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... > Kent Hovind on tape

Pages: (10) < ... 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 >

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:34    Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,11:08) There are millions of people who THINK they are Christian. I have a suggestion, lcd.  As you appear to have nothing we haven't seen before, and your cartoonish misunderstandings of evolution can better be dealt with elsewhere (talkorigins, for example), why not find a site where some of these "millions of people who THINK they are Christian" hang out, and show them the error of their ways?  I'm sure there will be great excitement when they find the one true arbiter of real Christianity in their midst.  They'll be lining up to thank you. -------------- Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:35    Quote For other Christians, I offer up only what I read in the Bible. I don't judge them so I won't say what happens to them.  That is up to God. You say that Christians who believe in Evolution aren't real Christians, and yet you also claim you don't judge them? -------------- "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

lcd Posts: 137 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:36    Quote (dogdidit @ July 01 2008,13:27) Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,13:08) There are millions of people who THINK they are Christian. I think RtH gets credit here for calling "no true Scotsman". Out of curiosity, what was the pot up to? Well, if it looks like a flower, smells like a flower and attracts bees, if would be a difficult if not impossible thing to call it a duck, right? But I think I am a real Christian so I guess I put myself in that boat.  Then again so do many others.  The real test is when those who claim actually do what is needed.

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:41    -------------- You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

lcd Posts: 137 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:41    Quote (Assassinator @ July 01 2008,13:34) Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,13:21) What would you take as evidence? Emperical data, facts. Like with all forms of science, so where are they when it's about ID or Creationism?   Quote So what would you people take?  Things such as Dembski's Design Filter can be used, although it may need to be perfected.  Is that a problem?  Why is Evolution allowed to change stripes, "Punctuated Equilibrium", no wait, "Gradualism", oh that don't work, back to "Uniformism"?  It seems as those ID Theories, some of which may be still being built upon, doesn't get the same respect. Evolution is allowed to "change stripes" because that's the way science works. Science keeps correcting itself, that's the power of science. If something is wrong, it will change. O and by the way, Dembski's "Design filter" or commonly known as the Explanatory Filter (if that's not the one you mean, correct me) if utterly useless. To save me a lot of typing, read this nice little article from our own Wesley Elsberry: http://www.talkreason.org/articles/eandsdembski.pdf   Quote Or can money only be spent at the altar of Evolutionary Science? Money can be spend on science. So either start conducting it, or stop moaning. And you sir, are only talking about (bad?) theology, and not science. So "science can change stripes as that what science does it's self correcting". Yet when Creationism goes to show that it is a science, witness ID, it's "snake oil", "lies" and worse. Let me see if I can get this straight.  What you and your heroes do is wholesome, self-correcting and right. What ID scientists do is lie, cover up and take money from unsuspecting dupes like myself.  What that makes me, in your opinion then is a sucker. Do I smell a hypocrite here?

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:47    Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,11:41) Yet when Creationism goes to show that it is a science, witness ID, it's "snake oil", "lies" and worse. But, uh, Creationism hasn't 'shown it is a science', is the problem. Again, Behe, who is one of the few sciency types ID can point to, has conceded common descent. I'll bet you reject common descent. So, do you reject Behe's contributions to ID? If not, why not? -------------- "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

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:48    Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,14:08) There are millions of people who THINK they are Christian. Real Christians follow God's Word and believe it as such.  If you're going to say, "Well lot's of Christians feel that Evolution and the Bible can both exist", obviously aren't. I don't mean to offend anyone but how does one say thy ar a full Christian when they pick and choose which parts of God's Word they wish to believe? Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,14:30) For other Christians, I offer up only what I read in the Bible. I don't judge them so I won't say what happens to them.  That is up to God. As far as Kosher, I am not a full on vegetarian, I eat fish though no shell fish, shrimp, etc., and I'm lactose intolerant.  So no "meat with milk" for me.  So yes, I think I do. Trust me we've had many "open and intense discussions" at church about following God's Laws. Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,14:41) Do I smell a hypocrite here? Well I certainly do. Anyone else? -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:49    -------------- You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:49    Quote what evidence you have for Mao's support of Darwinism? That ought to be interesting, since in 1958 Mao presided over China, and China adopted Comrade Academician Trofim D. Lysenko's ideas about agriculture wholesale. China had been having grain surpluses when using agriculture informed by the evolutionary science of the West; once Lysenko's policies were followed in China, they had grain shortfalls such that between 20 and 40 million people died in the resulting famine. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:50    The addition of the blatant hypocrisy is getting it a little closer to realistic, though. -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

lcd Posts: 137 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:51    Quote (JohnW @ July 01 2008,13:34) Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,11:08) There are millions of people who THINK they are Christian. I have a suggestion, lcd.  As you appear to have nothing we haven't seen before, and your cartoonish misunderstandings of evolution can better be dealt with elsewhere (talkorigins, for example), why not find a site where some of these "millions of people who THINK they are Christian" hang out, and show them the error of their ways?  I'm sure there will be great excitement when they find the one true arbiter of real Christianity in their midst.  They'll be lining up to thank you. Well JW, It seems that you and your friends are trotting out the same "ill-thought and oft-quoted" tired explanations of circular logic yourself.  Yet you have the gall to call me on it. Wow.

lcd Posts: 137 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:51    Quote (Lou FCD @ July 01 2008,13:48) Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,14:08) There are millions of people who THINK they are Christian. Real Christians follow God's Word and believe it as such.  If you're going to say, "Well lot's of Christians feel that Evolution and the Bible can both exist", obviously aren't. I don't mean to offend anyone but how does one say thy ar a full Christian when they pick and choose which parts of God's Word they wish to believe?   Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,14:30) For other Christians, I offer up only what I read in the Bible. I don't judge them so I won't say what happens to them.  That is up to God. As far as Kosher, I am not a full on vegetarian, I eat fish though no shell fish, shrimp, etc., and I'm lactose intolerant.  So no "meat with milk" for me.  So yes, I think I do. Trust me we've had many "open and intense discussions" at church about following God's Laws.   Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,14:41) Do I smell a hypocrite here? Well I certainly do. Anyone else? Funny you can as most people can't smell what's under their own nose.

lcd Posts: 137 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:52    Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ July 01 2008,13:49) Glad to see you're coming to terms with what you've been spraying across the internet for what, years now?

lcd Posts: 137 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:54    Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ July 01 2008,13:49) Quote what evidence you have for Mao's support of Darwinism? That ought to be interesting, since in 1958 Mao presided over China, and China adopted Comrade Academician Trofim D. Lysenko's ideas about agriculture wholesale. China had been having grain surpluses when using agriculture informed by the evolutionary science of the West; once Lysenko's policies were followed in China, they had grain shortfalls such that between 20 and 40 million people died in the resulting famine. Obviously Mao was doing the best he could for Darwinian Science which was "cull the weak".

Sealawr Posts: 54 Joined: Feb. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:56    Pardon me for being direct.  I don't post often, but I am amused when scientifically, philsophically and theologically untrained persons opine on science philosophy and theology all at once.  These people often hit the tridefecta, so to speak. So, assuming this is a genuine question--     Quote What would you take as evidence?   An answer to the following question previously asked of you would be a good start.     Quote Pick a single thing. Anything. It's up to you. Show us a) What ID or creationism predicts regarding that. b) What "evolution" predicts regarding that. And then show us why the answer is more accurate for A then B. For example. A global flood. Creationism predicts that fossils will be found all mixed together due to the flood waters being chaotic, but with filtering by size (smallest to largest) when they settled and fossilized. Evolution predicts that fossils will be found in chronological order, not size order. How say you? -------------- DS: "The explantory filter is as robust as the data that is used with it." David Klinghoffer: ""I'm an IDiot"

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:56    The attitude and evasion of actual science questions is getting a little more toward the accurate portrayal as well. Keep working on it, we'll send you off a-trolling when you're a little more ready. -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

lcd Posts: 137 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:57    Quote (Lou FCD @ July 01 2008,13:50) The addition of the blatant hypocrisy is getting it a little closer to realistic, though. Yes, this is what we were told exactly what would happen if one were to engage with Evolutionists. You have faith in Evolution. I have faith in God. You say the same things over and over, until such time it's been shown to be a lie then you quickly change your tune like nothing ever happened. ID has changed over the years to show the science behind God's Word and in His Word. Yet I'm the hypocrite?  Wow.

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:58    Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,14:57) Quote (Lou FCD @ July 01 2008,13:50) The addition of the blatant hypocrisy is getting it a little closer to realistic, though. Yes, this is what we were told exactly what would happen if one were to engage with Evolutionists. You have faith in Evolution. I have faith in God. You say the same things over and over, until such time it's been shown to be a lie then you quickly change your tune like nothing ever happened. ID has changed over the years to show the science behind God's Word and in His Word. Yet I'm the hypocrite?  Wow. Better.  You're getting there. I still think you should throw in some Nazis though. -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:58    Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,13:54) Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ July 01 2008,13:49) Quote what evidence you have for Mao's support of Darwinism? That ought to be interesting, since in 1958 Mao presided over China, and China adopted Comrade Academician Trofim D. Lysenko's ideas about agriculture wholesale. China had been having grain surpluses when using agriculture informed by the evolutionary science of the West; once Lysenko's policies were followed in China, they had grain shortfalls such that between 20 and 40 million people died in the resulting famine. Obviously Mao was doing the best he could for Darwinian Science which was "cull the weak". Mao's rejection of evolutionary science is evidence of his acceptance of evolutionary science? Cool. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:01    Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,11:51) Quote (JohnW @ July 01 2008,13:34) Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,11:08) There are millions of people who THINK they are Christian. I have a suggestion, lcd.  As you appear to have nothing we haven't seen before, and your cartoonish misunderstandings of evolution can better be dealt with elsewhere (talkorigins, for example), why not find a site where some of these "millions of people who THINK they are Christian" hang out, and show them the error of their ways?  I'm sure there will be great excitement when they find the one true arbiter of real Christianity in their midst.  They'll be lining up to thank you. Well JW, It seems that you and your friends are trotting out the same "ill-thought and oft-quoted" tired explanations of circular logic yourself.  Yet you have the gall to call me on it. Wow. If it's an "explanation of circular logic" you're looking for, here's one.  You might also want to do a google search for remedial English classes. Once you've learned how to translate what you want to say into strings of words, feel free to try again. -------------- Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

jeannot Posts: 1201 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:03    Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,13:03) To all, especially oldmanintheskydidntdoit What would you take as evidence?  I can hear all of you now, "Another ID dodge".  This is not the case.  More than a few other Creationists and IDists may have tried, it seems too many times they get ridiculed or shouted down. So what would you people take?  Things such as Dembski's Design Filter can be used, although it may need to be perfected.  Is that a problem?  Why is Evolution allowed to change stripes, "Punctuated Equilibrium", no wait, "Gradualism", oh that don't work, back to "Uniformism"?  It seems as those ID Theories, some of which may be still being built upon, doesn't get the same respect. When it comes to Information contained in DNA, it is obvious it exists.  Without that Information, there would be no inherited traits.  A Palm Tree in such a situation can produce seeds that grow an Elm.  Without information in DNA, Monkeys could really give birth to humans and an E. Coli can divide and instead of two E Coli cells, you have an embryonic cat on one side and a dog on the other. So from that we know there is information contained in the DNA. Information, can and does get lost.  A strand of DNA doesn't replicate correctly and the sites in the genes that tells a cell to stop dividing gets lost.  So now you have a cancer cell.  The loss of that information prevents it from no longer being able to stop multiplying.  Loss of info must be a bad thing. So how does one measure the information in DNA?  Good question and  I don't rightly know.  I guess it would take time and money.  From the other thread, one scientist was given 20 years to try and change E. Coli into something else.  All he was able to do was change what they eat.  Is that a change or loss of information?  I'd say loss as it seems to state that the "new strain" of E. Coli doesn't do as well when there's both forms of nutrition for all the E. Coli to consume. I stated previously about the amount of money given to do dogmatic Evolutionary Science.  Why don't we try giving ARN or DI 20 years and lots of taxpayer money to come up with something in 20 years? Or can money only be spent at the altar of Evolutionary Science? Before discussing evidence for creation/ID, one must formulate a hypothesis. You provided none.

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:11    Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,11:51) Quote (Lou FCD @ July 01 2008,13:48) Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,14:08) There are millions of people who THINK they are Christian. Real Christians follow God's Word and believe it as such.  If you're going to say, "Well lot's of Christians feel that Evolution and the Bible can both exist", obviously aren't. I don't mean to offend anyone but how does one say thy ar a full Christian when they pick and choose which parts of God's Word they wish to believe?   Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,14:30) For other Christians, I offer up only what I read in the Bible. I don't judge them so I won't say what happens to them.  That is up to God. As far as Kosher, I am not a full on vegetarian, I eat fish though no shell fish, shrimp, etc., and I'm lactose intolerant.  So no "meat with milk" for me.  So yes, I think I do. Trust me we've had many "open and intense discussions" at church about following God's Laws.   Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,14:41) Do I smell a hypocrite here? Well I certainly do. Anyone else? Funny you can as most people can't smell what's under their own nose. For the record, "I know you are, but what am I?" usually quits working after 5th grade. -------------- "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

lcd Posts: 137 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:15    Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 01 2008,14:11) For the record, "I know you are, but what am I?" usually quits working after 5th grade. Well Arden, what's to say. You may not think you guys are doing not just the exact thing but claiming I'm the only one who is doing it is wrong. The reason why you guys seem to be getting away with it is that there are far more of you then there are of just me.

Assassinator Posts: 479 Joined: Nov. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:15    Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,13:41) Quote (Assassinator @ July 01 2008,13:34) Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,13:21) What would you take as evidence? Emperical data, facts. Like with all forms of science, so where are they when it's about ID or Creationism?     Quote So what would you people take?  Things such as Dembski's Design Filter can be used, although it may need to be perfected.  Is that a problem?  Why is Evolution allowed to change stripes, "Punctuated Equilibrium", no wait, "Gradualism", oh that don't work, back to "Uniformism"?  It seems as those ID Theories, some of which may be still being built upon, doesn't get the same respect. Evolution is allowed to "change stripes" because that's the way science works. Science keeps correcting itself, that's the power of science. If something is wrong, it will change. O and by the way, Dembski's "Design filter" or commonly known as the Explanatory Filter (if that's not the one you mean, correct me) if utterly useless. To save me a lot of typing, read this nice little article from our own Wesley Elsberry: http://www.talkreason.org/articles/eandsdembski.pdf     Quote Or can money only be spent at the altar of Evolutionary Science? Money can be spend on science. So either start conducting it, or stop moaning. And you sir, are only talking about (bad?) theology, and not science. So "science can change stripes as that what science does it's self correcting". Yet when Creationism goes to show that it is a science, witness ID, it's "snake oil", "lies" and worse. Let me see if I can get this straight.  What you and your heroes do is wholesome, self-correcting and right. What ID scientists do is lie, cover up and take money from unsuspecting dupes like myself.  What that makes me, in your opinion then is a sucker. Do I smell a hypocrite here? The problem is, like what's sad before, that Creationism ánd ID have not shown they're science.

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:16    Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,11:54) Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ July 01 2008,13:49) Quote what evidence you have for Mao's support of Darwinism? That ought to be interesting, since in 1958 Mao presided over China, and China adopted Comrade Academician Trofim D. Lysenko's ideas about agriculture wholesale. China had been having grain surpluses when using agriculture informed by the evolutionary science of the West; once Lysenko's policies were followed in China, they had grain shortfalls such that between 20 and 40 million people died in the resulting famine. Obviously Mao was doing the best he could for Darwinian Science which was "cull the weak". So anyone who kills lots of people is a 'Darwinist'? Sure you wanna go with that answer? -------------- "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

lcd Posts: 137 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:18    Quote (JohnW @ July 01 2008,14:01) If it's an "explanation of circular logic" you're looking for, here's one.  You might also want to do a google search for remedial English classes. Once you've learned how to translate what you want to say into strings of words, feel free to try again. Heh JW, love your sense of humor. I think you need to complete your courses before you go and offer them up to others though. Just a thought, I know it's hard for you to do but I bet if you try hard enough, one might actually slip in there despite your best efforts to go through life "blinded by (your idea of) science"!

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:18    Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,12:15) Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 01 2008,14:11) For the record, "I know you are, but what am I?" usually quits working after 5th grade. Well Arden, what's to say. You may not think you guys are doing not just the exact thing but claiming I'm the only one who is doing it is wrong. The reason why you guys seem to be getting away with it is that there are far more of you then there are of just me. Persecution claims. Check. If your logic made any sense, you'd be able to answer questions all by your lonesome. It isn't happening. -------------- "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

lcd Posts: 137 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:20    Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 01 2008,14:16) So anyone who kills lots of people is a 'Darwinist'? Sure you wanna go with that answer? Of course not as that would be a blanket statement and ill -advised.  But in Mao's case, his following of some "Scientific Principles" I think it fits.

lcd Posts: 137 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:22    Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 01 2008,14:18) Persecution claims. Check. If your logic made any sense, you'd be able to answer questions all by your lonesome. It isn't happening. If you guys would listen, I just might.  As I am fending off so many of you and the questions are coming fast and furious, and smack me down if I don't answer someone's question or one they want to see answered quickly, I may not be able to get to them all. But I must be going for a while.  Got to get back to the job site. From now on, I'll only answer those who are at least trying some civility.  It will help me maintain my composure.

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:27    So, LCD, to recap. You've admitted Hitler wasn't an atheist. You've failed to explain why Stalin imprisoned Darwinists. You've failed to demonstrate that Mao was a Darwinist. So, uh, WTF was your original point about Darwinist atheist dictators killing millions of people? Incidentally, as for your notion that Christians can't be murderous dictators, in addition to Germany, you might try googling 'Congo Free State'   Quote Of course not as that would be a blanket statement and ill -advised.  But in Mao's case, his following of some "Scientific Principles" I think it fits. Sure looks like what you're saying there. So, to repeat what Wes said: Mao killing Darwinists proves he was a Darwinist? Um, there's a reason the government doesn't give money to Creationists to do 'research'. -------------- "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

Pages: (10) < ... 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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