Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > The kentucky Creationist Museum

Pages: (6) < 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 >

cdesign proponentsist Posts: 16 Joined: Nov. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,01:13    I realize this is a little late (and OT), but I have always wanted to be able to question somebody who believes that slavery "Bible style" is okay. FtK, I realize that you are up front about not putting much thought into what you write here, but I have never been able to wrap my head around the idea of using anything as a moral guide which allows the ownership of another person, and I'm hoping, at least, for a peek further inside the reasoning of somebody who does. First of, let me emphasize the parts of what you already wrote that I find most puzzling. Quote In regard to slavery, I believe it was permitted in the Bible because of sin in the world. It existed before the Jews were formed as a nation and it existed after Israel was conquered. Slavery, like divorce, is not preferred by God. Instead, it was allowed. You must remember that even though the Israelite slaves were treated very harshly by the Egyptians, the Bible gave many rights and privileges to slaves. So, even though it isn’t the best way to deal with people, because God has allowed man freedom, slavery then exists. God instructed the Israelites to treat them properly. Some references to this are Exodus 10:10, 21:2, 21:20, and Leviticus 22:11. Remember also, that in modern times; that is, after the Civil War when emancipation was granted to numerous slaves the majority of them chose to remain with their masters on the plantation. So who knows what the situation was in Israel at the time. What I take away from the above is that you believe that God allows slavery because he allows evil into the world, but he only does so grudgingly, and he makes sure that there are rules about how masters should treat their slaves. What I would like is a little clarification on two issues. The first is why slavery is the exception. Sure, there's evil in the world and we have free will to chose, but there are still plenty of rules in the Bible about the right choice and the wrong choice. Why allow the existence of slavery (and legitimize it by making rules which govern it) while making a commandment against coveting your neighbor's possessions? It would seem, from a naive standpoint, to be marking some actions as as worse than others. Do you think this means that coveting is worse than slavery? The second issue I have would like clarification on is whether you really feel that the rules laid on on how to treat slaves are proper. Some of them seem outright cruel in my eyes (e.g. allowing a slave to go free but not letting the family go, allowing the death of a slave to go unpunished if he holds out for two days before dying). Since you pointed these out as examples, I assume that you feel that these are some of the proper rules on how to treat a slave, and I would like to know what context makes these moral actions. -------------- "Believe it or not, it really helps that the other side thinks we’re such morons." -Dembski The ID epiphany: Nothing in ID makes sense until you accept they're trying to look stupid.

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,04:15    FTK, Quote I've found that many TE's think that those who support ID have a hidden agenda to bring a particular religious belief into the public schools I think many of us are puzzled as to what exactly that it is ID would like to teach kids? The vast majority (www.uncommondescent.com) of ID seems to be about picking minor holes in "darwinism" and not providing positive proof for ID itself. It's almost as if they think that if they disprove "darwinism" ID is true by default. FTK, what specifically would you want taught in ID Class? Icons of evolution? Pandas and People? What? FTK, do you realise that you have no credibility whatsoever because you refuse to "go there" on the subject of the earths age, and the other simple questions you've been asked. You might not realize, but we're not interested in going there either, because there's nothing there but a fact! We're not after a discussion on the age of the earth, because there's nothing to discuss! What colour is red? How heavy is a one ton weight? Is water wet? How old is the earth? Does gravity work? -------------- I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies". FTK if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand Gordon Mullings

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,04:29    Quote (Ftk @ April 13 2007,16:13) Quote I mentioned discussing these ID/creationism matters in philosophy of science classes at university. In theory, that might possibly be an option (though that is a lot of science to shove into a philosophy class). But, the problem is that those who would be approved to teach the class would probably guys like Elsberry or Krebs.  In that case, the course would be useless.  That would be like having Kent Hovind teach a class on evolution (or ID or creation science for that matter - LOL).   See the problem?   It's also interesting that you don't think it's a problem to present these issues at the universities, yet on the SMU thread, people are outraged about the conference taking place this weekend on university grounds.   Would that be because there are actually ID advocates running the show rather than anti-ID professors teaching a class in regard to these issues? I don't think that I've ever been so thoroughly insulted before. What was that about IDC advocates not hurling insults? Convicted felon "Dr." Kent Hovind teaching a course on evolution would be useless because he does not know the topic. If I were teaching a course on philosophy of science that took up IDC, there certainly would be no such problem on my part. FtK apparently does have an issue that is based simply on advocacy status. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,04:42    Quote Honestly, I do understand the concerns that many of you have.   But, I still think that ID falls under the category of science, and I don't believe that it is a threat to scientific advancement whatsoever.   The fear and hesitation to accept ID centers around the philosophical and religious implications. My religion says that lying is wrong. Yours apparently doesn't. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,07:35    Quote (Ftk @ April 13 2007,18:29)  Your approach is probably one of the worst I've seen if your goal is to actually engage in serious discussion.   By the way, let's just make mention of what FTK herself wrote, on her very first days here: Quote Oh, I'm sorry, was I unclear as to my reason for being here?  I'm certainly not here to "discuss science" with any of you.   I have no intention of discussing anything of a serious nature here as it is quite clear that none of you are interested in the facts. You are, like every other ID/creationist I've met in the last 25 years, a dishonest evasive deceptive hypocritical liar. -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,07:42    Hey FTK, since you seem to have no interest in discussing creation, uh, "science", but lots of interest in telling everyone all about your religious opinions, I have a couple questions for you.  I want to see just how nutty you really are: *ahem* Quote I Corinthians:  34. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. 35. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. Do you think women should be allowed to speak in church, FTK? Quote Exodus 22:18   Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Do you think supernatural witches and witchcraft exist, FTK?  If so, do you think they should be killed? -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

lkeithlu Posts: 321 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,07:45    Okay, I'm coming here a little late. What, then, do you, FTK, plan to discuss? I thought that ID was being touted as science. Why not discuss the "science"? Afterall, that's what the DI wants, for ID to be discussed in the scientific arena (only, they want to change the ground rules for how that is done) Just curious (to save having to slog through pages) is your background in one of the fields of science? in secondary school education?

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,07:52    Quote (Ftk @ April 13 2007,23:53) I've found that many TE's think that those who support ID have a hidden agenda to bring a particular religious belief into the public schools.  Obviously, they wouldn't want that.  Some TE's believe that ID supporters want to actually teach biblical creation in the science class. Well heck, the ID agenda isn't "hidden" at all.  Indeed, anyone can read it for themselves -- just do a Google search for "the wedge document". Some excerpts: Quote The proposition that human beings are created in the image of God is one of the bedrock principles on which Western civilization was built. We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions. Governing Goals * To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies. * To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and hurnan beings are created by God. Twenty Year Goals * To see intelligent design theory as the dominant perspective in science. * To see design theory application in specific fields, including molecular biology, biochemistry, paleontology, physics and cosmology in the natural sciences, psychology, ethics, politics, theology and philosophy in the humanities; to see its innuence in the fine arts. * To see design theory permeate our religious, cultural, moral and political life. FIVE YEAR OBJECTIVES * Major Christian denomination(s) defend(s) traditional doctrine of creation Gee, FTK, I certainly can't see any reason why anyone would think that ID is just an agenda to bring a particular religious belief into schools, or to think that ID supporters want to actually teach biblical creation (or "traditional doctrine of creation") in the science class.  Can you? Are you really this dishonest, deceptive and evasive, FTK?  Or are you just not terribly bright and woefully uninformed? -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,08:38    Quote (cdesign proponentsist @ April 14 2007,01:13) I realize this is a little late (and OT), but I have always wanted to be able to question somebody who believes that slavery "Bible style" is okay. FtK, I realize that you are up front about not putting much thought into what you write here, but I have never been able to wrap my head around the idea of using anything as a moral guide which allows the ownership of another person, and I'm hoping, at least, for a peek further inside the reasoning of somebody who does. First of, let me emphasize the parts of what you already wrote that I find most puzzling.   Quote In regard to slavery, I believe it was permitted in the Bible because of sin in the world. It existed before the Jews were formed as a nation and it existed after Israel was conquered. Slavery, like divorce, is not preferred by God. Instead, it was allowed. You must remember that even though the Israelite slaves were treated very harshly by the Egyptians, the Bible gave many rights and privileges to slaves. So, even though it isn’t the best way to deal with people, because God has allowed man freedom, slavery then exists. God instructed the Israelites to treat them properly. Some references to this are Exodus 10:10, 21:2, 21:20, and Leviticus 22:11. Remember also, that in modern times; that is, after the Civil War when emancipation was granted to numerous slaves the majority of them chose to remain with their masters on the plantation. So who knows what the situation was in Israel at the time. What I take away from the above is that you believe that God allows slavery because he allows evil into the world, but he only does so grudgingly, and he makes sure that there are rules about how masters should treat their slaves. It sounds to me as if FTK is a "situational ethicist", who thinks that things are not *inherently* right or wrong, in all times and places, but that right and wrong vary from time to time and place to place, depending upon local cultures and history.  I.e., slavery might be wrong here and now, but was OK there and then.  Things outlawed in the Old Testament times were wrong then, but not wrong in New Testament times. Divine rules change from time to time and place to place. Right, FTK? -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,08:42    Another quick question for you, FTK: Quote Acts 2:44 --- And all that believed were together, and had all things common; 45.  And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. It sounds like the Apostles were, um, Communists. Would you like to comment on that, please? -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

Ftk Posts: 2239 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,09:21    cdesign proponentsist, I'd be happy to address your post, but Lenny et. al.  are sick of the religious mumbo jumbo.  Want me to send a response to you privately?  Just let me know. -------------- "Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

Ftk Posts: 2239 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,09:28    Quote FTK, do you realise that you have no credibility whatsoever because you refuse to "go there" on the subject of the earths age, and the other simple questions you've been asked. Fine...age of the earth....maybe 4.5 billion/maybe somewhere around 10,000.  I'm open to either and will not be bullied into ignoring other interpretations simply because authority insists that they are above reproach. As far as some of the other questions being asked, I've rambled on and on about many of them at my blog and in other forums.  I'm almost ready to post a response to Dave, and no doubt he'll bring it back over here for you all to critique and reject on account of my "dishonestly". -------------- "Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

Ftk Posts: 2239 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,09:53    Quote I don't think that I've ever been so thoroughly insulted before. What was that about IDC advocates not hurling insults? You and I disagree on our term “insult”.  What bothers me in these forums is that many evolutionists are vicious in their name calling routine.  There are thousands of examples to choose from, but here are just a couple that were recently thrown at Dr. Egnor: Quote “Michael Egnor is a Crappy Neurosurgeon Who Will Cut out Your Brain and Eat It,” “..compared Egnor’s arguments to taking “a big ol' steaming s*** on a piece of paper and want[ing] that taught as science.” “...let me say,as [sic] gently and politely as possible, that on this Egnor is full of s***,” “...if idiots couldn't weather having their idiocy pointed out to them, they wouldn't BE idiots now, would they.” I do apologize for comparing you to Hovind, and I agree that was a bit over the top.  I was trying to make a strong point.  I would be very uncomfortable having you teach a course on ID because you obviously believe that all ID supporters are liars, so it would be questionable as to how you would approach the topic of ID with your students.  Now, obviously, I don’t know you at all.  So, it could be that you are one of the few who would be able to leave their emotional baggage at the door and teach ID as an ID advocate would teach it.  I believe that would be quite difficult for a guy who works for an organization who is out to stop the movement at all cost, but who knows.   Quote My religion says that lying is wrong. Yours apparently doesn't. Well, for a guy who doesn’t like getting insulted, you certainly have no problem insulting others.  I’m not a liar. -------------- "Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,10:15    Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,09:28) Quote FTK, do you realise that you have no credibility whatsoever because you refuse to "go there" on the subject of the earths age, and the other simple questions you've been asked. Fine...age of the earth....maybe 4.5 billion/maybe somewhere around 10,000.  I'm open to either and will not be bullied into ignoring other interpretations simply because authority insists that they are above reproach. You tell 'em, FTK! Don't let yourself be pushed around by them pointy-headed atheist meanie scientists with their 'evidence' and their 150+ years of scientific consensus! If you want to believe that the earth is 10,000 years old then you go right ahead and believe that, since when it comes to science, any opinion is as good as any other! -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,10:18    Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,09:53)   Quote I don't think that I've ever been so thoroughly insulted before. What was that about IDC advocates not hurling insults? You and I disagree on our term “insult”.  What bothers me in these forums is that many evolutionists are vicious in their name calling routine.  There are thousands of examples to choose from, but here are just a couple that were recently thrown at Dr. Egnor:     Quote “Michael Egnor is a Crappy Neurosurgeon Who Will Cut out Your Brain and Eat It,” “..compared Egnor’s arguments to taking “a big ol' steaming s*** on a piece of paper and want[ing] that taught as science.” “...let me say,as [sic] gently and politely as possible, that on this Egnor is full of s***,” “...if idiots couldn't weather having their idiocy pointed out to them, they wouldn't BE idiots now, would they.” I do apologize for comparing you to Hovind, and I agree that was a bit over the top.  I was trying to make a strong point.  I would be very uncomfortable having you teach a course on ID because you obviously believe that all ID supporters are liars, so it would be questionable as to how you would approach the topic of ID with your students.  Now, obviously, I don’t know you at all.  So, it could be that you are one of the few who would be able to leave their emotional baggage at the door and teach ID as an ID advocate would teach it.  I believe that would be quite difficult for a guy who works for an organization who is out to stop the movement at all cost, but who knows.       Quote My religion says that lying is wrong. Yours apparently doesn't. Well, for a guy who doesn’t like getting insulted, you certainly have no problem insulting others.  I’m not a liar. If these are thousands of examples of insults to choose from, I find it strange all of your's were cherry picked for you by The Discovery Institute? http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007....ri.html   Quote In fact, Darwinist attacks upon Egnor are nothing new. Last summer a Darwinist wrote that “Michael Egnor is a Crappy Neurosurgeon Who Will Cut out Your Brain and Eat It,” and compared Egnor’s arguments to taking “a big ol' steaming s*** on a piece of paper and want[ing] that taught as science.” More recently, Egnor pointed out the viciousness of Darwinist attacks upon Michael Behe. Egnor was then greeted with telling replies from Darwinist commenters on PZ Myers’ blog who wrote things like: “let me say,as [sic] gently and politely as possible, that on this Egnor is full of s***,” and explained away Behe's perseverance through the attacks by saying “if idiots couldn't weather having their idiocy pointed out to them, they wouldn't BE idiots now, would they.” Yet for all their numbers and name-calling, not a single one has answered Egnor’s question: How does Darwinian mechanisms produce new biological information? Are you a paid shill for the disco institute? -------------- I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies". FTK if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand Gordon Mullings

Ftk Posts: 2239 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,10:38    LOL.  No, though it certainly would be cool to get paid to play on the internet!!!  Shoot, as much time as I've spent in cyberspace the last few years, I'd be a milionaire by now.   From what I read in Monkey Girl, it appears that Matzke gets paid to play.  Hmmm...there must be a few DI guys that check in here every once in a great while to see what Elsberry is up to... [ANY OF YOU DI GUYS WANNA PAY ME TO MIX IT UP WITH THESE NASTY 'OL DARWINISTS??????] Actually, that's a pretty funny accusation, Oldguy.  The DI guys would probably be more comfortable having me disappear from the Internet due to the fact that I'm nothin' other than a layperson.  I probably do them more harm than good. I used Casey's stuff because it was handy.  I already had it on my blog and rather than go through individual blogs and forum, I just pulled the quotes from what I had. Although, I suppose I'd merely have to go through a couple of Lenny's posts from the past few days and have plenty to work with. -------------- "Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

k.e Posts: 1948 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,10:43    God Ftk you take the cake. What do you do for a crust, sell used cars or something? I'll bet you know every trick in the book. Come on give us some more 'honesty'. Shouldn't you be peeling bannas and stuffing them in gearboxes or winding back speedometers? Do you have any idea .....even just an inkling, that you are a total moron? -------------- The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,10:49    Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,10:38) Although, I suppose I'd merely have to go through a couple of Lenny's posts from the past few days and have plenty to work with. Then do so! Or apologise to Lenny! -------------- I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies". FTK if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand Gordon Mullings

