+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 20

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    The self-styled *scientists* who rejoice in themselves and their own profound enlightenment every time they mock anyone challenging anthropogenic global warming, or Darwinism, or even for that matter, God, make outrageous, unreasonable demands without even recognizing they do it.

    Time and time again, these not-so-gentle folk DEMAND an "I.D. theory".

    How can we know the mind of God?
    How is that possible? What are His mechanics? It seems to me that God set things into motion, created the universe and the earth and animal life in abundance, and DNA offers up small but significant changes.

    Nobody is suggesting that we abandon science, as is so often claimed.

    Let's look at the other side of the coin.

    Who knows all things naturalistic?
    If you can't explain why masses attract with exquisite precision, does that imply that there is no gravity?

    If you can't explain why electrons are both particles and waves, does that mean there are no electrons?

    Those who incessantly and arrogantly attack "I.D.ers" use the most foolish arguments imaginable. They do it so often, they don't even realize what they are saying. It's mere regurgitation.

    Reality does not cease to exist merely because one does not know and cannot explain how God constructed atoms, or the universe, or human beings.

    But as we delve further and further into an understanding of all things, we see the horizon just keeps receding from us.
    This is not what one would, or should expect from a universe that made itself.

    "For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries"
    - Robert Jastrow
    "As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, but that America gave him the White House based on the same credentials." - Newt Gingrich

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Let me turn this around. (My edits in red.)

    Outrageous Demands by *Fundamental Thiests*

    The self-styled *Thiest* who rejoice in themselves and their own profound enlightenment every time they mock anyone challenging a self-centered view of the world, or Bible literalism, or even for that matter, God, make outrageous, unreasonable demands without even recognizing they do it.

    Time and time again, these not-so-gentle folk DEMAND an Evolutionary law. (BTW The Theory of Intelligent Design http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design)

    How can we know the mind of God?
    How is that possible? What are His mechanics? It seems to me that God set things into motion, created the universe and the earth and animal life in abundance, and DNA offers up small but significant changes.

    Nobody is suggesting that we abandon God, as is so often claimed.

    Let's look at the other side of the coin.

    Who knows all things naturalistic?
    If you can't explain why masses attract with exquisite precision, does that imply that there is no gravity?

    If you can't explain why electrons are both particles and waves, does that mean there are no electrons?

    Those who incessantly and arrogantly attack "Evolution understanders" use the most foolish arguments imaginable. They do it so often, they don't even realize what they are saying. It's mere regurgitation. (Answers in genisis, Ray comfort, PCS, Eric and Kent Hovind)

    Reality does not cease to exist merely because one does not know and cannot explain how God constructed atoms, or the universe, or human beings.

    But as we delve further and further into an understanding of all things, we see the horizon just keeps receding from us.
    This is what we’d expect if God created an infinite universe.

    "For the Thiest who has lived by his reason in the literal interpretation of the bible, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of understanding people who have been sitting there for centuries"
    - Me misquoting Robert Jastrow


    I really had to make very few edits.


    http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20070706


    I will Stop arguing with you if you can provide an argument for why my version of GOD doesn't exist, that can't also be used to disprove the existence of your version of God.

    So zero do you know the mind of god. Are you the next prophet? Or might it be possible that God is much smarter than you think he is. That perhaps God created a forever changing and adapting universe full of mysteries for humanity. Or do you contend that God had all the imagination and intelligence of the genie in Aldin.
    Last edited by Spector567; 08-22-2009 at 03:15 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    And now, recent revelations have uncovered the blatant bias, lies, and misrepresentations by leftists hell-bent on controlling everyone on earth by pronouncing that anthropogenic global warming will kill us all and destroy mother gaia.

    Except for the fact that they lie and spin and deceive. And then call it "science."
    "As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, but that America gave him the White House based on the same credentials." - Newt Gingrich

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,081

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Quote Originally Posted by BarackZero View Post
    How can we know the mind of God?
    How is that possible? What are His mechanics? It seems to me that God set things into motion, created the universe and the earth and animal life in abundance, and DNA offers up small but significant changes.

