Unicorns. satyrs, cockatrices, dragons
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-01-2011, 10:53 PM
 
RE: Unicorns. satyrs, cockatrices, dragons
Quote this message in a reply
10-01-2011, 10:55 AM
RE: Unicorns. satyrs, cockatrices, dragons
(09-01-2011 05:18 PM)ashley.hunt60 Wrote:  
(09-01-2011 03:50 PM)omega21 Wrote:  How old are you theophilus? You have made three threads now and all that is happening is you making arguments that are going no where as people counter everything you say with facts. Look the Bible is made up, and eveything you or someone else says to defend the blood thirsty tyrant Yahweh is futile. You didn't even respond to my last message in the Flood thread. I was curious so I will ask you again. What do you think of Yahweh's law that if a girl gets raped then she must marry the guy that raped her? That is just one of many horrible laws in the Bible. Yahweh is your God by the way in case you didn't know as some christians I have talked to don't know the name of their own God lol.

He's 70, and in his defense, he is getting somewhat swarmed here, so it's understandable that he cannot address all points thrown at him.

Yeah but I just think he can better spend his time on a theist website. He isn't going to be able to give a logical response to anything since no theist can no matter what age. There isn't anything one can say to prove God since there isn't any evidence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-01-2011, 10:28 AM (This post was last modified: 11-01-2011 10:31 AM by theophilus.)
RE: Unicorns. satyrs, cockatrices, dragons
(09-01-2011 05:28 PM)No J. Wrote:  
(09-01-2011 05:18 PM)ashley.hunt60 Wrote:  He's 70, and in his defensive, he is getting somewhat swarmed here, so it's understandable that he cannot address all points thrown at him.

He hasn't adequately addressed even one point. In his defence I will say that he appears very senile.
I am definitely not senile. There are three signs that someone is getting senile. One of them is that the memory gets bad, but I can't remember what the other two are.

As for answering the points that have been raised, I have provided links to websites that woud do a better job of that than I could.

The information in ancient libraries came from real minds of real people. The far more complex information in cells came from the far more intelligent mind of God.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-01-2011, 10:57 AM
RE: Unicorns. satyrs, cockatrices, dragons
Biased websites don't count.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-01-2011, 11:04 AM
RE: Unicorns. satyrs, cockatrices, dragons
(11-01-2011 10:57 AM)omega21 Wrote:  Biased websites don't count.
Since all people are biased in some way all websites must also be biased.

The information in ancient libraries came from real minds of real people. The far more complex information in cells came from the far more intelligent mind of God.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-01-2011, 02:33 PM
RE: Unicorns. satyrs, cockatrices, dragons
no that is not true at all. Scholary reviewed journals are reliable, and .edu websites are good too. Trust me I know reliable sources and non reliable sources. I am in college. If I used your website in a paper I would fail it. Rather if I write a paper with sources from scholars or peered reviewed by experts atleast then it would be a better paper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-01-2011, 07:12 PM
RE: Unicorns. satyrs, cockatrices, dragons
(11-01-2011 11:04 AM)theophilus Wrote:  
(11-01-2011 10:57 AM)omega21 Wrote:  Biased websites don't count.
Since all people are biased in some way all websites must also be biased.

The sites you use are biased towards theism. The sites we use, and are asking you to use, are biased towards fact. See the difference?

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stark Raving's post
11-01-2011, 08:12 PM
RE: Unicorns. satyrs, cockatrices, dragons
(11-01-2011 07:12 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  
(11-01-2011 11:04 AM)theophilus Wrote:  
(11-01-2011 10:57 AM)omega21 Wrote:  Biased websites don't count.
Since all people are biased in some way all websites must also be biased.

The sites you use are biased towards theism. The sites we use, and are asking you to use, are biased towards fact. See the difference?

No offense, Stark, but that was really circular.

theo (hope you don't mind if I call you theo), you are correct that all people have biases, but you can't really hide behind that. The difference between what we are citing and you is we are generally relying on peer reviewed scientific data that makes its ways to websites. And individual may have biases certainly, but when you are forced to present your data to an independent group, many of whom may be skeptical of what you claim, you are more likely to get an unbiased assessment of the claim.

Scientific claims are rejected all the time. And, sometimes accepted claims are modified or thrown out as new data becomes available. With religion, you don't get that. You get an answer and a continuous process of reworking the equation so the answer never changes. How can that possibly be valid? When the question keeps changing to support the predetermined answer, you've obviously got a problem.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BnW's post
11-01-2011, 11:40 PM
RE: Unicorns. satyrs, cockatrices, dragons
(11-01-2011 10:28 AM)theophilus Wrote:  I am definitely not senile. There are three signs that someone is getting senile. One of them is that the memory gets bad, but I can't remember what the other two are.

As for answering the points that have been raised, I have provided links to websites that woud do a better job of that than I could.

Point one has not been satisfactorally answered.

Point two is definitely is not satisfactory. The websites are not just unreliable, they are full of deliberate lies.

When I find myself in times of trouble, Richard Dawkins comes to me, speaking words of reason, now I see, now I see.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2011, 03:43 AM
RE: Unicorns. satyrs, cockatrices, dragons
No offence BnW, but sometimes your sense of humor is somewhat lacking.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: