Evolution is Science, Creationists Delusional

Originally posted by Solomons

either im stupid or you didn't refute evolution.

gee must I? It's soooo tempting OH LORD GIVE ME STRENGTH!

Whew,, for a second there I was gonna say, "well, I guess you're stupid"

Good thing the lord gave me the strength to stop huh.

Opps!!

Yikes!

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by Aermacchi
Trouble is, even THEY have to work at disbelieveing God 24/7. That must get tiring.

lol... There are some great arguments against God.
Maybe we'll discuss that someday

?

Well perhaps we CAN I would like that very much ESPECIALLY the one about all the contradictions, you know there ARE Christian sites that have some very intelligent rebuttals to those unbiased boys at hatethebible.com or where ever that bibliobigoted site was you got posted lol.

Take care my friend, it has been afterall

a challenge and THAT is good enough for me for now

G/nite

PS: Here Mel www.telegraph.co.uk...

[edit on 31-12-2008 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by littlebunny

Noobfun: as much as I would love to dissect everything you just said, and as much as I would love to post several video's and the science that disputes the beliefs you expose here... Not least of which the bat...

please do ill be happy to take a look, im pretty sure ive seen this argument already its about fossils and its a false argument it says you dont have some fossils ergo everything is a lie

which is wrong is just shows our record of fossalised bats is poor but paloentologists are working on it

We both know we aren't going to change the others beliefs...

i work on evidence its easy to change my mind, if its honest data not twined with twisting of words, such as that earlier video that declared mendel killed evolution by proving genes are passed not character traits when genes are responisble for charachter traits

remeber if it comes without real evidence, and i dont mean ahh you cant find xyz, many americans cant find vitenam on a map doesnt mean it isnt real, you have to refute the evidence to make a case, and then use evidence to make your case

happy new year.

Originally posted by Aermacchi
reply to post by melatonin

 

Ok,,

as long as you are not saying that I said he thought anything is fine with me mel. Oh and i got an email from whammy and he is right as we both have the same Book, here is a quote from his email.

Well I quoted directly out of Dawkins book any one can read for themselves , no matter how much he says its not true its right there in black and white. Dawkins claims that natural selection explains the existence of life in the book then tells Stein he doesnt know... he's a con man in the book.

Eh? I thought I made it pretty clear earlier I didn't even watch the whammy vid and wasn't referring to that...

Just to be crystal - my reference of whammy misrepresenting Dawkins is to an old thread and has nothing to do with that video you posted, which I still haven't watched.

Originally posted by Aermacchi
PS: Here Mel www.telegraph.co.uk...

[edit on 31-12-2008 by Aermacchi]

yeah, it essentially says what is on his website and was outlined in my post here. Indeed, they are from the same source here.

Telegraph article:

"I believe, but I cannot prove, that all life, all intelligence, all creativity and all 'design' anywhere in the universe is the direct or indirect product of Darwinian natural selection," said Prof Dawkins in the responses published yesterday on www.edge.org.

That, of course, means that there is no need for a god to design the universe: "It follows that design comes late in the universe, after a period of Darwinian evolution. Design cannot precede evolution and therefore cannot underlie the universe."

Dawkins' interview from his website:

BBC Radio 4: What was your own response to the question?

Richard Dawkins: Well, my response was about Darwinism, which is my own field. Darwinism is the explanation for life on this planet, but I believe that all intelligence, all creativity, and all design anywhere in the universe is the direct or indirect product of Darwinian natural selection. It follows that design comes late in the universe, after a period of Darwinian evolution. Design cannot precede evolution and therefore cannot underlie the universe. That was my response.

Still nothing like your quote...

"I believe but cannot prove we are the product of Darwinian Natural Selection and random mutation - Richard Dawkins"

...and, as I noted in t'other thread, it is pretty clear what it is he 'believes' but cannot 'prove'.