    Nobody is suggesting that we abandon science, as is so often claimed.
    Anyone see the the hypocrisy there?

    Let's look at the other side of the coin.

    Who knows all things naturalistic?
    If you can't explain why masses attract with exquisite precision, does that imply that there is no gravity?

    If you can't explain why electrons are both particles and waves, does that mean there are no electrons?

    Those who incessantly and arrogantly attack "I.D.ers" use the most foolish arguments imaginable. They do it so often, they don't even realize what they are saying. It's mere regurgitation.

    Reality does not cease to exist merely because one does not know and cannot explain how God constructed atoms, or the universe, or human beings.

    But as we delve further and further into an understanding of all things, we see the horizon just keeps receding from us.
    This is not what one would, or should expect from a universe that made itself.

    "For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries"
    - Robert Jastrow
    You'd have a better point if there weren't already widely accepted explanations regarding the origins of things from a completely atheistic standpoint. You have yet to actually make a valid case against Evolution, or at least one that doesn't fall apart under minor scrutiny.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    Let me turn this around. (My edits in red.)

    Outrageous Demands by *Fundamental Thiests*

    The self-styled *Thiest* (sic)

    self-centered view of the world, or Bible literalism, or even for that matter, God, make outrageous, unreasonable demands without even recognizing they do it.
    1. I have never made any "outrageous, unreasonable demand." Ever.


    Time and time again, these not-so-gentle folk DEMAND an Evolutionary law.
    2. I have never "DEMANDED an Evolutionary (sic) law". Nor do I know anyone who has.

    Nobody is suggesting that we abandon God, as is so often claimed.
    Of COURSE not. You merely pretend that Christians are "fundies" who believe in a "literal translation of the Bible" and "DEMAND an Evolutionary law" when all those contentions you make are blatant lies.




    Those who incessantly and arrogantly attack "Evolution understanders" use the most foolish arguments imaginable. They do it so often, they don't even realize what they are saying. It's mere regurgitation. (Answers in genisis, (SIC) Ray comfort, PCS, Eric and Kent Hovind)
    3. I understand evolution perfectly.
    Your contention to the contrary is merely another of your many Big Lies.
    4. Were I to posit "the most foolish arguments imaginable," you could certainly quote a few of them. This you cannot do.
    5. Learn how to spell. It is far simpler to spell words such as Genesis than it is to debate. After you have learned how to spell, you can move up from there.
    Maybe.




    of understanding people who have been sitting there for centuries"
    - Me misquoting Robert Jastrow

    You are not "understanding" by any means. You merely continue to pat yourself on the back as if you were one of the Anointed Class.

    Oh wait, you are. At least in your own mind.
    "As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, but that America gave him the White House based on the same credentials." - Newt Gingrich

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Yet another Parody. Only this time BZ is responding to his orignal post. Yet again I had to edit very little.
    If you wish to respond BZ you’d do well to remember 2 things.
    1 This is a parody not my own words but in fact yours with just a few nouns changed. I said so in big bold multi-coloured letters before.

    2 Any quoted response is in essence arguing with a parody of yourself. So in essence you just finished arguing with a yourself.
    Continue to argue with yourself if you'd like.

    The self-styled *scientists* who rejoice in themselves and their own profound enlightenment every time they mock anyone challenging anthropogenic global warming, or Darwinism, or even for that matter, God, make outrageous, unreasonable demands without even recognizing they do it.
    Scientists have never made any "outrageous, unreasonable demand." Ever.
    Time and time again, these not-so-gentle folk DEMAND an "I.D. theory".
    1. Scientists have never made any "outrageous, unreasonable demand." Ever.
    (Barrack has however, everytime he insisted that evolutionary theory cover all aspects and must be thrown out if it doesn’t even if there is no responable alternative.)

