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... > FL "Debate Thread"

Pages: (100) < ... 41 42 43 44 45 [46] 47 48 49 50 51 ... >

Schroedinger's Dog Posts: 1692 Joined: Jan. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,18:27    Question, Yodel Elf: What is the rational reason for the bible being true and all other cults being wrong? (Circular logic such as "because the bible says so" or "a billion believers can't be wrong" or "my minister says so" or "my parents say so" doesn't qualify as rational reason)... -------------- "Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G "I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis "The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

rhmc Posts: 340 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,18:39    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 14 2009,18:29) So you have God "guiding evolution" but at the same time, making it look like evolution is "a completely mindless process" (EB3), therefore making the situation look as if he's trying to deceive us humans.   so all the geologic evidence laying around that points quite clearly to an earth much older than 6,000 years, not to mention all them "bones" that humans keep diggin' up of creatures that clearly appear to have evolved from earlier forms is not evidence of efforts by a creator to decieve humans?

Dan Posts: 77 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,21:13    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 14 2009,15:49)   Quote 3. But FL says he can't understand how they get around his five big incompatibilities Uhhh, Dan, they DON'T get around them.  In fact, the Pope re-affirms the first three of them (you saw his quotations yourself) and is silent on the final two.  Agreed? Not agreed, because it's not true. Contrary to FL's claim, the pope does NOT affirm that there's any incompatibility between evolution, and the creation of man in God's image. The incompatibility exists only in the mind of FL, and we've already seen how reliable that mind is: http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-177803

Constant Mews Posts: 323 Joined: Sep. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,23:54    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 14 2009,15:50) Quote For example, what does abiogenesis have to with whether evolution and chrisitanity are incompitable, or whatever it was you said? Ask SLP.  This was his idea, not mine.  Go jump on him.  Me, I'm just finishing what he apparently wanted to start. He merely pointed out that your were quote-mining something you apparently didn't understand.  Why should he be civil to you, when you refuse to civil to us?  It's a fair question.

Constant Mews Posts: 323 Joined: Sep. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,23:56    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 14 2009,15:49) Quote 3. But FL says he can't understand how they get around his five big incompatibilities Uhhh, Dan, they DON'T get around them.  In fact, the Pope re-affirms the first three of them (you saw his quotations yourself) and is silent on the final two.  Agreed? Again, you are factually incorrect.  You cannot point to the precise quotes by the pope that show you are correct. Really, Floyd - discussion on the internet isn't that difficult.  You should be able to do it.

Constant Mews Posts: 323 Joined: Sep. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,00:01    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 14 2009,17:29) Quote The fact is that god, as commonly defined, can do anything. This includes guiding evolution in such a way that it appears perfectly mechanistic. So you have God "guiding evolution" but at the same time, making it look like evolution is "a completely mindless process" (EB3), therefore making the situation look as if he's trying to deceive us humans.   And since God's "guiding evolution", he must NECESSARILY also be guiding those cruel and sadistic aspects of evolution also---a gazillion years of "Nature Red in Tooth and Claw".  All that evolutionary bloodsport just to evolve the first humans. Good job Reed.  Got some good incompatibilities there, thanks! (Rosenhouse was right:  reconciling Christianity and evolution is NOT as easy at theistic evolutionists--or their secular homies, for that matter--try to make it sound.) God isn't trying to deceive us at all; evolution appears to be a mindless process because we are not aware of the ends for it that God has in store, just as we do not know history before it unfolds before us, though God does and we have faith that His will guides us to the eventual Jerusalem. Your comment would mean that God does not exist because we are not aware of the future.  That may be the single stupidest comment you have made so far. And now you demand that God conform to your trivial, limited, wholly unBiblical ideas of what constitutes good? Not much a Christian, are you Floyd?  You continually want to box God?  And the Problem of Evil exists with or without evolution.  Consider that.

