The Interface Between Science and God

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TzarChasm

You would deny that the US government used the sub human card on the American Indians?

Are you that naive, you didn't study history did you.
They were described by your own government as damages, murdered as inferior, libel

the government has used a lot of cards on a lot of people. but what does that have to do with the interface between science and god?

a reply to: Raggedyman

Read it again. Your comprehension skills are very .............

a reply to: Raggedyman

I like to use the 100 million PLUS figure because it's true

You haven't provided links to your evidence.

You have a bad habit of hypocrisy

I do? Provide the evidence please - with links.

Every time you launch a trial balloon, for some odd reason, it crashes and burns. Any thoughts on that???

a reply to: Phantom423

Things happen randomly.
Atheists make so many stupid comments here, some are bound to be right, those right comments over millions of years evolve feet and crawl out of the water, then grow wings and fly to the sky, eventually they turn into dinosaurs, (unless they are dinosaurs before birds) what day s it today...

Where were we
That's right, randomness proves evolution, kinda like Coke proved Santa, isn't it

a reply to: Raggedyman

Ok, let's use your argument on, say, religion, shall we?

OMG!!!

People writing a book proves God, Must mean Harry Potter is real...

People coming from 2 people, black people coming from white people, talking snakes...

Where were we.....

Oh yes, books prove God. Kind of like movies prove the Easter bunny.

a reply to: TerryDon79

I never said books prove God, that would be very stupid

I mean it's not even related to comments turning into dinosaurs and random nonsense, kinda like what I am hearing.
Try another tack, you won't evolve anything from that comment above

Funny thing is TD, I could be wrong on creation and God, I only assume by faith

Just like you and evolution

a reply to: Raggedyman

Exactly my point. You never said any of the above, just like we haven't said what you think we did.

Your anti-science argument is beyond weak. You always use the same, boring, tactics with nothing to back you up.

You use the same "show me proof!" , but ignore it. Then demand proof again. You don't want proof. You're just after rediculing people.

I thought Christians were meant to be loving and all that crap. You're the most ignorant and abusive "Christian" I've ever seen. Are you sure you're not a devil worshipper? You seem to fit in that category better.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Raggedyman

Exactly my point. You never said any of the above, just like we haven't said what you think we did.

Your anti-science argument is beyond weak. You always use the same, boring, tactics with nothing to back you up.

You use the same "show me proof!" , but ignore it. Then demand proof again. You don't want proof. You're just after rediculing people.

I thought Christians were meant to be loving and all that crap. You're the most ignorant and abusive "Christian" I've ever seen. Are you sure you're not a devil worshipper? You seem to fit in that category better.

My anti science argument is fully shaded by your own anti science argument, an argument based on assumption

Now to add to your hypocrisy you demand I love you, use the Christian card, like you believe that Christians must act in a certain way.
A way that is defined by my actions.
You say I am a devil worshiper because I question your faith in science, but prior you have infered hitler or his like we're Christian, that Christians murder, that they commit genocide but that's ok, they are Christians
I dare question your faith, no violence, no abuse (maybe a little) and I am a devil worshiper

Tar, that's pathetic, listen to yourself

Additionally, anyone by your standards who doesn't do the Christian thing must by default be a devil worshiper, according to your standard set out above
So Stalin, he wasn't loving, devil worshiper, Mao, devil...., Pol Pot atheist but a devil worshiper.
So I can then infer, all those atheist dictators were not atheists but devil worshippers, though they were atheists, so all atheists are devil worshippers, your argument is silly

It's just nonsense, you hang yourself with your own words

a reply to: Raggedyman



Most have given up convincing you to engage in some real introspection, and now realize how your infantile pursuit to demonise evolution has become entirely obsessive. You take issue with literally every single piece of evidence that anybody talks about and then proceed to misinterpret it, or out right lie about it. It's like you believe all scientists worldwide are so incompetent, brainwashed or involved in some conspiracy that none of them has ever done anything right, and we're all in need of your expertise and infallible genius to show us what..magic.. LOL!

Your obsession has blinded you to your own ignorance and everyone ( except for that one guy who keeps staring your posts) sees it!

You cannot see the forest for the trees. You're too obsessed with burning the forest down to ever see it clearly. I hope your cult pays you well for all this hyperbole cause getting paid to lie is so much better that doing for nothing.

a reply to: Raggedyman

Oh poor mr I-have-to-hate-science-so-I-can-have-my-religion.

Go on. Show some proof of anything your say so right. Just once. It'll be unique.

Or not. I don't really care. You seem to though. Going around all these threads, denouncing science.

