Why I am not Darwinist .... - Page 2 - Religion, God, and Theology

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Religion, God, and Theology

Why I am not Darwinist ....

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 2 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6

Page 2 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6

09-22-2015 , 01:38 PM

#26

uke_master

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 15,901

Festeringzit is totally poeing me these days

Quote

09-22-2015 , 02:15 PM

#27

festeringZit

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,442

Quote:

Originally Posted by uke_master

Festeringzit is totally poeing me these days

I'm not "poeing" at all.

Quote

09-22-2015 , 09:37 PM

#28

Sun Tzu

laconic

Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 84,770

Quote:

Originally Posted by festeringZit

I'm not "poeing" at all.

poe means it's impossible to tell if you're actually ******ed or just trolling

if you insist you're not trolling, I'm willing to take your word for it

Quote

09-22-2015 , 09:50 PM

#29

VeeDDzz`

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 4,384

Quote:

Originally Posted by festeringZit

He's still a blathering idiot.

Sounds like an unfair assessment, considering how much high-quality scientific work he's contributed.

Fighting blatant bias with blatant bias is hardly a productive or constructive approach.

Quote

09-22-2015 , 11:21 PM

#30

Lestat

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 10,998

Quote:

Originally Posted by festeringZit

Yeah, because this universe and life here just got here by magic.

What's so hard about saying, "I don't know"?

Try it a few times.

I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.

Stephen Hawking never claimed to know exactly what caused the universe to come into existence. Neither has Dawkins or any reputable scientist. They will all admit, "We don't know yet". But we sure as **** know about the diversity of life. You guys can keep sticking your thumbs in your ears all you want, but it won't change the facts. It seems you're the one who MUST have an answer to everything even if it's wrong? I seriously don't get why that is.

Quote

09-22-2015 , 11:23 PM

#31

Lestat

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 10,998

I'm not a Darwinist either. I'm also not a Newtonist, but I accept the overwhelming scientific consensus that scientific theories are the best possible explanation for what we can know in the present time.

Quote

09-22-2015 , 11:25 PM

#32

Lestat

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 10,998

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoinTrader

I see some evidence for micro evolution because we see it every day but macro evolution is filled with errors, speculation, and fairy tales.

I'm curious when you yourself have ever seen micro evolution take place, let alone, every day.

Quote

09-22-2015 , 11:29 PM

#33

batair

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 16,802

Quote:

Originally Posted by festeringZit

Yeah, because this universe and life here just got here by magic.

Because we all know, if gravity exists, then the universe can create
itself. Hawkings said it, so it must be true.

Or maybe it was alien sperm that did it, because Dawkins proposed that,
so it must be true...

Fairy tales are fun aren't they?

Do i need to dismiss all things i see as equally or more far fetched?

Quote

09-23-2015 , 12:35 AM

#34

Sun Tzu

laconic

Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 84,770

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoinTrader

I don't really buy into Darwinism for a number of reason. I see some evidence for micro evolution because we see it every day but macro evolution is filled with errors, speculation, and fairy tales.

if small amounts of change are observable over short time periods, what happens over millions or billions of years?

you are basically saying you can see how someone could walk 20 miles in a day but you don't see how that could get someone 600 miles in a month of walking

Quote

09-23-2015 , 01:26 AM

#35

BeaucoupFish

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 4,575

Quote:

Originally Posted by festeringZit

I'm not sure why you bothered to post that, as it actually proves my point. He said exactly what I said he said.

Now, whether or not Dawkins wants to backtrack and say that's not what he really intended to say - that's up to him. He's still a blathering idiot.

Now, you calling it spreading false information is laughable. You saying it has been shown to be false is also laughable.

Any questions?

Oh, and Dawkins claiming that all Intelligent Design folks are all creationist Christians in disguise is a blathering lie. Any questions about that also?

"I want to backtrack: that's spreading false information (it has been shown to be false). Oh, and all Intelligent Design folks are all creationist Christians in disguise."
- festeringZit, Sep 2015

Thanks for clarifying.

Quote

09-23-2015 , 03:26 AM

#36

Bladesman87

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 14,543

At times like this I prefer to fall back on Incompetent Design Theory.

Like emus. How drunk/stupid do you have to be before you think "Birds are cool, but one that can't fly would be even better"?

Quote

09-23-2015 , 07:06 AM

#37

tame_deuces

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 17,817

Quote:

Originally Posted by festeringZit

My post is "bickering?" If my one post in this thread is bickering,
what does that make your joke of a reply?

Oh, and let me make what is already painfully obvious even more obvious
to you: I was quoting the renowned (Atheist) physicist Stephen Hawking,
which means I guess that you don't think Hawking is worth his mettle.
Cool, because I think he's lost his mind on this issue.

The individuals you mention are clearly up front about a lot of what they discuss being speculation. Your claims are not factual and do not merit a response.