Constant Mews Posts: 323 Joined: Sep. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,00:03    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 14 2009,17:36) Quote I can't help it if you don't understand logic, evidence, or science. However, I DO understand that you said this:   Quote Cause, I think the others here have shown just as many quotes as you have that counter your argument. After which you were sincerely asked,       Quote Really?   Please document that claim. And I understand that the rrequested documentation wasn't provided.   All done, yes?     :) The documentation was provided.  You are lying, Floyd.  The Pope supports evolution.  I support evolution.  nmgirl supports evolution.  Thousands of clergy have signed a petition supporting evolution.  Catholics support evolution - that's a billion Christians right there. Citations were provided.  It is not possible for you to lie about that, Floyd - everything is documented here on the internet.

Constant Mews Posts: 323 Joined: Sep. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,00:04    Quote (Constant Mews @ Oct. 14 2009,18:15) Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 14 2009,15:49) Quote 3. But FL says he can't understand how they get around his five big incompatibilities Uhhh, Dan, they DON'T get around them.  In fact, the Pope re-affirms the first three of them (you saw his quotations yourself) and is silent on the final two.  Agreed? Of course we get around them.  I have shown you why they are not "incompatibles" at all. The fact that I exist - a devout Christian and a scientist who accepts evolution - is proof you are wrong, Floyd. Deal with it.  Or run away, as you are doing now.

Cubist Posts: 558 Joined: Oct. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,04:49    Quote (Constant Mews @ Oct. 15 2009,00:03) Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 14 2009,17:36)   Quote I can't help it if you don't understand logic, evidence, or science. However, I DO understand that you said this:     Quote Cause, I think the others here have shown just as many quotes as you have that counter your argument. After which you were sincerely asked,         Quote Really?   Please document that claim. And I understand that the rrequested documentation wasn't provided.   All done, yes?     :) The documentation was provided.  You are lying, Floyd.  The Pope supports evolution.  I support evolution.  nmgirl supports evolution.  Thousands of clergy have signed a petition supporting evolution.  Catholics support evolution - that's a billion Christians right there. Citations were provided.  It is not possible for you to lie about that, Floyd - everything is documented here on the internet. I beg to differ, CM: It's very possible for Loyd Flee (can't let the resident Frog have all the fun here!) to lie -- about5 this topic, or any other. Heck, how many statements of any kind has he made here which are actually true?

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,08:30    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 14 2009,15:49) Quote Quote 3. But FL says he can't understand how they get around his five big incompatibilities Uhhh, Dan, they DON'T get around them.  In fact, the Pope re-affirms the first three of them (you saw his quotations yourself) and is silent on the final two.  Agreed? Still lying I see, Floyd. tsk tsk... -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,08:36    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 14 2009,16:16) Quote Quote NOBODY CARES ABOUT YOUR BFFs!!! Hmmm.  Judging from your current stress level, I'd say that at YOU care about those incompatibilities, and  quite a bit!!!!  Heh!! Wow! Demonstrating your dishonesty previously and now demonstrating that you don't understand basic psychological logic. Care to go for three claims in a row that make you look silly, Floyd? In actuality, assuming you could discern peoples' stress levels on a message board such as this, the only thing high stress could tell you is how someone feels about the particular discussion with a given individual or set of individuals. You couldn't actually determine anything about a specific subject. And since those folks who have demonstrated some level of agitation on here have specifically directed said agitation at you and noted that said agitation was in response to your behavior and insistance on repeating faulty and false claims, I'd say you yet again are full of BS, Floyd. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,08:45    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 14 2009,17:29)   Good job Reed.  Got some good incompatibilities there, thanks! (Rosenhouse was right:  reconciling Christianity and evolution is NOT as easy at theistic evolutionists--or their secular homies, for that matter--try to make it sound.) Quote Quote The fact is that god, as commonly defined, can do anything. This includes guiding evolution in such a way that it appears perfectly mechanistic. So you have God "guiding evolution" but at the same time, making it look like evolution is "a completely mindless process" (EB3), therefore making the situation look as if he's trying to deceive us humans. Whoohoo!! Three silly statements in a row! You get a free TARD hat, Floyd! The fact is that it is quite easy for evolution (the process) to be mindless while an intelligence uses the knowledge of evolution (uses the process) to breed short haired dogs, fruit flies with white eyes, horses that can jump, etc. That you don't understand this distinction is not our problem. Quote And since God's "guiding evolution", he must NECESSARILY also be guiding those cruel and sadistic aspects of evolution also---a gazillion years of "Nature Red in Tooth and Claw".  All that evolutionary bloodsport just to evolve the first humans. Certainly invoking your 2000 year old primitive sun-god as the guider of evolutionary (or any physical) processes leads to the realization that such a god is a monster, but who cares? The bible presents that monster anyway, so clearly that god is not incompatible with evolution. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,09:00    Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 14 2009,18:17) it's been 12 days now Quote why is god not part of the required explanation for why water runs downhill, when he is part of the required explanation for the EXISTENCE OF WATER? do you have no answer? ??? -------------- 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