[edit on 1-1-2009 by melatonin]

Originally posted by spy66

ahh spy here to misquote

Well noob and co. Do believe in the a string "theory" to be true. It has just not been proven yet.

actually i think string theory is rather silly, is based on theroetical maths and doesnt mean anything of anything, it just gives possables

the same goes for quantum, our understadning is getting better some things we can prove some things we have no idea of why or how

you can look at the evidence and talk about them without having to believe its true

but way to generalise and try and discredit ... thats a logical fallacy of ad-hominim

They also believe that cosmic radiation can produce life on earth.

never said THAT nothing like it please go find it and repost it or quit with the propaganda

They also believe that a big star with just enough mass,That had just the right speed and angle. Hit the earth at just the right time and created the Moon.

HAHAHAHHAHA a star burning away a several thousand degree's kelvin? that would have evaporated the earth long before they collided?

your special you really are

But that's just a scientific theory not yet been proven.

what your reffering to is a hypothesis if its unproven, scientific theorys have been proven

It has just been simulated on a computer. But i guess that will have to do for now.

and chemcial analysis of rocks, maths, observations of receding orbit and a whole bunch of other stuff

And scientists do believe a Big Bang will happened every 80 to 100 billion years. This is not yet proven so we have to wait and see. So far the universe is suppose to be expanding not retracting.

supposed to be its proven common knowledge for years

when everything movind away for each other thats called exapanding

look at least be honest enough to go look up what your talking about and what scienctific theory really means

were honest enough to know what were talking about and go examine what the creationisits are talking about

its called honesty and common courtesy

[edit on 1/1/09 by noobfun]

Originally posted by Boniouk06

The poster said evolution and Science... so yes i included big bang into his theory. Unless of course he is so intelligent he believes some scientists but then has his OWN theories on our origins of the universe.

he can hold any view he likes on how the universe got here

Evolutionary theory(biology) deals with life one it is here and able to reproduce and become pressurised by enviromental factor that is when evolution starts

before this come abiogenesis(chemistry) which describes organice compounds self forming to become organic structures( mycells) and the process that lead to them becoming self replicating

anything before this is physics and geology

so you can include anything you want, dont forget gravity that plays a major staring role in all of it. but everything you include just displays A) your not talking about the topic but trying to drag it off track B)you dont really know what evolution is if you think it involves astro physics

I doubt it though. So yeah Science - evolution - big bang theory. All included in Science when in debate with religion. I doubt even the poster would disagree with my point there.

I would disagree strongly

when science debates it picks its topic and sticks to it, its religeons inability to stiuck to a topic to prove its case it goes running else where to find other things to try and argue about

if the bigbang theory is ever replaced it doesnt change evolution one bit becasue they are independant things

I understand people want to voice their opinions, and many do so in a very intellectual interesting educational way. But to say you can prove religion false or true, is unrealistic.

agreed, but you can prove holy texts are innacurate and/or carry false information, that of course doesnt disprove god but disproves the religeons books so the god written in it is wrong ad either a poor proximation of he real god or one someone mde up and wrote about

Same with alot of scientific theories. That's in fact why they are called theories.

that infact shows your misunderstanding of the term scientific theory

People used to believe the earth was flat, and it was considered FACT.

then someone came along with maths and proved it false by using evidence not just guessing, science in action baby

Then they discovered it was round and that was considered FACT...

its not really round but it si sphericle and if you think this is goving to be overturned thats quite laughable

maybe in 20 years we will discover things we can't comprehend now. Like another couple of dimensions, and we will come to know that the earth is in fact 7D... and we will laugh at people who said it was 3D and round... who knows..

well were upto 11 possible dimensions and the world will still ALWAYS be in the third dimension

becaue it has height width length and is tangible so it is and forever will be 3 dimensional

misunderstanding

"THEORIES!"

shows general lack of scientific knowledge

This debate can't be proven one way or the other.

its already proven we use it to make new medicences to increase crops to make the world a better place so you live beyond 30 and can call it names and generally be ungrateful

the same scientific method that gives you food and mediceine was used on evolution and proven, so if evolution is wrong so is food and mediceince and technology and you better go live in cave in animal skins and forage off the local bushes if you think that

[edit on 1/1/09 by noobfun]

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Nope I see he still wants me to believe a guy that can't get more than 30% of the words in his first sentence spelled correctly knows even more about Science just ain't gonna happen. If he doesn't take his posts serious enough to have others take them serious then,,,

*yawn* well like ive said im happy to mispell every single word, rather then run around calling every one unintelligent morons and then make up false hoods to argue my case from ignorance


p.s. you made a few typos your self, glass houses and all that

Too bad noob GET A DAMN WRITER or keep wasting your time looking ignorant. Even someone who wants to LOOK smart has enough sense to avoid dead giveaways they are not but YOU don't even go that far.

why would i want to look smart rather then actually have an understanding of the topics bieng discussed and actually know what im talking about

your all about apperance but lacking in substance hence the constant name calling word twisiting and lack of anything tangable beyond your own words

your a salesman with nothing to sell

roll up roll up come one come all see Aermacchi pattented snake oil guaranted to cure you of all ills and knowledge only $5 a bottle it defies science and cures intelligence with just one swig, you madam would you like a bottle of this fine elixier?

HA HA HA HA. Some of that post is SO poorly written I can't tell what google page you reconstructed the actual writers you copied them from to look like it was your stuff.

and the irony is you cant and this is another lie

feel free to prove me wrong, or is this yet another challenge to prove your honesty that you will run away from because youve been caught in the act again

i liked your story about the lying athiests, so what does that make you if your not even wiling to tell the truth to win? as your story goes

are you a super athiest?



[edit on 1/1/09 by noobfun]

Originally posted by Aermacchi
Nope I see he still wants me to believe a guy that can't get more than 30% of the words in his first sentence spelled correctly knows even more about Science just ain't gonna happen.

Too bad noob GET A DAMN WRITER or keep wasting your time looking ignorant. Even someone who wants to LOOK smart has enough sense to avoid dead giveaways they are not but YOU don't even go that far. HA HA HA HA.

This crap again?
Grammar doesn't matter if you make a good point.
Your grammar isn't that great to be honest - you've left out several commas.
And my grammar is far from perfect as well.
Who cares?
Would you like me to show you how terribly written your Bible is - with all the contradictions, inconsistencies, etc?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the meaning of the sentence and not the way it's spelled that matters?

Originally posted by Aermacchi
Well perhaps we CAN I would like that very much ESPECIALLY the one about all the contradictions, you know there ARE Christian sites that have some very intelligent rebuttals to those unbiased boys at hatethebible.com or where ever that bibliobigoted site was you got posted lol.

lol...
I pretty much use google to research this stuff, though there are some good sites that I use as well.
Yes there are Christian sites that have something to say about the contradictions. Unfortunately for them, there's not much they can say - as these contradictions exist in the earliest texts we have.
So I'll hear the ol' "translation error" argument. It may even be right, but who knows what the original text said? The fact is that the books we have of the Bible now ARE flawed and filled with contradictions.

But actually, I wasn't thinking about the contradictions but rather the illogical aspects of an omnipotent and omniscient God in our universe.

Originally posted by Boniouk06
Science is always upgrading its theories and every time it does you accept the new truth over the old theory. Contradictory

You have to crawl before you can walk, and you'll still stumble many times, but it's the progress that matters most.
Creationism, however, tries to walk it's first try - which isn't a pretty sight.

Originally posted by Boniouk06
As for religion. Its a faith game. God won't prove himself to the likes of you and me, because then it wouldn't require faith to believe in him.

LOL.
That's the same reason the Purple Cookie Monster of DOOM won't show his face to anyone (except me of course).
What a coincidence .

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by Aermacchi
Nope I see he still wants me to believe a guy that can't get more than 30% of the words in his first sentence spelled correctly knows even more about Science just ain't gonna happen.

Too bad noob GET A DAMN WRITER or keep wasting your time looking ignorant. Even someone who wants to LOOK smart has enough sense to avoid dead giveaways they are not but YOU don't even go that far. HA HA HA HA.

This crap again?
Grammar doesn't matter if you make a good point.
Your grammar isn't that great to be honest - you've left out several commas.
And my grammar is far from perfect as well.
Who cares?
Would you like me to show you how terribly written your Bible is - with all the contradictions, inconsistencies, etc?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the meaning of the sentence and not the way it's spelled that matters?

I wouldn't know what his point is I never read his "stuff" personally,, I doubt the kid knows how to spell his name right and YOU I have enjoyed our little jousts. I was hoping I conveyed that in my last post to you.

You see the last paragragh noob would make a post ten feet long out of as he usually does, disecting each and every word and if I'm lucky line by line and as bad as his poorly constructed arguments are wth me trying to read all the dis jointed mis-spelled simple words I have to ask myself since most of the videos he has posted I have already seen debunked, is he worth it?

Nope.

Not in my opinion.

So I skip past the ten foot long posts he has made from the others and gladly read those more to the point. I like reading Mels stuff and yours but that's just me. I have read many others complaining about that habit of noobs also, so I know it isn't just me. I even gave some examples like the one where I said never bet against god and he even took that apart and mentioned some line in a movie. Just too much exercise going through all that minutia then having to read so much that is just unnecessary line by line corrections even when speaking extemporaneuously, he makes an issue of it as though it were some kind of fact someone was making. I think my making an issue of his writing in general wouldn't matter if he his going to be that way about it fine I simply won't bother reading his posts.

TO MEL: Thanks for the links Mel, Ill take a look at the one you are talking about. As for the quote, yeah I see what you mean. Like I said I had heard it originally in a bbc podcast and was reciting it as best I could recall. I stand corrected in light of the full document. Mel, you have always had an uncanny ability to use humor in a way to get me to laugh at myself and not take myself so serious. Besides your sharp wit and intelligent blend of dry humor, access to the latest information, you are always a pleasure to read.

That in spite of our differences, you know I have the utmost respect for you as always.

TO Noob: Sorry Noob, I don't read your posts, read what I told truth. If you don't agree with it,, tuff. If you don't want to read mine, fine.

I couldn't care less

[edit on 1-1-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by Aermacchi


I wouldn't know what his point is I never read his "stuff" personally,, I doubt the kid knows how to spell his name right and YOU I have enjoyed our little jousts. I was hoping I conveyed that in my last post to you.

inferiority complex with overbearing augmentation, projection, personal bias, cognative bias, confermation bias you really are fun in a game of bias bingo

a continued use of fear tactics, emotion appeals and the whole gammet of logical fallacies i find it quite amusing

your afraid to honestly look at the evidence as challenging your beliefs is too worrysome for you, thats fine carry on right ahead, but please stop trying to drag everyone into the same display of fear of conviction

after all what use is faith if you never honestly challeneged it? never pull it out and give it a test run. its not faith you hold its blind delusion and security ideals to keep away the bogey man

TO Noob: Sorry Noob, I don't read your posts, read what I told truth. If you don't agree with it,, tuff. If you don't want to read mine, fine.

i read them, its hard for them to be true when you make so many false statements and supply no evidence for anything

im honest enough to read yours and understand what your trying to say and take it on its merits and research your claims, if your to afraid to even sneak a peek or check anything i say then how can you possibly say they are wrong and be honest about it?



this video could have been made for you

[edit on 1/1/09 by noobfun]

Originally posted by noobfun

Originally posted by Aermacchi


I wouldn't know what his point is I never read his "stuff" personally,, I doubt the kid knows how to spell his name right and YOU I have enjoyed our little jousts. I was hoping I conveyed that in my last post to you.

inferiority complex with overbearing augmentation, projection, personal bias, cognative bias, confermation bias you really are fun in a game of bias bingo

a continued use of fear tactics, emotion appeals and the whole gammet of logical fallacies i find it quite amusing

your afraid to honestly look at the evidence as challenging your beliefs is to worry some for you, thats fine carry on right ahead, but please stop trying to drag everyone into the same display of fear of conviction

after all what use is faith if you never honestly challenege it? never pull it out and give it a test run. its not faith you hold its blind delusion and security ideals to keep away the bogey man

TO Noob: Sorry Noob, I don't read your posts, read what I told truth. If you don't agree with it,, tuff. If you don't want to read mine, fine.

i read them, its hard for the to be true when you make so many false statements and supply no evidence for anything

im honest enough to read yours and understand what your trying to say and take it on its merits and research your claims, if your to afraid to even sneak a peek or check anything i say then how can you possibly say they are wrong and be honest about it?

