RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (21) < ... 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 >   
  Topic: Challenge to Evolutionists< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2007,22:12   

FTK - You're back! You're giddy!

I already commented on your expulsion, but won't again because Wesley sends raptors to pluck your scalp when you do. †

It always was love-hate, you and AtBC, now same as it ever was. A few rascals here turn you on (and turn on you) more than any 10 creationist stuffed shirts. They stir your soul, and you stir up AtBC, and both keep spinning long after the party's over. What IS that?

Here's a little advice. Just get with real evolutionary biology and come over to the dark side. You just KNOW you WANT to. You'd be able to argue from a position that actually has basis in science, you'd leave behind that nagging worry that you've committed thousands of hours to studying abject horseshit, and would no longer be associated with the phony psychotic trollery of the likes of supersport. You can even remain a committed Christian and hang out at your church.

We'd still pull your pigtails, but it wouldn't be in a mean way.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2007,22:26   

Quote
Answers which are just opinions, unsupported by facts, are NOT answers, even "this time around".


Holy smokin' monkey...then the ToE is in a whole lotta trouble, no??

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 22 2007,22:39   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 22 2007,22:12)
FTK - You're back! You're giddy!

I already commented on your expulsion, but won't again because Wesley sends raptors to pluck your scalp when you do. †

It always was love-hate, you and AtBC, now same as it ever was. A few rascals here turn you on (and turn on you) more than any 10 creationist stuffed shirts. They stir your soul, and you stir up AtBC, and both keep spinning long after the party's over. What IS that?

Here's a little advice. Just get with real evolutionary biology and come over to the dark side. You just KNOW you WANT to. You'd be able to argue from a position that actually has basis in science, you'd leave behind that nagging worry that you've committed thousands of hours to studying abject horseshit, and would no longer be associated with the phony psychotic trollery of the likes of supersport. You can even remain a committed Christian and hang out at your church.

We'd still pull your pigtails, but it wouldn't be in a mean way.


Well, Bill, you are one of only a couple people who understood my Lenny parody. †Thank you for that.

As far as coming over to the dark side, I have a much more difficult plan in mind.

I'm going to drag the whole lot of you out of that swamp that's foggin' your minds and into the light....



Now relax, while I work my magic...[God knows it's going to take a friggin miracle to pull this one off.]

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,01:20   

Ftk,

I know you don't care for me and don't like my attitude.  However, I was going to post on your supersport answers links.  Fortunately, I finished reading the thread before I posted.  Ditto what Albatrosity2 said.

Anytime you're willing to post actual answers that superturd or JoeMental posted, I'll be here.

Please, PLEASE, PLEASE remember that opinions aren't fact.  Also remember that evidence is necessary for anything you claim to be objective truth.

Thanks for continuing to be ignorant.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
jeannot



Posts: 1201
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,03:43   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 22 2007,22:26)
Quote
Answers which are just opinions, unsupported by facts, are NOT answers, even "this time around".


Holy smokin' monkey...then the ToE is in a whole lotta trouble, no??

So it's your position that the ToE is unsupported by facts?
Are you going to back that up or just retract?

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,03:53   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 22 2007,22:26)
 
Quote
Answers which are just opinions, unsupported by facts, are NOT answers, even "this time around".


Holy smokin' monkey...then the ToE is in a whole lotta trouble, no??

As we're still in the "honeymoon" period (shudder) of your return FTK, i'll cut you some slack but..

If the ToE is in trouble because it's unsupported by facts then why do you not let the same thing bother you when cheerleading for Walt Brown?

It's "unsupported by facts" all the way down with Brown yet you appear to have no problem with that.

And I could say exactly the same thing about your religion. What's more supported by verifiable facts, Jebus returning from the dead (it was writ in a book) or this article here picked at random because it had "evolution" in the title?


Adaptive evolution of centromere proteins in plants and animals

Do you see my point yet?

Anyway, I think it was a joke comment, but do you see my point as to why you can wind some people up (including me)?

I look forwards to not discussing the "speculation taught as fact" issue also.

--------------
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 Gaugerís work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Steverino



Posts: 411
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,07:22   

FTK,

Welcome back.  I'm never in favor of banning here...although, I didn't know the exact reasons.

