[Ahimaaz Smith]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

No factual basis? You say it like you cannot type 'George Bush' into Google and on the first page find links to sites with plenty of quotes and videos, also known as evidence,

So if it's on the Internet, it has to be true? Anyway, it's not my place to find evidence to back up your arguments.

Since you are too afraid of what you might find if you do so yourself, let me help you.

Not so. I just don't consider a Google search to be the same as, for example, actually knowing what I am talking about. But hey, at least we're finally getting into some substance rather than unadulterated opinion.

"I heard somebody say, 'Where's (Nelson) Mandela?' Well, Mandela's dead. Because Saddam killed all the Mandelas." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Sept. 20, 2007

Apparently Mandela is dead. Who knew?

God's balls man, are you really that stupid? There is a difference between Nelson Mandala as a metaphor and Nelson Mandela the man (just like when you said the President's IQ was the same as a glass of water's, I didn't think you meant that literally).

The President's point was that there isn't anyone in Iraq who is respected as an long-time enemy of the evil Saddam Hussein regime because Saddam killed them all. It will take time for those leaders to emerge. He wasn't saying that Neslon Mandela is actually dead (that information is classified). Frankly, this isn't especially hard to figure out. It seems that our President was just talking above your head.

On a side note, interestingly enough, there has recently been some confusion over the identity of Nelson Mandela right here in Freehold, Iowa.

"The solution to Iraq -- an Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself -- is more than a military mission. Precisely the reason why I sent more troops into Baghdad." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 3, 2007

More than a military mission, therefore, more troops. Flawless reasoning.

A regime needs stable political institutions, education, a basis (like flowing oil) for an economy, a Baptist church, and other institutions that are not military in nature. However, those institutions can only thrive if the community leaders, and the communities themselves, are not being shot up and blown up constantly. You find a way to ensure that without troops, and I'll support an immediate withdrawal, and so will President Bush.

Bottom line, (a) whatever you think of the war, when we went in, we made a commitment to the Iraqi people that we would not leave them in chaos and (b) THE SURGE IS WORKING. Praise God!

"And there is distrust in Washington. I am surprised, frankly, at the amount of distrust that exists in this town. And I'm sorry it's the case, and I'll work hard to try to elevate it." --George W. Bush, interview on National Public Radio, Jan. 29, 2007

You are confusing inarticulate with stupid. Moses was a stutterer, yet he still managed to do a pretty good job for the Israelites. It's the content of the President's character and his message that is important, not his stumbling over words.

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."

—Washington, D.C., Sept. 13, 2001

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." —Washington, D.C., March 13, 2002

We've got like 900 of Osama's minions in Guantanamo to gather intelligence and we closed his training bases in Afghanistan. Things changed a lot in those six months. One mark of a great President is that he changes priorities as the situation changes. This is called learning and progress.

Here's some evidence and professional opinion for you.
don't be afraid to watch those videos.

Donald Trump and Linda Ronstadt are hardly professionals, unless you're talking about professional self-promoters. Again, everything that you point to as showing Bush has a low IQ is just evidence that he is not articulate. Remember, President Bush = Moses.

If I say something and it can be proven wrong logically or empirically then I will be glad to retract my statement and rectify my knowledge. This is called learning and progress. You may want to look into it, because things change from day to day, let alone a period of over 2000 years.

There are still truths that are eternal. Your truth seems to be shaped primarily by your political views. Mine, on the other hand, runs contrary to my political instincts. If I weren't a Christian bound by the Bible, I'd be a liberal Democrat (I know, because I was, before I was saved).

I can see that your president has plenty of advisors, he has even said so himself.

No shit.

But moral? I see that billions of your country's dollars have been spent on a war looking for imaginary WMDs.

And freeing Iraqis from a sadistic, genocidal regime that has used WMDs in the past on Iran and on its own people. And letting the world know that we are NOT going to let another Muslim nation develop nuclear weapons--their choice, let in the inspectors or we'll send in the Marines.