FloydLee Posts: 577 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,09:33    Quote it's been 12 days now It's been answered.  Also change your sig line please. Both your first question (which you never acknowledged that I answered), and your most recent question, received answers. (And you don't accept the answer gvien for your 2nd question, which is fine, but don't pretend you didn't get an answer on that one too.) All done!

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,09:41    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 15 2009,09:33) All done! Let's see: You have failed to convince anyone here that your BFFs cause conflict between evolution and christianity. You have failed to convince anyone here that your BFFs are even valid! You have failed to reply to three persons critiques of your BFFs. You have failed to provide reponses when you indicated you would provide responses (as in "I'll post about this in a minute"). You have failed simple tests of logic. You have failed journalistic integrity. Your interpretation of the bible: failed. Your version of christianity: failed. yeah, I guess you're right... all done. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,09:50    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 15 2009,10:33) Quote it's been 12 days now It's been answered.  Also change your sig line please. Both your first question (which you never acknowledged that I answered), and your most recent question, received answers. (And you don't accept the answer gvien for your 2nd question, which is fine, but don't pretend you didn't get an answer on that one too.) All done! you didn't answer it. YOU said that the requirements of the explanations were different. your answer was "evilutionists won't accept god as the part of the requirement" that wasn't the question, idiot.   YOUR CLAIM is that the requirements are different.  why? -------------- 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

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,09:52    Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 15 2009,10:00) Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 14 2009,18:17) it's been 12 days now   Quote why is god not part of the required explanation for why water runs downhill, when he is part of the required explanation for the EXISTENCE OF WATER? do you have no answer? ??? just a reminder of what you need to answer, not change the subject or answer another question.  dishonest petty little fraud -------------- 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

FloydLee Posts: 577 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,10:04    Quote Certainly invoking your 2000 year old primitive sun-god as the guider of evolutionary (or any physical) processes leads to the realization that such a god is a monster, but who cares? The bible presents that monster anyway, so clearly that god is not incompatible with evolution. So honestly, you do believe that evolution is compatible with Christianity because both evolution and God are cruel and sadistic and monster-ish.  Is that correct?