It's so very sad that you view the side that can support its theory, the only real theory, with evidence, data and research as the "dark side".

Doesn't say much for your ability to critically think or to not be duped by BS because that what you need to believe.

I think it would be best if you have an issue...that you present one issue at a time and let the dedate runs its course on just that one issue before heading off in another direction.

So, what shall it be...SLOT...Age of the Earth....IC...

--------------
- Born right the first time.
- Asking questions is NOT the same as providing answers.
- It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys show up!

   
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,08:01   

Quote (Steverino @ Sep. 23 2007,08:22)
It's so very sad that you view the side that can support its theory, the only real theory, with evidence, data and research as the "dark side".

The "dark side" came from me. FTK advocates a place characterized by lots of lens flare.

FTK: Join me, and we can rule the galaxy as father and daughter. Come with me. It's the only way.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,11:44   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 22 2007,16:12)
HI OLDMAN!!

My golly gosh I've misssseeeedddd you!

*kisses**

Whatever else you say about FTK, I think it's clear that she hangs out here because we heathens are lot more interesting than your average UDer.

It reminds me of this crazy reactionary friend I used to have who'd call me on the phone ranting about the evils of liberals and nonchristians all the time. When I asked him why he felt this way when ALL his friends were liberals and nonchristians, he had no 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

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,11:46   

Quote (jeannot @ Sep. 23 2007,03:43)
Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 22 2007,22:26)
Quote
Answers which are just opinions, unsupported by facts, are NOT answers, even "this time around".


Holy smokin' monkey...then the ToE is in a whole lotta trouble, no??

So it's your position that the ToE is unsupported by facts?
Are you going to back that up or just retract?

I think this is great place to start, Ftk.  You made this statement after your re-instatement--in the new fact based incarnation.

So, I hate to bring it up, but I don't have to since jeannot already did.  Are you going back on the pirahna list so soon after coming back?

Fact 1: Speciation has been observed.

While this fact alone certainly doesn't sum up the whole of ToE, it does SUPPORT THE THEORY of ToE.

So, will you now acknowledge this fact and retract your above statement or will you give us a rundown on how this fact does not--in fact--support ToE?

I believe the choice is yours again.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10778
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,11:48   

FtK find RTH Sexi_Hawt
DHeddle Finds Tarden Chatterbox Sexi_Hawt

We have a "broad appeal"

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
someotherguy



Posts: 398
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,11:55   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 23 2007,11:48)
DHeddle Finds Tarden Chatterbox Sexi_Hawt

I think this revelation may come as a surprise to DHeddle. :D

--------------
Evolander in training

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10778
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,12:00   

Quote (someotherguy @ Sep. 23 2007,11:55)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 23 2007,11:48)
DHeddle Finds Tarden Chatterbox Sexi_Hawt

I think this revelation may come as a surprise to DHeddle. :D

But NOT Tarden?
:p

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,12:18   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 23 2007,12:00)
Quote (someotherguy @ Sep. 23 2007,11:55)
 
Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 23 2007,11:48)
DHeddle Finds Tarden Chatterbox Sexi_Hawt

I think this revelation may come as a surprise to DHeddle. :D

But NOT Tarden?
:p

HA HA THIS IS YOU:



--------------
"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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10778
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,12:21   

'AAAAAAAAAAAROLD!

You dirty old man!

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
slpage



Posts: 349
Joined: June 2004

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 24 2007,11:46   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 22 2007,19:15)
Now, here is what I want to know. †Why was he banned?? †Isn't it Wes who made the "I'm with the banned" buttons? †Don't you guys complain *all the time* about Davescots banning policy? †What the heck is going on around here?

Hmmm....

Let's see...

A dude that literally cuts and pastes thread-opening posts on half a dozen discussion boards, spam-trolls with 158 posts in 3 days (he has thousands of posts at CARM), evades, ignores replies, shifts goalposts, changes topics, etc., is banned one of only a couple of people ever banned here -  and you want to compare that to your extreme mesomorph pal Dave Springer who has banned more people than post at UD for such infractions as not agreeing with him on the the definition of a word?

Incredible...

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 24 2007,12:13   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 23 2007,04:39)
SNIP!

