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... > Brownie points

Pages: (4) < 1 2 [3] 4 >

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,21:03    Quote (Assassinator @ Mar. 15 2008,20:32) skeptic     Quote I am not lucky Ian, I live the life I live because of the choices I have made.  The same can be said for mankind.  The world is the way it is because of the actions that man has committed. Would you mind telling that to this kid, That picture speaks for itself, doesn't it skeptic? Perhaps Skeptic would maintain that that child's horrible situation was a result of 'bad lifestyle choices' on his parents' part. -------------- "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

skeptic Posts: 1163 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,01:15    again I reiterate, I'm not lucky and you don't know the first thing about me or where I've been.  The hard truth is no matter where you are you're living with the choices that others have made both past and present.  The only way to eliminate this evil, as you call it, is to eliminate free will.  Are you willing to accept that?  And no matter how many pictures you throw up there Assassinator, starvation is not evil, it's a fact of life.  I don't know understand how you can embrace this ideal of the whole world at peace with everyone prosperous and happy and at the same time view faith in God as untenable.  I could easily say that your fantasy is farther removed from reality than mine is. oh, and back on the original topic: Global Cooling Climate Panel hotseat

IanBrown_101 Posts: 927 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,02:15    Quote (skeptic @ Mar. 16 2008,07:15) again I reiterate, I'm not lucky and you don't know the first thing about me or where I've been.  The hard truth is no matter where you are you're living with the choices that others have made both past and present.  The only way to eliminate this evil, as you call it, is to eliminate free will.  Are you willing to accept that?  And no matter how many pictures you throw up there Assassinator, starvation is not evil, it's a fact of life.  I don't know understand how you can embrace this ideal of the whole world at peace with everyone prosperous and happy and at the same time view faith in God as untenable.  I could easily say that your fantasy is farther removed from reality than mine is. oh, and back on the original topic: Global Cooling Climate Panel hotseat You know what, you're an evil sod skep, you really are. Unless you have escaped this kid of crippling poverty or overcome some equal (or somehow worse, although I can't see how it could be worse) issue, not only do I not know anything about you, but I don't CARE. Know why? Because you're a selfish douchebag who thinks that just because everyoe has problems on some level, he isn't lucky. You know what? I've almost certainly (I've never goe to get myself checked out to confirm because I'm terrified that it might turn out positive) got depression. I've also got no money right now, and I've got some other mental issues (inability to accept praise, anger issues, some rather minor social issues, and a rather severe case of paranoia. My life, for the most part is fine, but sometimes these things come and bite me in the arse and when they do you can bet I think my life sucks. Heck, even when I'm happy I bemoan life to the point where my friends get annoyed by me now, but I still think I'm lucky. Why? Because I'm NOT starving, disease ridden and destitute. I have friends who care for me, hot and cold running water, a house and clothing, real food (although recently I've been down to just rice with spices to flavour it, which kinda sucks) and actual prospects, including a current position on a uni course. I AM lucky, because I'm not in Sudan right now, being massacred. I'm lucky because I DON'T live in rural India, starving and unlikely to ever escape. I'm lucky because I DON'T live in constant fear of being raped or murdered by hired thugs employed by my own government. But you? You are't lucky, o no. You CAN'T be lucky. People like you, who take their life for granted even when SHOWN how they are lucky, make me sick. I don't know you, you could be the greatest man who ever lived, and you know what? I still think you're vile. God is ridiculous because there is no need to believe in him, but people do. My "fantasy" as you lovingly call it may not be real now, and it may not be attainable, but at least it gives me something to work for that MIGHT work out. Hell, even if life is still unfair, which I have no doubt it will be, I might add, I could still make things a bit better. Trying to do somethig to help doesn't mean we think we're going to wave a wand and sort out all the worlds problems, heck, it does't even mean we think they will ever be solved, but it means we are willing to try, and through this effort we might make some difference. I consider living my life as if I can help to be far greater than YOU my twisted friend. You who thinks you are the universe, and who won't hear about how lucky he is from us plebs because we don't know how you SUFFERED. Christ man, you're the worst kind of pond scum. -------------- I'm not the fastest or the baddest or the fatest. You NEVER seem to address the fact that the grand majority of people supporting Darwinism in these on line forums and blogs are atheists. That doesn't seem to bother you guys in the least. - FtK Roddenberry is my God.

