Jump to content
Evolution Fairytale Forum
Sign in to follow this  
mike the wiz

No Evidence Could Convince Me Evolution Occured

Recommended Posts

 

 

"The only thing humans excel at is intelligence (well, most humans anyway.. ;) ).

Yeah most are (Except the ones who STILL believe in Fairytales like AbioDarwinism that is)

 

You make out that it's a dwindling minority that still hangs on to evolutionary belief. Of course the reality is that all scientists do accept evolution except the small minority who sign up to statements such as this:

 

"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record" -AiG

 

So scientists who do not adhere to this conclusion before any evidence are the ones who do not excel at intelligence ?

 

Do you see any issues with starting at an immovable conclusion before looking at evidence ?

 

 

"You make out that it's a dwindling minority that still hangs on to evolutionary belief."

 

Irrelevant, We don't know how many people believe or don't believe in the Mindless

MYO Mud to Man Myth of AbioDarwinism.. I would think that the great majority of

people who were shown exactly what it is, and what it entails, would laugh and shake

their head in disbelief at how people could actually believe such an incredible Fairytale.

 

But deceivers promote "evolutionary belief" as this....

evolution-happening-in-lab.jpg

 

 

ALSO

 

My use of the word STILL means "In spite of all of the available information today that

shows your religion of Metaphysical Naturalism to be a complete delusional fantasy :consoling:

 

 

"So scientists who do not adhere to this conclusion before any evidence are the ones who do not excel at intelligence ?"

 

NO

 

Scientists who STILL adhere to the Mindless MYO Mud to Man Myth of AbioDarwinism

Anyway, IN SPITE OF all of the evidence AGAINST IT and the lack of evidence FOR IT

Are either very Ignorant, foolish, dishonest, or Yes Stupid (Unintelligent)  :wacko:

 

 

 

"Do you see any issues with starting at an immovable conclusion before looking at evidence ?"

 

YES I SURE DO!!! :acigar:

 

‘Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, FOR WE CANNOT ALLOW A DIVINE FOOT IN THE DOOR..

 

Richard Lewontin  American evolutionary biologist, geneticist,

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"You make out that it's a dwindling minority that still hangs on to evolutionary belief."

 

Irrelevant, We don't know how many people believe or don't believe in the Mindless

MYO Mud to Man Myth of AbioDarwinism.. I would think that the great majority of

people who were shown exactly what it is, and what it entails, would laugh and shake

their head in disbelief at how people could actually believe such an incredible Fairytale.

 

But deceivers promote "evolutionary belief" as this....

So the numbers (reality) don't matter, right? Only you, the great Blitzking crazytionist knows what's really going on...

 

"So scientists who do not adhere to this conclusion before any evidence are the ones who do not excel at intelligence ?"

 

NO

 

Scientists who STILL adhere to the Mindless MYO Mud to Man Myth of AbioDarwinism

Anyway, IN SPITE OF all of the evidence AGAINST IT and the lack of evidence FOR IT

Are either very Ignorant, foolish, dishonest, or Yes Stupid (Unintelligent)  :wacko:

Almost all crazytionist scientists are crazytionist prior to being a scientist. Those that are are either very ignorant, foolish, dishonest, unintelligent or Yes Crazy.

 

"Do you see any issues with starting at an immovable conclusion before looking at evidence ?"

 

YES I SURE DO!!! :acigar:

 

‘Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, FOR WE CANNOT ALLOW A DIVINE FOOT IN THE DOOR..

 

Richard Lewontin  American evolutionary biologist, geneticist,

Since you don't realize, but the guy is talking about methodological materialism. Because by definition a method that uses only material means can only come to conclusions which contain only material components.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

apes will never sit typing on computers, nor will they ever shape the world around us and be stewards of the earth as the bible describes.

Mike, you seem to be forgetting Lassie, Rin Tin Tin and Rex - all very smart dogs.  Then there was Skippy the Bush Kangaroo, whom I once saw driving a speed boat!  And what about the redoubtable Mr. Ed, the horse that mastered human speech and human thoughts.  All this adds up to irrefutable evidence that the "lower creatures" are evolving intelligence that will one day rival that of humans.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

apes will never sit typing on computers, nor will they ever shape the world around us and be stewards of the earth as the bible describes.

