Jump to content


Photo

Frdb Retard Farm....


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
102 replies to this topic

#1 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 07 May 2009 - 01:11 AM

I was sent some links to this forum, I usually ignore what is said at forums like this. But since the forum allows such things, and they all think we are retarded. I thought I would leave a link to a thread where we are all basically deemed as the retard farm.

http://www.freeratio...ad.php?t=265210

If they react as they usually do, they will delete the thread. Currently there are about 3 or 4 threads going on how retarded we are. Yep and they even mention names.

But to show our membrs here, if you thought you were having an intelligent debate with the members from there, think again. They have only come here to play games with those who they deem as retarded. Then make fun of you as you will read in their posts.

Basically, they really don't know any of us personally. So why are we retarded? What makes us different from them is also a threat unto their so called intelligence. But don't get mad (guys from the other forum) at that comment. What you guys have said about everyone here is much worse.

Now I don't want anyone from here joining over there to start fights. That's not what we as Christians should do. And if you do, an it boils over to back here. Don't think I won't ban you for it. The reason I put up this thread is because I think the lying game of decepion should stop. And the people from there who came here should be exposed for their deeds.

Now. since what they have done affects the forum as a whole. I think the whole forum should have a say in what we should do with them.

1) Should we allow them to explain themselves and apologize and continue?
2) Should we put them in the cooler and let the mods an admins deal with them?
3) Or should we just ban them?

#2 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7001 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 12 May 2009 - 06:41 AM

To be totally transparent and to give people an idea of what real intolerance looks like I want to share some clarity with what's going on.

I used to post at FRDB. Actually, FRDB was the first place I ever posted in my life, it was IIDB at the time. I posted there from July 9th up until I received a time ban from there a few month ago. Obviously, because of the common topic, there are several members here from FRDB and they are welcome, in my book anyway, if they are here to make the dialogue robust and have some semblance of honest exchange.

My sister, JudyV here at EFT, and Babelfish at FRDB invited me to join there last year and after I found EFT, I invited her to join here. I was brand new in both places learning the forum etiquette. Well, the debate intensified and when my arguments started to get more heated at FRDB and I was getting more familiar with how their members operated I was able to hold my own there which turned into several infractions intended to discourage me. Well, my time ban and censoring was a good clue that I was wasting my time, so even though I was only time banned, still, I took the hint and shook the dust from my sandals. JudyV (Babelfish), got herself banned from here shortly after. (Check out her last few posts if you get a chance.)

I'm free to post at FRDB now if I wish but the atmosphere over there is very hostile and the table is severely tilted. I won't deny that it is easier to favor those you agree with and as a moderator here, I have to keep a conscious awareness of this to give evolutionists the benefit of the doubt. However, at FRDB people can cuss out creationists, call them names and have no good reason to do it. Not all members there are like that but those that choose to behave that way are offered great freedom to browbeat Christians and goad them along all they please. However, if a Christian there comes along making any sarcastic statements and exposing FRDB member biases and contradictions a censoring and banning is in your near future, at least it was for me.

I say all this to ask fellow Christians here to take their time and consider carefully where you cast your net. I believe in being bold and prepared to witnesses to whoever the Lord leads you to. However, there are those intent on wasting your time because life to them is nothing more than a short joke and those that disagree with their 'tolerance' must be made fun of.

I truly appreciate the way this forum/ministry is set up. Part of the reason I like it here so much is that I've even had banned atheists tell me, after they were banned, that their banning was justified. We welcome the open dialogue. There is no issue that we won't address, even if the answer is, 'I don't know.' On the other hand, when someone is intent on being misleading and deceptive, they are given their martyr badge :huh: so that the integrity of the forum can be maintained.

This thread is a potential hotbed of argument so please be considerate if you have an opinion to voice because we are monitoring this thread closely, at Ikester's request.

#3 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 12 May 2009 - 06:58 AM

Honestly,we need them.

1)It exposes their motives for the whole world to see.

2)It shows everyone how they have to lie to win an arguement.

