|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
FoamingFundy:
ok Jesus lives, and He surely is the G.A.O.T.U.
and jahbulon shall be judged and is judged,
666, shall abysssabake, and baphomet, shall
be revealed, Jesus is the Way the truth and
the life God bless ICC.
DragonTooth:
FoamingFundy, can you actually interact in a
simple conversation?
sigrabmd:
understand? you don't even understand your own
bible FoamingFundy.
FoamingFundy:
those to whom I speak well understand my mystery
language, when I speak plain then I'm speaking
to the plain, but the mystery language is for
the Dark Side of the house.
FoamingFundy:
yes I can DragonTooth, but allllllll must hear
the truth too
sigrabmd:
you cant even back up your bible. and you say
you're a pastor. cut the crap.
Parsifal:
funny church to preach in - this channel
FoamingFundy:
yes I very well know many bibles sir
sigrabmd:
care to enlighten us all on a few contradictions?
knowing you're a pastor.
FoamingFundy:
no I'm not profane, nor black-balled, I'm a
bearer of true light
FoamingFundy:
tu baal cain shall be judged
FoamingFundy:
boaz the same
DropDeadJesus:
Ride the
magic baphomat
DropDeadJesus:
and I'll
ride the magic carpet
DragonTooth:
your message is full of hate FoamingFundy, sounds
like christians want some sort of revenge and
are expecting to see the evil ones suffer like
hell
FoamingFundy:
I desire to give you the grip, what grip then
is what you would ask?
DropDeadJesus:
I got something
for you to grip
FoamingFundy:
is Jesus message in Mt. 7: 13-14 a message of
love? read it. you just might cry
pmk:
Raising a child with bizarre beliefs about wrathful
deities and eternal afterlife torture will someday
be prosecutable as child abuse
DragonTooth:
FoamingFundy, read Nietzsche and you will change
your mind
FoamingFundy:
Jesus isn't just alllllllll LOVE, vengeance
is my sayeth the Lord, God will repay evil.
FoamingFundy:
the knights templar is at hand
eadon-com:
FoamingFundy says he's a pastor: pastors are
punished by not being forbidden to reproduce
FoamingFundy:
if I tell of my pastorship, and location would
not I get a three-knocks on the door, shall
God forbid?
Parsifal:
but raising kids to believe that the life cycles
of creatures which undergo spectacular metamorphoses
can be explained by their assemblage over aeons
by trial and error, natural selection of random
mutations , I.e. Blind Man's Buff, sounds just
as crazy !
JGR:
I think metamorphoses have a lot to do with
the animal co-evolving with plants that they
depend on. So theory says.
eadon-com:
Parsifal, creation is crazier because it invokes
magic over evidence old chap
DragonTooth:
I agree parsifal, but why not just teaching
children to respect others without any "eternal
punishment" stuff but common sense instead?
FoamingFundy:
I AM not Tha IAM I am the voice of one cryin
in the wilderness.
PriestessNova:
what's better,
to believe in God, or to wave the magic wand
of evolution? either way it takes faith.
eadon-com:
evolution isn't magic guys, it has been simulated
in computers and it is the only explanation
of fossils and the ecosystems we see
FoamingFundy:
I am Not That IAM, but I am the voice of the
one who eats locust and honey.
eadon-com:
creationism is just moonshine
Parsifal:
all creation myths, whether dualistic, theistic,
or , like Darwinism- purely materialistic- are
all just whistling in the dark. Truth is , nobody
knows how we got here, maybe nobody ever will,
either. [Parsifal is James Plaskett, ex British
chess champ, chess grandmaster, agnostic and
anti-Darwinist]
eadon-com:
No serious scholar doubts evolution Parsifal,
no educated scholar has doubted it for decades
Parsifal:
I never said I doubted evolution - just Darwinistic
mechanisms
PriestessNova:
I would rather
believe that someone with intelligence designed
us. It couldn't have been all by accident.
Parsifal:
I am 80 - 90 per cent sold on evolution
Parsifal:
but I think PriestessNova talking sense too
eadon-com:
is it an accident, PriestessNova, that we were
created by a creator? It must be an accident
that god exists, no? It just removes the "accident"
one level of magic away
FoamingFundy:
everything reproduces after it own kind, evolution.
is a silly mans way of desiring to know all,
which is impossible from the jump
DropDeadJesus:
As far as
I'm concerned, all of you are on crack.
JGR:
Imperfection in animals points to evolution.
Natural history itself screams evolution. The
teeth of the balleen whale that grow up and
dissolve in the womb as a great example. The
eyes of cavefish deep beneath the ocean where
there is no light and the eyes have skin growing
over them and are useless screams evolution.
JGR:
Unless the whale was an ancestor of a teeth
bearing animal....how else to explain the obvious??
Parsifal:
does the ostrich evolving wings and then finding
it useful not to fly scream evolution??
DropDeadJesus:
yes.
Parsifal:
like Darwinism- very comforting to many
JGR:
The ostrich wings are a great example. Relatives
of an animal that flew.
FoamingFundy:
fellow craftsmen I must now go, beware of the
anti-christ. BUT REMEMBER IT IS JESUS WHO IS
THE G.A.O.T.U. PEACE I LEAVE WITH YOU.
PriestessNova:
I don't believe
that God caused the "Big Bang" as some have
proposed. He created everything with purpose.
DropDeadJesus:
Ostrich used
to be a bird that could not fly, as it evolved
into mostly a creature that moved on land, those
wings became useless, but did not completely
disappeared, YET
SnafuFoobar:
Fascinating as that theory sounds Ged183 I think
you'll find woolly mammoths are closer to elephants
than mice are
eadon-com:
Darwinism is comforting in the sense that it
is based on reality
Madpole:
God disconnected sisters and brothers;....
PriestessNova:
what reality,
eadon? it's just a theory.
eadon-com:
creationism has no scientific merit whatsoever,
in the same way that the sun going around the
earth theory has no merit, both are equally
ludicrous theories and both are discredited
I think
Parsifal:
there are hardly ANY- if any fossils, that could
be viewed as indisputably transitional
eadon-com:
soon creationism will be seen as absurd as the
earth is the centre of the universe theory
eadon-com:
parsifal, have you heard of the coelacanth?
Ged183:
The earth going round the sun can be observed.
Evolution can not.
SnafuFoobar:
he can probably spell it
PriestessNova:
in order
for a species to survive, it must reproduce...
that much is certain.
eadon-com:
lungfish, man-ape fossils? archaeopteryx, creature
half otter half whale?
eadon-com:
there are an astounding number of examples of
fossils showing the evolution from primitive
to modern over time
JGR:
There are thousands of transitional fossils.
Esp. in certain lineages. Horse, reptile to
bird.....human transitionals are scarcer but
I can easily search out 15 to 20 with pictures
just on the internet alone.
Parsifal:
and Darwinism is not comforting because it is
based on fact, eadon, but because it is based
on materialism- instead of God selection became
enthroned as the ultimate power. Coelacanth?
Nobody views that as a transitional fossil-
not since the 1930s
FoamingFundy:
eadon shall we consider the falsified fossil
finds?
PriestessNova:
yes lets.
Parsifal:
when modern coelacanths were found
eadon-com:
, it shows the link between fish and land animals
to an extent
Parsifal:
archaeopteryx ??> Extremely dubious. Of the
8 specimens only the first 2 show feathers
SnafuFoobar:
fossils are pretty hit and miss ..... unstable
links in the development that only lasted for,
say, a hundred generations could easily be missed
eadon-com:
Parsifal, we are discovering more ancient lizard/dinosaur
fossils that resemble birds all the time, especially
in china, it is beyond all reasonable doubt
I think
JGR:
Well parsifal....clearly feathers are more unlikely
to fossilize then bone wouldn't you say.
eadon-com:
the way evolution works, PriestessNova, is that
groups separate by distance and go their own
way
Parsifal:
Darwin himself was highly suspicious of the
2 Archaeopteryx fossils
Parsifal:
and so was Thomas Huxley. Each virtually ignored
them
eadon-com:
since those very early days Parsifal we have
an extraordinary collection of new fossils so
your argument is one that is based on evidence
that is Victorian in age
eadon-com:
the only way to get anywhere is for the christians
to learn evolution, and not from the religious
creationist propaganda anti-evolution manuals
either :)
Parsifal:
Archaeopteryx is the known fossil of COMPOGNATHUS
with feathers- just as if somebody stuck them
on. The 6 other specimens all show no clear
feathers- indeed one was first classified as
Compsognathus- before somebody changed his mind
and called it Archaeopteryx
PriestessNova:
the fact
is, you believe in evolution, I believe that
God created the world. And there doesn't seem
to be any middle ground here.
Parsifal:
what other fossils eadon, WHAT??
eadon-com:
Parsifal there have been recent discoveries
in china of new species of ancient birds that
closely resemble modern birds, which archaeopteryx
does not. These new fossils are more proof of
the transition between reptiles and birds
JGR:
eadon is right. 10 years ago scientists used
to say "we can fit the hominid fossils on a
pool table"....but this is no longer the case.
Even of the human line we have hundreds of fossils.
JGR:
Actually. 50 -100 years ago.
eadon-com:
as time goes on the fossil record will become
more and more complete and the creationists
will resort to more and more irrational arguments.
eadon-com:
this is why science will always win in the end,
because it is progressive and it is answering
the big questions, whether the god squad likes
it or not, they are always playing catch-up
with science
DragonTooth:
PriestessNova, what is the purpose of god for
creation?
PriestessNova:
the purpose
God created the world? and the things in it?
for his pleasure of course. and our own.
Madpole:
eadon - science will never WIN because it is
not about WAR !
eadon-com:
oh yes it is :)
Madpole:
What about us - trying to UNDERSAND each other
? OK - You are right.
eadon-com:
science and creationists are at war because
creationism is a fairytale, but they treat it
as fact - not good science, teaching kids fairytales
as facts
JGR:
They can make all the red-faced thumping on
the bible hollering claims that they want. It
hardly makes there claims any truer. So much
posing going on in creationism. So much preaching
but it is all so empty.
DragonTooth:
why would he need a universe to have pleasure?
Didn't he live in eternal pleasure from before?
DragonTooth:
lets face it PriestessNova, all religious explanations
are based on nonsense beliefs
JGR:
All these people wanting to see the transitional
fossils for themselves should visit talkorigins.org.
It is a public service site that collected all
the fossil evidence and other proofs into one
nice education site.
DragonTooth:
science strives to find evidence, which makes
it evolve, religion is rather easy way out explanations
that were needed for lack of evidence in ancient
times
Parsifal:
re transitional fossils- you cite the evolution
of the horse as one such line- but since the
appearance of eohippus- the supposed ancestor
of the modern horse- over 250 proposed lines
of descent have been put forward
Parsifal:
there is no clear consensus as to why and where
the breaks occur
JGR:
It is interesting to compare the hominid fossils
for yourself with the skulls of monkeys and
the skulls of humans. You just can't quite group
them in either class. I say go and look for
yourself.
Parsifal:
so we are entitled to ask what links these sundry
fossils in the cited Orthogenesis of the Horse
eadon-com:
true Parsifal, and the thing is is that we do
not claim perfect knowledge. But over time the
gaps in our knowledge are gradually being filled
in. The evidence becomes compelling
Madpole:
But gaps are being discovered every second as
well...
Parsifal:
This is not a scientific fact: it is an act
of faith
JGR:
The horse still has a nice evolutionary history
and the claims are exaggerated by creationists
about it.
eadon-com:
it is about evidence, not faith, Parsifal. Only
religion demands faith
SnafuFoobar:
selective breeding managed by humans can accelerate
natural selection 1000-fold
Parsifal:
If you want to see how the recently discovered
supposed reptile/bird link fossils are now themselves,
just like Archaeopteryx, is now being held up
as a fraud- then I refer you to an article this
year in Scientific American- surely visible
on the net
Parsifal:
as far as hominid fossils go, there are now
scarps of about 1000, but I fail to see why
I ought to regard any of them as other than
extinct apes or early men
JGR:
I have seen every single creationist statement
in this channel debunked at talkorigins.org.
The horse deal, IDesign etc...
eadon-com:
I read the Scientific American article and the
argument is not whether birds evolved from reptiles
but whether they evolved form dinosaurs and
more primitive reptiles. That birds evolved
from reptiles, Parsifal, according to the article,
is beyond question
JGR:
By scientists, biologists, paleontologists,
engineers, etc...
Parsifal:
and, most importantly, it is NOT evolution with
which I have such a beef
eadon-com:
Scientific American is opposed to creationism,
as are virtually all scientists
Parsifal:
it's your proposed mechanisms. Darwinism is
blind man's buff. And that's why it never really
caught on in e.g. France
eadon-com:
... Darwinism has been refined by modern science,
so it is bound to be simplistic by the standards
of modern science. For example genetics has
cast a lot of light on the mechanisms of evolution
that Darwin couldn't have known about in his
day
Parsifal:
so many key transitions call for not just something
relatively simple , like the lengthening of
an arm or a beak
eadon-com:
so it is unfair to cast mud at evolution based
on purely Darwinian mechanisms
JGR:
Darwin spoke of "correlations of growth"...something
built for one thing can do another thing.....a
computer built for issuing pay checks might
play a mean game of tic tac toe.....not everything
needs to be explained by natural selection....
eadon-com:
ok lets take flight, feathers could evolve first
for warmth, then for gliding and finally for
flight
Parsifal:
but of very many coordinated alterations of
not only structures but also physiological processes
eadon-com:
what seems a massive transition - flight - can
be gradual
Parsifal:
it's just SO unlikely that it could all have
come together by just chance and necessity
Parsifal:
so mathematically improbable. Something is missing.
Some great unknown
eadon-com:
no, it is inevitable, because the better an
organism is , by definition it is more likely
to survive. So evolution has an inbuilt mechanism
to promote efficiency and sophistication, without
resorting to chance
Richner:
Parsifal, if you would just find Jesus (he's
hiding in the bushes behind your house), you
wouldn't have to have interesting conversations
anymore. ;oP
Parsifal:
right eadon- which is why monocelular bacteria-
the simplest of all organism, THRIVE everywhere.
Not very logical
eadon-com:
on the contrary the simple organisms will always
proliferate, this is predicted by evolution
Parsifal:
no it is not
RabbitMunch:
Just because one design is successful doesn't
exclude other designs from evolving.
Parsifal:
the idea is that those that are best adapted
hang in there. I say again something unknown
must be involved here
RabbitMunch:
There is not one best organism, and once that
organism exists, evolution stops. that's not
how it works.
Parsifal:
either God, creating ex nihilo and then monitoring,
somehow, for some reason or other. Or soul
eadon-com:
yes and bacteria are best adapted to fill in
the micro ecological niches. Seeing as there
are more micro niches than macro niches it follows
that there are more bacteria
Parsifal:
or a life force, or just the empirically demonstrated
fact of the truth of Lamarckian mechanisms i.e.
that organisms CAN acquire beneficial characteristics
from their environments and then pass them on
to their offspring
eadon-com:
well you can resort to life force, but this
is teleology and has not been taken seriously
since Kant's time
JGR:
Let's do some simple math...nobody disagrees
with geographic evolution....why blacks are
black and their skin color is different from
whites for example....if the gene code changes
in a pop .01 every 10,000 years then...in 100,000,00
years you have a 10% change . That is an example
of genetic drift....one mechanism for evolution...
eadon-com:
organisms like bacteria can exchange genes with
each other and viruses, this is certainly a
big evolutionary force.
eadon-com:
Lamarckian mechanisms might be plausible, some
forms are being re-examined, experimentally,
I believe. But it is not mainstream stuff
JGR:
Organisms change....this is not disputed.....but
creationists think there is a limit.....but
everything in your grocery store has been grown
50 times it's original wild size by artificial
selection....corn was the size of cherries....watermelon
was bitter and poisonous....etc...etc...
JGR:
Pumpkins is another good example....
Parsifal:
not true. Things do NOT grow 50 times. There
is a recognised limit called genetic homeostasis
eadon-com:
, there are some who do, but they are not many.
