Why Do Evolutionists Attack "Creationsists"

[S.J.]

Hollie, just ignore S.J. If you go back and read his older posts, it's obvious that he's not interested in learning anything about science since he constantly repeats the same lines after people explained why they are nonsensical. He sounds like a classic forum troll. Just ignore him.

Yeah, like you would ever be able to teach somebody about science. So far, the only thing you've done is hurl insults. If I'm the troll, why are YOU the one contributing nothing to the discussion except insults? You tell hollie to ignore me but you don't. Put your money where your ******* mouth is and stop commenting (unless all you're interested in is trolling).

 

[zombiehunter696]

Yeah, like you would ever be able to teach somebody about science. So far, the only thing you've done is hurl insults. If I'm the troll, why are YOU the one contributing nothing to the discussion except insults? You tell hollie to ignore me but you don't. Put your money where your ******* mouth is and stop commenting (unless all you're interested in is trolling).

I guess having actually taught people about science in the past doesn't count. I've also contributed to many threads about science. Unlike you, I actually know the basic terminology used. Of course, you ignore anyone trying to educate you about them and instead just insult and whine.

You are the one who I would be afraid of teaching science. Do you still think theories are proven? Why do you persist in ignoring that? Now let's watch as you ignore it again.

I'm not the one ignoring anyone telling me I'm wrong and instead trying to dodge. Maybe you should read your posts a little closer. Of course, you seem to be unable to read other people's so I guess reading your own might be a challenge.

I'm done with you. I'll hang around and see if anyone says anything interesting, but I'll be scrolling over your posts. Feel free to pretend you've won now. I'm sure everyone will care. That's sarcasm by the way.

 

[S.J.]

I guess having actually taught people about science in the past doesn't count.

Yeah, right. What did you do, give some kid an ice cream cone and tell him he evolved from an ape while he was eating it? Is this another one of those "take my word for it" claims?

Do you still think theories are proven?

No, ya stupid shit. That's been my whole point all along, you CAN'T prove a theory. Man, you are one dumb ************, aren't you?

 

[S.J.]

I'm done with you. I'll hang around and see if anyone says anything interesting, but I'll be scrolling over your posts.

Good. I'm getting tired of kicking your ass.

 

[newpolitics]

Looks to me like the only thing the evolution dupes are trying to prove is that anyone who doesn't accept their theory (without proof) is somehow less intelligent than they are. Their argument is personal attacks and name calling. That's what it ALWAYS comes down to.

I thought you were done here. Stick to your word. You do nothing but detract from the possibility of a substantive discussion.

 

[emilynghiem]

Why don't you go back and read what I said, instead of twisting my words or put words in my mouth? For a minute I thought you might have actually been interested in a substantive exchange. I should have known better, huh?

I did read what you "said". I even used the quote function to capture your exact comments.

Regarding evilution, and your contention that there may be a new discovery that flew in the face of evilution, you wrote out:

" For all we know, this may have already happened".

I simply asked if you had any data, any evidence or anything else that might indicate your suspicion was true.

For example, if I made the statement: "I understand you may have been subjected to prior arrest for trading sexual favors to men on the street corner in exchange for vials of crack cocaine.... For all we know, this may have already happened".

That would be presumptuous, no?

Well, congratulations. You've shown yourself to be on the same level as zombie. Name calling and adolescent remarks are all you have.

Dear SJ and Zombiehunter: I don't agree with all the namecalling either.
My boyfriend and I have completely opposite views on this, and we don't call each other names. It is just that our minds and perspectives are different in how we interpret the same data we both agree is true. So if he and I can AGREE on which data to look at, and yet our interpretations are the opposite, then it isn't from either of us being stupid or zombies. We just don't see life and the universe the same way.

I see it as open ended where you could interpret the same data as either evolution or creation, neither or both; and it is all faith based depending on how you see it.

He believes BOTH have been proven. And we get along fine.

So if he and I don't call each other names, then please don't do that either!
If you don't see things the same way, neither of you has to justify it to anyone else. It doesn't make you more right or wrong, but judging the other person is unfair and wrongful.

Please know there are other things just as critical if not more to explore and agree on.
Let's not lose the relationship or opportunity over this point, where we could focus in other ways and actually gain a lot more from sharing. And in the process these other issues will resolve themselves. Don't lose the relationship! Maybe our differences need to be there. If we all played the same instrument, we couldn't support a full orchestra. Maybe we are supposed to be totally different, so all the parts are covered within a greater symphony.

 

[Youwerecreated]

In reality, in human relations,
it is the person trying to change the mind of the other
who takes on the burden of proof to show why (based on the other person's
viewpoint framework or understanding or else the proof fails if they don't get it).

If you are both trying to change each other,
both of you have equal responsibility to explain why.

I'm not trying to change his mind. I don't care what he chooses to believe, I just don't want him trying to force his beliefs on the rest of us. He can't prove anything. If his theory was provable, the majority of the country would be atheists.

The theory has been proved as 99.9% of all colleges and universities in the world teach it as fact.
10,000 teach it as fact.
2 do not.
Do the math or do we have to prove that to you also?

I guess by your reasoning I should bet with the public then I couldn't lose my bet. Hmm, I wonder how all those casinos in vegas got built.

 

[S.J.]

Looks to me like the only thing the evolution dupes are trying to prove is that anyone who doesn't accept their theory (without proof) is somehow less intelligent than they are. Their argument is personal attacks and name calling. That's what it ALWAYS comes down to.

I thought you were done here. Stick to your word. You do nothing but detract from the possibility of a substantive discussion.

I thought you said YOU were done.

 

[zombiehunter696]

Yeah, right. What did you do, give some kid an ice cream cone and tell him he evolved from an ape while he was eating it? Is this another one of those "take my word for it" claims?

I said I was done, but I have to respond to this. This is the most pathetic thing you've said. A pathetic attempt at a personal attack that makes you look like a petulant toddler. Actually, I think I just insulted toddlers everywhere.

No, ya stupid shit. That's been my whole point all along

No it hasn't. You demanded multiple times that we prove the ToE. When told how ignorant it was to say something like that, you ignored it and kept demanding. Now you want to say that your entire point is what I and several others have said the whole time?

you CAN'T prove a theory.

That's what people have been saying the ENTIRE ******* TIME TALKING TO YOU! Are you really this delusional?

 

[newpolitics]

Looks to me like the only thing the evolution dupes are trying to prove is that anyone who doesn't accept their theory (without proof) is somehow less intelligent than they are. Their argument is personal attacks and name calling. That's what it ALWAYS comes down to.

I thought you were done here. Stick to your word. You do nothing but detract from the possibility of a substantive discussion.

I thought you said YOU were done.

I'm done with you, or trying to be. You're seemingly hard to get rid of. You keep on wanting to argue nothing.

 

[zombiehunter696]

I'm done with you, or trying to be. You're seemingly hard to get rid of. You keep on wanting to argue nothing.

Take a look at his previous response to me. He's now trying to argue that the fact theories are never proven was his entire point. I wonder what he'll pull from his ass next.

 

[newpolitics]

I'm not trying to change his mind. I don't care what he chooses to believe, I just don't want him trying to force his beliefs on the rest of us. He can't prove anything. If his theory was provable, the majority of the country would be atheists.

The theory has been proved as 99.9% of all colleges and universities in the world teach it as fact.
10,000 teach it as fact.
2 do not.
Do the math or do we have to prove that to you also?

I guess by your reasoning I should bet with the public then I couldn't lose my bet. Hmm, I wonder how all those casinos in vegas got built.

YWC, be a doll, would you? Help out our idiot friend over here, SJ, and explain to him what a scientific theory is. You're a creationist biologist. He has to believe you.

 

[S.J.]

If anyone is interested in how this thread turned into a pissing contest, all they have to do is go back and read the comments from the beginning. Zombiehunter initiated the name-calling. Don't take my word for it, go look. Also, look at my posts and you'll see that I was trying to be civil, and ignored the first few digs. It's the evolutionists that got nasty first. Again, don't take my word for it, go back and read the comments. The atheists always do this, they start with the name-calling and personal insults until someone responds in kind, then they accuse that person of resorting to personal attacks. All you have to do is look.

 

[LittleNipper]

The theory has been proved as 99.9% of all colleges and universities in the world teach it as fact.
10,000 teach it as fact.
2 do not.
Do the math or do we have to prove that to you also?

I guess by your reasoning I should bet with the public then I couldn't lose my bet. Hmm, I wonder how all those casinos in vegas got built.

YWC, be a doll, would you? Help out our idiot friend over here, SJ, and explain to him what a scientific theory is. You're a creationist biologist. He has to believe you.

Here is prime example of evolutionary theory in action: Evolutionist plays -- let's pretend
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nwew5gHoh3E]Richard Dawkins demonstrates the evolution of the eye - YouTube[/ame]

Note that this scientist has proof of nothing, but certainly offers his opinion as though it were fact. But when Creationists do likewise, foul is always the responce.... The thing this gentlemean does not offer is how an organism could survive not knowing what he was looking at -- food, tree, rock, enemy.........

 

[newpolitics]

I guess by your reasoning I should bet with the public then I couldn't lose my bet. Hmm, I wonder how all those casinos in vegas got built.

YWC, be a doll, would you? Help out our idiot friend over here, SJ, and explain to him what a scientific theory is. You're a creationist biologist. He has to believe you.

Here is prime example of evolutionary theory in action: Evolutionist plays -- let's pretend
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nwew5gHoh3E]Richard Dawkins demonstrates the evolution of the eye - YouTube[/ame]

Note that this scientist has proof of nothing, but certainly offers his opinion as though it were fact. But when Creationists do likewise, foul is always the responce.... The thing this gentlemean does not offer is how an organism could survive not knowing what he was looking at -- food, tree, rock, enemy.........

He offers a predictive model of eye evolution that has evidentiary correlates in the animal kingdom. This makes it a highly plausible scenario, not just a guess as you claim.

Never mind, your response does not at all pertain to what I was asking YWC.

 

[S.J.]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZ983dbDrng]Evolution (South Park edition) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why Do Evolutionists Attack "Creationsists"

And there’s no such thing as an ‘evolutionist,’ as evolution is neither a religion nor a belief.

 

[S.J.]

Why Do Evolutionists Attack "Creationsists"

And there’s no such thing as an ‘evolutionist,’ as evolution is neither a religion nor a belief.

Well it sure as shit ain't fact.

 

[DStar777]

Why Do Evolutionists Attack "Creationsists"

And there’s no such thing as an ‘evolutionist,’ as evolution is neither a religion nor a belief.

Well it sure as shit ain't fact.

Actually, yes it is. Evolution has been observed. I cannot provide a link at this point but you can type "Observed Speciation Events" into your Google search engine and find examples of observed evolution.

 

[DStar777]

Creationists want their theory taught in secular schools.

That's like asking Secular science be preached in Churches.

That's a good point but there is a distinction that is ignored: We have separation of Chruch and state and rightly so. We DON'T have separation of school and state although I think it's time to consider it.