Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

farmerman wrote:
"If we can go to the moon, why cant we cure the common cold"?
FM, at first you personally have never been on the Moon, and second you really cannot cure common cold without the help of the immune system ... hence, what in particular is your problem? You are missing key information about life and evolution - just accept it.

Read what he actually said on this issue, Herald. You are making a fool of yourself.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

You are making a fool of yourself.

This is not critically fatal, so far I am watching your comments.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

"Live v Dead DNA" kinda like "live or dead nylon"

No, it is very much different. A dead DNA is when a retro virus for example can circulate throughout the biosphere without making any harm or damages ... and when it is re-activated to attack the immune system, for example, it might be everything else but dead.

0 Replies

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
You are making a fool of yourself.
This is not critically fatal, so far I am watching your comments.

?????

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

?????

Yes, F., what is the idea of writing five question marks in boldface, and what is the difference between five question marks in boldface ????? and six question marks in italics ??????, for example ... if you have to say something that is really important - and is relevant to the topic above all - believe it or not, but you don't need any boldface.
The accent is in the context of what you are saying - it is neither in the syntax, nor in the desktop publishing fireworks. If you don't have anything important to say the boldface could hardly save you. Anyway.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
?????
Yes, F., what is the idea of writing five question marks in boldface, and what is the difference between five question marks in boldface ????? and six question marks in italics ??????, for example ... if you have to say something that is really important - and is relevant to the topic above all - believe it or not, but you don't need any boldface.
The accent is in the context of what you are saying - it is neither in the syntax, nor in the desktop publishing fireworks. If you don't have anything important to say the boldface could hardly save you. Anyway.

I had something to say...whether it is important enough for someone like you or not, is a problem you have to deal with.

My initial response to you was:

Quote:

Read what he actually said on this issue, Herald. You are making a fool of yourself.

Allow me to repeat it, because it still holds:

Read what Farmerman actually wrote on the issue. You are making a fool of yourself.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Quote:

Since when you have become expert in medical science

So, we can discount your arguments then since you are not an expert in science? Good to know what your standards are. Now why don't you apply them to yourself.

2 Replies

@parados,

He doesn't know how! LOL

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

I had something to say...whether it is important enough for someone like you or not, is a problem you have to deal with.

I am not sure that the boldface with which you are writing is exactly my problem. Anyway.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Read what Farmerman actually wrote on the issue. You are making a fool of yourself.

O.K., why don't you tell me what was the claim of FM about 'the aminoacids that are nothing more than simple polymers'? ... and what does that 'simple' mean?

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

So, we can discount your arguments then since you are not an expert in science?

... and so you think that if you have written some mumbo jumbo 'scientific' method two decades ago, printed on paper, collecting the dust in some basement at present you are an 'expert in science' (whatever this might mean). WFM

2 Replies

@Herald,

Since you're not an expert in science, how in hell would you know? LOL

PLEASE PROVIDE PROOF FOR YOUR GOD. JUST ONE IS OKAY.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

PLEASE PROVIDE PROOF FOR YOUR GOD. JUST ONE IS OKAY.

Who designed the laws of physics, for example ... not who discovered them, or as an alternative, how can a law of physics appear by stochastic processes on 'auto pilot'. Can you give an example of something well structured with systematic functionality appearing just so, out of nothing, and by pure stochastics?

1 Reply

@Herald,

you got a point! studied Hoyle?

0 Replies

Then there is this, but first I must mention I am not sure if there is a God, or whatever.

BUT, in 'science' isn't God excluded at the beginning of any research?
So, that by 'science' we automatically exclude a God or whatever?
And, isn't thay not very stupid? I mean, if there is a god, or whatever, 'science' is not be able to find it because it was already ezxcluded from the beginning?
So it's a bit of circular reasoning by 'science" (again!).
Besided that science isn't for searching any truth anyhow!
It is an indoctrination-tool for the masses. Like opium, like a rel.... get it?

0 Replies

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
I had something to say...whether it is important enough for someone like you or not, is a problem you have to deal with.
I am not sure that the boldface with which you are writing is exactly my problem. Anyway.

If you have a problem with me writing in "boldface"...it is your problem.

Quote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Read what Farmerman actually wrote on the issue. You are making a fool of yourself.
O.K., why don't you tell me what was the claim of FM about 'the aminoacids that are nothing more than simple polymers'? ... and what does that 'simple' mean?

I never said a word about any of that, Herald. I mentioned one specific post of yours.

Here is your post:

http://able2know.org/topic/226001-165#post-5813645

Here is the post to which you were responding:

http://able2know.org/topic/226001-165#post-5813194

Get someone (make it someone who can actually read) to help you figure out why I thought it appropriate to tell you:

"Read what he actually said on this issue, Herald. You are making a fool of yourself."

Which I did at:

http://able2know.org/topic/226001-166#post-5813650

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Herald 's first language is not English so he misses the little analogies and comparisons in irony that we frequently use.
Rather than debating a point that he will NEVER UNDERSTAND, I gave up on him.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Herald 's first language is not English so he misses the little analogies and comparisons in irony that we frequently use.
Rather than debating a point that he will NEVER UNDERSTAND, I gave up on him.

I didn't know it was a second language for him. I'll drop it...although yesterday someone said to me, "If we can land a spacecraft on a particular spot on a goddam comet...how come we can't balance our checkbook." He was talking about the deficit. As you can imagine, you and Herald came to mind. (You first! )

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Herald 's first language is not English

When a person misses the real arguments he starts dealing with the language qualification. Is this the most important on this thread?

farmerman wrote:

Rather than debating a point that he will NEVER UNDERSTAND, I gave up on him.

... and what is that point (of view perhaps) that I will never understand ... if it is not some secret?

0 Replies

@Herald,

You are the one that set the requirement of being an expert in order to comment. Yet you don't seem to apply that standard to yourself, do you?

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Why don't you simply answer to the questions on the thread ... if you can at all.

1 Reply

Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know