    Nobody is suggesting that we abandon science, as is so often claimed.
    Of COURSE not. You merely pretend that Scientists are godless leftists and are not christian themselves who believe in "nothing" when all those contentions you make are blatant lies.


    Those who incessantly and arrogantly attack "I.D.ers" use the most foolish arguments imaginable. They do it so often, they don't even realize what they are saying. It's mere regurgitation.
    3. Scientists understand Evolution perfectly.
    Your contention to the contrary is merely another of your many Big Lies.
    4. Were I to posit "the most foolish arguments imaginable," you could certainly quote every single quote mined thread and character assault on random people as if affects a scientific theory. This I don't have room to do.
    5. Learn how to argue a point. It is far simpler to have a point than to painstackingly quote mine. After you have learned answer points that disagree with you and not mearly ignore them or check spelling, you can move up from there.
    Maybe.


    "For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries"
    - Robert Jastrow
    You are not "understanding" by any means. You merely continue to pat yourself on the back as if you were one of the Anointed Class.

    Oh wait, you are. At least in your own mind. (no edits needed here)


    Last edited by Spector567; 01-01-2010 at 12:18 PM.

  7. #7
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    ZERO,

    This is your ID Theory. Not much science, just the desire to push a religious agenda on the general public.

    THE WEDGE STRATEGY
    CENTER FOR THE RENEWAL OF SCIENCE & CULTURE
    INTRODUCTION

    The proposition that human beings are created in the image of God is one of the bedrock principles on which Western civilization was built. Its influence can be detected in most, if not all, of the West's greatest achievements, including representative democracy, human rights, free enterprise, and progress in the arts and sciences.

    Yet a little over a century ago, this cardinal idea came under wholesale attack by intellectuals drawing on the discoveries of modern science. Debunking the traditional conceptions of both God and man, thinkers such as Charles Darwin, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud portrayed humans not as moral and spiritual beings, but as animals or machines who inhabited a universe ruled by purely impersonal forces and whose behavior and very thoughts were dictated by the unbending forces of biology, chemistry, and environment. This materialistic conception of reality eventually infected virtually every area of our culture, from politics and economics to literature and art

    The cultural consequences of this triumph of materialism were devastating. Materialists denied the existence of objective moral standards, claiming that environment dictates our behavior and beliefs. Such moral relativism was uncritically adopted by much of the social sciences, and it still undergirds much of modern economics, political science, psychology and sociology.

    Materialists also undermined personal responsibility by asserting that human thoughts and behaviors are dictated by our biology and environment. The results can be seen in modern approaches to criminal justice, product liability, and welfare. In the materialist scheme of things, everyone is a victim and no one can be held accountable for his or her actions.

    Finally, materialism spawned a virulent strain of utopianism. Thinking they could engineer the perfect society through the application of scientific knowledge, materialist reformers advocated coercive government programs that falsely promised to create heaven on earth.

    Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies. Bringing together leading scholars from the natural sciences and those from the humanities and social sciences, the Center explores how new developments in biology, physics and cognitive science raise serious doubts about scientific materialism and have re-opened the case for a broadly theistic understanding of nature. The Center awards fellowships for original research, holds conferences, and briefs policymakers about the opportunities for life after materialism.

    The Center is directed by Discovery Senior Fellow Dr. Stephen Meyer. An Associate Professor of Philosophy at Whitworth College, Dr. Meyer holds a Ph.D. in the History and Philosophy of Science from Cambridge University. He formerly worked as a geophysicist for the Atlantic Richfield Company.

    THE WEDGE STRATEGY
    Phase I.

    Scientific Research, Writing & Publicity
    Phase II.

    Publicity & Opinion-making
    Phase III.