Schroedinger's Dog Posts: 1692 Joined: Jan. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,10:05    Let me illustrate Ras' question with a cute lolcat: -------------- "Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G "I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis "The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,10:12    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 15 2009,10:04)   Quote Certainly invoking your 2000 year old primitive sun-god as the guider of evolutionary (or any physical) processes leads to the realization that such a god is a monster, but who cares? The bible presents that monster anyway, so clearly that god is not incompatible with evolution. So honestly, you do believe that evolution is compatible with Christianity because both evolution and God are cruel and sadistic and monster-ish.  Is that correct? It's still more supported and plausible than your YEC-strosity -- which would make God into a bigger liar than you, even. Now that would be monstrous. Your "response" to Erasmus lacks substance. -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,11:01    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 15 2009,10:04) Quote Quote Certainly invoking your 2000 year old primitive sun-god as the guider of evolutionary (or any physical) processes leads to the realization that such a god is a monster, but who cares? The bible presents that monster anyway, so clearly that god is not incompatible with evolution. So honestly, you do believe that evolution is compatible with Christianity because both evolution and God are cruel and sadistic and monster-ish.  Is that correct? For the seventh time Floyd read and respond to what I write, not what you think I said or what you want me to have said or what you presume I said or what you think my statement implies or anything else. My statement is quite clear and in no way offers or implies a causal relationship of any kind. I merely presented recognition that invoking a god (any god, even your god) as the guider and forethought behind any process (e.g., rationalizing a "purpose" or "goal" for the outcome of natural processes) makes such a god responsible for the conditions of the  process itself and therefore a cruel and sadistic monster. But since that's what the OT does anyway (example, presenting god as the reason for Noah's Flood or the Commander of Joshua's raids), it becomes a mute point. Your god is a monster - that is any god based on a literal reading of the bible - so it really is irrelevant for you to complain about such with regard to your god being the guider of evolution. Bottom line, I do NOT think that evolution is compatible with Christianity because a biblically literal reading and evolution both present a cruel and sadistic god. That happens to be a compatibility, but is not the only one nor is it even a relevant one since biblical literalness has nothing to do with Christianity. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,11:09    the question i asked...   Quote why is god not part of the required explanation for why water runs downhill, when he is part of the required explanation for the EXISTENCE OF WATER? reminder:  Floyd made the 2 claims that 1)  God is part of the required explanation for the existence of water and 2)  God is not part of the required explanation for why water runs downhill. His answer to that question?   Quote Simply put, because you evolutionists don't accept that.   from the mouth of the tard hisself   Quote Yes, God is the required explanation for the origin of water.  Likewise for the origin of gravity.  So yes, God is indirectly, ultimately, the required explanation for water running downhill. so he has contradicted himself.  Both cannot be true. If he goes with the first statement, then he has reduced this matter to the opinion of the reviewer and thus dissolves his Big Five Fantasies. If he goes with his second statement by including the caveat "indirectly, ultimately" floyd shows that the theory of evolution, by being silent on the matter of gods, IS "ULTIMATELY AND DIRECTLY" COMPATIBLE WITH CHRISTIANITY. UNLESS Yodel Elf begins every single explanation of every single fucking thing with "In the beginning God created blah blah blah" and then proceeds to give a full historical material account of every particle involved in the process or phenomena to be explained, he is taking the very same shortcut taken by ToE ( and every other scientific theory ever devised). In other words he is here pissing all over himself ALL OVER NOTHING. Floyd you are petty dishonest little fraud who is probably not even a Christian. Admit you are wrong you little bitch -------------- 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

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,11:10    Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 15 2009,10:52) Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 15 2009,10:00) Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 14 2009,18:17) it's been 12 days now   Quote why is god not part of the required explanation for why water runs downhill, when he is part of the required explanation for the EXISTENCE OF WATER? do you have no answer? ??? just a reminder of what you need to answer, not change the subject or answer another question.  dishonest petty little fraud you get another shot because you have one more foot. ???? -------------- 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

Constant Mews Posts: 323 Joined: Sep. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,11:14    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 15 2009,09:33) Quote it's been 12 days now It's been answered.  Also change your sig line please. Both your first question (which you never acknowledged that I answered), and your most recent question, received answers. (And you don't accept the answer gvien for your 2nd question, which is fine, but don't pretend you didn't get an answer on that one too.) All done! Actually no, Floyd.  You have not actually answered his question.  You really should - it would clarify for you, at least, that you have already conceded your point 1.

