of information:
> > invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
> >> In article <66lta612ocpvve0bq...@4ax.com> G. Morgan
> >> <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> But you already knew that, you're just trolling.
> >>
> >> You seem to be bent on calling anyone who proves that you are mistaken
> >> as a troll.
> >>
> >> Sounds like insecurity to me, you are hiding behind personal attacks.
> >> Grow up already.
> >
> > I saw yer mom in the Bible...she had an AMAZING bush.
> >
> > Word.
> >
> Was it the burning bush?
>
^_^
--
http://www.republicorp.us/
http://stopbeck.com|www.snuhwolf.9f.com|www.eyeonpalin.org|www.youropenbook.org
§nühw¤£f
following:
OldGringo38
OldGringo38
> In message<iac5gb$od4$3...@news.eternal-september.org>, OldGringo38 pondered the
> following:
>> On 10/28/2010 10:25 AM Just to please that super-ego, ���hw��f wrote
>> the
>> following tidbit of information:
>>> invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>>>> In article<66lta612ocpvve0bq...@4ax.com> G. Morgan
>>>> <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> But you already knew that, you're just trolling.
>>>>
>>>> You seem to be bent on calling anyone who proves that you are mistaken
>>>> as a troll.
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like insecurity to me, you are hiding behind personal attacks.
>>>> Grow up already.
>>>
>>> I saw yer mom in the Bible...she had an AMAZING bush.
>>>
>>> Word.
>>>
>> Was it the burning bush?
>>
> Kinda liek Demi Moores, only 10x as thick.
>
> ^_^
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
Mike Yetto <mye...@nycap.invalid> wrote:
>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid <invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid> writes and having writ moves on.
>>Wake me up when you can PROVE that there is no God, and when you can
>>PROVE that he did not create man.
>
>I do not make the claim that a god exists, or doesn't exist.
You jumped in the discussion about it, genius.
>If you wish to present proof that one does, then do so. Proof of
>the existence of a god would put that god into the realm of
>science and knowledge and take faith and belief out of the
>picture.
LOL.
You just said "I do not make the claim that a god exists, or doesn't
exist. " and now you clearly dispute his existence by asking me to post
a proof he does and the jump into other conclusions.
My original statement about stands and you just proved it again, you are
uninformed and as confused as any atheist out there, which does NOT say
that I said that you are an atheist.
Learn to read, some reading comprehension can certainly make you look
much better.
> Where would religion be then?
Who told you that religion and science and knowledge do not agree or can
not co-exist?
He continue to whine saying that you are not an atheist, but you
certainly act like one.
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), "Science, Philosophy and Religion: a
Symposium", 1941
>>After that, wake me up when you can explain where did that "inferior
>>form of life" that you claim "man evolved from" came from and how.
>
>Regardless of the extent of mankind's knowledge of the origin of
>life,
Why it would be regardless?
That is EXACTLY the point of this discussion.
It would help if you take a look at the subject line of the thread, and
read some of the posts in it before you jump into it.
It certainly makes you look less foolish.
>unexplained does not equal untrue.
But when someone can not explain or cannot show you that God exists
(for example, like you and your cohorts claim) that means it is untrue
since it was not explained.
Nice going, and then you wonder why most of you are not taken seriously.
>And to shoot down your next straw-man, it does not equal true either.
>
You keep running around screaming "straw-man" and few other words that
you don't even understand what they mean (not to mention in poorly
constructed sentences, but that is another story), and still can't grasp
the basics.
Let me see if I can summarize this for you, maybe you'll get it this
time.
You and your likes jump on believers (specifically Christians) claiming
that they are stupid/have blind faith, ....etc because they believe that
God exists and man was created and not evolved as your UNPROVEN theories
SUGGEST, and claim that you are using science, rational thoughts, and
knowledge, not to mention accusations that Christianity did this and
that, and all the nonsense that came with that argument.
This was all proven false right in this thread.
Science (real science) does agree with religion (real religions, not
cults, not some political movements in the name of religion, ...etc),
and twisting science does not make you look better or your help your
case.
