Creationists

[daws101]

can I get some soda and chips at that concession?

He knew he was beat, he probably started to doubt his own thoughts, got scared and left.

Do you people actually read the posts ? the questions go ignored or worse yet some weak argument is offered as an explanation when there is no evidence supporting the explanation.

I have purposely stayed away wondering what would be said,you guy's are very predictable.

lol! stayed away! it's been all of 4 days.
you're like an addict, in your mind that must have seemed like an eternity(pun intended)
NONE OF YOUR SO CALLED QUESTIONS EVER WENT IGNORED THEY WERE ASKED AND ANSWERED COUNTLESS TIMES .
Weak arguments? coming from you that's hilarious!

 

[daws101]

Do you people actually read the posts ? the questions go ignored or worse yet some weak argument is offered as an explanation when there is no evidence supporting the explanation.

I have purposely stayed away wondering what would be said,you guy's are very predictable.

What questions were ignored? Secondly, neither of you offered anything in terms of "explanations" to, for example, the diversity of life on the planret , except silly and pointless claims that "The gawds did it".

That's not an explanation.

Further, neither of you were here to learn or to debate. Your goal was to proselytize, or worse, in the case of your creepy co-religionist, stalking.

We saw in clear and unmistakable terms the attitude of both the YEC’ists and just how retograde your ideology really is: anyone who disagrees with you is sick, stupid, perverted, an imbecile, etc. etc.

Chirality was an explanation. The cell it's so complex that it could have not formed in any natural form this has been explained. Under perfect conditions the miller and urey experiment was an argument for design not spontaneous generation.

wrong as always.
you have no evidence of a non natural formation.Chirality and irreducible complexity are not proof or argument for design or a designer.
it's already been shown to you that NO ONE knows how the first cell formed.
to say you do is a LIE.

 

[daws101]

Many scientist may believe in Bigfoot. Who cares?

Christian creationist have never offered even a plausible explanation for supernaturalism as the mechanism describing diversity of life on the planet.

Your claims to gawds are no better supported than claims to Bigfoot or theLoch Ness monster.

I have no reason to believe you ever attended further education beyond christian home schooling. Quite clearly, your abilities to articulate christian creationism is limited to cutting and pasting from some of the more notorious and sleazy of the christian creationist ministries.

They have,they presented evidence of the cell showing the cell is to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Products of the cell perform functions, functions that are a product of purposeful design. The truth is hollie there is no explanation absent of purposeful design. You have DNA that gets interpreted and converted into mRNA which is converted in to proteins.

Sorry if you can't see the purposeful functions you can't see purposeful design. You would never get life without these purposeful funtions of the cell. The amazing is to think this all happened by chance and we are not even considering chirality yet.

"They" have presented no such thing as the cell being to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Your comment is ridiculous. You may find that repeating slogans of "purposeful design" is a function of indoctrination (such repetition is a characteristic of cults), but repeating slogans causes you to appear as just another mind-numbing automaton.

There is no evidence that any process in nature is "purposeful". That's like claiming a tornado purposefully destroys one home while "purposefully" avoiding another across the street. That's ridiculous.

did anybody notice that Ywc is tossing around a new word: chirality!

 

[CandySlice]

Klinghoffer clangs

Klinghoffer clangs - The Panda's Thumb

David Klinghoffer, Disco ‘Tute apologist, has responded to the recent kerfuffle involving Ann Gauger’s mangling of population genetics and phylogenetics (see Joe Felsenstein’s comment on Sandwalk) whilst green-screened over a stock laboratory photograph (see here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/6520435-post12916.html).

Klinghoffer doesn’t bother to address the scientific nonsense Gauger promoted, of course–how could he?–but claims that the green-screened lab was convenient because Typically, filming in a genuine location like this would be troublesome for us and bothersome for others who work there – a distraction for all involved, including viewers, when the intent is to focus on the argument. Many other times, in other contexts, we have similarly used backdrops where, to get to an actual locale, it would require travel not to mention complicated, time-consuming setup and many other headaches. Going with a green screen makes sense for an organization that operates under a constrained budget.

So in Klinghoffer’s head there are just two alternatives: use a stock photo and green-screen Gauger into it, or tape Gauger speaking in her own lab. Here’s a third alternative for Klinghoffer and the DI’s film producers: Take a still photo of Gauger’s lab, which might be 10 minutes or so of interruption of the horde of minions working in it, and then green-screen her into that photo. That would have saved $19.00 (the reported cost of the stock photo) for the constrained budget of the DI. But it would also mean escaping from a false dichotomy, and ID proponents seem to be cognitively unable to entertain more than two alternatives at once; witness their decades-long efforts to equate (mostly specious) critiques of evolution with evidence for ID.

Is it me or are there a lot of rope suckers in this forum ?

And there's your typical 'christian'. Not satisfied to be a laughing stock he also needs to hit the lowest common denominator at some point in the conversation.
No wonder people are leaving the church. People like this are sending them away in droves.

Is this your attempt at changing the subject ?

Nope. Just drawing attention to what you really are under all that 'I'm so God-like'.

 

[Hollie]

They have,they presented evidence of the cell showing the cell is to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Products of the cell perform functions, functions that are a product of purposeful design. The truth is hollie there is no explanation absent of purposeful design. You have DNA that gets interpreted and converted into mRNA which is converted in to proteins.

Sorry if you can't see the purposeful functions you can't see purposeful design. You would never get life without these purposeful funtions of the cell. The amazing is to think this all happened by chance and we are not even considering chirality yet.

"They" have presented no such thing as the cell being to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Your comment is ridiculous. You may find that repeating slogans of "purposeful design" is a function of indoctrination (such repetition is a characteristic of cults), but repeating slogans causes you to appear as just another mind-numbing automaton.

There is no evidence that any process in nature is "purposeful". That's like claiming a tornado purposefully destroys one home while "purposefully" avoiding another across the street. That's ridiculous.

did anybody notice that Ywc is tossing around a new word: chirality!

chirality! No, I didn’t notice that until I read your post.

Is chirality the act of neutering a Christian? (snark).

 

[CandySlice]

They have,they presented evidence of the cell showing the cell is to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Products of the cell perform functions, functions that are a product of purposeful design. The truth is hollie there is no explanation absent of purposeful design. You have DNA that gets interpreted and converted into mRNA which is converted in to proteins.

Sorry if you can't see the purposeful functions you can't see purposeful design. You would never get life without these purposeful funtions of the cell. The amazing is to think this all happened by chance and we are not even considering chirality yet.

"They" have presented no such thing as the cell being to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Your comment is ridiculous. You may find that repeating slogans of "purposeful design" is a function of indoctrination (such repetition is a characteristic of cults), but repeating slogans causes you to appear as just another mind-numbing automaton.

There is no evidence that any process in nature is "purposeful". That's like claiming a tornado purposefully destroys one home while "purposefully" avoiding another across the street. That's ridiculous.

did anybody notice that Ywc is tossing around a new word: chirality!

I know. They learn it and then try to use it in a sentence--pretending to an erudition they really don't have.
I think it was either YWC or that other dummy that got hung up in the word 'loathing' the other day. Used it three times in one sentence and even conjugated it at one point.

 

[CandySlice]

"They" have presented no such thing as the cell being to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Your comment is ridiculous. You may find that repeating slogans of "purposeful design" is a function of indoctrination (such repetition is a characteristic of cults), but repeating slogans causes you to appear as just another mind-numbing automaton.

There is no evidence that any process in nature is "purposeful". That's like claiming a tornado purposefully destroys one home while "purposefully" avoiding another across the street. That's ridiculous.

did anybody notice that Ywc is tossing around a new word: chirality!

chirality! No, I didn’t notice that until I read your post.

Is chirality the act of neutering a Christian? (snark).

It goes along with the whole mind-set of these people. They're mimics in most cases. Uneducated for the most part they have a few standard blurbs they've been able to memorize to blurt out at the proper (and sometimes NOT so proper) times, a few select copy and paste pieces they like to trot out, probably unable to understand half of what they've posted themselves, and always a sprinkling of new words they've picked up along the way. Words they then proceed to batter to death unsure of what most of them really mean. In short, they think everybody is as dumb as they are and since these tactics have worked on other weak-minded souls they try to run their painfully lame half-baked con jobs here.
Of course here there are some very learned people who don't let them get away with that cheap shit. And you can see them disintergrate right in front of your eyes once a light is shined on them.