It is sad to see that you couldn't defend your views without resorting to hyperbole.

Quote

09-23-2015 , 10:14 AM

#38

festeringZit

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,442

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lestat

I have absolutely no idea where you got this blather from.

I have absolutely no problems admitting there are things I nor anyone
else have no clue about. So, you can apologize for that drivel you
posted above. I'm waiting.

Quote

09-23-2015 , 10:21 AM

#39

festeringZit

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,442

Quote:

Originally Posted by tame_deuces

The individuals you mention are clearly up front about a lot of what they discuss being speculation. Your claims are not factual and do not merit a response.

It is sad to see that you couldn't defend your views without resorting to hyperbole.

Next time you attempt to reply to my posts, please do your homework
first, as you clearly have absolutely no clue about what you are
trying to talk about. Either that, or you are a complete troll, only
interested in lying and creating drama and bickering.

I'll wait for your apology also.

Stephen Hawking, The Grand Design:

“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.The universe didn't need a God to begin; it was quite capable of launching its existence on its own,"

Quote

09-23-2015 , 10:23 AM

#40

festeringZit

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,442

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeaucoupFish

Glad to see at least you're being overt about your desire to distort and lie
about people's posts.

Quote

09-23-2015 , 10:58 AM

#41

batair

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 16,802

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladesman87

At times like this I prefer to fall back on Incompetent Design Theory.

Like emus. How drunk/stupid do you have to be before you think "Birds are cool, but one that can't fly would be even better"?

And someone put mammals that were never on land in the water. thats odd.

Quote

09-23-2015 , 11:21 AM

#42

festeringZit

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,442

Quote:

Originally Posted by batair

And someone put mammals that were never on land in the water. thats odd.

What's even odder is scientists supplying fake whale fossils to museums,
admitting it after the fact - and then the museums continue to display
the fake fossils.

Funny how that works...

Quote

09-23-2015 , 11:27 AM

#43

batair

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 16,802

No thats not odder.

A blue whale that never was on land is odder. God must of us wanted us to think it was once walking around on land then changed a lot when it really didn't. Strange indeed.

Quote

09-23-2015 , 11:59 AM

#44

Lestat

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 10,998

Quote:

Originally Posted by festeringZit

You called it "magic". You also claimed that Hawking said "it must be true". Did you not? So you can apologize for YOUR mistakes, but I'm not gonna hold my breath. I don't think you're to the necessary level of the subject matter ITT, let alone being able to recognize all the logic mistake you're making.

Quote

09-23-2015 , 04:06 PM

#45

festeringZit

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,442

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lestat

Are you really that obtuse that you can't see the obvious sarcasm?

Quote

09-24-2015 , 12:13 AM

#46

Lestat

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 10,998

Quote:

Originally Posted by festeringZit

Are you really that obtuse that you can't see the obvious sarcasm?

I'm not a reg here anymore. What you wrote is a typically ignorant argument by a creationist almost verbatim, and I've dealt with enough of them that I don't assume sarcasm. Wish I could.

Quote

09-24-2015 , 12:21 AM

#47

BeaucoupFish

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 4,575

Quote:

Originally Posted by festeringZit

Glad to see at least you're being overt about your desire to distort and lie
about people's posts.

What's the matter, don't you like being quote mined?

Quote

09-24-2015 , 03:43 AM

#48

tame_deuces

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 17,817

Quote:

Originally Posted by festeringZit

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Grand Design

"We do not yet have a definitive answer to this question, but we now have a candidate for the ultimate theory of everything, if indeed one exists, called M-theory"

or this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Grand Design

" But no single theory within the network can describe every aspect of the universe—all the forces of nature, the particles that feel those forces, and the framework of space and time in which it all plays out"

So either these quotes are just in the book by some editorial mistake and should be ignored, or your description needs to be adjusted.

Quote

09-24-2015 , 11:59 AM

#49

festeringZit

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,442

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeaucoupFish

What's the matter, don't you like being quote mined?

You are clearly trolling.

While my quote didn't in any way change the substance of the subject matter, yours clearly did.

Care to try again, or are you just here to troll?

Quote

09-24-2015 , 12:01 PM

#50

festeringZit

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,442

Quote:

Originally Posted by tame_deuces

Yeah... the problem of course is that you don't read what you quote, reference or criticize, which seems to be an RGT trend as of late. For example, your narrative of the book certainly doesn't fit this quote:

or this:

So either these quotes are just in the book by some editorial mistake and should be ignored, or your description needs to be adjusted.

Editorial mistake? BWHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH

Funny how the "mistake" was never corrected, considering the ****-storm it created in the media.

Quote

Page 2 of 6

First

1 2 3 4 5 6

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 2 of 6

First

1 2 3 4 5 6

Last