I can't think of a better living example that testifies to the world.

#4 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 12 May 2009 - 06:59 AM

Caution is advised for those who follow the link over there. This is a family site, and the language is kept pretty clean. Not the case at all over there.

#5 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 12 May 2009 - 07:51 AM

Well I can obviously see why atheist would resort to calling Christians retards. I mean, they have no other evidence to provide for evolution. So, they go on to their next best thing... calling people retards. They cannot provide evidence like, how evolution is NOT random, how life comes from none-life, how massive fossil grave sites all over the world could NOT be from a massive flood.

It's obvious when one's arguement becomes weak, that they will resort to name calling. Happens all the time.

#6 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 12 May 2009 - 09:35 PM

Well I can obviously see why atheist would resort to calling Christians retards.  I mean, they have no other evidence to provide for evolution.  So, they go on to their next best thing... calling people retards.  They cannot provide evidence like, how evolution is NOT random, how life comes from none-life, how massive fossil grave sites all over the world could NOT be from a massive flood. 

It's obvious when one's arguement becomes weak, that they will resort to name calling.  Happens all the time.

View Post


Well when you cannot really prove something, but you want everyone to believe it anyway. Then the only other way you can achieve this is by stereotyping people into groups.

1) You make your group the smartest, most educated, most fun loving, free thinking, rational, logical, etc... Looking group around.

2) You take the other group, that you don't agree with and demonize them. And label them the very opposite of what you claim your group to be. Which is everything negative to what society deems as positive.

And even though this does not prove the groups idea (evolution), nor is it scientific. It does promote the agenda of the idea by taking fear and peer pressure to "make" people want to join group one. Not by how they have proved anything. But through fear mongering of being labelled a negative influence if you dare join them, or defend their ideas.

Starting a thread and naming it the retard farm is the perfect example of peer pressure and fear mongering. What this does is it says: before you even read the thread. You will be deemed as a retard if we catch you defending the views of this group.

Pre-labeling a group even before the reader reads what they have said, is pushing a preconceived truth into the mind of the reader. Which by the way does not equal anything that this group claims to be.

1) By labelling them the retard farm, this does not give the reader a chance to make up his "own" mind. Free-thinking is denied.
2) By labelling them the retard farm, this controls free thought through fear of being stereotyped along side this group.

Questions:
1) Does any of this prove evolution?
2) Is any of this even remotely scientific?
3) And is this not more of an example of what fundamentalists do?

In fact, is this not more of: My belief vs. Your belief?

If this is scientific in proving evolution. Then evolution is only proven through bias, hatred, and stereotyping. And if not, then why is just about every thread at the other forum based solely on these tactics and ideas?

90% of what is posted in the creation vs evolution sections is nothing but ideas on how to stereotype anyone whom disagrees with them. And then through peer pressure and fear, try to brow beat people whom disagree into believing as they do.

Make up ideas and play games with those whom disagree with evolution as if science itself is child's play, and evolution is a prank they will pull on everyone. If evolution is what teaches so many people to:

1) Make fun of others.
2) Deny freedom of choice.
3) Use fear and peer pressure.
4) Stereotype with bias and hatred.
Etc...

What does that really say about the so called scientific theory, if the people who believe in it have to resort to these tactics to make it "look" like it has been proven against the opposition to it?

If the theory truly had mountains of evidence, and is a proven fact. Then would it really need all the mind games that are promoted from the other forum?

1) Does a scientific theory require people to sign up at opposing forums under false world views?
2) Does a scientific theory require people to sign up at opposing forums and cause havoc?
3) Does a scientific theory require people to sign up at opposing forums and tell lies?
4) Does a scientific theory require people to sign up at opposing forums using proxies after being banned for the above actions?
5) Does a scientific theory require people to sign up at opposing forums under different names because the deceptions they use to prove a scientific theory requires them to, so they cannot be traced back to them?
6) Does a scientific theory require people to sign up at opposing forums using 10 or more different e-mail addresses because each time they get banned for their deceptions, they have to in order to go around the ban and do it all over again?