Louis Posts: 6436 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,04:12    {Reads thread} {Falls over laughing} {Realises how common belief in this utter drivel is} {Cries} A) I believe X, therefore X is true. B) X is logically inconsistent and unsupported by any evidence. A)  Human reason is imperfect, X is still true because I bloody well say so. B) Ah, I see. Quick, Nurse! The screens! {Leaves} Louis P.S. Free will? What is that? Do I have free will to perform any act I can conceive of? Or is "free" will actually not as free as some might like us to believe? P.P.S. Actually, please don't answer the above. I've heard/read the asinine answers of the terminally credulous and deluded before, and I have no wish to be patronised again about a subject I am more familiar with than most believers. P.P.P.S. So the news is "Even Southern Baptists are capable of doing something sensible and influenced by evidence"? Well done. Next you'll be telling us that they get their cars fixed by mechanics instead of voodoo witch doctors and act as if the real world exists on occasion. Wow! Well done them. I welcome our brethren and sistren from the Southern Bapist flock to the evidence based community on this issue. Why would this get Brownie points? No one with an ounce of sense cares THAT people agree or disagree about a topic, they care HOW and WHY that agreement or disagreement exists. It's something to do with evidence, not opinion. Gee I wonder if I've said something about that before. I'll leave others to chase the morons around the identical Mulberry bush (Hat Tip R Bill) this time. -------------- Bye.

Reed Posts: 274 Joined: Feb. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,04:19    Quote (skeptic @ Mar. 15 2008,23:15) Global Cooling Climate Panel hotseat The first link shows a breathtaking misunderstanding of science worthy of cdesign proponentis. The second is a litany of well refuted, yet still oft-repeated denailist canards. This is the familiar habitat of the cdesign proponentis. Finally, I notice you never did answer any of my questions.

skeptic Posts: 1163 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,09:29    Sorry, Reed, there's so much on here to respond to at the moment your's might have just gotten lost in the shuffle.  Repeat them please and I'll try to get to them.  Also, in regards to the oft-refuted article, I find it funny that it was published again just 3 days ago. Louis, I would make one observation.  In this country right now the political force behind GW really doesn't care how you came to the light only that you did and you have now fallen in lock-step with the Truth.  Change you lightbulbs, buy a hybrid car, install solar panels and prepare for oblivion all the while blaming capitalism and accepting the only true resolution to the impending disaster: POPULATION CONTROL. Ian, I'm not sure where to begin so I won't.  Baby steps might help before we could have a serious conversation about this.  Just a couple of starters for you to work.  1) I am not the Devil.  2) Take responsibility for you actions and recognize that others are responsible for theirs.  3) Smell the roses.  4)  Realize that you can not simultaneously hate and blame God for the state of the world and deny his existence.

Assassinator Posts: 479 Joined: Nov. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,09:34    Skeptis, you totally miss my point. I never sad that starvation is evil, or talked about some Utopia. I ment that against your bullshit about choices, YOU have choices. Was it that little boy's choice to starve to death? Was it his choice to get born there? You ARE lucky, lucky you cán choose. They can't. If your God exists, with those properties it's simple: he wants those children to starve, he lets them starve, he lets them suffer. Skeptic, do yourself a favor and stop bullshitting about choices. You're damned lucky you're not born in Kenia or Ethiopia. You're damned lucky you cán choose and they cán't, and you know that. Edit: I see you posted slightly faster, so it's that kid own fault he starved to death?? Was that his own responsibility?? In light in all of your logic skeptic, why would I worship your God? Why shouldn't I worship another God, because there are countless numbers of Gods.