    Cultural Confrontation & Renewal
    THE WEDGE PROJECTS
    Phase I. Scientific Research, Writing & Publication

    Individual Research Fellowship Program
    Paleontology Research program (Dr. Paul Chien et al.)
    Molecular Biology Research Program (Dr. Douglas Axe et al.)
    Phase II. Publicity & Opinion-making

    Book Publicity
    Opinion-Maker Conferences
    Apologetics Seminars
    Teacher Training Program
    Op-ed Fellow
    PBS (or other TV) Co-production
    Publicity Materials / Publications
    Phase III. Cultural Confrontation & Renewal

    Academic and Scientific Challenge Conferences
    Potential Legal Action for Teacher Training
    Research Fellowship Program: shift to social sciences and humanities
    FIVE YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN SUMMARY
    The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy. If we view the predominant materialistic science as a giant tree, our strategy is intended to function as a "wedge" that, while relatively small, can split the trunk when applied at its weakest points. The very beginning of this strategy, the "thin edge of the wedge," was Phillip ]ohnson's critique of Darwinism begun in 1991 in Darwinism on Trial, and continued in Reason in the Balance and Defeatng Darwinism by Opening Minds. Michael Behe's highly successful Darwin's Black Box followed Johnson's work. We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.

    The Wedge strategy can be divided into three distinct but interdependent phases, which are roughly but not strictly chronological. We believe that, with adequate support, we can accomplish many of the objectives of Phases I and II in the next five years (1999-2003), and begin Phase III (See "Goals/ Five Year Objectives/Activities").

    Phase I: Research, Writing and Publication

    Phase II: Publicity and Opinion-making

    Phase III: Cultural Confrontation and Renewal

    Phase I is the essential component of everything that comes afterward. Without solid scholarship, research and argument, the project would be just another attempt to indoctrinate instead of persuade. A lesson we have learned from the history of science is that it is unnecessary to outnumber the opposing establishment. Scientific revolutions are usually staged by an initially small and relatively young group of scientists who are not blinded by the prevailing prejudices and who are able to do creative work at the pressure points, that is, on those critical issues upon which whole systems of thought hinge. So, in Phase I we are supporting vital witting and research at the sites most likely to crack the materialist edifice.

    Phase II. The pnmary purpose of Phase II is to prepare the popular reception of our ideas. The best and truest research can languish unread and unused unless it is properly publicized. For this reason we seek to cultivate and convince influential individuals in pnnt and broadcast media, as well as think tank leaders, scientists and academics, congressional staff, talk show hosts, college and seminary presidents and faculty, future talent and potential academic allies. Because of his long tenure in politics, journalism and public policy, Discovery President Bruce Chapman brings to the project rare knowledge and acquaintance of key op-ed writers, journalists, and political leaders. This combination of scientific and scholarly expertise and media and political connections makes the Wedge unique, and also prevents it from being "merely academic." Other activities include production of a PBS documentary on intelligent design and its implications, and popular op-ed publishing. Alongside a focus on influential opinion-makers, we also seek to build up a popular base of support among our natural constituency, namely, Chnstians. We will do this primarily through apologetics seminars. We intend these to encourage and equip believers with new scientific evidence's that support the faith, as well as to "popularize" our ideas in the broader culture.

    Phase III. Once our research and writing have had time to mature, and the public prepared for the reception of design theory, we will move toward direct confrontation with the advocates of materialist science through challenge conferences in significant academic settings. We will also pursue possible legal assistance in response to resistance to the integration of design theory into public school science curricula. The attention, publicity, and influence of design theory should draw scientific materialists into open debate with design theorists, and we will be ready. With an added emphasis to the social sciences and humanities, we will begin to address the specific social consequences of materialism and the Darwinist theory that supports it in the sciences.

