Let's lay it out on the table--Creationism vs. Evolution. Two stories to describe one event that we have never witnessed nor will ever prove conclusively. Which story sounds better? Why? and/or why waste your time discussing it?
Greeb
by Miguel
I think I understand your basic point of view, however is there any need to resort to personal attack?
Why not just state your argument and back it up with facts and references? There isn't any need to insult people or use invective - leave that to folks like Jonathan and Vender Doov.
Just a friendly comment.
Fuck you're a loser.
Not only do we know that you love Dukes of Hazard, but you admit to liking Oprah and Dr. Phil too?
What else fills up your intellectual calendar fuckbreath? Jerry Springer? Cheats? The Naked News?
LOL.
You're so fucking pathetic you don't even need me, Gallo, Miguel or MArtha to make you look stupid, you do that all by your little self.
Jesus, what a fucking waste of sperm you are.
Just in case you dont "get it", here is a little hint:
Miggy as he realizes we are all laughing at their little mud wrestling competition, tries to get the Midgit Freak to step out of the ring.
But he is just too stupid to realize that he is the best entertainment and the "main attraction" to the circus act:)
Thinking he's got someone in some sort of head lock, He tells Miggy "hey they are getting what they deserve" but the reality is that people are laughing at him:)
So have you tried the new HAM Sandwiches at Arby's Restaurants yet?:) Oh, and Wendys has a new HAMBURGER with BACON:)
Typical Idiotman.
Vomiting more of his inane and senseless tripe and unwittingly serving as a further warning to the world that pre-natal alcohol poisoning has serious effects on cognition.
And for those of you who are as intellectually challenged as Idiotman, Vender & Mitten: Your Mummy shouldn't have kept sucking those Jim Beans throughout her 9 months carrying your pathetic foetus.
This has been a community service announcement with translations for ignorant jerkoffs.
So far Mitten's only response to my post below has been to attack the concept of religiously inspired dietary laws.
Not a word of retraction for the outright falsehoods she peddled, nor the factual mistakes she made, nor even any attempt to defend her position.
Instead all she does is comment how much she likes bacon and dogs and isn't afraid of them.
It's an oft-used and readily recognisable tactic: avoid discussing facts and focus on one specific irrelevancy in order to deflect comment from the refutation of their basic thesis.
I look forward to read your defense of your opinions and your acknowledgement of your factual errors (or attempts for the defense of same - with references hopefully).
I decided to answer a previous post in a separate thread. My apologies for this but I felt this was an important issue.
Often times it is ignorance and fear that fuel hatred, and such posts only serve to maintain a stereotype that is useful to hate groups or opportunistic politicians.
* Why are there Hundreds of Muslim sects in Islam?
There aren't of course.
There are in fact fewer than a dozen - which I will go through here:
The most well known and largest sects are:
- Sunnis
- Shi'ites.
Less well known are:
- Sufis (Mystics)
- Kahrijites (Earliest of the fundamentalist sects)
- Wahhabis (First of the Modern Fundamentalist movements)
- Ismailis (a sub-sect of the Shi'ites - probably extinct)
- Zaidis (Messianic & apocalyptic zealots)
- Fatimids (Successors to the Ismailis and also extinct)
- Nizari (Sub-sect of Isamilis. Extinct)
- Alawis / Nusayris (sub-sect of Ismailis - NOT Shia - Not considered mainstream Islam)
- Druze (Not considered mainstream Islam as they believe in a personification of God)
- Baha'i (Now considered a separate religion - no longer Islamic in nature)
- Sikhism (As with Bahai, considered a separate religion - no longer Islamic in nature)
In comparison Christianity has at least a hundred different denominations, groups and sects.
* Why are these Islamic sects fighting and killing each other, even within the same sect?
For the same reasons that Christian sects have been fighting each other for millenia - politics for the most part, theology to a secondary degree, from Albigensian Crusades to the Thirty Years War and the Troubles in Northern Ireland.
* Why are Muslims struggling to flee to non-Muslim countries?
Most of the Muslim countries being fled are subject to either internal or external conflicts and/or economic hardship.
In this sense the Muslims fleeing from these countries are no different from Christians or any other religious adherents who flee from their countries for the same reasons.
Countries like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the Emirates are not being fled from, nor is the most populous Islamic country on Earth - Indonesia.
* Why cannot the Muslim males and females pray together, like other religions in a family unit?
Islam, along with Judaism, segregates males & females during worship because they feel that men and women can better concentrate on worship if so segregated.
* Why is a Muslim marriage only a contract and not sacred, unlike other religions?
Marriage is considered just as sacred in Islam - whole suras from the Quran are devoted to its spiritual sanctity.
Unlike many contemporary religions in the region, when Islam first arose it's legalistic approach to marriage was a godsend to women because it recognised that they owned wealth & property in their own right, and could also institute divorce on their own behalfs.
* Why cannot Muslims marry in a mosque, like others, blessed in their sacred places?
Totally false. Marriages can and do take place in Mosques.
The fact that local customs may have marriages taking place at homes does not mean that marriages are not allowed in Mosques.
* Why a Muslim can divorce his wife/s, by just saying the word Talak thrice?
That is the formal act of divorce as initiated by a man.
However Islam discourages divorce and promotes marriage as sacred just like Christianity.
Unlike Christianity Islam formalises the steps that either man or woman must take in order to secure a divorce including the selection of a mutually accepted arbiter to attempt an amicable reconciliation in the first instance.
In Islam, unlike traditional pre-modern Christianity, both men and women are deemed to be equal in having the right to seek divorce as evidenced in the following Quranic verse.
...but, in accordance with justice, the rights of the wives (with regard to their husbands) are equal to the (husbands;) rights with regard to them, although men have precedence over them (in this respect). And God is almighty wise.
--- Sura 2:228
* Why cannot Muslims touch dogs and pork?
For the same reason Judaism forbids pork and other types of animals - they are considered unclean. Pigs are so because they are considered filthy and traditionally harboured disease (like tapeworm) and dogs because they fed on carrion.
Judaism is replete with an enormous set of traditional dietary strictures.\
* Why are Muslim countries so backward compared to Christian, Buddhist, Jew, Taoist, Hindu, Bahais, etc.?
Backward in what respect? Science? Engineering? Education? Economics?
Bahrein, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Kuwait, the Emirates, Dubai, Indonesia all have comparable science/engineering/education/economics to many Western countries.
This is a generalisation based on ambiguity.
* Why are Muslims everywhere fighting for territory-control and yet, when taken over retard it, like Iran, trapped, (17 million Iranians fled)?
As I have already pointed out this statement does not apply to Muslims everywhere, just to those in countries suffering repression, economic problems, and internal or external conflicts.
I have yet to see Saudi Arabia or Indonesia or Brunei fighting for territory control.
* Why cannot the Islamic law be revised, instead of applying the same outdated 1400-year old system to today's needs?
For the same reason that conservative Christians and Jews also resist the modification of what they see as Gods law as represented in their Holy Scriptures.
Other Islamic countries, however, do not apply Shariah law at all and stick to secular civil laws Indonesia, Turkey, Egypt, Syria and Libya to name just a few.
* Why are there so much of rape, molestation's, incest, other sexual crimes, unemployment and destruction in Muslim countries?
Another generalisation based on a straw man. Not all Islamic countries have a high rate of sexual crime take Indonesia and Turkey as an example no coincidence that they have a higher educational level, strong secular government, and cosmopolitan culture.
On the other hand Pakistan could not be more different.
Around the world, despite the type of religion, it is ignorance, poverty, and conflict that inspire and promote sexual offenses.
Unemployment and destruction are also consequences of economic hardship & conflict NOT religion.
* Why are Muslim family members killing their own mothers, wives, sisters, daughters, etc. (Honor Killing?)
For the same reason that some Christians kill doctors for performing abortions or Japanese take their own lives, or Indians and Chinese still kill girl children through a twisted understanding of their own scriptures or a patriarchal culture which devalues womens rights and sees them as chattels.
* Why is there so much of hatred in Muslims, Allah?
One could ask the same question of Christians in particular or humanity as a whole.
* Why use powerful Loud Speakers to pray; who is deaf, Allah?
For the same reason that Christians tend to use BIG crosses or religious imagery to serve as a symbol and focal point for communal worship.
The only difference is that one medium is audial and the other visual.
Both are less artefacts of religion than holdovers of culture.
* Why are Muslim charities used for terrorism?
For the same reason that Sinn Fein and many other front charities used to collect money for the terrorist organisation IRA from supporters in the United States. It is done in order to support a perceived legitimate struggle against an enemy.
* Why does Islam stick out as a sore thumb, among religions
As I have already demonstrated, this is less a fact than it is a perception and not a very informed perception as that since it is based on inaccuracies and outright falsehoods.
* and Muslims blatantly lie and hide true Islam
Another statement without a shred of corroborative evidence.
* but now nobody believes Muslims anymore, seeing the truth of barbaric Islam in action?
Whos nobody? Bigoted and fearful people who dont personally know any Muslims and wouldnt try to if they had the chance because of their preconceptions and biases?
My mistake...thank you for the heads up regarding roundworm in pigs.
Mitten may have thrown off blinkered anti-science thinking, but I'm afraid her rather ill-informed opinion (it cannot be referred to as 'knowledge' in any way) on religion, culture & history remain the same.
With this kind of reasoning we could argue that cats are unclean. Ever heard of toxoplasmosis:)
Hell. We should all name our cats Toxo:)
I mean everything therefore is "unclean". Beef can have mad cow disease. And all animals can have parasties, viruses, and infections.
These religious scums are just as bad if not worse then the evolutionists scam artists. Christian fundys believe that UFO's are Demons, and that they can regain their virginity. And what about Vodoo dolls and casting spells on people?
Religion is the whore that is the underlying pathology of all this crazy thinking. And then you have the evolutionists who manufacture "evidence", and religious nuts who then use this "evidence" to argue "science has found god".
I mean you have the superstitious who think life is like Gilligans Island, and then the evolutionists who are on some sort of ego trip. I just sit back and laugh at all this controversy:)
Its like having a ring side seat at a circus "wrestling match" where midgits and freaks have mud wrestling matches:)
The point was, you execrable pile of maggot fodder, that dietary strictures are common to many religions not just Islam, and that those dietary strictures usually have their basis in reality as experienced by ancient cultures.
You, however, have your head so far up your ass that you can't see that.
As for all the rest of your spastic diatribe, you obviously just love reading what you write you poor excuse for a lobotomised leprechaun.
As for midgits and freaks they obviously have more intelligence than you do.
You are a laughable piece of shit that doesn't even know how ridiculous you appear to anyone reading your drivvle.
Reading your shit is better than watching a spastic trying to juggle sharp knives.
Oh look!! Here enters the Midgit-Freak Greeb into the ring:) As Demon, Miquel, Gallo, and Martha wipe the mud off of their faces, the Greeb Freak enters the rung and slips and falls in the mud and the crowd goes wild and starts doing the wave!
Rip his fuckin head off Greeb Freak:)
Run like fucking hell Martha:)
What the fuck was that Scamallo?:)
Dont just sit there like a fuckin lump Miquel!
Hey Demon, where is that fuckin pizza I ordered?:)
So Jonathan Idiotman capers like a lunatic on a caffein bender because he's so fucking jealous that everybody else has a high school education eh? HAHAHAHAHHA what a fucking loser!!
Hey Idiotman what's your day job? Carwash? Gas jerk? Male prostitute? Oh wait that's your evening job isn't it?
What a fucktard.
This concept of things being "unclean" is utter BS based on stupid religious superstition! Just because other BS superstitions have something in common with other BS superstitions does not make BS superstitions true! These same BS superstitions that tell you that animals A and B are unclean to eat, also will tell you that you need to pray 5 times a day on a carpet to an imaginary sky-daddy who lives in the sky or that some sky-daddy came to earth and died for people to be saved. Long ago, these nutcases believed that everything was caused by a sky daddy. Religious superstitions give people all kinds of fucked up ideas in their head.
What is particular funny about these nuts who tell you that you can't eat A and B, are the same fucks who I see drinking pop and eating junk food.
Frankly, I enjoy eating bacon and pork sausages and petting dogs. I can go into any restaurant or gathering of friends, and not have to worry myself shitless if that pizza or meal has some pork in it. I've seen so many of these idiots go into paranoia over whether or not there may be a trace of a pork product.
What utter stupidity these paranoid nuts live in with their religious superstions, always trying to kiss their gods ass in order to get a special reward.
The point, you silly twat, was not about your personal likes or dislikes or opinions on religious dietary restrictions.
The point is that dietary restrictions have a basis in practical fact based on the experience of primitive cultures
Using your idiotic argument let's also claim that traditional herbalist remedies and medicinal plant cures are 'stupid religious superstition'.
They're not of course because even modern science has verified the usefullness of many traditional remedies via biochemical analysis.
Your problem is that you are a cultural bigot who has her head up her ass because you can't now stand religion in general and non-western cultures.
You're ignorant AND you're a retard.
And seeing as up to a few months ago you were one of the religious loonies who defended her position with the lame argument of "I'm right BECAUSE the BIBLE sez so" you haven't got a fucking leg to stand on when it come to criticising the religious views of other people
You never used logic before you pathetic pillock, and you still aren't using it now. All you've done is shift your bigotry from being religiously-based to it being culturally based.
You are a moron.
Your so fucking lame you have to INVENT stuff about other religions to make your paranoia and vomitous bigotry sound even REMOTELY reasonable.
Speaking of paranoid nuts, that describes you to a 'T' you gutless, ignorant trailer trash idiot.
You think that because some people are different and have different views that it makes them ripe for your idiotic, paranoic and ridiculous lies?
Fuck you and the horse that rode in on you.
You condemn other for criticism and yet, that is exactly what you do. Tough luck for you Greeb!
The superstition of being anti-pork is utterly insane and based on stupidity, just like being anti-green tea. Traditional herbalist are not a religion. If someone wants to use herbs, they can by all means use them as I use them. But when someone draws the line and goes into madness is when they start to make claims on superstitions. If a person starts to spew forth garbage that green tea is unclean because their God said so, that is stupidity and superstition. Or if someone claims that the 'herb Milk' Thistle is evil and that one cannot please God because it is unclean, that too is madness.
And yet, this is the garbage that Muslims spew forth with their anti-pork garbage, who won't eat pork because they feel they need to kiss Allahs ass to get to heaven. What insane nonsense and garbage.
But since you are a liberal, why don't you mix all the religions into one. Why don't you make a religion where you have to pray on a magic carpet 5 times each day, and on the first prayer, you'll make a prayer to Allah. On the second prayer, you will make a prayer to Jesus. On the third, why don't you nibble on a piece of pork jerky while petting a dog? You can add 2 more superstitions to the final 2 prayers.
But doing so, makes it all as brainless as Islam. Do you think that Islam is better than the idiocy of Christianity or that Christianity is better than Islam? Then take your pick and believe in one, but don't expect intelligent folk to follow you up on that and not point out how stupid it is to stick your ass up in the air 5 times a day, or to believe that some sky-daddy died on a stick so you can get to heaven.
You can call all that "different views" and your vales will still be nothing more than man-made stupidity. The "different views" of Islam in this case in their anti-pork hogwash, (pun, intended) is still pure garbage. Millions in America will continue to enjoy family barbeques, roasting sausages and having bacon strips put on their burgers without fear and paranoia from Muslim garbage that they are displeasing some imaginary sky-daddy who thinks that pigs are unclean and that they should stick their asses up in the air 5 times a day to make a sky-daddy happy. Millions of Americans will continue to get pet dogs and occasionally feed them leftover ham scraps from a picnic or barbeque without fear and paranioa.
I don't condemn you for criticising you obnoxious gasbag, I condemn you for being stupid, ignorant and bigoted.
The dietary strictures on eating pork are neither stupid or insane you malodorous twat. Despite your ignorant stupidity, they were originally based on solid evidence that people who ate pig flesh tended to become sick. Just because it is continued today out of tradition doesn't make the original idea stupid.
In fact YOU are stupid because all you are going to continue doing is flapping your gums and talking like a trailer-park nonentity parroting the same old party-line because what's different scares you.
You are a pathetic individual.
By the way you ignorant cunt, herbs & plants today are used for an enormous range of purposes including decoration, religious symbolism, and tradition as well as for as yet unsubstatiated medicinal reasons.
The fact that you can't comprehend the analogy between dietary strictures and the traditional use of herbs just illustrates that you are a fucking ignorant cow.
No, I take that back, you are a pathetically ignorant sow.
And no one claims that pigs are evil you moron. Unclean is different from being evil.
Fucking hell you're a loon. No wonder you were a failure as a christian, you don't even know your own fucking former scriptures.
Retard.
Helllooooo Earth calling Mitten the Idiot!!!
It isn't just Muslims that don't eat pork you lying sack of manure.
Ever hear of the Jews? Or did that little bit of the OT escape you?
What did you do in your Bible Study days anyway? Pass the time by picking your nose?
AHAHAHAHAHAHA you think you're insulting me by calling me a liberal? You stupid pukeheaded redneck.
Just because I actually bother to LEARN about other cultures and religions instead of, like YOU stuffing shit in your ears and beleieving in the oldest religion of all - MY WAY OF LIFE IS THE OnlY VALID ONE!!!!
You bigoted, ignorant and brain-addled hag.
You are exactly what is wrong with America today you stupid, elementary-school dropout.
All you need to know you get from turgid newspapers like the National Enquirer or 1950s issues of Republican propaganda.
Everything you don't understand frightens you you maggot: other cultures, religions, other languages, and LEARNING.
You were born ignorant and see no reason not to die that way.
Pathetic.
You are so brain-dead and foamingly-at-the-mouth bigoted that you probably sneer at the French FOR eating snails, the Aborigines for eating grubs, the Hindus for not eating beef, and the Catholics for not eating fish on Fridays.
You can rationalise it in whatever way your pathetic anmd ignorant bigotry feels most comfortable with, but it doesn't change the fact that you are of exactl the same mold as the assholes who burn books (from Einstein to Harry Potter) and the retards who raise burning crosses and wear white sheets.
Oh and by the way you stupid bitch, Muslims and Jews aren't fearful of pork - they just prefer not to eat it. Just as there are liberal Jews who do eat pork, there are also liberal Muslims who obey the injunction in the Quran that says not to eat pork IF THEY CAN HELP IT.
But you are so bigotted and have mentally constipated that you won't ever see or admit that will you you cankerous piece of offal.
Being a Catholic myself I thought I'd make one tiny correction.
Catholics don't red meat meat on Fridays, but they do eat fish.
It is not a dietary restriction in the same way as the Muslim or Jewish laws about pork.
Instead, it is more a form of fasting in which red meat is given up as a sacrifice to God.
Originally this sort of fasting was not limited to just Fridays but other days too, including religious holidays especially during Lent & Easter.
Also this sort of fasting had a practical value too as in Europe and the Mediterranean countries, meat was not always as readily available or affordable as fish. In a way it could be seen as a method of formalising a rationing of resources or of religious tradition immitating life?
You can protest and squeal like a pig (another pun, Oink Oink) as much as you want in your defense of a retarded Islamic superstition but it still remains nothing more than utterly stupidity to be paranoid out of your mind of pork. It is just one of many superstitions from the past that is pure HOGwash! Paranoia and fear of pork is just as stupid as having paranoia and fear of green tea or beans.
You can come up with all kinds of reasons for a stupid superstition, just like you can come up with all kinds of reasons as to why people believed the earth was flat or that lighting was caused by God or that a shadow is a part of the soul. You can take up a defense for these superstitions as well, but there are just as baloney as the pork-paranoia belief!
Heck, why don't you mix these idiotic superstitions up with the anti-bacon BS into one big superstition? Since dumb fucks are paranoid and scared shitless of pigs; so pig shadows are evil too now! Stay away from pig shadows! What a world of paranoia we will have now with this new superstition!
Hasan, after leaving his local mosque, is walking down the street and he comes across a Burger King restaurant, where people are eating burgers with bacon strips. He sees the shadows being cast from the burgers and he starts to sweat like a pig. A group of people are walking towards him, enjoying their burgers. He stops dead in his tracks and starts to head the other way to escape the burger shadows. But what he sees is something just as frightening as the burger shadows in the other direction. Hasan sees a woman walking down the sidewalk walking a dog. Hasan becomes trapped with fear. The group of people eating the burgers are coming towards him in one direction, and from the other direction the woman walking her dog is coming and they are closing in on him. Hasan becomes almost paralyzed in fear. He feels the sweat now, going down his face and his eyes begin to burn. He stands frozen in time, and everything begins to appear in slow motion. He looks at the shadows that the Burgers cast and his stomach turns. They are coming closer and closer. He looks the other way and sees the woman with the dog and he starts to get woozy. The dog is coming closer and closer. He watches as the dog takes each step and with each step, his doom with a wagging tail is coming towards him. There is nothing he can do. He is trapped! His paralyzing paranoia-fear over takes him and he loses his senses. He runs out into the street out of fear and runs right in front an eighteen-wheeler that splatters him!
Damn those evil wagging dogs and burger shadows being cast on the ground! Damn that bacon to hell! I suppose that the Islamic hell won't have fire, but will be a giant hog farm!
Welcome to the world of paranoia! Idiots will come up with all kinds of idiotic beliefs and claim that their paranoia is based in reason because their God said so! Why don't you Greeb, become paranoid of bread because it may have mold? Then go out and stand in front of the Safeway's in your town/city and demand that they stop selling bread! That kind of paranoia, is as just as dumb as a paranoia of pig shadows and fear of pork itself! Maybe the morons from the local mosque will join you, but they will protest the banning of pork from Safeway! You then can all scream:
DOWN WITH PORK!
DOWN WITH BREAD!
DOWN WITH SAFEWAY!
Man, I am getting hungry now! I think I'm going to go make a ham sandwich with bacon strips that I bought from Safeway, that will be between two pieces of bread that also came from Safeway! :-)
Once I went into a McDonalds and ordered a Mig Mac combo meal. Some of these Muslim whores had ordered a hamburger, but had asked that the beef be removed. They essentially ordered a bun:)
I just sat there in line looking at them the same way someone might look at someone for being paranoid that their soul might be taken away if someone took their picture:)
As they sat down they carefully opened their buns to make sure no beef was inside. Since I was behind them in line, and after my order was given to me I sat next them and as I started to eat my sandwich. They gave me these dirty looks like I was the devil or something:)
They had two children and could not help but think how sad it was to be teaching children such silly superstition.
I agree it is stupid and moronic. Mask it under the guise of "religion" "tradition" "culture" or whatever, but these people are fuckin idiots!!!
HAHAHAHAHA Idiotman comes wooing and butt-sniffing to Mitten!!
Aaaawwwwwwww aint it cute?
Pardon me while I retch into this airsick bag. LOL.
Now they can both whine to each other about the evil people who don't think like they do.
What a pair of ignorant, moronic, educationaly-challenged, losers.
Hey let's hear again how yummy you think bacon is?
MMMMMMMMM
LOL.
It is funny watching Muslims get so worked up over pork. In school, we were having a pizza party in one of our classes one time and there was a Muslim idiot and he wanted to know which pizza had no pork in it. The teacher was preoccupied at the time so we pointed at a ham and pineapple pizza and told him that it was a beef pizza.
We then watched as the moron picked up 2 slices and put them on his plate and started to stuff his face with pork. We were giggling as we watched this and my friend went up to the Muslim moron when he was on his second slice and she asked him how he was enjoying the pizza. He said that it was good and then my friend told him that he was eating a HAM and pineapple pizza!!!!!!
You should have seen his face. OH MY FUCKING GOD! He looked as if we had chopped up his mom and put her flesh in the pizza and gave it to him to eat. He looked as if he had just lost his salvation from Allah. It was so funny to see the shocked expression on his face and the look in his ugly eyes. WHAT A MORON! He spit out the pizza into a paper napkin and ran out of the classroom. I assumed he ran to the bathroom to regurgitate the pizza.
We had such a great laugh about that. And what a moron! Maybe he should have simply ate an empty bun like the Muslims you saw! LoL :-)
The pizza tasted good until someone told him it was fucking pork he was eating! When these Muslim whores don't know they are eating pork, they love the taste of pig flesh!
Spare me your self-righteous hypocritical hogwash!
You people take delight in mocking Vender Doov on the forum, which is a deliberate act of unkindness and that is perfectly fine just because he is a creationist. LoL
Come back and preach to me when you pull your head out of your ass! LoL :-)
So the stupid slaggy Mitten is STILL equating religious diet with fear? LOLOLOLOL what a fucking imbecilic and chlamydiac infested hag you are!
Like I predicted you can't come up with a fucking logical excuse to support your infantile drek so you created a super long projectile vomit post in which you whine about how good bacon is and how stupid not eating it is.
Hey what's your next squeal going to be about you used-up shit? Burning vegetarians at the cross?
LMAO
You're so stupid you don't even know that you're retarded posts make you look even more stupid than your previous ones.
You patheticaly ignorant sow.
So now you bring in vegetarianism into your twisted mix of loving fear-based superstitions and seeing that you defend the trash of thinking that pigs are evil, you would rather see people live in ignorance and fear, rather than release them from whatever ridiculous fear their stupid religions and superstitions may bring. That's the problem with liberals like you, you all claim you want to help mankind but you hate it when someone exposes stupidity or silly superstitions.
Suppose that Islamic bitches around the world decided to give up their stupidity. They would overcome their stupid fear of pigs. Then they would realize that no God ever told them not to eat pigs, but it came from men. Then they would realize that they are not risking their salvation from Allah by eating bacon. Then they would realize that there is no Allah and they could all use their holy books to wipe their asses with when they take massive dumps from all the roast hams they will be enjoying, thanks to letting go of their paranoia and fear of pigs.
But liberals can have none of that! Liberals like you are fighting against setting these motherfuckers free from their hilarious paranoia of bacon-fear and superstitions of bacon getting in the way of salvation and yet, you all talk about a better world. No matter that Liberals like you are not taken seriously! LoL :-)
The only stupidity being exposed here is your pathetic excuse for logic you slimy, trailer-park fuck slot.
Whether its not eating pork or meat in general, dietary restrictions are choices, something you can't seem to wrap your tiny, little pinheaded skull around.
You can't even explain the difference between vegetarian choices and Muslim or Jewish dietary restrictions. You are such a loser Mitten HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Keep posting though you redneck bicycle, every word shows you up for the stupid, frightened little Aryan NAtion poster-girl that you are.
Bush has one thing right though, Guanmtanomo Bay should be expanded and fucktards like you thrown into it to fight for bacon chips with the Taliban losers.
You bet they are choices you stupid pathetic idiot. To choose to be a superstitious moron paranoid about pork makes as much sense as choosing to regain your virginity.
Like it or not there are people who can see through all this nonsense, and find these dietary ideas to be as silly as believing Santa Claus is real.
I mean if an adult really believed in Santa you are going to attract a great deal of attention and ridicule. And it would be stupid to then play the victim and get all bent out of shape for people laughing at you as you try and defend your belief in good old Saint Nick:)
Oh, but when I told them Santa was real, they were cruel and mean to me and started laughing as I ran out of the lunch room:) I mean go to fuckin Oprah or perhaps Dr. Fuckin Phil:) Maybee you should find yourself a "happy place" and hide somewhere you pathetic loser!!
You must have been breast fed by your Father!!
Well da, you moronic piece of pathological tissue. Wow, religions have dietary strictures and that was the point:) No shit Sherlock, like that was some sort of Einstein insight:)
All religions have superstitions. And that's the point you stupid monkey:) The point is however is that it is silly superstition dumb fuck. (had to say it twice to see if this monket can understand). Dont give a rats ass what their "reasons" are behind such idiocy you motherfuckin pervert.
Wow the Midgit-Freak has made the following point: religions often have these silly superstitions about certain foods being unclean like pork:) Ya, and so birds fly and the sky is blue:)
Perhaps you should try some bacon, ham, or a hamburger! They are really very tasty, especially when prepared properly. Lets go to a drive thru and eat our ham sandwiches in front of some religious lunatics as they pray to their mythological god!!:) We could have our dog bark at them as well!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:)
Pathological tissue?
Fuck you can't even insult properly you revolting fragment of diseased afterbirth.
Dietary strictures in religions have a practical basis in historical fact you numbnut. Deny it all you like asshole, but just as herbal and traditional medicines have a basis in historical fact (which may or may not be valid today) so too do dietary strictures.
But you're so moronic all you're going to do is vomit forth another inane paragraph about how much you like being fucked by a hot dog or pumping your neighbour's dog right?
You leprous mass of maggot-riddled offal.
Hey what's a 'monket' you vocabulary-poor asshole?
Yeah we all know you hate religion Idiotman, just like you hate science, reading, learning, education, other cultures, and probably sanitation.
We get it already - you're a filthy, bigoted and ignorant asswipe.
No need to seel us on that anymore buddy.
Dickbreath.
Incidentally I like my hamburger with crispy bacon and I have a rotweiler and a dachshund.
But before you ask, the answer is NO: you can't hump my dogs.
Hey, don't look now, but I think you're late for that combined Aryan Nation Bund meeting and your local Lobotomy Support Group.
Oh yes the old "there are some good cells" within the cancer argument.
Stroke it dude!
No other religion/region produces terrorism on such a massive scale. Christianity has the KKK, but you dont see them hijacking commercial planes and trying to shoot down them down.
Japan had probably more "good cells" in their culture, and Im sure many who died in the nuclear blasts were against attacking the US.
But in treating cancer you really dont care, only in that you cure the cancer.
Suppose you lived in a city where people were wearing sunglasses and blue shirts and then going around killing people. This was some sort of gang, that for whatever reason decided to put on blue shirts and sunglasses before going out on their killings.
Now it would be reasonable for people to be distrustful of anyone they came across who was wearing a blue shirt and sunglasses (unless they knew them of course).
Obviously not all people wearing blue shirts and sunglasses are murderers. And I could list 500 reasons why this is so. But it would be stupid to then argue you are a biggot for not trusting someone wearing blue shirts and sunglasses if you met them on the street.
You liberal hypocrites get all bent out of shape over such stupid things. Start throwing words like "biggot" and "religious intolerance" around when people are simply trying to protect themselves. If we know there are Muslims who hijack planes and perform suicide bombings in the name of their little Jihad, it would seem reasonable to be skeptical of someone you dont know who is Muslim.
And its stupid to think pork and dogs are dirty. Porky the pig was cool if you ask me:) And I like bacon, ham, and having dogs around. I dont give a rats ass what their "reasons" are behind such idiocy! Makes NO DIFFERENCE you liberal hypocrite!!
JONATHAN:
"No other religion/region produces terrorism on such a massive scale. Christianity has the KKK, but you dont see them hijacking commercial planes and trying to shoot down them down."
During the cold war planes were not only hijacked and blown up but bombs were exploded amongst crowds in cities, rocket attacks made on school buses etc.
Most of these attacks were perpetrated by many different nationalities: Arabs, Irish, Turks, Japanese etc.
The binding thread amongst these perpetrators (whom we would now call 'terrorists') was that they were Communists.
By your criteria all communists must therefore be terrorists.
JONATHAN:
"But it would be stupid to then argue you are a biggot for not trusting someone wearing blue shirts and sunglasses if you met them on the street."
It IS STUPID to make false statements about a religion as I have illustrated in the post beginning this thread.
More so, attempting to justify falsehoods like those IS BIGOTED.
JONATHAN:
"If we know there are Muslims who hijack planes and perform suicide bombings in the name of their little Jihad, it would seem reasonable to be skeptical of someone you dont know who is Muslim."
By your argument then, all black people must also be treated with skepticism and suspicion in the US since most crimes are perpetrated by black people, and black teens all run in gangs and sell drugs, and are obvously violent....and all the other cliched stereotypes?
Wonderful.
So little 9 year old Fatima from the Islamic school down the street should be treated with skepticism and suspicion because she happens to share the same religion as Osama Bin Laden?
You are not only illogical and ignorant, you are hoisted with your own petard!
You shriek about people holding on to history and not letting go of old grudges and yet you do exactly the same thing.
JONATHAN:
"And its stupid to think pork and dogs are dirty."
So all Jews are stupid too as well as Muslims?
You really are a bigoted buffoon.
The laughable thing is that you are so proud of your idiocies that you have no idea that you are an object of utter ridicule.
No wonder you have so much fat in place of brain tissue.
You don't have the intelligence or learning to make a logical comeback so you spray your inconsequential vomit over the board.
Nice try douchebag but no one's being fooled.
You're just a nonentity that's trying to compensate for your inadequacies.
What a freakasaurus.
No he recognises a Moron when he sees one you faecal sack
by Greeb
He's not the one working at a gas station and who's biggest goal in life is
to visit Neverland Ranch you retarded grade school dropkick.
Fuck you're hilarious and you don't even know why, that's the real kicker.
LOL I been to a few boards round the net and I see lots of doofuses but this guy has to be one of the worse. Seriously does he now hes an embarasment to hisself?
Too fucking priceless!
Jonathan I-failed-to get-into-elementary-school Zimmerman attempts to correct grammar and spelling!!!!
It's sort of like George Bush trying to demonstrate high school physics.
What a waste of semen.
Holy shit Idiotman thinks the moron's mis-spelling is actually a word!??
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA too fucking rich!
You really should try to take some evening classes if your evening prostitute work will allow it. Oh but wait, that's assuming you have enough language skills to take high school equivalency? Judging from your usual efforts I don't give you much of a chance.
You really are a sorry sack of manure aren't you?
I'm wondering if Creationists here would care to answer a few questions?
1.) So you agree that organisms produce more offspring than actually survive to reproduce themselves?
If not then why not? Can you give examples?
2.) Do you agree that organisms either adapt to their environmental circumstances and survive, or fail and dissapear?
If not then why not? Can you give an example?
3.) If you disagree with the idea of descent with modification, do you therefore disagree with the idea of human reproduction from egg/sperm to newborn?
Why are the the two developmental processes different in your opinion?
What fundamental barrier prevents one and allows the other to occur?
4.) Do you agree with the concept of arranging nature into a nested heirarchy of relationships?
I.E.: Cats belong to the Kingdom Animalia, Phylum Chordata, Class Mammalia, Order Carnivora, Family Felidae, Genus Felis, Species Catus.
If not, why not?
What alternatives do you have to offer?
How do you define the Biblical 'kinds' or 'Baramin'?
These four questions, if honestly attempted, can be the basis of ongoing discussions.
And here we have Miguel once again, putting up his feathers with more irrelevant stupidity! God forbid if he makes it to heaven for he'll drive god insane with all his stupid irrelevant questions about nothing.
IDIOT QUOTE: "So you agree that organisms produce more offspring than actually survive to reproduce themselves?"
ROFL!! That's like going up to a construction worker and asking them if their measuring tape is important. But wait a minute, Migel will quickly resort to the old "measuring tapes don't reproduce" non-sector.
In cause you don't know what a non-sector is, don't bother looking it up, just take a look at yourself: Migel, the walking, talking, breathing non-sector manifested in the flesh that produces question after question of random nonsense.
Next, migel will be going into hospitals, where moms have just given birth to kids, and asking the moms if they believe that babies will be able to reproduce in the future. LoL
PART 1: So you agree that organisms produce more offspring
STOP:
PART 2: than actually survive to reproduce themselves?
STOP: Basically, Migel is asking for example, if kangaroos give birth to kangaroos in order to give birth to kangaroos! LoL
What do you think that kangaroos are mating for? To help feed the local crocodile population? You twit. LoL And you wonder why creationists don't take you seriously!
VENDER:
"ROFL!! That's like going up to a construction worker and asking them if their measuring tape is important. But wait a minute, Migel will quickly resort to the old "measuring tapes don't reproduce" non-sector. "
Interesting that Vender doesn't answer the question isn't it?
This one or any of the other 3.
VENDER:
"In cause you don't know what a non-sector is, don't bother looking it up, just take a look at yourself: Migel, the walking, talking, breathing non-sector manifested in the flesh that produces question after question of random nonsense."
After initial puzzlement at Vender's ramble I believe he is referring to the word 'non-sequitur' - what he erroneously spells 'non-sector' LOL.
A 'non-sequitur' is a latin term literally meaning "it does not follow".
It is a term used to describe when a conclusion does not logically follow from another fact or facts.
Since Vender quoted my first question (identified as such by a question mark [?]) as a 'non-sequitur', it is plain that he does not understand the use of the word since my question did not contain any conclusion.
I don't know whether to guffaw at or feel sorry for Vender. ;-)
MIGUEL:
"So you agree that organisms produce more offspring than actually survive to reproduce themselves?"
VENDER:
"Basically, Migel is asking for example, if kangaroos give birth to kangaroos in order to give birth to kangaroos! LoL"
How odd. I wonder how, in Vender's twisted logic, he equates my question about an observed natural phenomenon with his kangaroo fetish???
;-P
Notice he doesn't dare answer it - either to agree or disagree with the statement.
Most creationists of any caliber would, I think, immediately distance themselves from Vender - he seems to be more a liability to creationism than a staunch defender.
Anybody know anything about "Scientists Confront Creationism" part 2? I read the first one from the 1980's with all the talk about thermodynamics, Paluxy Tracks, and the old argument the Australopithecines were nothing but apes. I understand it is due to come out soon if it has not already.
Oh, and Jonathan. You are not invited to the discussion table:) But I have a feeling he will crash the party anyway.
Part one was written by evolutionists and used sources written and "approved" by evolutionists. Part two uses the same strategy.
As Ive said before, people believe what they want to believe. They simply find sources to support it.
Imagine a world where astrologers had their own journals, did their own "experiments", and cited alledged data. An astrologer does some experiment somewhere, forges some data, then presents it to the "peer review" board who reviews it for accuracy.
If the "study" was favorable, then it gets published, and astrologers have even more "evidence" to support astrology. And the reverse would also be true.
These astrologers held their noses in the air, because they had all these prestigious journals, conferences, gave lectures, and taught it in their schools.
Now suppose people were fighting astrology, and they came out with a book titled "Astrologers Confront The Critics". They cited all the studies done to support astrology, came up with reasons studies that showed astrology to be false were flawed, and published t
this book and made millions of dollars.
Im sure deep down inside "scientists" are glad creationism exists. They then can use this "controversy" to write books and do the same thing the astrologers would have done. The book publishers get to sell books, scientists can make a little coin as well and also get some recognition from their peers (hey Im PUBLISHED).
I think its funny. People make money from those wishing to believe in creationism, and others make money from those "fighting" creationism. I mean just look at all the books written. The National Center For Science Education rakes in thousands and thousands of dollars from memberships and book sales. The same is true for the Gish and Henry Morris teams at the Institute for Creation Research, but they are making a little more money (Im sure this pisses off the evolutionists).
Martha: Now hopefully for some sane conversation:)
gallo: I'm too late. Jonathan has already responded with insanity.
Martha: Anybody know anything about "Scientists Confront Creationism" part 2? I read the first one from the 1980's with all the talk about thermodynamics, Paluxy Tracks, and the old argument the Australopithecines were nothing but apes. I understand it is due to come out soon if it has not already.
gallo: "Scientists Confront Creationism" is one of the few books on the topic that I haven't read. It was published in 1983, and in paperback in 1984.
The "Part 2" to which you refer is probably "Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism" due to be published in March of 2007. The publisher in all cases was W.W. Norton. Laurie R. Godfrey, the editor of the first book has been joined by Andrew J. Petto, who even gets first billing.
Martha: Oh, and Jonathan. You are not invited to the discussion table:) But I have a feeling he will crash the party anyway.
gallo: But since he rarely has anything constructive to add, we can just ignore him.
That was nice of you Scamallo! Martha figured out how to get out of the maze in her little habitrail you guys set her in, so Scamallo rewards her with a little carrot:)
Do you practice daily to be so stupid and ignorant or were you born that way?
Actually skip it.
You were obviously born that way.
My only hope is that you never sully the gene pool with your foetid chromosomes.
There's a good book called: "The Counter Creationism Handbook" by Mark Isaacs from Talk.Origins.
It's based on the "Index to creationist claims" at the same site.
It's a nice handy reference to have about.
Regarding Jonathan....I agree with you and Gallo, wwe should just ignore him.
He displays more ignorance than even Double Shalom and an equal amount of trolling to Vender.
Jehovah's witnesses themselves have counter handbooks to counter other religions. Then other religions have their own counter handbooks to counter Jehovah's witness's claims.
You'll find a counter handbook for just about every religion. Everyone these days is running around with some kind of counter book to help counter this and help counter that...
But since it is an evolutionist book, well then.... that's a complete different story...... evolutionists must have the one true counter handbook..... ROFL!
Here, I have a good idea for the evolutionist orgy here:
After Migel the Librarian picks up the book, she can use it beat Martha the hamster with when she fails the next level of her maze. Demon38 the pizza boy will come and make a pizza out of Martha the Hamster, in which he will deliver it to Gallo who will eat it. LoLoLoLoL!!!!!
In this "Handbook" please list all supporting documentation.
Note any sources from evolutionists, "data" collected by evolutionists, studies performed by evolutionists, "peer reviewed" publications from evolutionists, dont count.
When it comes right down to it you cant say anything for sure. You simply regurgitate things written by evolutionists, peer reviewed by evolutionists, alledged data collected by evolutionists, studies by evolutionists, etc..
Its like having an Astrologers Handbook and they use sources from astrologers, studies performed by astrologers, data collected by astrologers, and finally peer reviewed by astrologers.
But you can't find even one source, not written by an evolutionists, peer reviewed by an evolutionists, "data" by an evolutionists, or published by an evolutionist.
Same for astrology. Bet if I went into an astrology book store, or went to some astrology school, Id be taught the same way. You know, the studies, data, books, journals would all be from astrologers. Funny how that works:)
If Martha were taking astrology she would get the same recognition, praise, and treats as well from her astrology teachers everytime she regurgitated something from an astrology source:)
It doesn't matter how many references are presented to you dickwad.
You'd have no fucking idea what to make of them!
You're so funny wriggling about trying to sound like you know what you're talking about and just making anyone else with a high school education laugh uproariously at you.
Keep posting you egregious sack of pus because the more you post the more your sub-elementary school education shows.
Hey did you ever get past basic science Johnny boy? Or were the concepts too difficult to grasp?
Maybe the teachers felt so fucking sorry for you they let you skip most of your classes so that you wouldn't feel so pitiful compared to the school moron?
Keep posting dumbass, but hey not for too long ok, your village misses its idiot when you're away too long.
Hellooooo!!! Earth calling retarded Idiotman!!
The sources are all science texts articles and research papers. Just because YOU don't accept them doesn't mean they aren't valid you waste of genetic material.
Come on then you asspuppy, give us your breathtaking alternative theory to evolution!
What's that?
You can't?
Ohhh, you don't need too??
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Nice try you pinhead. Whining that there is no evidence for evolution doesn't cut it when you don't even have the creationist's pathetic excuse of an alternative.
You can't explain WHY the evidence is unacceptable except to bleet constantly that evolutionists provide it.
Bat puckey.
You have no idea what the evidence is, and even if you did you couldn't find an alternative explanation if your life depended on it.
You are a fucking fine example of heavy metal poisoning school-age children and affecting their cognition levels LMAO.
Just keep licking your lead-painted walls you dumbass.
Hi all! I was browsing the forums here and saw this misinformed post. Well there is a mountain of facts to back up evolution actually.
Why don't peer reviewed journals count? They are "reviewed" and debated on so as to gain knowledge and make sure all the evidence in the reports stand up to much scrunity, and this is done by several people...creationists never turn in any work to be reviewed by scientists because all creationists do is misquote scientists, or twist the facts of biology, and other sciences around, to attempt to make it sound like it agrees with their religious dogma, which is despicable. The real scientists know the truth, and so do all the people who actually look at the actual evidence. Like so many who just say, 'Na, there's no evidence for evolution at all!,' have they ever actually read a book on evolution, or went to a reputable website with good information? I'm betting no. Just saying evolution doesn't exist won't make it so.
Since I don't have the time to write out the ton of evidence for you, I'll list some good sites that can inform you...assuming you even look at them...but probably not, but I'll list them anyway.
http://www.talkorigins.org/
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoEvidence.html
http://www.lifeevolving.org/
Below is also my site, which is in a blog format for my rants and raves about many of the evolution/creationism debates, as well as religion and other things.
www.geocities.com/arizonaatheist
By the way, that counter-creationism handbook is actually a very good resource...I've used it in a few debates before, and is, again, reviewed by scientists in each field of research, unlike creationists, some of whom, have written about subjects in which they know little about...though I can't find the source where I read it at. A scientist was crticizing one of the creation (so called) scientists about how he spoke of the laws of themodynamics as a cause for a creator, and got much information wrong, and the real scientist wrote a rebuttal, citing his errors.
For those who don't know, Dennis Miller is a comedian from America who has a show called Dennis Miller Live on HBO.He is not Jewish. He recently said the following about the Middle East situation:
"A brief overview of the situation is always valuable, so as a service to all Americans who still don't get it, I now offer you the story of the Middle East in just a few paragraphs, which is all you really need.
Here we go:
The Palestinians want their own country. There's just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It's a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years.
Like "Wiccan," "Palestinian" sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in the 1967 war, Gaza was owned by Egypt, the West Bank was owned by Jordan, and there were no "Palestinians."
As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the "Palestinians," weeping for their deep bond with their lost "land" and "nation."
So for the sake of honesty, let's not use the word "Palestinian" anymore to describe these delightful folks, who dance for joy at our deaths, until someone points out they're being taped.
Instead, let's call them what they are:
"Other Arabs Who Can't Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death."
I know that's a bit unwieldy to expect to see on CNN. How about this, then: "Adjacent Jew-Haters." Okay, so the Adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they don't. They could've had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David but if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks a nd Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living.
That's no fun No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the region want: Israel. They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course -- that's where the real fun is -- but mostly they want Israel.
Why? For one thing, trying to destroy Israel- or "The Zionist Entity" as their textbooks call it -- for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away from the fact that they're the blue-ribbon most illiterate, poorest, and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you've ever been around God's Earth . . . you know that's really saying something.
It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim Midleast. Unless I'm missing something, the Arabs haven't given anything to the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for that one.
Chew this around &spit it out: 500 million Arabs; 5 million Jews. Think of all the Arab countries as a football field, and Israel as a pack of matches sitting in the middle of it. And now these same folks swear that, if Israel gives them half of that pack of matches, everyone will be pals..
Really? Wow, what neat news. Hey, but what about the string of wars to obliterate the tiny country and the constant din of rabid blood oaths to drive every Jew into the sea?
Oh, that? We were just kidding.
My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the Numbers. Imagine 500 million Jews and 5 million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not.
Or marshaling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab State into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting.
No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.
Mr. Bush, God bless him, is walking a tightrope. I understand that, with vital operations in Iraq and others, it's in our interest, as Americans, to try to stabilize our Arab allies as much as possible, and, after all, that can't be much harder than stabilizing a roomful of super models who've just had their drugs taken away.
However, in any big-picture strategy, there's always a danger of losing moral weight. We've already lost some. After September 11th, our president told us and the world he was going to root out all terrorists and the countries that supported them. Beautiful. Then the Israelis, after months and months of having the equivalent of an Oklahoma City every week (and then every day), start to do the same thing we did, and we tell them to show restraint.
If America were being attacked with an Oklahoma City every day, we would all very shortly be screaming for the administration to just be done with it and kill everything south of the Mediterranean and east of the Jordan."
If Gaza is a "prison camp" then it is because the Palestinians have made it so, and certainly not the Israelis.
When there were peace negotiations going on between Israel and the Palestinians (in 1993 and in 2000) the Gaza borders were open, Palestinians traveled and worked in Israel, Israelis traveled to the Palestinian territories, there were joint Israeli-Palestinian industrial and commercial projects, in short.... things looked good. There were even plans to construct an overpass connecting the Gaza Strip to the West Bank.
When the Palestinians launched their waves of intafada terror against the Israeli civilian population they brought upon themselves the inevitable closing of the Gaza and West Bank borders. How could they have expected anything else?
You can't cross the Gaza border into Israel and blow up restaurants, discotheques, schools, and bus stops, and expect Israel to let you continue to walk across the border whenever you want.
The Palestinians elected Hamas to govern them. Hamas's written plan is to destroy Israel. As long as that is so, the Palestinians will continue creating their own "prison camps". Hopefully, at some point, this will end and the Palestinians will opt for peace rather than terror and violence.
Jews live all over the world and whereevr they are they are non-violent, get havily involved with the arts, science, technology and sscholarly endeavour. Israel is a remarkable little enclave of the arts, agricultural miracles, science, technology and scholarship constantly under attack for 58 years by large, belligerent Arab nations steeped in backwardness. I wish Rami Khouri and the rest of the Arab and Muslim world would get their own house in order and stop blaming the USA and Israel for their violence, chaos, civil disorder and retrograde attitudes.
Just as a rapist won't get sprayed if he doesn't attack women, so Lebanon won't be attacked by Israel if Hizbullah doesn't attack Israel. It is really that simple.
Hizbullah was born out of the ashes of the PLO that used to fire into Israel from Lebanon in the early 1980s. After Israel destroyed the PLO presence in Lebanon in 1982, the Hizbullah developed as a home-grown PLO-alternative, funded, armed, and trained by Iran, which in 1979 had become a radical Islamist leader in an increasingly extreme Moslem world. So, as long as any armed group in Lebanon threatens and attacks Israel, Israel will defend itself.
Lastly, to claim that the Palestinian issue is the source of all problems in the Middle East is nonsense. In 1947, the Jews accepted the United Nations partition plan for Palestine that would have created a Jewish state side-by-side with an Arab state in Palestine. The Jews accepted the UN plan and the Arabs rejected it and tried to destroy the fledgling state of Israel (and failed).
Between 1948 and 1967 the Arabs ruled over what are now called the Palestinian territories (the West bank and Gaza). They could easily have established a Palestinian state there if they wanted to, but they didn't. Jordan annexed the West bank and Egypt controlled Gaza and left it to fester.
In 1967, the Arabs attacked Israel within its current internationally-recognized borders. They were not trying to establish a Palestinian state; they were trying to destroy Israel. Well, they didn't succeed then eaither.
So don't tell me that the lack of a Palestinian state side by side with Israel is the source of the conflicts in the Middle East.
There was almost peace between Israel and the Palestinians on two occasions: after the 1993 Oslo accords and then again in 2000 at the Camp David meetings. In both cases, the Palestinians wrecked their own chance to get what they said they wanted (a state side by side with Israel) by launching their infamous intifadas (terror attacks on Israel civilians).
I firmly believe that eventually there will be a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. I do not believe, though, that it will end the violence in the Middle East, because the real source of violence in radical Islam (and not the Israel-Palestinian issue). So who will Khouri blame then?
Bend over because you need a spanking naughty little boy!
He said, she said, they did this they did that. As though you are the perfect little angels who never did anything naughty:)
This is the entire problem: too much blaming and playing the victim.
Not even once in your post did you look in the mirror and evaluate yourself.
The Palestianians did such and such and such. Well pretell, did it ever occur to you you stupid monkey, the Palestianians are probably saying the same thing?
Everyone in the Middle east needs to be set in seperate corners. Its like children fighting and arguing and coming up with a list of things done to them. Daddy, she stole my bike last year and is a fucking theif. But daddy, he took my doll 6 months ago and is an evil brother!!
Just shut the fuck up you spoiled brats and start behaving the way you should!!!!!!!
Ill will have to get out my paddle that I have named "Conflict Resolution" and give you a spanking.
I store Conflict Resolution in the closet next to your bedrooms for safe keeping and convenience to access if it needs to be taken out and used.
If you want a spanking just say "Thank You Sir Can I have Another" after everytime Conflict Resolution hits your ass:)
Why even take what a comedian says seriously in the first place?
The entire area there reminds me of little children fighting in the playground. No he took my toy first so Im going to kick the shit out of him and learn him a lesson:)
There is so much hate and animosity in the region and everyone points their fingers at someone else. They are like spoiled children who never learned discipline, learned to share, nor learned to live with other people.
Each group only thinks of themselves, and perceives other groups as a threat. Like paranoid bullies, each group beats their chests like gorillas in the wild, spreads their urine to mark their "turf", and waits like a pit bull ready to pounce.
Its like drug dealers all fighting for their turf and to protect their own interests. They kill each other, and then they have to avenge the killing of their own kind, and the circle of violence is a never ending loop that reinforces more violence.
I think its sad that there needs to be a UN peace keeping force in the region in hopes of stopping these children from killing each other.
I say we simply step back and nuke the entire region with nuclear weapons. Like cancer, sometimes the best treatment is to be as aggressive as possible and wipe out the entire pathology in hopes of normal tissue growing in the area where the cancer once was.
We have not been aggressive enough. The little war in Irag is like taking a cancer that has spread through someones whole body and trying to fight it with a few pills. Rather then doing chemo and surgery and being as aggressive as possible, the cancer simply spreads further as the doctors try to "treat" it with a few medicines.
I wish I were President of the USA. Id simply order our troops out of there, then launch a few nuclear weapons, and after the dust has settled, go in there with troops and construction workers, and rebuild the entire area.
Set up a border fence and after all construction is complete, people can then be allowed back in slowly, providing they can show they are no threat to a civilized society.
* Why are there Hundreds of Muslim sects in Islam?
* Why are these Islamic sects fighting and killing each other, even within the same sect?
* Why are Muslims struggling to flee to non-Muslim countries?
* Why cannot the Muslim males and females pray together, like other religions in a family unit?
* Why is a Muslim marriage only a contract and not sacred, unlike other religions?
* Why cannot Muslims marry in a mosque, like others, blessed in their sacred places?
* Why a Muslim can divorce his wife/s, by just saying the word Talak thrice?
* Why cannot Muslims touch dogs and pork?
* Why are Muslim countries so backward compared to Christian, Buddhist, Jew, Taoist, Hindu, Bahais, etc.?
* Why are Muslims everywhere fighting for territory-control and yet, when taken over retard it, like Iran, trapped, (17 million Iranians fled)?
* Why cannot the Islamic law be revised, instead of applying the same outdated 1400-year old system to today's needs?
* Why are there so much of rape, molestation's, incest, other sexual crimes, unemployment and destruction in Muslim countries?
* Why are Muslim family members killing their own mothers, wives, sisters, daughters, etc. (Honor Killing?)
* Why is there so much of hatred in Muslims, Allah?
* Why use powerful Loud Speakers to pray; who is deaf, Allah?
* Why are Muslim charities used for terrorism?
* Why does Islam stick out as a sore thumb, among religions, and Muslims blatantly lie and hide true Islam; but now nobody believes Muslims anymore, seeing the truth of barbaric Islam in action?
I say we nuke the entire region and get rid of this cancer once and for all!!!
I will even volunteer to push the button to launch these weapons.
The Middle East is like the worlds birth place for hate.
Much of the worlds hate has its birthplace there. Its like a simmering pot of witches brew that bubbles from the fire underneath, and every now and again it gets a little too hot, and the brew spills over.
I would have no problem nuking the Muslims since Islam is a cancer in the world. We need to get rid of the cancer of Islam and if nuking Arab scum is what it takes, so be it. So I would nuke everything but israel, and then give the land to Israel and then the US, Canada, Britian, and a few other countries, would get their oil. Everyone would be happy accept China and Russia but that's too bad for them. But screm china and dumb russia. What are they doing to help the USA?
Agreed. I think Israel should be allowed to survive. While they are not perfect (well nobody is), the level of cancer within the surrounding countries needs to be eliminated. The only problem is doing it the way it needs to be done.
Like in cancer treatments, in order to make sure you get all the cancer cells, you have to kill some normal tissue surrounding the cancer and then cut of its blood supply so it cant grow. I suppose we could nuke all the countries except Israel, except nuclear fallout might create a problem for Israel.
Im not too worried about oil. We just need to start investing in getting oil from Canada and Alaska. I think its stupid to rely as much as we do for oil in an area so filled with pathological cultures.
I dont care if China or Russia would get pissed at us for eliminating this cancer in the Middle East. I say Fuck Em!!
Iâll tell you why I would spare Israel. Israel came about in the 40âs and it has shown that is a country about progress. It has a good military, a good economy and good infrastructure. It has built this in a short period of time, while the rest of the Savages that occupy the middle east, have not been able to build anything in hundreds of years. Here is a small tiny country, that makes up 1/10 of 1% of the Muslim world, and the savages have failed to wipe out Israel. What a joke.
Of course, no one in the news will tell people why Muslims have not been able to take over a small tiny young country. Itâs because they are fucking morons. They had all the time in the world to build an empire and all they have accomplished nothing and now they hate a country for being able to do what they canât. And not only have they created nothing, but they have become a cancer.
A cancer that can easily be rid of with Nukes. If worked with Japan. Japan decided that it was going to be a cancer and it got a response with Nukes and it solved that problem right away. But the problem is this retarded âhuman rightsâ activists with PMS that have too much time on their hands and all they end up doing in the long run, is killing more people because their husbands wonât go near their stinky twats.
Activists and peace protesters remind me of a situation where there is a ship, and it is taking in water and is slowly sinking. The captain knows this and so, he is heading to the nearest port before everyone drowns and there might be a good chance that everyone will drown. So the captain dumps the payload of the ship and starts an emergency journey to safety. On the way back, there is another ship that is sinking and everyone is about to drown. To turn around and save them with your boat is suicide but the activists are screaming that we must turn our sinking ship around and save them. So we do. And then later, we run into another sinking ship, and another, and another. What happens in the end: Everyone fucking dies. The Activists and peace protesters have just killed everyone with their stupidity of wanting to save everyone.
And these idiots are the same idiots that talk about love and how everything is love and one and blah blah blah. Lets see them talk about love when while a bear is mauling them to death. All these fancy love thinking goes right out the window and is worthless when it hits the real world. In the real world, out in the wild, everything is eating everything else in order to survive. When a pack of lions takes down a deer, there is no love in that. The oneness talk goes out the window. Lions want to survive, and they need to kill to survive.
But going back to Israel: Smart countries are countries that will make way for space exploration. Earth will not last forever and if we want to continue life on earth, we will have to build space technology to search for new planets. The only hope that mankind has, is doing this. And with the middle east, Muslim countries will never pave the way for space exploration. All they really care about is suicide and the Koran. They are a doom to the world and if the whole world would be under Islamic law, the human race would never have a chance to go on once the earth stops sustaining life.
The Muslim world is nothing more than a cancer, that dooms life on earth and leads to ignorance. Just like the sinking ship, it is taking the world down with it. Of course, when they took out our world trade centers in NY, Palestinian and Lebanese maggots were dancing in the streets. So when Israel was bombing the living fuck out of them, it brought me great delight to see their pain because when I was watching the bombs fall on CNN, I was thinking to myself: Lets see you laugh and cheer now you Islamic maggot scum.
But nuking them would be so great. Look at Iraq, there is a civil war there and suicide bombers blowing themselves up left and right. Iraq is a mess and is costing us billions of dollars. The best way to clean the mess and save money up is to start over from scratch. Nuke Iraq, and start over. Then nuke the rest of the maggots in the middle east.
Nukeing the maggots will save us tillions of dollars and instead of wasting trillions of dollars by building weapons to keep the cancer at bay, nuking them destorys the cancer, saves trillions of dollars that we can then spend on space technology.
I remember in WWII we had two options. Either continue fighting with Japan or use nuclear weapons.
The fighting option would have taken possibly years and cost us hundreds if not thousands of our own troops lives.
We nuked them and it was over. And we also developed a mutually respectful relationship with Japan and they are no longer our enemies.
And to think we are in Iraq losing our soldiers, trying to fight a cancer and at the same time trying to free Iraq and help save the "good cells" within and around the cancer.
We are also spending billions of dollars, when we could be using this money in other ways.
I mean as an American if I were to take a trip to the Middle East, minding my own business, as a tourist taking pictures and not bothering anyone, to think that these people might kidnap me and cut my throat simply for being an American!! And then we try to help them, help to solve their conflicts with the UN and everything, and these moronic scums would not even give it a second thought to cut my throat.
I think it is better to get out of there because nothing is really going to solve their conflicts anyway, and just get rid of this cancer once and for all and remove the entire cancer.
Like in Japan, it was sad for the "good cells" to have died, but it got rid of the cancer. And it saved a long out war and losing our own soldiers.
I also agree that liberals are hypocrites. They talk about love, peace talks and all their bullshit. But the realities of the "real world" often make it more horrific by going with this approach. If it were not for the cancer scums, there would not even be a problem in the first place!! So it seems the "fault" of what ever we would need to do to cure the cancer, would rest solely on their hands not ours.
We have a right to live without cancer scums. The world would be a much better place, but the liberal rhetoric would say that what needs to be done to cure it, is worse then the disease itself!!
If I had cancer I would want the most aggressive treatment available. To do everything, even if the side effects were horrific, to maximize the chances of curing this deadly disease. If it ment cutting of a limb and killing some "good cells" then so be it!!
What I find funny is that these carpet prayers disgrace their God each time they pray on their magic carpet. Each time they go to pray on their hands and knees, they stick their butts up in the air for Allah. What kind of respect is it to stick your ass up in the air for your sky-daddy?
And thanks to the liberals, we have become a nation of weak pussies. Back in ww2, besides nuking other cities, we went out and bombed the shit out of cities as well. There was none of this liberal BS of "civilian casualties" and "war crimes" because bombs were dropped on cities. When you were at war with the enemy, you bombed any trace of them you could find. We were at war with cancer and we did everything it took to destroy that cancer. These brought us victory and brought down the enemy.
Had 'peace lovers' and Liberals been around, we would have lost the war! Had this been the 1940's, the Islamic world would have been put in its place long ago by people who were not afraid to nuke them and bomb them into the stone age, but thanks to liberals, they have created a world of pussies who want to treat cancer with vitmain C and grape seed extract.
Oh, but evolution is supported by all this evidence. See this fossil, and that fossil. This one is intermediate, etc.. And then there is the geological column, and a fossil called XYZ. This fossil XYZ has the following 50 characters, and this is exactly what evolution predicts!!
We see evidence in genetics and the following 500 areas of study. So you see one has to be a total idiot, a stupid motherfucker, and have a mindset similar to someone who still believes the earth is flat, not to accept evolution. Now dont tell me that YOU are that stupid now?:)
The Anti-Scamvolutionist Bulldog says:
Yes Mr.Scamvolutionists I hear what you are saying and you have said a lot. But my only question to you is simply: How do you know anything of what you just said?
Scamvolutionist:
Hmmm. Errr. (After a pause of a couple of seconds) he finally musters out: Oh, well I read it in these 1000 sources. They are of course "peer reviewed".
Anti-Scamvolutionist:
I will simply ask: who are those "peers"?
Scamvolutionist:
Hmmm. Errr. Well Professor Jones and Professor Smith from this Prestigious University where one has to score 10,000 billion on their SAT Scores just for consideration for matriculation.
Anti-Scalvolutionist:
But are they not evolutionists themselves?
Scamvolutionist:
Well Yes.
Anti-Scamvolutionist:
So you are essentially using sources written by evolutionists, and that were "peer reviewed" by evolutionists, and that were finally given the OK for publication by evolutionists.
Scamvolutionists:
(as he bows his head)Hmmm. Errr. Well the answer is Yes I guess.
The Anti-Scamvolutionists smiles as the arrogant Scamvolutionists, who was so confident in his ability to regurgitate things he had memorized, is left with very little else to say:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)
Suppose I showed you some long equation in mathamatics.
I plugged in the numbers and got the answer.
Now if you were to ask me: how do I know this?
It would of course be reasonable for me to answer that I learned about it in my mathamatics textbook.
Yes, this textbook was written by a mathamatician, it was "peer reviewed" by mathamaticians, and ultimately given the OK for publication as being correct by mathamaticians.
It would be ridiculous to then argue that you dont know anything for sure, because I used a "biased" source written by a math professor, peer reviewed by math professors, and given the OK as being correct by math professors.
That is in fact the entire point of "peer review". It acts as a "monitor" to ensure accuracy.
Peer review actually increases the validity of a source used, not decreases it as you suggest.
I see your deputy Scamallo gave you a little high five for using the political speech he wrote for you:)
You are of course comparing apples to oranges. And what about all those "experts" in subjects you disagree with?
A fundamentalists Preacher and his "peers" could be viewed as an "expert" in Bible interpretation. They have their "peer reviewed" journals as well to maintain "quality control". And we could argue about mathamatics along the same lines you did you stupid monkey:)
Nope it still aint good enough to appeal to "authority" by simply citing sources that you agree with.
The bottom line is that people believe what they want to believe, and they simply find sources to support them.
Someday Martha, you will do a little thinking on your own, rather then simply swallowing what you read from an evolutionists and then regurtitating it and deluding yourself into thinking its an education. Rather then following Scamallo, Demon, and Miquel like a dumb rabbit following a carrot tangled before your nose, perhaps you might find the courage to take your own path and think a little for yourself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So instead of diverting from the main issue (a good strategy BTW Martha), lets get back to it.
Martha, tell me why you believe in evolution and exactly how you know what anything your saying is true?
âve been reading your so called âresponsesâ (and I use that term loosely) and how you actually manage to breath is a mystery to me and itâs a scary thought to think that someone like you, is out there in the world. I would recommend that you take some biology or science courses at your local college, but in your case, I think we would have to re-do your whole schooling process, starting from kindergarten.
But, ignorant people like you are a dying breed Johnny; creationism is on the way out and your antics on the board (and those of Vender Doov as well I should add) are a fine example of what ignorance can do to a person. In your mindless ignorance, you have actually done more good for evolution, than for creationism. If someone comes along and happens to read these posts and is undecided on the topic, then youâd do a fine job of making them see the ignorance of creationists. Heck Johnny, I can tell you that 99% of creationists out there would be embarrassed to associate with you.
More and more people are accepting the fact that all life evolved, Johnny. You can fight it as long as you want but you are fighting a lost cause. And the most amusing thing is: as more time that passes by, the more we learn about the earth and nature, and as we continue to learn more and as our knowledge of ourselves and the world we live in expands -- the harder it is for creationism to survive. The perfect breeding ground for creationism, is ignorance. The more ignorant people you have, the more people youâll have believing in creationism. Creationism is not even taken seriously in scientific communities, and just reading a few of your posts, really shows why.
As WOG presented this speech at the World Evolution Is Fact Club Convention in dumb fuck Switzerland, the crowd stood up and cheered giving praises to WOG.
But the scandel erupted when it was discovered that WOG simply regurgitated a speech written by Scamallo the night before, because WOG was recovering from a drug induced euphoria and was incapable of writing his speech.
Scamallo was pissed because he had to write it and wanted to get laid that night instead. So he missed out on some pussy, which pissed him off to no end:)
Funny, but about the time I started asking for sources and documentation the evolutionists are silent!!
A simple question: how do you know that? Can stump an evolutionists!
They site their sources and talk about "peer reviewed journals", but the bottom line is that they really dont know for sure anything they are saying. They simply regurgitate mountains and mountains of memorized readings from evolutionists themselves!!
So listen up. Anyone wishing to encounter one of these tricky evolutionists in a discussion simply ask them "how do know anything of what you just said?".
So here are the New Rules!!!!!
1) Any evolutionists who wishes to make a statement had better present a convincing case to answer the simple question: how do you know that?
2) You can only follow rule number 1.
I dont give a rats ass how many "sources" you can muster, only the question above must be answered. Now be convincing you tricky Scamvolutionists!!
NJAEOK: I don't think I understand all I know about what you said. Is it your belief that the universe is the construct of a divine entity and is eternal in the sense that a flame is eternal? I.E. so long as the divine eternity continues to feed fuel to the flame? So to speak.
POTPHER: Yes I do believe that the universe was caused to become by the divine entity. Now coming to your other question: Is the universe eternal? My answer depends on the understanding of eternity. Suffice to mention that the universe has not always been there. It has always been there in the sense of time. But time had a beginning too at the big bang (as viewed by cosmic evolutionists). The universe did not come to be from infinity past. In this sense the universe has a beginning and hence is not eternal. About the future, the existence and state of existence of the universe depends on the divine entity.
Let me explain my self thoroughly. To start with, I suggest that the universe is not the only existence. What do we mean when we say "exist"? If we narrow our comprehension to that for which we can test then what exists is what is "tangible". In this respect, matter and energy do exist. It is my goal here to show that other than what there is, there is more to it.
Why does something exist instead of nothing? I said that Leibniz answered this question by arguing that something exists rather than nothing because a necessary being exists which carries within itself its reason for existence and is the sufficient reason for the existence of all contingent being. I think he was alluding to a Supreme Being who purposed, designed and made other beings. Furthermore I would like to suggest also that something exists rather than nothing because we can detect it and hence we humans are the authors of what we think exists.
Think of this: Evolutionist Richard Gott's results concerning the Big Bang Theory obtained in computer simulations (programs which attempt to show how everything came about after the supposed initial explosion) are of course governed by the starting assumptions built into the program. Now Richard Gott of Princeton University produced a computer simulation, using starting assumptions he claims are 'reasonable', which ends up showing on the computer screen structures resembling the lumpy universe we have. What are these 'reasonable assumptions'? One is that 90 to 99 per cent of the mass of the universe is made up of an invisible and hitherto unidentified and undetected form of matter! It is evident that even in the minds of evolutionists, is buried the notion that what exists is not merely matter and energy. By no means am I proposing that he is correct. All I want to stress is that we (creationists and evolutionist) both believe in either assumptions or forms of things or state of being. In short we are all religious zealots.
However, I'm not ashamed to admit that I believe in creation. Notice that I said I "believe". That's the way it works for my faith. On the other hand, I find it very amusing to see people who claim that their particular inclination of a theory is what fact is without substantiating their statements. The fact is there is no scientific fact in place that genuinely explains genesis of life. Furthermore it's unscientific to rule out creation as much as it is equally unscientific to claim that creation is a fact. Is it heresy on my part? No!!! I view creationism as not science (behaviour of tangible things) for how can matter and energy be made from nothing (non pre-existing materials)? My reference of argument is from this quotation:
Through faith we understand that the worlds (universe or even domains and things therein) were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. [Hebrews 11:3]
From the above quote is evident that according to biblical interpretation of existence, matter and energy are not the only things that there is. There are other things which do not appear - can not be seen or detected.
Well that said I concede that that's a serious violation of natural law. I say so because matter and energy cannot be created nor destroyed but can be transformed into other forms. But now just there, we were transformed from a form which we can not detect. So there is no violation of the universal law as such. In the same manner I also consider evolution as religion because most of its aspects are just unproved claims e.g. Cosmic Evolution, Abiogenesis and Neo-Darwinism name it - it's all fallacy and fantasy well-grilled in fiction.
For many years now I have been arguing that there could be a being out there not from within our domain of spacetime who could be capable of violating the laws of nature. This could be possible if that being is not made of what is tangible (matter). I proposed that perhaps the state of being is not merely as we in nature know it. We could be a shadow of what is real. I further suggest that other than the spacetime domain we have another or even others domains that could perhaps exist. What there is, is not merely matter and energy I argued. We have discovered matter and energy because our current knowledge and tools that limit us to only these two forms of existence. We use matter and energy to discover existence of forms of energy and matter. Wouldn't it be probable that perhaps our current tools cannot detect what is in other domains? I'm just trying to be open-minded and thereby accommodate as much possibilities as possible.
Look, what is observed is so observed because there is an element of change. Here I use the word "change" to mean change of state and duration thereof. You wouldn't see a thing if light never reflected (change). Now follow me carefully: Consider a hypothetical point in which all matter and energy in the universe is potentially trapped and there was no change i.e. frozen. Would you say nothing exists? No, it is only correct to say that potential exists at that particular point. This point energy exists in terms of capability to evolve into various energy forms including some of the energy eventually into matter. It is clear therefore that before time was, there was infinity past in which case, the point energy was unchanging. In terms of relating infinity past to time domain, then time is negligible. Are you telling me we have exhausted all possible ways to find an Intelligent being who would have craft things into being in the universe in this short limited time we have lived? Is it not a serious error to suggest that we are the only ones that have a state of being? You see that we have made our assumptions facts yet what is out there is by far unexplored. I consider it very hypocritical to claim that our beliefs do not rests on unverified assumptions.
Does God exist? We read in the bible that God says that He is the Alpha and Omega. Correct me if I'm wrong. I believe "Alpha" is the first character of the Greek alphabet while "Omega" is the last character on the Greek alphabet. All He was saying was that He was the beginning and the end in the time domain. I Am I am also qualifies that He is also the present. I believe He was showing us that He is omnipresent in spacetime. To Him He is in the tomorrow as vividly as He is in the present. In short he feels the entire universe and entire time spectrum. I know it's difficult in our physical perception to fathom such a being in such an occurrence. But what we don't realise is that the physical (matter and energy in spacetime) come out of the spiritual (God who lives in eternity). This is shown in Hebrews 11:3. To me "spacetime" is just like a point in eternity as opposed to a break that links eternal past to eternal future. The thing that is more real is eternity. Now a question arises: Does God change?
It is impossible for such a being to change. How can he change when past, present and future to him are one and the same? For him to change would mean part of Him stepping out and become a human being and then he can respond to man's changes by him changing too. Don't we read that Christ had to learn obedience? He was tempted and yet he never sinned. He became human that we might become the sons of God.
Lets go back to the question, Does God exist? Based on the attributes of God, I should state that God does not exist. What????? Please don't collapse!!! All I'm trying to say is that God does not exist but He is the Existence. He does not exist in the way that we view existence. However he exists in the way that He views existence. Now you can relax.
My understanding that God doest not exist is based on the fact that He does not change. He fills the entire space-time domain and eternity. He is simultaneously in yesterday today and forever. He does not change and thus we cannot detect Him. God is the existence.
An Evolutionist does not doubt who his parents are and yet perhaps he has never taken a DNA comparison test of his assumably parents. What criteria is he using to base his parentage claim? If it's purely on faith lines, why not believe in a higher being to have created life? That's hypocrisy!!! You might think that I'm too lazy to search for answers and that that's the more reason why I believe in creation. The truth is that it is still a possibility and you know it just like I have argued that there is no scientific basis to deny that a being could have made the universe. After all there is no scientific law that denies simple answers to be true. Evolutionists, please if you are reading these lines, I do not desire to pick up a nasty conversation with you. I'm merely trying to show that your view too is very narrow. It is very unfair on your part to cheat yourselves that your perception is correct scientifically. Even if you were to say that it's near accurate, it still remains that a miss is as good as a mile. Perhaps scientific methods won't pin it down within our limited time. However, let's continue to search and argue until the one who made things puts us to rest. Oh how nice it will be to be told that "Gentlemen and ladies, you were all wrong." But so far I'm convinced that my opinion is correct and so should the other be.
My conclusion is that those that deny existence of other domains are hypocritical. I say so because such arrogance as is displayed by them is like that of a blind man whose hands in a dark room come across a spoon and he proclaims that the room is occupied by only a spoon without regard of perhaps numerous plates, cups and a dozen other utensils. In reality true science is blind. There is no scientific basis to deny existence of the spiritual realm I propose is a domain totally different from the space-time domain. In other words, there is a whole world outside the kitchen.
Archaeopteryx is the most well known transitional fossil between major clades - in this case between reptiles & birds.
It has a whole suite of both reptilian and avian morphological features - exactly what Darwin and Huxley predicted would be found in a (then) hypothetical link between reptiles & birds.
However for nearly 150 years Archaeopteryx has been the ONLY such link between these two major clades and has been attacked on numerous occassions. It is regularly attacked by creationists who claim it is only a bird (because it has feathers) and in total denial of the reptilian and dinosaurian morphologies present in the fossils. In addition, Archaeopteryx was also dubbed a fraud by two physicists in the 1980s - Fred Hoyle st al. Of course their ultimate failure to prove their thesis rested mainly upon their ignorance of basic comparative anatomy and palaeontology - to whit, they got it wrong because they didn't have the requisite knowledge.
However Archaeopteryx no longer needs to carry the burden of evidence alone. Since the 1980's dozens of fossils of feathered dinosaurs and allied species have come to light - mostly from China - and have now turned the majority of the palaeontological world to accepting the evolutionary link between birds and theropod dinosaurs.
I am wondering if any creationists out there can give detailed SCIENTIFIC arguments as to why they believe otherwise?
You can use theological arguments if you wish - but that won't help you prove your case.
When pressed the only "sources" you can come up with are from evolutionists. Those who alledgedly "verified" it, were themselves evolutionists.
Talk about a "closed loop":) Its like you scratch each others back, and wink at each other, and then say
See All This "EVIDENCE".
You then publish it in evolutionists sources and get away with it because it is "peer reviewed".
Thats like Bos Hogg being Rosco P Coldtrain's "peer" and he then "reviews" the "evidence" discovered by Rocso. Oh and then you have to have "independent verification" to make it look even better, so along comes another deputy who "independently verifies" these findings:)
....I'm actually going to assume your questions are serious.
JONATHAN:
"How do you know any of this?"
By reading old son. Educating oneself is a lifetime's work.
JONATHAN:
"When pressed the only "sources" you can come up with are from evolutionists."
LOL.
So when there is an astronomical question who would you ask questions of?
By your silly argument we shouldn't go to experts in a field to answer questions from that field.
JONATHAN:
"Those who alledgedly "verified" it, were themselves evolutionists."
Erm....if the initial hypotheses were wrong hundreds of eager scientists would have jumped on the case immediately!
Obviously you don't know that peer review is a cutthroat business. If your science is wrong or you've made a simple mistake somewhere then it WILL be found in very short order by the many other scientists in the field or related ones.
In the case of the theropod ancestry of birds, some scientists (also evolutionists) still don't buy it. However they are a decreasing minority simply because the evidence continues to mount supporting the theory.
You can bellow, posture and babble as much as you like mate but until you come up with a plausible explanation for the data that has been gathered so far (multiple fossils of feathered theropod dinosaurs, birds with theropod-like features, morphologies of birds and certain clades of theropod dinosaurs becoming more and more difficult to separate) then all you're doing is spouting a lot of hot air.
You don't even have the intellectual or moral confidence to attempot any sort of an explanation because you haven't a clue about the subject.
Simply put your argument boils down to: "We DON'T NEED an explanation for the diversity of life on Earth."
"....I'm actually going to assume your questions are
serious."
Wishful thinking, Miguel. This clown doesn't even know what Archaeopteryx is.
Jonathan is as entertaining as a wet jock strap, I'm done answering him. He doesn't understand biology and he can't debate. I figure if I ignore him he'll go away (yeah, I know, wishful thinking on my part).
Nothing you have said makes any sense you moronic poster boy for birth control!
I know you deliver pizzas and then get on this web site and copy stuff you read to make yourself appear more intelligent.
Poor Demon. He's a Pizza Boy.
Poor Miquel. He's a Librarian.
Poor Gallo. He's a little Bullshitter.
Poor Martha. She's a hamster in a habitrail and Demon, Miquel, and Scamallo give her treats everytime she figures out the maze:)
So you have nothing left but insult? It seems that everything you post is a mindless, idiotic insult. You convey no information (except about yourself). You continue to make yourself look foolish.
"DOUBLE SHALOM: By your silly narrow view, you think ID scientists are not scientists with an opposing explanation in that field."
There is no such thing as ID science, so there is no such thing as ID scientists. And ID is not science, just warmed over creationism that is completely unsupported.
Then back up your moronic assertion! Tell us how ID is science, how it follows the scientific method. Then tell us what research ID scientists are working on and how they conduct experiments. Then tell us any useful contribution ID science has made to the world. Seems pretty straight forward to me, but, of course, you can't do it because INTELLIGENT DESIGN IS NOT SCIENCE!
You and all your bullshit! Peer reviewed journals, experiments, etc.., all done by evolutionists!!
Its like astrologers having their own journals, research being conducted by astrologers, and then their "data" is published in journals they monitor themselves.
Any "data" alledged to contradict their astrology obviously wont pass "peer review" and therefore wont be published.
Perhaps you take your own "journals", "data" and "studies" as seriously as a heart attack, but I take them with a grain of salt.
You can hide behind the mask of the definition of science, then say "see evolution is SCIENCE", but behind this masquerade its nothing more then a SCAM.
DOUBLE SHALOM: By your silly narrow view, you think ID scientists are not scientists with an opposing explanation in that field.
gallo: Please give an example of one piece of original science that has been accomplished by ID scientists. Be sure to recount the data, state the hypotheses, explain the predictions and the tests devised to test them. Please cite the peer reviewed journal where this "science" was published.
You see, IDiots have been around for more than 10 years and I have yet to see any science reported that they have accomplished.
You are all of your "original science" and "peer reviewed" journals bullshit.
That has already been addressed and is about as reliable as a whores testimony in court.
When pressed to document anything an evolutionists says, the reply is always from some evolutionists source. Those who write those sources are evolutionists, those who are the "peers" are evolutionists, and these are the same ones who get to decide what is published and what is not.
You dont know anything you say for sure. Simply regurgitating things you've read in some evolutionist source.
So unless someone can explain how they know anything they say for sure, then its nothing but hot air. Hell, I could say there is a cat floating in the corner of my room.
Ya, and all the "science" in evolution is conducted by evolutionists, peer reviewed by evolutionists, and ultimately given the "OK" for publication by evolutionists!!
I mean read any evolution textbook used in colleges or High Schools and read the bibliography in the back. All the sources used as "supporting documentation" are performed, conducted, and published by evolutionists themselves!!!!!!!!!!!