All Evolutionists, go see the movie "Expelled"

[dewolf]

Originally Posted by snowman

There is Proof that there is a God. How about rising from the dead! Kinda sounds like it might be pretty good proof of something, especially if the guy also claimed to be the son of God. Many other miracles were worked and witnessed by many people. The records of these events are not fairy tales, they are fact.

So one source calls them fact, the Bible. Presented as fact they fall down badly and you know it. I met a bloke who was a brilliant surgeon who said to me, " you know, I know some incredibly intelligent people, but sh$t some of them are dumb". Starting to know what he meant by that with the crap you spew, lol.

[sjf911]

Originally Posted by snowman

You all amaze me. I have minors in Nuclear Physics, Nuclear Engineering, Math. I have designed both ground and space portions of GPS as well as several other nav systems. I have also designed parts for almost every weapons system currently in use. I have several patents and many non registered inventions that are the result of my work over the years. What do you do?
And this makes you an expert in biological sciences? Hardly.

Math is just another language, nothing more. No magic there. Absolute? Hardly, advanced differential equations are often solved by Guessing the answers!
So what? I was a math major, too. Big deal.

The more you know, the more you know that you don't KNOW!
The more you know, the more you question.

There is Proof that there is a God. How about rising from the dead! Kinda sounds like it might be pretty good proof of something, especially if the guy also claimed to be the son of God. Many other miracles were worked and witnessed by many people. The records of these events are not fairy tales, they are fact.
You choose to believe this BS because it fits your preconcieved world-view, likely forced upon you as a child. Those who choose to remain skeptical understand the weakness of eyewitness testimony and the power of suggestion, myths, and lies to corrupt/alter individual memory especially when very biased preconceptions exist.

But the real clincher is that if you look at he wonder of nature, anyone with a smigon of intelligence knows that nature is very orderly and most likely the result of a design. Designing many things over many years gives one some insight. That insight recognizes another designers work.
Argument from incredulity. More BS that has been debunked over and over and over. Only a simpleton sees "design" in biological systems.

Like I said. Where is the "burning bush"? Your fairy-tale god had no trouble manifesting himself to primitive and superstitious people in the past, many times. Does he have a case of stage fright? Maybe he has developed the divine equivalent of erectile dysfunction (ED). We can call it "impotence". He should pick up a prescription of Divine Viagra. You never know, it might help.

[frogger]

Originally Posted by sjf911

Like I said. Where is the "burning bush"? Your fairy-tale god had no trouble manifesting himself to primitive and superstitious people in the past, many times.

To primitive and superstitious people in a tiny sliver of land in the Middle East. It's as if there was no knowledge of the world beyond the Middle East. Isn't that just a little bit peculiar?

[IROC]

Originally Posted by sjf911

Like I said. Where is the "burning bush"? Your fairy-tale god had no trouble manifesting himself to primitive and superstitious people in the past, many times. Does he have a case of stage fright? Maybe he has developed the divine equivalent of erectile dysfunction (ED). We can call it "impotence". He should pick up a prescription of Divine Viagra. You never know, it might help.

Another valid analogy is the whole UFO phenomenon. From about the end of WW2 up through the '80s there were tons of UFO sightings and reports. Now that every Tom, Dick and Harry has a cell phone with a camera function, these "sightings" have dropped way off. Not to say that there are no more sightings, but they aren't near as numerous as they used to be.

Why were miracles and "acts of god" so prevalent 2000 years ago, but there aren't any today? Hmmm. Just like potential UFO witnesses, a growing portion of the general public in the world today is armed with just enough skepticism and critical thinking skills to blow off supposed "miracles" for what they really are - statistical coincidences. Now, there are those who still believe that miracles occur, but they are quickly becoming the primitive fringe of society...sort of like the UFO wackos who still claim that the face on Mars is real.

[frogger]

Originally Posted by IROC

...sort of like the UFO wackos who still claim that the face on Mars is real.

It's not? You're kidding, aren't you?

[IROC]

Originally Posted by frogger

It's not? You're kidding, aren't you?

Sorry to burst your bubble. Of course, there are very quiet discussions going on at JPL right now about some recent findings. Evidently they've found a teapot-shaped rock formation on Mars that appears to be of intelligent design.

[frogger]

Originally Posted by IROC

Sorry to burst your bubble. Of course, there are very quiet discussions going on at JPL right now about some recent findings. Evidently they've found a teapot-shaped rock formation on Mars that appears to be of intelligent design.

I see teapots everywhere.

[kstar]

Originally Posted by frogger

I see teapots everywhere.

I see frog people.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by trekkor

The Seventh day is now over 6000 years long...

How do you explain that if it is a 24 hour day?


KT

After being proven wrong (by the very scripture itself) on your claim that the days of creation are longer than 24 hours, as well as exposed for misrepresenting additional scripture to support your claim, why are still clinging to the 7th day as longer than 24 hours argument?

You have poignantly illustrated all that is wrong with organized religion: Man warping God's message for his own selfish purpose.

[trekkor]

No.


You have no response.


( door slowly closes )


KT

[trekkor]

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa

After being proven wrong (by the very scripture itself) on your claim that the days of creation are longer than 24 hours,

No.

as well as exposed for misrepresenting additional scripture to support your claim,

No.

why are still clinging to the 7th day as longer than 24 hours argument?

because it's relevant.

You have poignantly illustrated all that is wrong with organized religion: Man warping God's message for his own selfish purpose.

What do you think I have to gain?

Nearly everthing you posted was wrong.


Don't be scared...


KT

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Since Jesus is the Door, I can see why you are closing it.

[trekkor]

More silliness?

get serious, shaun.


KT

[kang]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

Of course i do. The chances of us ever determining if WE have a creator are next to less than zero. But i have never argued that. I have merely argued that a form of creationalism is possible, as there is evidence of it all around us.


I am in 100% agreement with this statement.

What creating a universe does, is prove that it is possible that a form of "intelligent design" is responsible for our origins.

It DOES NOT prove we were created in such a fashion- only that it is possible, and demonstrable. Therefore, it is a valid competing theory wrt our own origins IMO. Nothing more.


A creator may have done it..it's been predicted to be possible by science even when using our own dark ages near-term technology.
Our 'god' may be some guy with a particle accelerator creating universes in a laboratory in some alternate universe. It appears at this time that this is an absolutely viable possibility, and...assuming the predictions about forming universes in particle accelerators holds true, it is a demonstrable means of creation.

That would prove that the concept of creationalism exists, even if it is not the mechanism by which we came to be. That's all i've been trying to say. At no time have i meant to imply this to mean that because intelligent design(a better term would be deliberate formation) of a universe is POSSIBLE that we were created in the same manner. Just that it can't be eliminated as a distinct possibility.

Really, when you think about it, what other means of universe creation can we predict, then verify? Doesn't that make the notion of "deliberate formation" the most likely candidate for our own existance? Maybe we're all in an infinite time loop, and mankind is mankind's creator. No one knows.

The reality is it doesn't matter, but it's fun to debate on the internet.

Yes, I agree it’s fun to debate on the internet.

It’s fun to talk about M-theory and creating universes in the lab and the infinity of possible universe and all that, but that’s mostly mental masturbation. Not that I have anything against that…

You seem to have a different notion of god than most mainstream Christians. If I recall, you seem to think your god (or your creator or whatever you want to call it) initiated the big bang and then stood back and just watched. You’re not alone in these beliefs, but you are in the minority. I’m still curious how/why you arrived at this vision of what god is.

With these views of god, your view of ID is considerably different than what our society generally considers to be ID. You’re familiar with the term irreducible complexity, correct? Proponents of what is generally thought of as ID in our society (as opposed to your view of ID) claim that their intelligent designer guided and directed evolution and that there is evidence of this in the form of irreducibly complex biological systems, such as the eye, the molecular motor of certain flagella, etc. I’m sure you’re also aware that there is no evidence of this view of ID.

This thread was originally about the movie “expelled.” In this movie, Stein is complaining about people who believe in this form of ID being laughed out of the halls of science. Of course, the reason they are laughed out of the halls of science is that this form of ID is not science at all, not by the wildest stretch of imagination.

What are your views of this form of ID?

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by trekkor

More silliness?

get serious, shaun.


KT

I've been nothing but serious. You've played this as a game. When presented with facts, you ignore them and then say they are false with nothing to back it up. I've never seen such intellectual or spiritual dishonest in my life. I pity you.

[frogger]

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa

I've been nothing but serious. You've played this as a game. When presented with facts, you ignore them and then say they are false with nothing to back it up. I've never seen such intellectual or spiritual dishonest in my life. I pity you.

Welcome to our world dealing with trekkor.

[Purrybonker]

These threads on religion are fun, but probably pointless except to pump the rates of hypertension amongst us posters to all-time highs. I’m an atheist and used to feel a bit embarrassed about it and kind of kept it to myself in a family of very religious people. Dawkins was my salvation to come out of the closet.

But one thing that has never made sense to me about religion is this….

Even if I accepted and believed everything that say, the Catholic church, had to tell me about god, sin and salvation – why would I, as a free person opt to be subservient to some one being simply because of it’s gift of creating me? I think that I would rather not have this gift than to be bound to living a life of subservience and worship. What’s the point?

It’s like my Dad, the colonel used to say – “I brought you into this world and I can take you out again…”.

I guess that’s my point – religion rings no bells with me, either from an intellectual/spiritual (if you want) perspective, or from a moral/ethical/pragmatic perspective. Create me? That’s cool. Compel me to live by your rules, fall down and worship you and assert that I love you or rot in hell for my omissions (or some iteration of these steps).

I’ll pass, thanks.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by competentone

Evolution does contradict the beliefs of those who interpret the Bible literally, but those who treat the Bible as some sort of "historical" or "factual" text really don't know much about history or the Bible. Such people are really exceedingly stupid and should receive nothing but intolerance if they attempt to pass their stupidity off as some sort of "knowledge" within an academic setting.

Did you really call everyone who believes the bible is factual stupid?
Nice to meet you Mr. Pot. It's a shame this kind of thing is acceptable here even though it goes directly against the moderator's own rules.
Bye bye.

[IROC]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

Did you really call everyone who believes the bible is factual stupid?

What word or term would you choose?

[kang]