[SteveTheNiceAtheist]

Re: oh my god

It seems to me that you spend a lot of time saying that God is wrong – I see that as hate because God is not to be discussed, He is to be loved and feared. You have a loud mouth – I think these “people” would come for you first. Have you been thinking about these "people" for a long time? Have you seen a pastor - he could say prayers with you?There is God’s law and Man’s law, mostly they are the same.That is not what God says – women are inferior to men because they were made from a part of man – the rib. Do you know, there is some discussion on whether women have souls? What do you think?

SteveTheNiceAtheist: UHMMM... the part i am curious about is:

" women are inferior to men because they were made from a part of man – the rib. Do you know, there is some discussion on whether women have souls? What do you think?[/ "

Strictly scientifically speaking men and woman have an equal number of ribs, it only seem like men are missing a rib because of the phique of the body. Do baptists still accept the women are inferior because of the idea they are taken from a rib. I mean there would be a better case if women were made from a foot bone, but from a rib which we now know still exists and in actuality hasn't been taken out of the male form? O.o

[Ahimaaz Smith]

Re: oh my god

Yet again, you are blathering bullshit all over the place. I know that time is just a measuring system, but this has no relation to the argument at hand. And, you are obviously displaying your lack of the basic rules of physics. There are multiple forces acting on your two magnets. Gravity is pulling them down, the table is pushing them up, you are forcing them together while a magnetic force is pushing them apart. The magnetic force just happens to be stronger than the force you can apply on the two magnets. Also, way to completely contradict yourself when earlier you stated that gravity is a law and then turn around and say that mass doesn't attract mass. That's exactly what gravity is.

The good Pastor didn't say that mass doesn't attract mass. He was simply pointing out the tautology in your argument. Why does mass attract mass? Because of gravity. Why is there gravity? Because mass attracts mass. That's what you're claiming to be science, and the simple fact is that explains nothing. As True Christians™, we know why mass attracts mass--because God wants it to. So we can explain gravity, whereas you with your so-called scientific method can only observe it.

I admit, I haven't personally seen an animal evolve, but scientists have determined they have after studying the physical evidence presented to them through the natural world. It's completely mind-boggling how ignorant you are of the basic facts of evolution.

We aren't ignorant of evolution. In fact, I was an evolutionary biologist before I was saved. But, unlike you, we understand the difference between a hypothesis and a fact. Indeed, when you refer to the basic facts of evolution, you show you're own bias. You are simply not willing to accept any other explanation, no matter what the evidence to the contrary.

BTW, when you say you haven't personally seen an animal evolve, you are implying that somebody else has. Well, nobody has personally seen an animal evolve, so, in fact, the whole world collectively hasn't seen an animal evolve. Ever. Scientists claim there are something like 10,000 new species of insect evolving every year, but nobody has ever seen even one of them actually evolve. Not one.

No, I'm not stupid, and not a racist. This basic name calling is not becoming of you, and leads me to believe that you are like a wounded animal trapped in a corner, lashing out in any way possible. Pathetic.

He didn't say you are a racist, he asked whether you are a racist. It's hard to justify believing in survival of the fittest on the one hand and everybody is equal on the other, isn't it? Darwinism requires that some subgroup be better than the others, and that leads directly to eugenics and Nazism, as we've seen time and time again.

Always remember, if you can't refute someones arguments, attack the person individually! Works like a charm, and only makes you look like an immature little brat.

Calling someone an immature little brat isn't refuting someone's arguments, it's an attack on the person individually! My God, you're dense.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: oh my god

Holy shit I can't believe how stupid I am.

I have found the light, praise Jesus!

He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool: but whoso walketh wisely, he shall be delivered. Proverbs 28:

Thinking for yourself is condemned by God.

[WilliamJenningsBryan]

Re: oh my god

Holy shit I can't believe how stupid I am.

I have found the light, praise Jesus!

Well, there might be some hope for you yet.

I was about to inquire how a table "pushes up" on magnets, but you have missed the Pastor's wider perspective on the problems of epistemology.

[Pastor Al E Pistle]

Re: oh my god

Holy shit I can't believe how stupid I am.

I have found the light, praise Jesus!

Friend, the simple act of entering this forum opens your heart to JESUS, whether you accept him or not. Many people are never granted the Divine Revelation, so you must be close to Salvation(TM). Many are chosen, but few are called.

[Pastor Al E Pistle]

Re: oh my god

Always remember, if you can't refute someones arguments, attack the person individually!

What you are attempting to describe is called an ad hominem attack. We don't do that here. We are TRUE CHRISTIANS(TM).

[Nobar King]

Re: oh my god

There is always room for redemption in Jesus' heart.

[Thinkforyourself]

Re: oh my god

Holy shit I can't believe how stupid I am.

I have found the light, praise Jesus!

[Thinkforyourself]

Re: oh my god

I'm sorry, but I have had a tiring day and I hate arguing with someone so close-minded and full of hate as you are. Are you a racist too, or just stupid? Wait! Don't answer. I'll have someone more experienced in dealing with someone on your level of the food chain tomorrow. I can't be bothered.

Silly me, I forgot to respond to this piece of work (Not that it necessarily deserves it)

No, I'm not stupid, and not a racist. This basic name calling is not becoming of you, and leads me to believe that you are like a wounded animal trapped in a corner, lashing out in any way possible. Pathetic.

Always remember, if you can't refute someones arguments, attack the person individually! Works like a charm, and only makes you look like an immature little brat.

[Thinkforyourself]

Re: oh my god

Now you are merely arguing for the sake of argument. If you want to play that game, you have no proof that time exists outside our invention of it, nor that it always points in one direction. I have here on my desk, two large Neodymium magnets. Very massive. I cannot put them even CLOSE to one another. They repel. So mass doesn't attract mass PERIOD. You had better come up with something that makes sense, PERIOD. Right now you are just babbling. How many animals have you watched evolve? Oh.....NONE? I do not consider the reproductive cycle of moths to be evolution, and I don't see any 'partial' evolutions.

I'm sorry, but I have had a tiring day and I hate arguing with someone so close-minded and full of hate as you are. Are you a racist too, or just stupid?

Yet again, you are blathering bullshit all over the place. I know that time is just a measuring system, but this has no relation to the argument at hand. And, you are obviously displaying your lack of the basic rules of physics. There are multiple forces acting on your two magnets. Gravity is pulling them down, the table is pushing them up, you are forcing them together while a magnetic force is pushing them apart. The magnetic force just happens to be stronger than the force you can apply on the two magnets. Also, way to completely contradict yourself when earlier you stated that gravity is a law and then turn around and say that mass doesn't attract mass. That's exactly what gravity is.

I admit, I haven't personally seen an animal evolve, but scientists have determined they have after studying the physical evidence presented to them through the natural world. It's completely mind-boggling how ignorant you are of the basic facts of evolution.

[Pastor Al E Pistle]

Re: oh my god

Oh wow, this is a doozy.

To start off, you have no proof whatsoever of, ahaha, dinosaurs helping to build Noah's Ark, which ALSO has no evidence of existing at all. You then go on to claim that the dinosaurs were too big to fit on the boat, which is quite humorous because you seem to believe that all dinosaurs were massive. Of course satan putting those fossils there is ridiculous, but some old dude building a big boat out of wood with dinosaurs helping him and then fitting two of every species of animal on it and sustaining them for fourty days is completely rational. Right.

http://www.dinosaurtypes.net/images/home_page/DinosaursRef.gif

You can see in the picture right there that some of those weren't that much bigger than an elephant.

Mass attracts mass. That is an observable effect. Animals evolve over time. Also an observable effect, and one that is, PERIOD, the best explanation we have. Creationism doesn't come close. I don't see a problem with a probable theory that explains our world...

Now you are merely arguing for the sake of argument. If you want to play that game, you have no proof that time exists outside our invention of it, nor that it always points in one direction. I have here on my desk, two large Neodymium magnets. Very massive. I cannot put them even CLOSE to one another. They repel. So mass doesn't attract mass PERIOD. You had better come up with something that makes sense, PERIOD. Right now you are just babbling. How many animals have you watched evolve? Oh.....NONE? I do not consider the reproductive cycle of moths to be evolution, and I don't see any 'partial' evolutions.

I'm sorry, but I have had a tiring day and I hate arguing with someone so close-minded and full of hate as you are. Are you a racist too, or just stupid? Wait! Don't answer. I'll have someone more experienced in dealing with someone on your level of the food chain tomorrow. I can't be bothered.

[Thinkforyourself]

Re: oh my god

You sure are a piece of work. You blast in here and start running your mouth without having a clue. SATAN didn't stack bones around to test our faith. What a stupid idea. The dinosaurs were alive and well and did the heavy lifting to help Noah and his two sons build the ark. But they were too big to be taken aboard, so they drowned in the flood.