    GOALS
    Governing Goals

    To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies.
    To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and hurnan beings are created by God.
    Five Year Goals

    To see intelligent design theory as an accepted alternative in the sciences and scientific research being done from the perspective of design theory.
    To see the beginning of the influence of design theory in spheres other than natural science.
    To see major new debates in education, life issues, legal and personal responsibility pushed to the front of the national agenda.
    Twenty Year Goals

    To see intelligent design theory as the dominant perspective in science.
    To see design theory application in specific fields, including molecular biology, biochemistry, paleontology, physics and cosmology in the natural sciences, psychology, ethics, politics, theology and philosophy in the humanities; to see its innuence in the fine arts.
    To see design theory permeate our religious, cultural, moral and political life.
    FIVE YEAR OBJECTIVES
    1. A major public debate between design theorists and Darwinists (by 2003)

    2. Thirty published books on design and its cultural implications (sex, gender issues, medicine, law, and religion)

    3. One hundred scientific, academic and technical articles by our fellows

    4. Significant coverage in national media:

    Cover story on major news magazine such as Time or Newsweek
    PBS show such as Nova treating design theory fairly
    Regular press coverage on developments in design theory
    Favorable op-ed pieces and columns on the design movement by 3rd party media
    5. Spiritual & cultural renewal:

    Mainline renewal movements begin to appropriate insights from design theory, and to repudiate theologies influenced by materialism
    Major Christian denomination(s) defend(s) traditional doctrine of creation & repudiate(s)
    Darwinism Seminaries increasingly recognize & repudiate naturalistic presuppositions
    Positive uptake in public opinion polls on issues such as sexuality, abortion and belief in God
    6. Ten states begin to rectify ideological imbalance in their science curricula & include design theory

    7. Scientific achievements:

    An active design movement in Israel, the UK and other influential countries outside the US
    Ten CRSC Fellows teaching at major universities
    Two universities where design theory has become the dominant view
    Design becomes a key concept in the social sciences Legal reform movements base legislative proposals on design theory
    ACTVITIES
    (1) Research Fellowship Program (for writing and publishing)

    (2) Front line research ******* at the "pressure points" (e.g., Daul Chien's Chengjiang Cambrian Fossil Find in paleontology, and Doug Axe's research laboratory in molecular biology)

    (3) Teacher training

    (4) Academic Conferences

    (5) Opinion-maker Events & Conferences

    (6) Alliance-building, recruitment of future scientists and leaders, and strategic partnerships with think tanks, social advocacy groups, educational organizations and institutions, churches, religious groups, foundations and media outlets

    (7) Apologetics seminars and public speaking

    (8) Op-ed and popular writing

    (9) Documentaries and other media productions

    (10) Academic debates

    (11) Fund Raising and Development

    (12) General Administrative support

    THE WEDGE STRATEGY PROGRESS SUMMARY
    Books

    William Dembski and Paul Nelson, two CRSC Fellows, will very soon have books published by major secular university publishers, Cambridge University Press and The University of Chicago Press, respectively. (One critiques Darwinian materialism; the other offers a powerful altenative.)

    Nelson's book, On Common Descent, is the seventeenth book in the prestigious University of Chicago "Evolutionary Monographs" series and the first to critique neo-Dacwinism. Dembski's book, The Design Inference, was back-ordered in June, two months prior to its release date.

    These books follow hard on the heals of Michael Behe's Darwin's Black Box (The Free Press) which is now in paperback after nine print runs in hard cover. So far it has been translated into six foreign languages. The success of his book has led to other secular publishers such as McGraw Hill requesting future titles from us. This is a breakthrough.

    InterVarsity will publish our large anthology, Mere Creation (based upon the Mere Creation conference) this fall, and Zondervan is publishing Maker of Heaven and Earth: Three Views of the Creation-Evolution Contoversy, edited by fellows John Mark Reynolds and J.P. Moreland.

    McGraw Hill solicited an expedited proposal from Meyer, Dembski and Nelson on their book Uncommmon Descent. Finally, Discovery Fellow Ed Larson has won the Pulitzer Prize for Summer for the Gods, his retelling of the Scopes Trial, and InterVarsity has just published his co-authored attack on assisted suicide, A Different Death.

    Academic Articles

    Our fellows recently have been featured or published articles in major sciendfic and academic journals in The Proceedings to the National Academy of Sciences, Nature, The Scientist, The American Biology Teacher, Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, Biochemirtry, Philosophy and Biology, Faith & Philosophy, American Philosophical Quarterly, Rhetoric & Public Affairs, Analysis, Book & Culture, Ethics & Medicine, Zygon, Perspectives on Science and the Christian Faith, Relgious Studies, Christian Scholars' Review, The Southern Journal ofPhilosophy, and the Journal of Psychalogy and Theology. Many more such articles are now in press or awaiting review at major secular journals as a result of our first round of research fellowships. Our own journal, Origins & Design, continues to feature scholarly contribudons from CRSC Fellows and other scientists.

    Television and Radio Appearances

    During 1997 our fellows appeared on numerous radio programs (both Christian and secular) and five nationally televised programs, TechnoPolitics, Hardball with Chris Matthews, Inside the Law, Freedom Speaks, and Firing Line. The special edition of TechnoPolitics that we produced with PBS in November elicited such an unprecedented audience response that the producer Neil Freeman decided to air a second episode from the "out takes." His enthusiasm for our intellectual agenda helped stimulate a special edition of William F. Buckley's Firing Line, featuring Phillip Johnson and two of our fellows, Michael Behe and David Berlinski. At Ed Atsinger's invitation, Phil Johnson and Steve Meyer addressed Salem Communications' Talk Show Host conference in Dallas last November. As a result, Phil and Steve have been interviewed several times on Salem talk shows across the country. For example, in ]uly Steve Meyer and Mike Behe were interviewed for two hours on the nationally broadcast radio show ]anet Parshall's America. Canadian Public Radio (CBC) recently featured Steve Meyer on their Tapestry program. The episode, "God & the Scientists," has aired all across Canada. And in April, William ***** debated Oxford atheist Peter Atkins in Atlanta before a large audience (moderated by William F. Buckley), which was broadcast live via satellite link, local radio, and intenet "webcast."

    Newspaper and Magazine Articles

    The Firing Line debate generated positive press coverage for our movement in, of all places, The New York Times, as well as a column by Bill Buckley. In addition, our fellows have published recent articles & op-eds in both the secular and Christian press, including, for example, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Washington Times, National Review, Commentary, Touchstone, The Detroit News, The Boston Review, The Seattle Post-lntelligenter, Christianity Toady, Cosmic Pursuits and World. An op-ed piece by Jonathan Wells and Steve Meyer is awaiting publication in the Washington Post. Their article criticizes the National Academy of Science book Teaching about Evolution for its selective and ideological presentation of scientific evidence. Similar articles are in the works
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    ZERO,

    This is your ID Theory. Not much science, just the desire to push a religious agenda on the general public.
    Please stop lying. It is not "MY" ID theory at all. Not remotely so.

    My agenda is chiefly concerned with science, a topic with which you have only a passing familiarity.

    Should you wish to prove otherwise, please wax enlightening. For a change.
    "As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, but that America gave him the White House based on the same credentials." - Newt Gingrich

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Quote Originally Posted by BarackZero View Post
    Please stop lying. It is not "MY" ID theory at all. Not remotely so.
    Quote Originally Posted by BarackZero View Post

    My agenda is chiefly concerned with science, a topic with which you have only a passing familiarity.

    Should you wish to prove otherwise, please wax enlightening. For a change.
    Your right it isn't your I.D. theory. Generally the creation of a theory is for those with some sort of science degree or education. Something you do not have. However, it is the theory as it has been outlined by those who created the theory. Just like the theory of creationism and surrounding theories from the 1600's were considered valid theories in there time.

    so if logically only has a passing familiarity something I find laughable considering the depth of logically's other posts. You by comparison would have no understanding what so ever.

    We have addressed it several times Zero. Saying that there is no absolute proof about something is MEANINGLESS in science. Absolute proof is for scientific Laws and we have none of those (some of have been called laws but they are not). Hence why ever single aspect of science fits under theory.