Atheism/unbelief/agnostics and logic/rational thinking do not co-exit.
To deny that there is a cause for all existence and there is a force
that drives all the universe is just irrational and in fact down right
stupid.
To claim that God does not exist and then fail to explain where things
around you originated really makes you look foolish.
If you BOLDLY claim that something does not exist, you'd better have
your reasons and the UNDISPUTED proof that he doesn't.
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough"
--Albert Einstein
>>Best of luck to you in your research, you gonna need it, and you'll end
>>up still failing to meet this simple challenge to prove that your theory
>>has any credibility.
>
>To what theory of mine are you referring?
Learn how to read in context.
The "mine" here is not a literal one, it is address to you and others
who hang on theory of evolution straw when attacking religion.
>>>Mike "don't forget to feed your crocoduck" Yetto
>
>>That should be
>>Mike "As uninformed and as confused as any atheist out there" Yetto.
>
>When did I say I am an atheist?
When did I say that you are?
Does the "as any" need to be explained to you, young man?
If I have said that you are an atheist, then you have a reason to whine.
That is not saying that you don't think and act like one.
> I am not confused
"Denial ain't just a river in Egypt."
-- Mark Twain quotes
> just because your straw-man is confused.
>
*Yawn*
1. Work on your vocabulary and add some to it, instead of running around
repeating the same words that you don't understand what they mean.
2. Learn how to construct sentences.
3. Look in the mirror to see who is the confused.
>Mike "too much of a skeptic to be an atheist" Yetto
Actually, Mike "Too stupid to be logical" Yetto is more accurate.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
>invalid@don't.bother.org.invalid wrote:
>
>>or resort to personal attacks.
>
>Which is what you just did.
Where?
Ahh, they were so obvious that you couldn't find them to quote them.
LOL.
Thanks for the laugh, buddy.
>Did I call you names or insult you?
Yes, all your posts(and the ones from others too) were nothing but down
right accusations, condescending remark and conspiracy theories.
In fact you just jumped dancing with that idiot who posted a childish
and a lame insult, and now you whine about me allegedly attacking you.
All my posts had "my friend" and "young man" and things like that in
them.
You're a typical atheist.
When you get beat and have nothing to counter run out of excuses and
lost the argument, you play the innocent victim.
I have yet to see a single atheist/unbeliever who can engage in a
discussion without personal attacks, condescending remarks, arrogance,
accusations, conspiracy theories or rely on facts.
Once proven wrong, all we get is whining, accusations, dropping the
subject completely, running away, insults, or simply playing the
innocent victim. (*)
>I win.
*Yawn*
You did?
Funny, I don't see how you win, but running away.
Maybe in your dreams, but certainly not in real life, young man.
Your claims, conspiracy theories, twisting science, and false
accusations were destroyed with evidence and facts.
Don't feel bad, you're not the first one, and won't be the last one to
experience this. Think of it as a wake up call.
>You resorted to personal attacks, which according to you is an
>end-game.
See (*) and good luck to you in your research.
Maybe one day you'll realize how mistaken you were.
inv...@don't.bother.org.invalid
G. Morgan <usenet...@gawab.com> wrote:
Yeah, amazing how many were killed by atheists, and now they claim that
they are against murder and that religion is responsible for killing,
and a "genius" like you still blames it on religion...
If you want a small example of those numbers, ask politely, and you'll
get them, but I doubt that you'll like them or they would make you
realize how wrong you are.
But nice to see how you get destroyed in this discussion and now
resorted to just picking words out of context to troll.
Aardvark
> Your claims, conspiracy theories, twisting science, and false
> accusations were destroyed with evidence and facts.
I must have missed that bit. Surprising, as I've been following the whole
thread.
--
"En un lugar de la Mancha, de cuyo nombre no quiero acordarme,
no hace mucho tiempo que vivía un hidalgo de los de lanza en
astillero, adarga antigua, rocín flaco y galgo corredor."
-Cervantes, 'Don Quixote'
Aardvark
> Yeah, amazing how many were killed by atheists,
And the killers proclaimed 'This is for atheism!' as he did the deed?
I see.