PostmodernProph
....fully immersed....
science prove you a liar.....It's not a life yet
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
science prove you a liar.....It's not a life yet
science prove you a liar.....It's not a life yet
excellent question.....but it doesn't change the fact she shouldn't have killed him earlier OR later.....hard to imagine anything worse than killing children.......unless its someone claiming its not only a good thing, its a "RIGHT".......What is sick is trying to prevent a poor woman who wants an abortion from being able to get one quick and cheap.
You are right. This woman should have had an abortion and this kid wouldn't have been tortured and neglected for 7 years and then killed.
Detroit boy 7 dies malnourished bruised mother boyfriend arrested News - Home
Ask his mom why she didn't put him up for adoption.
precisely......why shouldn't it be up to the unborn children?......they're the ones who are impacted the most......as a 63 year old man, its not likely.....I would consider killing your children to be more stupid......
Then if YOU are ever in that situation then that's what YOU can do.
Then really it shouldn't matter what you, me or the hundreds of 63 year old men in Congress think either. This should be left up to women and most of them want abortion to remain safe and legal.
Ok lets have the baby, raise him or her till they can talk and then ask them if they want to be aborted.
the part proven by science?......of course.....didn't you realize that before?.......now, about those parts that science HASN'T proven......science prove you a liar.....It's not a life yet
So evolution is true?
Like many fundamentalists, you see any gap in science as a crack to spackle with your gawds. It's surprising just how small those cracks are.the part proven by science?......of course.....didn't you realize that before?.......now, about those parts that science HASN'T proven......science prove you a liar.....It's not a life yet
So evolution is true?
excellent question.....but it doesn't change the fact she shouldn't have killed him earlier OR later.....hard to imagine anything worse than killing children.......unless its someone claiming its not only a good thing, its a "RIGHT".......What is sick is trying to prevent a poor woman who wants an abortion from being able to get one quick and cheap.
You are right. This woman should have had an abortion and this kid wouldn't have been tortured and neglected for 7 years and then killed.
Detroit boy 7 dies malnourished bruised mother boyfriend arrested News - Home
Ask his mom why she didn't put him up for adoption.
Like many fundamentalists, you see any gap in science as a crack to spackle with your gawds. It's surprising just how small those cracks are.the part proven by science?......of course.....didn't you realize that before?.......now, about those parts that science HASN'T proven......science prove you a liar.....It's not a life yet
So evolution is true?
Your gawds of the cracks have been jammed into smaller and smaller cracks as science and knowledge have left less and less room for literal rendering of Ark tales, talking snakes and magical realms.
the part proven by science?......of course.....didn't you realize that before?.......now, about those parts that science HASN'T proven......science prove you a liar.....It's not a life yet
So evolution is true?
then it was in error.....ID is not a competing concept with evolution......it is a competing theory of origin.......what theory of origins do you believe they will be teaching then?........As I asked in a different thread, if Dover wasn't about using pseudoscience to shoehorn Christianity into the science class, why did the school board use a law firm that bills itself as "the sword and shield for people of faith"?
a much better question.....why did the judge think that abiogenesis was "science".......did no one think to explain it to him?.......
Here's Judge Jones' decision. http://ncse.com/files/pub/legal/kitzmiller/highlights/2005-12-20_Kitzmiller_decision.pdf
Show me where the question of abiogenesis is even addressed.
You keep moving goalposts. The judge didn't even address abiogenesis, and neither did any of the witnesses or attorneys or the parents or the school board or anyone else associated with the trial. Every biology text aimed at high school kids or freshmen say the same thing when it comes to the origin of life: to wit, "we're not sure but this is what likely happened because of what we do know about physics and biochemistry" and leave the origin of life at that. Evolution, something we are sure of, is what happens next and that is what the trial was about.
does that tell us things about the folks you hang around with?......excellent question.....but it doesn't change the fact she shouldn't have killed him earlier OR later.....hard to imagine anything worse than killing children.......unless its someone claiming its not only a good thing, its a "RIGHT".......What is sick is trying to prevent a poor woman who wants an abortion from being able to get one quick and cheap.
You are right. This woman should have had an abortion and this kid wouldn't have been tortured and neglected for 7 years and then killed.
Detroit boy 7 dies malnourished bruised mother boyfriend arrested News - Home
Ask his mom why she didn't put him up for adoption.