 

[Youwerecreated]

He knew he was beat, he probably started to doubt his own thoughts, got scared and left.

Do you people actually read the posts ? the questions go ignored or worse yet some weak argument is offered as an explanation when there is no evidence supporting the explanation.

I have purposely stayed away wondering what would be said,you guy's are very predictable.

lol! stayed away! it's been all of 4 days.
you're like an addict, in your mind that must have seemed like an eternity(pun intended)
NONE OF YOUR SO CALLED QUESTIONS EVER WENT IGNORED THEY WERE ASKED AND ANSWERED COUNTLESS TIMES .
Weak arguments? coming from you that's hilarious!

Not addicted and I saw the same meaningless posts not responding to the facts.

 

[Youwerecreated]

What questions were ignored? Secondly, neither of you offered anything in terms of "explanations" to, for example, the diversity of life on the planret , except silly and pointless claims that "The gawds did it".

That's not an explanation.

Further, neither of you were here to learn or to debate. Your goal was to proselytize, or worse, in the case of your creepy co-religionist, stalking.

We saw in clear and unmistakable terms the attitude of both the YEC’ists and just how retograde your ideology really is: anyone who disagrees with you is sick, stupid, perverted, an imbecile, etc. etc.

Chirality was an explanation. The cell it's so complex that it could have not formed in any natural form this has been explained. Under perfect conditions the miller and urey experiment was an argument for design not spontaneous generation.

wrong as always.
you have no evidence of a non natural formation.Chirality and irreducible complexity are not proof or argument for design or a designer.
it's already been shown to you that NO ONE knows how the first cell formed.
to say you do is a LIE.

It's funny you would make light of only left handed amino acids found their way into the first cell or any cell for that matter when both left and right handed amino acids exist not only that but they bonded in the right sequence.

I don't need to see the designer to know the cell was designed.

 

[Youwerecreated]

They have,they presented evidence of the cell showing the cell is to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Products of the cell perform functions, functions that are a product of purposeful design. The truth is hollie there is no explanation absent of purposeful design. You have DNA that gets interpreted and converted into mRNA which is converted in to proteins.

Sorry if you can't see the purposeful functions you can't see purposeful design. You would never get life without these purposeful funtions of the cell. The amazing is to think this all happened by chance and we are not even considering chirality yet.

"They" have presented no such thing as the cell being to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Your comment is ridiculous. You may find that repeating slogans of "purposeful design" is a function of indoctrination (such repetition is a characteristic of cults), but repeating slogans causes you to appear as just another mind-numbing automaton.

There is no evidence that any process in nature is "purposeful". That's like claiming a tornado purposefully destroys one home while "purposefully" avoiding another across the street. That's ridiculous.

did anybody notice that Ywc is tossing around a new word: chirality!

Hey did you notice that I spoke about chirality earlier in the thread ? Did you notice all my talk of left handed and right handed amino acids are about chirality most of it went over your head until I used the term in the latest example.

 

[Youwerecreated]

And there's your typical 'christian'. Not satisfied to be a laughing stock he also needs to hit the lowest common denominator at some point in the conversation.
No wonder people are leaving the church. People like this are sending them away in droves.

Is this your attempt at changing the subject ?

Nope. Just drawing attention to what you really are under all that 'I'm so God-like'.

Whatever floats your boat.

 

[Youwerecreated]

"They" have presented no such thing as the cell being to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Your comment is ridiculous. You may find that repeating slogans of "purposeful design" is a function of indoctrination (such repetition is a characteristic of cults), but repeating slogans causes you to appear as just another mind-numbing automaton.

There is no evidence that any process in nature is "purposeful". That's like claiming a tornado purposefully destroys one home while "purposefully" avoiding another across the street. That's ridiculous.

did anybody notice that Ywc is tossing around a new word: chirality!

chirality! No, I didn’t notice that until I read your post.

Is chirality the act of neutering a Christian? (snark).

So you don't understand the meaning of left and right handed amino acids,figures.

 

[Youwerecreated]

"They" have presented no such thing as the cell being to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Your comment is ridiculous. You may find that repeating slogans of "purposeful design" is a function of indoctrination (such repetition is a characteristic of cults), but repeating slogans causes you to appear as just another mind-numbing automaton.

There is no evidence that any process in nature is "purposeful". That's like claiming a tornado purposefully destroys one home while "purposefully" avoiding another across the street. That's ridiculous.

did anybody notice that Ywc is tossing around a new word: chirality!

I know. They learn it and then try to use it in a sentence--pretending to an erudition they really don't have.
I think it was either YWC or that other dummy that got hung up in the word 'loathing' the other day. Used it three times in one sentence and even conjugated it at one point.

Explain chirality of the cell,this should be good.

 

[Youwerecreated]

did anybody notice that Ywc is tossing around a new word: chirality!

chirality! No, I didn’t notice that until I read your post.

Is chirality the act of neutering a Christian? (snark).

It goes along with the whole mind-set of these people. They're mimics in most cases. Uneducated for the most part they have a few standard blurbs they've been able to memorize to blurt out at the proper (and sometimes NOT so proper) times, a few select copy and paste pieces they like to trot out, probably unable to understand half of what they've posted themselves, and always a sprinkling of new words they've picked up along the way. Words they then proceed to batter to death unsure of what most of them really mean. In short, they think everybody is as dumb as they are and since these tactics have worked on other weak-minded souls they try to run their painfully lame half-baked con jobs here.
Of course here there are some very learned people who don't let them get away with that cheap shit. And you can see them disintergrate right in front of your eyes once a light is shined on them.

So since I know I am more educated in the field of science I will let you choose a subject to debate in the field of science.

Talk is cheap, poop or get off the pot.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Why is it when I offer a challenge to you cowards you run and hide,eh candyslice?

 

[Hollie]

did anybody notice that Ywc is tossing around a new word: chirality!

chirality! No, I didn’t notice that until I read your post.

Is chirality the act of neutering a Christian? (snark).

So you don't understand the meaning of left and right handed amino acids,figures.

You don't understand that unquestioning belief in what is spewed from creationist ministries is laughable.

 

[PretentiousGuy]

Life comes from living organisms scientific fact.

No it isn't... Abiogenesis?

Abiogenesis theory is a theory filled with conjecture lacks any real evidence that would support the theory. Many famous evolutionist avoid using this theory as an answer to the origins question. There is a reason for that as I stated.

You tout something as scientific fact when it is not, the IX commandment doesn't have an escape clause for apologetics. Certainly we do not have all the answers but the scientists are actually working on it. You begrudge them for that? You begrudge them for not being satisfied with the easy answer when there is something far more interesting than any creation myth, far more interesting than any man could fathom.

 

[Hollie]

"They" have presented no such thing as the cell being to complex to be a product of a random natural process. Your comment is ridiculous. You may find that repeating slogans of "purposeful design" is a function of indoctrination (such repetition is a characteristic of cults), but repeating slogans causes you to appear as just another mind-numbing automaton.

There is no evidence that any process in nature is "purposeful". That's like claiming a tornado purposefully destroys one home while "purposefully" avoiding another across the street. That's ridiculous.

did anybody notice that Ywc is tossing around a new word: chirality!

Hey did you notice that I spoke about chirality earlier in the thread ? Did you notice all my talk of left handed and right handed amino acids are about chirality most of it went over your head until I used the term in the latest example.

I think everyone noticed how pompous you appear thinking your new found buzz-word anything but another creationist scam.

 

[zombiehunter696]

Why is it when I offer a challenge to you cowards you run and hide,eh candyslice?

Why don't you offer you challenge to a scientist. You know, those people that spend their lives studying this stuff? Why go to a massage board and ask random strangers who may have had their last course in biology was in high school?

 

[Youwerecreated]

No it isn't... Abiogenesis?

Abiogenesis theory is a theory filled with conjecture lacks any real evidence that would support the theory. Many famous evolutionist avoid using this theory as an answer to the origins question. There is a reason for that as I stated.

You tout something as scientific fact when it is not, the IX commandment doesn't have an escape clause for apologetics. Certainly we do not have all the answers but the scientists are actually working on it. You begrudge them for that? You begrudge them for not being satisfied with the easy answer when there is something far more interesting than any creation myth, far more interesting than any man could fathom.

No, my problem is they see obvious evidence of design and dismiss it. Hell you even have well known evolutionist admitting to things looking designed but then go on to say they arose through a natural process to which they have zero evidence for.