Now what would the same people think of us Christians if we used all the same deceptions to try and prove that God exists? They would know it was all phony just by our actions. So how does that make evolution look just by their own actions?

Can such a person obtain mercy from God?

1tim 1:12 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;
13 Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.

#7 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 13 May 2009 - 02:56 AM

It is remarkable and telling that they post such grossly inaccurate accounts. They know full well that no honest person who takes a look things will ever take their word at face value ever again. That this is no concern betrays their own assessment of the crowd they run with.

Think about it. If I post a series of outright lies, and expect my friends to accept them, what does this say? What is my own opinion of my "friends"? And it's a policy backed up by observation and historic evidence. Not only are the most obvious lies imaginable posted and accepted - they're applauded. Praise is heaped upon those who lie the most. I have not yet taken the time to see which is preferred, the most obvious lie or the greatest quantity.

And let me be clear: I'm not talking about repeating things we all know they pretend to believe in, like evodates and "homology" and such. I'm talking about lies that every single evolutionist who looks into will immediately know are untrue. The junk about people being banned "for posting evidence". I haven't seen anyone banned recently who didn't break the rules here. (And apparently stubborn assertions are "evidence").

Myself, I would've banned several of them after the first or second offense, but at least some of them were given warning after warning and a lot of leeway. Then one day the warnings run out. Oops! And considering how many of them are probably trying to get banned, I hold the opinion that the staff here is being too lenient. Posters who totally ignore warnings and break the same rule immediately after being warned are openly defiant and up to no good.

A little of this may simply be projection. I don't doubt that some of them prefer to believe creationists are just as dishonest as they themselves are, and employ the same methods. When one is dishonest, one may be tempted to think "so is everyone else". What a dim view! When I myself have been dishonest, I still preferred to believe there were other people in this world who were honest.

Of course projection could only account for getting the ball rolling. The stark contrast between the low-grade, obvious lies involved here and reality could never be overcome by a small initial inclination to believe that which turns out to be so utterly untrue. It is difficult to describe the hopelessness of the lies I speak of. Nobody, regardless of predisposition or mental deficiency, could know any relevant facts at all and fall victim to them. But that's apparently the goal. That's how prestige is accumulated in at least one community.

A community where people pride themselves on dishonesty is not a pool of good candidates for participation here. I would like to remind everyone that not all evolutionists behave in this manner. This is a fact which is very well-established. Their numbers are far smaller even than they appear, for it is a common practice among the dishonest to sign up under multiple accounts.

Edited by CTD, 13 May 2009 - 02:58 AM.


#8 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 13 May 2009 - 09:08 PM

Here are some examples of what they think of us.

Of course if that's a case I will crap myself laughing, because that means casual lurkers surfing the site won't get to read their moronic "arguments" either.  I wouldn't put it past Ikester to shoot himself in the foot like that, he really is that stupid.


Ikester's a real douche. He used to post at CF, but eventually left (probably after getting his a** handed to him repeatedly). He had a website/blog which was highly amusing. At one point he posted how he was in a lightning storm which he interpreted as Satan attacking him for putting up an anti-evolution web site. The guy's about as fundy as you can get.

I too tried posting on that forum, but he soon went on a little powertrip and warned me I had to bow down to his omnipotent moderator powers. I told him to stuff it and just ban me.


Here is the main reason non-yec's (atheist-evolutionist) get banned here. They have no respect for authority, this ministry, or any member here. They try and reverse the guilt to justify their actions.

If I visited their forum and showed the same disrespect, I would actually expect to get banned. But what they want is a forum where the opposition caves in to their every desire to evangelize here. And this is made very clear with the next comment.

I agree that Adam_777 seemed nice over there. If he were in charge, I have a feeling that forum would be a lot more tolerant of non-YECs. That said, he didn't exactly fare very well in debate.


Now why would they have such glowing reports about Adam_777 after Adam made it clear about what they did with this post?