Life isn't so precious we need to be worrying about women's unborn fetus'.
as opposed to your 'science of the gaps'.....you know you can't prove it, but you proved something yesterday, therefore everything else you believe MUST be true.....the part proven by science?......of course.....didn't you realize that before?.......now, about those parts that science HASN'T proven......science prove you a liar.....It's not a life yet
So evolution is true?
God of the gaps. I find it amazing you guys can't see it. For thousands of years thunder and glass was from god. As science progressed your god got smaller and smaller until today not one thing we see is "must be god" except for everything according to you guys.
So we went from everything we couldn't explain being "must be god" to today where EVERYTHING is god. Very interesting.
lol no....the entirety of biology is what the intelligent designer designed.....then it was in error.....ID is not a competing concept with evolution......it is a competing theory of origin.......what theory of origins do you believe they will be teaching then?........a much better question.....why did the judge think that abiogenesis was "science".......did no one think to explain it to him?.......
Here's Judge Jones' decision. http://ncse.com/files/pub/legal/kitzmiller/highlights/2005-12-20_Kitzmiller_decision.pdf
Show me where the question of abiogenesis is even addressed.
You keep moving goalposts. The judge didn't even address abiogenesis, and neither did any of the witnesses or attorneys or the parents or the school board or anyone else associated with the trial. Every biology text aimed at high school kids or freshmen say the same thing when it comes to the origin of life: to wit, "we're not sure but this is what likely happened because of what we do know about physics and biochemistry" and leave the origin of life at that. Evolution, something we are sure of, is what happens next and that is what the trial was about.
No. ID is a competing hypothesis for the entirely of biology.
All by magic just 6,000 years ago.lol no....the entirety of biology is what the intelligent designer designed.....then it was in error.....ID is not a competing concept with evolution......it is a competing theory of origin.......what theory of origins do you believe they will be teaching then?........Here's Judge Jones' decision. http://ncse.com/files/pub/legal/kitzmiller/highlights/2005-12-20_Kitzmiller_decision.pdf
Show me where the question of abiogenesis is even addressed.
You keep moving goalposts. The judge didn't even address abiogenesis, and neither did any of the witnesses or attorneys or the parents or the school board or anyone else associated with the trial. Every biology text aimed at high school kids or freshmen say the same thing when it comes to the origin of life: to wit, "we're not sure but this is what likely happened because of what we do know about physics and biochemistry" and leave the origin of life at that. Evolution, something we are sure of, is what happens next and that is what the trial was about.
No. ID is a competing hypothesis for the entirely of biology.
whatever you choose to believe, sweetcheeks......All by magic just 6,000 years ago.lol no....the entirety of biology is what the intelligent designer designed.....then it was in error.....ID is not a competing concept with evolution......it is a competing theory of origin.......what theory of origins do you believe they will be teaching then?........
You keep moving goalposts. The judge didn't even address abiogenesis, and neither did any of the witnesses or attorneys or the parents or the school board or anyone else associated with the trial. Every biology text aimed at high school kids or freshmen say the same thing when it comes to the origin of life: to wit, "we're not sure but this is what likely happened because of what we do know about physics and biochemistry" and leave the origin of life at that. Evolution, something we are sure of, is what happens next and that is what the trial was about.
No. ID is a competing hypothesis for the entirely of biology.
sorry....there is no magic capable of causing a single celled organism to change into a multicelled organism.......Hollie has to be wrong about that one......What magic was used to fully develop the first cell ? and caused that first cell to go on to form every group of living organisms that has ever existed in only 4.6 billion years.
No magic is required.sorry....there is no magic capable of causing a single celled organism to change into a multicelled organism.......Hollie has to be wrong about that one......What magic was used to fully develop the first cell ? and caused that first cell to go on to form every group of living organisms that has ever existed in only 4.6 billion years.
well science certainly isn't involved or you would have been able to show it by now......No magic is required.sorry....there is no magic capable of causing a single celled organism to change into a multicelled organism.......Hollie has to be wrong about that one......What magic was used to fully develop the first cell ? and caused that first cell to go on to form every group of living organisms that has ever existed in only 4.6 billion years.
.
Magic is not a process that is required in science or biology. In the worldview of you YEC'ists, science is not a requirement at all. Science, biology, chemistry, etc. are irrelevant when magical gawds *poofed* all of existence just 6,000 years ago.well science certainly isn't involved or you would have been able to show it by now......No magic is required.sorry....there is no magic capable of causing a single celled organism to change into a multicelled organism.......Hollie has to be wrong about that one......What magic was used to fully develop the first cell ? and caused that first cell to go on to form every group of living organisms that has ever existed in only 4.6 billion years.
.