Mike, you seem to be forgetting Lassie, Rin Tin Tin and Rex - all very smart dogs.  Then there was Skippy the Bush Kangaroo, whom I once saw driving a speed boat!  And what about the redoubtable Mr. Ed, the horse that mastered human speech and human thoughts.  All this adds up to irrefutable evidence that the "lower creatures" are evolving intelligence that will one day rival that of humans.

 

Don't forget the talking snake from genesis and donkey from numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"You make out that it's a dwindling minority that still hangs on to evolutionary belief."

 

Irrelevant, We don't know how many people believe or don't believe in the Mindless

MYO Mud to Man Myth of AbioDarwinism.. I would think that the great majority of

people who were shown exactly what it is, and what it entails, would laugh and shake

their head in disbelief at how people could actually believe such an incredible Fairytale.

 

But deceivers promote "evolutionary belief" as this....

 

So the numbers (reality) don't matter, right? Only you, the great Blitzking crazytionist knows what's really going on...

 

"So scientists who do not adhere to this conclusion before any evidence are the ones who do not excel at intelligence ?"

 

NO

 

Scientists who STILL adhere to the Mindless MYO Mud to Man Myth of AbioDarwinism

Anyway, IN SPITE OF all of the evidence AGAINST IT and the lack of evidence FOR IT

Are either very Ignorant, foolish, dishonest, or Yes Stupid (Unintelligent)  :wacko:

 

Almost all crazytionist scientists are crazytionist prior to being a scientist. Those that are are either very ignorant, foolish, dishonest, unintelligent or Yes Crazy.

 

"Do you see any issues with starting at an immovable conclusion before looking at evidence ?"

 

YES I SURE DO!!! :acigar:

 

‘Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, FOR WE CANNOT ALLOW A DIVINE FOOT IN THE DOOR..

 

Richard Lewontin  American evolutionary biologist, geneticist,

 

Since you don't realize, but the guy is talking about methodological materialism. Because by definition a method that uses only material means can only come to conclusions which contain only material components.

 

"So the numbers (reality) don't matter, right? Only you, the great Blitzking crazytionist knows what's really going on."..

 

Yes.. You are starting to understand.. Argumentum Ad Populum and Ad Verecundiam are well known logical fallacies.. Try to avoid them if you can..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.. You are starting to understand.. Argumentum Ad Populum and Ad Verecundiam are well known logical fallacies.. Try to avoid them if you can..

So when you want to get an answer to some question you go for the belief with the fewest adherents or the person with the least authority on the subject ? You think that's a logical way of getting at the truth ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Fjuri: Don't forget the talking snake from genesis and donkey from numbers.

 

Both supernatural events, the serpent and donkey couldn't talk from biology. I believe it's reasonable to not take them hyper-literally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes.. You are starting to understand.. Argumentum Ad Populum and Ad Verecundiam are well known logical fallacies.. Try to avoid them if you can..

So when you want to get an answer to some question you go for the belief with the fewest adherents or the person with the least authority on the subject ? You think that's a logical way of getting at the truth ?
So when you want to get an answer to some question you go for the belief with the fewest adherents or the person with the least authority on the subject ?

 

I NEVER get answers to MY questions (Oh, believe me I have got a whole bunch of them) For example, Would you like to review my other recent post asking for a plausible or conceivable ORDER for "Man's (or his first "ancestor's") Vital Interdependent Organs?..

 

The least "Authority" on the subject? So I should listen to Richard Dawkins, Jerry Coyne, Lawrence Krauss, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett instead of William Demski, Richard Sternberg, Michael Behe, David Berlinski and Jonathan Safarti because the Atheists (Even though none of them can answer ANY of my questions) have been bequeathed with "Authority" simply because they believe that they are "Accidental Apes" that evolved from a worm??

 

SO NOW I MUST ASK.

 

So do YOU think that's a logical way of getting at the truth ?

 

 

“I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.

“Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

“There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.â€

[Crichton gave a number of examples where the scientific consensus was completely wrong for many years.]

“… Finally, I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E = mc². Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.â€

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Fjuri: Don't forget the talking snake from genesis and donkey from numbers.

 

Both supernatural events, the serpent and donkey couldn't talk from biology. I believe it's reasonable to not take them hyper-literally.

I think there has been plenty of evidence of Demonic posession where a different voice is heard coming from people... For example Young girls spewing obscenities and other utterances in low hideous voices.. I believe that evil spirits (Demons) do exist and can even posess animals like snakes, donkeys or even pigs.

 

Of course if one doesnt believe in the realm of the Spirit as described in the Bible then of course it makes no sense..

 

 

28 When He arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes, two demon-possessed men coming from the tombs met Him. They were so violent that no one could pass that way. 29 “What do you want with us, Son of God?†they shouted. “Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?â€

 

30 Some distance from them a large herd of pigs was feeding. 31 The demons begged Jesus, “If you drive us out, send us into the herd of pigs.â€

 

32 He said to them, “Go!†So they came out and went into the pigs, and the whole herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and died in the water. 33 Those tending the pigs ran off, went into the town and reported all this, including what had happened to the demon-possessed men. 34 Then the whole town went out to meet Jesus. And when they saw Him, they pleaded with Him to leave their region.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Blitzking: For example Young girls spewing obscenities and other utterances in low hideous voices.. I believe that evil spirits (Demons) do exist and can even posess animals like snakes, donkeys or even pigs. 

 

There was a particular case called the "Enfield case" where people taped the girls speak in an old man's gutteral voice. People witnessed it too, it was very well corroborated, atheists often use the "talking snake" as an easy way of mocking the bible but they forget that supernatural things like floating axes, also happened which were impossible. They don't cite those examples because they seem less absurd. 

 

What is a voice anyway? I shall echo the Lord; "who made man's mouth?"

 

It is only absurd to think of a snake talking because we live in a mundane world where certain things never change by experience, but imagine if one day you saw a pterosaur fly out from behind a cliff. "Impossible!" Yes - impossible now, but once they existed!

 

See a dragon in the mountains? Absurd! But is it? We now know dracorex existed;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dracorex

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There was a particular case called the "Enfield case" where people taped the girls speak in an old man's gutteral voice. People witnessed it too, it was very well corroborated, atheists often use the "talking snake" as an easy way of mocking the bible but they forget that supernatural things like floating axes, also happened which were impossible. They don't cite those examples because they seem less absurd. 

 

We'll mock you for all supernatural hocus pocus Mike, we'll just look at whatever is applicable at the time. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Fjuri: We'll mock you for all supernatural hocus pocus Mike, we'll just look at whatever is applicable at the time

 

Hya heth, as hath de heth laughing ma seth zuperior intellect. (parsel tongue)

 

http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Parseltongue

 

:farmer:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

There was a particular case called the "Enfield case" where people taped the girls speak in an old man's gutteral voice. People witnessed it too, it was very well corroborated, atheists often use the "talking snake" as an easy way of mocking the bible but they forget that supernatural things like floating axes, also happened which were impossible. They don't cite those examples because they seem less absurd. 

 

We'll mock you for all supernatural hocus pocus Mike, we'll just look at whatever is applicable at the time. ;)

 

 

Dont be a fool. No matter WHICH belief you embrace, Creationism or Metaphysical Accidentalism YOU CANNOT AVOID  The supernatural...

 

We just dont have the amount of faith that it takes to believe in YOUR version of Supernatural...

 

 

I thought it might be a good idea to set the record straight on who REALLY believes in "Magic"..  Creationists believe

that an Omnipotent God, Who lives outside the realm of Time / Matter / Space That HE Created was the causation for

all of the wonderment, order, design and complexity we see in the world / universe today..Darwinists / Atheists have

written the book on magic.. What I would consider to be Hypocrisy on Steroids..It goes something like this..In the beginning

NOTHING (Or a miniscule dot) Exploded and created all of the matter in the known universe.. no "Magic" needed 

LOL..THEN, self replicating DNA molecules, encoded with millions of lines of specified / irreducibly complexity were

able to mindlessly create themselves out of Dirt, Air, Heat and Water... when Man, with all of his knowledge, technology,

resources, and the ability to artificially control atmospheric and chemical conditions CANT EVEN BEGIN TO IMAGINE

how to create DNA,!!!!    No "Magic" there ..LOL Or the fact that Mans 10 Vital interdependent organs and their support

systems have to ALL be working together in tandem or we DIE and GO EXTINCT..   Which was the "Order" for their "Evolution"?

Stomach first? Brain second? Lungs third?  Or did they all "Evolve" TOGETHER?? No "Magic" Required"  LOL Oh.. How

about the chicken or Egg,?? Which came first? Oh, The Egg?? OK, Just how did all of those genetic blueprints / Specified

DNA for that "Proto" Chicken GET INSIDE THAT EGG?? WHO OR WHAT PUT IT THERE????    No.. No magic Needed huh??

Or How about 100 MYO Dinosaur Red Blood Cells, Soft Tissue, and DNA fragments being able to last 100,000,000 Years

WITHOUT BIODEGRADING COMPLETELY IN 50,000 YEARS!!!!  Noo... No Magic required there....Or How about the European

Green woodpecker that has a tongue that wraps around the back of its head, over the top of its brain and through its right nostril

, We OBSERVE that WITHOUT that special tongue, The bird CANT EAT and DIES,,,, How did that tongue "Evolve" over millions

of years?  Nice Trick HUH?? Or The hummingbird has wings that flap at up to 100 times per second so it can hover at eat. Without

those special wings, It CANT EAT and DIES, According to the Mindless MYO mud to Man Myth, That hummingbied supposedly

evolved over 20 million years from a Tree Swift (Common glider)  Who has enough Imagination to believe THAT??? I suggest you

Atheists / Darwinists take another look at your hypothetical hypothesis of Mindless MYO Mud to Man Myth.. We have been

brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing a Lie that has ZERO Empirical Scientific Evidence to support it..I believe that you

have an emotional attachment to an A Priori assumption that Abio / Darwinism is true.. Not because it is part of science

(Which it is NOT) but because..."Evolution made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled Atheist" RICHARD DAWKINS

 

 

Here are 2 good videos that explain a lot of it... I doubt you will watch them and we both know why.

 

I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist (1 of 2) - Frank Turek, PhD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoqzcDrILJ0

 

 

 

I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist (2 of 2) - Frank Turek, PhD

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gvaptt_nZXE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Fjuri: Don't forget the talking snake from genesis and donkey from numbers.

Both supernatural events, the serpent and donkey couldn't talk from biology. I believe it's reasonable to not take them hyper-literally.
I think there has been plenty of evidence of Demonic posession where a different voice is heard coming from people... For example Young girls spewing obscenities and other utterances in low hideous voices.
In one of his books, the late Catholic exorcist, Fr. Gabriele Amorth, relates the story of a very young Italian girl who lived in a small village and who suddenly started speaking a strange language that was eventually identified as ancient Greek. Previously, she couldn't even speak common Italian, but only the dialect that was unique to her region. Suddenly being able to speak a foreign tongue is apparently a common sign of demonic possession, which turned out to be the case for this girl.

 

Atheists dismiss documented cases like these as nonsense, of course, which is not an explanation, but simply wilful denial of reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont be a fool. No matter WHICH belief you embrace, Creationism or Metaphysical Accidentalism YOU CANNOT AVOID  The supernatural...

 

We just dont have the amount of faith that it takes to believe in YOUR version of Supernatural...

 

 

I thought it might be a good idea to set the record straight on who REALLY believes in "Magic"..  Creationists believe

that an Omnipotent God, Who lives outside the realm of Time / Matter / Space That HE Created was the causation for

all of the wonderment, order, design and complexity we see in the world / universe today..Darwinists / Atheists have

written the book on magic.. What I would consider to be Hypocrisy on Steroids..It goes something like this..In the beginning

NOTHING (Or a miniscule dot) Exploded and created all of the matter in the known universe.. no "Magic" needed 

LOL..THEN, self replicating DNA molecules, encoded with millions of lines of specified / irreducibly complexity were

able to mindlessly create themselves out of Dirt, Air, Heat and Water... when Man, with all of his knowledge, technology,

resources, and the ability to artificially control atmospheric and chemical conditions CANT EVEN BEGIN TO IMAGINE

how to create DNA,!!!!    No "Magic" there ..LOL Or the fact that Mans 10 Vital interdependent organs and their support

systems have to ALL be working together in tandem or we DIE and GO EXTINCT..   Which was the "Order" for their "Evolution"?

Stomach first? Brain second? Lungs third?  Or did they all "Evolve" TOGETHER?? No "Magic" Required"  LOL Oh.. How

about the chicken or Egg,?? Which came first? Oh, The Egg?? OK, Just how did all of those genetic blueprints / Specified

DNA for that "Proto" Chicken GET INSIDE THAT EGG?? WHO OR WHAT PUT IT THERE????    No.. No magic Needed huh??

Or How about 100 MYO Dinosaur Red Blood Cells, Soft Tissue, and DNA fragments being able to last 100,000,000 Years

WITHOUT BIODEGRADING COMPLETELY IN 50,000 YEARS!!!!  Noo... No Magic required there....Or How about the European

Green woodpecker that has a tongue that wraps around the back of its head, over the top of its brain and through its right nostril

, We OBSERVE that WITHOUT that special tongue, The bird CANT EAT and DIES,,,, How did that tongue "Evolve" over millions

of years?  Nice Trick HUH?? Or The hummingbird has wings that flap at up to 100 times per second so it can hover at eat. Without

those special wings, It CANT EAT and DIES, According to the Mindless MYO mud to Man Myth, That hummingbied supposedly

evolved over 20 million years from a Tree Swift (Common glider)  Who has enough Imagination to believe THAT??? I suggest you

Atheists / Darwinists take another look at your hypothetical hypothesis of Mindless MYO Mud to Man Myth.. We have been

brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing a Lie that has ZERO Empirical Scientific Evidence to support it..I believe that you

have an emotional attachment to an A Priori assumption that Abio / Darwinism is true.. Not because it is part of science

(Which it is NOT) but because..."Evolution made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled Atheist" RICHARD DAWKINS

 

 

Here are 2 good videos that explain a lot of it... I doubt you will watch them and we both know why.

 

I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist (1 of 2) - Frank Turek, PhD

 

I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist (2 of 2) - Frank Turek, PhD

Oh Boy, I want 2 hours of my life back. What a substanceless video you posted.

 

Just pick the strongest argument he proposed (according to you) and we'll have a discussion about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Dont be a fool. No matter WHICH belief you embrace, Creationism or Metaphysical Accidentalism YOU CANNOT AVOID  The supernatural...

 

We just dont have the amount of faith that it takes to believe in YOUR version of Supernatural...

 

 

I thought it might be a good idea to set the record straight on who REALLY believes in "Magic"..  Creationists believe

that an Omnipotent God, Who lives outside the realm of Time / Matter / Space That HE Created was the causation for

all of the wonderment, order, design and complexity we see in the world / universe today..Darwinists / Atheists have

written the book on magic.. What I would consider to be Hypocrisy on Steroids..It goes something like this..In the beginning

NOTHING (Or a miniscule dot) Exploded and created all of the matter in the known universe.. no "Magic" needed 

LOL..THEN, self replicating DNA molecules, encoded with millions of lines of specified / irreducibly complexity were

able to mindlessly create themselves out of Dirt, Air, Heat and Water... when Man, with all of his knowledge, technology,

resources, and the ability to artificially control atmospheric and chemical conditions CANT EVEN BEGIN TO IMAGINE

how to create DNA,!!!!    No "Magic" there ..LOL Or the fact that Mans 10 Vital interdependent organs and their support

systems have to ALL be working together in tandem or we DIE and GO EXTINCT..   Which was the "Order" for their "Evolution"?

Stomach first? Brain second? Lungs third?  Or did they all "Evolve" TOGETHER?? No "Magic" Required"  LOL Oh.. How

about the chicken or Egg,?? Which came first? Oh, The Egg?? OK, Just how did all of those genetic blueprints / Specified

DNA for that "Proto" Chicken GET INSIDE THAT EGG?? WHO OR WHAT PUT IT THERE????    No.. No magic Needed huh??

