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... > Ancient Rainforest Revealed in Coal Mine

Pages: (2) < 1 [2] >

carlsonjok Posts: 3326 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,13:32    Quote (Ftk @ April 24 2007,12:14) I'm only here to correct serious misconceptions about my position that people seem to like to bring to this forum. In fairness to your antagonists, you haven't actually taken a position on anything, so it isn't clear what there is to mis-conceive.  So, since this thread is supposed to be about an ancient rain forest discovered in an Illinois mine, will you take a position with regards to said discovery or do I need to......... -------------- It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

Ftk Posts: 2239 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,13:44    Good grief, what the heck is wrong with you, Oldman?  You're just dying to get into a big YE/OE bashing session, and I provided on the other thread a freaking 4 month long debate I was involved in called "Brown's evidence".  What the heck more could you want?   Read it...have a ball.  I was up against god only knows how many Darwinists on that thread.  Well over 40 I'm sure.   I have never said that I believe YE creation scientists to be right and other scientists to be wrong.  I believe there is ~much~ to consider coming from both sides of the debate.   I don't think ~anyone~ has it right yet. So there. -------------- "Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,14:09    Quote Good grief, what the heck is wrong with you, Oldman? Umm, do I have to answer that?  ;) If I do, you got to too!   Quote You're just dying to get into a big YE/OE bashing session, and I provided on the other thread a freaking 4 month long debate I was involved in called "Brown's evidence". That was there, this is here! OK, lets talk about the fossil forest instead. How old do you think it really is?   Quote What the heck more could you want? Ask me a question, i'll do my best to answer it. I'd like you to do the same.   Quote Read it...have a ball.  I was up against god only knows how many Darwinists on that thread.  Well over 40 I'm sure. Did they describe themselves are Darwinists? What convineinent handy label did you apply to yourself during that debate?   Quote I have never said that I believe YE creation scientists to be right and other scientists to be wrong. True True. You've said very little of substance, which to be fair to you, you are under no obligation to do. You obviously come here to relax, and chill, and so who am I (random internet gonk) to question that.   Quote I believe there is ~much~ to consider coming from both sides of the debate. I agree, however where we differ includes what to teach children. I say "teach the controversy" and give kids philosophy classes instead of religious education. Apparently you want to teach them that the earth quite possibly could be 10,000 years old and that there is "scientific" evidence to say so. Or is your moniker wrong?   Quote  I don't think ~anyone~ has it right yet. Nobody ever gets it right (part from math folk!), but you can get close. And YEC is unsupportable by any honest open minded person without religious dogma forcing their viewpoints into particular containers. There are a number of Ex-YEC here. Did you know that?   Quote So there. Well, IDers do get the best book covers, I'll give you that! -------------- 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

Jasper Posts: 76 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,15:01    Quote Read it...have a ball.  I was up against god only knows how many Darwinists on that thread.  Well over 40 I'm sure. If one generously defines "Darwinist" as "anyone who disagrees with FtK," there were a total of 38 different "Darwinists" that posted to that thread: Pete Liz Craig KC EB Connor J apple Josh Rosenau Jason Meyers PhD Jeremy Mohn RBHoppe ToSeek Art RF Brady Bill A Les Lane Jack Krebs Glyn Jim Swan csadams Eric Reynolds Kevin Nyberg Joe Meert slpage texathome JonF zack falin Don Monro computer science guy celdd Seventy-Six Gary S. Gaulin Greg Myers MisterOpus1 Unsympathetic reader Harry Gregory John Smallberries grmorton Piasan Several of these people had only a few posts.

Albatrossity2 Posts: 2780 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,15:23    Quote (Jasper @ April 24 2007,15:01) If one generously defines "Darwinist" as "anyone who disagrees with FtK," there were a total of 38 different "Darwinists" that posted to that thread: Well, since she is on record with a definition that Darwinist=jerk, we'd probably have to add at least one name to the list, e.g.    Salvador Cordova The best comment on that whole thread comes from about the middle (page 35). Jack Krebs wrote       Quote What we are experiencing here is a long, drawn-out form of the Gish Gallop: no matter what responses are made to all the unsubstantiated and incorrect assertions that are made in one cut-and-paste from Brown, instead of a discussion all we get is another cut-and-paste with more unsubstantiated and incorrect assertions. What I don't understand is why ftk doesn't see that in the eyes of virtually everyone here, this looks foolish. Her persistence, while it may look admirable to her, merely comes across to me as a symptom of denial - a persistent reluctance to see that this tactic is impressing no one. What's next? -------------- Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind Has been obligated from the beginning To create an ordered universe As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.                         - Pattiann Rogers

Doc Bill Posts: 1039 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,15:31    Quote (Ftk @ April 24 2007,12:14) I'm only here to correct serious misconceptions about my position that people seem to like to bring to this forum. I see you made a typo in a previous posting.  Allow me to correct it for you at no charge. FtK meant to write: Quote I'm only here to post misconceptions. Much more accurate

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,15:48    ftK: Quote Strange world we live in. It appears that anything that can be even remotely traced to religion is now outlawed, and porn, homosexuality, explicit sexual content in books, and naturalistic creation stories are A-Okay. My bold. So, let me get this straight - naturalistic creation stories are in the same category as porn, homosexuality and explicit sexual content in books? Like ones not an attempt to discover humanity's ultimate origin and the others, well, just not, basically! I've read that "Post", and I still don't understand the point of it! Are you saying that because naturalistic creation stories are taught that either religion should be taught in science class or that naturalistic creation stories are banned in science class? Or sexual content all together should be banned? Ftk: Quote Such a puzzling world we live in. As I surf the web from one Darwinist site to another, it seems that most of these folks are die hard liberals who believe that there should never be censorship of anything in our schools and universities. huh? I think I see your problem. You have confused http://scholar.google.com with http://www.google.com And FTK, it may interest you to know that this website http://textalyser.net/ rates your website like so: Readability (Gunning-Fog Index) : (6-easy 20-hard) 5.2 Average Syllables per Word : 1.69 Number of different words : 1375 And so on. For Comparison, PT gets Number of different words : 1973 Readability (Gunning-Fog Index) : (6-easy 20-hard) 8.1 And so on. Interesting huh? -------------- 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

jeannot Posts: 1201 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,15:55    Quote (Ftk @ April 24 2007,10:03) Twisting reality to mesh with Darwin's "The Origins of Species" shouldn't be how science works either. http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/creationism/age_of_earth.html Quote "Flood geology" has been dead ever since leading Christians scholars in geology at Cambridge and Oxford rejected it, and that was before Darwn's Origins was ever published. By the 1850s, Christian men of science agreed the earth was extremely old. For some of their reasons, see, "Reasons Why 'Flood Geology' Was Abandoned in the Mid-1800s by Christian Men of Science". Such men included: Reverend William Buckland (head of geology at Oxford) Reverend Adam Sedgwick (head of geology at Cambridge) Reverend Edward Hitchcock (who taught natural theology and geology at Amherst College, Massachusetts) John Pye Smith (head of Homerton Divinity College) Hugh Miller (self taught geologist, and editor of the Free Church of Scotland's newspaper) and, Sir John William Dawson (geologist and paleontologist, a Presbyterian brought up by conservative Christian parents, who also became the only person ever to serve as president of three of the most prestigious geological organizations of Britain and America).

Louis Posts: 6436 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,16:01    Quote I believe there is ~much~ to consider coming from both sides of the debate. Why? Louis -------------- Bye.

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,17:56    Quote (Ftk @ April 24 2007,09:47) Sigh... Don't steal my catchwords, FTK. Intelligently design your OWN. -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,18:00    Quote (Ftk @ April 24 2007,12:14) I'm only here to correct serious misconceptions about my position Honey, with all due respect (none), nobody here gives a flying #### about "your position".  We're all jsut here to laugh at you.  (shrug) You seem to have an awfully inflated sense of your own self-importance.  I've noticed that to be quite common amongst fundie whackjobs. -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,18:01    Quote (Louis @ April 24 2007,16:01) Quote I believe there is ~much~ to consider coming from both sides of the debate. Why? Louis Let me guess: so we don't go to hel1? -------------- "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

Amadan Posts: 1337 Joined: Jan. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,18:13    http://www.orwelltoday.com/doublethink.shtml "Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them." Further comment would be superfluous. And redundant. -------------- "People are always looking for natural selection to generate random mutations" - Densye  4-4-2011 JoeG BTW dumbass- some variations help ensure reproductive fitness so they cannot be random wrt it.

Louis Posts: 6436 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,18:18    Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ April 25 2007,01:00) We're all just here to laugh at you. That's not strictly true. As I mentioned with my "Quantum Leap" analogy a while ago, I'm here because I'm an optimist. I hope one day to meet a genuinely curious IDCist or YECist who is convincable on the basis of the actual evidence. I've met a few and I'd like to meet more. Although I DO laugh at people like FTK because after a while their evasions and tap dancing just become funny. I sadly note that IMO (happy to be wrong) FTK has jumped that shark and is headed down the long dreary road to Object of Mockery. I hope she'll pull off the road and try to work her way back home, but I doubt she'll manage it. It seems a little beyond her. After all, she can;t even support a simple claims she made about science being twisted to conform to "On the Origin of Species". Some people would call throwing claims like that up and not supporting them dishonest. Not me, I'm FAR to nice to think that! Louis -------------- Bye.

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,18:46    Quote (Louis @ April 24 2007,18:18) Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ April 25 2007,01:00) We're all just here to laugh at you. That's not strictly true. As I mentioned with my "Quantum Leap" analogy a while ago, I'm here because I'm an optimist. I hope one day to meet a genuinely curious IDCist or YECist who is convincable on the basis of the actual evidence. I gave up on that looonnngggg ago.  They all have soundproof heads. So I'm just here to laugh at them. -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

Tom Posts: 15 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,21:42    I don’t know if everyone knows, but there is a new movie due out this summer: A Few Good Creationists starring Free to Konfuse(Ftk) played by Jack Nicholson and Darwin played by Tom Cruise. Here’s one scene set in a courtroom, late in the day with a thunderstorm in the background Darwin:  Ftk, where is this evidence that supports your position? Ftk:  I’ve blogged about it on my website and other websites, you can go there to get your answers. Darwin:  Ftk, where is the evidence? Ftk:  You want evidence? Darwin:  I think I’m entitled. Ftk:  You want EVIDENCE! Darwin:  I want the Facts!! Ftk:  You can’t handle the Facts!  Son I live in a make believe world.  Myself and other creationists use tactics such as quote mining, strawmen, and suspension of disbelief.  We are putting you evilutionists on notice that we have our on creationologies to explain the natural world and we don’t give a #### what you think! Darwin:  Is the bible your source for the facts? Ftk:  I think I’ve answered the question. Darwin:  Is the bible your source for the facts?! Ftk:  You’re God #### Right It Is!!!!!!!! (Echoes of thunder throughout the courtroom) End of scence After watching Ftk jump around from thread to thread and avoiding question after question, from some reason A Few Good Men popped into my head and I came up with this little script.  Hope you enjoyed it.

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,21:49    "I eat breakfast 300 yards from 4000 scientists who are trained to destroy my childish arguments, so don't think for one second you can come down here and flash your degrees and make me nervous. YOU WANT ME ON THAT TARD; YOU NEED ME ON THAT TARD"

nuytsia Posts: 131 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 24 2007,23:21    Really hate to bring this thread back on to topic but I've just noticed that the BBC have an article on this find. Curiously it's filed under Wales? Cos like, that where coal comes from... Wales. You know?   Come home to a real fire...   As you were soldier...

Darth Robo Posts: 148 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2007,06:56    "I'm only here to correct serious misconceptions about my position that people seem to like to bring to this forum." So in other words, you're basically here to say "I think 'Darwinism' is wrong and you're all liars, but I'm not going to give you any evidence to that effect." At least skeptic is entertaining.  (yawn) -------------- "Commentary: How would you like to be the wholly-owned servant to an organic meatbag? It's demeaning! If, uh, you weren't one yourself, I mean..."

Louis Posts: 6436 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2007,07:01    FTK, I've thought about this, and sorry but I for one am quite disappointed with you. Oh well I'm sure your little heart is breaking right! ;-) Here's two issues you have raised that I think you owe everyone here an explanation for or a retraction of. 1) Quote I believe there is ~much~ to consider coming from both sides of the debate. Why? 2) Quote Twisting reality to mesh with Darwin's "The Origins of Species" shouldn't be how science works either. Please provide some evidence that this is happening or has happened. Why do you expect or think that it is or has? On what basis do you make this claim? Just try answering those two questions FTK or withdrawing your unsupported claims. Louis -------------- Bye.

Stephen Elliott Posts: 1776 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2007,14:09    Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ April 24 2007,18:46) Quote (Louis @ April 24 2007,18:18)   Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ April 25 2007,01:00) We're all just here to laugh at you. That's not strictly true. As I mentioned with my "Quantum Leap" analogy a while ago, I'm here because I'm an optimist. I hope one day to meet a genuinely curious IDCist or YECist who is convincable on the basis of the actual evidence. I gave up on that looonnngggg ago.  They all have soundproof heads.   So I'm just here to laugh at them. Lenny, I was an IDCist. I was convinced by actual evidence. Whatever happened to the "1 contradiction disproves a positive claim to none"?

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: April 25 2007,18:16    Quote (Stephen Elliott @ April 25 2007,14:09) quote] I gave up on that looonnngggg ago.  They all have soundproof heads.   So I'm just here to laugh at them.[/quote] Lenny, I was an IDCist. I was convinced by actual evidence. Whatever happened to the "1 contradiction disproves a positive claim to none"? Ah, well, I have no interest in converting fundies.  Despite the occasional successes, the payoff just isn't worth the effort.   Back when they were a serious threat, I was serious about fighting fundies.  Now, though, they're nothing.  Nobodies.  So I'm just here to laugh at them. Glad YOU got caught, though.   -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

Pages: (2) < 1 [2] >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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