My sister, JudyV here at EFT, and Babelfish at FRDB invited me to join there last year and after I found EFT, I invited her to join here. I was brand new in both places learning the forum etiquette. Well, the debate intensified and when my arguments started to get more heated at FRDB and I was getting more familiar with how their members operated I was able to hold my own there which turned into several infractions intended to discourage me. Well, my time ban and censoring was a good clue that I was wasting my time, so even though I was only time banned, still, I took the hint and shook the dust from my sandals. JudyV (Babelfish), got herself banned from here shortly after. (Check out her last few posts if you get a chance.)


They want the ones that run this forum to suspect Adam_777 as a mole for their side so that we will boot him.

So you see it's not only the members here they are after to destroy. It's the ministry itself. Getting rid of the opposition automatically makes a weak theory strong. Because if there is no one challenging it, then it gets to reign supreme even with all it's problems. If that is not the goal, then why do they have problems with anyone whom opposes it to the point in which they feel the need to eliminate the vioce of the opposition? And use unscientific means so that their theory can reign supreme.

Can anyone list each tactic from there, used against this forum, and what makes it scientific in proving evolution?

Also, what is the driving force that makes those whom believe in evolution, which is supposed to be scientific, feel the need to search out religious forums and debate against religious ideas using a supposed scientific one?

Only a religion can compete on the same level as religion.

For if evolution were as scientific as it is claimed to be, then using it to debate religious ideas would be like trying to disprove electricity with gravity. There would be no relation, and therefore no debate. But yet every aspect of evolution can be debated with the religious idea of creation. Which means there is a relation. One that is denied by those whom believe it.

The fact that the actual idea that man came from animals is actually rooted in Pagan religion. And goes as far back as the time of Moses. Egyptian religion had gods that were half man half animal. They believed that royalty came from certain animals, and that was the reason they were smarter and had power over everyone else (a type of natural selection, and survival of the fittest). So no, Darwin was not the originator of the evolution idea. He made it popular.

So the basic question would be: Why try to convert (evangelize) whole denominations and ministries to believe in evolution unless evolution is a religion itself? Most all Pagan religions accept evolution. Which makes evolution a part of Pagan religion. You don't see any evolutionsts having "any" problem with that. Now why is that? To claim evolution is not religion on one hand, but then approve of it being part of a religion on the other hand makes the first claim a lie. Because you either draw a line that says will we not associate with religion because our idea is not religious. Or you allow it because it really is religion.

For if true scientists were really wanting to not make evolution look like a religon, They would not allow such comparisons, debates, books written on that very subject,etc... In fact because of the damage it could do to the image of science,it would be Taboo to do it. But is that what we see? Nope. Now why is that?

#9 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7001 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 13 May 2009 - 09:35 PM

Those are good examples and I assure you, I'm no mole. :huh:

Beside the reason you gave above, I don't know why I don't receive a more heavy dose of what I've come to expect. I'm a little jealous of you, CTD, and De_Skudd. The colorful language and exquisite comparisons to vile things that you guys get, tells me you're doing something right. I must need to work harder. :)

#10 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 13 May 2009 - 10:53 PM

Those are good examples and I assure you, I'm no mole.


Maybe not,but you do share a common ancestor with one. :lol:

#11 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7001 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 14 May 2009 - 08:20 AM

Maybe not,but you do share a common ancestor with one. :lol:

View Post

;)

#12 Guest_kingreaper_*

Guest_kingreaper_*
  • Guests

Posted 14 May 2009 - 09:14 AM

For if evolution were as scientific as it is claimed to be, then using it to debate religious ideas would be like trying to disprove electricity with gravity. There would be no relation, and therefore no debate. But yet every aspect of evolution can be debated with the religious idea of creation. Which means there is a relation. One that is denied by those whom believe it.