    If I understand your point of view correctly you just don't like the theory of evolution and Atheism on some weird idea that the 2 are the same.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Spector, why don't you wander off and play seventh grade with somebody onl your own level. You haven't even the intellect to differentiate between the possessive form of "you" and the contraction for "you are."

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    Your (sic) right it isn't your I.D. theory. Generally the creation of a theory is for those with some sort of science degree or education. Something you do not have. (sic) However, it is the theory as it has been outlined by those who created the theory. Just like the theory of creationism and surrounding theories from the 1600's were considered valid theories in there (sic) time.

    so if logically only has a passing familiarity something I find laughable considering the depth of logically's other posts. You by comparison would have no understanding what so ever. (sic)

    We have addressed it several times Zero. Saying that there is no absolute proof about something is MEANINGLESS in science. Absolute proof is for scientific Laws and we have none of those (some of have been called laws but they are not). Hence why ever (sic) single aspect of science fits under theory.

    If I understand your point of view correctly you just don't like the theory of evolution and Atheism on some weird idea that the 2 are the same.
    You don't understand anything, zero.

    Moreover, like so many others here, you don't want to understand.
    "As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, but that America gave him the White House based on the same credentials." - Newt Gingrich

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,081

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Quote Originally Posted by BarackZero View Post
    Spector, why don't you wander off and play seventh grade with somebody onl your own level. You haven't even the intellect to differentiate between the possessive form of "you" and the contraction for "you are."

    Moreover, like so many others here, you don't want to understand.
    Oh right, because he made a typo your steaming pile of bullshit suddenly became valid. Great thought process there.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Quote Originally Posted by BarackZero View Post
    Spector, why don't you wander off and play seventh grade with somebody onl your own level. You haven't even the intellect to differentiate between the possessive form of "you" and the contraction for "you are."



    You don't understand anything, zero.

    Moreover, like so many others here, you don't want to understand.
    With respect your the one the wondered into my forum and choose to spam, insult and carry on and quickly banned like you are on most forums. The fact that didn't know which one would indicate that you do so often.


    As to not understanding. Perhaps you could explain it to us. I have asked you several times to please explain your point of view. We have all witnessed your quote mining and insults to notable figures in an apparent attempt to discredit a theory that they had no part in creating or researching.

    I'll ask you again. What is your goal. What do you believe. We know what you hate. Please tell us what you want to promote.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    1. I resent your profound ignorance.
    I resent it deeply because you pretend otherwise. Your ignorance is displayed every time you write. Every single time.

    2. I resent your efforts to separate me out and play me against everyone else with your cowardly use of "we" and "us."

    I speak for myself. I don't need to look to my right and my left and say "we" and "us."

    3. I deeply resent the hateful comments of even professors and authors, and have quoted them precisely, again and again. The fatuous pretense that only Darwinists are intelligent is a Big Lie. Nevertheless, it is endlessly repeated, by leftists like you. It is inexcusable. It is reprehensible.

    4. I deeply resent the same attitude expressed by the left in all things political, religious, or scientific.
    Leftists always resort almost instantly to the pretension of intellectual supremacy, while branding their/your hated opponents as flat earth simpletons. That too is a Big Lie.
    Telling such Big Lies never stops Kazza or BlueCrabsofIgnorance from their childishness.

    Were you the least bit honest, you would allow differing opinions, indeed you would welcome them as something different from the usual "We're smart, you're not, Darwin was brilliant, Al Gore is too, so neener,neener, case closed."

    Now if you'll excuse me, I really hope never to have to respond to you again.
    The best you have done to date is pose questions, never offer anything substantial to consider.

    By substantial, I mean something like a discussion of the insuperable statistics of polypeptide synthesis, say of human hemoglobin, which is 528 amino acids in length. Tell me again, what are the two respective chains labeled? I *forget*.
    "As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, but that America gave him the White House based on the same credentials." - Newt Gingrich

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,081

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Quote Originally Posted by BarackZero View Post
    1. I resent your profound ignorance.
    I resent it deeply because you pretend otherwise. Your ignorance is displayed every time you write. Every single time.
    HA! says the guy who wrote "
    Now when animals "evolved" and developed eyes, that was going UP the slopes of Mount Improbable.

