|
|
Post by strat-0 on Nov 10, 2005 16:01:03 GMT -5
I have never seen seen anyone handed their ass as utterly, completely, and scientifically as Matzke has done to Wells at the website Luke posted the link for aboave, Talk Origins. Wells is busted. Badly. That's about the end of the story. Sadly, it won't do much good though, since as they say, no one is so blind as he who will not see. Some people's minds are made up and they won't be confused with the facts.
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Nov 10, 2005 17:16:32 GMT -5
www.slate.com/id/2128755/ - Funny read. I am sure we are all dummer for having had this discussion...all of us, except Dee, who found all of this hilarious and only had her viewpoints strengthened. Such is the case when one searches only for the things that agree with your worldview.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Nov 10, 2005 18:10:11 GMT -5
Wow....I can see this is indeed a sad case of affairs. I see this whole argument has become extremely idiototic, soley because not ONE of you is even remotely familar with Michael Behe. Nice try kmc, and Luke. But I hate to inform you that Michael Behe has more intelligence in his little pinky than everyone on this board put together.  Maybe if you would lay off the brain baking you could understand....but then again maybe not. As for the article I cited about the Behemoth, yes I know that was a pro evolutionary site. Why on earth would I do something like that? Well could it be the fact that an evolutionist used the word Behemoth to describe a dinosaur, after shin just called me the stupidest person on this board for saying dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible  duhduhduhduh duh duh duh *banjo playing* Here is one of Behe's critics, interesting what he has to say, read it and LEARN. Darwin v. Intelligent Design (again) bostonreview.net/BR21.6/orr.html |
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Nov 10, 2005 18:12:16 GMT -5
www.slate.com/id/2128755/ - Funny read. I am sure we are all dummer for having had this discussion...all of us, except Dee, who found all of this hilarious and only had her viewpoints strengthened. Such is the case when one searches only for the things that agree with your worldview. That is quite a mouth full considering every link or cut and paste by the others was EXACTLY the same thing you accuse me of. But what I have put up is coming from BOTH sides of the fence. |
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Nov 10, 2005 19:18:19 GMT -5
Certainly, if we can find someone who agrees with you, Dee, then your point is valid. Great to know that's how it works. That Santa is real can be validated by millions of children worldwide. Conservative and Liberal children. Certainly, then, Santa must be real.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Nov 10, 2005 19:31:38 GMT -5
The very same thing can be said about the points made here by others.
Funny, 40% of scientists still believe in God, or a superior being.
But thats ok, I guess we will all find out in the end now won't we.....
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Nov 10, 2005 19:52:07 GMT -5
The very same thing can be said about the points made here by others. Funny, 40% of scientists still believe in God, or a superior being. But thats ok, I guess we will all find out in the end now won't we..... No, it can't, because scientific reality is not dependent on how many people believe in something. Scientific reality depends on what can be disproven. ID cannot. But you know, Galileo was right even as the world ridiculed him. Belief in any kind of Biblical truth is not a prerequisite to belief in God. Many people believe that creation is bullshit and yet are ardent believers in God. |
|
|
|
Post by shin on Nov 10, 2005 19:55:53 GMT -5
As for the article I cited about the Behemoth, yes I know that was a pro evolutionary site. Why on earth would I do something like that? Well could it be the fact that an evolutionist used the word Behemoth to describe a dinosaur, after shin just called me the stupidest person on this board for saying dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible Hey, while we're not actually reading the substance of articles we're linking to and cherrypicking the words one person uses to describe the T-Rex (completely devoid of all biblical context might I add), why not also point out that "Tyrannosaurus Rex" is LATIN for "Terrible King Lizard"...now you tell me how a LIZARD can be a KING during times when people SPOKE LATIN, hmm?? Perhaps because he was the terrible lizard OF "the King"...  I believe the bushmen drew that, so we can consider it a historical document. Indeed. |
|
|
|
Post by shin on Nov 10, 2005 20:02:47 GMT -5
"Thanks Rex, without you this walk through Golgotha would've been crucifying!"
"Oh Jesus, you really nailed that pun!"
ba dum TISH
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Nov 10, 2005 21:23:57 GMT -5
The very same thing can be said about the points made here by others. Funny, 40% of scientists still believe in God, or a superior being. But thats ok, I guess we will all find out in the end now won't we..... Oh I see, you've bought into the bullshit that it's science OR God. There's no reason you can't believe in both because they are two completely different things. The God squad has pulled a fast one...it's God Vs. Science, pick your team...you're either with us or you against us....that sounds familiar... |
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Nov 10, 2005 21:25:39 GMT -5
Shin, that was the most retarded post I have ever seen by you.
Did it ever occur to you that the Bible is indeed a historical document? It is cited in college history books for historical purposes?
I am having just a wee bit of a problem understanding EXACTLY what you are putting into my mouth? Especially with some of this garbage I have seen put up here about humans and dinosaurs living together. Are you that retarded to think that just because the dinosaur is described perfectly in the form of Behemoth that Job actually lived side by side with them? Or because Bushmen may have drawn pictures of them they lived side by side with them as well? I am sure the knowledge of dinosaurs was known by "certain" groups and handed down through the generations. Just like ancient maps have been drawn that are strikingly similar to how the earth's land looked, without the use of ariel photography.
Did it ever occur to you that there is some original truth in folklore? Oh wait....probably not....because you obviously are null & void in the history and folklore department.
I still have yet to hear an explanation from ANY of you why there are so many misleading falsehoods being taught in the textbooks concerning evolution.....come on....I know you can do it. Yep, and you call it verifiable science.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Nov 10, 2005 21:31:42 GMT -5
The very same thing can be said about the points made here by others. Funny, 40% of scientists still believe in God, or a superior being. But thats ok, I guess we will all find out in the end now won't we..... Oh I see, you've bought into the bullshit that it's science OR God. There's no reason you can't believe in both because they are two completely different things. The God squad has pulled a fast one...it's God Vs. Science, pick your team...you're either with us or you against us....that sounds familiar... Actually if you knew anything about Behe or read any of his work, or the article I just posted about him written by one of his critics you would know that is completely NOT true. But then why should I be surprised, shin can't even grasp the concept that even an article out of a science magazine uses the Biblical term for the dinosaur. And most scholars indeed agree that the Behemoth was indeed a dinosaur, as well as Leviathon. |
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Nov 10, 2005 21:33:48 GMT -5
Because there's all kinds of misleading shit taught in every classroom, and you'd like to add ID to the list...
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Nov 10, 2005 21:35:39 GMT -5
Oh I see, you've bought into the bullshit that it's science OR God. There's no reason you can't believe in both because they are two completely different things. The God squad has pulled a fast one...it's God Vs. Science, pick your team...you're either with us or you against us....that sounds familiar... Actually if you knew anything about Behe or read any of his work, or the article I just posted about him written by one of his critics you would know that is completely NOT true. But then why should I be surprised, shin can't even grasp the concept that even an article out of a science magazine uses the Biblical term for the dinosaur. And most scholars indeed agree that the Behemoth was indeed a dinosaur, as well as Leviathon. Really this is proof for you? That the same word was used? That's pretty weak proof... |
|
|
|
Post by Nepenthe on Nov 10, 2005 21:37:15 GMT -5
Because there's all kinds of misleading shit taught in every classroom, and you'd like to add ID to the list... Teaching that human origins may have had a little help from an outside force is misleading? Please elaborate....enlighten me. But putting pictures of fake embyros in Biology books, using "staged" experiments to try and prove a point, and completely leaving out much information and twisting the real scientific evidence is perfectly ok No no evolutionists don't have an agenda whatsoever.. Bullshit. |
|
