Food for Thought, Thinking of Evolution?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-11-2013, 05:04 PM
RE: Food for Thought, Thinking of Evolution?
(16-11-2013 04:43 PM)cjlr Wrote:  In the past, scientists held certain opinions.
Today, scientists hold different opinions.
In the past, scientists were better,
THEREFORE, their opinions are more valid.

Which is, as they say, more worthless than shit in a sewer.

...

4/10. Would troll again.

First of all... everything originated from somewhere... where one person says it's evolution, another states that there is a Master Creator, where another doesn't care where but knows we came from somewhere. You all clearly know my stance, but the people in this forum's inability to continue a progressive discussion doesn't make a thesis poorly thought out... maybe poorly presented I can admit, but if there is no background for an argument, there is no foundation for an argument. All modern science is based off of the studies of these "creation" scientists, regardless of their beliefs. All modern science including the study of the theory of evolution fits into a leg of these inventions or discoveries. There were in history agnostics who didn't believe in God, but didn't have any beliefs. The theory of evolution originated in an un-organized and dishonest manner... evolutionary scientists have still not been able to show any worth-while evidence for the theory. Modern science can prove fact that granite had to have been formed in under three literal minutes.... look it up yourself... the study of Polonium 218 Halo, or pleochroic halos... since I can't show you the study without being told I'm spamming. Honestly... a forum controlled like this is like a football game with a hometown ref. who calls a penalty on the apposing team on every play... I guess you may as well forfeit right... then it's done none of us any good... you haven't given me any proof that evolution is right, and Atheism is correct, and my proof has all been given up in penalty yards... sounds about right. :-)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 05:11 PM
RE: Food for Thought, Thinking of Evolution?
(16-11-2013 04:42 PM)birdseye Wrote:  
(16-11-2013 04:20 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  That will only get you banned.

If you expect me to read the stuff you copy/pasted from somewhere you are mistaking.

For the third time, what's your point?

While what I was doing is not considered Spam-by its definition... I understand the deleting of many of the things that I presented... because they are too compelling... or too in depth. I can cite from a book and not be "Spamming" anyone... it does not fit the definition of spam, much like the theory of evolution not fulfilling the scientific laws to make it fact.

To theorize and make conjectures on something without a basis of support is foolish, and is exactly how the theories of evolution began. The Bible on the other hand has been proven by archaeology, as the posts on Sodom and Gomorrah poorly tried to disprove and do exist. The flood can be verified. Sandalled footprints have been found stepping on Trilobites in the Cambrian Strata. The flood is the only explanation for missing layers, petrified trees growing through million year layers... theory without proof with only and ever be theory. To bully someone around and wrongfully accuse them of "Spamming" is a misguided technique for what you yourself said you wouldn't do, weeding out the bad. That's fine... As for hell... as many believe... the bible does not support an eternal torment. Each shall suffer according to his sins, and nothing more beyond that... the spirit does die and go away, and doesn't live on in eternal torment. Nut for those who believe, they shall inherit eternal life, and only those who believe have been promised an eternal life. The rest have been promised dust.

You are ridiculous. The flood verified? Sandalled footprints on trilobites?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 05:20 PM
RE: Food for Thought, Thinking of Evolution?
(16-11-2013 05:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are ridiculous. The flood verified? Sandalled footprints on trilobites?

It is called the Meister Footprint, or Meister Track,


Attached File(s) Thumbnail(s)
       
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 05:24 PM (This post was last modified: 16-11-2013 05:33 PM by Chas.)
RE: Food for Thought, Thinking of Evolution?
(16-11-2013 05:20 PM)birdseye Wrote:  
(16-11-2013 05:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are ridiculous. The flood verified? Sandalled footprints on trilobites?

It is called the Meister Footprint, or Meister Track,

Not a footprint.

You clearly have no knowledge of how fossils form. The 'footprint' could not form in that kind of fossil bed. There was no layer of material to outline a negative image (a footprint). There would have to be molten material, volcanic ash, soft mud, or some such filling in the 'footprint' immediately after it was made. There is no such material present, no layer.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
16-11-2013, 05:26 PM
RE: Food for Thought, Thinking of Evolution?
(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  All modern science is based off of the studies of these "creation" scientists, regardless of their beliefs.

We have gone over this, smart people are not infallible. They are human. Also being an expert in one thing doesn't make them an expert in the formation of the universe itself.

and if you yourself can say "regardless of their beliefs" what the hell is the point in bringing up their beliefs in the first place?

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  All modern science including the study of the theory of evolution fits into a leg of these inventions or discoveries. There were in history agnostics who didn't believe in God, but didn't have any beliefs.

More irrelevant drivel.

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  The theory of evolution originated in an un-organized and dishonest manner... evolutionary scientists have still not been able to show any worth-while evidence for the theory.

Why did you spam about DNA when you clearly don't have a clue? Do you not know of the similarities between the genetic code of species? I suppose your creationist site left that part out.