I agree, but there are some quirks of inheritance
that are quite hard to explain purely by gene
transfer, there are other mechanisms of inheritance
above genes that are recently being taken more
seriously
JGR:
There is this weird Lamarckian thing going around
where a virus infects the gene code and is passed
onto the children....it is highly speculative
right now and hardly meets Lamarckian standards.
Dudge:
Lamarckian evolution is dead. Nobody believes
it anymore
JGR:
Parsifal does:)
Dudge:
nobody that's taken seriously on the topic,
sorry :)
Parsifal:
again wrong and please stop insulting people.
I do know the facts Dudge
Dudge:
Parsifal, you really believe acquired characteristics
are passed on to the offspring from birth?
Parsifal:
yes, based on evidence
Isolani:
"The sins of the fathers are cast..." Sounds
biblical, too.
JGR:
Look, you have kin selection, correlations of
growth, gene drift, natural selection and sexual
selection as well as macro-mutations. All these
mechanisms account for the change we see in
the fossils. If you don't know what these are
then you shouldn't be arguing with evolution.
First you must understand the enemy
JGR:
ya know?
eadon-com:
why attack Darwin when the science of evolution
has moved on so much since Darwin. Darwin was
the inventor of the fields of natural selection
and evolution, but to attack the founder of
a science for being wrong on some details is
a little uncharitable.
Dudge:
eadon, he's saying modern evolutionary theory
is totally wrong, not just Darwin
Spearfish:
all Darwin did was ride around on a boat and
write his observations of the obvious down in
a little notebook
Parsifal:
I do understand those mechanisms JGR, if your
comment about understanding the enemy was addressed
to me
Parsifal:
and I am NOT a creationist - for the thousandth
time
JGR:
Not entirely addressed to you parsifal.....
JGR:
Darwin wasn't even the gung ho 'natural selection
is the only way' guy everybody makes him out
to be...Darwin was a pluralist who fought against
that type of thinking with his counterpart Wallace
who was a strict gradual adaptionist....Darwin
admitted that natural selection may not be the
main mechanism and even proposed others.
Parsifal:
eadon's earlier remark that no thinker, no serious
scientist doubts Darwinism is just untrue. Rattray
Taylor, Koestler, Milton, Waddington, Grasse,
Riedl... von Bertalannfy were all amazed that
the mechanisms of neo-Darwinism were ever given
the time of day
eadon-com:
yes at the time it was a revolution and it was
resisted because most scientists at that time
were christians, but modern scientists do not
doubt the theory of evolution, any more than
gravity
ObeeSpun-One:
AT the bottom is superstition, then religion,
then philosophy, and of course at the top is
the scientific framework of evolutionary psychology!!!!!!
science is our new god along with technology.
ObeeSpun-One:
the moral dilemma is something we cannot ignore,
religion and philosophy can only carry me so
far, my beliefs are inconsequential and synthetic,
extrapolating into other areas of life for generating
income is all religion of today is good for.
Isolani:
A memorable sentiment from ObeeSpun-One IMHO
eadon-com:
I tried explaining evolution to a Christian
once, and I was amazed at how he had difficulty
grasping even the simplest concepts. It is no
WONDER they prefer the cosy propaganda of creationism.
MagiciansHat:
maybe your explanation was flawed
Isolani:
Just found out about Lamarckism, "Lamarckian
evolution, which is now largely discredited,
would be evolution by the inheritance of acquired
characteristics. It would allow a creature to
pass on a longer neck to its kids simply by
stretching"
Parsifal:
Lamarckism is largely discredited...? My ass.
Tell that to Dr Mae-wan Ho, author of The Rainbow
and The Worm, or Genetic Engineering: Dream
or Nightmare. Might well give you an argument
Isolani!!
Spearfish:
leave your donkey out of this Parsifal
eadon-com:
it is devalued though, isn't is parsifal, what
with the rise of genetic science and all
JGR:
The rainbow ..hehe....was put in the sky by
god to remind him that he can't flood us again..
Isolani:
Parsifal I just copied that, it isn't my opinion
(discredited)
FoamingFundy:
eadon shall we consider the f-f-f's the falsified
fossil finds
eadon-com:
yeah, I've seen the arguments and they are usually
as phoney as hell, but I will humour you
Spearfish:
I thought that the fff was the fundamentalist
fool factor
JGR:
FoamingFundy...shall we consider Jim Bakker
or Swaggart.....there are fakes in every field...at
least science is critical of itself...and self-correcting....unlike
the bible which blah blah blah...I read it...done...I
know it...
Isolani:
If there is a kind of evolution/alteration over
time of human/animal structures, I wonder if
there may also be a sort of emotional evolution
as well in us beasts. THAT would give us all
some hope :)
Spearfish:
GREETINGS TO ALL CHRISTIAN COWARDS, WHOSE FEAR
OF NATURE CAUSES THEM TO LIVE IN A STATE OF
TERRIFIED CREDULITY!!!
MagiciansHat:
to whom?
eadon-com:
parsifal is dangerous, he comes out with long
words and names in order to silence opposition
who fear to ask what all the technobabble means
Parsifal:
oh come on eadon!! Wait until you read my book!!
eadon-com:
it is a nice tactic, on a higher level than
most dirty tricks
Parsifal:
That is OVERFLOWING with Bullshit!!
Isolani:
A persiflage of Parsifal verbiage in sesquipedalian
form :) - joking:)
Spearfish:
*let's it wash over him*\
MagiciansHat:
denying evolution is like denying gravity
Parsifal:
and what was one of these long words I used
anyway, eadon (Note that these are all short
: )
eadon-com:
erm HOMEOSTASIS
Spearfish:
any monkey knows that word!
Isolani:
Parsifal I think eadon just baited you back
with that bit about long words.
Spearfish:
what's it mean anyway?
Parsifal:
that term was coined by Ernst Mayr, Harvard
Professor and now in his 90s and still a Darwinist
sigrabmd:
lol Spearfish
eadon-com:
lol
Spearfish:
lol
Parsifal:
it means that that things cannot change beyond
a certain point
sigrabmd:
Spearfish you ain't a monkey then?
Isolani:
for a sec there I thought "monkey" was one of
those Robo-Admin forbidden words.
Parsifal:
. she'll like that
MagiciansHat:
HOMEOSTASIS does not mean that
Parsifal:
look, do not give me a hard time a bout the
term
Parsifal:
blame the bloody Darwinian Prof. who coined
it!!
Spearfish:
I guess the Big Bang was god getting Mary drunk
and laying her
eadon-com:
Does god need to get Mary drunk to do that Spearfish,
is god that ugly?
Spearfish:
sure god is ugly, he looks like us
 Please add your comment to this page | | | | | | From: |
James Plaskett | Subject: | 2001-02-08 15:32:20 |
| | | | | | From: |
Elena Dee Garcia | Subject: | 2002-02-19 10:15:28 |
| | | | | | From: |
Tinzy | Subject: | 2002-04-26 18:08:23 |
| | | | | | From: |
simplefred | Subject: | 2002-09-10 14:11:30 |
| | | | | | From: |
Victor | Subject: | 2003-03-26 21:48:13 |
| | | | | | From: |
Evo | Subject: | 2003-08-18 18:57:13 |
| | | | | | From: |
Paulo Olhero | Subject: | 2003-10-27 18:32:10 |
| | | | | | From: |
sean | Subject: | 2003-11-03 20:45:45 |
| | | | | | From: |
bballchic101 | Subject: | 2003-12-05 14:16:12 |
| | | | | | From: |
D Ives | Subject: | 2004-02-08 14:35:18 |
| | | | | | From: |
D Ives | Subject: | 2004-02-08 14:39:36 |
| | | | | | From: |
Trevor Burns | Subject: | 2004-08-20 05:27:15 |
| | | | | | From: |
John | Subject: | 2005-01-25 00:12:12 |
| | | | | | From: |
gale | Subject: | 2007-01-15 23:35:02 |
| | | | | | From: |
caleb | Subject: | 2007-06-05 11:13:38 |
| | | | | | From: |
Confused-Mammal | Subject: | 2008-04-20 22:03:06 |
| | | | |
help: how to add your comment Page hits: 3689
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