    And, when for example fish LOST their eyes in caves, that TOO was going UP the slopes of Mount Improbable.

    Got it? It's all so simple when you're a godless leftist."

    What an idiot.


    2. I resent your efforts to separate me out and play me against everyone else with your cowardly use of "we" and "us."

    I speak for myself. I don't need to look to my right and my left and say "we" and "us."
    You are against everyone else here. You have literally no allies in this forum while almost everybody, including the evolutionist skeptics, is your enemy.

    3. I deeply resent the hateful comments of even professors and authors, and have quoted them precisely, again and again. The fatuous pretense that only Darwinists are intelligent is a Big Lie. Nevertheless, it is endlessly repeated, by leftists like you. It is inexcusable. It is reprehensible.
    Quoting them precisely? Heh, no not really. If someone said "I'd be lying if I said that I hate black people" and then they're quoted as saying "I hate black people", that may very well be precise but its still a load of bullshit anyway.

    4. I deeply resent the same attitude expressed by the left in all things political, religious, or scientific.
    Leftists always resort almost instantly to the pretension of intellectual supremacy,
    And you give us a pretty good reason to.

    while branding their/your hated opponents as flat earth simpletons. That too is a Big Lie.
    Telling such Big Lies never stops Kazza or BlueCrabsofIgnorance from their childishness.
    Again, because you give us plenty of reason to.

    Were you the least bit honest, you would allow differing opinions, indeed you would welcome them as something different from the usual "We're smart, you're not, Darwin was brilliant, Al Gore is too, so neener,neener, case closed."
    We normally do, you're just an idiot.

    Now if you'll excuse me, I really hope never to have to respond to you again.
    The best you have done to date is pose questions, never offer anything substantial to consider.
    Allow me to misspell something so you can attack me for it.

    vestegal orgins.

    By substantial, I mean something like a discussion of the insuperable statistics of polypeptide synthesis, say of human hemoglobin, which is 528 amino acids in length. Tell me again, what are the two respective chains labeled? I *forget*.
    Absolutely meaningless. There's no point in discussing the creation of heme since 1. You'd just ignore it and 2. it has nothing to do with the origins of life. The first forms of primitive life on this planet didn't have hemoglobin. If they did, then you might have a point, but they didn't, so you're just being an idiot again.

  15. #15
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Quote Originally Posted by BarackZero View Post
    Please stop lying. It is not "MY" ID theory at all. Not remotely so.

    My agenda is chiefly concerned with science, a topic with which you have only a passing familiarity.

    Should you wish to prove otherwise, please wax enlightening. For a change.
    My agenda is chiefly concerned with science, a topic with which you have only a passing familiarity.
    "Your agenda...."....Now that's laughable. Science is something you are either ignorant of, or dishonest about.

    Or both.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Re: Outrageous Demands By *scientists*

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    "Your agenda...."....Now that's laughable. Science is something you are either ignorant of, or dishonest about.

    Or both.
    "Agenda" is YOUR word. YOU said it first:

    "ZERO,

    This is your ID Theory. Not much science, just the desire to push a religious agenda on the general public."
    - IllogicallyNobody

    So laugh at your own ignorance.
    "As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, but that America gave him the White House based on the same credentials." - Newt Gingrich

Similar Threads

  1. The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict
    By BarackZero in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 149
    Last Post: 02-05-2010, 12:52 PM
  2. Europe demands a crisis
    By David Ben-Ariel in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-21-2008, 10:16 PM
  3. LOL!! KOOKCINICH demands a recount
    By franKg in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-12-2008, 08:49 PM
  4. Iran demands oil pay in yen not dollars
    By Solve et Coagula in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-16-2007, 05:44 AM
  5. Most Outrageous Statements of 2005
    By DeeDee1965 in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 12-30-2005, 12:06 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •