32
   

Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jun, 2014 03:58 am
@cicerone imposter,
If ever proof was needed that you are completely uninterested in being Abled to Know there it is. Thus trolling. Non stop.

I offer you a quote from one of the most famous writers of the last two centuries which suggests that you have not understood the Bible about which you blather so much and you don't want to know. A socialist and an atheist too he was. Fabian women fighting over him which is evolution's sternest test.

Not for you any "maybe I should look into it before I open my trap".

100% proof you are an ignorant trolling bigot.

What are you doing on Able 2 Know when not even a guy like Shaw can dent your thick skull? You don't want to know anything. You know it all. No discussion.

You should be on a Holiday Snaps site with others who are so bored with where they live that they spend their own kid's inheritance money in their desperation to get away from it.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jun, 2014 04:06 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
The idea doesn't need evidence it is so obvious.



ROFLMAO You're a ******* joke! You are the joke.


Oh yeah. Every stud farm stable maid knows it. Every kennel maid. Every pigeon racer. Every woman knows it too.

They knew it thousands of years ago. As soon as settled agriculture appeared in the world. fm uses it for sheep breeding. The whole meat industry too.

It is obvious.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jun, 2014 04:25 am
@cicerone imposter,
Also the fruit growers, the flower sellers and the sperm banks along with those who are marketing Oxbridge eggs on eBay.
0 Replies
 
Herald
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jun, 2014 09:04 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
Religious motivation has none of what can be determined as 'common sense,' because it relies on faith and nothing else!

RE: the beliefs
Even science is based on beliefs - this is not the world. It is our knowledge about the world, our understanding, which actually is a representation based on personal beliefs. The fact that science is based on beliefs of first order (result of personal experience, observations & conclusions) and the religion is based on beliefs of second order (result of trusting on external beliefs) does not change the very circumstance that it is beliefs in essence ... only beliefs and nothing else.

RE: the 'common sense'
This is not true (that "Religious motivation has none of what can be determined as 'common sense,' ") for most of the extended interpretations of the religious beliefs are based on logic - logical inferences and logical assumptions, etc.
The problem that it is full of misinterpretations and cross-cultural misunderstandings does not necessarily mean that all the logic that it uses is fake. The method of assigning beliefs on external experience is also based on logic and comprises logic by itself. If you don't trust this method you will never assign belief to any messages on the mass media and would trust only things of immediate personal experience (which BTW is also disputable in terms of trustworthiness).
Can you guarantee that there are no scientific conclusions based on fake logic and fake assumptions (like the theory of the Big Bang ... for example)?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jun, 2014 09:24 pm
@Herald,
Of coarse science is based on 'beliefs.' It's a belief that relies on proving through observation that what is considered scientific truth can be relied upon to be based on facts and evidence. Science has a way of correcting mistakes and errors through continued research. Scientific belief is reliable enough for us to have confidence in their findings.

You wrote,
Quote:
for most of the extended interpretations of the religious beliefs are based on logic - logical inferences and logical assumptions, etc.


How do you apply logic to religious beliefs? Please provide examples of "logical inferences and logical assumptions?"
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2014 03:52 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
How do you apply logic to religious beliefs? Please provide examples of "logical inferences and logical assumptions?"


That you believe that you own your house and the land it is on because it is written on a piece of paper that you do.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2014 10:28 am
@spendius,
Not only that, but I have title papers to prove it, and the county assessor has this house in our name - all legal in a court of law.

You really don't know logic or laws, and haven't answered the question on "logical inferences and logical assumptions" as they apply to religion.
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2014 10:30 am
@Herald,
for starters, the evoultion THEORY is one big hoax!

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2014 10:37 am
@Quehoniaomath,
You're one dumb arse! You post bull shyt without any regard to facts and evidence.

You,
Quote:
the evoultion THEORY is one big hoax!


Prove it!
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2014 10:57 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
You really don't know logic or laws, and haven't answered the question on "logical inferences and logical assumptions" as they apply to religion.


Of course I have. More fully on the Something from Nothing thread.

This is a thread not concerned with legalities founded on force and strictly limited in time.

Which religion are you talking about?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2014 11:06 am
@spendius,
You,
Quote:
Which religion are you talking about?

All or any one you wish to present.
0 Replies
 
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2014 11:32 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Prove it


Now, THAT is strange, I have to laugh, really,
There is NO EVIDENCE for the nonsense of evolution, and I have to proof it?????????


No, no, no.

It is on the morons (read scientists) to prove that (macro)evolution is true!
As long as there is no evidence I regard all this bollocks and shite as one big hoax.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2014 11:44 am
@Quehoniaomath,
From evolutionfact.com. Prove the following five facts are lies.
You can't just make a claim they are lies without proving from factual evidence that they are. Where's you evidence? Just empty words.

Quote:
Five Proofs of Evolution
In this article, we look at five simple examples which support the Theory of Evolution.
by Richard Peacock
1. The universal genetic code. All cells on Earth, from our white blood cells, to simple bacteria, to cells in the leaves of trees, are capable of reading any piece of DNA from any life form on Earth. This is very strong evidence for a common ancestor from which all life descended.

2. The fossil record. The fossil record shows that the simplest fossils will be found in the oldest rocks, and it can also show a smooth and gradual transition from one form of life to another.

Please watch this video for an excellent demonstration of fossils transitioning from simple life to complex vertebrates.

3. Genetic commonalities. Human beings have approximately 96% of genes in common with chimpanzees, about 90% of genes in common with cats (source), 80% with cows (source), 75% with mice (source), and so on. This does not prove that we evolved from chimpanzees or cats, though, only that we shared a common ancestor in the past. And the amount of difference between our genomes corresponds to how long ago our genetic lines diverged.

4. Common traits in embryos. Humans, dogs, snakes, fish, monkeys, eels (and many more life forms) are all considered "chordates" because we belong to the phylum Chordata. One of the features of this phylum is that, as embryos, all these life forms have gill slits, tails, and specific anatomical structures involving the spine. For humans (and other non-fish) the gill slits reform into the bones of the ear and jaw at a later stage in development. But, initially, all chordate embryos strongly resemble each other.

In fact, pig embryos are often dissected in biology classes because of how similar they look to human embryos. These common characteristics could only be possible if all members of the phylum Chordata descended from a common ancestor.

5. Bacterial resistance to antibiotics. Bacteria colonies can only build up a resistance to antibiotics through evolution. It is important to note that in every colony of bacteria, there are a tiny few individuals which are naturally resistant to certain antibiotics. This is because of the random nature of mutations.

When an antibiotic is applied, the initial innoculation will kill most bacteria, leaving behind only those few cells which happen to have the mutations necessary to resist the antibiotics. In subsequent generations, the resistant bacteria reproduce, forming a new colony where every member is resistant to the antibiotic. This is natural selection in action. The antibiotic is "selecting" for organisms which are resistant, and killing any that are not.
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2014 11:48 am
@cicerone imposter,
I know all this, but it still is NO EVIDENCE for macroevolution in which one species evolves in another species.
You see hwat you are talking about is not macro-evolution.
it hasn't beeen done yet, there is no evidence, and there waa evidence but these where hoaxes indeed, to name afew, piltdownman, peppered moths and what have you, it is all just a bundle of bollocks and lies.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2014 04:25 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Im waiting for Quahogs head to explode. Hes a stage IV science denier that Im afraid theres nothing he even is able to understand.

sad, but funny.

when Brits are twits they go for the whole turnip.MAybe we should start calling him Baldrick
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2014 04:37 pm
@Quehoniaomath,
If you 'know all this,' but don't understand the meaning of the facts and evidence presented, you're dumber than shyt!

Quit wasting cyber space with your ignorance. All will be better off.
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2014 04:50 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
If you 'know all this,' but don't understand the meaning of the facts and evidence presented, you're dumber than shyt!

Quit wasting cyber space with your ignorance. All will be better off.


wow! Me thinks you are a coward. If you were here you wouldn't dare to say that in my face.

Really...
0 Replies
 
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2014 04:51 am
@farmerman,
whatever, anyway, please explain why you still believe in the evoolution bollocks?
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2014 05:59 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
Hes a stage IV science denier that Im afraid theres nothing he even is able to understand.


You went all the way, fm, when you denied the science in the Nigerian case and chose to seek popularity with your sentimental, and probably faked, homilies. And then never answered the challenge when it was put to you.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2014 02:07 pm
@Quehoniaomath,
why do I owe anything to you? youre the luddite, so I doubt you would even understand what is explained to you.
 

Related Topics

Intelligent Design - Question by giujohn
What is Intelligent Design? - Discussion by RexRed
Do *ANY* creationists understand evolution? - Discussion by rosborne979
The Bed Bug/Parasite Plant Theory - Question by TeePee38
dna worlds - Discussion by Syamsu
DD VERSUS EVOLUTION - Discussion by Setanta
The Evil of god - Discussion by giujohn
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/21/2024 at 01:27:32