Ben Stein Stumps Richard Dawkins.

[PostmodernProph]

/raises hand.....if all we needed for the Big Bang was energy and the energy was there before the Big Bang, why didn't the Big Bang happen before the Big Bang?......I put it to you that in fact, something had to change in order for there to be a Big Bang........

Exactly! The Big Bang (spontaneous creation) was caused. Someone got the ball rolling.

Well, there you go again, personifying energy again.

yet we just established that energy cannot be the cause.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

science claims the universe of energy can neither be created nor destroyed and this universe of energy is what went bang at the Big Bang causing time to begin. Time has a beginning not energy.

/raises hand.....if all we needed for the Big Bang was energy and the energy was there before the Big Bang, why didn't the Big Bang happen before the Big Bang?......I put it to you that in fact, something had to change in order for there to be a Big Bang........

Who said it didn't?

logic....again providing evidence that atheists are certainly not logical.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

/raises hand.....if all we needed for the Big Bang was energy and the energy was there before the Big Bang, why didn't the Big Bang happen before the Big Bang?......I put it to you that in fact, something had to change in order for there to be a Big Bang........

Exactly! The Big Bang (spontaneous creation) was caused. Someone got the ball rolling.

You assume "someone" as the human based configuration of your gods and as usual, your argument is nothing more than "... because I say so"

not at all.....we say "all we need is time, someday science will prove it to be true"......

 

[PostmodernProph]

It's a fable. Get over it.

go away, child...I'm having a conversation with someone who's posted something new....I'm bored with your repetitive dribble.....

Having a conversation generally indicates that you would be contributing the dialogue, which of course you aren't.

I find it laughable that one should dismiss Hinduism and its idol-worshipping as false and unsupported while at the same time being wholly unable to provide the slightest evidence that your, (the collective “your”), religion and it's various customs including animal sacrifice, are in any way garnered greater authority.

you continue to disregard the difference between science and religion.....Hindus choose to believe what they believe in the absence of conclusive evidence.....I choose to believe that I believe in the absence of conclusive evidence.....you choose to believe what you believe in the absence of conclusive evidence......the only difference is that you're the only one who pretends science has proven what you choose to believe.....

it is that dishonesty which sets us all apart...

 

[PostmodernProph]

We see evidence for this in the background radiation of the universe.

no, you silly twit.....you do not......

 

[PoliticalChic]

As so many religious extremists, your notions of the Big Bang derive from the nonsense you scour from creation ministries. You confuse the Big Bang theory with prior non-existence. This is a tactic of religionists as it gives them a window whereby a supernatural “belch”, and their gawds have magically *poofed* all of existence into being.

The Big Bang theory refers to a cataclysmic event in which there was a major disruption in existing matter and energy. We see evidence for this in the background radiation of the universe. What we do not, and as yet cannot see, is the prior state of existence before the Big Bang. This could be a window for one or more gods, just not your gods.

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski

Ah yes. The typical contribution from the "quote-mine" princess.


Encyclopedia of American Loons: Search results for Berlinski

Berlinski. What a joke. A carnival barker for the Disco'tute.

Ah yes. The typical response from the board moron.

 

[Hollie]

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski

Ah yes. The typical contribution from the "quote-mine" princess.


Encyclopedia of American Loons: Search results for Berlinski

Berlinski. What a joke. A carnival barker for the Disco'tute.

Ah yes. The typical response from the board moron.

I was just noting your typical cut and paste "quotes" as pointless and irrelevant.




That was followed by your typical, stuttering and mumbling attempt at insult because your fundie cranks are exposed as frauds.


The Panda's Thumb: Search Results

On EvolutionNews, Robert Crowther creates a strawman and knocks it down by confusing the term “Darwin Skeptic” with “Intelligent Design proponent”. Remember that the claim is not that all Darwin skeptics are religious fundamentalists but rather that ID is irreparably tied to religious concepts and motivations and lacking in scientific content.

Remember that Berlinski is on the record as “I have never expressed support for theories (sic) of Intelligent Design…”. or the following excerpt in which he distances himself from Intelligent Design?