Oh lawks. FTK's back? I predict evasion and smugness. I still have a swathe of perfectly polite questions for you FtK, when you're ready that is.

Of course in the interim you can convert me to the light or whatever it is you think you represent. It should be funny to watch. I suggest you try it.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 24 2007,12:13   

Quote (Albatrossity2 @ Sep. 22 2007,21:19)
Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 22 2007,19:15)
   
Quote (blipey @ Sep. 22 2007,16:20)
Hey Ftk,

This might be a great time for you to substantiate that my claim of question dodging is untrue.  Please take the requisite 3 seconds to show an example of supersport answering a question.  Examples of JoeG doing the same would be great as well (on his thread, of course).

You have made this claim that I am wrong.  In your new "show the evidence mode" I guess you'll now be showing me the proof?

Blipster, just because you don't like or agree with a person's answer doesn't mean they didn't give one.

And, dude, I am all about substantiation this time around.  Here are just some of his answers...

Here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here

Baloney. Answers which are just opinions, unsupported by facts, are NOT answers, even "this time around". Click on those 9 links and you find that sporty's answers were, in reality

#1- a bald-faced assertion unsupported by evidence
#2 - answering a question by posing another question, which was not an answer
#3 - an opinion, later shown to be complete bs
#4 - a busted link, perhaps you copied the URL wrong
#5 - an opinion that a dinosaur fossil is 6.8 thousand years old, unsupported by evidence
#6 - an opinion, later debunked
#7 - a quotemine of an article, which was shown not to back up his assertion at all
#8 - same bs as #7, repeated for comic effect?
#9 - a bunch of bs which avoided an actual answer

Furthermore, he avoided ever backing up his claim that mental processes can generate life instantly, even though he was asked about this at least 9 or 10 times.

Sounds like your kind of guy.

Welcome back.

So, Ftk, what about it?  Are you going to let this stand?  Normal, rational persons who really are concerned with education and the kids see this sort of thing as a progressive argument.

I asserted that supersport, JoeG, and yourself dodge questions (as evidenced by many threads here and other places).

You said "no we don't".

I said, "Fine.  Could you provide some examples of questions being answered?"

After about 6,000 years (only capped at this number by the obvious age of the Earth), you provided a list of what you claim to be supersport answers.

Albatrosity2 showed that these were not, in fact, answers, but merely a slew of assertions and personal opinions.

It would now be on your shoulders to counter his (and my) claim.

Oh, wait, you don't have time...you've done it before...it doesn't matter...there's a conspiracy that counters whatever you say....  Let me translate that for you:

You have the attention span of a two year old are too lazy to continue an argument that you aren't smart enough to finish.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 24 2007,22:19   

Quote
You have the attention span of a two year old are too lazy to continue an argument that you aren't smart enough to finish.


ROTFL...while that may all very well be true, I fail to see how SS answered questions any differently than the rest of you did. †Your answers were replete with a bald-faced assertions unsupported by evidence, opinions, speculation, and goodness knows that Dave is world famous for providing a lame piece of evidence that supposedly provides irrefutable *facts* for the question being asked, and then immediately turns the tables from defense to offense by slamming back a question and harping on it indefinitely because he knows that the question he is asking cannot be supported with empirical evidence any more than the one he is trying to answer, as if somehow that makes his answer more believeable.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 24 2007,22:34   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Sep. 18 2007,08:18)
Quote (supersport @ Sep. 18 2007,08:14)
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Sep. 18 2007,08:09)
 
Quote (supersport @ Sep. 18 2007,08:03)
 
Quote (Steverino @ Sep. 18 2007,07:36)
   
Quote (supersport @ Sep. 18 2007,07:14)
     
Quote (Steverino @ Sep. 18 2007,07:05)
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO....not you people....or Ted Haggard...Senator Larry Craig...Senator David Vitter...

unSupersport, you are a tard.

the only tards -- whatever that is -- are the people who believe in darwinism without even a shred of evidence that their chosen mechanism can accomplish what's advertised.

No, "Tard" would be those too ignorant to acknowledge what is and is not evidence.