Richard Simons Posts: 425 Joined: Oct. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,09:46    Quote (skeptic @ Mar. 16 2008,01:15) And no matter how many pictures you throw up there Assassinator, starvation is not evil, it's a fact of life. Then what would you consider to be evil? For too many people starvation is both evil and a fact of life.   Quote I don't know understand how you can embrace this ideal of the whole world at peace with everyone prosperous and happy and at the same time view faith in God as untenable. What a strange comment. It is the fact that the ideal of peace and prosperity for all of creation is unattainable that convinces many that belief in an omniscient, benevolent, all-powerful god is untenable. Reed's comments on the links you gave are spot on. Quote (skeptic @ Mar. 16 2008,09:29) 2) Take responsibility for you actions and recognize that others are responsible for theirs. This comes across as pompous and self-satisfied. Only someone who has never been in an inescapable situation in which they are suffering through no fault of their own could imply that taking responsibility is sufficient to avoid suffering from all forms of evil. How, exactly, could the starving child in the photo have avoided the suffering by taking personal responsibility? What should they (or their parents) have done differently? Assume, for the sake of argument, that they were caught up in a massive crop failure resulting from a changing climate. -------------- All sweeping statements are wrong.

Nerull Posts: 317 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,10:27    Quote (skeptic @ Mar. 16 2008,10:29) Louis, I would make one observation.  In this country right now the political force behind GW really doesn't care how you came to the light only that you did and you have now fallen in lock-step with the Truth.  Change you lightbulbs, buy a hybrid car, install solar panels and prepare for oblivion all the while blaming capitalism and accepting the only true resolution to the impending disaster: POPULATION CONTROL. Yikes, Skeptic. Your not just an annoying twit. Your a loon. The only place you hear people screaming "Global warming is population control!!!" is fringe AM radio stations where nutcases rant about the Illuminati. That tells me quite a bit about you. -------------- To rebut creationism you pretty much have to be a biologist, chemist, geologist, philosopher, lawyer and historian all rolled into one. While to advocate creationism, you just have to be an idiot. -- tommorris

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,10:37    Quote (skeptic @ Mar. 16 2008,10:29) Also, in regards to the oft-refuted article, I find it funny that it was published again just 3 days ago. In a shamelessly right wing hack publication. Quote In this country right now the political force behind GW really doesn't care how you came to the light only that you did and you have now fallen in lock-step with the Truth.  Change you lightbulbs, buy a hybrid car, install solar panels and prepare for oblivion all the while blaming capitalism and accepting the only true resolution to the impending disaster: POPULATION CONTROL. No, the Truth they care about him accepting is their right wing propaganda.  The whole entire second sentence in your "observation" is the antithesis of GW and his political force.  Are you living in some alternate universe where this isn't the case? (ETA:  I misread this the first time around.  I saw GW and automatically connected Skeptic and the Washington Times with GW meaning George W Bush.  That's why the above makes no sense.) Quote 4)  Realize that you can not simultaneously hate and blame God for the state of the world and deny his existence. Are you really that dense?  He's saying that IF god exists, then god is not omni-max, else all of this evil would not happen.  IF god exists, then he is not worthy of worship, but of revulsion instead.  He (and everyone else) can however argue these things without actually believing in god or hating god (it's impossible to hate something that doesn't exist, right Heddle?)  Are you really unable to grasp this rather simple concept?

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,10:45    Quote (skeptic @ Mar. 16 2008,02:15) The only way to eliminate this evil, as you call it, is to eliminate free will. What a load of carp.  We could make strides to eliminate this sort of evil by giving a damn and helping people in need, which does nothing to disrupt anyone's free will. Of course, this begs the question of why god can't eliminate this evil without giving up our free will.  Why can't he?  Why did god create this evil in the first place?  You either have to jettison god's omni-benevolence or some other attribute that is normally associated with god in order to make up for this.  Appeals to "free-will" - which I should note is untenable with an omni-max god anyway - simply don't cut it. Quote And no matter how many pictures you throw up there Assassinator, starvation is not evil, it's a fact of life. By your definition, nothing is evil.  Too bad for you, your god has created that condition where starving occurs, murder occurs, rape occurs, genocide occurs, etc. etc. etc.  You can try to explain away the human condition by simply tossing out the idea of "evil" but that doesn't make your god any less of an a-hole. Quote I don't know understand how you can embrace this ideal of the whole world at peace with everyone prosperous and happy and at the same time view faith in God as untenable.  I could easily say that your fantasy is farther removed from reality than mine is. I'm sorry, but who embraces an ideal of the whole world at peace...?  No one is saying that.  What we are saying is that if god exists, and god is omni-max, then god has a lot of explaining to do about this condition that definitely does exist.  Further, I can say that faith in god is untenable because the first part of your statement doesn't hold and for the simple fact that there is no evidence for any god or gods.  If it is not untenable to believe in god, then it's not untenable to believe in the floating teapot, FSM, Allah, Thor, Zeus, invisible pink unicorns, or anything else that anyone can conceivably think of.  And, no, you can't say that a fantasy that I don't hold is farther removed from your fantasy that doesn't have a lick of evidence for it.

skeptic Posts: 1163 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,10:56    Quote (Nerull @ Mar. 16 2008,10:27) Quote (skeptic @ Mar. 16 2008,10:29) Louis, I would make one observation.  In this country right now the political force behind GW really doesn't care how you came to the light only that you did and you have now fallen in lock-step with the Truth.  Change you lightbulbs, buy a hybrid car, install solar panels and prepare for oblivion all the while blaming capitalism and accepting the only true resolution to the impending disaster: POPULATION CONTROL. Yikes, Skeptic. Your not just an annoying twit. Your a loon. The only place you hear people screaming "Global warming is population control!!!" is fringe AM radio stations where nutcases rant about the Illuminati. That tells me quite a bit about you. Actually, I seem to recall Kristine say just this within the last month.  I'm hearing this more and more and I find this truly scary. As for the rest, you guys are unable to think beyond your emotions to even get to what I'm saying.  Ironic.

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,11:16    Quote (skeptic @ Mar. 16 2008,11:56) As for the rest, you guys are unable to think beyond your emotions to even get to what I'm saying.  Ironic. No, we understand what you are saying perfectly well, you just - as usual - are saying stupid things.  Of course, it's easy for you to lash out and call us emotional, childish, etc. than for you to actually think about what you are saying and actually read our rebuttals and comments isn't it?

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,12:06    All Skeptic is doing is rather childishly expressing an extremely common view seen among upper middle class American Christians, especially Protestants. They believe that all good fortune or bad fortune is due to how good a person you are, whether you practice the right religion, or whether you come from a 'good culture'. In this mindset, anyone who is horribly poor is poor because they deserve to be poor. Their freewill led them to make choices that made them poor. If Skeptic is well off, well fed, and safe, that's ONLY because he's made the right choices -- and he REALLY doesn't want to hear that it's the result of being born in the right place, at the right time, and with the right parents. I'm sure he's never thought about it, but that he thinks that if he was born in, say, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Haiti, or wherever, he'd still be just as well off and well fed as he is now, because, of course, he would make the right decisions because of his free will. This is why so many American conservatives hated Guns, Germs, and Steel -- they really hated the idea that White Westerners are as wealthy and powerful as they are ultimately due to geographical accident. Goddamn it, they want to be told they're wealthy and powerful because they're religiously and culturally superior, and so they DESERVE it! It seems to be the logical extension of the Protestant idea that faith is the ultimate virtue and that good works are irrelevant. It's pretty obviously a religious rationalization for selfishness. -------------- "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

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,12:39    All of Arden's germy guns are made of rubber and the only steel is where the battery goes. Skeptic you are back to being an insufferable wanker.  The suggestion to 'get over it, take responsibility for yourself, pull yourself up by the bootstraps ect ect' is the fucking voice of privilege.  That doesn't mean you are wrong.  It means that your simplistic analysis is rather incomplete. anyway louis you're gay. -------------- 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

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,13:28    Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Mar. 16 2008,12:39) anyway louis you're gay. Yeah, and not even in a cool way. A proper gay man would dress better. PS: People need to watch this. -------------- "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

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,13:45    Another thing Skeptic is doing is the odious Xian ideal of the sins of the parents pass to the sins of the children.  Starving children in Africa are there perhaps not because of their bad choices, but the bad choices of their ancestors, so it's all their fault, and the kids fault by extension.  It's just like how we are all guilty of the sin of Adam, and are therefore guilty and lowly scum in the eyes of god.  Apparently, god has found the "sin" gene and knows who inherits it and who doesn't?

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,13:55    Is there an actual point to this thread? Was there ever? -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,14:04    Quote (Lou FCD @ Mar. 16 2008,13:55) Is there an actual point to this thread? Was there ever? Something about how Skeptic thought we should have warm fuzzies for Southern Baptists because a couple of them don't deny global warming. I don't remember that well anymore. -------------- "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

Louis Posts: 6436 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,14:10    Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Mar. 16 2008,19:28) Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Mar. 16 2008,12:39) anyway louis you're gay. Yeah, and not even in a cool way. A proper gay man would dress better. :angry: PS: People need to watch this. Whilst I am (perhaps sadly) not a member of the homosexual fraternity (or indeed sorority) I have to say that I *DO* need to dress better. Arden is at least right about that. The sun, it would appear, shines on every dog's arse one day. Louis P.S. Lou, a "point"? The only "point" Skeptic has here is a) taking up space that could be better used and b) claiming (falsely) to "introduce" us to concepts he thinks we're unaware of whilst whining about how mean we all are. It's concern trolling and wankery of the most contemptible kind. The point of this thread, if it can be even called that is "Oh Gosh! Look! Some people I think you hate (because I lack the imagination, honesty or intellect to understand/deal with what you *actually* think and feel about religion and religious people) said something that the woefully inaccurate caricature of what I think you are might agree with". Wow. Consider the earth shattered. -------------- Bye.

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,14:22    Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Mar. 16 2008,15:04)   Quote (Lou FCD @ Mar. 16 2008,13:55) Is there an actual point to this thread? Was there ever? Something about how Skeptic thought we should have warm fuzzies for Southern Baptists because a couple of them don't deny global warming. I don't remember that well anymore. Yes well, the Catholic Church finally got around to acknowledging that the earth goes around the sun, so I guess they deserve a cookie as well. If someone could get the discussion back around to the Baptists beginning to join the current century on one particular scientific question and why that's worthy of comment, I'll consider leaving the thread open. Perhaps a discussion of what makes global warming less threatening than evolution to particular cults?  What makes this part of science and reality OK to accept (after years of hemming, hawing, and general tap-dancing and denial), while that part of science and reality remains anathema would be an interesting discourse. Is it just the special place in a particular god's heart thing, or is there something else at work as well?  After all, there's not really any part of science or reality that doesn't impact on the theology in what a literalist would see as a negative way.  I don't hear much insistence that rabbits chew their cud or that the earth has corners and supporting pillars, for example.  Why not? -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,14:30    Quote (Louis @ Mar. 16 2008,15:10) The point of this thread, if it can be even called that is "Oh Gosh! Look! Some people I think you hate (because I lack the imagination, honesty or intellect to understand/deal with what you *actually* think and feel about religion and religious people) said something that the woefully inaccurate caricature of what I think you are might agree with". Wow. Consider the earth shattered. That's what I've gotten from it as well. As such, let's get it around to something worthwhile or put it out of its misery. -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

skeptic Posts: 1163 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,14:44    When you guys come back to reality and start to think again in lieu of these boorish generalizations you might try thinking about the condition of humanity as a whole and the causes for that conditions.  Is it God's fault that man has chosen to act the way it has, to squander it's resources the way it has, to kill one another the way it has?  As much as you wish it to be so, this has nothing to do with me and where I was born or what I've been exposed to.  This has to do with free will and humanity's exercise thereof. Also, to shed some light on my motivation for starting the thread, much to the contrary of proposed theories, I posted that story as sarcasm.  Personally, I find it pathetic that the SBC or any other organization feel so pressured that they must jump on a brain-dead bandwagon to curry favor.  Just a hint, the SBC doesn't really embrace GW, this is PR, nothing more.  If you follow SB theology, outside of the commandment to tend the Garden, baptists and most fundamentalists believe that God is directly in control and nothing mankind can do or say will change that.  The world will end at God's command and not a moment before and if God chooses to use GW or a rain of fire then incandescent light bulbs and hybrid cars aren't going to change that.  It's PR and that's why it's easier to embrace than evolution because they don't really believe it either.

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,15:11    Quote (skeptic @ Mar. 16 2008,15:44) When you guys come back to reality and start to think again in lieu of these boorish generalizations you might try thinking about the condition of humanity as a whole and the causes for that conditions. That's rich coming from you. Quote Is it God's fault that man has chosen to act the way it has, to squander it's resources the way it has, to kill one another the way it has? Yes, if god is omni-max. Quote As much as you wish it to be so, this has nothing to do with me and where I was born or what I've been exposed to. No one said it did.  What we said was that you have choices that others don't because of where you were born, etc. and that you are an insensitive jerk for not recognizing that. Quote This has to do with free will and humanity's exercise thereof. Not only are you incapable of showing the free will is possible with an omni-max god - it isn't due to the inherent contradiction of a god that knows all at the time of creation - to blame a newborn child in Africa who is starving for his lot because of his free will is not only ludicrous, but insane. Quote Also, to shed some light on my motivation for starting the thread, much to the contrary of proposed theories, I posted that story as sarcasm.  Personally, I find it pathetic that the SBC or any other organization feel so pressured that they must jump on a brain-dead bandwagon to curry favor. IOW, not only are you an evolution denier, but also a denier of global warming and you are willing to cite propagandistic sources like the Washington Times as evidence.  Further, you will heap scorn on those that do understand the science because that's your way of dealing with people who disagree with you and are right, much like you heap scorn on all of us for pointing out your deficient understanding of evolution and your pathetic arguments in regards to your religion. Lou, this horse is dead.  You may as well shoot it.

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,15:41    well it depends on which baptists you are talking about then i reckon that does make a difference.  these first baptist types that go to church downtown where they work ain't exactly the kinda baptists I like to pick on. I'm talking bout missionary baptists and three wheel baptists, i'm talking about churches being about 100 meters from each other going down the road because they had some sort of doctrinal split a while back and some of em ain't spoke since.  I'm talking the kinda baptist where you could still get the spirit in the middle of preachin and just holler as loud as you could right there with your hand held up high and just holler about it. That's a lot more fun to talk about than our boorish generalizations or some people's argumentum ad mere assertionismus incessantum.  Has anyone here ever went to a snake handling?  Cause they probly weren't baptists there. -------------- 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

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,15:45    BTW, I think Steve Story's theory of the multiple denial has once again been confirmed through another test.  All science denialists have at least 2 pieces of science they deny.  For Skeptic, it seems to be global warming and evolution.

Louis Posts: 6436 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,16:24    Wait so Skeptic thinks that IF global warming is happening and IF it's god's will that it's happening (which it pretty much has to be according to fundy "theology") then there's nowt we can do so therefore all the people trying to "save the planet" are doing is either wasting their time or sinister population control/red agenda etc? Whoa. Dude. Ease back on the ketamine. I've said it before and I've said it again, Obliviot's grip on reality is exceedingly tenuous. Very demonstrably so. I've also said before that "we" (if such an entity exists) need to do very little to combat fundy fuck knuckles like Skeptic. All we need to do is let them open their mouths. Thanks again Skeptic for making our point that you are a dangerously clueless idiot. Louis P.S. GCT, I can never remember if Obliviot is actually an antievolutionist or not. Sometimes I seem to remember he is, sometimes I seem to remember he isn't. Either way the multiple denialist idea is in general a very good one, and certainly one borne out by a prima facie examination of the evidence. -------------- Bye.

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,16:31    Quote (Louis @ Mar. 16 2008,16:24) Wait so Skeptic thinks that IF global warming is happening and IF it's god's will that it's happening (which it pretty much has to be according to fundy "theology") then there's nowt we can do so therefore all the people trying to "save the planet" are doing is either wasting their time or sinister population control/red agenda etc? Actually, if I interpreted Skeptic's old-man grousing correctly, I think he's saying that while he thinks that global warming (and environmentalism, and probably evolution) is all a bunch a pointy-headed liberal hogwash, he may not himself ascribe to the "Jesus wants us to burn through the planet's resources as quick as possible so as to hasten the rapture" notion. I *think* he's just describing what the SB's think, not necessarily agreeing with it. Do correct me if there's evidence to the contrary. Quote Just a hint, the SBC doesn't really embrace GW, this is PR, nothing more.   We figured that out. Give us *some* credit. -------------- "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

Assassinator Posts: 479 Joined: Nov. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,16:53    Skeptic:   Quote When you guys come back to reality and start to think again in lieu of these boorish generalizations you might try thinking about the condition of humanity as a whole and the causes for that conditions. Certainly, but you know that the little kid I showed earlier has nothing to do with that and doesn't deserve that.   Quote Is it God's fault that man has chosen to act the way it has, to squander it's resources the way it has, to kill one another the way it has?  As much as you wish it to be so, this has nothing to do with me and where I was born or what I've been exposed to.  This has to do with free will and humanity's exercise thereof. We never sad it was God's fault, we just blaim him for not doing anything. And again, that little kid and thousands like them have nothing to do with those choices. You do know that don't you? I wasn't talking about us as a whole, I'm talking about individuals, individuals like that little child who are apperantly ignored by God and left to die horribly just like tens of thousands like him. It's about this Skeptic: You and I have choices, that little kid had none. Nothing has been done about it, he died slowly and horribly. We're only wondering how that is compatible with a loving God, we're just wondering why the héll we want to worship such a being. Do you understand that? @Louis: No no what he sad about population control, is that population control would be a 'solution' for climate change. I do find it almost funny that we westren people think we can and should stop climate change. Really, isn't that the most retarted thing you've (and anyone) has heard?

Reed Posts: 274 Joined: Feb. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,17:13    Quote (skeptic @ Mar. 16 2008,07:29) Sorry, Reed, there's so much on here to respond to at the moment your's might have just gotten lost in the shuffle.  Repeat them please and I'll try to get to them. They are still here, no need to repeat them.       Quote Also, in regards to the oft-refuted article, I find it funny that it was published again just 3 days ago. This is a standard denialist tactic. Repeat the same lies frequently to maintain the illusion that there is a real debate. Teach the non-existent controversy!   Quote 4)  Realize that you can not simultaneously hate and blame God for the state of the world and deny his existence. You have utterly failed to understand the objection, or are deliberately distorting it. Pointing out the apparent contradictions in your view doesn't require us to accept the assumptions it is based on. As an apparent believer in God, you have to deal with the whole question of whether God is a giant asshole, and how that squares with the claim that he is also good and loving. Atheism, and indeed other religions such Hinduism and the Greek and Norse mythologies do not, since these views do not depend on an all-powerful benevolent creator.

Pages: (4) < 1 2 [3] 4 >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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