Creationists

[Youwerecreated]

yes !are you afraid that you're wrong?
since religion is consumed by people it should be tested for validity.

How can you test something that is supernatural??

[For the rest of the observers, this is just me turning Hollie and Daws own words back on them]

There is nothing supernatural about the natural world. Science cannot test for supernatural, supermagical gods.

For the rest of the observers, note how the fundies are adept at dismantling their own arguments.

Hey nitwit science can't many things within their theory that is taught as fact.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Still you are evasive. Are you posting with a second account as Youwerecreated?

I should advise you that doing so is against the board rules.

Otherwise, why are so afraid to answer direct questions about christianity and the inability of folks like you and your alternate identity to come to tems with religion (under the guise of ID), not being taught in schools?

You made the outrageously stupid comment that "Christian creationism was the status quo" for some length of time with the implication that we should then continue to teach tales, fables and superstitious nonsense as fact.

You have been dodging and sidstepping from addressing my response in typical fundie fashion.

Let me explain something to you that I have in the past. The reason you see so many diferent views on the same evidence ,men of science all of them are affected by their presuppositions that is human nature. The question is which presuppositions are best supported by the evidence.

We are limited by what we know and can learn because no one was there to see exactly how it was done. No one was there to see how the universe was formed or life began. That said for me personally I have seen enough evidence to believe this didn't all happen by chance. For me someone had to design and put things into motion.

specious speculation no basis in fact!

Wrong! all explanations of evidence are only opinions.

 

[Youwerecreated]

True in the sense that you're going bat shit!

Daws, you need to catch up buddy. All of these posts you are commenting on was me being "Hollie for a day" to show how utterly frustrating her methods are. They weren't really meant to be taken seriously by you but if you want to, go right ahead.

right ...

It's due to inference as has been explained to ad nauseam.

 

[UltimateReality]

True in the sense that you're going bat shit!

Daws, you need to catch up buddy. All of these posts you are commenting on was me being "Hollie for a day" to show how utterly frustrating her methods are. They weren't really meant to be taken seriously by you but if you want to, go right ahead.

Your spamming the thread was nothing more than an inability to compose s coherent comment.

I don't know why its so difficult for fundie to be honest.

 

[UltimateReality]

yes !are you afraid that you're wrong?
since religion is consumed by people it should be tested for validity.

How can you test something that is supernatural??

[For the rest of the observers, this is just me turning Hollie and Daws own words back on them]

There is nothing supernatural about the natural world. Science cannot test for supernatural, supermagical gods.

For the rest of the observers, note how the fundies are adept at dismantling their own arguments.

Actually, the question you missed is if you are convinced religion is all supernatural, why would you contradict yourself and ask for scientific proof?

 

[UltimateReality]

Oh my. It's the angry fundie persona. How cute.

Flipping hamburgers at McDonalds hardly qualifies you as a biologist.

Lane Lester is just one more hack who has discarded any pretence of objectivity or integrity by being a propaganda mouthpiece for the fundie creationist cabal.

Your silly avoidance tactic relative to my scenario above was not surprising. Like Lester and the other hacks whose works aren't published in peer reviewed science publications, they have earned a reputation as dishonest and lacking integrity for a predefined bias.

You Christian creationist hacks are a joke in the science community.

I'll take fries with that order.

And yet you ignore his question about your credentials. I'm looking around wondering if anyone else is seeing how dishonest and ALWAYS evasive you are.

No one even knows if you are a man or woman, and you never confirmed nor denied whether or not you were raised in a Christian home. Instead, you just make up lies about others who have shared about their personal positions on here. Please tell me you don't think for one second any of us are falling for your nonsense.

why does this matter to you:" No one even knows if you are a man or woman, and you never confirmed nor denied whether or not you were raised in a Christian home."UR

you pull this little gem out of each and every time your ass is in a crack .

HOLLIE'S sex /or religious upbringing, like mine ,are not relevant to this conversation.
it's a cheap childish maneuver to bolster your bigotry and it's chicken shit.

Wow, aren't you the clueless one. The relevance of it is Hollie goes around calling everyone liars and saying they twist the truth, yet she has represented herself on this forum as a woman and on another one as a man. Bascially, by her continual lying, he/she has robbed herself of all credibility. When you come to his/her defense, you just wind up looking stupid when you don't have all the facts.

 

[UltimateReality]

Omigosh was that an enlightening 5 pages. I would love to keep it going because it was really getting under her skin but I have to get to the gym.

Did you guys just see what happened there? I became Holly!!!! I employed all of her tactics and techniques and baited her into a frenzy. She was cutting and pasting like mad trying to teach me and I was just repeating the same thing over and over again like she does.

Technique 1: Continually accuse me of getting my info from the ICR website. Truth is I have never been to the ICR website. So I picked the IHEU website and just mentioned it over and over and over again, not bothering to really read any of her posts.

Technique 2: Continually quote this character Haran Yahya. I had no clue who that was and I doubt many ID Theorists or Creationist do since the guy is a Muslim trying to prove the existence of Allah. It's not really like Christians use the same sources as Muslims since for the most part, they want us Christians dead.

So I picked Lawrence Krauss and just kept accusing her of using him as a source over and over again. Lawrence Krauss is a Dawkins crony and atheist philosopher. The most disturbing thing about Holly is she never once denies that is where she is getting her info. I really think something is wrong with her. Maybe she is trying to manage hating on multiple forums at one time but it is like she isn't reading anything. She doesn't even question who Krauss is or what the IHEU is. Weird.

Tehnigue 3: Attribute some belief someone has explained numerous times they don't believe in just to aggravate them. Holly has repeatedly stated I believe in a 6000 year old earth when I have told her numerous times I do not. So for the last 5 or 10 posts, I keep talking about her belief in an eternal universe. Hollie has never said she believes in an eternal universe and if she believes current thought, more like believes the big bang and a universe that is approx 14 billion years old. Again, really weird she never denies that. It's like she isn't reading anything.

Technique 4: Continually accuse your opponent of being dishonest and misquoting. Did you see how I didn't even bother to read what she posted but just kept saying over and over again she was quoting out of context or intentionally leaving parts out? I kept using her phrase on her over and over,"intellectual dishonesty".

Technique 5: Aggravate your opponent by using subtle word games. Know your audience only believes in ONE God, continually refer to gods.

Bravo Hollie!! Your own techniques beat you at your own game!!

Omigosh Hollie. You were cutting and pasting like a mad woman. It is funny that you accused me of lashing out when I was just following your posting methodology. Did this little experience enlighten you at all to how frustrating your posts are, or how people could take you as the one who is attacking?

Here Daws, since you apparently missed this awhile back.

 

[daws101]

but not contrary to your islamic faith?

dumb question as they both believe in the same god... (the god of abraham)

That is true, supposedly but Gods name is not Allah. If they worshipped the same God they would not be mortal enemies.

Who is protecting Israel ? they are surrounded by their enemies.

Alla is just as good a name for god a any it's no less correct then the one you assholes usurped from the jews!

"If they worshipped the same God they would not be mortal enemies."YWC-another ignorant statement :

List of major religious warsThese figures of one million or more deaths include the deaths of civilians from diseases, famine, etc., as well as deaths of soldiers in battle and possible massacres and genocide.

Lowest estimate Highest estimate Event Location From To Religions involved Percentage of the world population[18]
&100000000030000000000003,000,000 &1000000001150000000000011,500,000[19] Thirty Years' War Holy Roman Empire 1618 1648 Protestants and Catholics &100000000000000005000000.5%–2.1%
&100000000020000000000002,000,000 &100000000040000000000004,000,000[20] French Wars of Religion France 1562 1598 Protestants and Catholics &100000000000000004000000.4%–0.8%
&100000000010000000000001,000,000[21] &100000000020000000000002,000,000 Second Sudanese Civil War Sudan 1983 2005 Islam and Christian &100000000000000000200000.02%
&100000000010000000000001,000,000[22] &100000000030000000000003,000,000[23] Crusades Holy Land, Europe 1095 1291 Islam and Christian &100000000000000003000000.3%–2.3%
&10000000000130000000000130,000[24] &10000000000250000000000250,000 Lebanese Civil War Lebanon 1975 1990 Sunni, Shiite and Christian &10000000000000000300000

[edit] Wars by religion[edit] ChristianityMain articles: Crusades and Thirty Years' War
Those who fought in the name of God were recognized as the Milites Christi, warriors or knights of Christ.[25]


Luther's 1543 pamphlet On the Jews and Their LiesThe Crusades were a series of military campaigns that took place during the 11th through 13th centuries in response to the Muslim Conquests. Originally, the goal was to recapture Jerusalem and the Holy Land from the Muslims, and support the besieged Christian Byzantine Empire against the Muslim Seljuq expansion into Asia Minor and Europe proper. Later, Crusades were launched against other targets, either for religious reasons, such as the Albigensian Crusade, the Northern Crusades, or because of political conflict, such as the Aragonese Crusade. In 1095, at the Council of Clermont, Pope Urban II raised the level of war from bellum iustum ("just war"), to bellum sacrum ("holy war").[26] In 16th Century France there was a succession of wars between Roman Catholics and Protestants (Hugenots primarily), known as the French Wars of Religion. In the first half of the 17th century, the German states, Scandinavia (Sweden, primarily) and Poland were beset by religious warfare in the Thirty Years War. Roman Catholicism and Protestantism figured in the opposing sides of this conflict, though Catholic France did take the side of the Protestants but purely for political reasons.

In the Middle Ages, religion played a major role in driving antisemitism. Though not part of Roman Catholic dogma, many Christians, including members of the clergy, have held the Jewish people collectively responsible for killing Jesus. According to this interpretation, both the Jews present at Jesus’ death and the Jewish people collectively and for all time, have committed the sin of deicide, or God-killing. For 1900 years of Christian-Jewish history, the charge of deicide ( Which was originally attributed by Melito of Sardis ) has led to hatred, violence against and murder of Jews in Europe and America."[27] This accusation was repudiated in 1964, when the Catholic Church under Pope Paul VI issued the document Nostra Aetate as a part of Vatican II. Martin Luther, an Augustinian monk and an ecclesiastical reformer whose teachings inspired the Reformation, wrote antagonistically about Jews in his book On the Jews and their Lies, which describes the Jews in extremely harsh terms, excoriates them, and provides detailed recommendations for a pogrom against them and their permanent oppression and/or expulsion.

The Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa, known in Arab history as the Battle of Al-Uqab (معركة العقا&#1576, took place on 16 July 1212 and was an important turning point in the Reconquista and in the medieval history of Spain.[28] The forces of King Alfonso VIII of Castile were joined by the armies of his Christian rivals, Sancho VII of Navarre, Pedro II of Aragon and Afonso II of Portugal in battle[29] against the Berber Muslim Almohad rulers of the southern half of the Iberian Peninsula.

once again you're talking out your ass!

 

[daws101]

Are you saying religion should be held to the same standard as science? MMMBah ha haha.

yes !are you afraid that you're wrong?
since religion is consumed by people it should be tested for validity.

I am no fan of organised religion. What unites Gods people is faith in Jesus.

Religion is mans creation not Gods creation. Abraham had no religion,just faith in the Almighty and he lived the best life he could for a sinful man.

Abraham (Avraham) was the first Jew, the founder of Judaism, the physical and spiritual ancestor of the Jewish people, and one of the three Patriarchs (Avot) of Judaism.

Although Adam, the first man, believed in one God, most of his descendents prayed to many gods. Abraham, then, rediscovered monotheism.

Abraham's faith in the One God was tested when God commanded him to sacrifice his son Isaac (Yitzhak). Abraham was about to fulfill God's commandment and sacrifice his son when the Angel of God stopped him. Abraham's faith in God has been a model for all future generations of Jews.

 

[daws101]

How is man being perfected with the genetic disorders due to mutations are rising in numbers ?

another bullshit statement, humans (not just men,) were never perfect. I understand that your fairy says different, but as always you have no evidence proving your "believed" claim.
2. there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise..

What we have proof of is since the fall of adam lifespans of humans greatly decreased. Through research and medicine we increased lifespans but not near what it once was.

bullshit! since you have no proof that Adam lived any conclusion drawn from that false premise by defintion is false.
so my answer stands :there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise

 

[daws101]

and yet you ignore his question about your credentials. I'm looking around wondering if anyone else is seeing how dishonest and always evasive you are.

