Creationists

[Youwerecreated]

No, no, not a fallacy they are myths.

So you believe the Darwinian Myth is responsible for Computers and Rocket ships?

Darwinian theory deals with natural, biological processes.

Computers and Rocket ships don't procreate or evolve by natural processes.

Your profoundly stupid comparisons only serve to suggest that you need to drink the Kool-aid and prove a component of Darwins' theory.

Listen you dunce if you are gonna try and defend a theory for Gods sake have a clue about the theory. Darwinian's had no clue of the biological processes we do today. Most of darwins views were based on a few observations with a lot of conjecture. The current theory of evolution is neo darwinism. Do I need to explain that to you as well you fraud.

 

[UltimateReality]

...
Creationist clowns...

Gone for awhile and nothing has changed. Hawly is still parroting because she doesn't have an original thought in that nazi head of hers. Either that or she is too busy daydreaming about beheading Christians.

 

[UltimateReality]

So you believe the Darwinian Myth is responsible for Computers and Rocket ships?

Darwinian theory deals with natural, biological processes.

Computers and Rocket ships don't procreate or evolve by natural processes.

Your profoundly stupid comparisons only serve to suggest that you need to drink the Kool-aid and prove a component of Darwins' theory.

Listen you dunce if you are gonna try and defend a theory for Gods sake have a clue about the theory. Darwinian's had no clue of the biological processes we do today. Most of darwins views were based on a few observations with a lot of conjecture. The current theory of evolution is neo darwinism. Do I need to explain that to you as well you fraud.

You might also want to let Einstein know that it is a completely logical train of thought to deduce that if Humans come from evolution and Computers and Rocket ships come from Humans, then we can conclude that evolution indirectly produces computers and rocket ships. This takes about a 3rd grade understanding of basic reasoning so it is not surprising he-she doesn't get it.

 

[newpolitics]

Darwinian theory deals with natural, biological processes.

Computers and Rocket ships don't procreate or evolve by natural processes.

Your profoundly stupid comparisons only serve to suggest that you need to drink the Kool-aid and prove a component of Darwins' theory.

Listen you dunce if you are gonna try and defend a theory for Gods sake have a clue about the theory. Darwinian's had no clue of the biological processes we do today. Most of darwins views were based on a few observations with a lot of conjecture. The current theory of evolution is neo darwinism. Do I need to explain that to you as well you fraud.

You might also want to let Einstein know that it is a completely logical train of thought to deduce that if Humans come from evolution and Computers and Rocket ships come from Humans, then we can conclude that evolution indirectly produces computers and rocket ships. This takes about a 3rd grade understanding of basic reasoning so it is not surprising he-she doesn't get it.

The inventions of rocket ships are purely incidental, and in no way guaranteed indirectly by an evolutionary process, so you can't say that evolution "indirectly produces computers and rocket ships." We only have one example of evolution to draw from: our own. Here again, you are using an argument from induction, combined with the fallacy of hasty generalization. You attempt to make a general statement about any evolutionary processes by observing our own, yet based on no other examples of evolutionary lineages. Therefore, you are attempting to make a general statement about evolution from a particular example of evolution (inductive reasoning) and using a very small sample size (one sample of evolution) to make a generalization about all evolutionary processes. This implies that there are extra-terrestrials out there under going evolution, and you are claiming that they too, have "computers and rocket ships." Yet, I thought as a theist, you don't believe in extra-terrestrials, because god made the universe for us? We have no idea what other evolutionary processes produce, because we have never directly observed them. Until we do, your statement is highly unsubstantiated. In all likelihood, evolution would mostly produce bacteria and algae and things of this nature and likely constitute most of the life in the universe. There may be a few instances of evolution producing life which produces computers in the cosmos, but at best, this sort of induction could only grant probabilities to your conclusion.

All you are left with, is the ability to say "this particular evolutionary process produced a species which produced computers and rocket ships." We already know this to be true, so you haven't gotten anywhere, logically.

 

[Hollie]

So you believe the Darwinian Myth is responsible for Computers and Rocket ships?

Darwinian theory deals with natural, biological processes.

Computers and Rocket ships don't procreate or evolve by natural processes.

Your profoundly stupid comparisons only serve to suggest that you need to drink the Kool-aid and prove a component of Darwins' theory.

Listen you dunce if you are gonna try and defend a theory for Gods sake have a clue about the theory. Darwinian's had no clue of the biological processes we do today. Most of darwins views were based on a few observations with a lot of conjecture. The current theory of evolution is neo darwinism. Do I need to explain that to you as well you fraud.

How typical that a Christian creationist clown who understands nothing of evolutionary processes would be uttering further stupidity.

 

[Hollie]

Darwinian theory deals with natural, biological processes.

Computers and Rocket ships don't procreate or evolve by natural processes.

Your profoundly stupid comparisons only serve to suggest that you need to drink the Kool-aid and prove a component of Darwins' theory.

Listen you dunce if you are gonna try and defend a theory for Gods sake have a clue about the theory. Darwinian's had no clue of the biological processes we do today. Most of darwins views were based on a few observations with a lot of conjecture. The current theory of evolution is neo darwinism. Do I need to explain that to you as well you fraud.

You might also want to let Einstein know that it is a completely logical train of thought to deduce that if Humans come from evolution and Computers and Rocket ships come from Humans, then we can conclude that evolution indirectly produces computers and rocket ships. This takes about a 3rd grade understanding of basic reasoning so it is not surprising he-she doesn't get it.

You might want to let your Christian creationist ministries know that their profoundly stupid adherents are pressing the notion that mechanical components evolve.

Are all creationists as stupid as you are?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Darwinian theory deals with natural, biological processes.

Computers and Rocket ships don't procreate or evolve by natural processes.

Your profoundly stupid comparisons only serve to suggest that you need to drink the Kool-aid and prove a component of Darwins' theory.

Listen you dunce if you are gonna try and defend a theory for Gods sake have a clue about the theory. Darwinian's had no clue of the biological processes we do today. Most of darwins views were based on a few observations with a lot of conjecture. The current theory of evolution is neo darwinism. Do I need to explain that to you as well you fraud.

How typical that a Christian creationist clown who understands nothing of evolutionary processes would be uttering further stupidity.

You choose the evolutionary process and let's see who actually knows the process and I will take it a step further by offering a rebuttal to it.

 

[Hollie]

Sad that no one who has frequented here can actually engage in a debate. This thread has been riddled with intellectual dishonesty and ad hominem attacks from atheists with an agenda.

Have you taken a look at your Avatar lately Captain Obvious? Wouldn't necessarily say that calling you a clown was name calling.



You make the fallacy of assuming that both accounts are myths. Since the Creation story is true, why would the Judeo-Christiani religion be the only religion that would have it as part of their history? Truth, no matter what religion it shows up in, always comes from God.

While the dating of the clay tablets may be accurate, this misses one very important fact. The Genesis story, while "written" down by Moses, had been a part of the Israelite's oral tradition for at least 1000 years, if not several thousand years by the time Moses took a chisel to rock.

By the way, while I believe in Creationism, I am not a "young earth" Creationist. I believe in a 4.5 Billion year old earth.

There is no evidence the creation tale is true. Science has disproved the tales you dreamy-eyed YEC'ers like to peddle as real.

Creationist clowns have a habit of making false claims and then running for the exits when pressed to support those claims. When your best effort amounts to cutting and pasting falsified, edited and phony "quotes" from christian creationist ministries, its time to peddle your snake oil elsewhere.

I notice you totally ignored responding with any kind of rebuttal to the DNA replication video from UR, typical from you. Still waiting on a viable explanation on the origins of life.

I noticed you also ignored the goofy video. Why dont you provide a detailed account of the false comparisons and bad analogies.

You can also reference the profoundly stupid comparisons that Christian creationists are forced to make. Here's a hint: what false principle did Meyer steal from Behe?

 

[CrackedSkull]

Your kidding right? You actually believe it's true?

Yeah, because this just happened by random chance. I have some beach front property in Arizona for sale too.

Let me guess - Ann Gauger sold you beachfront property in Arizona.

It must have been the photos' of the property she phonied-up by standing in front of a green screen.

Yeah - those creationist phonies find lemmings like you for the slaughter.

Let me guess - Ann Gauger sold you beachfront property in Arizona.

Did she get it from Ken Hovind?

 

[Youwerecreated]

There is no evidence the creation tale is true. Science has disproved the tales you dreamy-eyed YEC'ers like to peddle as real.

Creationist clowns have a habit of making false claims and then running for the exits when pressed to support those claims. When your best effort amounts to cutting and pasting falsified, edited and phony "quotes" from christian creationist ministries, its time to peddle your snake oil elsewhere.

I notice you totally ignored responding with any kind of rebuttal to the DNA replication video from UR, typical from you. Still waiting on a viable explanation on the origins of life.

I noticed you also ignored the goofy video. Why dont you provide a detailed account of the false comparisons and bad analogies.

You can also reference the profoundly stupid comparisons that Christian creationists are forced to make. Here's a hint: what false principle did Meyer steal from Behe?

why don't you make that your rebuttal and we will go from there.
You are suggesting meyer stole irreducible complexity. Does that mean that evolutionist stole darwins work ? Or since darwin was not the first to suggest evolution that he stole someone elses work ? I cannot believe the ignorance you exhibit.

 

[Hollie]

I notice you totally ignored responding with any kind of rebuttal to the DNA replication video from UR, typical from you. Still waiting on a viable explanation on the origins of life.

I noticed you also ignored the goofy video. Why dont you provide a detailed account of the false comparisons and bad analogies.

You can also reference the profoundly stupid comparisons that Christian creationists are forced to make. Here's a hint: what false principle did Meyer steal from Behe?

why don't you make that your rebuttal and we will go from there.
You are suggesting meyer stole irreducible complexity. Does that mean that evolutionist stole darwins work ? Or since darwin was not the first to suggest evolution that he stole someone elses work ? I cannot believe the ignorance you exhibit.

Gee whiz, what an angry fundie.

What you still can't understand is that evolutionary processes have passed through the filter of the scientific method where creationist tales and fables have been refuted as merely the imaginative musings of superstitious men.

Presenting your ignorance in such a public fashion seems to be a collective enterprise of hyper-religious loons.

 

[Hollie]

Listen you dunce if you are gonna try and defend a theory for Gods sake have a clue about the theory. Darwinian's had no clue of the biological processes we do today. Most of darwins views were based on a few observations with a lot of conjecture. The current theory of evolution is neo darwinism. Do I need to explain that to you as well you fraud.

How typical that a Christian creationist clown who understands nothing of evolutionary processes would be uttering further stupidity.

You choose the evolutionary process and let's see who actually knows the process and I will take it a step further by offering a rebuttal to it.

Already done. You are choosing to ignore the fact that I exposed your cutting and pasting from Christian creationist websites as fraudulent. The "quotes" you took from creationist websites were edited, parsed or manufactured. Their lies became your lies when you posted them multiple times after the lies were exposed. You dishonest cretin.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I noticed you also ignored the goofy video. Why dont you provide a detailed account of the false comparisons and bad analogies.

You can also reference the profoundly stupid comparisons that Christian creationists are forced to make. Here's a hint: what false principle did Meyer steal from Behe?

why don't you make that your rebuttal and we will go from there.
You are suggesting meyer stole irreducible complexity. Does that mean that evolutionist stole darwins work ? Or since darwin was not the first to suggest evolution that he stole someone elses work ? I cannot believe the ignorance you exhibit.

Gee whiz, what an angry fundie.

What you still can't understand is that evolutionary processes have passed through the filter of the scientific method where creationist tales and fables have been refuted as merely the imaginative musings of superstitious men.

Presenting your ignorance in such a public fashion seems to be a collective enterprise of hyper-religious loons.

still running hollie ?

 

[Hollie]

why don't you make that your rebuttal and we will go from there.
You are suggesting meyer stole irreducible complexity. Does that mean that evolutionist stole darwins work ? Or since darwin was not the first to suggest evolution that he stole someone elses work ? I cannot believe the ignorance you exhibit.

Gee whiz, what an angry fundie.

What you still can't understand is that evolutionary processes have passed through the filter of the scientific method where creationist tales and fables have been refuted as merely the imaginative musings of superstitious men.

Presenting your ignorance in such a public fashion seems to be a collective enterprise of hyper-religious loons.

still running hollie ?

Still promoting lies?

 

[Hollie]

Another list of creationist lies.

Another creationist list of lies – Pharyngula

It’s always amusing to see creationists try to explain why Charles Darwin was wrong, especially when they make up lists of reasons “Darwin’s theory of evolution does not hold up to scientific scrutiny.” These are always people who wouldn’t know what scientific scrutiny was if it knocked them immobile with a carefully measured dose of Conus snail toxin, strapped them to an operating table, and pumped high-intensity Science directly into their brains with a laser. As I often wish I could do.

Anyway, some ignorant jebus-lover hacked together a list of 10 “mistakes” that Darwin made. Strangely, they completely miss his actual errors (probably because they’ve never read anything by Darwin and don’t have enough knowledge of biology to recognize where he has been superceded) and babble on about what are actually creationist errors.

 

[Hollie]

Creationist Whoppers

This is a small sampler of creationist whoppers, gleaned from talk.origins in recent months. When I wrote that I had sent an unnamed creationist a small sampler of ICR whoppers, many people wrote and asked for a copy. I have much more distributed throughout my file system, and in books and on paper at home, but have not yet had a chance to gather them together. [plus my @#$! mailer seems to be broken. Sorry to those who wrote me and got no reply...]

So many liars, so little time! Until then, here is what I had sent to the creationist in question..

If you would like to enter your favorite creationist lie, mendacious misquotation or attack of amnesia, please mail them to me here, and much honor and glory will accrue to your name. Well, maybe a little.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Gee whiz, what an angry fundie.

What you still can't understand is that evolutionary processes have passed through the filter of the scientific method where creationist tales and fables have been refuted as merely the imaginative musings of superstitious men.

Presenting your ignorance in such a public fashion seems to be a collective enterprise of hyper-religious loons.

still running hollie ?

Still promoting lies?

Point out the lies and tell me why you consider them lies or are you just trying to change the subject ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Creationist Whoppers

This is a small sampler of creationist whoppers, gleaned from talk.origins in recent months. When I wrote that I had sent an unnamed creationist a small sampler of ICR whoppers, many people wrote and asked for a copy. I have much more distributed throughout my file system, and in books and on paper at home, but have not yet had a chance to gather them together. [plus my @#$! mailer seems to be broken. Sorry to those who wrote me and got no reply...]

So many liars, so little time! Until then, here is what I had sent to the creationist in question..

If you would like to enter your favorite creationist lie, mendacious misquotation or attack of amnesia, please mail them to me here, and much honor and glory will accrue to your name. Well, maybe a little.

may I suggest avoiding the nonsense on talk origins,it will cause your brain to waste away. I have read that site many times talk about a site full of fairytales. That is where most of you who can't think for yourselves go. Pretty much the same as atheist sites. I will take your spin as a refusal to talk about the issues. Well it's understandable when you don't know enough to have that discussion.

 

[Hollie]

Creationist Whoppers

This is a small sampler of creationist whoppers, gleaned from talk.origins in recent months. When I wrote that I had sent an unnamed creationist a small sampler of ICR whoppers, many people wrote and asked for a copy. I have much more distributed throughout my file system, and in books and on paper at home, but have not yet had a chance to gather them together. [plus my @#$! mailer seems to be broken. Sorry to those who wrote me and got no reply...]

So many liars, so little time! Until then, here is what I had sent to the creationist in question..

If you would like to enter your favorite creationist lie, mendacious misquotation or attack of amnesia, please mail them to me here, and much honor and glory will accrue to your name. Well, maybe a little.

may I suggest avoiding the nonsense on talk origins,it will cause your brain to waste away. I have read that site many times talk about site full of fairytales. That is where most of you that think for yourselves go. Pretty much the same as atheist sites. I will take your spin as a reluctance to talk about the issues.

I understand your frustration. Talkorigins is one site among many that exposes Christian creationist lies.

Your deep animosity to science based websites causes you to lash out because your promoting of falsehoods is easily debunked.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Creationist Whoppers

This is a small sampler of creationist whoppers, gleaned from talk.origins in recent months. When I wrote that I had sent an unnamed creationist a small sampler of ICR whoppers, many people wrote and asked for a copy. I have much more distributed throughout my file system, and in books and on paper at home, but have not yet had a chance to gather them together. [plus my @#$! mailer seems to be broken. Sorry to those who wrote me and got no reply...]

So many liars, so little time! Until then, here is what I had sent to the creationist in question..

If you would like to enter your favorite creationist lie, mendacious misquotation or attack of amnesia, please mail them to me here, and much honor and glory will accrue to your name. Well, maybe a little.

may I suggest avoiding the nonsense on talk origins,it will cause your brain to waste away. I have read that site many times talk about site full of fairytales. That is where most of you that think for yourselves go. Pretty much the same as atheist sites. I will take your spin as a reluctance to talk about the issues.

I understand your frustration. Talkorigins is one site among many that exposes Christian creationist lies.

Your deep animosity to science based websites causes you to lash out because your promoting of falsehoods is easily debunked.

No on the contrary,that site produces mindless robots that can't think for themselves. That site promotes fairytales and lies about the truth. You are nothing more then a deciple copying and pasting their religous lies.