Or How about 100 MYO Dinosaur Red Blood Cells, Soft Tissue, and DNA fragments being able to last 100,000,000 Years

WITHOUT BIODEGRADING COMPLETELY IN 50,000 YEARS!!!!  Noo... No Magic required there....Or How about the European

Green woodpecker that has a tongue that wraps around the back of its head, over the top of its brain and through its right nostril

, We OBSERVE that WITHOUT that special tongue, The bird CANT EAT and DIES,,,, How did that tongue "Evolve" over millions

of years?  Nice Trick HUH?? Or The hummingbird has wings that flap at up to 100 times per second so it can hover at eat. Without

those special wings, It CANT EAT and DIES, According to the Mindless MYO mud to Man Myth, That hummingbied supposedly

evolved over 20 million years from a Tree Swift (Common glider)  Who has enough Imagination to believe THAT??? I suggest you

Atheists / Darwinists take another look at your hypothetical hypothesis of Mindless MYO Mud to Man Myth.. We have been

brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing a Lie that has ZERO Empirical Scientific Evidence to support it..I believe that you

have an emotional attachment to an A Priori assumption that Abio / Darwinism is true.. Not because it is part of science

(Which it is NOT) but because..."Evolution made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled Atheist" RICHARD DAWKINS

 

 

Here are 2 good videos that explain a lot of it... I doubt you will watch them and we both know why.

 

I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist (1 of 2) - Frank Turek, PhD

 

I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist (2 of 2) - Frank Turek, PhD

Oh Boy, I want 2 hours of my life back. What a substanceless video you posted.

 

Just pick the strongest argument he proposed (according to you) and we'll have a discussion about that.

 

After careful consideration, I do not think you've watched the video you've posted yourself. I base this on the following facts:

- You respond very emotionally to the magic hocus pocus poke I made at Mike the Wiz, thereby committing a tu-quoque fallacy.

- The title of the video's you've posted are with regard to the subject "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist".

- The content of the video's have nothing to do with the title of the video...

 

Despite that, I'll still wait for you to pick your strongest argument from the video's and we'll have a discussion about that.

Of course you'll have to watch the video in order to find that strongest argument...  :kaffeetrinker:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There was a particular case called the "Enfield case" where people taped the girls speak in an old man's gutteral voice. People witnessed it too, it was very well corroborated, atheists often use the "talking snake" as an easy way of mocking the bible but they forget that supernatural things like floating axes, also happened which were impossible. They don't cite those examples because they seem less absurd. 

We'll mock you for all supernatural hocus pocus Mike, we'll just look at whatever is applicable at the time. ;)

 

while i'll agree that science doesn't dwell on "magic", i disagree that a scientist would mock a creationist.

 

maybe you haven't heard about quatuum physics and its absurdities.

it's telling that some scientists propose we live in a holographic universe, or that there are actually an infinity of realities, koonins many worlds in one, where a coin toss can be altered from 0.5 to 1.0 for example.

you don't call this ridiculous?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Dont be a fool. No matter WHICH belief you embrace, Creationism or Metaphysical Accidentalism YOU CANNOT AVOID  The supernatural...

 

We just dont have the amount of faith that it takes to believe in YOUR version of Supernatural...

 

 

I thought it might be a good idea to set the record straight on who REALLY believes in "Magic"..  Creationists believe

that an Omnipotent God, Who lives outside the realm of Time / Matter / Space That HE Created was the causation for

all of the wonderment, order, design and complexity we see in the world / universe today..Darwinists / Atheists have

written the book on magic.. What I would consider to be Hypocrisy on Steroids..It goes something like this..In the beginning

NOTHING (Or a miniscule dot) Exploded and created all of the matter in the known universe.. no "Magic" needed 

LOL..THEN, self replicating DNA molecules, encoded with millions of lines of specified / irreducibly complexity were

able to mindlessly create themselves out of Dirt, Air, Heat and Water... when Man, with all of his knowledge, technology,

resources, and the ability to artificially control atmospheric and chemical conditions CANT EVEN BEGIN TO IMAGINE

how to create DNA,!!!!    No "Magic" there ..LOL Or the fact that Mans 10 Vital interdependent organs and their support

systems have to ALL be working together in tandem or we DIE and GO EXTINCT..   Which was the "Order" for their "Evolution"?

Stomach first? Brain second? Lungs third?  Or did they all "Evolve" TOGETHER?? No "Magic" Required"  LOL Oh.. How

about the chicken or Egg,?? Which came first? Oh, The Egg?? OK, Just how did all of those genetic blueprints / Specified

DNA for that "Proto" Chicken GET INSIDE THAT EGG?? WHO OR WHAT PUT IT THERE????    No.. No magic Needed huh??

Or How about 100 MYO Dinosaur Red Blood Cells, Soft Tissue, and DNA fragments being able to last 100,000,000 Years

WITHOUT BIODEGRADING COMPLETELY IN 50,000 YEARS!!!!  Noo... No Magic required there....Or How about the European

Green woodpecker that has a tongue that wraps around the back of its head, over the top of its brain and through its right nostril

, We OBSERVE that WITHOUT that special tongue, The bird CANT EAT and DIES,,,, How did that tongue "Evolve" over millions

of years?  Nice Trick HUH?? Or The hummingbird has wings that flap at up to 100 times per second so it can hover at eat. Without

those special wings, It CANT EAT and DIES, According to the Mindless MYO mud to Man Myth, That hummingbied supposedly

evolved over 20 million years from a Tree Swift (Common glider)  Who has enough Imagination to believe THAT??? I suggest you

Atheists / Darwinists take another look at your hypothetical hypothesis of Mindless MYO Mud to Man Myth.. We have been

brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing a Lie that has ZERO Empirical Scientific Evidence to support it..I believe that you

have an emotional attachment to an A Priori assumption that Abio / Darwinism is true.. Not because it is part of science

(Which it is NOT) but because..."Evolution made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled Atheist" RICHARD DAWKINS

 

 

Here are 2 good videos that explain a lot of it... I doubt you will watch them and we both know why.

 

I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist (1 of 2) - Frank Turek, PhD

 

I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist (2 of 2) - Frank Turek, PhD

 

Oh Boy, I want 2 hours of my life back. What a substanceless video you posted.

 

Just pick the strongest argument he proposed (according to you) and we'll have a discussion about that.

After careful consideration, I do not think you've watched the video you've posted yourself. I base this on the following facts:

- You respond very emotionally to the magic hocus pocus poke I made at Mike the Wiz, thereby committing a tu-quoque fallacy.

- The title of the video's you've posted are with regard to the subject "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist".

- The content of the video's have nothing to do with the title of the video...

 

Despite that, I'll still wait for you to pick your strongest argument from the video's and we'll have a discussion about that.

Of course you'll have to watch the video in order to find that strongest argument...  :kaffeetrinker:

I watched both of them.. Which one of the them are you referring to?

I mentioned that here are 2 good videos and you keep talking about "the video"

 

I responded "Emotionally"? What is your logical basis for such an assertion? I thought I was very logical and showed who REALLY believes in "Magic "hoc est poc est".. You accidentalists think it ok to violate scientific laws like SLOT, Cause and Effect, and Biogenesis..

Creationists are by nature law abiding citizens..

 

There is a lot of good information in those videos.. Which part did you not agree with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Oh Boy, I want 2 hours of my life back. What a substanceless video you posted.

 

Just pick the strongest argument he proposed (according to you) and we'll have a discussion about that.

After careful consideration, I do not think you've watched the video you've posted yourself. I base this on the following facts:

- You respond very emotionally to the magic hocus pocus poke I made at Mike the Wiz, thereby committing a tu-quoque fallacy.

- The title of the video's you've posted are with regard to the subject "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist".

- The content of the video's have nothing to do with the title of the video...

 

Despite that, I'll still wait for you to pick your strongest argument from the video's and we'll have a discussion about that.

Of course you'll have to watch the video in order to find that strongest argument...  :kaffeetrinker:

There is a lot of good information in those videos.. Which part did you not agree with?

I'm not gonna play that game. I asked you to pick any argument from the video and we'll discuss it. You don't name anything, I won't go further into it. Its as simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

There was a particular case called the "Enfield case" where people taped the girls speak in an old man's gutteral voice. People witnessed it too, it was very well corroborated, atheists often use the "talking snake" as an easy way of mocking the bible but they forget that supernatural things like floating axes, also happened which were impossible. They don't cite those examples because they seem less absurd. 

We'll mock you for all supernatural hocus pocus Mike, we'll just look at whatever is applicable at the time. ;)

 

while i'll agree that science doesn't dwell on "magic", i disagree that a scientist would mock a creationist.

I'm not mocking "a creationist", I'm mocking Mike. Its personal playful banter and he loves it.

 

maybe you haven't heard about quatuum physics and its absurdities.

it's telling that some scientists propose we live in a holographic universe, or that there are actually an infinity of realities, koonins many worlds in one, where a coin toss can be altered from 0.5 to 1.0 for example.

you don't call this ridiculous?

People not understanding statistics is sad, not ridiculous. When you brought that up earlier I explained it to you how it worked. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. . . I'm mocking Mike. Its personal playful banter and he loves it.

ah yes, the nefarious mikey mischief, i heard about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Oh Boy, I want 2 hours of my life back. What a substanceless video you posted.

 

Just pick the strongest argument he proposed (according to you) and we'll have a discussion about that.

After careful consideration, I do not think you've watched the video you've posted yourself. I base this on the following facts:

- You respond very emotionally to the magic hocus pocus poke I made at Mike the Wiz, thereby committing a tu-quoque fallacy.

- The title of the video's you've posted are with regard to the subject "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist".

- The content of the video's have nothing to do with the title of the video...

 

Despite that, I'll still wait for you to pick your strongest argument from the video's and we'll have a discussion about that.

Of course you'll have to watch the video in order to find that strongest argument...  :kaffeetrinker:

There is a lot of good information in those videos.. Which part did you not agree with?

I'm not gonna play that game. I asked you to pick any argument from the video and we'll discuss it. You don't name anything, I won't go further into it. Its as simple as that.

I would but I am starting to think that I am merely wasting me time..

 

 

 

"Darwin's theory of evolution is the last of the great nineteenth-century mystery religions. And as we speak it is now following Freudians and Marxism into the Nether regions, and I'm quite sure that Freud, Marx and Darwin are commiserating one with the other in the dark dungeon where discarded gods gather."

 

(Dr. David Berlinski)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

evolution isn't a gradual paradigm, especially in regards to the creation of animal phyla.

they were "ready made", just there, with no detectable intermediates.

evolutionists tried to explain this by cladogenesis compressed in time, combined with the inevitable erosion of the phylogenetic signal.

but koonin dismisses this because the reliability of these estimates appears to be questionable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Oh Boy, I want 2 hours of my life back. What a substanceless video you posted.

 

Just pick the strongest argument he proposed (according to you) and we'll have a discussion about that.

After careful consideration, I do not think you've watched the video you've posted yourself. I base this on the following facts:

- You respond very emotionally to the magic hocus pocus poke I made at Mike the Wiz, thereby committing a tu-quoque fallacy.

- The title of the video's you've posted are with regard to the subject "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist".

- The content of the video's have nothing to do with the title of the video...

 

Despite that, I'll still wait for you to pick your strongest argument from the video's and we'll have a discussion about that.

Of course you'll have to watch the video in order to find that strongest argument...  :kaffeetrinker:

There is a lot of good information in those videos.. Which part did you not agree with?

I'm not gonna play that game. I asked you to pick any argument from the video and we'll discuss it. You don't name anything, I won't go further into it. Its as simple as that.

I would but I am starting to think that I am merely wasting me time..

You mean by having to watch the video. That sure is a waste of time. But since you brought it up, you should watch it and pick something out of it to discuss...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...So no, there is no "evidence" that could, or even should, persuade a rational and logical person to accept something without proof. ...

.

Everything was going well, until I read that sentence.

 

I am now dizzy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

Our Terms