I feel sorry for you. It must be hard to live as a hypocrite. Denouncing science while using it.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Phantom423

Things happen randomly.
Atheists make so many stupid comments here, some are bound to be right, those right comments over millions of years evolve feet and crawl out of the water, then grow wings and fly to the sky, eventually they turn into dinosaurs, (unless they are dinosaurs before birds) what day s it today...

Where were we
That's right, randomness proves evolution, kinda like Coke proved Santa, isn't it

Where did I say that randomness proves evolution??????

You're not required to believe anything that's posted on this board. It would be nice, however, if you read the contents of posts and understood what the author intended rather than making it up as you go along - a la Creationists.

a reply to: TerryDon79

Is that a deflection, you changing your line of reasoning.
TD I have stated my beliefs are based on faith, you, yours on science.
That means the onus is on science
Now run along, you need to provide empirical evidence, that is what facts are, empirical evidence.
Random chance is not proof of anything, random chance is just random chance

I love science, love what science has done, I love how you have to portray me as anti science because your argument is so weak
I don't believe in your historical science so much, it's all assumption and fath in random

Hi FF
I still havnt seen the evidence, just assumption, just belief

You can stop my argument, present the empirical evidence, it all ends then

I know, how about crickets with gills, show me

a reply to: Raggedyman

Evidence has been given in multiple threads. But you know that because you say "I'm not reading that" then say "show me evidence".

So no, I won't be wasting my time providing you with something you will ignore.

An ignorant Christian. Who would have thought such a thing existed lol.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TerryDon79

Is that a deflection, you changing your line of reasoning.
TD I have stated my beliefs are based on faith, you, yours on science.
That means the onus is on science
Now run along, you need to provide empirical evidence, that is what facts are, empirical evidence.
Random chance is not proof of anything, random chance is just random chance

I love science, love what science has done, I love how you have to portray me as anti science because your argument is so weak
I don't believe in your historical science so much, it's all assumption and fath in random

Hi FF
I still havnt seen the evidence, just assumption, just belief

You can stop my argument, present the empirical evidence, it all ends then

I know, how about crickets with gills, show me

No one is obliged to provide you with anything. The evidence has been presented at least a hundred times over the years, to include the ATS library. That you ignore it, is your problem, not ours.

In the meantime as the OP, I would appreciate if you would dispense with the ignorant, self serving arguments and allow people to post their thoughts on the videos. That was the original intent.

a reply to: TerryDon79

Flys evolving not flys, dogs into dogs, yeah, real evolution
Randomness over chance, hard evidence

You know why so many people still believe in creation or assisted evolution.
Because your theory is childish and absurd, a Santa clause of belief, for those who don't understand the complexity of science.

From nothing we get everything and you call that science, that's religion, faith


Hey Phantom
You don't need to provide me anything, as the op, I am happy t leave your thread at your request, hope common courtesy will avail should I pen a thread.


As for the videos, I only watched the last one, thought the kid nailed it, spot on
Pity he didn't do o video on atheism and its death toll...

a reply to: TerryDon79

You won't be wasting your time replying to me, hmmm...
I just can't imagine that happening, not here not other places, not by your past similar comments and posting history anyway

You are funny TD, I hope you mean to be funny

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TerryDon79

Flys evolving not flys, dogs into dogs, yeah, real evolution
Randomness over chance, hard evidence

Evidence was shown in other threads. You decided not to read it. Boohoo.

You know why so many people still believe in creation or assisted evolution.
Because your theory is childish and absurd, a Santa clause of belief, for those who don't understand the complexity of science.

That pretty much sums you up to a T. You wouldn't understand science if your life depended on it. I'm surprised you know how to use a device to be on the Internet.

From nothing we get everything and you call that science, that's religion, faith

Thats your argument. Not sciences. You made it up to try and have an argument against evolution, and failed.

a reply to: TzarChasm

So
It sounds like the libel case against me was dropped, sheer relief
Thanks, I was fretting it
Won't have to become mad max now

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TerryDon79

You won't be wasting your time replying to me, hmmm...
I just can't imagine that happening, not here not other places, not by your past similar comments and posting history anyway

You are funny TD, I hope you mean to be funny

And that there shows you can't read lol.

I said I wouldn't be giving you evidence as it's been given multiple times before. That's a bit different from "not replying to you".

Is that your argument now? Making up replies to you?

a reply to: Raggedyman

Hey Phantom You don't need to provide me anything, as the op, I am happy t leave your thread at your request, hope common courtesy will avail should I pen a thread.

I didn't ask you to leave the thread. I asked you to dispense with self-serving arguments. If you have something to contribute or want to respond to someone's post with evidence, then you're welcome to be here. As of this post, you haven't responded to requests for links or evidence to your claims. It's not unreasonable to ask you to do so.