No one even knows if you are a man or woman, and you never confirmed nor denied whether or not you were raised in a christian home. Instead, you just make up lies about others who have shared about their personal positions on here. Please tell me you don't think for one second any of us are falling for your nonsense.

why does this matter to you:" no one even knows if you are a man or woman, and you never confirmed nor denied whether or not you were raised in a christian home."ur

you pull this little gem out of each and every time your ass is in a crack .

Hollie's sex /or religious upbringing, like mine ,are not relevant to this conversation.
It's a cheap childish maneuver to bolster your bigotry and it's chicken shit.

wow, aren't you the clueless one. The relevance of it is hollie goes around calling everyone liars and saying they twist the truth, yet she has represented herself on this forum as a woman and on another one as a man. Bascially, by her continual lying, he/she has robbed herself of all credibility. When you come to his/her defense, you just wind up looking stupid when you don't have all the facts.

that's funny because it's a spot on discription of you!

 

[daws101]

omigosh was that an enlightening 5 pages. I would love to keep it going because it was really getting under her skin but i have to get to the gym.

Did you guys just see what happened there? i became holly!!!! i employed all of her tactics and techniques and baited her into a frenzy. She was cutting and pasting like mad trying to teach me and i was just repeating the same thing over and over again like she does.

Technique 1: continually accuse me of getting my info from the icr website. truth is i have never been to the icr website. So i picked the iheu website and just mentioned it over and over and over again, not bothering to really read any of her posts.

Technique 2: continually quote this character haran yahya. i had no clue who that was and i doubt many id theorists or creationist do since the guy is a muslim trying to prove the existence of allah. It's not really like christians use the same sources as muslims since for the most part, they want us christians dead.

So i picked lawrence krauss and just kept accusing her of using him as a source over and over again. Lawrence krauss is a dawkins crony and atheist philosopher. The most disturbing thing about holly is she never once denies that is where she is getting her info. I really think something is wrong with her. Maybe she is trying to manage hating on multiple forums at one time but it is like she isn't reading anything. She doesn't even question who krauss is or what the iheu is. Weird.

Tehnigue 3: attribute some belief someone has explained numerous times they don't believe in just to aggravate them. holly has repeatedly stated i believe in a 6000 year old earth when i have told her numerous times i do not. So for the last 5 or 10 posts, i keep talking about her belief in an eternal universe. Hollie has never said she believes in an eternal universe and if she believes current thought, more like believes the big bang and a universe that is approx 14 billion years old. Again, really weird she never denies that. It's like she isn't reading anything.

Technique 4: Continually accuse your opponent of being dishonest and misquoting. Did you see how i didn't even bother to read what she posted but just kept saying over and over again she was quoting out of context or intentionally leaving parts out? I kept using her phrase on her over and over,"intellectual dishonesty".

Technique 5: Aggravate your opponent by using subtle word games. Know your audience only believes in one god, continually refer to gods.

Bravo hollie!! Your own techniques beat you at your own game!!

Omigosh hollie. You were cutting and pasting like a mad woman. It is funny that you accused me of lashing out when i was just following your posting methodology. Did this little experience enlighten you at all to how frustrating your posts are, or how people could take you as the one who is attacking?

here daws, since you apparently missed this awhile back.

wrong !didn't miss it .
It's masturbation.... It's fun but meaningless.

 

[daws101]

View attachment 20439 i don't want my decedents to live in a world that's cold and dark. I hope america never looks like the pix.

(snicker)
that pic shows a world of clean tech!

yes daws, we know you are a fan of vivid imaginations.

especially yours!
God
god does entropy
life never ending
god protecting israel
young earth
noah
etc...

 

[daws101]

You must read more daws because he was discussing science. He also does scientific work in labs.

HE'S A CREATION PSEUDO SCIENTIST.

 

[Hollie]

Omigosh was that an enlightening 5 pages. I would love to keep it going because it was really getting under her skin but I have to get to the gym.

Did you guys just see what happened there? I became Holly!!!! I employed all of her tactics and techniques and baited her into a frenzy. She was cutting and pasting like mad trying to teach me and I was just repeating the same thing over and over again like she does.

Technique 1: Continually accuse me of getting my info from the ICR website. Truth is I have never been to the ICR website. So I picked the IHEU website and just mentioned it over and over and over again, not bothering to really read any of her posts.

Technique 2: Continually quote this character Haran Yahya. I had no clue who that was and I doubt many ID Theorists or Creationist do since the guy is a Muslim trying to prove the existence of Allah. It's not really like Christians use the same sources as Muslims since for the most part, they want us Christians dead.

So I picked Lawrence Krauss and just kept accusing her of using him as a source over and over again. Lawrence Krauss is a Dawkins crony and atheist philosopher. The most disturbing thing about Holly is she never once denies that is where she is getting her info. I really think something is wrong with her. Maybe she is trying to manage hating on multiple forums at one time but it is like she isn't reading anything. She doesn't even question who Krauss is or what the IHEU is. Weird.

Tehnigue 3: Attribute some belief someone has explained numerous times they don't believe in just to aggravate them. Holly has repeatedly stated I believe in a 6000 year old earth when I have told her numerous times I do not. So for the last 5 or 10 posts, I keep talking about her belief in an eternal universe. Hollie has never said she believes in an eternal universe and if she believes current thought, more like believes the big bang and a universe that is approx 14 billion years old. Again, really weird she never denies that. It's like she isn't reading anything.

Technique 4: Continually accuse your opponent of being dishonest and misquoting. Did you see how I didn't even bother to read what she posted but just kept saying over and over again she was quoting out of context or intentionally leaving parts out? I kept using her phrase on her over and over,"intellectual dishonesty".

Technique 5: Aggravate your opponent by using subtle word games. Know your audience only believes in ONE God, continually refer to gods.

Bravo Hollie!! Your own techniques beat you at your own game!!

Omigosh Hollie. You were cutting and pasting like a mad woman. It is funny that you accused me of lashing out when I was just following your posting methodology. Did this little experience enlighten you at all to how frustrating your posts are, or how people could take you as the one who is attacking?

All that just as a cover for your inability to respond to specific points?

 

[daws101]

I have already gave you my opinion on this issue.

oh, so now it an opinion not fact !

What do you think scientific explanations are Daws ?

a report based on evidence objective testing and observation.
THEY ARE NOT based on belief in the supernatural as a causation.

 

[daws101]

Omigosh was that an enlightening 5 pages. I would love to keep it going because it was really getting under her skin but I have to get to the gym.

Did you guys just see what happened there? I became Holly!!!! I employed all of her tactics and techniques and baited her into a frenzy. She was cutting and pasting like mad trying to teach me and I was just repeating the same thing over and over again like she does.

Technique 1: Continually accuse me of getting my info from the ICR website. Truth is I have never been to the ICR website. So I picked the IHEU website and just mentioned it over and over and over again, not bothering to really read any of her posts.

Technique 2: Continually quote this character Haran Yahya. I had no clue who that was and I doubt many ID Theorists or Creationist do since the guy is a Muslim trying to prove the existence of Allah. It's not really like Christians use the same sources as Muslims since for the most part, they want us Christians dead.

So I picked Lawrence Krauss and just kept accusing her of using him as a source over and over again. Lawrence Krauss is a Dawkins crony and atheist philosopher. The most disturbing thing about Holly is she never once denies that is where she is getting her info. I really think something is wrong with her. Maybe she is trying to manage hating on multiple forums at one time but it is like she isn't reading anything. She doesn't even question who Krauss is or what the IHEU is. Weird.

Tehnigue 3: Attribute some belief someone has explained numerous times they don't believe in just to aggravate them. Holly has repeatedly stated I believe in a 6000 year old earth when I have told her numerous times I do not. So for the last 5 or 10 posts, I keep talking about her belief in an eternal universe. Hollie has never said she believes in an eternal universe and if she believes current thought, more like believes the big bang and a universe that is approx 14 billion years old. Again, really weird she never denies that. It's like she isn't reading anything.

Technique 4: Continually accuse your opponent of being dishonest and misquoting. Did you see how I didn't even bother to read what she posted but just kept saying over and over again she was quoting out of context or intentionally leaving parts out? I kept using her phrase on her over and over,"intellectual dishonesty".

Technique 5: Aggravate your opponent by using subtle word games. Know your audience only believes in ONE God, continually refer to gods.

Bravo Hollie!! Your own techniques beat you at your own game!!

Omigosh Hollie. You were cutting and pasting like a mad woman. It is funny that you accused me of lashing out when I was just following your posting methodology. Did this little experience enlighten you at all to how frustrating your posts are, or how people could take you as the one who is attacking?

All that just as a cover for your inability to respond to specific points?

you did notice it's mostly me I and me again.
maybe UR is a teenage girl, sure posts like one!

 

[Hollie]

another bullshit statement, humans (not just men,) were never perfect. I understand that your fairy says different, but as always you have no evidence proving your "believed" claim.
2. there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise..

What we have proof of is since the fall of adam lifespans of humans greatly decreased. Through research and medicine we increased lifespans but not near what it once was.

bullshit! since you have no proof that Adam lived any conclusion drawn from that false premise by defintion is false.
so my answer stands :there is no credible proof that genetic disorders are on the rise

Creationist fundies don't understand that any supposed rise in the occurrance of genetic disorders must be considered with respect to modern science being better at diagnosing those disorders.

Fundies live in a dark place I'm happy not to be in.

 

[Hollie]

Omigosh was that an enlightening 5 pages. I would love to keep it going because it was really getting under her skin but I have to get to the gym.

Did you guys just see what happened there? I became Holly!!!! I employed all of her tactics and techniques and baited her into a frenzy. She was cutting and pasting like mad trying to teach me and I was just repeating the same thing over and over again like she does.

Technique 1: Continually accuse me of getting my info from the ICR website. Truth is I have never been to the ICR website. So I picked the IHEU website and just mentioned it over and over and over again, not bothering to really read any of her posts.

Technique 2: Continually quote this character Haran Yahya. I had no clue who that was and I doubt many ID Theorists or Creationist do since the guy is a Muslim trying to prove the existence of Allah. It's not really like Christians use the same sources as Muslims since for the most part, they want us Christians dead.

So I picked Lawrence Krauss and just kept accusing her of using him as a source over and over again. Lawrence Krauss is a Dawkins crony and atheist philosopher. The most disturbing thing about Holly is she never once denies that is where she is getting her info. I really think something is wrong with her. Maybe she is trying to manage hating on multiple forums at one time but it is like she isn't reading anything. She doesn't even question who Krauss is or what the IHEU is. Weird.

Tehnigue 3: Attribute some belief someone has explained numerous times they don't believe in just to aggravate them. Holly has repeatedly stated I believe in a 6000 year old earth when I have told her numerous times I do not. So for the last 5 or 10 posts, I keep talking about her belief in an eternal universe. Hollie has never said she believes in an eternal universe and if she believes current thought, more like believes the big bang and a universe that is approx 14 billion years old. Again, really weird she never denies that. It's like she isn't reading anything.

Technique 4: Continually accuse your opponent of being dishonest and misquoting. Did you see how I didn't even bother to read what she posted but just kept saying over and over again she was quoting out of context or intentionally leaving parts out? I kept using her phrase on her over and over,"intellectual dishonesty".

Technique 5: Aggravate your opponent by using subtle word games. Know your audience only believes in ONE God, continually refer to gods.

Bravo Hollie!! Your own techniques beat you at your own game!!

Omigosh Hollie. You were cutting and pasting like a mad woman. It is funny that you accused me of lashing out when I was just following your posting methodology. Did this little experience enlighten you at all to how frustrating your posts are, or how people could take you as the one who is attacking?

All that just as a cover for your inability to respond to specific points?

you did notice it's mostly me I and me again.
maybe UR is a teenage girl, sure posts like one!

Her fascination with me leads me to believe that she has mistaken this site for her "alternate lifestyle" dating service.

 

[daws101]

All that just as a cover for your inability to respond to specific points?

you did notice it's mostly me I and me again.
maybe UR is a teenage girl, sure posts like one!

Her fascination with me leads me to believe that she has mistaken this site for her "alternate lifestyle" dating service.

you mean christian mingle . com.