View Post

Religions believe many things that contradict science. For example, religious claims that the Earth was orbited by the stars, planets etc. were contradicted by the theory of universal gravitation

Does this make The Theory of Universal Gravitation religion?
^
Honest question

#13 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7001 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 14 May 2009 - 09:16 AM

I've noticed that FRDB members have an interesting way of analyzing how we operate here. What I find most peculiar is that they can't bring themselves to examine the possibility that people are banned for being dishonest. The only dishonest ones here are those of us who do the banning for not allowing their contradictory and unchecked viewpoints to fester and fill the forum with doublespeak.

Oh, well...

I feel like doing a public analysis of their hero Touchstone who sounded very professional while ignoring both; his own contradictions and intentional misinterpretations, of what others said, to bolster his strawman arguments.

#14 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7001 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 14 May 2009 - 09:23 AM

Religions believe many things that contradict science.

View Post

Let's be careful here. We here who are Christians, in the sense of religion, are not obligated to defend all expressions of religion throughout time. This is an attempt to set up a strawman of religion versus science. True religion, true philosophy, and true science should converge on the same truth.

The generalization of religion only muddies the waters of the intellect.

The main point, I believe, is that evolution is ultimately in the same philosophical bubble as other religions. You can try to put lipstick on a pig but it will still be a pig. You can try to put evolution under science but it still ultimately has all the hallmarks of a religion, it doesn't matter how many scientifically minded people believe it.

#15 Guest_kingreaper_*

Guest_kingreaper_*
  • Guests

Posted 14 May 2009 - 09:34 AM

Let's be careful here. We here who are Christians, in the sense of religion, are not obligated to defend all expressions of religion throughout time. This is an attempt to set up a strawman of religion versus science. True religion, true philosophy, and true science should converge on the same truth.

View Post

If Ikester meant that Evolution is not science because it contradicts modern christianity, he should have stated such.

The statement made was:

For if evolution were as scientific as it is claimed to be, then using it to debate religious ideas would be like trying to disprove electricity with gravity. There would be no relation, and therefore no debate. But yet every aspect of evolution can be debated with the religious idea of creation. Which means there is a relation. One that is denied by those whom believe it.


Gravitation could have been used to debate a religious idea (also a scientific, and a philosophical idea).
I am therefore interested to know whether Ikester considers this sufficient to make gravitation a religious question. As you aren't Ikester, your answer isn't necessarily his.

I'm not asking him to defend the geocentric models that were once used, rather I am asking whether their past existence makes gravitation a religion.

#16 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7001 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 14 May 2009 - 09:40 AM

If Ikester meant that Evolution is not science because it contradicts modern christianity, he should have stated such.

View Post

I think you're missing the point on purpose but I guess some people don't get it. Either way not my problem, new guy.

As you were.

#17 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 15 May 2009 - 01:23 AM

Religions believe many things that contradict science. For example, religious claims that the Earth was orbited by the stars, planets etc. were contradicted by the theory of universal gravitation

Does this make The Theory of Universal Gravitation religion?
^
Honest question

View Post


Let's have a little history lesson to better understand this.

Darwin and Lyell did not have any degrees in science. But yet their ideas are considered the foundation for science's biggest theory. One could actually say that they were no more educated than the average YEC.

Darwin had a degree in theology. Back in that day, theology taught that the Bible was to be taken literally. So yes, Darwin actually was YEC before he read Lyell's book which was an attack on that very subject. But, also Darwin having a degree in this means he also had to study other religions including pagan religions. Now this is where it gets interesting.

Most Pagan religions already believed that humans came from animals. It was their way of denying creation through the Christian God. This can be traced as far back as Moses. As the Egyptian religion believed that their gods were half animal half human. Their painted pics, and statues made this very clear. They believed that royalty came fro certain types of animals, and everyone else came from other type animals. What race you were determine what animal you came from. And also determined where your place was in society.