You should talk to some Iraqi Christians to see whether they are glad we invaded (I have, and they are).

What has America gained from the war? Nothing.

If you'd told me on September 12, 2001 that there would be no successful terrorist attack on American soil, I would have said you were crazy. I think I'll go with they guy who kept us safe, instead of you and Donald Trump and some Australian has-been singer.

What has America lost? Huge amounts of resources, irreplacable human lives and the rest of the world's respect.

Not all that huge by comparison to the economy of the US. Hopefully most of the soldiers who died were saved, so their lives weren't really lost. Respect of the world is overrated. We basically kick their asses by almost every measure--and I think a lot of Eurotrash are secretly grateful that we've been taking care of the terrorist problem.

Not only that, but the war 'on terror' has caused civil war to erupt in Iraq. You tell me, is this moral or logical?

The evils of Islam caused civil war to erupt in Iraq. The fact that these A-rabs can't control their tempers is a good reason to be sure they never develop nuclear weapons, whatever the cost.

Do your God's commands not say 'Thou shalt not kill'? In case you didn't notice, war = killing.

Have you actually read the Bible? There's enough God-sanctioned killing in the Bible to cover any ten other religions. Killing in a war duly sanctioned by a Congressional vote isn't the same as knocking off your next door neighbor.

Then why is fear of eternal damnation governing your politics?

I'm a Christian, I don't fear eternal damnation, and it has no implications for my politics. I do fear the retribution of the Lord here on Earth. God is known for periodically clearing out dens of sin in very nasty ways, and your right to butt boink your boyfriend ends where it puts my life, and those of the kids in the pre-K Sunday school class that I teach, in peril. Plus, I don't like the way our children are brainwashed with secular humanist "facts" and "values" in school.

Overall, I'll give your last post a B- (much improved over the F for what you've said before). Despite what I thought, you do actually seem to be able to provide some evidence that bears on your points, even if you misread it most of the time. You need to beware of hidden prejudices, though--just because someone stumbles when speaking, or speaks with a southern accent, that doesn't mean that person is stupid.

[One-eyed Jack]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

Darn it, Sacha-DG, you just don't understand God's hierarchy of authority. All good Christians and most conservatives understand this very well.

1. God is the ultimate authority. Don't question His authority.

2. Righteous kings rule upon Earth according to God's authority. Don't question the authority of righteous kings.

3. In America, we elect our ruler.

3a: If our ruler is elected righteously -- that is to say, if he's a conservative Republican -- then he rules with the authority of God (see #2). Don't question his authority.

3b: If our ruler is elected unrighteously -- that is, if he's Bill Clinton or (God forbid) his wife -- then we (meaning conservative Christians and Rush Limbaugh) must oppose him because that is God's will.

But basically, fundamentalist Christians and conservatives instinctively believe in and follow their anointed authority figures. They tend not to doubt their leaders. Liberals and atheists, on the other hand, tend to mutter and grouse, and eventually they rise up and repudiate their leaders. Then a few years later they rediscover them and come back to them and lionize them. Then the liberals get dissatisfied, rise up, and repudiate those self-same leaders all over again.

Not so conservative Christians. When you see an SUV with "Bush-Cheney 2008" and "Support Our Troops: Nuke Iran" you can bet the driver has a Bible on his nightstand and a large-caliber pistol in the drawer underneath it.

And that man is a Christian! Salt of the Earth!

Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. Matthew 5:13

A Godly Christian and a righteous man. So please don't go saying stuff like "Bush has the IQ of tapwater" and "When I look at Dick Cheney I think, evil cyborg" and "They're renaming the La Brea tarpits as the Memorial to Bush's Legacy". Just save your "wit" -- we Christians follow our leader.

Christian conservative America -- love it or leave it!

