RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster

RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

WhoreMods -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 9:15:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire The really do have to teach creationism at school in America don't they? ( I think) Well as long as it one specific brand creationism and fuk the rest Yep. They've yet to explain why that particular creation myth should get equal time to scientific theories, whereas the Hindu, moslem and pagan ones don't. Funny that. You'd almost think somebody was playing favourites.

Milesnmiles -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 9:16:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Whichever his answer, then ask him how that's not simplistic mumbo jumbo. He will not answer. He has no answers. He is simply a mindless critic. I guess, unlike some others, I have a life and don't spent 24/7 on the internet and so you get an answer when I have nothing better to do. Or maybe I should just use Musicmystery's post as an answer; quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery I see we've reached the personal insult portion of the "discussion." I'll consider that my cue that you've nothing left to say and need a way to huff off into the sunset. Enjoy. We're done here.

Milesnmiles -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 9:18:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Yep. Joining in on the "personal insults" that you railed against I see. Still nothing to say?

WhoreMods -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 9:20:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Yep. Joining in on the "personal insults" that you railed against I see. Still nothing to say? For somebody who claims not to be posting 24/7, you seem to have an real knack for posting when the people you're arguing with aren't online to answer. Coincidence or planning?

Milesnmiles -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 9:23:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: Help? It is the same simplistic mumbo jumbo that Evolutionists have been trying pass off as evidence that evolution is a fact for years. Maybe I missed it in all the verbiage above, so please tell me is it your position that all the species now present have been present since the beginning of life on this planet? Or is it your position that new life appeared in time but not through the process of natural selection as Darwin proposed? I couldn't help but notice that this "answer" doesn't really adress what was posted to you. Anyway, before I can answer, first tell me what you consider to be a "species".

Milesnmiles -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 9:28:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Yep. Joining in on the "personal insults" that you railed against I see. Still nothing to say? For somebody who claims not to be posting 24/7, you seem to have an real knack for posting when the people you're arguing with aren't online to answer. Coincidence or planning? So? There is no advanage one way or another whether they are on line or not. So what's your point?

WickedsDesire -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 9:28:30 AM)
Why do the Bible Bashers have that much power across there anyway - I have never understood that because Americanshire are the ~~race~~ inbred jackals with the least morals. In the Beginning: 1. Let there be cock wombles oops day 6 for that one and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind.’ And it was so. 7. Let there be golf - or hanging about schoolie yards or something What were the seven days o'creation anyway. Oh fuk it I am not copying and pasting all that out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genesis_creation_narrative#Six_days_of_Creation:_Genesis_1:3.E2.80.932:3

WhoreMods -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 9:38:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Yep. Joining in on the "personal insults" that you railed against I see. Still nothing to say? For somebody who claims not to be posting 24/7, you seem to have an real knack for posting when the people you're arguing with aren't online to answer. Coincidence or planning? So? There is no advanage one way or another whether they are on line or not. So what's your point? That you're avoiding confrontation while claiming to be too big a man to spend as much time in here as the people you're losing arguments to. Makes you look a bit of a pussy if it's deliberate, doesn't it? quote: ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire Why do the Bible Bashers have that much power across there anyway Because Reagan handed the republican party over to the fuckers back in 1980.

Milesnmiles -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 10:21:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Yep. Joining in on the "personal insults" that you railed against I see. Still nothing to say? For somebody who claims not to be posting 24/7, you seem to have an real knack for posting when the people you're arguing with aren't online to answer. Coincidence or planning? So? There is no advanage one way or another whether they are on line or not. So what's your point? That you're avoiding confrontation while claiming to be too big a man to spend as much time in here as the people you're losing arguments to. Makes you look a bit of a pussy if it's deliberate, doesn't it? Are really this ignorant? Don't you know a forum works? You're online and I'm "confronting" you but I'm about to go get something to eat. So if that makes me a "pussy" in your eyes so be it. If it comforts you, you can be the "pussy" while I'm gone and say something to my backside and I'll "confront" it when I get back. [8\|]

WhoreMods -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 12:08:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Yep. Joining in on the "personal insults" that you railed against I see. Still nothing to say? For somebody who claims not to be posting 24/7, you seem to have an real knack for posting when the people you're arguing with aren't online to answer. Coincidence or planning? So? There is no advanage one way or another whether they are on line or not. So what's your point? That you're avoiding confrontation while claiming to be too big a man to spend as much time in here as the people you're losing arguments to. Makes you look a bit of a pussy if it's deliberate, doesn't it? Are really this ignorant? Don't you know a forum works? You're online and I'm "confronting" you but I'm about to go get something to eat. So if that makes me a "pussy" in your eyes so be it. If it comforts you, you can be the "pussy" while I'm gone and say something to my backside and I'll "confront" it when I get back. [8\|] No you won't: you'll ignore it.