Constant Mews Posts: 323 Joined: Sep. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,11:16    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 15 2009,10:04) Quote Certainly invoking your 2000 year old primitive sun-god as the guider of evolutionary (or any physical) processes leads to the realization that such a god is a monster, but who cares? The bible presents that monster anyway, so clearly that god is not incompatible with evolution. So honestly, you do believe that evolution is compatible with Christianity because both evolution and God are cruel and sadistic and monster-ish.  Is that correct? No, he's not actually saying that.  You really need to read your opponent's posts before you make foolish statements.  But there is a grain of truth in what he says: the God of the OT is not incompatible with evolution.

FrankH Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,11:29    I have no idea how one can reconcile a literal reading of the Bible to a caring, compassionate and loving father-figure god. I can understand a POV where the Bible is a guide not so much of the god of Abraham's word, but how man fails to emulate goodness. A few things: 1:  An omniscient god telling two people who don't know right from wrong or about good and evil (remember they are innocent and have no knowledge) and them leaving them to be coerced by a snake?  I thought this god was omniscient!  Would it be ok for me to leave to 2 year olds who can speak a few sentences alone with a loaded gun on the coffee table and say, "Don't touch", and expect everything to be hunky-dory when I get back? 2:  A flood that wipes out ALMOST ALL evil (like this omniscient god didn't know he was going to get pissed right?).  I say almost all because it seems that Ham and his wife were somehow cursed but they were still left on the boat while newborns were killed. 3:  A war where you kill all of those who are trying to join with you, even getting circumsized to do so.  Then, while they are healing up, you kill the men, boys and women, leaving only the virgin, young females that you can take as concubines and war trophies. 4:  Telling one how much they can sell their daughters into slavery. 5:  Not just allowing slavery but saying that a master can beat their slave severely, if that slave is able to get up in 3 days. A person who doesn't take the Bible as literal can see these to be parables and stories about what not to do.  A literalist must do mental gymnastics just to avoid thinking about it, let alone make them see it a "good". -------------- Marriage is not a lifetime commitment, it's a life sentence!

FloydLee Posts: 577 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,13:27    Quote Certainly invoking your 2000 year old primitive sun-god Actually, even THIS much of your post is a painful exercise in Biblical illiteracy.  The God of the OT (who is the same as the God of the NT, but that's another post), is NOT "a primitive sun god" at all.  That much you could glean just by reading the Bible period!   Exactly how is it that the Creator and Ruler and Sustainer of the Entire Universe At All Levels All Time All Space All Dimensions (both Testaments make that clear, Gen. 1:1, Col. 1:16) be limited to a mere "god of the sun" like some heathen half-patootie job?  That's irrational baby! FloydLee

nmgirl Posts: 92 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,13:31    Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 15 2009,13:27) Quote Certainly invoking your 2000 year old primitive sun-god Actually, even THIS much of your post is a painful exercise in Biblical illiteracy.  The God of the OT (who is the same as the God of the NT, but that's another post), is NOT "a primitive sun god" at all.  That much you could glean just by reading the Bible period!   Exactly how is it that the Creator and Ruler and Sustainer of the Entire Universe At All Levels All Time All Space All Dimensions (both Testaments make that clear, Gen. 1:1, Col. 1:16) be limited to a mere "god of the sun" like some heathen half-patootie job?  That's irrational baby! FloydLee Floyd, you are such a spazz!   I'm going to put the water question another way: Why don't fundies like you require teaching God in physics class when kids study gravity?  why don't you require teaching about god in chemistry class when talking about molecules of H2O?

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,13:46    Quote Ruler and Sustainer of the Entire Universe At All Levels All Time All Space All Dimensions Just keep in mind that arrows in flight require constant efforts by angels to maintain their motion. Even in heaven, someone's got to clean the toilets and take out the garbage. -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2009,13:50    Quote why is god not part of the required explanation for why water runs downhill, when he is part of the required explanation for the EXISTENCE OF WATER? floyd you have another shot.  try not to hit your other foot.  or do, i don't care, we both know you are incapable of supporting your argument either way. -------------- 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

Pages: (100) < ... 41 42 43 44 45 [46] 47 48 49 50 51 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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