~~ OEJ

[Mrs. Mary Whitford]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

"I heard somebody say, 'Where's (Nelson) Mandela?' Well, Mandela's dead. Because Saddam killed all the Mandelas." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Sept. 20, 2007
Apparently Mandela is dead. Who knew?

Our Godly President knew! Who has more access to this knowledge, the leader of the free world or some little homer sitting at his mom's computer?

[Sacha-DG]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

As usual, you have no factual basis for what you say, so instead you resort to ad hominem attacks and retread conspiracy theories. If you want people to take you seriously, then get back on the medications and try to season your arguments with at least a shred of fact every now and then. Opinions are not facts. Especially yours.

No factual basis? You say it like you cannot type 'George Bush' into Google and on the first page find links to sites with plenty of quotes and videos, also known as evidence, to back up my statements. Since you are too afraid of what you might find if you do so yourself, let me help you.

"I heard somebody say, 'Where's (Nelson) Mandela?' Well, Mandela's dead. Because Saddam killed all the Mandelas." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Sept. 20, 2007
Apparently Mandela is dead. Who knew?

"The solution to Iraq -- an Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself -- is more than a military mission. Precisely the reason why I sent more troops into Baghdad." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 3, 2007
More than a military mission, therefore, more troops. Flawless reasoning.

"And there is distrust in Washington. I am surprised, frankly, at the amount of distrust that exists in this town. And I'm sorry it's the case, and I'll work hard to try to elevate it." --George W. Bush, interview on National Public Radio, Jan. 29, 2007


"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him." —Washington, D.C., Sept. 13, 2001

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." —Washington, D.C., March 13, 2002

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=a30rJQ...eature=related

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=whhbPVrb5KM&feature=related

Here's some evidence and professional opinion for you.
don't be afraid to watch those videos.

If I say something and the Bible contradicts it, of course I will retract that statement. Unlike you, I don't think that every word that I utter is God's honest truth. I make lots of mistakes. But not in this case.

I don't think that and I don't recall having ever said otherwise. If I say something and it can be proven wrong logically or empirically then I will be glad to retract my statement and rectify my knowledge. This is called learning and progress. You may want to look into it, because things change from day to day, let alone a period of over 2000 years.

If you can't see how profoundly logical and moral our President is, then it's a damned good thing that our Presidents are chosen by George H. W. Bush and not by morons like you.

I can see that your president has plenty of advisors, he has even said so himself. But moral? I see that billions of your country's dollars have been spent on a war looking for imaginary WMDs. That is what I see. What has America gained from the war? Nothing. What has America lost? Huge amounts of resources, irreplacable human lives and the rest of the world's respect. Not only that, but the war 'on terror' has caused civil war to erupt in Iraq. You tell me, is this moral or logical? Do your God's commands not say 'Thou shalt not kill'? In case you didn't notice, war = killing.

No shit.

Then why is fear of eternal damnation governing your politics?

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

Ummm....do I need to point out the problem with this or can someone just give me an answer?

I'd better point it out.

How godly can GWB actually be if he's not a True Chrstian? Now, I'm not exactly an expert on Christianity, but if Landover is the only True church of God (maybe this is where I'm wrong) and Georgy is a Methodist yet still godly, then isn't there a little bit of a paradox?

The obvious answer is: Who are you to question God? He uses His vessels as He wills. He used a pack of camel-loving mudslimes to smite the unspeakably vile heathens and queers in Joo York City on 9/11. The point is, God always wins. Always.

[Enigmatic Harpo Marx]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

and one may yet hope he recants the errant Methodist sect and becomes a True Christian Baptist.

Ummm....do I need to point out the problem with this or can someone just give me an answer?

I'd better point it out.

How godly can GWB actually be if he's not a True Chrstian? Now, I'm not exactly an expert on Christianity, but if Landover is the only True church of God (maybe this is where I'm wrong) and Georgy is a Methodist yet still godly, then isn't there a little bit of a paradox?