Musicmystery -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 12:39:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Yep. Joining in on the "personal insults" that you railed against I see. Still nothing to say? For somebody who claims not to be posting 24/7, you seem to have an real knack for posting when the people you're arguing with aren't online to answer. Coincidence or planning? Actually i didn't insult him at all -- just passed on further pointless conversation. I see that was the right choice.

WickedsDesire -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/20/2017 6:15:44 PM)
If I had to stun whoremods with my big stick you aint taking him

vincentML -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/21/2017 7:33:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Whichever his answer, then ask him how that's not simplistic mumbo jumbo. He will not answer. He has no answers. He is simply a mindless critic. I guess, unlike some others, I have a life and don't spent 24/7 on the internet and so you get an answer when I have nothing better to do. Or maybe I should just use Musicmystery's post as an answer; quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery I see we've reached the personal insult portion of the "discussion." I'll consider that my cue that you've nothing left to say and need a way to huff off into the sunset. Enjoy. We're done here. Really? You feel I have insulted you? Care to point out the specific post #?

vincentML -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/21/2017 8:10:40 AM)
quote: More that it is has not been “proven” to be a “fact” as of yet. Repeating what I said early in the thread: it is a Model based on the best fit for a set of facts and observations. Consequently, it is a construct. You put the cart before the horse. The facts and observations are as close to anything that is proven or at least consistent. The Model is a human construct. It is not subject to being proven. It is subject to being falsified by either new observations that do not support the model or by falsification of some of the facts/observations. Our model of the solar system was constructed on the works of Copernicus and Kepler and a few others. The model is supported by the success of placing satellites where we want them with some precision. quote: I have said neither. Although I may believe that the science correct, I still believe that sometimes the conclusions drawn from the correct science are wrong and I’m sure you have found that to be true in cases in the past. Well, of course they are. If they weren't scientists would get jobs at MacDonalds. New understandings are built upon misconceptions (that seemed reasonable) from the past. quote: I agree until the last sentence, the “explanation” or conclusion from the science is a “value judgement” and can ofttimes be “right or wrong”. Firstly, not a value judgment. A value judgment is loaded with personal bias. The conclusion comes from testing the null hypothesis (the likelihood that the original hypothesis is wrong) In a simplistic example, if you postulate that uncooked chicken eggs contain sodium chloride. We will test the null hypothesis that uncooked eggs have no salt to within a 98% probability. Then we gather sodium chloride from the eggs, if any, and compare the %weight of the salt to the %weight of the eggs. The no salt probability is very high and that is an advantage for the original belief that there is salt in uncooked eggs. I hope I got that right; it has been a long time since i studied laboratory theory. Now, you may say this is simplistic and silly and I will agree in such an obvious issue. But testing the null hypothesis has greater value in dealing with more complex questions. The point I am making is that the final evaluation is based on numbers, not on peoples values.

vincentML -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/21/2017 8:51:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: Help? It is the same simplistic mumbo jumbo that Evolutionists have been trying pass off as evidence that evolution is a fact for years. Maybe I missed it in all the verbiage above, so please tell me is it your position that all the species now present have been present since the beginning of life on this planet? Or is it your position that new life appeared in time but not through the process of natural selection as Darwin proposed? I couldn't help but notice that this "answer" doesn't really adress what was posted to you. Anyway, before I can answer, first tell me what you consider to be a "species". A species is often defined as a group of individuals that actually or potentially interbreed in nature. In this sense, a species is the biggest gene pool possible under natural conditions. [snip] That definition of a species might seem cut and dried, but it is not — in nature, there are lots of places where it is difficult to apply this definition. For example, many bacteria reproduce mainly asexually. The bacterium shown at right is reproducing asexually, by binary fission. The definition of a species as a group of interbreeding individuals cannot be easily applied to organisms that reproduce only or mainly asexually. Also, many plants, and some animals, form hybrids in nature. Hooded crows and carrion crows look different, and largely mate within their own groups — but in some areas, they hybridize. Should they be considered the same species or separate species? If two lineages of oak look quite different, but occasionally form hybrids with each other, should we count them as different species? There are lots of other places where the boundary of a species is blurred. It's not so surprising that these blurry places exist — after all, the idea of a species is something that we humans invented for our own convenience! DEFINING A SPECIES So, I will go with the gene pool definition. And here is a scenario for natural selection SPECIATION Let me rephrase my question to you. 1. Do you favor the idea that every gene pool now present on earth was present from the beginning of life on this planet and created by a supernatural power? 2. If you favor that there are "new" gene pools here in the present day do you believe they were placed here by a supernatural power. 3. If not a supernatural power (in question 2) do you have a theory alternate to the mechanisms provided by evolutionists: mutation, chromosome crossovers, polyploid formation, gene drift, natural selection, and maybe some others that i don't recall at the moment. Thank you for a straight forward reply.