[edit on 1/1/09 by noobfun]

Whatever noob, quite frankly, I am sick of your condescending BS, your long winded posts where the only time you use properly spelled words are when you have quoted others or the many times you plagiarized someone elses work and re-worded them. Don't worry, I only alert people who I catch doing that in a pvt u2u as I don't like to be a tattle tale. You are NOT a Psychiatrist so spare me the mundane platitudes on inferiority complex as I am fully aware one does not give me such a thing without my consent. I assure you, I never gave you that much respect or influence. What ever you had to say after the first few lines of ad-homs,, I'm afraid you just turn me off period. To put it bluntly in the style I have become accustomed to, I simply DON'T LIKE YOU.

Capeche?

WELCOME TO MY IGNORE LIST!

You may join Riley only the second time I have had to use this thing. Enjoy getting the last word as I know you will, the benefit of which will be for your "groupies" or Noobfans in the small dying peanut gallery of diehard believers of a theory so dead it is in full rigormortis. Know it is for the same reasons I put Riley there that YOU are joining having nothing to do with reasons YOU think I did this but more to do with you wasting bandwith and that some of us would like to breath fresh air. Yes you are THAT boorish. If you or anyone has found me to be the same, I encourage you to put me on your list as well. I am errr,, indifferent that way hehe.

have a nice life NOOOOOOB!





[edit on 1-1-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Whatever noob, quite frankly, I am sick of your condescending BS and you are NOT a Psychiatrist.

condesending? i guess thats a crime we are both guilty of then

i may not be a phsyciatrist but i study it, its a hobby and an acurate representation of the traits you repeatedly display

What ever you had to say after the first few lines of ad-homs,, I'm afraid you just turn me off period. To put it bluntly in the style I have become accustomed to, I simply DON'T LIKE YOU.

thank you for proving my point so eloquantley in refusing to face even the possability of challenging a belief

i wont be putting you on my block list, all the same id rather hear the other point of view no matter what it may be

God did create the universe... us.... even the poop i just made. I think that maybe its not creation that needs to be understood better, but the definition of god.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
God did create the universe... us.... even the poop i just made. I think that maybe its not creation that needs to be understood better, but the definition of god.

Umm ,, thanks for sharing,, ( I think)

So what you are saying is God is a poopie hole? I am sure that in Gods great wisdom, even THAT he had a good reason to create.

god created the sentence you wrote, just as it created the one i am writing....

o how we label causality different things. some see teh dominoes and others dont.....

Originally posted by Wertdagf
god created the sentence you wrote, just as it created the one i am writing....

o how we label causality different things. some see teh dominoes and others dont.....

Yeah, well if he did, I don't see a problem with it.

is that ok with you?

Noobfun, you say that the world is 3d now and that even though were upto 11 dimensions the world will always be 3D. thats naive to think we wont advice or learn of new theories which could disprove this. Spritituality, quantum physics, lots of things could prove that we are in 5d or such. To say we will always be 3d is the same as someone DUMB, hundreds of years ago saying the world will always be flat.

the rest of ur post was quite good, thanks.

The "if" is the only problem.. but of course that only hurts me when it hurts you. This is the nature of my love. I hope you understand.

Originally posted by Boniouk06
Noobfun, you say that the world is 3d now and that even though were upto 11 dimensions the world will always be 3D. thats naive to think we wont advice or learn of new theories which could disprove this.

as long as we find our selves in a space of dimensions length bredth depth we will always exist in a 3 dimensional space

as long as our universe has measurment it is 3 dimensional

comparing the older beleif the earth is flat to 3 dimesnsional understanding wont work, they believed the world its self was flat but was still a 3 dimensional reality becasue it had length and width and height

even if the universe turned out to be a figment of the imagination we still percieve it in the 3rd dimension even as figmanets of the imagination we still iteract in it in a 3 dimensional way

theres no way to alter that, so even if we end up with 150 new dimensions and completley rewrite most of our physics knowledge it will still be measuered by the 3 criteria that casue it to be 3 dimensional

en.wikipedia.org...

Spritituality, quantum physics, lots of things could prove that we are in 5d or such.

we are in a multidimensional universe (like i say string theory has us up to 11 at the moment but string theory is unproven) but the universe is still percieved in 3 dimensions and can never be otherwise .... unless we loose all knowledge start from scratch and asign a new name to it in the future