The best theory we have is gravity. It's called a law because we can measure it's effects, but we don't know what causes it. Oh sure, opponents of inference to the best explanation often raise the objection that theories that give us the best explanation of some phenomena need not be the most probable ones. And they are certainly right. But what can we conclude from this insight? Should we ban thought from theory choice and work instead, for example, with a Bayesian approach? This would be a mistake brought about by a certain misapprehension of the epistemological task. We have to think about the real aims of epistemology and scientific practice in order to see that we are not primarily interested in the most probable theories but in explanatory ones leading to a coherent model of our world.

I think YOU are the one who doesn't know what they are talking about.

Oh wow, this is a doozy.

To start off, you have no proof whatsoever of, ahaha, dinosaurs helping to build Noah's Ark, which ALSO has no evidence of existing at all. You then go on to claim that the dinosaurs were too big to fit on the boat, which is quite humorous because you seem to believe that all dinosaurs were massive. Of course satan putting those fossils there is ridiculous, but some old dude building a big boat out of wood with dinosaurs helping him and then fitting two of every species of animal on it and sustaining them for fourty days is completely rational. Right.

http://www.dinosaurtypes.net/images/home_page/DinosaursRef.gif

You can see in the picture right there that some of those weren't that much bigger than an elephant.

Mass attracts mass. That is an observable effect. Animals evolve over time. Also an observable effect, and one that is, PERIOD, the best explanation we have. Creationism doesn't come close. I don't see a problem with a probable theory that explains our world...

[Pastor Al E Pistle]

Re: oh my god

You obviously have no idea what the hell you are talking about. The theory of evolution is truest theory we know. Only an idiot or someone who is completely irrational would deny the evidence for evolution in order to sustain their stupid beliefs in something which has no basis on solid fact.

I must ask you if you are one of the "Young Earth" creationist who believe the earth was made six thousand years ago (or whatever, don't care for the precise amount) I bet you believe those fossils are there...because...uh..THE DEVIL PUT THEM THEIR TO TEST OUR FAITH. YEAH. THAT'LL WORK.

And, @the missing link comment...are you seriously asking scientists to produce every single transitional fossil in history? Good luck. That's a pathetic argument.

You sure are a piece of work. You blast in here and start running your mouth without having a clue. SATAN didn't stack bones around to test our faith. What a stupid idea. The dinosaurs were alive and well and did the heavy lifting to help Noah and his two sons build the ark. But they were too big to be taken aboard, so they drowned in the flood.

The best theory we have is gravity. It's called a law because we can measure it's effects, but we don't know what causes it. Oh sure, opponents of inference to the best explanation often raise the objection that theories that give us the best explanation of some phenomena need not be the most probable ones. And they are certainly right. But what can we conclude from this insight? Should we ban thought from theory choice and work instead, for example, with a Bayesian approach? This would be a mistake brought about by a certain misapprehension of the epistemological task. We have to think about the real aims of epistemology and scientific practice in order to see that we are not primarily interested in the most probable theories but in explanatory ones leading to a coherent model of our world.

I think YOU are the one who doesn't know what they are talking about.

[Thinkforyourself]

Re: oh my god

If it were proven, IT WOULDN'T BE A THEORY.

Are you REALLY that stupid? The THEORY of evolution is not the LAW of evolution, you silly teenage fool!

You obviously have no idea what the hell you are talking about. The theory of evolution is truest theory we know. Only an idiot or someone who is completely irrational would deny the evidence for evolution in order to sustain their stupid beliefs in something which has no basis on solid fact.

I must ask you if you are one of the "Young Earth" creationist who believe the earth was made six thousand years ago (or whatever, don't care for the precise amount) I bet you believe those fossils are there...because...uh..THE DEVIL PUT THEM THEIR TO TEST OUR FAITH. YEAH. THAT'LL WORK.

And, @the missing link comment...are you seriously asking scientists to produce every single transitional fossil in history? Good luck. That's a pathetic argument.

[eliot mayfield]

Re: oh my god

that's bullshit, that article says that dinosaurs, eve and adam lived at the same time, which is impossible. There were no "first" human being, they have developped from creatures similar to apes. This theory is scientifically proven.

Hmm, I recall seeing on National Geographic after extensive testing they even pinpointed the location Adam came from.