Creationists

[Youwerecreated]

You find it to be a fairytale because of your pre-supposition that ....., so you simply refute any evidence brought to you.

Can I get a mirror please???? How many times are you going to accuse me of the thing you are doing???

As far as the examples you gave, are you really that dense??? Every instance you cited was caused or manipulated by... here, wait for it... it's coming... an intelligent agent you Bozo!!!

Yep he was not bright enough to see they were products of man's creation. That is exactly why we have so many different breeds of domestic animals.

 

[UltimateReality]

Do you have any evidence that your designer exists?

Yes, I do!!! Scientific Evidence!! If you would actually listen to the Stephen Meyer video I linked to, you might enlighten your blinded, ignorant mind to a VALID SCIENTIFIC hypothesis for Designer that fits way better than your god of Natural Selection. I won't hold my breath though. You'd just rather keep stating the same thing over and over and over (ad naseum) with NO evidence, completely out of pure stupidity and ignorance because you won't bother to entertain an argument that goes against your materialistic religion. Watch the video and then put up some counter arguments and I might listen to you. Otherwise, your programmed regurgitation of the Darinists' religious handbook will be henceforth from now on, ignored. My gosh man, try to have a thought for yourself instead of just repeating things others have said.

If you won't listen to the whole video, at least go to 1:13:40 where an audience member asks the question, "What is science?" I think the answer absolutely has to prevent you from making the same ignorant mistake you keep doing by stating that you have scientific evidence. You don't. What you continue to present is a demarcation argument and it could just as easily be applied to the theory of evolution to disqualify it. It would also disqualify a great number of physics theories and we would not have a Hadron Collider if scientists had applied your simple minded thinking to the problem. Do you really want to go there. Funny how you present things like you know when many before you have put much thought and argument into the same issue without resolution. There is nothing more annoying than ignorant people who are arrogant!!!! Do yourself a favor and educate yourself Mr. Wiki...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem

 

[newpolitics]

Microevolurion yes macro no. Of course you can have what you call speciation within a family because the gene pool is so vast with information. Why do you think there are so many different breeds of horses,dogs,and cats ? This is not macroevolution this is microevolution. Why do you think everyone has their own set of finger prints ?

microevolution vs macroevolution is a false dichotomy invented by creationists. "macroevolution" is simply an extension of "microevolution", if left to evolve over a larger period of time from a common ancestor and in different conditions.

what speciation demonstrates is what you would called "macroevolution". The examples you provided are poor. Dogs, horses, etc... are still part of the same species because they can still mate and produce viable offspring. Speciation refers to when two animals can no longer mate and produce offsprings, hence are now on seperate "tracks" of evolution whose differences will only increase as each respective population responds to their respective geography and climate. It is important to note that this response to distinct geography and climate, which drives selective pressure, is what drives the change, because it makes certain traits more desirable than others. For instance, if it is a very hot and sunny climate (the sahara or its equivalent), survivability may optimized by lessening body surface and hence body mass to lessen any moisture lost to the heat, and we see this in nature, as desert climates tend to produce smaller animals. So, animals that are smaller and less massive would survive better, and their genes would be passed on with greater frequency, than others who would die off because they are losing too much moisture.

your entire argument is an argument from ignorance, which is a logical fallacy. you maintain a claim that there is a creator. the burden of proof, therefore, is on you to substantiate that claim. trying to put holes in the current theories that are based on evidence is fallacious because the current theory of evolution does not maintain that another, unseen player is at work. evolution and science is based on observable evidence. there is zero evidence for god, and nothing in observation points to a god. creationists rely on using an argument from ignorance, or basically, a god of the gaps. the bible does not count as evidence, because it does not prove god. it is a book. if it were, then which religion would be true? there are thousands, none of them having any evidence for the existence of the super-natural deity (or deities) they claim. religion and god is man-made.

here is some reading for you on micro vs macro evolution. this article did not inform my position.

Microevolution vs Macroevolution: Is There A Difference Between Microevolution & Macroevolution?

Wrong again careful who you call ignorant especially when you are wrong. Both terms came from evolutionist. Your false premise as well as the ones teaching you is that one leads to the other. One has been observed and one has not. When you have a vast genepool you can have features change from crossbreeding and inbreeding. Because you can have offspring that don't look like the parents but it does have features from both parents does not show evolution. I give you the truth with a simple answer you resort to insults and rhetoric. The problem is you are spewing nonsense from what dummy taught another. Please do yourself a favor and learn the difference between micro and macro so you know when you are being filled with junk knowledge.

I didn't insult you (now I will). You have just shown yourself to be ignorant in stating that I called you ignorant. I didn't. I said you were using an argument from ignorance, which is a debate fallacy.

Argument from ignorance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


You have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to reality. You're pre-suppositions are based on a book. I don't have any pre-suppositions except to find truth through observable evidence. There is no evidence for god, so.... I have no reason to believe in him. end of story. You can keep going in circles, but there is not much that can be discussed. You don't care about the truth. You care about yourself. That is sad. This is called ego.

 

[koshergrl]

Did you observe the evidence yourself?

Or did you...read a book?

If you read a book, your silliness is just..well, silly.

 

[Gadawg73]

Why did the creationists/intelligent design proponents have to lie in open court attempting to "prove" their case?
When there is no evidence, lie.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Why did the creationists/intelligent design proponents have to lie in open court attempting to "prove" their case?
When there is no evidence, lie.

I am not sure they did lie but when I get home I would love to read the manuscripts of the proceedings. But there has been manufactured evidence from your side and lying as well. Please provide the link I would like to read it myself. I am not near my pc I am on my phone. But I am secure in my views and my views are not just based on the bible. Everyone is influenced by their presuppositions. To say they don't affect the way they interpret evidence are not being honest. I have not seen anyone's rebuttal to ultimate reality's challenge. Did any of you watch the video with the ID speaker at Cambridge University ? Or is it we only read your stuff and respond and you guys don't bother reading opposing views ?

 

[daws101]

Only an imbecile can't see design in nature.

The only observed evolution is microevolution because of the vast Dna information and this evolution only occurs within a family,not from one family to another.

you have no proof that the design you bather on about is nothing more then an ongoing NATURAL PROCESS DUE TO THE CONDITIONS.
ONLY AN ILLITERATE ASSHOLE ATTEMPTING TO RATIONALIZE A FANTASY WOULD CLAIM THAT AS FACT.

You think you have proof?? You are more delusional than I thought. The theory Stephen Meyer lays out is the best explanation for the complex code we find. But that would take an hour of your life to actually listen to the TOTALLY SCIENTIFIC argument he lays out. You won't listen to it and comment, because you just rather argue and name call. So in your total ignorance of the VERY SOLID theory that is presented, it is you that apears as an ignorant, illiterate, sphincter:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbluTDb1Nfs]http://youtu.be/NbluTDb1Nfs[/ame]

 

[newpolitics]

Did you observe the evidence yourself?

Or did you...read a book?

If you read a book, your silliness is just..well, silly.

I read books that don't lay claim to supernatural events that defy everything we know about the universe. I read about things that are based upon natural laws and existence as part of our universe. Miracles are not natural, and have never been shown or proven. They are qualified as such only by the observer, but there is no objective verifiable proof they have EVER happened, including any done by the supposed jesus, who isn't even proved to have existed. There is no evidence he really did.

 

[Gadawg73]

Why did the creationists/intelligent design proponents have to lie in open court attempting to "prove" their case?
When there is no evidence, lie.

I am not sure they did lie but when I get home I would love to read the manuscripts of the proceedings. But there has been manufactured evidence from your and lying as well. Please provide the link I would like to read it myself. I am not near my pc I am on my phone. But I am secure in my views and my views are not just based on the bible. Everyone o don't care who it is,is influenced by their presuppositions. To say they don't affect the way they interpret evidence are not being honest. I have not seen anyone's rebuttal to ultimate reality's challenge. Did any of you watch the video with the ID speaker at Cambridge University ? Or is it we only read your stuff and respond and you guys don't bother reading opposing views ?

So you are now calling me a liar.
Some Christian you are Moe.
LOSER.

 

[UltimateReality]

Did you observe the evidence yourself?

Or did you...read a book?

If you read a book, your silliness is just..well, silly.

I read books that don't lay claim to supernatural events that defy everything we know about the universe. I read about things that are based upon natural laws and existence as part of our universe. Miracles are not natural, and have never been shown or proven. They are qualified as such only by the observer, but there is no objective verifiable proof they have EVER happened, including any done by the supposed jesus, who isn't even proved to have existed. There is no evidence he really did.

This statement shows your total ignorance on what the Intelligent Design arguemnt is. Why are you so AFRAID to listen to the Stephen Meyer lecture???

 

[UltimateReality]

Why did the creationists/intelligent design proponents have to lie in open court attempting to "prove" their case?
When there is no evidence, lie.

I am not sure they did lie but when I get home I would love to read the manuscripts of the proceedings. But there has been manufactured evidence from your and lying as well. Please provide the link I would like to read it myself. I am not near my pc I am on my phone. But I am secure in my views and my views are not just based on the bible. Everyone o don't care who it is,is influenced by their presuppositions. To say they don't affect the way they interpret evidence are not being honest. I have not seen anyone's rebuttal to ultimate reality's challenge. Did any of you watch the video with the ID speaker at Cambridge University ? Or is it we only read your stuff and respond and you guys don't bother reading opposing views ?

So you are now calling me a liar.
Some Christian you are Moe.
LOSER.

I will call you a liar. Remember, we "Creationist" nutbags are all crazy with our religion. You are obviously possessed by Satan, the father of lies, liar. So there you go. There, so now you can put me in my little box. Make you feel better??

 

[UltimateReality]

you have no proof that the design you bather on about is nothing more then an ongoing NATURAL PROCESS DUE TO THE CONDITIONS.
ONLY AN ILLITERATE ASSHOLE ATTEMPTING TO RATIONALIZE A FANTASY WOULD CLAIM THAT AS FACT.

You think you have proof?? You are more delusional than I thought. The theory Stephen Meyer lays out is the best explanation for the complex code we find. But that would take an hour of your life to actually listen to the TOTALLY SCIENTIFIC argument he lays out. You won't listen to it and comment, because you just rather argue and name call. So in your total ignorance of the VERY SOLID theory that is presented, it is you that apears as an ignorant, illiterate, sphincter:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbluTDb1Nfs]http://youtu.be/NbluTDb1Nfs[/ame]

Four laughing smiley faces. Now those are the types of intelligent responses we have come to know and love from Darwinists. Insert face palm here.

 

[newpolitics]

You think you have proof?? You are more delusional than I thought. The theory Stephen Meyer lays out is the best explanation for the complex code we find. But that would take an hour of your life to actually listen to the TOTALLY SCIENTIFIC argument he lays out. You won't listen to it and comment, because you just rather argue and name call. So in your total ignorance of the VERY SOLID theory that is presented, it is you that apears as an ignorant, illiterate, sphincter:

http://youtu.be/NbluTDb1Nfs

Four laughing smiley faces. Now those are the types of intelligent responses we have come to know and love from Darwinists. Insert face palm here.

I watched the whole thing. His entire premise is based on an argument from ignorance fallacy, that because we can't prove that abiogenesis happened (yet), god did it. This is not proof of god in any way. You can't look at a lack of evidence for any current theories in science and say god did it. That is not evidence. There is no direct evidence for an intelligent designer. Only a lack of evidence for abiogenesis. This is a god of gaps philosophy.

 

[Gadawg73]

I am not sure they did lie but when I get home I would love to read the manuscripts of the proceedings. But there has been manufactured evidence from your and lying as well. Please provide the link I would like to read it myself. I am not near my pc I am on my phone. But I am secure in my views and my views are not just based on the bible. Everyone o don't care who it is,is influenced by their presuppositions. To say they don't affect the way they interpret evidence are not being honest. I have not seen anyone's rebuttal to ultimate reality's challenge. Did any of you watch the video with the ID speaker at Cambridge University ? Or is it we only read your stuff and respond and you guys don't bother reading opposing views ?

So you are now calling me a liar.
Some Christian you are Moe.
LOSER.

I will call you a liar. Remember, we "Creationist" nutbags are all crazy with our religion. You are obviously possessed by Satan, the father of lies, liar. So there you go. There, so now you can put me in my little box. Make you feel better??

No, but if it makes you feel better have at it.
I have been shot at, beat up and left for dead.
I BELIEVE IN CREATION.
But creation is not science.
My religous faith, unlike yours which is so weak you have to argue iT as something it isn't, is so strong I do not need science to validate it.
Beliefs are never science.
YOU can NEVER disprove my religous beliefs. Why? Because they ARE BELIEFS.
You can never PROVE my religous beliefs. Why? Because they are BELIEFS.

 

[Youwerecreated]

you have no proof that the design you bather on about is nothing more then an ongoing NATURAL PROCESS DUE TO THE CONDITIONS.
ONLY AN ILLITERATE ASSHOLE ATTEMPTING TO RATIONALIZE A FANTASY WOULD CLAIM THAT AS FACT.

You think you have proof?? You are more delusional than I thought. The theory Stephen Meyer lays out is the best explanation for the complex code we find. But that would take an hour of your life to actually listen to the TOTALLY SCIENTIFIC argument he lays out. You won't listen to it and comment, because you just rather argue and name call. So in your total ignorance of the VERY SOLID theory that is presented, it is you that apears as an ignorant, illiterate, sphincter:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbluTDb1Nfs]http://youtu.be/NbluTDb1Nfs[/ame]

Only laughing no rebuttal ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Did you observe the evidence yourself?

Or did you...read a book?

If you read a book, your silliness is just..well, silly.

I read books that don't lay claim to supernatural events that defy everything we know about the universe. I read about things that are based upon natural laws and existence as part of our universe. Miracles are not natural, and have never been shown or proven. They are qualified as such only by the observer, but there is no objective verifiable proof they have EVER happened, including any done by the supposed jesus, who isn't even proved to have existed. There is no evidence he really did.

There is nothing about the origins of life that happens naturally unless you would like to point it out ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Why did the creationists/intelligent design proponents have to lie in open court attempting to "prove" their case?
When there is no evidence, lie.

I am not sure they did lie but when I get home I would love to read the manuscripts of the proceedings. But there has been manufactured evidence from your and lying as well. Please provide the link I would like to read it myself. I am not near my pc I am on my phone. But I am secure in my views and my views are not just based on the bible. Everyone o don't care who it is,is influenced by their presuppositions. To say they don't affect the way they interpret evidence are not being honest. I have not seen anyone's rebuttal to ultimate reality's challenge. Did any of you watch the video with the ID speaker at Cambridge University ? Or is it we only read your stuff and respond and you guys don't bother reading opposing views ?

So you are now calling me a liar.
Some Christian you are Moe.
LOSER.

I'm not calling you a liar and never have,but i have reason to not trust people on your side's interpretation.

 

[Gadawg73]

I am not sure they did lie but when I get home I would love to read the manuscripts of the proceedings. But there has been manufactured evidence from your and lying as well. Please provide the link I would like to read it myself. I am not near my pc I am on my phone. But I am secure in my views and my views are not just based on the bible. Everyone o don't care who it is,is influenced by their presuppositions. To say they don't affect the way they interpret evidence are not being honest. I have not seen anyone's rebuttal to ultimate reality's challenge. Did any of you watch the video with the ID speaker at Cambridge University ? Or is it we only read your stuff and respond and you guys don't bother reading opposing views ?

So you are now calling me a liar.
Some Christian you are Moe.
LOSER.

I'm not calling you a liar and never have,but i have reason to not trust people on your side's interpretation.

Fair enough. No worries.
But I still disagree with you.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Four laughing smiley faces. Now those are the types of intelligent responses we have come to know and love from Darwinists. Insert face palm here.

I watched the whole thing. His entire premise is based on an argument from ignorance fallacy, that because we can't prove that abiogenesis happened (yet), god did it. This is not proof of god in any way. You can't look at a lack of evidence for any current theories in science and say god did it. That is not evidence. There is no direct evidence for an intelligent designer. Only a lack of evidence for abiogenesis. This is a god of gaps philosophy.

How is it a fallacy if your side has not proven life can spontaneously come into existence through a natural process ?

Listen carefully life can not come into existence on it's own with no direction if you believe such nonsense you require more faith to believe in that then i need to believe in the designer.

 

[Youwerecreated]

So you are now calling me a liar.
Some Christian you are Moe.
LOSER.

I'm not calling you a liar and never have,but i have reason to not trust people on your side's interpretation.

Fair enough. No worries.
But I still disagree with you.

You always have