Milesnmiles -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/24/2017 2:04:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML ... Really? You feel I have insulted you? Care to point out the specific post #? Your post 215 says: quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML ... He will not answer. He has no answers. He is simply a mindless critic. It says nothing about the OP and is directed at me and somehow does not seem to be a compliment. [8\|]

Milesnmiles -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/24/2017 2:05:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Yep. Joining in on the "personal insults" that you railed against I see. Still nothing to say? For somebody who claims not to be posting 24/7, you seem to have an real knack for posting when the people you're arguing with aren't online to answer. Coincidence or planning? So? There is no advanage one way or another whether they are on line or not. So what's your point? That you're avoiding confrontation while claiming to be too big a man to spend as much time in here as the people you're losing arguments to. Makes you look a bit of a pussy if it's deliberate, doesn't it? Are really this ignorant? Don't you know a forum works? You're online and I'm "confronting" you but I'm about to go get something to eat. So if that makes me a "pussy" in your eyes so be it. If it comforts you, you can be the "pussy" while I'm gone and say something to my backside and I'll "confront" it when I get back. [8\|] No you won't: you'll ignore it. What's to ignore?

Milesnmiles -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/24/2017 2:40:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Repeating what I said early in the thread: it is a Model based on the best fit for a set of facts and observations. Consequently, it is a construct. You put the cart before the horse. The facts and observations are as close to anything that is proven or at least consistent. The Model is a human construct. It is not subject to being proven. It is subject to being falsified by either new observations that do not support the model or by falsification of some of the facts/observations. Our model of the solar system was constructed on the works of Copernicus and Kepler and a few others. The model is supported by the success of placing satellites where we want them with some precision. You can repeat it till the cows come home but “best fit” does not make it a “proven fact”, like many evolutionists say it is. It seems that you do not understand what I’m saying. What you are saying here is exactly what I am saying to the evolutionists that say evolution is a “proven fact”. quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Well, of course they are. If they weren't scientists would get jobs at MacDonalds. New understandings are built upon misconceptions (that seemed reasonable) from the past. Okay, so we agree on that. quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Firstly, not a value judgment. A value judgment is loaded with personal bias. Yes, as soon as a scientist starts to draw conclusions from the facts personal bias is often involved. quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML The conclusion comes from testing the null hypothesis (the likelihood that the original hypothesis is wrong) In a simplistic example, if you postulate that uncooked chicken eggs contain sodium chloride. We will test the null hypothesis that uncooked eggs have no salt to within a 98% probability. Then we gather sodium chloride from the eggs, if any, and compare the %weight of the salt to the %weight of the eggs. The no salt probability is very high and that is an advantage for the original belief that there is salt in uncooked eggs. I hope I got that right; it has been a long time since i studied laboratory theory. Now, you may say this is simplistic and silly and I will agree in such an obvious issue. But testing the null hypothesis has greater value in dealing with more complex questions. The point I am making is that the final evaluation is based on numbers, not on peoples values. No, not silly but you must realize that there is a difference between laboratory science and what is going on with evolutionary science. Evolutionary science has no “eggs” to test cooked or uncooked and thus has no “hard numbers” to evaluate so as to draw unbiased conclusions from.

Nnanji -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/24/2017 3:05:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery I see we've reached the personal insult portion of the "discussion." I'll consider that my cue that you've nothing left to say and need a way to huff off into the sunset. Enjoy. We're done here. Actually, you reached th personal insult portion some time ago when you were dictating who did and who did not understand things. Although, you probably don't see that sort of thing as insulting. I imagine it's why you've never had any friends.

Milesnmiles -> RE: Creationist Belief Falling into the Dumpster (7/24/2017 3:14:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML ... It's not so surprising that these blurry places exist — after all, the idea of a species is something that we humans invented for our own convenience! Thank you, that is why I asked. Many feel that what a species is is written in stone and it is difficult to talk to someone who feels that way. quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Let me rephrase my question to you. 1. Do you favor the idea that every gene pool now present on earth was present from the beginning of life on this planet and created by a supernatural power? Yes I do, it seems a better version of how we got here. Although I don't believe it happened over night or in 144 hours. I believe it happened in a progression, over a period of time, much like building a house, you don't build the roof and then put a house underneath it. quote: 2. If you favor that there are "new" gene pools here in the present day do you believe they were placed here by a supernatural power. I don't really feel there are "new" gene pools here in the present day. I think that all the "new" gene pools are the reslut of the natural variations of the original gene pools, like wolves and dogs. quote: 3. If not a supernatural power (in question 2) do you have a theory alternate to the mechanisms provided by evolutionists: mutation, chromosome crossovers, polyploid formation, gene drift, natural selection, and maybe some others that i don't recall at the moment. Like I said in my answer to question 2, I think the answer lies in the natural variations of the original gene pools. quote: Thank you for a straight forward reply. I hope this answers what you were asking. Also I don't believe "God" is "supernatural", everything "God" does is in harmony with what is natural and is not above it or beyond it.

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625