Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I would like to Apologize to anyone I have offended in this thread. I never meant to do that but discussing some issues it does cause some exchanges to get personal. I have not acted like the person I should have at times in this thread and I regret that.
Take care all, will see you sometime maybe in another thread. Montrovant I do appreciate you being a very reasonable person and I did enjoy discussing issues with you.
This latest, weepy-eyed farewell lasted only a few hours. Usually (the last 8 or 9 weepy-eyed farewell's) you had the good sense to bail out long enough for your latest, profoundly silly claim to scroll past a few pages so as to reduce the embarrassment.
I would like to Apologize to anyone I have offended in this thread. I never meant to do that but discussing some issues it does cause some exchanges to get personal. I have not acted like the person I should have at times in this thread and I regret that.
Take care all, will see you sometime maybe in another thread. Montrovant I do appreciate you being a very reasonable person and I did enjoy discussing issues with you.
This latest, weepy-eyed farewell lasted only a few hours. Usually (the last 8 or 9 weepy-eyed farewell's) you had the good sense to bail out long enough for your latest, profoundly silly claim to scroll past a few pages so as to reduce the embarrassment.
I really wish you would get a life and leave the thread, even if it meant several weepy eyed attempts. Ah, alas one can dream. One question, what will you have really accomplished at the end of your self-loathing, miserable, Christian-hating, nazi-loving existence? Yours is the tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, while signifying absolutely nothing.
Just pre-ordered my copy...
Just pre-ordered my copy...
ID challenges a reigning scientific paradigm. But as sociologist Steve Fuller says, ID is not anti-science, but rather anti-establishment. ID theorists want more scientific investigation, not less. They simply want the freedom to follow the evidence without harassment or philosophical restrictions.
An ID-based view of science promises to open new avenues of scientific investigation. Without materialist paradigms governing science, perhaps more scientists would have sought function for structures like "junk" DNA and vestigial organs, rather than assuming they were non-functional evolutionary relics.
incorrect I'm embarrassing you.
this is one of those posts where you attempt to and fail to showcase your imaginary superiority in education and life in general.
Don't need to it's apparent.
Daws there are different fields of science for a reason.
Yes. Different fields of science were all configured among global conspirators to persecute Christian fundamentalists.
A good article from Laurence A. Moran at sandwalk
Sandwalk
Let's look at a recent post on Evolutin News * Views (sic): From Discovering Intelligent Design: Opposition from the Scientific Establishment. As the title suggests, this is an excerpt from one of the books being heavily promoted by the IDiots.
They have a problem. How do the IDiots explain why 99.9% of biologists oppose Intelligent Design Creationism? It's because they all have a materialistic bias that prevents them from following the evidence wherever it may lead. Read this bit ...
ID challenges a reigning scientific paradigm. But as sociologist Steve Fuller says, ID is not anti-science, but rather anti-establishment. ID theorists want more scientific investigation, not less. They simply want the freedom to follow the evidence without harassment or philosophical restrictions.
An ID-based view of science promises to open new avenues of scientific investigation. Without materialist paradigms governing science, perhaps more scientists would have sought function for structures like "junk" DNA and vestigial organs, rather than assuming they were non-functional evolutionary relics.
Let me remind you that the presence of junk DNA in our genome was not anticipated by those who believed in the importance of natural selection. What happened was that the evidence became too substantive to ignore so scientists had to accept the presence of junk DNA in spite of the fact that most of them expected selection to eliminate it.
Now if you insist on believing in an intelligent design paradigm then you simply can't follow the evidence wherever it may lead because junk DNA isn't part of your worldview. In other words, the example used by the IDiots in this post is the exact opposite of the point they are making.
Oops!
Now you know why we call them IDiots.
Don't need to it's apparent.
Daws there are different fields of science for a reason.
Yes. Different fields of science were all configured among global conspirators to persecute Christian fundamentalists.
I never said this I do however believe presuppositions will affect conclusions in some cases.
Yes. Different fields of science were all configured among global conspirators to persecute Christian fundamentalists.
I never said this I do however believe presuppositions will affect conclusions in some cases.
Well, yeah. Presuppositions affecting conclusions is precisely the mechanism used by creationists to define their nonsensical claims thus their conclusions: "the gawds did it"
Sure, it's dishonest and pointless but that doesn't stop the creation ministries and the Meyer groupies from continuing their lies.
A good article from Laurence A. Moran at sandwalk
Sandwalk
Let's look at a recent post on Evolutin News * Views (sic): From Discovering Intelligent Design: Opposition from the Scientific Establishment. As the title suggests, this is an excerpt from one of the books being heavily priomoted by the IDiots.
They have a problem. How do the IDiots explain why 99.9% of biologists oppose Intelligent Design Creationism? It's because they all have a materialistic bias that prevents them from following the evidence wherever it may lead. Read this bit ...
ID challenges a reigning scientific paradigm. But as sociologist Steve Fuller says, ID is not anti-science, but rather anti-establishment. ID theorists want more scientific investigation, not less. They simply want the freedom to follow the evidence without harassment or philosophical restrictions.
An ID-based view of science promises to open new avenues of scientific investigation. Without materialist paradigms governing science, perhaps more scientists would have sought function for structures like "junk" DNA and vestigial organs, rather than assuming they were non-functional evolutionary relics.
Let me remind you that the presence of junk DNA in our genome was not anticipated by those who believed in the importance of natural selection. What happened was that the evidence became too substantive to ignore so scientists had to accept the presence of junk DNA in spite of the fact that most of them expected selection to eliminate it.
Now if you insist on believing in an intelligent design paradigm then you simply can't follow the evidence wherever it may lead because junk DNA isn't part of your worldview. In other words, the example used by the IDiots in this post is the exact opposite of the point they are making.
Oops!
Now you know why we call them IDiots.
Still waiting for your response concerning this since you brought it up. It seems Harun Yahya kicked your butt again another reason to loathe them so.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/7352667-post2445.html
funny coming from you.I never said this I do however believe presuppositions will affect conclusions in some cases.
Well, yeah. Presuppositions affecting conclusions is precisely the mechanism used by creationists to define their nonsensical claims thus their conclusions: "the gawds did it"
Sure, it's dishonest and pointless but that doesn't stop the creation ministries and the Meyer groupies from continuing their lies.
Hell you argue for a theory you know very little about because it fits your agenda.
I never said this I do however believe presuppositions will affect conclusions in some cases.
Well, yeah. Presuppositions affecting conclusions is precisely the mechanism used by creationists to define their nonsensical claims thus their conclusions: "the gawds did it"
Sure, it's dishonest and pointless but that doesn't stop the creation ministries and the Meyer groupies from continuing their lies.
Hell you argue for a theory you know very little about because it fits your agenda.
funny coming from you.Well, yeah. Presuppositions affecting conclusions is precisely the mechanism used by creationists to define their nonsensical claims thus their conclusions: "the gawds did it"
Sure, it's dishonest and pointless but that doesn't stop the creation ministries and the Meyer groupies from continuing their lies.
Hell you argue for a theory you know very little about because it fits your agenda.
you argue for a fantasy ...
Well, yeah. Presuppositions affecting conclusions is precisely the mechanism used by creationists to define their nonsensical claims thus their conclusions: "the gawds did it"
Sure, it's dishonest and pointless but that doesn't stop the creation ministries and the Meyer groupies from continuing their lies.
Hell you argue for a theory you know very little about because it fits your agenda.
Well, hell, I've schooled you many times on the matters of science, biology, and the many fields of science that collectively support evolution.
You're a poor student. I can attribute that in part to your Christian fundamentalist beliefs and likely poor aptitude. I suspect you have also learned from the creation ministries you frequent that lies and deceit are a tactic to promote your fundamentalist beliefs.
Yes, it's dishonest and sleazy, but considering the number of times I have scolded you for cutting and pasting the same lies and phony / altered "quotes", I can only accept your actions as intentionally dishonest and sleazy.
A good article from Laurence A. Moran at sandwalk
Sandwalk
Let's look at a recent post on Evolutin News * Views (sic): From Discovering Intelligent Design: Opposition from the Scientific Establishment. As the title suggests, this is an excerpt from one of the books being heavily priomoted by the IDiots.
They have a problem. How do the IDiots explain why 99.9% of biologists oppose Intelligent Design Creationism? It's because they all have a materialistic bias that prevents them from following the evidence wherever it may lead. Read this bit ...
Let me remind you that the presence of junk DNA in our genome was not anticipated by those who believed in the importance of natural selection. What happened was that the evidence became too substantive to ignore so scientists had to accept the presence of junk DNA in spite of the fact that most of them expected selection to eliminate it.
Now if you insist on believing in an intelligent design paradigm then you simply can't follow the evidence wherever it may lead because junk DNA isn't part of your worldview. In other words, the example used by the IDiots in this post is the exact opposite of the point they are making.
Oops!
Now you know why we call them IDiots.
Still waiting for your response concerning this since you brought it up. It seems Harun Yahya kicked your butt again another reason to loathe them so.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/7352667-post2445.html
This has been explained to you countless times already.
That aside, a 6,000 year old earth precludes any consideration of evilution on the time scale you mentioned.
You can confirm this on Harun Yahya's website.
It is interesting how you denied cutting and pasting from Harun Yahya. When your posts were identified, you abruptly stuttered and mumbled about how you "may have" done exactly that. Yet again your dishonest tactics were exposed.Hell you argue for a theory you know very little about because it fits your agenda.
Well, hell, I've schooled you many times on the matters of science, biology, and the many fields of science that collectively support evolution.
You're a poor student. I can attribute that in part to your Christian fundamentalist beliefs and likely poor aptitude. I suspect you have also learned from the creation ministries you frequent that lies and deceit are a tactic to promote your fundamentalist beliefs.
Yes, it's dishonest and sleazy, but considering the number of times I have scolded you for cutting and pasting the same lies and phony / altered "quotes", I can only accept your actions as intentionally dishonest and sleazy.
Wake up hollie.
Still waiting for your response concerning this since you brought it up. It seems Harun Yahya kicked your butt again another reason to loathe them so.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/7352667-post2445.html
This has been explained to you countless times already.
That aside, a 6,000 year old earth precludes any consideration of evilution on the time scale you mentioned.
You can confirm this on Harun Yahya's website.
Evade.
It is interesting how you denied cutting and pasting from Harun Yahya. When your posts were identified, you abruptly stuttered and mumbled about how you "may have" done exactly that. Yet again your dishonest tactics were exposed.Well, hell, I've schooled you many times on the matters of science, biology, and the many fields of science that collectively support evolution.
You're a poor student. I can attribute that in part to your Christian fundamentalist beliefs and likely poor aptitude. I suspect you have also learned from the creation ministries you frequent that lies and deceit are a tactic to promote your fundamentalist beliefs.
Yes, it's dishonest and sleazy, but considering the number of times I have scolded you for cutting and pasting the same lies and phony / altered "quotes", I can only accept your actions as intentionally dishonest and sleazy.
Wake up hollie.
Would you care to stutter and mumble your way past some examples of your dishonest "quote mining"?
This has been explained to you countless times already.
That aside, a 6,000 year old earth precludes any consideration of evilution on the time scale you mentioned.
You can confirm this on Harun Yahya's website.
Evade.
No evasion. Harun Yahya has stolen a young earth model of the planet from Christian creation ministries.
You're aware of that you have frequently cut and pasted from that site.