More evidence is the fossil records, and multiple examples of speciation both observed in the lab (on species that reproduce fast enough for us to see a change: Bacteria and flies) and in nature (Ring Species)

Now before you spout more ignorant claims, do a honest search into the things I have conveniently bolded for you.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 05:32 PM
RE: Food for Thought, Thinking of Evolution?
Look closer at the footprint, and tell me if your intellectual mind still lies to you... stone does not fragment like that. And what about the Leaky footprints? Found in strata that places them "4 million years back"?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 05:41 PM
RE: Food for Thought, Thinking of Evolution?
(16-11-2013 05:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-11-2013 05:20 PM)birdseye Wrote:  It is called the Meister Footprint, or Meister Track,

Not a footprint.

You clearly have no knowledge of how fossils form. The 'footprint' could not form in that kind of fossil bed. There was no layer of material to outline a negative image (a footprint). There would have to be molten material, volcanic ash, soft mud, or some such filling in the 'footprint' immediately after it was made. There is no such material present, no layer.

Good catch Chas. Thanks for the link. I try to stay on top of these as much as humanely possible.

And now to rant..

These 'footprints' are the things that these $%*()!!@#$ show children.

Children have no idea about a person's credentials. They only see the visual evidence and take it as 'gospel.'

(Most)Adults have the ability to understand that the footprints are hogwash, but children do not.

Absolutely $%!^&*)$ reprehensible. This makes me want to vomit.

This is why I cannot be a peaceful atheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like jaguar3030's post
16-11-2013, 05:53 PM
RE: Food for Thought, Thinking of Evolution?
(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  First of all... everything originated from somewhere...

Where did the "Master Creator" originate?

...

Why should I accept that premise, when not even you accept it?

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  where one person says it's evolution, another states that there is a Master Creator, where another doesn't care where but knows we came from somewhere.

No.

If you want to argue deism, as in first cause of the universe itself, that's fine.

We know - as far as it is possible to know anything - how life has developed on Earth. We know where human beings came from. We know how old our planet is. We know how it has changed over time. We know how stars form.

We don't know everything.

God of the gaps, ho!

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  You all clearly know my stance, but the people in this forum's inability to continue a progressive discussion doesn't make a thesis poorly thought out... maybe poorly presented I can admit, but if there is no background for an argument, there is no foundation for an argument.

But no. That doesn't come close to following.

Your thesis is incoherent and fallacious. There is no basis for discussion.

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  All modern science is based off of the studies of these "creation" scientists, regardless of their beliefs. All modern science including the study of the theory of evolution fits into a leg of these inventions or discoveries. There were in history agnostics who didn't believe in God, but didn't have any beliefs.

The conclusions of modern scientists differ from their predecessors.

That's not an argument. It is an observation. It is an eminently explicable observation.

Do you deny the validity of the data informing the apparent shift in conclusions? Do you deny the ability of those so concluding to make their conclusions?

Because you've got to pick one of those.

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  The theory of evolution originated in an un-organized and dishonest manner...

Nope.

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  evolutionary scientists have still not been able to show any worth-while evidence for the theory.

Nope.

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  Modern science can prove fact that granite had to have been formed in under three literal minutes....

Nope.

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  look it up yourself...

Indulge me.

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  the study of Polonium 218 Halo, or pleochroic halos...

Nope.

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  since I can't show you the study without being told I'm spamming.

You could provide a link. That's not spamming.

Do you know how providing sources works? You don't have to verbatim copy and dump the content of the source. You just have to say what it was and say where to find it.

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  Honestly... a forum controlled like this is like a football game with a hometown ref. who calls a penalty on the apposing team on every play... I guess you may as well forfeit right... then it's done none of us any good...

Oh, so we're veering into the "IT'S ALL A CONSPIRACY" territory. Good to know.

(16-11-2013 05:04 PM)birdseye Wrote:  you haven't given me any proof that evolution is right, and Atheism is correct, and my proof has all been given up in penalty yards... sounds about right. :-)

Does such self-absorbed conceit ever get old?

I imagine it must get old, after a while. Say what you will about cognitive dissonance, it's gotta be hard to maintain that much after a while.

Evolution is a fact. Bear with me as I demonstrate. Do you deny any of the following observations?
1. Traits exhibit variation between individuals.
2. Variation between individuals affects which individuals are more likely to reproduce and/or survive.
3. Variation is hereditary.

Because guess what? That's evolution. That's it. So where do you and reality disagree?

Special bonus response:
(12-06-2013 09:53 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Speciation: evidence for, speculation on, and discussion of.
Some
examples
from
the
past
year.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
16-11-2013, 05:54 PM
RE: Food for Thought, Thinking of Evolution?
(16-11-2013 05:32 PM)birdseye Wrote:  Look closer at the footprint, and tell me if your intellectual mind still lies to you... stone does not fragment like that. And what about the Leaky footprints? Found in strata that places them "4 million years back"?

3.6 million years. And they are not human footprints, but what is your point?

Those footprints are barefoot and were formed when volcanic ash buried them immediately.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 05:57 PM
RE: Food for Thought, Thinking of Evolution?
(16-11-2013 05:41 PM)jaguar3030 Wrote:  This is why I cannot be a peaceful atheist.

Yep. A child's mind being perverted is a crime against humanity.

Uh... hey, Kansas - Censored - is available. I usually just say fuck and shit like that. Shy

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kim's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: