NationStates Jolt Archive

Just out of curiosity, do you think the universe magically came into existance by the will of a magical being in the sky?

He's not magical, he's just a 13 year old messing around with the Sims. And when you slice us open, little 1's and 0's will pop out.

Duh.

Earthquakes and the like tend to move bones around, and it is likely that humans and dinosaurs lived in distinct geological areas. Another theory is that God experimented with dinosaurs, but opted to annihilate them instead, favoring humans over them. The dinosaurs failed to live up to God's expectations and he killed them.

Earthquakes disturb layers. Scientists notice that, don't you think? I was talking about finds in undisturbed layers.
And, no, dinosaur fossils and human fossils are found in the same geographical areas.

Oh, and *lolz for that last bit. That has to be the funniest explanation I ever heard. :D

Another theory is that God experimented with dinosaurs, but opted to annihilate them instead, favoring humans over them. The dinosaurs failed to live up to God's expectations and he killed them.

So...uh, God made a mistake? Thou art a heretic!

So...uh, God made a mistake? Thou art a heretic!

No, he most certainly did not make a mistake. However, God smites those whom he abhors because of their sinful behavior. The dinosaurs may have fallen into this category because they failed to develop any equitable social structure as the humans did, and instead became violent and immoral predators.

Trilby63;12097775']LG does.

I'm the exception that proves the rule. :)

No, he most certainly did not make a mistake. However, God smites those whom he abhors because of their sinful behavior. The dinosaurs may have fallen into this category because they failed to develop any equitable social structure as the humans did, and instead became violent and immoral predators.

Nah. You said He made a mistake because they didn't live up to his expectations. If he didn't expect what happened, that can only be because He is not omniscient. So you're saying God isn't God. So you ARE a heretic, and a fool, and probably homosexual too - not that there's anything wrong with that!

Earthquakes and the like tend to move bones around, and it is likely that humans and dinosaurs lived in distinct geological areas. Another theory is that God experimented with dinosaurs, but opted to annihilate them instead, favoring humans over them. The dinosaurs failed to live up to God's expectations and he killed them.

God: Say RAWR!
Dino: Miau?
God: Damn this! I'm making humans!

No, he most certainly did not make a mistake. However, God smites those whom he abhors because of their sinful behavior. The dinosaurs may have fallen into this category because they failed to develop any equitable social structure as the humans did, and instead became violent and immoral predators.

Dionsaurs were immoral???
*roflmao

No matter who you are, you do make a good little troll. ;)

Just to get one thing right : Most dinosaurs were herbivores. The carnivorous ones just get more attention these days.

God: Say RAWR!
Dino: Miau?
God: Damn this! I'm making humans!

http://www.reloaded.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/hysterical.gif

Nah. You said He made a mistake because they didn't live up to his expectations.

God gave the dinosaurs a chance, being as just and merciful as he is. However, they spat in his face with their vile behavior and he was forced to expunge them from the Earth. God has smitten many people before; there is no reason to think that he would not do so with other animals.

No, he most certainly did not make a mistake. However, God smites those whom he abhors because of their sinful behavior. The dinosaurs may have fallen into this category because they failed to develop any equitable social structure as the humans did, and instead became violent and immoral predators.

Instead became violent and immoral predators? Yeah, like humans.

God gave the dinosaurs a chance, being as just and merciful as he is. However, they spat in his face with their vile behavior and he was forced to expunge them from the Earth. God has smitten many people before; there is no reason to think that he would not do so with other animals.

Hmmm... I'm curious. Where in the bible did you find that explanation?

Instead became violent and immoral predators? Yeah, like humans.

We have developed grand cities as a testament to the glory of God, and many of us fervently worship him. The dinosaurs failed to accomplish either of those two tasks and their existence only caused pain and suffering; they didn't do anybody and good and were supremely selfish and ungrateful for what God did for them. However, all this is purely conjecture; I may have to ask a more learned Bible scholar about this.

How do we know that the stars are actually that far away? Did we take an inter-galactic ruler to measure the distance? No, we assumed based upon faulty reasoning. Those stars are not more than 6,000 years old.

YES! It's called the Cepheid Variable Method. When the hell did High School Algebra become 'faulty reasoning'?

*engraves the speed of light on the back of a cast-iron frying pan and waves it ominously* Don't make me use this! :p

We have developed grand cities as a testament to the glory of God, and many of us fervently worship him. The dinosaurs failed to accomplish either of those two tasks and their existence only caused pain and suffering; they didn't do anybody and good and were supremely selfish and ungrateful for what God did for them. However, all this is purely conjecture; I may have to ask a more learned Bible scholar about this.

I'm just rying to imagine a triceratops to build a house.... or a pterodactyl putting on the roof tiles...

http://www.reloaded.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/hysterical.gif

We have developed grand cities as a testament to the glory of God, and many of us fervently worship him. The dinosaurs failed to accomplish either of those two tasks and their existence only caused pain and suffering; they didn't do anybody and good and were supremely selfish and ungrateful for what God did for them. However, all this is purely conjecture; I may have to ask a more learned Bible scholar about this.

So, making buildings, praying and following God is an excuse to be violent?
Also, why do other animals exist at all then? If only humans were able to fervently worship God.

Hmmm... I'm curious. Where in the bible did you find that explanation?

It is my own hypothesis; I will seek an expert opinion on the matter. Ah, here it is!

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/2.asp

It is possible that the dinosaurs perished in the great Flood, and those taken by Noah on his Ark failed to thrive, leading to the extinction of dinosaurs. This also account for the fossils of dinosaurs embedded deeply within layers of stone.

Another theory I read was that the myth has it's origins at the end of the last ice age. The melting of glaciers and inland ice on the poles caused massive flodding and storms in many parts of the world for a few decades.

Well, I don't know about that. The Ice Age which most of us know and love would have been many years before Noah, if you take the Bible as somewhat historically accurate.

For me, I picked no until more information about evolution is formulated. Because mainly evolution seems so half-baked in the way its founding principles are time, and coincidences. I don't want to be betting that way; given enough time, anything could happen, and with enough time these coincidences (which were are not able to recreate in a controlled environment) could slowly build up enough momentum that voila! Life and homo sapiens.

So really, while its fun to make fun of God, bawling about how there isn't any real evidence and all that, except of course some written material, I wouldn't say evolution has a uber amount either. Some rock samples that are in essence debatable if they contradict the Bible, and a slew of bones with evidence that multiple human like apes existed.

Now sorry for rambling, but I feel that the vast majority of people who have supported evolution have given little if any reason, and/or just made fun of God. Basically: you guys need to look smarter, and less like a bunch of angry adolescents. So please, read and review-

YES! It's called the Cepheid Variable Method. When the hell did High School Algebra become 'faulty reasoning'?

*engraves the speed of light on the back of a cast-iron frying pan and waves it ominously* Don't make me use this! :p

You have to admit though, this guy makes a good troll. :)

It is my own hypothesis; I will seek an expert opinion on the matter. Ah, here it is!

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/2.asp

It is possible that the dinosaurs perished in the great Flood, and those taken by Noah on his Ark failed to thrive, leading to the extinction of dinosaurs. This also account for the fossils of dinosaurs embedded deeply within layers of stone.

Ah, but weren't all humans supposed to die in that flood too? You know, apart from Noah and his bunch of inbreeders?
Again, this doesn't account for the fact that fossils of certain species can only be found in certain layers, and other fossils of other species only in other layers.

Well, I don't know about that. The Ice Age which most of us know and love would have been many years before Noah, if you take the Bible as somewhat historically accurate.

For me, I picked no until more information about evolution is formulated. Because mainly evolution seems so half-baked in the way its founding principles are time, and coincidences. I don't want to be betting that way; given enough time, anything could happen, and with enough time these coincidences (which were are not able to recreate in a controlled environment) could slowly build up enough momentum that voila! Life and homo sapiens.

So really, while its fun to make fun of God, bawling about how there isn't any real evidence and all that, except of course some written material, I wouldn't say evolution has a uber amount either. Some rock samples that are in essence debatable if they contradict the Bible, and a slew of bones with evidence that multiple human like apes existed.

Now sorry for rambling, but I feel that the vast majority of people who have supported evolution have given little if any reason, and/or just made fun of God. Basically: you guys need to look smarter, and less like a bunch of angry adolescents. So please, read and review-


I can't claim to be an expert neither in biology nor in evolution, but what part of it doesn't make sense to you there?
The fact that the bible doesn't allow for enough time for it all to happen?

You have to admit though, this guy makes a good troll. :)

A brilliant one. I'm nearly wetting myself here. :D

You have to admit though, this guy makes a good troll. :)

Not really - he (she) is too inconsistent on some issues, and too persistent on others. It makes for an unconvincing portrait - and all the 'best' trolls are effective because they could be genuine.

I'm just rying to imagine a triceratops to build a house.... or a pterodactyl putting on the roof tiles...

http://www.reloaded.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/hysterical.gif

It would certainly explain how the Great Pyramids got built: Dinosaur helpers. :)

Ah, but weren't all humans supposed to die in that flood too? You know, apart from Noah and his bunch of inbreeders?
Again, this doesn't account for the fact that fossils of certain species can only be found in certain layers, and other fossils of other species only in other layers.
You mean in maybe 3 or 4 areas on the whole Earth, the orders coincide with your hypothesis. For the rest of the fossil digsites, its just a mass, or the layers are mixed up. For beliving in a hypothesis that is fundamentally a series of coincidences, I can't blame you for thinking that way.

I can't claim to be an expert neither in biology nor in evolution, but what part of it doesn't make sense to you there?
The fact that the bible doesn't allow for enough time for it all to happen?
That anything and everything can be explained by adding another set of zeros, if not any actual evidence-evidence.

I'm just rying to imagine a triceratops to build a house.... or a pterodactyl putting on the roof tiles...

http://www.reloaded.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/hysterical.gif

The velociraptor car mechanic:

"yeah, it's not too good. Your brake pads are worn down, you're alignment is off, your transmission is shot, your manifold is bent and I...um....ate your children. Sorry"

That anything and everything can be explained by adding another set of zeros, if not any actual evidence-evidence.

So where exactly do you feel evidence is lacking?

It would certainly explain how the Great Pyramids got built: Dinosaur helpers. :)

Exactly! Clearly, as a punishment for aiding the Egyptians in their worship of false gods, God had no choice but to smite the dinosaurs for their sinful pyramid building! It all makes sense! Where's your Darwin now you evilutionists? :headbang:

Evolution is pretty simple, actually. It is something that HAS to happen, always has happened, and always will happen.

Random mutations occur in a population. Some of these mutations make organisms more fitted to their environment. The organisms with the superior mutations survive to reproduce, while the ones with inferior mutations die off. Add up the number of different generations with different mutations over several billions years, and getting to where we are now isn't so much a stretch.

Further, something isn't "debatable" because it contradicts the Bible. That's like saying something is "debatable" if it contradicts any other book. Scientifically, the Bible has no more "weight" than any other written work. FurtherMORE, the Bible doesn't attempt to explain in detail how life happened. It's a moral compass created by people who needed to explain WHY things were right and wrong, and the afterlife - just because they were insecure and worried that people would go insane without being scared by magical fairy stuff.

So where exactly do you feel evidence is lacking?

Has anyone ever witnessed a dinosaur turning into a potato?

Statistically, it's highly unlikely, despite the small chance, that 'we' wouldn't have evolved and developed sentience. (I say 'we' because if it hadn't have been us, then it might have been the felines, canines or avians instead of the apes, and then they'd be sitting here, on the Internet discussing this.)

Lets dumb it down.

A lot.

Flip a standard coin. The chances of you getting heads or tails are even, right? So, lets assume that the coin shows 'heads'. What are the odds that the second flip will be the same? Well, even. 50%. But overall, the odds that you'll get two coin-flips to produce 'heads' both times is half that. 25%. And the third? Well, 50% again. But the overall chance? 12.5%. An attempt to get seven coin flips to produce the result of 'heads' drops below 1%: 0.78125%. This is despite the fact that, if you have the six necessary flips behind you, your chance of obtaining that seventh stays at 50%.

Does that mean it's impossible? No. Unlikely in the short term, with only one person flipping coins? Yes. Unlikely in the long run, more than one person flipping coins, and continually trying again? Not unlikely at all.

Simply because statistics say that something has a 0.00000001% chance of happening doesn't mean that it's impossible.

God gave the dinosaurs a chance, being as just and merciful as he is.

You aren't capitalizing His personal pronouns. AGAIN. Again, you show disrespect to God.

Know why? Because you don't actually believe in God. You're just trolling for attention. You probably want to make people who believe in God look like idiots. But really, the only thing you're accomplishing is making yourself look like one.

However, they spat in his face with their vile behavior and he was forced to expunge them from the Earth. God has smitten many people before; there is no reason to think that he would not do so with other animals.

They "disappointed" His "expectations." Therefore, what He expected - what He KNEW, being omniscient - was not what happened. Therefore, you have already stated that God is not omniscient. Period. Full stop. You don't believe in an all-knowing God. Period. Full stop.

Give it up already.

So where exactly do you feel evidence is lacking?

When did uni- and basic multi- cellular organisms turn into humans. Lacking that, when did they turn into something approaching, lets say, a fish. Lizard, or some other creature.

When stuff like that is said, usually some highly intelligent 'evilutionist' decides that a real debate is to much for his limited mind, and decides to talk about potatoes.

Yes, about one half of people are below average intelligence.

No, he most certainly did not make a mistake. However, God smites those whom he abhors because of their sinful behavior. The dinosaurs may have fallen into this category because they failed to develop any equitable social structure as the humans did, and instead became violent and immoral predators.

Are you questioning God's judgement and foresight? Animals - including 'dinosaurs', are not like humans who have free will, and The Lord in all his wisdom knows their fate, so if he punished 'the dinosaurs' as you say, it would be out of sadism. I am disgusted by your ostentatious display of blashemy!

When did uni- and basic multi- cellular organisms turn into humans. Lacking that, when did they turn into something approaching, lets say, a fish. Lizard, or some other creature.

When stuff like that is said, usually some highly intelligent 'evilutionist' decides that a real debate is to much for his limited mind, and decides to talk about potatoes.

Yes, about one half of people are below average intelligence.

What most people fail to understand is that due to the high rate of reproduction of bacteria, we can see macroevolution on a microbiological scale. It's enough that scientists are able to see changes over time in the specimens they have.

Well then add another 2 sites to that, they're not dig sites but they're close enough:

Coast of North Wales, theres a public beach in an area called Llanfairfechan (near where I used to live so I've seen this place with my own eyes). In the cliffs at this beach you can see the strata clearly in the rocks and in one layer there's guess what? fossils!!! I've mostly only found shellfish there but I did once find a segment of an Ammonite. Ammonites were most common during the Mesozoic period 248 - 65 million years ago. They became extinct 65 million years ago. However a relative of theirs, the nautilus, still survives. So that dates the layer of sedimentary rock in that cliff containing those fossils at likely the Mesozoic period.

The second place you can add is a small sand quarry, now disused, also in north wales where the layers of stand and gravel are very very clearly defined. So I dont know what you're talking about when you say ONLY 3 or 4 digsites WORLD WIDE show layered strata and that all the rest are just a big jumble.

I suggest that you put asside your beliefs for one moment and take the time to actually go out into the big wide world and look for yourself with your own eyes instead of just believing every word you've been instructed to by your peer group. What have you got to lose? If you and your peers are right you won't find a single thing.

It would certainly explain how the Great Pyramids got built: Dinosaur helpers. :)

Well you've surely seen that historical documentary amusingly titled 'The Flintstones?'

When did uni- and basic multi- cellular organisms turn into humans. Lacking that, when did they turn into something approaching, lets say, a fish. Lizard, or some other creature.

When stuff like that is said, usually some highly intelligent 'evilutionist' decides that a real debate is to much for his limited mind, and decides to talk about potatoes.

Oddly enough this is the first time you've actually asked any questions of the kind. Nevertheless:

Ask and ye shall receive (http://andabien.com/html3/personal/evolution-timeline.htm)

This timeline should answer most of your questions. If you want more specific dates then I'll dig out my copy of 'The Ancestor's Tale'.

EDIT: Oh, and what's more I've seen very similar questions being asked by genuine creationists. One asked "Have you ever seen a rock turn into a monkey".

When did uni- and basic multi- cellular organisms turn into humans. Lacking that, when did they turn into something approaching, lets say, a fish. Lizard, or some other creature.

When stuff like that is said, usually some highly intelligent 'evilutionist' decides that a real debate is to much for his limited mind, and decides to talk about potatoes.

Yes, about one half of people are below average intelligence.

Basic "uni- and multi-" cellular organisms didn't "turn into" humans.

Their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.
And their kids were a bit different.

For several billions years, that made humans.

Statistically, it's highly unlikely, despite the small chance, that 'we' wouldn't have evolved and developed sentience. (I say 'we' because if it hadn't have been us, then it might have been the felines, canines or avians instead of the apes, and then they'd be sitting here, on the Internet discussing this.)

Lets dumb it down.

A lot.

Flip a standard coin. The chances of you getting heads or tails are even, right? So, lets assume that the coin shows 'heads'. What are the odds that the second flip will be the same? Well, even. 50%. But overall, the odds that you'll get two coin-flips to produce 'heads' both times is half that. 25%. And the third? Well, 50% again. But the overall chance? 12.5%. An attempt to get seven coin flips to produce the result of 'heads' drops below 1%: 0.78125%. This is despite the fact that, if you have the six necessary flips behind you, your chance of obtaining that seventh stays at 50%.

Does that mean it's impossible? No. Unlikely in the short term, with only one person flipping coins? Yes. Unlikely in the long run, more than one person flipping coins, and continually trying again? Not unlikely at all.

Simply because statistics say that something has a 0.00000001% chance of happening doesn't mean that it's impossible.

So brings us back to my main reason for thinking it is fundamentally lacking, when in doubt, you say the person tries to get 2000 coin flips in a row (fish jumping on land and walking lets say) by trying 100 Billion years. Yes it is technically attainable, but no one has managed to flip a coin, or seen someone flip a coin, heads 2000 times in a row. You just say that it must have happened, because if it didn't, you will have to explain one to many things to Him when you go to Heaven.

(See, I use all His personal pronouns in capitalization!) ;)

So brings us back to my main reason for thinking it is fundamentally lacking, when in doubt, you say the person tries to get 2000 coin flips in a row (fish jumping on land and walking lets say) by trying 100 Billion years. Yes it is technically attainable, but no one has managed to flip a coin, or seen someone flip a coin, heads 2000 times in a row. You just say that it must have happened, because if it didn't, you will have to explain one to many things to Him when you go to Heaven.

(See, I use all His personal pronouns in capitalization!) ;)

Evolution happens to populations, not to individuals.

Try again.

So brings us back to my main reason for thinking it is fundamentally lacking, when in doubt, you say the person tries to get 2000 coin flips in a row (fish jumping on land and walking lets say) by trying 100 Billion years. Yes it is technically attainable, but no one has managed to flip a coin, or seen someone flip a coin, heads 2000 times in a row. You just say that it must have happened, because if it didn't, you will have to explain one to many things to Him when you go to Heaven.

(See, I use all His personal pronouns in capitalization!) ;)

I used coin-flipping so that it would be understandable.

Personally, I have nothing to explain to a 'being' that is, at best, magical, and at worst, a pathetic psychological electric blanket. I anticipate moving into oblivion and complete lack of thought and being.

When did uni- and basic multi- cellular organisms turn into humans. Lacking that, when did they turn into something approaching, lets say, a fish. Lizard, or some other creature.

When stuff like that is said, usually some highly intelligent 'evilutionist' decides that a real debate is to much for his limited mind, and decides to talk about potatoes.

Yes, about one half of people are below average intelligence.

You do realise that no humans ever evolved from unicellular organisms, right? And also that the evolution of humanity encompasses several million species from the first unicellular being to today's homo sapiens?
Do you expect me to list them all here, especially considering that many of those speices didn't simply evolve linearly.