[Ahimaaz Smith]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

I'm sorry, but when you said George W. Bush was the greatest US president of the modern era, you were joking right?

I wouldn't joke about something like that.

I'm not exactly up to date with my history of American politics

But I bet that won't stop you from running your mouth.

but I can safely say that your Mr. Bush, quite frankly, is a mormon and I can also safely say that the rest of the world, including a large percentage of Americans would agree with me.

Looks like I won my bet.

But don't get me wrong,

You got wrong all by yourself, don't try to pin the blame on me.

when I say he's a mormon, I don't just mean that from a political point of view. The man must have the IQ of a glass of water. How he ever became president, I'll never know. Unless of course I was to agree that his father fixed the elections.

As usual, you have no factual basis for what you say, so instead you resort to ad hominem attacks and retread conspiracy theories. If you want people to take you seriously, then get back on the medications and try to season your arguments with at least a shred of fact every now and then. Opinions are not facts. Especially yours.

How can you know something when proven evidence contradicts it?

If I say something and the Bible contradicts it, of course I will retract that statement. Unlike you, I don't think that every word that I utter is God's honest truth. I make lots of mistakes. But not in this case.

I would rather be lead by someone who is able to use rational, logical and moral judgement to make the decisions which ultimately govern the nation's finances and affairs.

If you can't see how profoundly logical and moral our President is, then it's a damned good thing that our Presidents are chosen by George H. W. Bush and not by morons like you.

I would not be so confident if he broke open a 2000 year-old story book and based his choices on that.

Then, in addition to being an idiot who can't produce a single fact to back up your arguments, you will burn in Hell.

When it comes to politics, we are not talking about the afterlife, we are talking about what happens in our lifetimes.

No shit.

Money governs everything.

Except your mouth. Obviously, nothing governs that.

[One-eyed Jack]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

sAre you, Sir (or Madam), calling George W. Bush a m0r0n?

Sir! This is a man who, during his college studies at Yale, passed political science with solid grades of 73% in PS13a and 71% in PS14b. And he PASSED the advanced course PS48 on the pass-no-pass system, so let's have no caviling about his intelligence here!

This is a solid, solid lower-lower echelon performance.

Just because he cannot speak Spanglish competently is no reason to assume his IQ is, say, 9 points below the national average. Besides, many a hardworking dullard has made important contributions to the sciences, the arts, and to the trimming of ever-encroaching Texas brush.

So impugn not America's beloved president.

He is a Christian man who prays regularly, and one may yet hope he recants the errant Methodist sect and becomes a True Christian Baptist.

~~ OEJ

[Sacha-DG]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

If rational empiricism is the backbone of science, unquestioning faith is the backbone of religion.

Think about it: if you are voting in any election in the next year or two, who do you want representing you?

1. A rational empiricist, who bases his policies on mere worldly evidence and fallible human logic?

2. Or a religious man who knows what is right, despite any contrary evidence, because his faith tells him what to believe?

Praise the Lord! The choice is clear! Historically, righteous men of faith make the best leaders! Just look at the greatest US president of the modern era: George W. Bush!

Think about it when you go to the polls.
~~ OEJ

I'm sorry, but when you said George W. Bush was the greatest US president of the modern era, you were joking right? I'm not exactly up to date with my history of American politics, but I can safely say that your Mr. Bush, quite frankly, is a moron and I can also safely say that the rest of the world, including a large percentage of Americans would agree with me.

But don't get me wrong, when I say he's a moron, I don't just mean that from a political point of view. The man must have the IQ of a glass of water. How he ever became president, I'll never know. Unless of course I was to agree that his father fixed the elections.

knows what is right, despite any contrary evidence

How can you know something when proven evidence contradicts it?
I would rather be lead by someone who is able to use rational, logical and moral judgement to make the decisions which ultimately govern the nation's finances and affairs.
I would not be so confident if he broke open a 2000 year-old story book and based his choices on that.
When it comes to politics, we are not talking about the afterlife, we are talking about what happens in our lifetimes. Money governs everything.

As for the person who called the developers of that Mario game 'chinks', shame on you. You are the one who shall be condemned to eternal damnation.

[Enigmatic Harpo Marx]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

Yeah.

In point of fact, the moral argument boils down to the same answer.

So do the historical questions, quite often -- for instance, some pencil-neck archaeologists question whether Moses existed. Christians don't have much in the way of collaborative evidence that he did, so that too comes down to a matter of faith.

But what would religion be if not faith?

And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin. Romans 14:23

If rational empiricism is the backbone of science, unquestioning faith is the backbone of religion.

Think about it: if you are voting in any election in the next year or two, who do you want representing you?

1. A rational empiricist, who bases his policies on mere worldly evidence and fallible human logic?

2. Or a religious man who knows what is right, despite any contrary evidence, because his faith tells him what to believe?

Praise the Lord! The choice is clear! Historically, righteous men of faith make the best leaders! Just look at the greatest US president of the modern era: George W. Bush!

Think about it when you go to the polls.
~~ OEJ

Haha, I hope they pay you for that political propoganda! You do make some undeniable points though. Leaders are best when they have a higher goal to strive for though I will say that the goal need not be religion (though that tends to be the one that people most strongly adhere to).

Also I must agree to the fact when it come to matters of religion faith is a must and when it come to science empiricism is the key. This is all fine until they start treding into each other's territory. I say leave religion to the faithful and science to the scientists.

[Brother Temperance]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

Why do you say organisms do not exist, when we see them in our schools microscopes?

When I look through a kaleidoscope, I can see pretty colours. Does that mean that when God uses the AIDS to kill queers and negroes and suchlike undesirables, he uses pretty colours to do so? Don't be absurd.

I'm sorry sir but, is everything you read must have a Bible reference? The Bible doesn't talk about the Gravity Theory, but still, it is surely what you believe in.

It's a pretty controversial subject.

So apparently this Bible was divinely dictated. What about parts where God was explaining things people had no concept of or idea about. Such as dinosaurs or evolution. Is it not possible that they dumbed down the ideas to make sense to the general public or to themselves? How would you write about things you had no words for? You wouldn't.

When Charles Darwin sat down with Satan to write the Origin of Species, there was no word for evolution, but that didn't stop them now did it? There goes your argument.

What proof? Show me this proof. And what are you talking about, Christ walking on water or raising people from the dead has no relevance to Evolution. So next time dont bring up something that has nothing to to with the topic.

No, it's perfectly relevant. Christ walking on water is scientifically impossible, so this example proves that there's something very wrong with science.

Bobby-joe assumes that a child never exposed to religion will go to hell. But in the eyes of god all children are innocent.

Where in the Bible does it say that?
Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.


Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

So your idea is wrong billy joe. How could God be so negative to someone who never even had the fair chance to understand religion like you? He could be the most kind, caring, loving person to his family and the world. He could have sacrificed his own body to save someone close to him, but yet since he doesnt know Jesus as his savior he will spend a eternity in hell.

Have you ever read the Book of Job? It doesn't matter how nice you are, or how much you love God, if God wants to torture you then He'll torture you. Deal with it already.

Yep, thanks to the smartest people in the world (who overwhelmingly happen to be atheist) we are able to understand that we all originate from one African woman older than your god.

Friend, I know negresses are famer for their loose morals, but this just seems implausible. Who is this whorish old darkie you claim gave birth to everyone?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

I know. The Bible's pretty extraordinary.

There will be no peace until the majority turns atheist.

Friend, in Cambodia, Red China and the Soviet Union, the majority were atheist. That's what atheism looks like in practise.

It is virtually impossible to speak in hyperbole of the blessings stem cell research.

It is totally possible, as proved by the fact that you're doing so. Not even all secular scientists believe in stem cell research. It's basically just a marketing gimmick, because selling aborted fetuses to perverted Jew scientists is more profitable than selling them to Chinese restaurants.

I'll leave you with a simple question. I simply ask of you to answer it off the top of your sick, demented head. Hopefully this wont be too hard for you achieve. Where have modern day dogs come from? Was it your god?

No, they come from other dogs. Where do you think modern day dogs come from? An old Africky woman? Are you some kind of a racist?

[Duvenoy]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

Yeah.

In point of fact, the moral argument boils down to the same answer.

So do the historical questions, quite often -- for instance, some pencil-neck archaeologists question whether Moses existed. Christians don't have much in the way of collaborative evidence that he did, so that too comes down to a matter of faith.

But what would religion be if not faith?

And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin. Romans 14:23

If rational empiricism is the backbone of science, unquestioning faith is the backbone of religion.

Think about it: if you are voting in any election in the next year or two, who do you want representing you?

1. A rational empiricist, who bases his policies on mere worldly evidence and fallible human logic?

2. Or a religious man who knows what is right, despite any contrary evidence, because his faith tells him what to believe?

Praise the Lord! The choice is clear! Historically, righteous men of faith make the best leaders! Just look at the greatest US president of the modern era: George W. Bush!

Think about it when you go to the polls.
~~ OEJ

Quite so, quite so. The legacy of our Godly president will resound through the coming ages as one so unique that it cannot ever be matched.

Job: 39:27 Doth the eagle mount up at thy command, and make her nest on high?
39:28 She dwelleth and abideth on the rock, upon the crag of the rock, and the strong place.
39:29 From thence she seeketh the prey, and her eyes behold afar off.
39:30 Her young ones also suck up blood: and where the slain are, there is she.

There. That should put paid to this evilution nonsense once & for all! The eagle doth not put herself at anyone's beck & call, be it scientist or ruler, or even a churchman. Only God of Abraham commands the eagle.

doov

[One-eyed Jack]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

Yeah.

In point of fact, the moral argument boils down to the same answer.

So do the historical questions, quite often -- for instance, some pencil-neck archaeologists question whether Moses existed. Christians don't have much in the way of collaborative evidence that he did, so that too comes down to a matter of faith.

But what would religion be if not faith?

And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin. Romans 14:23

If rational empiricism is the backbone of science, unquestioning faith is the backbone of religion.

Think about it: if you are voting in any election in the next year or two, who do you want representing you?

1. A rational empiricist, who bases his policies on mere worldly evidence and fallible human logic?

2. Or a religious man who knows what is right, despite any contrary evidence, because his faith tells him what to believe?

Praise the Lord! The choice is clear! Historically, righteous men of faith make the best leaders! Just look at the greatest US president of the modern era: George W. Bush!

Think about it when you go to the polls.
~~ OEJ

[Enigmatic Harpo Marx]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

I suppose we can only fall back on our faith in the mighty and omniscient God, and assume that -- like the baker who put strychnine in the muffins -- He had His reasons.

Honestly, I have no opinion on this matter but I think I'm starting to find a pattern in how these creation science threads boil down. A disappointing answer, yet one that cannot be argued (at least not truely argued) without disproving the existance of God. Something that I have found to be more trouble than it's worth.

[One-eyed Jack]

Re: Hello, I noticed that many of you don't understand evolution.

Most of the Bible was recorded in the revelations given to the major prophets. However, God Himself is the source of His holy Word.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1

The Gospels are word-for-word transcriptions of what Jesus said, taken down on steno pads by His apostles. They also recorded what Jesus did.

Now, (big sigh) I must again mention that the King James Bible is the definitive source of scripture.

About 450 different English-language versions of the Bible have existed. As a pragmatic matter we have to choose a definitive one; as a matter of aesthetics it is clear to me that the King James is the best-written (it's the Shakespeare of scripture); as a matter of faith the King James is the version which God inspired.

~~ OEJ