Name of Gods or Goddesses........../ Depiction Description................/ Jurisdiction of Gods 
Amun, Amon, Atum............................../ Man with head of a Ram.............../ Life and Reproduction
Amun-Ra, Amon-Ra, Atum-Ra.............../ Scarab, Falcon's head & Sun Disk.../ Sun God, God of the Universe
Anubis/.............................................../ Head of a Jackal.........................../ God of Tombs
Bast or Bastet....................................../ Head of a Cat.............................../ Life giving, cats, fire, pregnant women
Bes...................................................../ Dwarf.........................................../ Protection against evil
Geb...................................................../ Black Goose................................../ Vegetation and the Underworld
Hathor................................................./ Head of a cow................................/ Goddess of Love
Horus.................................,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,/ Head of a Hawk............................../ Sky & Sun God
Isis....................................................../ With the Horns of a Cow................../ Fertility, Healing & Love Goddess

etc... Reference: http://www.king-tut....-gods/index.htm


Being that Darwin rejected God after reading Lyell's book, there was only the ideas of pagan religion left to believe once the Christian aspect of his teachings was removed. So the idea of man coming from animals was around long before Darwin. Darwin got his ideas for evolution from those teachings of Pagan religion while taking theology. And evolution is rooted in Pagan religions. 95% of Pagan religions believe in evolution as is, or to some degree. Yet not one evolutionist I've seen has one problem with this. This is because evolution being a religion fits like a hand and glove issue.

Darwin coming up with an idea that is the exact opposite of creation on every issue proves that Darwin was trying to get revenge himself against God by coming up with an idea that was he exact opposite of what God did.

What creation claims vs..................What evolution claims.

1) Earth before sun........................ 1) Sun before earth.
2) Oceans before land.................... 2) Land before oceans.
3) Light before sun..........................3) Sun before light.
4) Land plants first..........................4) Marine life first.
5) Fruit tree before fish....................5) Fish before fruit tree.
6) Fish before insects.......................6) Insects before fish.
7) Plants before sun..........................7) Sun before plants.
8) Man was created from solid matter...8) Man evolved from liquid.
9) Bird before reptiles.........................9) Reptiles before birds.

The facts are:
1) Darwin had a degree in theology. Zero degrees in science.
2) Darwin read an anti-creation book (Lyell's book). Lyell had Zero degrees in science.
3) Darwin turned against God.
4) Darwin came up with an idea that was the "exact opposite" of God's creation.
5) From that day unto this, this supposed scientific theory has been at war with creation (a religious idea). The exact type of creation (YEC) that Darwin rejected. You don't see evolutionists attacking any other religion like it attacks the Christian religion. Even Dawkins books focus mainly on which religion? It is because Darwin made his idea tailored to be against one thing. The God whom he rejected because of Lyell's book.
6) Evolutionists have no problem with mixing religion with evolution as it is apparent on every forum. So there is no boundary to keep science from mingling with religion.
7) Theistic evolution is often used as a false world view to help evangelize Christians.
8) Pagan religions use the evolution idea.
9) And evangelizing for evolution is not one bit scientific.

And I recently banned one member here for actually admitting to trying to evangelize for evolution.

So basically all evolutionists are fighting a religious war where their side is in such deception, they don't even know it.

Unless you got a scientific explanation for all this?

#18 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 15 May 2009 - 02:01 AM

Lame game. He's equating past scientific ideas with religion. By his formula, a scientific model becomes "religion" when something better comes along.

It wasn't religion that told mankind stars go around the earth. It was valid observation. (And those who understand the classical principle of relativity know that a man standing still and looking at the sky has a perfectly valid perspective.)

It actually goes a little deeper. The objective is to create an association in the readers mind: "all bogus ideas = religious ideas." It's rather silly, seeing how bogus evolutionism has always been. No points for consistency.

#19 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 15 May 2009 - 02:39 AM

Lame game. He's equating past scientific ideas with religion. By his formula, a scientific model becomes "religion" when something better comes along.

It wasn't religion that told mankind stars go around the earth. It was valid observation. (And those who understand the classical principle of relativity know that a man standing still and looking at the sky has a perfectly valid perspective.)

It actually goes a little deeper. The objective is to create an association in the readers mind: "all bogus ideas = religious ideas." It's rather silly, seeing how bogus evolutionism has always been. No points for consistency.

View Post


Kinda like the Flat Earth idea. It was actually thought up by an atheist while writting a book meant to discredit all Christians at that time. It carried on as a historic fact until some one pointed out the mistake. Then it was removed from several books. But is still used unto this day as fact even though it's a lie.

http://www.yecheadqu...flat_earth.html

And here's some more examples of what they think of the members here:

Though I'd check in on the EFT retard farm again, see how the inmates are doing.

It's hilarious. They've raised argument from personal incredulity to an art form. Each of the retards seems to have his own area of retarded specialization, to wit:

Since being called on his lies here, de_skudd is back at EFT doing his usual fart and bluster "Were you there??? Did you see it??". His latest bit of stupidity is to claim science is wrong because no one witnessed it, but everything in Genesis is real because it represents eyewitness testimony.

CTD is still being an obnoxious jerk now ranting about how his 'common sense' should count more than the opinions of expert paleontologists, geologists, and geneticists who have actually studied the relevant evidence in detail.

Oliver is still hung up on probabilities, claiming everything would take a gazillion to one chance to form, therefore Gawddidit. Never mind that he can't show any basis for his asinine claims.

Jason777 is more of an all purpose clown, randomly spraying out stuff he C&Ped from AIG and ICR that he doesn't understand and can't defend. There does seem to be a new recruit, lightbo, who is trying to outdo jason777 for title of the title of board polytard though.

For the last few weeks there has been a pro-science guy, Touchstone, doing a masterful job of making them all look like idiots. Not particularly hard, I know, but the trick is to do it without getting yourself banned. Adam777 has already warned TS twice that he's violating board rules (by posting things that contradict the EFT cartoon version of evolution) and Ikester has already locked one of the more embarrassing (for him) threads. Same ol' same ol' from them.

For a site that only gets a handful of visitors, and most of them just to laugh, that bunch has more ignorant egotistical blowhards/m3 than just about anywhere else on the web!


Lets see how many ways evolution has to be proven that is non-scientific.
Lets see how many religious forums,. blogs, website we can go to to prove our religion of evolution is far superior.
Lets see how many more recruits we can convert and evangelize (a type of "saving" someone from the other side).

My, my, theory is so weak I have to resort to equivacation, stereotyping, and demonizing just so I can compete. And because I can't say what I want and cuss them out, I'm going to whine and cry.

It's the same song and dance on "every" anti-creationist Bible scoffing site out there. They resort to these non-scientific tactics because there theory has mountains of evidence?

And claim their theory is nt religion even though:

1) It has roots in Pagan religion.
2) They allow theistic religion.
3) They seek out religion.
4) They make ection on their forums that are more or less: God vs. evolution.
5) They try to evangelize people on religious forums, just like religious people do.

etc....

And the only way they can justify their lies, is to claim someone else lies more than anyone else they have ever seen. How lame is that? :lol:

What I find even more lame, is that I know there are atheist here on this forum, that disagree with what these people are doing. They are actually embarassed by it. But because of the fear mongering and peer pressure that is done, they are to afraid to voice it. That is sad. Those who allow others to control their life will never have a life of their own. Is there really free will and free thinking in the atheistic belief? Or does peer pressure shut everyone up and make them to afraid to stand up?

#20 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 15 May 2009 - 03:53 AM

Here is an out right example of evoluton evangelism talk:

Not a thing.  I do feel sorry for your brother though. He has moments where he stays very civil with pro-science folks like Touchstone and *almost* gets it. Then, sadly, the board a**holes (CTD, Jason777, Oliver, de_skudd) show up to spout smarmy one line insults, and Adam reverts to the pack mentality.

Don't give up hope. My sister worked through her crazy "born-again" period, I gotta believe Adam is smart enough to do so to.


What can they say? They evangelize just as we do. But I'd sure like one of them to explain how evangelism for their idea is scientific.

I wonder when they are going to open their own church and start doing alter calls? They already pushing for evolution sunday.
http://www.google.co...volution sunday




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users