I don't think the coin analogy works very well because it doesn't seem to include the role of natural selection. How about this:

1.) Flip 1,000,000,000 coins once.
2.) If all the coins are now showing heads, go to step 5.
3.) Re flip all the coins which came down tails but leave those which are showing heads.
4.) Go to step 2.
5.) Celebrate.

Obviously the chance of getting 1,000,000,000 heads after one attempt is negligible, but once you factor in time and natural selection it becomes nigh inevitable.

How do you explain all of these dinofossils then? Is your magical sky fairy so smart it would plant evidnce against it?

Exactly! Clearly, as a punishment for aiding the Egyptians in their worship of false gods, God had no choice but to smite the dinosaurs for their sinful pyramid building! It all makes sense! Where's your Darwin now you evilutionists? :headbang:

Well, God might've been upset at the builders, but He clearly loved the building, because it managed to survive the Great Flood and the resulting geological cataclysm that wiped out all life, deposited several thousand feet of liquefied rock strata and sedimentary rock deposits, raised mountains, collapsed seabeds and formed the polar ice caps. I thought it was a marvel of engineering prowess WITHOUT taking into account the Great Flood. :)

When did uni- and basic multi- cellular organisms turn into humans. Lacking that, when did they turn into something approaching, lets say, a fish. Lizard, or some other creature.

When stuff like that is said, usually some highly intelligent 'evilutionist' decides that a real debate is to much for his limited mind, and decides to talk about potatoes.

Yes, about one half of people are below average intelligence.

Since every single creature alive today was conceived as a single cell that divided and divided until it formed an embryo, a fetus and eventually a living creature, is it really THAT farfetched to you that it took a while for life to figure out how to divide?

Evolution happens to populations, not to individuals.

Try again.
I am sorry to burst your bubble, but Lydania and me were 'dumbing it down' so to speak. So if you don't have anything else meaningful to offer, I ask you to leave debating to your more educated members of your hypothesis. Either that or continue to look like you have little clue-

I used coin-flipping so that it would be understandable.

Personally, I have nothing to explain to a 'being' that is, at best, magical, and at worst, a pathetic psychological electric blanket. I anticipate moving into oblivion and complete lack of thought and being.
I completely understand, and think th metaphor of coin flipping can only explain so much of the debate, good metaphor though.

My argument still stand though, while it is technically achievable, it has never been witnessed, has is not being witnessed, and it will not be witnessed. At least, from my overly biased point of view.

I don't think it is a pathetic blanket for our mind, I think if anything it is a booster. I think the media (I don't want to sound to much like a wide eyed fanatic) has lead most people to a certain degree think Muslims are all willing to die for Allah and their faith. Also, it makes out that most Christians are far rightists believing that immigrants should be shot trying to cross the Rio. If anything, I feel that religion has only increased happiness, charity, and moral standards.

You do realise that no humans ever evolved from unicellular organisms, right? And also that the evolution of humanity encompasses several million species from the first unicellular being to today's homo sapiens?
Do you expect me to list them all here, especially considering that many of those species didn't simply evolve linearly.

Yes, yes, and for the last, I don't know. Mainly because I don't quite understand why you can't pick one unicellular organism, and trice a relatively linear (if a little simple) path to humans. That's evolution, and that's just about how it works.

I don't think the coin analogy works very well because it doesn't seem to include the role of natural selection. How about this:

1.) Flip 1,000,000,000 coins once.
2.) If all the coins are now showing heads, go to step 5.
3.) Re flip all the coins which came down tails but leave those which are showing heads.
4.) Go to step 2.
5.) Celebrate.

Obviously the chance of getting 1,000,000,000 heads after one attempt is negligible, but once you factor in time and natural selection it becomes nigh inevitable.

Well you've surely seen that historical documentary amusingly titled 'The Flintstones?'

I want to know what animal Wilma ues to insert and remove her tampons. :D

Yes, yes, and for the last, I don't know. Mainly because I don't quite understand why you can't pick one unicellular organism, and trice a relatively linear (if a little simple) path to humans. That's evolution, and that's just about how it works.


Nuh, uh. DO you mean one individual? One species? A genus? And that's not how evolution works.

I want to know what animal Wilma ues to insert and remove her tampons. :D

:eek:
Some sort of snake, I guess...
>.>

Yes, yes, and for the last, I don't know. Mainly because I don't quite understand why you can't pick one unicellular organism, and trice a relatively linear (if a little simple) path to humans. That's evolution, and that's just about how it works.

You can. (http://www.amazon.com/Ancestors-Tale-Pilgrimage-Dawn-Evolution/dp/061861916X/sr=8-1/qid=1166380504/ref=sr_1_1/104-4980213-3867944?ie=UTF8&s=books)

I seriously recommend this book; you've asked several questions about the timing of speciations and I think you'd find it interesting. It goes back from modern human being to before animals branched off from plants.

Nuh, uh. DO you mean one individual? One species? A genus? And that's not how evolution works.

Okay, pick a species of uni organisms, please, a master of a particular field should be able to understand what a novice is trying to say. Meaning, if you are some 'knowmore-than-thou' person, then please. Go on ahead, and try to decode what I meant, but if you are actually little informed (like you think 'education' means reading your 9th grade Biology book) like I belive you are, don't try to act like I can't tell my 2's from my 3's.

You can. (http://www.amazon.com/Ancestors-Tale-Pilgrimage-Dawn-Evolution/dp/061861916X/sr=8-1/qid=1166380504/ref=sr_1_1/104-4980213-3867944?ie=UTF8&s=books)

I seriously recommend this book; you've asked several questions about the timing of speciations and I think you'd find it interesting. It goes back from modern human being to before animals branched off from plants.

I think you can, it is Cabra West that thinks you can't.

Agreeing with the religious zealot, are you feeling okay?

You know, when I first heard that the earth was round, I laughed out loud. I mean, everybody knows it's flat! Duh.

You know, when I first heard that the earth was round, I laughed out loud. I mean, everybody knows it's flat! Duh.

What?! Round??! Next you'll be telling me Santa isn't real :(

Magical: "having seemingly supernatural qualities or powers"

God: "a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship"

I realize you feel the need to be contrary, but if you're gonna use the english language, you may as well use it in such a way as not to pointlessly make an arse of yourself.

No, it's not that I feel the need to be contrary as you the all knowing have obviously declared but no I do Not consider God to be a magician or anysort of sorcerer or witch. That is what pops into my obviously so much smaller of a mind than yours of course.... :rolleyes:

If you feel the need to call it magical powers more power to you. I'm simply expressing my opinion in simplified terms. I don't feel the need to be technical on this topic since I am well aware that the anti-God and also the atheists overwhelmingly are more than believers here on NSG. I have my right to my opinions as you do for yours. I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't be vicious or unnecessarily rude in replying to my posts especially over something as my simplified post. Thanks.

I think you can, it is Cabra West that thinks you can't.

Agreeing with the religious zealot, are you feeling okay?

Obviously we can't identify every single species and every single branching off but we can trace a pretty good line from humans to single-celled organisms. There are holes in our current understanding (over four billion years one would expect a few gaps) but they're getting smaller by the day, especially with the advances made possible by the study of genetics and DNA.

I think you can, it is Cabra West that thinks you can't.

Agreeing with the religious zealot, are you feeling okay?

I never said that "you" can't, I said it's pointless to expect someone on an internet forum to list you the entire ancestry in one post.

And how is quoting this book agreeing with you? It lists said ancestry... it should answer quite a few questions for you. I just put it on my list of books to read next year.

You aren't capitalizing His personal pronouns. AGAIN. Again, you show disrespect to God.

I do not adhere to those strict principles; I do believe in the truth of the word of God, I do accept Jesus as my savior, but I do not capitalize personal pronouns which do not need to be capitalized. I am not disrespecting God by employing proper grammar -- only names, places, and the like are capitalized, not pronouns. Some people do, and I don't mind them. However, I am not as fanatically religious as they -- I live my life based on the precepts taught to us by God, and I believe that's all anyone needs to do to be a good Christian.

Pages 123654 and 654123:
"And the Lord in his primal form blew life onto earth from a passing-by comet."

"And the Lord did that in many solar systems."
"And many different forms of life appeared in many constellations around the universe."
"The spirit of the Lord grew freely everywhere."

What we are today is the worse we have in the universe, anyway thanks the Lord we strong and stone enough to be happy about it.

I know it's true, I wrote the Scriptures.

I am not disrespecting God by employing proper grammar

Yeah - actually you are.

But lie to yourself if it makes you feel better. I'm sure quite a number of devil-worshippers have done the same throughout history. Whatever floats your boat, ya know?

Yeah - actually you are.

That means you conform to a very fundamentalist interpretation of the Christian religion; I do not. I feel that one must obey the Bible and devote his life to helping and converting others to be a good Christian. I feel that it is unnecessary to capitalize personal pronouns, as that rule was not listed in the Bible but instead crafted by men who may have been wrong in their zealous attempt to glorify God. Religion is for the soul, not for the pen. If you love God with all your heart, the capitalization of pronouns doesn't matter; even an illiterate man can be wholly religious and treated by God like a son.

That means you conform to a very fundamentalist interpretation of the Christian religion; I do not. I feel that one must obey the Bible and devote his life to helping and converting others to be a good Christian. I feel that it is unnecessary to capitalize personal pronouns, as that rule was not listed in the Bible but instead crafted by men who may have been wrong in their zealous attempt to glorify God. Religion is for the soul, not for the pen. If you love God with all your heart, the capitalization of pronouns doesn't matter; even an illiterate man can be wholly religious and treated by God like a son.

FALSE
Read the Letters... It is written you should not study the Scriptures without knowledge or professionalism.
And you can not work on the Scriptures without faith.

That's where religions come to help the miscreant to understand what the Scriptures reveal to the people. And preposterous the one who believe to do it alone....

No, he most certainly did not make a mistake. However, God smites those whom he abhors because of their sinful behavior. The dinosaurs may have fallen into this category because they failed to develop any equitable social structure as the humans did, and instead became violent and immoral predators.

Okay. Please explain how, say, Diplodocus was a "violent and immoral predator." Please. I really, deeply want to hear you explain this.

It is my own hypothesis; I will seek an expert opinion on the matter. Ah, here it is!

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/2.asp

It is possible that the dinosaurs perished in the great Flood, and those taken by Noah on his Ark failed to thrive, leading to the extinction of dinosaurs. This also account for the fossils of dinosaurs embedded deeply within layers of stone.

No Answers In Genesis (http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/default.htm)
http://www.talkorigins.org/

I see your creationist website written by people without any training in biology and I raise you two websites written by people with actual educations in relevant fields.
You can't quote Answers in Genesis as an "expert opinion" on this topic, as they lack actual trained experts.

No, he most certainly did not make a mistake. However, God smites those whom he abhors because of their sinful behavior. The dinosaurs may have fallen into this category because they failed to develop any equitable social structure as the humans did, and instead became violent and immoral predators.

Dude, the dinosaurs had very little thinking capacity. The smartest dinos were Troodontidae, and they had very little intellligence compared to humans. Form an equitable social structure? All they could do was stay alive. When you go to the brain shop, next time get a working brain.

Okay. Please explain how, say, Diplodocus was a "violent and immoral predator." Please. I really, deeply want to hear you explain this.Diplodocus wasn't a predator at all.

Diplodocus wasn't a predator at all.

And somewhere a point has been made...

And somewhere a point has been made...There is only one immoral group in the Bible, you know. And it's not dinosaurs.

No, he most certainly did not make a mistake. However, God smites those whom he abhors because of their sinful behavior. The dinosaurs may have fallen into this category because they failed to develop any equitable social structure as the humans did, and instead became violent and immoral predators.
We aren't violent and immoral predators?:p

Besides, I've got a bible here that says: 'God doesn't exist', and since the Bible says ist, it must be true.

There is only one immoral group in the Bible, you know. And it's not dinosaurs.

Mmm. Yes. Of course. The Fabled Tribe of Darwinians.

Mmm. Yes. Of course. The Fabled Tribe of Darwinians.Not quite.

Not quite.

Is it the moneychangers?

There is only one immoral group in the Bible, you know. And it's not dinosaurs.

It's the donkeys.

*nods sagely*

Not quite.

Wait.... what was Mel Gibson going on and on about that one time? The British?

When did uni- and basic multi- cellular organisms turn into humans. Lacking that, when did they turn into something approaching, lets say, a fish. Lizard, or some other creature.

When stuff like that is said, usually some highly intelligent 'evilutionist' decides that a real debate is to much for his limited mind, and decides to talk about potatoes.

Yes, about one half of people are below average intelligence.

I can't decide if this is a pretty good parody, or if you are genuine.

The whole point about gradual transition is that there would be no point where you had a front-half-lizard-back-half-dog creature. And that's fine - science doesn't mind bumbling around for millions of years neither really one thing nor another.

If you need the kind of concrete transition that leaps from 'we-were-mud, now-god-breathed-us-to-life', you are never going to find it in the realms of scientific endeavour.

So brings us back to my main reason for thinking it is fundamentally lacking, when in doubt, you say the person tries to get 2000 coin flips in a row (fish jumping on land and walking lets say) by trying 100 Billion years. Yes it is technically attainable, but no one has managed to flip a coin, or seen someone flip a coin, heads 2000 times in a row. You just say that it must have happened, because if it didn't, you will have to explain one to many things to Him when you go to Heaven.

(See, I use all His personal pronouns in capitalization!) ;)

First - why do you feel the need for this instantaneous transition?

Second - It doesn't have to be heads 2000 times ina row - that's an illustration. Simply shuffle a deck of cards, and deal all the cards face up in a row - now look at that 'pattern', and work out what the 'odds' are of all the cards coming up in THAT order.

The point of the example is: statistics are irrelevent for things that already happened. The odds of it happening are: one. It did.

Evolution happens to populations, not to individuals.

Try again.

It happened to me once. I was walking along and an evolutionist turned me into a newt.


I got better.

It happened to me once. I was walking along and an evolutionist turned me into a newt.


I got better.

You mean that evolution is a disease? How dreadful. We should start looking for a cure immedeatly.

That means you conform to a very fundamentalist interpretation of the Christian religion; I do not. I feel that one must obey the Bible and devote his life to helping and converting others to be a good Christian. I feel that it is unnecessary to capitalize personal pronouns, as that rule was not listed in the Bible but instead crafted by men who may have been wrong in their zealous attempt to glorify God. Religion is for the soul, not for the pen. If you love God with all your heart, the capitalization of pronouns doesn't matter; even an illiterate man can be wholly religious and treated by God like a son.

And, we've seen how he treats his son...

You mean that evolution is a disease? How dreadful. We should start looking for a cure immedeatly.

There is one, it's called abstinence. :D

And, we've seen how he treats his son...

His son saved all of humanity, which is more than I can say for you.

There is one, it's called abstinence. :D

But that's like....boring :p

His son saved all of humanity, which is more than I can say for you.

Actually, his son condemned all of humanity. You just choose to read it in a flattering light. Or, maybe it's just a book...

How do you KNOW I haven't saved all humanity, by the way?

His son saved all of humanity, which is more than I can say for you.

http://www.booksfirst.co.uk/img/products/034A7FB8.jpg

But that's like....boring :p

Well... there's a whole book of other options too, that aren't strictly abstinence.... unless 'evolution' works out a way to get round the limits of oral or anal intercourse.. :o

Well... there's a whole book of other options too, that aren't strictly abstinence.... unless 'evolution' works out a way to get round the limits of oral or anal intercourse.. :o

Still doesn't quite seem...statisfying.

Still doesn't quite seem...statisfying.

Ah, don't believe the hype, my friend. It is entirely possible to have satisfying sexual relationships in a wide variety of ways. Don't buy into the Hollywood-esque idea that there is some right 'position' and technique.

His son saved all of humanity, which is more than I can say for you.

Well... not all of it. Only those parts of humanity that obey arbitrary rules.

Ah, don't believe the hype, my friend. It is entirely possible to have satisfying sexual relationships in a wide variety of ways. Don't buy into the Hollywood-esque idea that there is some right 'position' and technique.

Well, experience has already told me that itself, but thanks anyway :p

His son saved all of humanity, which is more than I can say for you.

I saved all of humanity and a sandwich. Eat that. Actually, don't. Then it wouldn't be saved anymore.

I saved all of humanity and a sandwich. Eat that. Actually, don't. Then it wouldn't be saved anymore.

Are you comparing yourself to Jesus by asserting that you saved a sandwich? Well, it's a start, but you can never hope to be even 1/49th of what Jesus was.

youre questioning evolution and dinosaurs? how much LSD have you been on?????????

... but you can never hope to be even 1/49th of what Jesus was.

A stoner and a jobless hippy?

Are you comparing yourself to Jesus by asserting that you saved a sandwich? Well, it's a start, but you can never hope to be even 1/49th of what Jesus was.

Nah. More like 49/1th. Yea, that's pretty achievable.

Are you comparing yourself to Jesus by asserting that you saved a sandwich? Well, it's a start, but you can never hope to be even 1/49th of what Jesus was.

I saved a sandwich and all of humanity. I don't see Jesus doing any sandwich-saving. Hence, I win.

I saved a sandwich and all of humanity. I don't see Jesus doing any sandwich-saving. Hence, I win.

*bows*

*eats sandwich*

I saved a sandwich and all of humanity. I don't see Jesus doing any sandwich-saving. Hence, I win.

You tie. Jesus fed 5000 people with a couple fish and some bread, biatch.

Assuming, of course, that's even possible....... :p

Are you comparing yourself to Jesus by asserting that you saved a sandwich? Well, it's a start, but you can never hope to be even 1/49th of what Jesus was.

Show me the verse where Jesus saved a sandwich.

Looks like he's playing catch-up...

it's like rock soup. He found someone with enough food to make 5,000 servings of soup, hit him over the head with the rock, and made the soup. Entirely possible, it's just that the story didn't quite get repeated right.

A stoner and a jobless hippy?

The "jobless hippy" could apply to me.... :p

You tie. Jesus fed 5000 people with a couple fish and some bread, biatch.

Assuming, of course, that's even possible....... :p

Actually.... one could argue that it was his buddies that did that.

Plus - if anything, that would be losing a sandwich. not saving one.

There were primordial creatures which existed, whose skeletons were found by archaeologists, that we typically consider "dinosaurs." However, they could have lived no more than 6,000 years ago, as that was when the Earth was created by God. They certainly did not inhabit the Earth millions of years ago.Jesus Christ. Why even bother replying?

lmao :p
if i could be bothered, i'd sig that :D

It's possible. Who knows though, we're talking billions of years ago. All we can do is hypothesize. Some take it into account by faith others choose science. The truth though is that neither explains it without guesses or assumptions so the big "I don't know" is a good answer.

A stoner and a jobless hippy?

You can insult me; I am accustomed to ridicule for my ideas. But don't you dare insult our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

or what?

*waits to be smitten*

*glances out window*

*taps foot*

*looks at watch*

It's possible. Who knows though, we're talking billions of years ago. All we can do is hypothesize. Some take it into account by faith others choose science. The truth though is that neither explains it without guesses or assumptions so the big "I don't know" is a good answer.

But the science is confirmed by evidence, and the assumptions/guesses involved decrease as new evidence is found. So the scientific consensus on evolution is the best answer.

Also, I have decreed it to be true, and since we established that I'm better than Jesus...;)

You can insult me; I am accustomed to ridicule for my ideas. But don't you dare insult our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

He might be yours but he isn't mine. This is a major problem in that a lot of "religious" people think that their version of "existence" applies to everyone. I'd appreciate it if you didn't include me in your "our" statement. Thank you.

You can insult me; I am accustomed to ridicule for my ideas. But don't you dare insult our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Hebrew scripture says one shouldn't have other gods before Jehovah. The guy you call 'Lord and Saviour' is just evidence of your heresy. It's a little hypocritical to accuse another of blasphemy because they don't agree with your own apostate convictions.

You can insult me; I am accustomed to ridicule for my ideas. But don't you dare insult our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

why not?

*feeds teh troll*....IT'S FUN!!!

why not?

He died for your sins, you ungrateful ********.

Edit: sorry for the flame.

You can insult me; I am accustomed to ridicule for my ideas. But don't you dare insult our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.I dare. Your alleged Lord and Savior is a fraud. The Jewish god is a fabrication, and thus there was never any need for a "messiah" (christos), and thus Yeshua (iesous) was no more than a carpenter with weird ideas and an even weirder fellowship.

He died for your sins, you ungrateful ********.
Edit: sorry for the flame.meh, he just made a show

His son saved all of humanity, which is more than I can say for you.

Give mine time. The oldest is only two. :)

He died for your sins, you ungrateful ********.

Edit: sorry for the flame.

I don't believe you.

Do you believe Harry Potter really saved us all from Voldemort, also?

Stars. Stars. Stars. Lots of stars. Galaxies. Nebulas. Lots of happy glowing stars. A hundred billion or more per galaxy. Billions of galaxies. Some of them billions of light years away.

One of the nearest is the Andromeda Galaxy. It is 2.5 million light years away. It is visible to the naked eye on a dark night in a reasonably rural area(low light pollution). It is there. Just look up. There's no refuting that it's there. It's a galaxy. It's 2.5 million light year away. That's it. That's fact. By looking at that galaxy, you are looking at an object THAT EXISTED 2.5 MILLION YEARS AGO!!! My god, how the blue bloody fuck can you refute fucking stars! I mean, come on! They're fucking STARS!

SN 1987A was a supernova that took place in 1987. It was the death... the DEATH of a star 168,000 light years away. Did you get that? The star ENDED 168,000 years ago! One would have to be nearly beaten to death with a fucking cast-iron frying pan to even begin to reach the level of brain damage necessary to pretend that we're seeing a star whose Death throes and the resulting electromagnetic maelstrom were brought into existence 162,000 light years from the smoking remains of the actual star just so it's demise would reach us in 1987. Who could worship a god that's so deceptive? How could you believe anything else He does?

Don't hold back, LG. Tell us how you really feel. :D

I don't believe you.

Do you believe Harry Potter really saved us all from Voldemort, also?

Not yet. But does it disturb anybody else that grown adults and kids are having 'wand' duels? :eek:

He died for your sins, you ungrateful ********.

Edit: sorry for the flame.
and?
sounds a bit silly to me.

I don't believe you.

Do you believe Harry Potter really saved us all from Voldemort, also?

:p

He died for your sins, you ungrateful ********.

Edit: sorry for the flame.

But I'd first have to believe he existed and was the actual son of 'God' to believe that
a. he died
b. he died for my sins
c. that it did a damn bit of good in the first place.

You can insult me; I am accustomed to ridicule for my ideas. But don't you dare insult our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

well, I appreciate your permision to call you a gormless retard.:D But it still doesn't mean that your mythological stories are true, or that I intend to allow you to make me live my life by them. They are after all, silly stories told to make children feel safe in the dark. If you still need them, fine. But me, I'm going to start a fire and cook some hot dogs.:cool:

Do you believe Harry Potter really saved us all from Voldemort, also?

are you implying that he didn't?

are you implying that he didn't?

I'm withholding judgement until I see corroboration... ;)

Don't hold back, LG. Tell us how you really feel. :D

I feel like getting a cast-iron frying pan and engraving it with the speed of light and all those other little threads in the tapestry I call, Reality and using that frying pan to beat the sense into people who patently choose the deliberate ignorance dished out in generous helpings by religious lunatics over self-discovery, knowledge and personal faith. I'm supposed to be the crazy one here. ME. It's my job! I'm the wacko, and people like this are trying to take my job away! I feel like an unemployed white guy angry because illegal immigrants are taking away all the $2 an hour under the table farming jobs that I don't really want. :mad:

Am I not crazy enough for you people anymore? :(

Stars. Stars. Stars. Lots of stars. Galaxies. Nebulas. Lots of happy glowing stars. A hundred billion or more per galaxy. Billions of galaxies. Some of them billions of light years away.

One of the nearest is the Andromeda Galaxy. It is 2.5 million light years away. It is visible to the naked eye on a dark night in a reasonably rural area(low light pollution). It is there. Just look up. There's no refuting that it's there. It's a galaxy. It's 2.5 million light year away. That's it. That's fact. By looking at that galaxy, you are looking at an object THAT EXISTED 2.5 MILLION YEARS AGO!!! My god, how the blue bloody fuck can you refute fucking stars! I mean, come on! They're fucking STARS!

SN 1987A was a supernova that took place in 1987. It was the death... the DEATH of a star 168,000 light years away. Did you get that? The star ENDED 168,000 years ago! One would have to be nearly beaten to death with a fucking cast-iron frying pan to even begin to reach the level of brain damage necessary to pretend that we're seeing a star whose Death throes and the resulting electromagnetic maelstrom were brought into existence 162,000 light years from the smoking remains of the actual star just so it's demise would reach us in 1987. Who could worship a god that's so deceptive? How could you believe anything else He does?

you might like this http://atheistdelusion.cf.huffingtonpost.com/atheistdelusion.swf :D

are you implying that he didn't?

it says so in the book!!!!!!!!1111ONE+!111

you might like this http://atheistdelusion.cf.huffingtonpost.com/atheistdelusion.swf :D

YAY! :D

you might like this http://atheistdelusion.cf.huffingtonpost.com/atheistdelusion.swf :D

And that really frames the mind-bending stupidity of Biblical literalism. I mean, it's not like the entire point of a prophet was to interpret metaphors given by God through dreams or signs. I mean, when some of the most important guys in the Bible were interpreting things given to them as prophecies it sort of suggests that maybe the Bible is meant to be interpreted rather than taken literally, since it was written by people who devoted their lives to interpreting symbols and all.

Hell, Jesus used metaphors all the time...that's the entire point behind teaching people through parables. They interpret it to, not take it literally, in order to understand it.

And that really frames the mind-bending stupidity of Biblical literalism. I mean, it's not like the entire point of a prophet was to interpret metaphors given by God through dreams or signs. I mean, when some of the most important guys in the Bible were interpreting things given to them as prophecies it sort of suggests that maybe the Bible is meant to be interpreted rather than taken literally, since it was written by people who devoted their lives to interpreting symbols and all.

Hell, Jesus used metaphors all the time...that's the entire point behind teaching people through parables. They interpret it to, not take it literally, in order to understand it.

"understand and follow the advice and teachings of the bible and the (often decidedly hippie) morality therin"

not

"follow [the bible] blindly without question or introspection"

yes?

Am I not crazy enough for you people anymore? :(

You are performing your task as forum "crazy person" quite well, and I do not seek to strip that title from you. You seem quite paranoid in the defense of your insanity, but please do not view me as an usurper. I am not trying to be more "crazy" than you, but simply to elucidate people to the word of God and perhaps save their immortal souls. I will never even match your priceless comedic value with my somber messages of morality, but I pursue a deeper purpose than the pure, undiluted hedonism which you spout.

"understand and follow the advice and teachings of the bible and the (often decidedly hippie) morality therin"

not

"follow [the bible] blindly without question or introspection"

yes?

But following things blindly is so much easier. It means I don't have to think. :)
*gets run over by a bus*

You are performing your task as forum "crazy person" quite well, and I do not seek to strip that title from you. You seem quite paranoid in the defense of your insanity, but please do not view me as an usurper. I am not trying to be more "crazy" than you, but simply to elucidate people to the word of God and perhaps save their immortal souls. I will never even match your priceless comedic value with my somber messages of morality, but I pursue a deeper purpose than the pure, undiluted hedonism which you spout.

love of mud = undiluted hedonism:confused: :confused:





;)

You are performing your task as forum "crazy person" quite well, and I do not seek to strip that title from you. You seem quite paranoid in the defense of your insanity, but please do not view me as an usurper. I am not trying to be more "crazy" than you, but simply to elucidate people to the word of God and perhaps save their immortal souls. I will never even match your priceless comedic value with my somber messages of morality, but I pursue a deeper purpose than the pure, undiluted hedonism which you spout.

"somber messages of morality" = lolz

Do you believe Harry Potter really saved us all from Voldemort, also?

Harry Potter was a fictional character in a disgusting propaganda novel which sought to indoctrinate our children with vile atheist views. The whole book is ridden with witchcraft and the occult!

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/harrypotter.html

You are performing your task as forum "crazy person" quite well, and I do not seek to strip that title from you. You seem quite paranoid in the defense of your insanity, but please do not view me as an usurper. I am not trying to be more "crazy" than you, but simply to elucidate people to the word of God and perhaps save their immortal souls. I will never even match your priceless comedic value with my somber messages of morality, but I pursue a deeper purpose than the pure, undiluted hedonism which you spout.

And that shall be your undoing. :)

Harry Potter was a fictional character in a disgusting propaganda novel which sought to indoctrinate our children with vile atheist views. The whole book is ridden with witchcraft and the occult!

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/harrypotter.html
:headbang:

Harry Potter was a fictional character in a disgusting propaganda novel which sought to indoctrinate our children with vile atheist views. The whole book is ridden with witchcraft and the occult!

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/harrypotter.html

Actually, if you've read them, the central premise is the all-conquering power of redemptive love.

Seems to me I read that in another best-seller, too...

(This wasn't a highpoint of your masquerade... you would be more 'realistic' if you used a more natural approach.)

Harry Potter was a fictional character in a disgusting propaganda novel which sought to indoctrinate our children with vile atheist views. The whole book is ridden with witchcraft and the occult!

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/harrypotter.html

Now I challenge you to find an unbiased source.

love of mud = undiluted hedonism:confused: :confused:





;)

Didn't you know? ;)

Now I challenge you to find an unbiased source.

By definition, an unbiased source will not say that Harry Potter is either bad or good, as that would be bias.

You are performing your task as forum "crazy person" quite well, and I do not seek to strip that title from you. You seem quite paranoid in the defense of your insanity, but please do not view me as an usurper. I am not trying to be more "crazy" than you, but simply to elucidate people to the word of God and perhaps save their immortal souls. I will never even match your priceless comedic value with my somber messages of morality, but I pursue a deeper purpose than the pure, undiluted hedonism which you spout.

Yesh, LG is funny because he tries to be, you're funny because you don't ;)

Okay, if not an UNBIASED source, how about a non-christian one that condemns it? (and not just a bad review, but condemns it in the way that the fundie Christian community does?)

Harry Potter was a fictional character in a disgusting propaganda novel which sought to indoctrinate our children with vile atheist views. The whole book is ridden with witchcraft and the occult!

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/harrypotter.html

good joke article :)
very amusing :D


Didn't you know? ;)
*buys some 24 carat mud for next hedonistic splurge and goes to bed an evil sinner*

night all :fluffle: (this thread amuses me)

You are performing your task as forum "crazy person" quite well, and I do not seek to strip that title from you. You seem quite paranoid in the defense of your insanity, but please do not view me as an usurper. I am not trying to be more "crazy" than you, but simply to elucidate people to the word of God and perhaps save their immortal souls. I will never even match your priceless comedic value with my somber messages of morality, but I pursue a deeper purpose than the pure, undiluted hedonism which you spout.

And I disagree! Mud can be pretty deep!

Actually, if you've read them, the central premise is the all-conquering power of redemptive love.

Really? I must have missed that part, because I was busy reading trash about how Harry Potter and his henchmen cast spells, sometimes on innocent people, to achieve their mischievous ends. Now, I realize that the book is fiction, and atheist parents should have the right to read it to their impressionable children, as we do have free speech in this country. However, it should not be found on school property.

By definition, an unbiased source will not say that Harry Potter is either bad or good, as that would be bias.
The Bible says God is good! It's biased and must be inaccurate! :p

Okay, if not an UNBIASED source, how about a non-christian one that condemns it? (and not just a bad review, but condemns it in the way that the fundie Christian community does?)

Cites it as a source of 'satanism', an entry drug to 'withcraft', and claim that it perverts our children into 'evil' lifestyles?

Whichever source you find that makes those kinds of claims, is likely to only be pretending to be non-Christian, do't you think?

Yesh, LG is funny because he tries to be, you're funny because you don't ;)

You can laugh at me all you want; I'm impervious to ridicule. We'll see who is laughing in the next life, though.

Of course.

But I'd like to see if there are people out there who are non-fundies who think that it's a message of witchcraft.

Because if it really WAS, then even moderate christians might see it that way.

Really? I must have missed that part, because I was busy reading trash about how Harry Potter and his henchmen cast spells, sometimes on innocent people, to achieve their mischievous ends. Now, I realize that the book is fiction, and atheist parents should have the right to read it to their impressionable children, as we do have free speech in this country. However, it should not be found on school property.

Henchmen?

It doesn't sound like you have actually read the books at all, my friend.

I realise the Bible is fiction, and 'christian' parents should have the right to read it to their impressionable children. However, it should not be found on school property.

The Bible says God is good! It's biased and must be inaccurate! :p

Well, now that you mention it . . .

You can laugh at me all you want; I'm impervious to ridicule. We'll see who is laughing in the next life, though.

And, if it is the Muslims?

You can laugh at me all you want; I'm impervious to ridicule. We'll see who is laughing in the next life, though.

If you can't laugh in this one, you won't in the next, ace.

Okay, if not an UNBIASED source, how about a non-christian one that condemns it? (and not just a bad review, but condemns it in the way that the fundie Christian community does?)

Here's another source. However, I doubt that atheists will have a problem with a book that slanders religion.

http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/Harry&Witchcraft.htm

You can laugh at me all you want; I'm impervious to ridicule. We'll see who is laughing in the next life, though.

*snicker* Why would I want to wait to laugh in a next life when I can have a terribly good laugh now?

The Bible says God is good! It's biased and must be inaccurate! :P

Great logical deduction :D

Henchmen?

They committed transgressions not only of school rules, but of "wizarding law." They are criminals. As such, his "associates" or "colleagues" can be referred to as "henchmen."

You can laugh at me all you want; I'm impervious to ridicule. We'll see who is laughing in the next life, though.

And as you enter those pearly gates and get doused with several dozen gallons of oatmeal, you will realize the truth: All clowns go to Heaven(we're like dogs that way). :D

By definition, an unbiased source will not say that Harry Potter is either bad or good, as that would be bias.

you might want to look up that word sometime

Here's another source. However, I doubt that atheists will have a problem with a book that slanders religion.

http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/Harry&Witchcraft.htm

Let us read the first lines on this unbiased site?

"Note: We are not trying to ban Harry Potter books. Our aim is to answer questions from concerned parents and help them understand the books from a Biblical perspective. "

Nope - looks like you fail.

They committed transgressions not only of school rules, but of "wizarding law." They are criminals. As such, his "associates" or "colleagues" can be referred to as "henchmen."

If you are going to try to throw some kind of legalistic definition into the mix, it might be worth pointing out one can only truly use the phrase 'henchmen' for mounted men... etymologically speaking.

But, the more important point would be that Potter doesn't 'lead' anyone, criminals or otherwise - thus, the common usage of 'henchman' would be inappropriate.

I still say, it just looks like you haven't actually read the books. So - which site are you pulling your alleged 'opinion' from, I wonder?

Just me, or did we...digress from the topic at hand? :p

But, the more important point would be that Potter doesn't 'lead' anyone, criminals or otherwise - thus, the common usage of 'henchman' would be inappropriate.

Potter is certainly the leader of his gang. In fact, in one book, he forms an extralegal "club" against school rules in which he teaches a multitude of miscreants how to use dangerous spells (against school rules, again). I have read the books, for your information. I recognize the insidious propaganda message contained within, and I do not allow it to deflect me from my devotion to the Lord.

Waitaminute... I noticed this quote on the anti-Potter websites,

"There shall not be found among you anyone who... practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. For all who do these things are an abomination to the Lord..." Deuteronomy 18:9-12

Jesus is an abomination! :eek:

against school rules? *gasp*

Do you honestly mean to tell me that you have never ONCE sinned in your life?

Besides, if you really read the books with a less biased perspective going into them, you'd realize that it's the RIGHT thing for them to do, because Umbridge and the Ministry of Magic are refusing to believe the truth about Voldemort's return and are trying to fool the rest of the wizarding world into believing that too.

And isn't God all about truth, or something?

Just me, or did we...digress from the topic at hand? :p

Did Harry Potter come from unicellular organisms? Inquiring minds want to know~!

Did Harry Potter come from unicellular organisms? Inquiring minds want to know~!

Considering he had parents, I'd say he came from multicellular organisms.

yes. we did come from Unicellural Organisms. Unless of course you think that we we're the same size at conception, as we are a birth.

Considering he had parents, I'd say he came from multicellular organisms.

Who's to say that his parents really weren't GIANT AMOEBAS?!

Just me, or did we...digress from the topic at hand? :p

What topic? :confused:

Who's to say that his parents really weren't GIANT AMOEBAS?!

It's not written in the Holy Harry Potter scriptures and therefore it is untrue. :p

The universe came into existence because God made it. However, he did not employ magic to do it, nor is he "magical."

The first time I heard this absurd statement was during the first day of my 6th grade, and I laughed out loud, thinking it was a joke. Sadly, it turns out that many people do believe such a ridiculous notion.

Who's to say that his parents really weren't GIANT AMOEBAS?!
Harry Potter was conceived by the midi-chlorians.

Who's to say that his parents really weren't GIANT AMOEBAS?!

Giant Space Amoebas@! That explains EVERYTHING!!!1@1

Potter is certainly the leader of his gang. In fact, in one book, he forms an extralegal "club" against school rules in which he teaches a multitude of miscreants how to use dangerous spells (against school rules, again). I have read the books, for your information. I recognize the insidious propaganda message contained within, and I do not allow it to deflect me from my devotion to the Lord.

I have read the Bible, for your information. I recognise the insidious propaganda message contained within, and I do not allow it to deflect me from placing only as much faith in a thing, as I can find evidence to support.

I've seen no evidence that you have even read the Potter books, let alone thought about the real issues present in the texts. Indeed - there is a depth of literary criticism that not everyone is capable of fully embracing - which I am certainly not going to accept is true in your case, without better evidence.


The point is - there is at least as much evidence that Harry Potter saved us all from Voldemort, as their is that this Jesus bloke performed some miraculous act of self-sacrifice. That is - there is none, except references in a book.

Harry Potter was conceived by the midi-chlorians.

Star Wars references :rolleyes:

It's not written in the Holy Harry Potter scriptures and therefore it is untrue. :p

But those are just a metaphor . . .

By the way, just what is a "meta" for?

The first time I heard this absurd statement was during the first day of my 6th grade, and I laughed out loud, thinking it was a joke. Sadly, it turns out that many people do believe such a ridiculous notion.

Outstanding use of the OP's argument against itself! /salute!

God has created everything in the universe. To see the size, complexity, and perfection of everything and every system on the planet and in the universe and to claim otherwise is wishful thinking. So perhaps we came from unicellular lifeforms but that begs the question, where did that spark of life come from.

God has created everything in the universe. To see the size, complexity, and perfection of everything and every system on the planet and in the universe and to claim otherwise is wishful thinking. So perhaps we came from unicellular lifeforms but that begs the question, where did that spark of life come from.

The Illumnati. :rolleyes:

God has created everything in the universe. To see the size, complexity, and perfection of everything and every system on the planet and in the universe and to claim otherwise is wishful thinking. So perhaps we came from unicellular lifeforms but that begs the question, where did that spark of life come from.

Where did the spark of your god come from? At least I can form a theory as to how life began from complex organic chemistry.

God has created everything in the universe. To see the size, complexity, and perfection of everything and every system on the planet and in the universe and to claim otherwise is wishful thinking. So perhaps we came from unicellular lifeforms but that begs the question, where did that spark of life come from.

Salaam

God has created everything in the universe. To see the size, complexity, and perfection of everything and every system on the planet and in the universe and to claim otherwise is wishful thinking. So perhaps we came from unicellular lifeforms but that begs the question, where did that spark of life come from.

If I pour sand from one point to another, it forms a cone. If I pour enough, it makes a big cone.

That is a perfectly regular three-dimensional form. ANd yet, it's surface is entirely random, since it is formed by the dropping of sand grains.

Thus - it is perfect in from, yet utterly irregular. Irregularity makes it complex. Thus, my entirely random pouring of sand creates an almost infinitely complex, perfect form - with NO planning or design.

To find design ONLY because you cannot conceive how pattern could happen without, is to find only what you set out to look for.

You place your result before your investigation. You claim "It is", therefore you think it. Descartes, before his horses.

God has created everything in the universe. To see the size, complexity, and perfection of everything and every system on the planet and in the universe and to claim otherwise is wishful thinking. So perhaps we came from unicellular lifeforms but that begs the question, where did that spark of life come from.

LOL.

Where did the spark of your god come from? At least I can form a theory as to how life began from complex organic chemistry.

Allah has always been and always will be. He is self-sustaining and has no limitations. He is all knowing and ever merciful.

Allah has always been and always will be. He is self-sustaining and has no limitations. He is all knowing and ever merciful.

And, in his infinite mercy, he gave humans the worst spine in the universe.

Salaam

alikum salaam

Allah has always been and always will be. He is self-sustaining and has no limitations. He is all knowing and ever merciful.

Why? If your supposed creator does not need a creator, why do you think life needs one?

Star Wars references :rolleyes:
http://www.thejawa.com/customs/reference/e4/motti/motti2.JPG
I find your lack of faith disturbing.

And, in his infinite mercy, he gave humans the worst spine in the universe.

what?

http://www.thejawa.com/customs/reference/e4/motti/motti2.JPG
I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Feed me pie and my faith will grow :p

Why? If your supposed creator does not need a creator, why do you think life needs one?

because matter or energy(especially something as complex as life) in this universe can not simply appear from nowhere, it needs a creator.

because matter or energy(especially something as complex as life) in this universe can not simply appear from nowhere, it needs a creator.

Things that appear complex are often in fact guided by simple rules.

Take a paper plane for example. The design is pretty simple.. but its path through the air can be crazy and complicated, loop the loops , and twirls.

Things that appear simple are often in fact guided by complex rules.

Take a plane for example it goes up.. travels to its destination.. and goes down. Its path is pretty simple. To achieve it takes a very large set of redundant equipment, navgation and a complex pilot.

Just because the universe looks awfully complex doesn't mean that it isn't guided by simple rules.

Evolution seems awfully complex... but the premise is fairly simple.

Oh and in answer to the original OP (I am guessing that by page 30 this has already been said but) yes every single one of us was at one point a unicellular organism, called a zygote. (yes when egg and sperm meet they form a single celled organism) Though admittedly it was only for a brief instant.. before we became a dualcelled organism, and then a quadcelled organism.. etc etc

So it is absolutely true that we come from unicellular organisms.. I assume you mean via a long path of evolutionary change.. but still..

why can it not simply appear from nowhere?

because matter or energy(especially something as complex as life) in this universe can not simply appear from nowhere, it needs a creator.

Why does it need a creator? :p

LOL.

what system isn't perfect?

alikum salaam

Genoa Salami. :)

because matter or energy(especially something as complex as life) in this universe can not simply appear from nowhere, it needs a creator.

Why? Matter and energy are fundamentally the same thing, and cannot be created or destroyed. If your god is eternal, why can't matter and energy be?

http://www.thejawa.com/customs/reference/e4/motti/motti2.JPG
I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Woot! Great post, Hami!

Genoa Salami. :)

I fancy a good ham myself. :)

because matter or energy(especially something as complex as life) in this universe can not simply appear from nowhere, it needs a creator.

How many damn times do we have to tell you that that is patently false, and that matter and energy do spontaneously appear from nothing?

because matter or energy(especially something as complex as life) in this universe can not simply appear from nowhere, it needs a creator.

why?

why do you feel a need to attribute what you can see and feel to....ghosts, hokus pokus?

If I pour sand from one point to another, it forms a cone. If I pour enough, it makes a big cone.

That is a perfectly regular three-dimensional form. ANd yet, it's surface is entirely random, since it is formed by the dropping of sand grains.

Thus - it is perfect in from, yet utterly irregular. Irregularity makes it complex. Thus, my entirely random pouring of sand creates an almost infinitely complex, perfect form - with NO planning or design.

To find design ONLY because you cannot conceive how pattern could happen without, is to find only what you set out to look for.

You place your result before your investigation. You claim "It is", therefore you think it. Descartes, before his horses.

lol. your comparing a pile of sand to the complexity of say DNA. its apples and oranges.

what system isn't perfect?

The human spine.
The human eye.
Human males having testicles outside their body.

Why does it need a creator? :p

Basic physics: The Laws of Conservation. Matter and energy must always exist. If that's true, then where did the ultradense surprise present that began the Big Bang come from?

lol. your comparing a pile of sand to the complexity of say DNA. its apples and oranges.

DNA isn't particularly complex, which you'd know if you ever bothered to read a biology textbook.

Basic physics: The Laws of Conservation. Matter and energy must always exist. If that's true, then where did the ultradense surprise present that began the Big Bang come from?

That's what I've been dying to know ever since I heard of the Big Bang. If you find out, will you tell me?

Because so far I seem to be running in circles. Literally. :p

Why? Matter and energy are fundamentally the same thing, and cannot be created or destroyed. If your god is eternal, why can't matter and energy be?

right, which is why such things can not be without the will of Allah.

Feed me pie and my faith will grow :p
Wanna buy some death sticks?
Woot! Great post, Hami!
http://thousandrobots.com/blog/files/palpatine_02.jpg

Now you see the true power of the Dark Side!

Okay, maybe I should quit now while I'm ahead.

right, which is why such things can not be without the will of Allah.

Gotta love circular logic.

Basic physics: The Laws of Conservation. Matter and energy must always exist. If that's true, then where did the ultradense surprise present that began the Big Bang come from?

The Big Crunch of the universe before this one, perhaps. The universe may be an eternal cycle of big bangs and big crunches, with neither a beginning nor an end. Time is simply a measure of change.

because matter or energy(especially something as complex as life) in this universe can not simply appear from nowhere, it needs a creator.

Bullshit. Matter and energy spontaneously appear and disappear all the time. Show us the same courtesy as we show you. We don't opine on the koran without reading it, so pllease read some science books before opining on the state of the universe.

right, which is why such things can not be without the will of Allah.

Huh? What's the difference between your god existing without creation and matter or energy existing without creation? Seriously. Look at yourself objectively. You're talking shite.

Wanna buy some death sticks?

*mumbles* You want to go home and rethink your life.

http://thousandrobots.com/blog/files/palpatine_02.jpg

Now you see the true power of the Dark Side!

Okay, maybe I should quit now while I'm ahead.

Maybe you should. I'm having fun though :D

I fancy a good ham myself. :)

I'll take blessed chicken or beef, thanks.;)

I'll take blessed chicken or beef, thanks.;)

Plucked?

I'll take blessed chicken or beef, thanks.;)

Where do you get your hallal meat anway?

I fancy a good ham myself. :)
<.<

>.>

So long, all. I might call NSG a day for this morning. I want to go home and rethink my life, anyway.

That's what I've been dying to know ever since I heard of the Big Bang. If you find out, will you tell me?

Because so far I seem to be running in circles. Literally. :p

You're in good company. The question, "What caused the first effect?" was the first stepping stone for me from agnosticism back to faith. But that's me. I find my own truth. As nutty as I am, I am not so nutty as to presume that my faith is fact, and I'm not deluded enough to believe a collection of 2000 year old myths, fables and third-hand retellings that have been translated and retranslated by kings, clergy and others seeking to consolidate their own power is the Absolute Truth. :p

The Big Crunch of the universe before this one, perhaps. The universe may be an eternal cycle of big bangs and big crunches, with neither a beginning nor an end. Time is simply a measure of change.

How did the cycle start?

It just did.

Duh :D

How did the cycle start?

God farted.

You're in good company. The question, "What caused the first effect?" was the first stepping stone for me from agnosticism back to faith. But that's me. I find my own truth. As nutty as I am, I am not so nutty as to presume that my faith is fact, and I'm not deluded enough to believe a collection of 2000 year old myths, fables and third-hand retellings that have been translated and retranslated by kings, clergy and others seeking to consolidate their own power is the Absolute Truth. :p

I guess I'll know when I die in some cataclysmic cosmic event. Along with everyone else. It will be messy. And muddy. And deluding.

Speaking of which, what level of delusion are you on? I'm currently at 42. They don't appear to have toilets here though. Should I try 41?

God farted.

We owe our existence to a spicy burrito. :)

I guess I'll know when I die in some cataclysmic cosmic event. Along with everyone else. It will be messy. And muddy. And deluding.

Speaking of which, what level of delusion are you on? I'm currently at 42. They don't appear to have toilets here though. Should I try 41?

Like me, my delusions defy labels. :)

I'll take blessed chicken or beef, thanks.;)

Um, I ordered the vegetarian. . .

Like me, my delusions defy labels. :)

:eek:

In that case...

You're in good company. The question, "What caused the first effect?" was the first stepping stone for me from agnosticism back to faith. But that's me. I find my own truth. As nutty as I am, I am not so nutty as to presume that my faith is fact, and I'm not deluded enough to believe a collection of 2000 year old myths, fables and third-hand retellings that have been translated and retranslated by kings, clergy and others seeking to consolidate their own power is the Absolute Truth. :p

Nice summation! :)
Not very funny tho . . .

Where do you get your hallal meat anway?

Different shops or dining places around town. There's even a Halal pizza place near the Mosque that I go to every once in awhile after prayer. In pinch any meat except pork that has been blessed by a jew or christian is ok. which basically means no chinese food or anything like that.

Different shops or dining places around town. There's even a Halal pizza place near the Mosque that I go to every once in awhile after prayer. In pinch any meat except pork that has been blessed by a jew or christian is ok. which basically means no chinese food or anything like that.

Could you eat kosher chinese?

Bullshit. Matter and energy spontaneously appear and disappear all the time. Show us the same courtesy as we show you. We don't opine on the koran without reading it, so pllease read some science books before opining on the state of the universe.

Huh? What's the difference between your god existing without creation and matter or energy existing without creation? Seriously. Look at yourself objectively. You're talking shite.

this idea of matter or energy randomly appearing is based on at best very shaky science and last for far less than a second. yet the secularists hold this up as to why they can deny Allah. I find this kind of sad.

Could you eat kosher chinese?

they have that? :eek:

*finally stops laughing*

Thanks to everyone that's participated in this thread. It's been the funniest thing I've read all year. *snickers* Unfortunately I feel that I have to add my two cents to it, so bear in mind as I rant.

To the OP: In all seriousness. I'm an atheist. Hell, my nation resides in the region called Atheist Empire. My point is that, if you're trying to convince me that your way of thinking is correct, you're going to have to do a hell of a lot more than point at the bible and say it's true. I've already established that I don't believe in it, so offering it as a legit' source of proof affects me none. While I am deeply impressed that you offered evidence other than the bible (which is a lot more than any other creationist I've ever heard of has done), I'm inclined to believe that these sites are blatantly biased. Propaganda works both ways you know. (Harry Potter... propaganda... ha!) While I admit that many of the people in this thread haven't offered as much proof as you have for their own side of the story (LG and Pure Metal being surprising exceptions), that doesn't mean the theory behind it is dismissible. I'm an engineer. I've studied physics. Extensively. Your defense against not being able to measure stars distance from the earth was laughable. High school students can do that nowadays! Hell, we can get the mass of said stars just as easily! Ever look into quantum physics? One of my favorite college teachers had this to say about the beginning of everything: "In the beginning, there was nothing. And then it exploded." We came from a singularity! (For the folk smart enough to see where I'm going with this, bear with me) A singularity! Life, everything, spawned from an point that is literally a billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a billionth smaller than an electron! Now, can you see why atheists/scientists/physicists/agnostics/biologists/statisticians can believe in something as simple as evolution from a single-celled organism? As many people have mentioned already, we can study evolution happening in labs with fruit flies and bacteria and viruses! No, we weren't back there in time watching it happen, but we can damn well prove that it was happening! [/rant]

Whew! Talk about beating around the bush to make a point! Ah well.

And of course, we all know that LG is god. He's just messing with our minds.

this idea of matter or energy randomly appearing is based on at best very shaky science and last for far less than a second. yet the secularists hold this up as to why they can deny Allah. I find this kind of sad.

Well, you have obviously failed to read up on this, as it lasts for far more than a second, and is not based on shaky science at all.

So, now I'm going to assert that the Qu'ran claims that Allah is a giant chicken, which is about comparable to what you are doing here.

they have that? :eek:

Well, duh! Have you never seen "My Favourite Year"?

God has created everything in the universe. To see the size, complexity, and perfection of everything and every system on the planet and in the universe and to claim otherwise is wishful thinking. So perhaps we came from unicellular lifeforms but that begs the question, where did that spark of life come from.

Chemical reactions.

Well, you have obviously failed to read up on this, as it lasts for far more than a second, and is not based on shaky science at all.



proof?

proof?

It's based on physics, and the only way for the matter to disappear is if it comes into contact with antimatter, which is quite possible, as antimatter appears at the same time, but not certain.

Give me a minute, because Google is being a jerk and tossing up things that don't include my search terms.

Nice summation! :)
Not very funny tho . . .

The revelation came to me after a groin kick. :p

they have that? :eek:

Yeah. There is one in my neighborhood. I'm ashamed to say I eat there once in a while because I actually have the odd craving for sweet and sour veal.

I know, it's sick, but what are you going to do.

And of course, we all know that LG is god. He's just messing with our minds.

Everybody has to have a hobby. :)

That means you conform to a very fundamentalist interpretation of the Christian religion; I do not. I feel that one must obey the Bible and devote his life to helping and converting others to be a good Christian.

Well, everyone around here knows I'm more fundamentally Christian than the likes of you.

But you don't feel one must obey the Bible. You feel you must obey your interpretation of it. And your interpretation is wrong - all the more wrong for you claiming that what you do is justified by God Himself. And look at this thread! What do we see? Nothing but insults, arrogance, absolute pride. You don't care what God says. You care what you say.

Rather than trying to prove how everyone else who doesn't share your biased, literalist interpretation is wrong and stupid (and failing, at that), why don't you go ACTUALLY out into the REAL world and DO something Christian. Help people. Give aid and succor and comfort to those in need.

Because the only thing you're accomplishing with this charade is the same thing I accomplish by calling you names -some meager, momentary and selfish satisfaction. Nothing else. Nothing else at all.

Religion is for the soul, not for the pen.

Right. So go out and BE Christian. Stop trying to convince other people, with your keyboard, how superior your interpretation of the Book is. You only alienate yourself, your viewpoint. Religion may be for the soul indeed - not a political forum on teh interwebs.

this idea of matter or energy randomly appearing is based on at best very shaky science and last for far less than a second. yet the secularists hold this up as to why they can deny Allah. I find this kind of sad.

It's not shaky science. Read a brief history of time. It explains why black holes can 'evaporate' because of this very phenomenon.

There are various forms of science which we can safely put our faith in -- these have to do with readily observable phenomena. However, once you claim we randomly evolved from an organism which first existed over a billion years ago, you've got to be pulling all these "facts" out of your ass. No one was alive billions of years ago to know this.

There is no place for faith in science, except for the scientist working on experiments of dubious results, but if it is proven there is again, no need for faith.

Your defense against not being able to measure stars distance from the earth was laughable. High school students can do that nowadays! Hell, we can get the mass of said stars just as easily!

Correction: high school students can incorrectly measure the distance of stars from the Earth. They have no way of correctly computing that measurement, since the speed of life may not necessarily be constant under all conditions and because the velocity of the stars is not known. And, anyway, we don't have some giant scales with which to weigh the stars, so we have no clue as to how massive they are, except for seriously flawed assumptions based on seriously flawed assumptions of their size. We not only do not know how big they are, but we don't know how far away they are nor how massive they are. We know nothing at all about them. We don't even know whether or not they are hot or cold.

It's not shaky science. Read a brief history of time. It explains why black holes can 'evaporate' because of this very phenomenon.

Black holes don't exist. Just because some guy who can't even talk says that they exist doesn't make it the indisputable truth. Have we ever seen a black hole? No, of course not. The anomalies which we classify "black holes" because science cannot account for their existence are actually the Hand of God.

It's not shaky science. Read a brief history of time. It explains why black holes can 'evaporate' because of this very phenomenon.

First of all, Hawking Radiation is a LOOOOONG way from solid ground. But assuming the theory is correct, it is NOT spontaneously produced. Despite the name, 'virtual particles' and the resulting thermal effect, there is still an equal and opposite reduction of mass due to the evaporation of the black hole. The Law of Conservation is still preserved.

Black holes don't exist. Just because some guy who can't even talk says that they exist doesn't make it the indisputable truth. Have we ever seen a black hole? No, of course not. The anomalies which we classify "black holes" because science cannot account for their existence are actually the Hand of God.

Ah hahahahahaaha! Say something else! You're so damned funny! I have been calling people in from my neighborhood to read your posts! My wife and best friend are keep looking over my shoulder to see if you've posted anything else that they can laugh about!

PLEASE SAY SOMETHING ELSE! You're better than Larry Black!













Well, maybe not. But your are funny!:D

First of all, Hawking Radiation is a LOOOOONG way from solid ground. But assuming the theory is correct, it is NOT spontaneously produced. Despite the name, 'virtual particles' and the resulting thermal effect, there is still an equal and opposite reduction of mass due to the evaporation of the black hole. The Law of Conservation is still preserved.

why would the law of conservation necessarily have anything to do with the creation of the universe?

And, anyway, we don't have some giant scales with which to weigh the stars, so we have no clue as to how massive they are, except for seriously flawed assumptions based on seriously flawed assumptions of their size.

Whoopsies! High school physics coming back to anyone?

Force of Gravity is equal to the gravitational constant multiplied by: (the mass of the first object times the mass of the second object) divided by the radius or distance between the two squared. Or Fg = G(Mm/r^2). Now, Force centripical is equal to the mass times the velocity squared divided by the radius. Or Fc = mV^2/r. To keep an object in orbit, the force centripical must be equal to the force of gravity, lest the object in orbit get flung away or spin inevitably into the mass the object is in orbit around. So G(Mm/r^2) = mV^2/r. You'll notice one of the masses will cancel out. (the little m) That mass is the object in orbit. If one knows the velocity and radius of the objects, it is a simple matter to find the mass of the object that is being orbited. Thus, we can find the mass of stars (and black holes and planets and galaxies ect) through what is in orbit around them within a small range of error (since we can assume nothing is in a perfect orbit).

You fail. Out of curiosity, have you even taken a physics class yet? This is really quite simple to prove. There are no "flawed assumptions", as you put it.

First of all, Hawking Radiation is a LOOOOONG way from solid ground. But assuming the theory is correct, it is NOT spontaneously produced. Despite the name, 'virtual particles' and the resulting thermal effect, there is still an equal and opposite reduction of mass due to the evaporation of the black hole. The Law of Conservation is still preserved.

I'm not arguing the mass/energy balance of a black hole. I'm simply suggesting that Hawking radiation militates for the existence of virtual particle pairs. Which are the spontaneous generation of matter and energy.

And add one to a false vacuum, and you'll get all the matter and energy you want. (I think. To be honest, I'm a structural engineer, so it's a long time since I had to think about this).

Basic physics: The Laws of Conservation. Matter and energy must always exist.

Once again, why must the laws of thermaldynamics necessarily have anything to do with the creation of the universe?