Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Religious Debates & Threads => Topic started by: MMC78 on January 28, 2008, 10:10:01 PM
-
Anyone with a basic working knowledge of history, cosmology and physics? (Looking everything up on Google doesn't count)
I'm asking because I've seen a lot of posts like this:
Do the planets have a stamp on the that sais "hi, I'm Jupitor and I've been living here for 4.6 billion years''? and do the dinosaure bones have a tag when they get dugged out saying " Im 65 million years old"? and has A Macro-evolution ever been observed? NO NO NO. All you know about a bone buried in the ground is that it was once a life form that died.
Or our perfectly shaped planet magically appeared and all life as we know it began with single celled creature that magically appeared on our perfectly shaped planet.
I must say some of the things you say sound intelligent, but some of the things you say are plain stuped. World not being perfect....huh. If you shrunk the earth to the size of a pool ball, it would be just as round and just as smooth. If the earth was 1 querter of an astronamical mile closer to the sun we would roast, and 1 q further we would freeze.
The first man and women wrote about themselves. This is the most obvious thing to do considering we (nowadays) store information
Better yet, The size of the matter that exploded was smaller the this period.
Isn't that like saying 1 + 1 = 656353537374335755356453 753737345356337655653444 553453
I like rational debates with people, but to engage in discourse with this person would be like trying to explain how a television program to a dog. That's not entirely fair, this is more of a demonstration at a lack of education than a lack of innate intelligence. The result however is the same.
-
Why do you hate the Lord Jesus Christ so much? ???
-
Anyone with a basic working knowledge of history, cosmology and physics? (Looking everything up on Google doesn't count)
I'm asking because I've seen a lot of posts like this:
I like rational debates with people, but to engage in discourse with this person would be like trying to explain how a television program to a dog. That's not entirely fair, this is more of a demonstration at a lack of education than a lack of innate intelligence. The result however is the same.
I have been away for a few months and my first day back you and CD82 are writing threads about me, I'm flatered
BTW you are the one posting irrelevent stuff and not debating intelligently. If what I write makes you emotional then log off, you don't see me taking things personal. :-[
-
I have been away for a few months and my first day back you and CD82 are writing threads about me, I'm flatered
BTW you are the one posting irrelevent stuff and not debating intelligently. If what I write makes you emotional then log off, you don't see me taking things personal. :-[
Don't get me wrong, you're not working me up. I'm just debating whether or not to engage you in scientific debate. Its hard to argue a points of science with someone that doesn't have certain fundamental knowledge of science.
Philosophy and scripture are other matters though.
-
Don't get me wrong, you're not working me up. I'm just debating whether or not to engage you in scientific debate. Its hard to argue a points of science with someone that doesn't have certain fundamental knowledge of science.
Philosophy and scripture are other matters though.
None of these fundy clowns has even the most basic understanding of evolution. Most have never attended university, which unfortunately can often times speak volumes. Onetimehard is also the slowest of the lot, based on what I have seen.
-
Why do you hate the Lord Jesus Christ so much? ???
I think the lord Jesus, if he existed, would want his followers to strive to understand the world around him.
From what I've seen on this board there is an absolute lack of basic scientific knowledge among the faithful (MCWAY is a slight exception).
If the world were in the hands of people like BeachBum, Onetimehard, MCWAY we would still be living in a theocratic dark ages. We certainly wouldn't be using computers to communicate with each other over great distances.
Are people really this ignorant? Is it really this fucking bleak?
-
You don't need to think when you got Jesus by your side.
After all, Paul said "If God is for us, who can be against us?" and "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me."
You don't need to think or learn science or anything. The answers are all in the Bible!
-
Good grief. Some arrogant kids on this board. Some of you think a little too highly of yourselves. :)
-
I'm not the one claiming I can dismiss an entire branch of science without having bothered to learn the basics of it, am I?
That's our "OneTimeHard," the greatest scientific innovator since Einstein!!!
-
A bunch of you guys are incapable of having a discussion without insulting people. That don't impress me much. :)
-
Whom have I insulted?
-
Whom have I insulted?
Are you kidding? You created a thread devoted solely to trying to insult someone. If I had the desire--and I don't--I could probably string together a number of comments you've made, many of them condescending, to people who disagree with you.
You're not the only one, but look I don't intend to turn this into some drawn out discussion. It's not that important.
-
You mean OneTimeHard?
The thread isn't meant to insult him at all. It is meant to call him out on his science claims.
Either his claims are true, or they are false. If they are true, he is the greatest scientific mind alive today. If they are false, then he should stop claiming they are true.
It's that simple! :)
And I don't make condescending comments to people who disagree with me on opinions. I express sadness that people who don't know anything about a certain branch of science think they are qualified to discuss or discredit it.
-
Anyone with a basic working knowledge of history, cosmology and physics? (Looking everything up on Google doesn't count)
I like rational debates with people, but to engage in discourse with this person would be like trying to explain how a television program to a dog. That's not entirely fair, this is more of a demonstration at a lack of education than a lack of innate intelligence. The result however is the same.
I consider myself to be a Christian although some people might disagree and also consider myself to be educated.
-
I would consider loco educated from what I've seen.
His relationship with the Lord doesn't ring false to me either, is based on faith.
Instead of claiming to have facts or knowledge.
-
I would consider loco educated from what I've seen.
His relationship with the Lord doesn't ring false to me either, is based on faith.
Instead of claiming to have facts or knowledge.
Thanks Hedgehog! I appreciate that!
-
I would consider loco educated from what I've seen.
His relationship with the Lord doesn't ring false to me either, is based on faith.
Instead of claiming to have facts or knowledge.
Agreed. I think loco, of all the "believers" on here, has the most clear-cut, well-defined ideas about religion.
He freely admits his religiosity is based on faith, but still falls into the trap of treating the Bible as a science book at times (hence his interest in creationism).
On the whole, he is the "fundy nutcase" I most enjoy debating with 8)
-
Agreed. I think loco, of all the "believers" on here, has the most clear-cut, well-defined ideas about religion.
He freely admits his religiosity is based on faith, but still falls into the trap of treating the Bible as a science book at times (hence his interest in creationism).
On the whole, he is the "fundy nutcase" I most enjoy debating with 8)
Thanks, columbusdude82! But in my personal opinion, the same applies to other believers on here too.
For the record, I don't believe that the Bible is a science book, and I don't believe that the Bible is a history book either. I do believe that the Bible is the word of God.
-
loco, one thing I've always wondered about calling the Bible the "word of God," you don't really mean God is the "speaker", do you?
As in, when the Bible narrates a story, do you think God is the speaker? When the Bible includes a prayer to God, you think God is talking to himself? When the Bible uses the first person, you think it is God referring to himself?
The Koran, for example, is written in the plural first person (e.g. "We have done this..." or "We have given you that..."), and Allah is (supposedly ::) ) the speaker there. But the Bible is very different!
-
Who said our planet is perfectly shaped?
It's wider at the equator than it's north to south elliptical.
And aside from it's 23% tilt it's wobbling a few fractions of degrees at 2200 year cycles.
-
Who said our planet is perfectly shaped?
It's wider at the equator than it's north to south elliptical.
And aside from it's 23% tilt it's wobbling a few fractions of degrees at 2200 year cycles.
The cool (or perhaps disturbing depending on your perspective) about that wobble (precession) is that the north star won't always indicate true north.
Fun fact, the south pole doesn't have a celestial object comparable to the north star, but you can find true south by finding the southern cross, taking the bottom and top stars of that cross then moving from the top most star a distance of approximately 4 1/2 times that length. This points to true south.
-
None of these fundy clowns has even the most basic understanding of evolution. Most have never attended university, which unfortunately can often times speak volumes. Onetimehard is also the slowest of the lot, based on what I have seen.
You can confirm, with certainty, that most of the "fundy clowns" (a category in which I safely say you put me) have never attended university?
-
You can confirm, with certainty, that most of the "fundy clowns" (a category in which I safely say you put me) have never attended university?
why do you avoid debating me on the existence of a god, or supernatural being?
you have yet to respond to three of my posts adressing you.
there is no good reason to think a benevolent god exists.
-
why do you avoid debating me on the existence of a god, or supernatural being?
you have yet to respond to three of my posts adressing you.
there is no good reason to think a benevolent god exists.
I've avoided nothing from you. What you've done, to date, is go on emotional rants, claiming that, because there is evil in this world (i.e. children dying), there is no God. Or, people have no free will, because (perish the thought) they may actually be held responsible for their actions, one way or the other.
Then, there's your continued erroneous claims that because man has (finally) discovered certain scientific principles and, as a result, been able to manipulate them (to a degree) to achiever certain tasks, that man has somehow put God out of existence. Of course, you've yet to explain how those processes and those resources came to be, as man CANNOT create them.
As for your "no good reason......", spiel, that is but an opinion with which I (and a myriad of Christians) do not agree.
-
I think the lord Jesus, if he existed, would want his followers to strive to understand the world around him.
From what I've seen on this board there is an absolute lack of basic scientific knowledge among the faithful (MCWAY is a slight exception).
If the world were in the hands of people like BeachBum, Onetimehard, MCWAY we would still be living in a theocratic dark ages. We certainly wouldn't be using computers to communicate with each other over great distances.
Says who? Or have you forgotten of the many men of science who were believers in God? Why is it that, when the printing press (with movable type) came to be, the Bible was among the first reproduced, and it was among the most-reproduced works of that time?
Then, there are biological advances by men like Louis Pasteur, who not only helped cured some of the deadliest diseases known to man but skewered one of the biggest tenets of evolution (spontaneous generation).
Are people really this ignorant? Is it really this fucking bleak?
Loco has, on multiple occasions, provided the lists of scientific fathers of the Western world, who were Christians, and DID NOT subscribe to the theory of evolution (pre or post-Darwin).
That leads me to my point. The idea that a belief in evolution is necessary for scientific advancement is ridiculous and patently false. It wasn't needed then and it ain't needed now.
-
I've avoided nothing from you. What you've done, to date, is go on emotional rants, claiming that, because there is evil in this world (i.e. children dying), there is no God. Or, people have no free will, because (perish the thought) they may actually be held responsible for their actions, one way or the other.
Then, there's your continued erroneous claims that because man has (finally) discovered certain scientific principles and, as a result, been able to manipulate them (to a degree) to achiever certain tasks, that man has somehow put God out of existence. Of course, you've yet to explain how those processes and those resources came to be, as man CANNOT create them.
As for your "no good reason......", spiel, that is but an opinion with which I (and a myriad of Christians) do not agree.
firstly you are avoiding arguing with me still.
also you are twisting my words and putting words in my mouth.
the problem of evil is a very strong argument against your all loving god. also i said free will doesnt exist if god has planned ones life as it wont matter what one does as the outcome is pre-determined. your intellectual dishonesty and misconceptions are very low ball tactics in debate.
adress my points with something rational.
-
firstly you are avoiding arguing with me still.
also you are twisting my words and putting words in my mouth.
the problem of evil is a very strong argument against your all loving god. also i said free will doesnt exist if god has planned ones life as it wont matter what one does as the outcome is pre-determined. your intellectual dishonesty and misconceptions are very low ball tactics in debate.
adress my points with something rational.
I didn't twist your words nor have I put any words in your mouth, and I'll be more than willing to reprint them, if you like.
I've addressed your points. Whether they fit your subjective category of "rational" or not ain't my concern.
Plus, you claim that God isn't needed to explain anything. So, as I said beforehand, explain origin of life.
-
I didn't twist your words nor have I put any words in your mouth, and I'll be more than willing to reprint them, if you like.
I've addressed your points. Whether they fit your subjective category of "rational" or not ain't my concern.
Plus, you claim that God isn't needed to explain anything. So, as I said beforehand, explain origin of life.
Ah...he can't explain the origin of life and neither can I. We don't know.
But you DO apparentlu. You know that the Judeo-Christian deity did it, huh? How did you come to possess this knowledge.
God of the Gaps MCWAY....
-
Ah...he can't explain the origin of life and neither can I. We don't know.
His claim was that God was not needed to explain the origin of life.
But you DO apparentlu. You know that the Judeo-Christian deity did it, huh? How did you come to possess this knowledge.
God of the Gaps MCWAY....
If "we" don't know, then the possibility of "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth....." is still in play. And, that's what I believe. But, in your case, and that of Pole, it's not about "not knowing"; it's about not wanting to acknowledge the divine, under any circumstances.
-
His claim was that God was not needed to explain the origin of life.
If "we" don't know, then the possibility of "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth....." is still in play. And, that's what I believe. But, in your case, and that of Pole, it's not about "not knowing"; it's about not wanting to acknowledge the divine, under any circumstances.
Why do you believe the Genesis story to be absolutely and perfectly true?
-
I didn't twist your words nor have I put any words in your mouth, and I'll be more than willing to reprint them, if you like.
I've addressed your points. Whether they fit your subjective category of "rational" or not ain't my concern.
Plus, you claim that God isn't needed to explain anything. So, as I said beforehand, explain origin of life.
explain abiogenesis?
if i do and im right does that prove to you your god doesnt exist? or will you find another gap in knowledge to slide him in too.
so let me get this straight, god started life then left it to evolution a clumsy process which doesnt gurantee our existence and which takes billions of years. also, he is not needed for species to be created but thought it neccesary for him to start it off. He uses natural processes for star formation, evolution etc but couldnt think of one for abiogenesis so he skipped some steps and poped a cell on earth to start us off.
ya that makes sense.
i stand by my claims, i would debate you on anything, you make absolutely no sense.
-
explain abiogenesis?
if i do and im right does that prove to you your god doesnt exist? or will you find another gap in knowledge to slide him in too.
so let me get this straight, god started life then left it to evolution a clumsy process which doesnt gurantee our existence and which takes billions of years. also, he is not needed for species to be created but thought it neccesary for him to start it off. He uses natural processes for star formation, evolution etc but couldnt think of one for abiogenesis so he skipped some steps and poped a cell on earth to start us off.
ya that makes sense.
i stand by my claims, i would debate you on anything, you make absolutely no sense.
MCWAY is more consistent than that. He doesn't believe in evolution, but rather that his desert deity created 'kinds' of all species with his awesome magical powers. According to him everything came into existence via magic.
-
MCWAY is more consistent than that. He doesn't believe in evolution, but rather that his desert deity created 'kinds' of all species with his awesome magical powers. According to him everything came into existence via magic.
He needs Gary Busey.
-
He needs Gary Busey.
If he only knew the power of the Lord of Madness!
(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z25/Todesfick/Bane_symbol.jpg)
-
He needs Gary Busey.
well said. :D
let it be known that debussey df is mcmac's god.
-
explain abiogenesis?
if i do and im right does that prove to you your god doesnt exist? or will you find another gap in knowledge to slide him in too.
so let me get this straight, god started life then left it to evolution a clumsy process which doesnt gurantee our existence and which takes billions of years. also, he is not needed for species to be created but thought it neccesary for him to start it off. He uses natural processes for star formation, evolution etc but couldnt think of one for abiogenesis so he skipped some steps and poped a cell on earth to start us off.
ya that makes sense.
I made no claim that God started life and left it to evolution. Or did you forget that I believe in Creation?
i stand by my claims, i would debate you on anything, you make absolutely no sense.
And, you'll fall by those same claims. As for your allegedly explaining abiogenesis, GOOD LUCK!!! The last guys that tried had their hearts broken by one Louis Pasteur. Based on that, and the futile attempts of others, I don't like your chance.
-
I made no claim that God started life and left it to evolution. Or did you forget that I believe in Creation?
And, you'll fall by those same claims. As for your allegedly explaining abiogenesis, GOOD LUCK!!! The last guys that tried had their hearts broken by one Louis Pasteur. Based on that, and the futile attempts of others, I don't like your chance.
Do you know the difference between a religious charlatan such as yourself and a scientist? When a scientist doesn't know something, he admits it. Scientists don't know exactly how abiogenesis occurred, but to put in the place of that ignorance ancient mythology (which is not even original), for which we have zero evidence, claiming it to be true, is intellectually dishonest in the most profound manner. I hope you realise that.
-
I made no claim that God started life and left it to evolution. Or did you forget that I believe in Creation?
And, you'll fall by those same claims. As for your allegedly explaining abiogenesis, GOOD LUCK!!! The last guys that tried had their hearts broken by one Louis Pasteur. Based on that, and the futile attempts of others, I don't like your chance.
i have no doubt you are insane.
how do you explain that matter cannot be created nor destroyed, and that this can be proven over and over?
-
i have no doubt you are insane.
how do you explain that matter cannot be created nor destroyed, and that this can be proven over and over?
Proven by whom? MAN!!! Hence, there's no issue by my saying that MAN cannot created nor destroy energy.
What's been "proven over and over" is that he can't do it, NOT that it can't be done.
Do you know the difference between a religious charlatan such as yourself and a scientist? When a scientist doesn't know something, he admits it. Scientists don't know exactly how abiogenesis occurred, but to put in the place of that ignorance ancient mythology (which is not even original), for which we have zero evidence, claiming it to be true, is intellectually dishonest in the most profound manner. I hope you realise that.
Scientists don't know THAT abiogenesis has occured, and many (including the one, whose quote I included) have admitted as such. And, they've also admitted that the reason they still hold to evolution is because IF THEY DO NOT, THEY MUST CONCEDE TO THE CONCEPT OF SUPERNATURAL CREATION.
Therefore, to use Wald's words, it's a "philosophical necessity" that they believe in evolution.
-
Proven by whom? MAN!!! Hence, there's no issue by my saying that MAN cannot created nor destroy energy.
What's been "proven over and over" is that he can't do it, NOT that it can't be done.
Scientists don't know THAT abiogenesis has occured, and many (including the one, whose quote I included) have admitted as such. And, they've also admitted that the reason they still hold to evolution is because IF THEY DO NOT, THEY MUST CONCEDE TO THE CONCEPT OF SUPERNATURAL CREATION.
Therefore, to use Wald's words, it's a "philosophical necessity" that they believe in evolution.
"Proven by whom? MAN!!! Hence, there's no issue by my saying that MAN cannot created nor destroy energy.
What's been "proven over and over" is that he can't do it, NOT that it can't be done."
is there something im missing. matter cannot be created nor destroyed hence it needs nothing to account for its existence since it has always existed. it was not created, it cannot be. IT IS ETERNAL, THIS IS A LAW, A PROVEN LAW.
offer me an alternative theory with some proof. if not, you have no point other then christian rhetoric disproven by science.
"What's been "proven over and over" is that he can't do it, NOT that it can't be done.
Scientists don't know THAT abiogenesis has occured, and many (including the one, whose quote I included) have admitted as such. And, they've also admitted that the reason they still hold to evolution is because IF THEY DO NOT, THEY MUST CONCEDE TO THE CONCEPT OF SUPERNATURAL CREATION.
Therefore, to use Wald's words, it's a "philosophical necessity" that they believe in evolution. "
who are these idiots that would accept another hypothesis without evidence? so if evolution is wrong god did it why?