Berlinski Wrote:
“If I thought that intelligent design, or any artful contrivance like it, explained anything in any depth, I would leap to the cannon’s mouth and say so. I do not and I did not.” For the record: I do not believe that theories of intelligent design explain those features of living systems that Darwin’s theory of evolution fails to explain. And vice-versa.



It's actually laughable when you fundie cranks trot out Berlinski in failed attempts to support supernaturalism.


What a shame that Berlinski has a record of dismissing ID'iosy when he later associates himself with the charlatans at the Disco'tute.


It's probably a lack of options. Berlinski is such a hack, he can't find work doing real science so he's left to front for Christian fundies.

 

[Hollie]

/raises hand.....if all we needed for the Big Bang was energy and the energy was there before the Big Bang, why didn't the Big Bang happen before the Big Bang?......I put it to you that in fact, something had to change in order for there to be a Big Bang........

As so many religious extremists, your notions of the Big Bang derive from the nonsense you scour from creation ministries. You confuse the Big Bang theory with prior non-existence. This is a tactic of religionists as it gives them a window whereby a supernatural “belch”, and their gawds have magically *poofed* all of existence into being.

The Big Bang theory refers to a cataclysmic event in which there was a major disruption in existing matter and energy. We see evidence for this in the background radiation of the universe. What we do not, and as yet cannot see, is the prior state of existence before the Big Bang. This could be a window for one or more gods, just not your gods.

What you don't seem to be aware of is that you practice a religion of your own. You have faith in something that is not known to be fact. You have faith in the tenets of Darwinism (your god). You have faith in the doctrines of hypothetical, imaginative thinkers (your prophets). You have faith in the gospel of secular-minded, University professors (your preachers).

Nothing but clichés you cut and paste from Christian extremist websites.

 

[Hollie]

We see evidence for this in the background radiation of the universe.

no, you silly twit.....you do not......

Actually, yes, you angry, self-hating 6,000 year old earth'er.

Do a search with the term "Penzias and Wilson."



Do you realize that with your complete and profound ignorance of science, you reinforce a lot of negative stereotypes aimed at fundie Christians?

 

[Hollie]

As so many religious extremists, your notions of the Big Bang derive from the nonsense you scour from creation ministries. You confuse the Big Bang theory with prior non-existence. This is a tactic of religionists as it gives them a window whereby a supernatural “belch”, and their gawds have magically *poofed* all of existence into being.

The Big Bang theory refers to a cataclysmic event in which there was a major disruption in existing matter and energy. We see evidence for this in the background radiation of the universe. What we do not, and as yet cannot see, is the prior state of existence before the Big Bang. This could be a window for one or more gods, just not your gods.

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski

Don't expect a reasoned response. The doors to certain minds in this thread are welded shut and wrapped with chains made of hardened steel. The fact of the matter is than no amount of man's experiments have come close to replicating a "big bang." But more importantly, these "scientists" are trying to force something to happen using their intelligence which actually adds credence to the idea that the original creation came about by an intelligent force.

In other words, if these "scientists" really wanted to replicate a "big bang" they would simply harness some energy then sit back and wait for the energy to "do something" on its own. But they know that nothing would happen so they feel a need to harness some energy then "make it" do something. See my point?

You have no point.

Your attempt at making a point was a careless and amateurish fail at prompting your extremist beliefs.

 

[DriftingSand]

As so many religious extremists, your notions of the Big Bang derive from the nonsense you scour from creation ministries. You confuse the Big Bang theory with prior non-existence. This is a tactic of religionists as it gives them a window whereby a supernatural “belch”, and their gawds have magically *poofed* all of existence into being.

The Big Bang theory refers to a cataclysmic event in which there was a major disruption in existing matter and energy. We see evidence for this in the background radiation of the universe. What we do not, and as yet cannot see, is the prior state of existence before the Big Bang. This could be a window for one or more gods, just not your gods.

What you don't seem to be aware of is that you practice a religion of your own. You have faith in something that is not known to be fact. You have faith in the tenets of Darwinism (your god). You have faith in the doctrines of hypothetical, imaginative thinkers (your prophets). You have faith in the gospel of secular-minded, University professors (your preachers).

Nothing but clichés you cut and paste from Christian extremist websites.

Actually, my post is 100% in my own words. Are you certain you understand what "cut and paste" means? Also, you completely glossed over a rather large post of mine that very briefly explains God as I understand Him. Again -- 100% my words without a single cut and paste.

 

[DriftingSand]

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski

Don't expect a reasoned response. The doors to certain minds in this thread are welded shut and wrapped with chains made of hardened steel. The fact of the matter is than no amount of man's experiments have come close to replicating a "big bang." But more importantly, these "scientists" are trying to force something to happen using their intelligence which actually adds credence to the idea that the original creation came about by an intelligent force.

In other words, if these "scientists" really wanted to replicate a "big bang" they would simply harness some energy then sit back and wait for the energy to "do something" on its own. But they know that nothing would happen so they feel a need to harness some energy then "make it" do something. See my point?

You have no point.

Your attempt at making a point was a careless and amateurish fail at prompting your extremist beliefs.

Another mindless, knee-jerk response lacking substance. Watch out ... someone might see your true character.

 

[edthecynic]

recall that the innocent you are referring to is the guy you're blaming for the act.....

I'm not sure if I follow you.

why not?.....are you unfamiliar with the doctrines of Christianity?.....you were criticizing God for punishing an innocent in the place of the guilty.....this overlooks the fact that the innocent he was punishing was his incarnate self......

would you likewise describe everyone who sacrifices himself to save someone else, for example a fireman who dies trying to rescue a child from a burning building, as morally bankrupt and Satanic?......

A fireman trying to save someone is not the same as you committing murder and you agreeing to allow them to hang your daughter in your place!!!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Ah yes. The typical contribution from the "quote-mine" princess.


Encyclopedia of American Loons: Search results for Berlinski

Berlinski. What a joke. A carnival barker for the Disco'tute.

Ah yes. The typical response from the board moron.

I was just noting your typical cut and paste "quotes" as pointless and irrelevant.




That was followed by your typical, stuttering and mumbling attempt at insult because your fundie cranks are exposed as frauds.


The Panda's Thumb: Search Results

On EvolutionNews, Robert Crowther creates a strawman and knocks it down by confusing the term “Darwin Skeptic” with “Intelligent Design proponent”. Remember that the claim is not that all Darwin skeptics are religious fundamentalists but rather that ID is irreparably tied to religious concepts and motivations and lacking in scientific content.

Remember that Berlinski is on the record as “I have never expressed support for theories (sic) of Intelligent Design…”. or the following excerpt in which he distances himself from Intelligent Design?

Berlinski Wrote:
“If I thought that intelligent design, or any artful contrivance like it, explained anything in any depth, I would leap to the cannon’s mouth and say so. I do not and I did not.” For the record: I do not believe that theories of intelligent design explain those features of living systems that Darwin’s theory of evolution fails to explain. And vice-versa.



It's actually laughable when you fundie cranks trot out Berlinski in failed attempts to support supernaturalism.


What a shame that Berlinski has a record of dismissing ID'iosy when he later associates himself with the charlatans at the Disco'tute.


It's probably a lack of options. Berlinski is such a hack, he can't find work doing real science so he's left to front for Christian fundies.

I thought "pointless and irrelevant" was your nickname.


You never deal with the substance.....why is that?

 

[edthecynic]

nailing energy to a cross....now THAT would be an interesting science experiment!........

So you are admitting there was no physical Jesus. e=mc2, or energy EQUALS mass, times a constant.

odd conclusion, that....rather you might have realized I was criticizing your conclusion that the deity we believe in was energy......

energy PERSONIFIED.

 

[edthecynic]

/raises hand.....if all we needed for the Big Bang was energy and the energy was there before the Big Bang, why didn't the Big Bang happen before the Big Bang?......I put it to you that in fact, something had to change in order for there to be a Big Bang........

Who said it didn't?

logic....again providing evidence that atheists are certainly not logical.....

Was it "logic" that edited out "the Big Crunch" from my answer, or dishonesty?

Again providing evidence that Christians are certainly not honest.

 

[edthecynic]

We see evidence for this in the background radiation of the universe.

no, you silly twit.....you do not......

Actually, yes, you angry, self-hating 6,000 year old earth'er.

Do a search with the term "Penzias and Wilson."

Do you realize that with your complete and profound ignorance of science, you reinforce a lot of negative stereotypes aimed at fundie Christians?

What is funny is the video the Creationists posted, "Creation is a scientific fact" earlier in this thread acknowledges the background radiation and quotes both of them, now suddenly they are kooks.

BTW, it has not gone without notice that none of the Creationists could rebut any of the points I made about the video!

 

[RandomVariable]

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski

Don't expect a reasoned response. The doors to certain minds in this thread are welded shut and wrapped with chains made of hardened steel. The fact of the matter is than no amount of man's experiments have come close to replicating a "big bang." But more importantly, these "scientists" are trying to force something to happen using their intelligence which actually adds credence to the idea that the original creation came about by an intelligent force.

In other words, if these "scientists" really wanted to replicate a "big bang" they would simply harness some energy then sit back and wait for the energy to "do something" on its own. But they know that nothing would happen so they feel a need to harness some energy then "make it" do something. See my point?

You have no point.

Your attempt at making a point was a careless and amateurish fail at prompting your extremist beliefs.

Hollie, you're not picking on the logically challenged again are you? You know that's not fair.

 

[Hollie]

What you don't seem to be aware of is that you practice a religion of your own. You have faith in something that is not known to be fact. You have faith in the tenets of Darwinism (your god). You have faith in the doctrines of hypothetical, imaginative thinkers (your prophets). You have faith in the gospel of secular-minded, University professors (your preachers).

Nothing but clichés you cut and paste from Christian extremist websites.

Actually, my post is 100% in my own words. Are you certain you understand what "cut and paste" means? Also, you completely glossed over a rather large post of mine that very briefly explains God as I understand Him. Again -- 100% my words without a single cut and paste.

You're entitled to your version of gods as others are. For that matter, your arguments for your gods are best directed at those who have a competing version of gods. It's you lovely folks who are creating the divisiveness and conflicts around the globe over petty claims to inerrancy of ancient myths.

What's truly astounding is the consistent theme of hate and self-hate that drenches the posts of the more extremist cabal. We get it - you believe mankind is inherently evil and base and you accept that you are evil and base and in need of salvation. You simply accepted such a defeatist and ultimately unhealthy attitude for no other reason than you mindlessly accepted the religion you were given. That's quite common as cultural heritage and geographic location typically defines religious belief.

Such a pathology of hate and self-hate has consequences and one of those consequences is revulsion for learning and an inability to accept documentary evidence that conflicts with your dogma.

 

[RandomVariable]

Nothing but clichés you cut and paste from Christian extremist websites.

Actually, my post is 100% in my own words. Are you certain you understand what "cut and paste" means? Also, you completely glossed over a rather large post of mine that very briefly explains God as I understand Him. Again -- 100% my words without a single cut and paste.

You're entitled to your version of gods as others are. For that matter, your arguments for your gods are best directed at those who have a competing version of gods. It's you lovely folks who are creating the divisiveness and conflicts around the globe over petty claims to inerrancy of ancient myths.

What's truly astounding is the consistent theme of hate and self-hate that drenches the posts of the more extremist cabal. We get it - you believe mankind is inherently evil and base and you accept that you are evil and base and in need of salvation. You simply accepted such a defeatist and ultimately unhealthy attitude for no other reason than you mindlessly accepted the religion you were given. That's quite common as cultural heritage and geographic location typically defines religious belief.

Such a pathology of hate and self-hate has consequences and one of those consequences is revulsion for learning and an inability to accept documentary evidence that conflicts with your dogma.

I really hate jumping in on a thread I have not read all the previous posts on but there have been many on this thread. What documentary evidence do you refer to?