Please post any evidence that supports YEC or ID.

the evidence of YEC is the simple fact that lifeforms could not have built up materialistically over time.  There is no physical way (as evidence of this thread that mutations can't do it.)  Therefore, life must have appeared instantly by way of mental processes.  The only question now is when it happened (like that really matters)...but I would say YEC is certainly a possibility since the dinosaurs have been unearthed with soft tissue and proteins in their bones, meaning some of the most "ancient" of earths creatures still have organic material hanging off them.   Also, as far as human evolution goes, there are a grand total of about 200 Neanderthal individuals unearthed, about 25 or so of the so-called "homo erectus" unearthed ---- these people, if they evolved into modern humans would have had to number in the multi, multi millions.......so where the heck are they?  Evos will come back and say that fossilization is rare, and I would agree -- it only happens when it floods or when lots of water is around.  But you guys cannot count evidence that doesn't exist -- and the evidence shows there's simply not enough dead humans in the ground for evolution to have ever dreamed of happening.

The evidence shows that you have no answer to my point regarding bacteria and toxic environments.

Nice try to handwaive it away 10/10.

Do you have a reference/link for the dinosaurs with "organic material hanging off them"?

you have yet to show that they aren't degenerating.

Supersport, how long do you think it takes the average bacteria to reproduce?

Sanfords generic entropy puts an upper limit on the number of available reproduction events.

Supersport, I know they are not degenerating because they are still there after the maximum amount of reproductive events Sanford says are available to them.

I ask again, how long do you think it takes the average bacteria to reproduce?

And how many generations does that give us per year?

Oh look.  I found a spot where oldman explicitly answers a challenge from supersport.  As yet, supersport has yet to acknowledge that this point was even made.

And that took me 35 seconds of searching on this thread alone.  Would you care to back up your assertion that supersport's questions go unanswered?

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,06:16   

FtK

Claiming that it is lame is one thing, and you are good at that. Providing evidence against it is another, and I note that you conveniently left that stuff out of your post. As I recall, you have a copy of Carroll's book, where my "lame piece of evidence" is found.

So let's check the goalposts before we start. Sporty asked    
Quote
I challenge evolutionists to show me ONE mutation ever documented in the history of science that has created a new, beneficial, selectable morphological addition to an existing body part.    .    .    .    (a mutation that alters physical, outward appearance in a beneficial way. )

I responded    
Quote
Endless Forms Most beautiful, by Sean Carroll, has several examples of this. One of them is a mutation in the regulatory sequence of a gene that give more pigmentation to a section of a fruit fly wing. Since fruit flies use their wings in mating displays, a change in the pigmentation can have profound effects on mating success. But Carroll describes a phylogenetic tree showing how this mutation occurred, when it occurred, and the resulting speciation events that occurred.


So, in your new incarnation that requires you to back up assertions, or retract them, please show me how that example does not address sporty's question. Thanks in advance.

As for this characterization  
Quote
immediately turns the tables from defense to offense by slamming back a question and harping on it indefinitely because he knows that the question he is asking cannot be supported with empirical evidence any more than the one he is trying to answer, as if somehow that makes his answer more believeable.

interested readers might note two things. Firstly, I had been asking that question for some time previously, and he had never answered it. Honest discussions require that questions get addressed; dishonest discussants require constant reminders of that. Secondly, as noted above, I answered his question with evidence-based material. I suspect that for most folks, compared to a non-answer, that evidence-based answers are "more believable." Apparently not for you, however.

Anyway, sorry to stay in character, but I really would like to know how my answer to sporty's OP is lame. If that is just your opinion, and you can't back it up with facts or other evidence, you haven't kept up your end of the bargain.

--------------
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

   
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,06:32   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 22 2007,19:15)
Quote (blipey @ Sep. 22 2007,16:20)
Hey Ftk,

This might be a great time for you to substantiate that my claim of question dodging is untrue.  Please take the requisite 3 seconds to show an example of supersport answering a question.  Examples of JoeG doing the same would be great as well (on his thread, of course).

You have made this claim that I am wrong.  In your new "show the evidence mode" I guess you'll now be showing me the proof?

Blipster, just because you don't like or agree with a person's answer doesn't mean they didn't give one.

And, dude, I am all about substantiation this time around.  Here are just some of his answers...

Here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here

Now, here is what I want to know.  Why was he banned??  Isn't it Wes who made the "I'm with the banned" buttons?  Don't you guys complain *all the time* about Davescots banning policy?  What the heck is going on around here?

Wes, are you going to address this, or are you going to pull a Lilley??

Oh My. I thought this was a joke, where FTK was saying "yep, you are right, those guys were trolls".

I did not realize FTK was seriously saying that SS had in fact answered points.

FTK, you've just gone down a few more notches, and I did not know those notches were even available!

--------------
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 Gaugerís work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,09:19   

Off Topic:

Dave, hey, I was planning to scoot out of work early today and come up to KSU to listen to Miller's lecture on MN, but I'm just too busy to take off early. †

Why the heck didn't they schedule it for the evening? †Don't you have some pull around there? †Get them to schedule this stuff in the evening so I don't have to take off work....

As for your last post, it'll have to wait...yes, yes, evasion, blah, blah, blah...whatever.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,09:31   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 25 2007,09:19)
Off Topic:

Dave, hey, I was planning to scoot out of work early today and come up to KSU to listen to Miller's lecture on MN, but I'm just too busy to take off early.  

Why the heck didn't they schedule it for the evening?  Don't you have some pull around there?  Get them to schedule this stuff in the evening so I don't have to take off work....

As for your last post, it'll have to wait...yes, yes, evasion, blah, blah, blah...whatever.

FtK

Too bad you can't make it, but I've got no clout with our geology department. Or anyone else, for that matter...

For the onlookers, this talk  
Quote
What's All the Fuss About Methodological Naturalism?: Dr. Keith B. Miller, Department of Geology, Kansas State University. Tuesday, September 25, 2007, 4:00pm, Thompson Hall 213. Sponsored by the Department of Geology

should be quite good. Keith is an evangelical Christian. He is also a scientist, and an excellent teacher. According to the Geology Dept. website,  
Quote
He frequently teaches service courses for the department, including a section of Natural Disasters, and has originated a course on dinosaurs. His research interests are in terrigenous rocks and paleosols. He is also particularly interested in issues in science education and fundamentalist opposition to evolution, and served as editor for a book on the subject.

Too bad you have to miss it, FtK; I suspect that you and your kids would enjoy the talk, and you might even learn something (scientific) about dinosaurs

--------------
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

   
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,09:36   

Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 25 2007,09:19)
Off Topic:

Dave, hey, I was planning to scoot out of work early today and come up to KSU to listen to Miller's lecture on MN, but I'm just too busy to take off early.  

Why the heck didn't they schedule it for the evening?  Don't you have some pull around there?  Get them to schedule this stuff in the evening so I don't have to take off work....

As for your last post, it'll have to wait...yes, yes, evasion, blah, blah, blah...whatever.

Hey, seems more like a private message to me then a forum post.

blah, blah, blah. whatever.

--------------
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 Gaugerís work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,09:36   

I know he's a Christian, Dave....I've met him in the past.  And, believe me, it's absolutely *killing* me not to be able to get out of here....how long is he lecturing?  Hour?

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,12:03   

I've just read this entire thread at the behest of Erasmus FCD.

I'm very glad I was on holiday.

I should do it much more often.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,13:19   

Welcome back, Louis.  Sorry you're not still on holiday, and that you read this thread straight through without a whisky.  Wow.  Someone beat the spellcheck on this board--it wants me to put an "e" in whisky!

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
silverspoon



Posts: 123
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,07:52   

Quote
So, in your new incarnation that requires you to back up assertions, or retract them, please show me how that example does not address sporty's question. Thanks in advance.

Did this ever get an answer from Ftk?

Consider this a bump incase Ftk simply forgot to back up, or retract.

--------------
Grand Poobah of the nuclear mafia

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,07:54   

Quote (silverspoon @ Sep. 26 2007,07:52)
 
Quote
So, in your new incarnation that requires you to back up assertions, or retract them, please show me how that example does not address sporty's question. Thanks in advance.

Did this ever get an answer from Ftk?

Consider this a bump incase Ftk simply forgot to back up, or retract.

No answer yet.  But I understand that she has been busy...

--------------
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

   
  603 replies since Sep. 17 2007,22:32 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (21) < ... 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]