Ftk Posts: 2239 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,10:51    Quote Do you have any idea .....even just an inkling, that you are a total moron? Well, I certainly consider that possibility ever single day.  God knows, I get my daily dose of evolutionists telling me what a complete moronic idiot I am. -------------- "Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,10:58    Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,10:38) I used Casey's stuff because it was handy.  I already had it on my blog and rather than go through individual blogs and forum, I just pulled the quotes from what I had. I wonder did you even check the quotes to see if they were accurate (and in fact existed) before "using them on your blog"? Or did you just repeat what Casey had to say? If a "darwinist" used data without checking it's veracity you would no doubt be the first in line to call them out! But like you say     Quote My personal opinion is that I see no reason to disregard portions of God’s word for current scientific theories that are certainly questionable. Scientific theories postulated by mere human intellect are always changing. Out of interest FTK, do you think 2+2 has always been 4 and always will be? Or is that also a scientific theory postulated by mere human intellect and therefore subject to change too? EDIT: BTW, FTK - How's your other blog at overwhelmingevidence going? Link Quote I look forward to discussing the issues with pro-ID folks for a change. Yeah, no comments to either of your posts, and about a comment a week on the rest of the site on average since then! This is how popluar ID is "with the kids" (and the comments were generally trolls anyhow, v funny). -------------- I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies". FTK if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand Gordon Mullings

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,11:00    Once again, FTK proves herself impossible to parody: parody:   Quote How old is the earth? Somewhere between six thousand and 5 billion years. FTK:   Quote age of the earth....maybe 4.5 billion/maybe somewhere around 10,000. -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,11:02    Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,09:53)  I’m not a liar. Yes you are, FTK.  A deliberate one. After all, YOU just told everyone here that (1) ID isn't an attempt to force a particular religious agenda into public schools and (2) ID isn't about Biblical creation. I quoted the DI's very own words, in the Wedge Document, demonstrating that BOTH of those statements are wrong.  Crashingly wrong.  Bone-numbingly wrong.  Nuclear-level wrong.  So wrong that a blind person could not miss their wrongness. That, logically, either means (1) you don't know what you are talking about, or (2) you are lying to us. Since you yourself have gone on at great length about how well-informed you are and how many ID books and peer-reviewed science articles you have read in your yearsa nd years of research, I appear to have no choice but to rule out option number 1. That leaves option number 2.  I.e., you are a liar.  A deliberate one. That is not an "insult", my dear FTK.  It is a simple observation.  You say things that are not true.  That is called "lying".  People who lie, are called "liars". Ergo, you are a liar. If, on the other hand, you'd like to demonstrate to us that you are NOT really a deliberate deceitful deceptive liar, but just a pig-ignorant putz who has no idea what she's blithering about because she's never actually read it, then I welcome any and all evidence you'd like to present for that.  It may help change my opinion about you. -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,11:06    Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,09:21) I'd be happy to address your post, but Lenny et. al.  are sick of the religious mumbo jumbo.   Nice evasion. So let's see . . . you won't discuss science. You won't discuss religion, either. What the #### WILL you discuss? Heck, even when you were just talking about how cute your ass is, you STILL did the typical creationist/ID thing, and didn't present a shred of evidence to support your assertion . . . . . . Or won't you discuss THAT either, now? (snicker)  (giggle) -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,11:10    Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,10:38) Although, I suppose I'd merely have to go through a couple of Lenny's posts from the past few days and have plenty to work with. Please do.  I invite you to try. Unlike you, I can back up everything I say. But then, unlike you, I am not an evasive dishonest deceptive liar who refuses to answer direct questions. And no, FTK, that is not an "insult".  It is a simple statement of observed fact. -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

Ftk Posts: 2239 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,11:13    Quote I wonder did you even check the quotes to see if they were accurate (and in fact existed) before "using them on your blog"? Or did you just repeat what Casey had to say? Of course I do.  I don't think you realize the depth of my obsession with this subject.  I have PZ, Good Math/Bad Math, Orac, PT, and many other science blogs & forums bookmarked.  I peek in all the time. -------------- "Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,11:18    Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,09:28) Fine...age of the earth....maybe 4.5 billion/maybe somewhere around 10,000.  I'm open to either and will not be bullied into ignoring other interpretations simply because authority insists that they are above reproach. And naturally you come to that conclusion based on the best scientific data and evidence, right FTK . . . . ? (snicker)  (giggle) Hey, what OTHER scientific conclusions do you, uh, not allow yourself to be "bullied into", FTK? Maybe heliocentrism/maybe geocentrism? Maybe germs cause disease/maybe evil spirits cause disease? Maybe flat earth/maybe round earth? You go, girl.  Don't you let those evil atheistic god-hating scientific conspiracists bully YOU into believing their "billions-year-old/heliocentric/round earth/germs cause diseases"  crap. And make sure you tell EVERYBODY, absolutely EVERYBODY, about it. (snicker)  (giggle)  BWA HA HA HA HA AHA  !!!!!!!! -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,11:24    Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,10:38)  The DI guys would probably be more comfortable having me disappear from the Internet due to the fact that I'm nothin' other than a layperson.  I probably do them more harm than good. Wow, your martyr complex runs far far deeper than most other fundies' -- YOU even want to be oppressed by your *own* side. Cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo. BTW, FTK, *nobody* does any good for ID.  Nobody.  As I long ago noted, the best way to destroy ID is to simply let them talk (on the witness stand, if possible).  They quite happily shoot themselves in the head every time.   I suppose that helps explain why ID is dead, dead, dead, dead. -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,11:28    Quote The DI guys would probably be more comfortable having me disappear from the Internet due to the fact that I'm nothin' other than a layperson.  I probably do them more harm than good. Believe me, you are no less qualified than anyone else advocating Intelligent Design on the internet. -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,11:47    Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,09:53) Quote I don't think that I've ever been so thoroughly insulted before. What was that about IDC advocates not hurling insults? You and I disagree on our term “insult”.  What bothers me in these forums is that many evolutionists are vicious in their name calling routine.  There are thousands of examples to choose from, but here are just a couple that were recently thrown at Dr. Egnor:   Quote “Michael Egnor is a Crappy Neurosurgeon Who Will Cut out Your Brain and Eat It,” “..compared Egnor’s arguments to taking “a big ol' steaming s*** on a piece of paper and want[ing] that taught as science.” “...let me say,as [sic] gently and politely as possible, that on this Egnor is full of s***,” “...if idiots couldn't weather having their idiocy pointed out to them, they wouldn't BE idiots now, would they.” I do apologize for comparing you to Hovind, and I agree that was a bit over the top.  I was trying to make a strong point.  I would be very uncomfortable having you teach a course on ID because you obviously believe that all ID supporters are liars, so it would be questionable as to how you would approach the topic of ID with your students.  Now, obviously, I don’t know you at all.  So, it could be that you are one of the few who would be able to leave their emotional baggage at the door and teach ID as an ID advocate would teach it.  I believe that would be quite difficult for a guy who works for an organization who is out to stop the movement at all cost, but who knows.     Quote My religion says that lying is wrong. Yours apparently doesn't. Well, for a guy who doesn’t like getting insulted, you certainly have no problem insulting others.  I’m not a liar. FtK, you might work harder on your reading comprehension. I'll have more about the Hovind thing later. As for hurling insults, I've never tried to claim that none come from pro-science people. What I've documented is that IDC advocates, even or especially the big names, do routinely deploy invidious comparisons of the most extreme sorts, contra the various claims that they are always the victims and never the slingers of mud. Here's a link to my earlier statement on the symmetry of insult flow. And the invidious comparisons thread. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

k.e Posts: 1948 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 14 2007,11:52    Quote My personal opinion is that I see no reason to disregard portions of God’s word for current scientific theories that are certainly questionable. Scientific theories postulated by mere human intellect are always changing. Well I'm glad your personal opinion is so useful and authoritive and on Par with 'God's words'. I'm also grateful (to god if you will) that you are not in a position to implement those opinions since I'm pretty #### sure any Airplane you designed or drugs you designed would be be less than useless. Or even High School Biology lessons. In fact as an exemplar of 'mere human intellect' I'd like to wager you have few peers. -------------- The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

Pages: (6) < 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard