Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 On 4 Jun., 00:47, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <uAF8i.15454$JQ3.7...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-0306071312560001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <9j1663pg2co5elm1hpf7umont827mer...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 12:08:44 -0700, in alt.atheism > > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> <Jason-0306071208450...@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> >In article <f3ueed$8qe$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > >> ><tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> ... > > > >> >> Also a field in which the so called "ID-nuts" don't especially do too > > >> >> good. Astonomy includes how the universe began. He probably "argued" > > >> >> that "goddidit". So no wonder. Also, if he is one of those buggers > > >> >> that > > >> >> believes the universe and/or the earth is only 6000 years old, he runs > > >> >> into tons of trouble. > > >> >> So, no. He is out. > > > >> >> Tokay > > > >> >Tokay, > > >> >He did not get tenure but is still a professor. If they fire him, he > > >> >could > > >> >get a job as a professor at a Christian college where they don't > > >> >discriminate against the advocates of creation science. > > > >> Real colleges don't teach religious lies as science. I don't think you > > >> can find a single church-related college that would want the lies of > > >> 'creation science' taught in science class. The 'Bible colleges' you are > > >> thinking of have are not real colleges. > > > >> >Discrimination is > > >> >suppose to be illegal but I guess that some of the members of this > > >> >newsgroup appear to believe that it's acceptable for public colleges to > > >> >discriminate against professors that are advocates of creation science > > >> >by > > >> >not granting them tenure. How would you feel if a Christian college > > >> >refused to grant tenure to a biology professor since he was an advocate > > >> >of > > >> >evolution? > > > >> Once again, you defame those who disagree with you. There was no illegal > > >> discrimination and the man did not fail to get tenure because of his > > >> religious beliefs. Stop telling lies. > > > > I attended a Christian college for two years. One of the biology > > > professors was a Christian and was an advocate of creation science. He > > > taught evolution theory. He did not teach creation science to his > > > students. He did have a special session each quarter where he taught the > > > basics of creation science. None of his students were required to attend > > > and none of the students that attended the special session were required > > > to take tests. As far as I know, the other biology professors did not > > > discriminate against him. I visited his office and had a conversation with > > > him. He was not my biology professor. I doubt that he would have been > > > allowed to teach the special creation science session if he had worked in > > > a state university. > > > Jason > > > I'm curious Jason, what did he teach the students? Since there is no science > > involved with creation 'science' I fail to see how he could teach anything. > > Dr. D.T. Gish wrote a book that was published many years ago and was > revised in 1995. The title of the original book was, "Evolution: The > Fossils Say No" and the revised version is entitled, "Evolution: The > Fossils Still Say No". The book has 391 pages. Dr. Gish discusses the > fossil evidence and the basic concepts of creation science. It would be > easy for a professor to use that book and related books to develop a two > hour lecture. It would not be possible to discuss the actual science in the book for two hours. There is none, and that was the point. My college biology professor could use one chapter from our > college text book to develop a two hour lecture. The advocates of > Intelligent Design developed an entire textbook and the textbook did not > mention God or any scriptures. I did read Dr. Gish's book. > Jason- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 On 4 Jun., 01:05, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <yuF8i.15375$JQ3.5...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-0306071213090001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <f3ue0d$7q7$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > > > >> [snip a bunch of questions. Learn yourself. I am not wasting my time] > > > >> > 20. Would you like to explain the origin of any of the following > > >> > twenty-one features of the earth: > > > >> > The Grand Canyon and Other Canyons > > >> > Mid-Oceanic Ridge > > >> > Continental Shelves and Slopes > > >> > Ocean Trenches > > >> > Seamounts and Tablemounts > > >> > Earthquakes > > >> > Magnetic Variations on the Ocean Floor > > >> > Submarine Canyons > > >> > Coal and Oil Formations > > >> > Glaciers and the Ice Ages > > >> > Frozen Mammoths > > >> > Major Mountain Ranges > > >> > Overthrusts > > >> > Volcanoes and Lava > > >> > Geothermal Heat > > >> > Metamorphic Rock > > >> > Strata > > >> > Plateaus > > >> > Salt Domes > > >> > Jigsaw Fit of the Continents > > >> > Fossil Graveyards > > > >> > If so, I will point out some obvious problems with your > > >> > explanation and refer you to 77 pages that explain them all as a result > > >> > of > > >> > a global flood. > > > >> You REALLY think that all this was the result of a global flood? > > >> How long ago? > > >> IIRC some scientists think there even was one.... Some 4 billion years > > >> ago. > > >> But that is another matter. > > > > Yes, I believe there was a global flood. I don't know how many years ago > > > that it happened. I doubt that anyone knows the time period that it took > > > place. > > > I'm glad you believe that Jason. Since the world of science says that there > > is no evidence of a global flood perhaps you can explain why you think there > > was. > > Hello, > Dr. Henry Morris (the founder of ICR) wrote a book entitled, "The Bible > Has The Answers" (394 pages). The book was first published in 1971. A > second edition, enlarged by 50 percent, was published in 1976. Dr. Morris > discussed all of the evidence related to the flood in that book. The > evidence discussed in that book is why I think there was a global flood. > Jason- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 On 4 Jun., 01:07, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <RoF8i.15298$JQ3.14...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-0306071236540001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <1180864433.482133.263...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> On Jun 3, 9:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> > In article <f3t1f1$i75$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > >> > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > >> > > Jason wrote: > > >> > > > In article <f3rg71$rer$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > >> > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> > > >> Jason wrote: > > >> > > >>> In article <s9j163tfd53h20c63pfengglsdqakrb...@4ax.com>, Free > > >> > > >>> Lunch > > >> > > >>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> > > >>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:29:51 -0700, in alt.atheism > > >> > > >>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> > > >>>> <Jason-0106071829510...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> > > >>>>> In article <bqc163pt6i3gfpq0oi8u9lp5rr85pmd...@4ax.com>, Free > > >> > > >>>>> Lunch > > >> > > >>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> > > >>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:01:10 -0700, in alt.atheism > > >> > > >>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> > > >>>>>> <Jason-0106071801100...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> > > >>>>>>> In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.com>, > > > Free Lunch > > >> > > >>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> > > >>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism > > >> > > >>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> > > >>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse..net>: > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> In article > > > <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > >> > > >>>>>>>> ... > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Except those who are educated and are not idiots. > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that they keep > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> the > > >> > apes and > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo, they > > > kept the > > >> > > >>> gorilla > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> in a facility that made it impossible for him to escape or > > >> > throw fecal > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have created and > > > designed > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> monkeys and apes to be vastly different than humans so as > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> not to > > >> > > >>> confuse > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> the advocates of evolution. > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> Jason > > > >> > > >>>>>>>> What does California keep in the cages at San Quentin? > > >> > > >>>>>>> People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and > > >> > > >>>>>>> gorillas > > >> > use fire? > > >> > > >>>>>> Does your entire theology rely on the fact that humans > > > learned to tame > > >> > > >>>>>> fire and other animals did not? > > > >> > > >>>>>> Wow.... > > >> > > >>>>> No--I was only pointed out one of the major difference between > > >> > mankind and > > >> > > >>>>> animals. > > >> > > >>>> It's a trivial behavioral difference. > > > >> > > >>>>> I also pointed out in another post that mankind worships God > > >> > > >>>>> and > > >> > > >>>>> that animals do not worship God. Of course, not all humans > > > worship God. > > >> > > >>>> Another trivial difference. > > >> > > >>> Another major difference: > > >> > > >>> IQ levels--much lower than normal people. > > > >> > > >>> also: Animals can not have conversations with people by talking. > > > >> > > >> Actually, they can. You should really start reading some > > >> > > >> scientific > > >> > > >> stuff. They taught some bonobos to use a kind of sign language. So > > >> > > >> they > > >> > > >> can't "talk" by language. But conversation is not limited to > > >> > > >> sound. > > >> > > >> What was your point again? > > > >> > > >> Tokay > > > >> > > > My point is that they can not have converations with people BY > > >> > > > TALKING. > > > >> > > I hope you do not fix this on language. Language, i.e. sounds. We are > > >> > > communicating by internet. No sound? > > > >> > > > Of course, they can communicate. One lady had a bird feeder outside > > >> > her window. > > >> > > > When the bird feeder became empty, the birds would peck on her > > >> > > > window to > > >> > > > let her know that she needed to refill the bird feeder. After she > > > refilled > > >> > > > the feeder, the birds would stop pecking on her window. Dogs let > > >> > > > their > > >> > > > owners know when they are hungry. Yes, apes can use sign language. > > > Do you > > >> > > > think that an ape would be able to win a chess game with a 12 year > > >> > > > old > > >> > > > child? > > > >> > > Hardly. But that is not the question. > > > >> > > Do you think that an ape would be able to figure out the solution > > >> > > > to an algebra problem? One of the other differences is a low IQ. > > >> > > > jason > > > >> > > Ah, so the difference is one of IQ? > > > >> > > You are on very thin ice, let me tell you..... > > > >> > I have provided three separate reasons. > > > >> The point is, Jason, that your IQ is hardly that much more than that > > >> of an ape, based on what you've posted here. I'm sure an ape could > > >> also learn to cut and paste, especially if there was no requirement > > >> for him to understand what he was cutting and pasting. > > > >> You really do need to have things spelled out for you, don't you? > > > >> Martin > > > > Martin, > > > You have told me that life evolved from non-life. Yes, spell it out for > > > me. Explain how life evolved from non-life. > > > Jason > > > It's really simple Jason, once the earth was uninhabitable. Now there is > > life. Life doesn't 'evolve' from non-life. Life can begin from non-life. > > Regardless of how life started, evolution now directs the distribution and > > diversity of life on earth. > > Spell it out, explain how life can begin from non-life.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 On 4 Jun., 01:10, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <4sF8i.15341$JQ3.14...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-0306071242230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <1180863203.738843.244...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > >> On 2 Jun., 03:01, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> > In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > >> > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > >> > > On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism > > >> > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> > > <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> > > >In article <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, > > >> > > >gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > >> > > ... > > > >> > > >> Except those who are educated and are not idiots. > > > >> > > >Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that they keep the apes > > >> > > >and > > >> > > >monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo, they kept the > > >> > > >gori= > > >> lla > > >> > > >in a facility that made it impossible for him to escape or throw > > >> > > >fecal > > >> > > >material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have created and designed > > >> > > >monkeys and apes to be vastly different than humans so as not to > > >> > > >confu= > > >> se > > >> > > >the advocates of evolution. > > >> > > >Jason > > > >> > > What does California keep in the cages at San Quentin? > > > >> > People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and gorillas use > > >> > fire?-= > > >> Skjul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > >> > - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > >> Does using fire mean that you are not related to other apes? No > > >> Jason, it does not mean that. You zoo example was completely > > >> meaningless. > > > > These are some of the differences: > > > the use of fire > > > burying the dead > > > the ability to communicate by talking > > > differences in DNA > > > differences in IQ > > > the ability to worship > > > Explain to me how chimps and humans share the same defect gene as explained > > here: > > >http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0500450102v1.pdf > > Sorry, I have never taken any classes related to genes or read any books > or articles about genes.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 16:05:07 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0306071605080001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <yuF8i.15375$JQ3.5714@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" ><mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0306071213090001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <f3ue0d$7q7$02$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris >> > <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: >> > >> >> Jason wrote: >> >> >> >> [snip a bunch of questions. Learn yourself. I am not wasting my time] >> >> >> >> > 20. Would you like to explain the origin of any of the following >> >> > twenty-one features of the earth: >> >> > >> >> > The Grand Canyon and Other Canyons >> >> > Mid-Oceanic Ridge >> >> > Continental Shelves and Slopes >> >> > Ocean Trenches >> >> > Seamounts and Tablemounts >> >> > Earthquakes >> >> > Magnetic Variations on the Ocean Floor >> >> > Submarine Canyons >> >> > Coal and Oil Formations >> >> > Glaciers and the Ice Ages >> >> > Frozen Mammoths >> >> > Major Mountain Ranges >> >> > Overthrusts >> >> > Volcanoes and Lava >> >> > Geothermal Heat >> >> > Metamorphic Rock >> >> > Strata >> >> > Plateaus >> >> > Salt Domes >> >> > Jigsaw Fit of the Continents >> >> > Fossil Graveyards >> >> > >> >> > If so, I will point out some obvious problems with your >> >> > explanation and refer you to 77 pages that explain them all as a result >> >> > of >> >> > a global flood. >> >> >> >> You REALLY think that all this was the result of a global flood? >> >> How long ago? >> >> IIRC some scientists think there even was one.... Some 4 billion years >> >> ago. >> >> But that is another matter. >> > >> > Yes, I believe there was a global flood. I don't know how many years ago >> > that it happened. I doubt that anyone knows the time period that it took >> > place. >> >> I'm glad you believe that Jason. Since the world of science says that there >> is no evidence of a global flood perhaps you can explain why you think there >> was. > >Hello, >Dr. Henry Morris (the founder of ICR) wrote a book entitled, "The Bible >Has The Answers" (394 pages). The book was first published in 1971. A >second edition, enlarged by 50 percent, was published in 1976. Dr. Morris >discussed all of the evidence related to the flood in that book. The >evidence discussed in that book is why I think there was a global flood. Morris was wrong. When it comes to science, the Bible does not have the answers. Morris lied about the science to make you feel good. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 In article <ba8663tn66fnvj274pchevj2ue693ks8v6@4ax.com>, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 14:11:57 -0700, in alt.atheism > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > <Jason-0306071411580001@66-52-22-102.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >In article <615663l15ik3mdb5s0bm2rg636pnmqfevk@4ax.com>, Jim07D7 > ><Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote: > > > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: > >> > >> <...> > >> > > >> >I attended a Christian college for two years. One of the biology > >> >professors was a Christian and was an advocate of creation science. He > >> >taught evolution theory. He did not teach creation science to his > >> >students. He did have a special session each quarter where he taught the > >> >basics of creation science. None of his students were required to attend > >> >and none of the students that attended the special session were required > >> >to take tests. As far as I know, the other biology professors did not > >> >discriminate against him. I visited his office and had a conversation with > >> >him. He was not my biology professor. I doubt that he would have been > >> >allowed to teach the special creation science session if he had worked in > >> >a state university. > >> >Jason > >> > >> Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, has been the location of > >> a presentation by Duane Gish, presenting the case for scientific > >> creationism. "Gish is [or was] the vice president of the Institute for > >> Creation Research and was touted in fliers for the event as "one of > >> the world's leading experts on Scientific Creationism."" > >> > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duane_Gish > >> http://www.ftvc.org/news0900.html > > > >That is great news. I saw Dr. Gish debate a professor from the local state > >college. The auditorium was full of people. They advertised the debate in > >the ICR newsletter and at many of the churches. As a result, lots of > >Christians attended the debate. > >Jason > > > Gish is a con man. It's not great that he is allowed to teach his lies > anywhere. Churches should feel shame that they let him teach such > nonsense. He has debated hundreds of science professors and won most of those debates. He easily won the the debate that I attended. The main reason is because the professor from the state college lost his temper and made a fool of himself. Even the students that came to support their professor stopped clapping for him after he made a fool of himself. I learned from a professor that a taught public speaking class that when someone that is in a debate starts name calling, it means that person lost the debate. That's the reason I don't get upset when people call me names--it means that I won the debate. Someone told me that Dr. Gish lost the debate that he attended. The reason was that the professor had attended a previous debate and was prepared to respond to every issue that Dr. Gish mentioned in the debate. That professor that won the debate never lost his temper or started name calling. Jason Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 16:10:14 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0306071610140001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <4sF8i.15341$JQ3.14436@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" ><mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0306071242230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <1180863203.738843.244120@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, >> > gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: >> > >> >> On 2 Jun., 03:01, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> > In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> > > On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism >> >> > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> > > <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >> > > >In article <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, >> >> > > >gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > ... >> >> > >> >> > > >> Except those who are educated and are not idiots. >> >> > >> >> > > >Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that they keep the apes >> >> > > >and >> >> > > >monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo, they kept the >> >> > > >gori= >> >> lla >> >> > > >in a facility that made it impossible for him to escape or throw >> >> > > >fecal >> >> > > >material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have created and designed >> >> > > >monkeys and apes to be vastly different than humans so as not to >> >> > > >confu= >> >> se >> >> > > >the advocates of evolution. >> >> > > >Jason >> >> > >> >> > > What does California keep in the cages at San Quentin? >> >> > >> >> > People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and gorillas use >> >> > fire?-= >> >> Skjul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - >> >> > >> >> > - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - >> >> >> >> Does using fire mean that you are not related to other apes? No >> >> Jason, it does not mean that. You zoo example was completely >> >> meaningless. >> > >> > These are some of the differences: >> > the use of fire >> > burying the dead >> > the ability to communicate by talking >> > differences in DNA >> > differences in IQ >> > the ability to worship >> >> Explain to me how chimps and humans share the same defect gene as explained >> here: >> >> http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0500450102v1.pdf > >Sorry, I have never taken any classes related to genes or read any books >or articles about genes. > Then why would you be so arrogant as to reject the discoveries that were made by those who have? Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 On 4 Jun., 01:13, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <0kF8i.13105$RX.1...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > > > > > b...@nonespam.com wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > In article <f3ueed$8qe$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > > >>> In article <f3t24v$7mv$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > >>> <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >>>> Jason wrote: > > >>>>> In article <4661add3.268...@news.east.earthlink.net>, > > >>>>> lumin...@everywhere.net (Luminoso) wrote: > > > >>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:48:06 -0700, bramble > > >>>>>> <leopoldo.perd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>>> On 31 mayo, 21:21, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >>>>>>>> In article <f3mkof$hbv$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > >>>>>>>> My point was that the so called founder of evolution theory was a > > >>>>>>>> Christian at least during some years of his life. I only read > the last > > >>>>>>>> chapter of his book and it was apparent that he had an excellent > > >>>>>>>> understanding of the book of Genesis. He mentioned the term "creator" > > >>>>>>>> several different times. I am more in agreement with Darwin than I > > >>> am with > > >>>>>>>> Evolutionists that believe that mankind evolved from a one > celled life > > >>>>>>>> form. It's my opinion that Darwin did NOT believe that. I read > the last > > >>>>>>>> paragraph three times and it was difficult to understand the point > > >>> that he > > >>>>>>>> was making. However, he did use these words in that sentence: > > >>>>>>>> "...having been originally BREATHED INTO A FEW FORMS OR INTO > ONE." That > > >>>>>>>> appeared to me to be related to God breathing life into people. > That is > > >>>>>>>> very different than believing that mankind evolved from a one > > > celled life > > >>>>>>>> form. > > >>>>>>>> Jason > > >>>>>>> Of course, Jason. He was living in a Christian world. He had to > > >>>>>>> tread very carefully as not to have problems. That is why, he let in > > >>>>>>> his first book the man outside of the picture. It was a time in which > > >>>>>>> there was a certain degree of freedom. If Darwin had lived a hundred > > >>>>>>> years earlier, he could not have dared to write this book. So in > > > spite of > > >>>>>>> being the author of the book, Origins of species, he had to behave as > > >>>>>>> any other high class gentleman of his time, going to church on > > >>>>>>> sundays. > > >>>>>> There is a myth propagated by the extreme 'creationist' faction > > >>>>>> that it's impossible to be both "religious" and an "evolutionist". > > >>>>>> Very likely Darwin -was- religious, his culture was saturated > > >>>>>> with religious ideas and perspectives. It would have been very > > >>>>>> unusual for him -not- to have been religious in some way. > > > >>>>>> But he couldn't have been a strict "CHRISTIAN". His studies > > >>>>>> showed that the proposed scheme of creation in the christian > > >>>>>> bible was flat wrong. No "Zap ! There's an elephant, Zap ! > > >>>>>> There's a chicken". A long and winding road instead. > > > >>>>>> So Darwin had to be something other than a strict "christian". > > >>>>>> A "bad christian" perhaps, a deist maybe. What he had learned > > >>>>>> was incompatible with christian dogma, but not with the idea > > >>>>>> of -some- kind of god-entity kick-starting life on earth. > > > >>>>>> The kind of reason & evidence-based thinking that Darwin helped > > >>>>>> along eventually spawned a crop of unbelievers, but AT THE TIME > > >>>>>> and given the cultural environment true athiests were few and > > >>>>>> far between (and they usually didn't advertise themselves). > > > >>>>>> As for the thread title, yes, there may be an "alternative" > > >>>>>> to evolution. Alas it would have to involve aliens or 'gods' > > >>>>>> constantly bringing new forms of life to earth over a very > > >>>>>> long period. The 'intermediate forms' not being 'intermediate' > > >>>>>> but simply genetically-engineered lifeforms that didn't adapt > > >>>>>> well, thus requiring a series of "improved" versions to be > > >>>>>> constructed. > > > >>>>>> That scenerio, while not impossible, seems -extremely- unlikely. > > >>>>>> If there are aliens involved, more likely an alien stopped-off > > >>>>>> here to take a crap and some of its bacteria managed to survive, > > >>>>>> and subsequently evolve. There would be a certain poetic justice > > >>>>>> in discovering that egomaniacal humans were spawned from a > > >>>>>> floater left by some grey-skinned alien :-) > > >>>>> The problem is that evolutionists now have total control and will not > > >>>>> allow any alternative theories to be taught in the public school system. > > >>>> If it's a valid theory, no problem. We explained at length what a valid > > >>>> scientific theory must be. Which criteria it must fulfill. ID simply and > > >>>> plainly fails said criterias. > > > >>>>> They don't even like it when college professors teach college students > > >>>>> about creation science. > > >>>> See above. > > > >>>> Many years ago, there was a famous movie about the > > >>>>> Scopes Monkey Trial. I saw that movie. The Christians were accused > of not > > >>>>> allowing a teacher to teach students about evoluton. That has all > changed. > > >>>>> The evolutionists are now in control and will not allow > intelligent design > > >>>>> to be taught in the public schools system. > > >>>> NOT in SCIENCE CLASS! It FAILS all criteria. So it is not science! Teach > > >>>> it all you like. Around here the class is termed "Religion" (pronounce > > >>>> it german). Or "Ethik". (It IS taught, just not in science class.) > > > >>>> The evolutionists are the new > > >>>>> fascist. > > >>>> lol > > > >>>> Several days ago, I read about a college professor that was an > > >>>>> advocate of creation science. He was denied tenure (spelling??). > > >>>> That depends what class he wanted to teach. If it was sociology, he can > > >>>> be my guest. If it was biology, he is out. Nor science. Simple, actually. > > > >>>> Of > > >>>>> course, if he was an advocate of evolution, he would have been granted > > >>>>> tenure. > > >>>> Depends. If he wanted to teach sociology, What is his qualification? > > > >>>> Tokay > > >>> I was told he taught astronomy classes. > > > >> Also a field in which the so called "ID-nuts" don't especially do too > > >> good. Astonomy includes how the universe began. He probably "argued" > > >> that "goddidit". So no wonder. Also, if he is one of those buggers that > > >> believes the universe and/or the earth is only 6000 years old, he runs > > >> into tons of trouble. > > >> So, no. He is out. > > > >> Tokay > > > > Tokay, > > > He did not get tenure but is still a professor. If they fire him, he could > > > get a job as a professor at a Christian college where they don't > > > discriminate against the advocates of creation science. Discrimination is > > > suppose to be illegal but I guess that some of the members of this > > > newsgroup appear to believe that it's acceptable for public colleges to > > > discriminate against professors that are advocates of creation science by > > > not granting them tenure. How would you feel if a Christian college > > > refused to grant tenure to a biology professor since he was an advocate of > > > evolution? > > > First, it's their right. Second, it is exactly what I would expect. The > > surprise would be that they hired him in the first place. > > If a Christian college refused to grant a biology professor tenure since > he was an advocate of evolution--would the college have that right?- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 In article <QBF8i.15473$JQ3.13928@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-0306071411580001@66-52-22-102.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <615663l15ik3mdb5s0bm2rg636pnmqfevk@4ax.com>, Jim07D7 > > <Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote: > > > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: > >> > >> <...> > >> > > >> >I attended a Christian college for two years. One of the biology > >> >professors was a Christian and was an advocate of creation science. He > >> >taught evolution theory. He did not teach creation science to his > >> >students. He did have a special session each quarter where he taught the > >> >basics of creation science. None of his students were required to attend > >> >and none of the students that attended the special session were required > >> >to take tests. As far as I know, the other biology professors did not > >> >discriminate against him. I visited his office and had a conversation > >> >with > >> >him. He was not my biology professor. I doubt that he would have been > >> >allowed to teach the special creation science session if he had worked > >> >in > >> >a state university. > >> >Jason > >> > >> Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, has been the location of > >> a presentation by Duane Gish, presenting the case for scientific > >> creationism. "Gish is [or was] the vice president of the Institute for > >> Creation Research and was touted in fliers for the event as "one of > >> the world's leading experts on Scientific Creationism."" > >> > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duane_Gish > >> http://www.ftvc.org/news0900.html > > > > That is great news. I saw Dr. Gish debate a professor from the local state > > college. The auditorium was full of people. They advertised the debate in > > the ICR newsletter and at many of the churches. As a result, lots of > > Christians attended the debate. > > Jason > > Ah yes, old "Bullfrog" Gish. Tell me Jason, do you think that real science > is done by public debate? No--it's a great method of helping people that attend the debates to understand the issues. Most of the people that attended Dr. Gish's debates are not involved in any science related fields or involved in scientific research. Dr. Gish has retired. Quote
Guest Jim07D7 Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said: >Dr. D.T. Gish wrote a book that was published many years ago and was >revised in 1995. The title of the original book was, "Evolution: The >Fossils Say No" and the revised version is entitled, "Evolution: The >Fossils Still Say No". The book has 391 pages. Dr. Gish discusses the >fossil evidence and the basic concepts of creation science. It would be >easy for a professor to use that book and related books to develop a two >hour lecture. My college biology professor could use one chapter from our >college text book to develop a two hour lecture. The advocates of >Intelligent Design developed an entire textbook and the textbook did not >mention God or any scriptures. I did read Dr. Gish's book. But in order to support his alternative, what is needed is "Creation: The Fossils Say Yes". Why don't you see this? Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 In article <uAF8i.15454$JQ3.7214@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-0306071312560001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <9j1663pg2co5elm1hpf7umont827mertl3@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 12:08:44 -0700, in alt.atheism > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> <Jason-0306071208450001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >> >In article <f3ueed$8qe$02$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > >> ><tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > >> > >> ... > >> > >> >> Also a field in which the so called "ID-nuts" don't especially do too > >> >> good. Astonomy includes how the universe began. He probably "argued" > >> >> that "goddidit". So no wonder. Also, if he is one of those buggers > >> >> that > >> >> believes the universe and/or the earth is only 6000 years old, he runs > >> >> into tons of trouble. > >> >> So, no. He is out. > >> >> > >> >> Tokay > >> > > >> >Tokay, > >> >He did not get tenure but is still a professor. If they fire him, he > >> >could > >> >get a job as a professor at a Christian college where they don't > >> >discriminate against the advocates of creation science. > >> > >> Real colleges don't teach religious lies as science. I don't think you > >> can find a single church-related college that would want the lies of > >> 'creation science' taught in science class. The 'Bible colleges' you are > >> thinking of have are not real colleges. > >> > >> >Discrimination is > >> >suppose to be illegal but I guess that some of the members of this > >> >newsgroup appear to believe that it's acceptable for public colleges to > >> >discriminate against professors that are advocates of creation science > >> >by > >> >not granting them tenure. How would you feel if a Christian college > >> >refused to grant tenure to a biology professor since he was an advocate > >> >of > >> >evolution? > >> > >> Once again, you defame those who disagree with you. There was no illegal > >> discrimination and the man did not fail to get tenure because of his > >> religious beliefs. Stop telling lies. > > > > I attended a Christian college for two years. One of the biology > > professors was a Christian and was an advocate of creation science. He > > taught evolution theory. He did not teach creation science to his > > students. He did have a special session each quarter where he taught the > > basics of creation science. None of his students were required to attend > > and none of the students that attended the special session were required > > to take tests. As far as I know, the other biology professors did not > > discriminate against him. I visited his office and had a conversation with > > him. He was not my biology professor. I doubt that he would have been > > allowed to teach the special creation science session if he had worked in > > a state university. > > Jason > > I'm curious Jason, what did he teach the students? Since there is no science > involved with creation 'science' I fail to see how he could teach anything. Dr. D.T. Gish wrote a book that was published many years ago and was revised in 1995. The title of the original book was, "Evolution: The Fossils Say No" and the revised version is entitled, "Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No". The book has 391 pages. Dr. Gish discusses the fossil evidence and the basic concepts of creation science. It would be easy for a professor to use that book and related books to develop a two hour lecture. My college biology professor could use one chapter from our college text book to develop a two hour lecture. The advocates of Intelligent Design developed an entire textbook and the textbook did not mention God or any scriptures. I did read Dr. Gish's book. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 In article <yuF8i.15375$JQ3.5714@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-0306071213090001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <f3ue0d$7q7$02$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > >> > >> [snip a bunch of questions. Learn yourself. I am not wasting my time] > >> > >> > 20. Would you like to explain the origin of any of the following > >> > twenty-one features of the earth: > >> > > >> > The Grand Canyon and Other Canyons > >> > Mid-Oceanic Ridge > >> > Continental Shelves and Slopes > >> > Ocean Trenches > >> > Seamounts and Tablemounts > >> > Earthquakes > >> > Magnetic Variations on the Ocean Floor > >> > Submarine Canyons > >> > Coal and Oil Formations > >> > Glaciers and the Ice Ages > >> > Frozen Mammoths > >> > Major Mountain Ranges > >> > Overthrusts > >> > Volcanoes and Lava > >> > Geothermal Heat > >> > Metamorphic Rock > >> > Strata > >> > Plateaus > >> > Salt Domes > >> > Jigsaw Fit of the Continents > >> > Fossil Graveyards > >> > > >> > If so, I will point out some obvious problems with your > >> > explanation and refer you to 77 pages that explain them all as a result > >> > of > >> > a global flood. > >> > >> You REALLY think that all this was the result of a global flood? > >> How long ago? > >> IIRC some scientists think there even was one.... Some 4 billion years > >> ago. > >> But that is another matter. > > > > Yes, I believe there was a global flood. I don't know how many years ago > > that it happened. I doubt that anyone knows the time period that it took > > place. > > I'm glad you believe that Jason. Since the world of science says that there > is no evidence of a global flood perhaps you can explain why you think there > was. Hello, Dr. Henry Morris (the founder of ICR) wrote a book entitled, "The Bible Has The Answers" (394 pages). The book was first published in 1971. A second edition, enlarged by 50 percent, was published in 1976. Dr. Morris discussed all of the evidence related to the flood in that book. The evidence discussed in that book is why I think there was a global flood. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 In article <RoF8i.15298$JQ3.14669@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-0306071236540001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <1180864433.482133.263330@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> On Jun 3, 9:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > In article <f3t1f1$i75$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > >> > > Jason wrote: > >> > > > In article <f3rg71$rer$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > >> > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> Jason wrote: > >> > > >>> In article <s9j163tfd53h20c63pfengglsdqakrb...@4ax.com>, Free > >> > > >>> Lunch > >> > > >>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:29:51 -0700, in alt.atheism > >> > > >>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> > > >>>> <Jason-0106071829510...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >> > > >>>>> In article <bqc163pt6i3gfpq0oi8u9lp5rr85pmd...@4ax.com>, Free > >> > > >>>>> Lunch > >> > > >>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:01:10 -0700, in alt.atheism > >> > > >>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> > > >>>>>> <Jason-0106071801100...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >> > > >>>>>>> In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.com>, > > Free Lunch > >> > > >>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism > >> > > >>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> > > >>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >> > > >>>>>>>>> In article > > <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, > >> > > >>>>>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > >> > > >>>>>>>> ... > >> > > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Except those who are educated and are not idiots. > >> > > >>>>>>>>> Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that they keep > >> > > >>>>>>>>> the > >> > apes and > >> > > >>>>>>>>> monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo, they > > kept the > >> > > >>> gorilla > >> > > >>>>>>>>> in a facility that made it impossible for him to escape or > >> > throw fecal > >> > > >>>>>>>>> material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have created and > > designed > >> > > >>>>>>>>> monkeys and apes to be vastly different than humans so as > >> > > >>>>>>>>> not to > >> > > >>> confuse > >> > > >>>>>>>>> the advocates of evolution. > >> > > >>>>>>>>> Jason > >> > > >> > > >>>>>>>> What does California keep in the cages at San Quentin? > >> > > >>>>>>> People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and > >> > > >>>>>>> gorillas > >> > use fire? > >> > > >>>>>> Does your entire theology rely on the fact that humans > > learned to tame > >> > > >>>>>> fire and other animals did not? > >> > > >> > > >>>>>> Wow.... > >> > > >>>>> No--I was only pointed out one of the major difference between > >> > mankind and > >> > > >>>>> animals. > >> > > >>>> It's a trivial behavioral difference. > >> > > >> > > >>>>> I also pointed out in another post that mankind worships God > >> > > >>>>> and > >> > > >>>>> that animals do not worship God. Of course, not all humans > > worship God. > >> > > >>>> Another trivial difference. > >> > > >>> Another major difference: > >> > > >>> IQ levels--much lower than normal people. > >> > > >> > > >>> also: Animals can not have conversations with people by talking. > >> > > >> > > >> Actually, they can. You should really start reading some > >> > > >> scientific > >> > > >> stuff. They taught some bonobos to use a kind of sign language. So > >> > > >> they > >> > > >> can't "talk" by language. But conversation is not limited to > >> > > >> sound. > >> > > >> What was your point again? > >> > > >> > > >> Tokay > >> > > >> > > > My point is that they can not have converations with people BY > >> > > > TALKING. > >> > > >> > > I hope you do not fix this on language. Language, i.e. sounds. We are > >> > > communicating by internet. No sound? > >> > > >> > > > Of course, they can communicate. One lady had a bird feeder outside > >> > her window. > >> > > > When the bird feeder became empty, the birds would peck on her > >> > > > window to > >> > > > let her know that she needed to refill the bird feeder. After she > > refilled > >> > > > the feeder, the birds would stop pecking on her window. Dogs let > >> > > > their > >> > > > owners know when they are hungry. Yes, apes can use sign language. > > Do you > >> > > > think that an ape would be able to win a chess game with a 12 year > >> > > > old > >> > > > child? > >> > > >> > > Hardly. But that is not the question. > >> > > >> > > Do you think that an ape would be able to figure out the solution > >> > > > to an algebra problem? One of the other differences is a low IQ. > >> > > > jason > >> > > >> > > Ah, so the difference is one of IQ? > >> > > >> > > You are on very thin ice, let me tell you..... > >> > > >> > I have provided three separate reasons. > >> > >> The point is, Jason, that your IQ is hardly that much more than that > >> of an ape, based on what you've posted here. I'm sure an ape could > >> also learn to cut and paste, especially if there was no requirement > >> for him to understand what he was cutting and pasting. > >> > >> You really do need to have things spelled out for you, don't you? > >> > >> Martin > > > > Martin, > > You have told me that life evolved from non-life. Yes, spell it out for > > me. Explain how life evolved from non-life. > > Jason > > It's really simple Jason, once the earth was uninhabitable. Now there is > life. Life doesn't 'evolve' from non-life. Life can begin from non-life. > Regardless of how life started, evolution now directs the distribution and > diversity of life on earth. Spell it out, explain how life can begin from non-life. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 In article <4sF8i.15341$JQ3.14436@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-0306071242230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <1180863203.738843.244120@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > > gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > > > >> On 2 Jun., 03:01, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> > > On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism > >> > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> > > <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >> > > >In article <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, > >> > > >gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > >> > > >> > > ... > >> > > >> > > >> Except those who are educated and are not idiots. > >> > > >> > > >Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that they keep the apes > >> > > >and > >> > > >monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo, they kept the > >> > > >gori= > >> lla > >> > > >in a facility that made it impossible for him to escape or throw > >> > > >fecal > >> > > >material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have created and designed > >> > > >monkeys and apes to be vastly different than humans so as not to > >> > > >confu= > >> se > >> > > >the advocates of evolution. > >> > > >Jason > >> > > >> > > What does California keep in the cages at San Quentin? > >> > > >> > People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and gorillas use > >> > fire?-= > >> Skjul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > >> > > >> > - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > >> > >> Does using fire mean that you are not related to other apes? No > >> Jason, it does not mean that. You zoo example was completely > >> meaningless. > > > > These are some of the differences: > > the use of fire > > burying the dead > > the ability to communicate by talking > > differences in DNA > > differences in IQ > > the ability to worship > > Explain to me how chimps and humans share the same defect gene as explained > here: > > http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0500450102v1.pdf Sorry, I have never taken any classes related to genes or read any books or articles about genes. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 In article <0kF8i.13105$RX.1723@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, bm1@nonespam.com wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <f3ueed$8qe$02$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > >>> In article <f3t24v$7mv$02$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > >>> <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>> In article <4661add3.268854@news.east.earthlink.net>, > >>>>> luminoso@everywhere.net (Luminoso) wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:48:06 -0700, bramble > >>>>>> <leopoldo.perdomo@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 31 mayo, 21:21, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >>>>>>>> In article <f3mkof$hbv$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> My point was that the so called founder of evolution theory was a > >>>>>>>> Christian at least during some years of his life. I only read the last > >>>>>>>> chapter of his book and it was apparent that he had an excellent > >>>>>>>> understanding of the book of Genesis. He mentioned the term "creator" > >>>>>>>> several different times. I am more in agreement with Darwin than I > >>> am with > >>>>>>>> Evolutionists that believe that mankind evolved from a one celled life > >>>>>>>> form. It's my opinion that Darwin did NOT believe that. I read the last > >>>>>>>> paragraph three times and it was difficult to understand the point > >>> that he > >>>>>>>> was making. However, he did use these words in that sentence: > >>>>>>>> "...having been originally BREATHED INTO A FEW FORMS OR INTO ONE." That > >>>>>>>> appeared to me to be related to God breathing life into people. That is > >>>>>>>> very different than believing that mankind evolved from a one > > celled life > >>>>>>>> form. > >>>>>>>> Jason > >>>>>>> Of course, Jason. He was living in a Christian world. He had to > >>>>>>> tread very carefully as not to have problems. That is why, he let in > >>>>>>> his first book the man outside of the picture. It was a time in which > >>>>>>> there was a certain degree of freedom. If Darwin had lived a hundred > >>>>>>> years earlier, he could not have dared to write this book. So in > > spite of > >>>>>>> being the author of the book, Origins of species, he had to behave as > >>>>>>> any other high class gentleman of his time, going to church on > >>>>>>> sundays. > >>>>>> There is a myth propagated by the extreme 'creationist' faction > >>>>>> that it's impossible to be both "religious" and an "evolutionist". > >>>>>> Very likely Darwin -was- religious, his culture was saturated > >>>>>> with religious ideas and perspectives. It would have been very > >>>>>> unusual for him -not- to have been religious in some way. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> But he couldn't have been a strict "CHRISTIAN". His studies > >>>>>> showed that the proposed scheme of creation in the christian > >>>>>> bible was flat wrong. No "Zap ! There's an elephant, Zap ! > >>>>>> There's a chicken". A long and winding road instead. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> So Darwin had to be something other than a strict "christian". > >>>>>> A "bad christian" perhaps, a deist maybe. What he had learned > >>>>>> was incompatible with christian dogma, but not with the idea > >>>>>> of -some- kind of god-entity kick-starting life on earth. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The kind of reason & evidence-based thinking that Darwin helped > >>>>>> along eventually spawned a crop of unbelievers, but AT THE TIME > >>>>>> and given the cultural environment true athiests were few and > >>>>>> far between (and they usually didn't advertise themselves). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As for the thread title, yes, there may be an "alternative" > >>>>>> to evolution. Alas it would have to involve aliens or 'gods' > >>>>>> constantly bringing new forms of life to earth over a very > >>>>>> long period. The 'intermediate forms' not being 'intermediate' > >>>>>> but simply genetically-engineered lifeforms that didn't adapt > >>>>>> well, thus requiring a series of "improved" versions to be > >>>>>> constructed. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That scenerio, while not impossible, seems -extremely- unlikely. > >>>>>> If there are aliens involved, more likely an alien stopped-off > >>>>>> here to take a crap and some of its bacteria managed to survive, > >>>>>> and subsequently evolve. There would be a certain poetic justice > >>>>>> in discovering that egomaniacal humans were spawned from a > >>>>>> floater left by some grey-skinned alien :-) > >>>>> The problem is that evolutionists now have total control and will not > >>>>> allow any alternative theories to be taught in the public school system. > >>>> If it's a valid theory, no problem. We explained at length what a valid > >>>> scientific theory must be. Which criteria it must fulfill. ID simply and > >>>> plainly fails said criterias. > >>>> > >>>>> They don't even like it when college professors teach college students > >>>>> about creation science. > >>>> See above. > >>>> > >>>> Many years ago, there was a famous movie about the > >>>>> Scopes Monkey Trial. I saw that movie. The Christians were accused of not > >>>>> allowing a teacher to teach students about evoluton. That has all changed. > >>>>> The evolutionists are now in control and will not allow intelligent design > >>>>> to be taught in the public schools system. > >>>> NOT in SCIENCE CLASS! It FAILS all criteria. So it is not science! Teach > >>>> it all you like. Around here the class is termed "Religion" (pronounce > >>>> it german). Or "Ethik". (It IS taught, just not in science class.) > >>>> > >>>> The evolutionists are the new > >>>>> fascist. > >>>> lol > >>>> > >>>> Several days ago, I read about a college professor that was an > >>>>> advocate of creation science. He was denied tenure (spelling??). > >>>> That depends what class he wanted to teach. If it was sociology, he can > >>>> be my guest. If it was biology, he is out. Nor science. Simple, actually. > >>>> > >>>> Of > >>>>> course, if he was an advocate of evolution, he would have been granted > >>>>> tenure. > >>>> Depends. If he wanted to teach sociology, What is his qualification? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Tokay > >>> I was told he taught astronomy classes. > >>> > >>> > >> Also a field in which the so called "ID-nuts" don't especially do too > >> good. Astonomy includes how the universe began. He probably "argued" > >> that "goddidit". So no wonder. Also, if he is one of those buggers that > >> believes the universe and/or the earth is only 6000 years old, he runs > >> into tons of trouble. > >> So, no. He is out. > >> > >> Tokay > > > > Tokay, > > He did not get tenure but is still a professor. If they fire him, he could > > get a job as a professor at a Christian college where they don't > > discriminate against the advocates of creation science. Discrimination is > > suppose to be illegal but I guess that some of the members of this > > newsgroup appear to believe that it's acceptable for public colleges to > > discriminate against professors that are advocates of creation science by > > not granting them tenure. How would you feel if a Christian college > > refused to grant tenure to a biology professor since he was an advocate of > > evolution? > > First, it's their right. Second, it is exactly what I would expect. The > surprise would be that they hired him in the first place. If a Christian college refused to grant a biology professor tenure since he was an advocate of evolution--would the college have that right? Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 On Jun 4, 2:57 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1180862637.657471.263...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Jun 3, 9:25 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <kb14639jhm2blku18rlfbu04og9sink...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 13:34:34 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > > <Jason-0206071334340...@66-52-22-85.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > > >In article <4661add3.268...@news.east.earthlink.net>, > > > > >lumin...@everywhere.net (Luminoso) wrote: > > > > > >> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:48:06 -0700, bramble > > > > >> <leopoldo.perd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> >On 31 mayo, 21:21, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > >> >> In article <f3mkof$hbv$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > > > >> >> My point was that the so called founder of evolution theory was a > > > > >> >> Christian at least during some years of his life. I only read > the last > > > > >> >> chapter of his book and it was apparent that he had an excellent > > > > >> >> understanding of the book of Genesis. He mentioned the term > "creator" > > > > >> >> several different times. I am more in agreement with Darwin than I > > > am with > > > > >> >> Evolutionists that believe that mankind evolved from a one > celled life > > > > >> >> form. It's my opinion that Darwin did NOT believe that. I read > the last > > > > >> >> paragraph three times and it was difficult to understand the point > > > that he > > > > >> >> was making. However, he did use these words in that sentence: > > > > >> >> "...having been originally BREATHED INTO A FEW FORMS OR INTO > ONE." That > > > > >> >> appeared to me to be related to God breathing life into > people. That is > > > > >> >> very different than believing that mankind evolved from a one > > > celled life > > > > >> >> form. > > > > >> >> Jason > > > > > >> >Of course, Jason. He was living in a Christian world. He had to > > > > >> >tread very carefully as not to have problems. That is why, he let in > > > > >> >his first book the man outside of the picture. It was a time in which > > > > >> >there was a certain degree of freedom. If Darwin had lived a hundred > > > > >> >years earlier, he could not have dared to write this book. So > in spite of > > > > >> >being the author of the book, Origins of species, he had to behave as > > > > >> >any other high class gentleman of his time, going to church on > > > > >> >sundays. > > > > > >> There is a myth propagated by the extreme 'creationist' faction > > > > >> that it's impossible to be both "religious" and an "evolutionist". > > > > >> Very likely Darwin -was- religious, his culture was saturated > > > > >> with religious ideas and perspectives. It would have been very > > > > >> unusual for him -not- to have been religious in some way. > > > > > >> But he couldn't have been a strict "CHRISTIAN". His studies > > > > >> showed that the proposed scheme of creation in the christian > > > > >> bible was flat wrong. No "Zap ! There's an elephant, Zap ! > > > > >> There's a chicken". A long and winding road instead. > > > > > >> So Darwin had to be something other than a strict "christian". > > > > >> A "bad christian" perhaps, a deist maybe. What he had learned > > > > >> was incompatible with christian dogma, but not with the idea > > > > >> of -some- kind of god-entity kick-starting life on earth. > > > > > >> The kind of reason & evidence-based thinking that Darwin helped > > > > >> along eventually spawned a crop of unbelievers, but AT THE TIME > > > > >> and given the cultural environment true athiests were few and > > > > >> far between (and they usually didn't advertise themselves). > > > > > >> As for the thread title, yes, there may be an "alternative" > > > > >> to evolution. Alas it would have to involve aliens or 'gods' > > > > >> constantly bringing new forms of life to earth over a very > > > > >> long period. The 'intermediate forms' not being 'intermediate' > > > > >> but simply genetically-engineered lifeforms that didn't adapt > > > > >> well, thus requiring a series of "improved" versions to be > > > > >> constructed. > > > > > >> That scenerio, while not impossible, seems -extremely- unlikely. > > > > >> If there are aliens involved, more likely an alien stopped-off > > > > >> here to take a crap and some of its bacteria managed to survive, > > > > >> and subsequently evolve. There would be a certain poetic justice > > > > >> in discovering that egomaniacal humans were spawned from a > > > > >> floater left by some grey-skinned alien :-) > > > > > >The problem is that evolutionists now have total control and will not > > > > >allow any alternative theories to be taught in the public school system. > > > > > No, the problem is that you refuse to accept scientific discoveries and > > > > are stamping your feel like a toddler who can't have his way. Your > > > > claims about the history of life on earth are false. Repeating them will > > > > not make them true. > > > > > >They don't even like it when college professors teach college students > > > > >about creation science. Many years ago, there was a famous movie > about the > > > > >Scopes Monkey Trial. I saw that movie. The Christians were accused of not > > > > >allowing a teacher to teach students about evoluton. That has all > changed. > > > > >The evolutionists are now in control and will not allow intelligent > design > > > > >to be taught in the public schools system. The evolutionists are the new > > > > >fascist. Several days ago, I read about a college professor that was an > > > > >advocate of creation science. He was denied tenure (spelling??). Of > > > > >course, if he was an advocate of evolution, he would have been granted > > > > >tenure. > > > > > Your understanding of the case is wrong. Please, stop offering your > > > > opinion about things that you are ignorant of. > > > > Since you know more than I do about that story--do you believe the > > > professor would have been denied or granted tenure if he had been an > > > advocate of evolution? > > > Considering the "expertise" of those who advocate creationism, it > > would be one less reason NOT to hire him on, wouldn't it? > You are making an assumption. He may or may not have had more expertise > than other professors. Am I? Have you considered how easily those of us here can refute creationist "arguments"? Hint: we are not all university professors here. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 On Jun 4, 3:13 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <f3ue0d$7q7$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > [snip a bunch of questions. Learn yourself. I am not wasting my time] > > > > 20. Would you like to explain the origin of any of the following > > > twenty-one features of the earth: > > > > The Grand Canyon and Other Canyons > > > Mid-Oceanic Ridge > > > Continental Shelves and Slopes > > > Ocean Trenches > > > Seamounts and Tablemounts > > > Earthquakes > > > Magnetic Variations on the Ocean Floor > > > Submarine Canyons > > > Coal and Oil Formations > > > Glaciers and the Ice Ages > > > Frozen Mammoths > > > Major Mountain Ranges > > > Overthrusts > > > Volcanoes and Lava > > > Geothermal Heat > > > Metamorphic Rock > > > Strata > > > Plateaus > > > Salt Domes > > > Jigsaw Fit of the Continents > > > Fossil Graveyards > > > > If so, I will point out some obvious problems with your > > > explanation and refer you to 77 pages that explain them all as a result of > > > a global flood. > > > You REALLY think that all this was the result of a global flood? > > How long ago? > > IIRC some scientists think there even was one.... Some 4 billion years ago. > > But that is another matter. > > Yes, I believe there was a global flood. I don't know how many years ago > that it happened. I doubt that anyone knows the time period that it took > place. There was a local flood that happened about 4900 years ago. See http://www.flood-myth.com General introduction There are six surviving versions of the Ancient Near East flood story including the Genesis version. One of these versions, written centuries before Genesis, is called the Epic of Atrahasis and clearly describes the flood as a river flood. Later story tellers changed "river" to "sea" and thus changed the local river flood into an ocean deluge. The ambiguous word for hills was mistranslated as mountains. There were several such mistakes or mistranslations during transmission of Noah's flood story. Noah's father Lamech was king of the Sumerian city-state Shuruppak, a commercial center on the Euphrates River in what is now Iraq. Noah also became king of Shuruppak. The ark was a commercial river barge for hauling cargo on the Euphrates River. The river barge hauled wine, beer, stone, lumber, textiles, oil, and livestock which was less than 280 head of cattle, sheep, goats, and other domesticated animals. There were no kangaroos, giraffes, elephants, lions, etc. on Noah's cattle barge. About 2900 BC a freak thunderstorm caused the Euphrates River to rise 15 cubits (22 feet) and it overflowed the levees. By the time Noah recognized that the levees were about to be breached, it was too late to evacuate his livestock to highground. He therefore boarded the nearby river barge to ride out the storm. He had to cut the mooring lines to prevent barge from heeling over in the rising river. The runaway barge floated down the Euphrates River into the Persian Gulf where it grounded in an estuary at the mouth of the river. This is discussed and described in detail in the Noah's Ark book. Maps in the book show the route taken by Noah's river barge. Noah was a wealthy land owner and a merchant or trade official for the Shuruppak government before becoming king. The flood of 2900 BC did not destroy Shuruppak. There were thousands of survivors of the flood and Noah met some of them after the barge grounded. Some of the things they talked about are quoted in surviving versions of the flood story. Noah was no longer king and had to flee into exile. A dispute occurred between Noah and his sons. His family separated and he never saw his sons again. A map in the book shows where the sons went and the route they took to get there. Noah got angry with his sons after being seen naked. The reason why he got angry is explained in the book. The Noah's Ark book gives the exact location (within a few yards) of Noah's altar where he offered a sacrifice after the barge grounded. It is an archaeological site and has already been excavated by archaeologists. The book describes in detail how the ark was probably constructed using the technology of 2900 BC. It was much smaller and shaped differently than it is usually described. The numbers in Genesis 5 are deciphered in the book and compared with the numbers in the Sumerian King List. The numbers were mistranslated. Methuselah did not live to be 969 and Noah did not live to 950. Noah lived to be 83. Methuselah was 85 when he died a few months after the barge grounded. The barge did not ground on a mountain. The mountains of Ararat were mentioned in the original legend, but the ark did not ground there. How the mountains of Ararat got involved is discussed at length in the book. After the barge grounded, Noah, his wife, his daughter, and his boatman traveled to a island where they lived in exile. The island is a real island and is identified in chapter 5 of the Noah's Ark book. Noah was an interesting man and several new facts about him are discussed in the book. Skeptical view of the flood myth As skeptics have long been aware, there was no global flood in the last 5000 years, a boatload of animals did not ground on so-called Mount Ararat or on any mountain, and the world's animals are not descended from two or seven pairs of each species that lived during the third millennium BC. Nor is there any archaeological proof that a man survived a flood by being on a boat loaded with animals, food, and drinking water. The Noah's Ark book summarized here does not claim historicity for Noah or the ark story, but the book does claim that some of the story elements in the Ancient Near East flood were based on an actual river flood. This archaeologically attested flood of the Euphrates River has been radiocarbon dated to about 2900 BC. This flood left a few feet of yellow mud in the Sumerian city Shuruppak, the ruins of which have been found at Tel Fara about 125 miles southeast of Baghdad. Some but not all Sumerian cities also show signs of this river flood at the beginning of the Early Dynastic I period. According to the Sumerian King List, a legendary king named Ziusudra lived in Shuruppak at the time of the flood. There was also a flood myth about king Ziusudra which includes several story elements very similar to the Genesis flood myth. Shuruppak was also the flood hero's city according to the Epic of Gilgamesh. The flood myth in the Epic of Gilgamesh was adapted from an earlier myth, the Epic of Atrahasis which is also very similar to the Genesis flood myth. Six of these Ancient Near East flood myths contain numerous distinctive story elements that are very similar to the Genesis flood myth and indicate a literary affinity or dependency on a common body of myths about the flood hero Ziusudra and based on the Euphrates River flood of 2900 BC. Parts of the original myths were physically possible, but other parts were not possible. The possible parts can be treated as an ancient legend to which mythical material was added later. However, without contemporary artifacts, it is not possible to prove how much of the original legend was true and how much was fiction based on a real flood. In the Noah's Ark book, the original legend is reconstructed by piecing together fragments from the various surviving editions of the flood myth, like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. This reconstruction is governed by the requirement that each story element in the legend be physically possible, technologically practical, consistent with archaeological facts, and plausible for 2900 BC. Some of the impossible story elements were mistranslations or misunderstandings, and these are corrected before including them in the reconstructed legend. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 On Jun 4, 3:36 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > You have told me that life evolved from non-life. Yes, spell it out for > me. Explain how life evolved from non-life. Again? Perhaps you'll bother to look at a few of the links this time. In 1953, the Miller-Uley experiment showed that amino acids could form spontaneously from elements present in the "primorial soup". (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment ) Other experiments showed that bilipid membranes can form spontaneously. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_bilayer ) Sidney Fox's research showed that amino acids can spontaneously form protein chains. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_W._Fox ) Protein chains can then guide the formation of RNA chains just as RNA chains are known to guide the formation of protein chains. (See http://www.hhmi.org/news/lindquist2.html ). German scientists have already produced molecules in the laboratory that are capable of reproducing themselves and are therefore alive. (See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/217054.stm ). RNA is commonly believed to have existed before DNA, which then emerged much later. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_world_hypothesis ). Primative cells would have formed as a way to prevent the contents of the cell from drying out. (See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/239787.stm ). The simplest cells would have been prokaryote cells (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prokaryote ) which would have been the ancestors of modern bacteria and archaea while more advanced eukaryotic cells (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eukaryotic ) would have been the ancestors of modern animal, plant and fungis cells. Eukaryotic cells could have formed through a process known as viral eukaryogenesis (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_eukaryogenesis ) in which a virus forms an endosymbiosic relationship with a host prokaryote cell. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endosymbiotic_theory ) Mitochondria and plastids are also believed to have arisen as a result of endosymbiosis, the evidence being that mitochondria and plastids share characteristics with bacteria cells, the only difference being that they cannot survive independent of the rest of the cell, but that's fine because human cells cannot survive independent of the rest of the body either. In both cases, the parts have evolved to depend on the whole. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_multicellularity ). Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 In article <1180909764.150176.122420@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > On 4 Jun., 01:13, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <0kF8i.13105$RX.1...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b...@nonespam.com wrote: > > > Jason wrote: > > > > In article <f3ueed$8qe$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > > > >> Jason wrote: > > > >>> In article <f3t24v$7mv$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > >>> <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > > > >>>> Jason wrote: > > > >>>>> In article <4661add3.268...@news.east.earthlink.net>, > > > >>>>> lumin...@everywhere.net (Luminoso) wrote: > > > > > >>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:48:06 -0700, bramble > > > >>>>>> <leopoldo.perd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>> On 31 mayo, 21:21, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> In article <f3mkof$hbv$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > > > >>>>>>>> My point was that the so called founder of evolution theory wa= > s a > > > >>>>>>>> Christian at least during some years of his life. I only read > > the last > > > >>>>>>>> chapter of his book and it was apparent that he had an excelle= > nt > > > >>>>>>>> understanding of the book of Genesis. He mentioned the term "c= > reator" > > > >>>>>>>> several different times. I am more in agreement with Darwin th= > an I > > > >>> am with > > > >>>>>>>> Evolutionists that believe that mankind evolved from a one > > celled life > > > >>>>>>>> form. It's my opinion that Darwin did NOT believe that. I read > > the last > > > >>>>>>>> paragraph three times and it was difficult to understand the p= > oint > > > >>> that he > > > >>>>>>>> was making. However, he did use these words in that sentence: > > > >>>>>>>> "...having been originally BREATHED INTO A FEW FORMS OR INTO > > ONE." That > > > >>>>>>>> appeared to me to be related to God breathing life into people. > > That is > > > >>>>>>>> very different than believing that mankind evolved from a one > > > > celled life > > > >>>>>>>> form. > > > >>>>>>>> Jason > > > >>>>>>> Of course, Jason. He was living in a Christian world. He had = > to > > > >>>>>>> tread very carefully as not to have problems. That is why, he = > let in > > > >>>>>>> his first book the man outside of the picture. It was a time i= > n which > > > >>>>>>> there was a certain degree of freedom. If Darwin had lived a h= > undred > > > >>>>>>> years earlier, he could not have dared to write this book. So = > in > > > > spite of > > > >>>>>>> being the author of the book, Origins of species, he had to be= > have as > > > >>>>>>> any other high class gentleman of his time, going to church on > > > >>>>>>> sundays. > > > >>>>>> There is a myth propagated by the extreme 'creationist' facti= > on > > > >>>>>> that it's impossible to be both "religious" and an "evolution= > ist". > > > >>>>>> Very likely Darwin -was- religious, his culture was saturated > > > >>>>>> with religious ideas and perspectives. It would have been very > > > >>>>>> unusual for him -not- to have been religious in some way. > > > > > >>>>>> But he couldn't have been a strict "CHRISTIAN". His studies > > > >>>>>> showed that the proposed scheme of creation in the christian > > > >>>>>> bible was flat wrong. No "Zap ! There's an elephant, Zap ! > > > >>>>>> There's a chicken". A long and winding road instead. > > > > > >>>>>> So Darwin had to be something other than a strict "christian". > > > >>>>>> A "bad christian" perhaps, a deist maybe. What he had learned > > > >>>>>> was incompatible with christian dogma, but not with the idea > > > >>>>>> of -some- kind of god-entity kick-starting life on earth. > > > > > >>>>>> The kind of reason & evidence-based thinking that Darwin help= > ed > > > >>>>>> along eventually spawned a crop of unbelievers, but AT THE TI= > ME > > > >>>>>> and given the cultural environment true athiests were few and > > > >>>>>> far between (and they usually didn't advertise themselves). > > > > > >>>>>> As for the thread title, yes, there may be an "alternative" > > > >>>>>> to evolution. Alas it would have to involve aliens or 'gods' > > > >>>>>> constantly bringing new forms of life to earth over a very > > > >>>>>> long period. The 'intermediate forms' not being 'intermediate' > > > >>>>>> but simply genetically-engineered lifeforms that didn't adapt > > > >>>>>> well, thus requiring a series of "improved" versions to be > > > >>>>>> constructed. > > > > > >>>>>> That scenerio, while not impossible, seems -extremely- unlike= > ly. > > > >>>>>> If there are aliens involved, more likely an alien stopped-off > > > >>>>>> here to take a crap and some of its bacteria managed to survi= > ve, > > > >>>>>> and subsequently evolve. There would be a certain poetic just= > ice > > > >>>>>> in discovering that egomaniacal humans were spawned from a > > > >>>>>> floater left by some grey-skinned alien :-) > > > >>>>> The problem is that evolutionists now have total control and will= > not > > > >>>>> allow any alternative theories to be taught in the public school = > system. > > > >>>> If it's a valid theory, no problem. We explained at length what a = > valid > > > >>>> scientific theory must be. Which criteria it must fulfill. ID simp= > ly and > > > >>>> plainly fails said criterias. > > > > > >>>>> They don't even like it when college professors teach college stu= > dents > > > >>>>> about creation science. > > > >>>> See above. > > > > > >>>> Many years ago, there was a famous movie about the > > > >>>>> Scopes Monkey Trial. I saw that movie. The Christians were accused > > of not > > > >>>>> allowing a teacher to teach students about evoluton. That has all > > changed. > > > >>>>> The evolutionists are now in control and will not allow > > intelligent design > > > >>>>> to be taught in the public schools system. > > > >>>> NOT in SCIENCE CLASS! It FAILS all criteria. So it is not science!= > Teach > > > >>>> it all you like. Around here the class is termed "Religion" (prono= > unce > > > >>>> it german). Or "Ethik". (It IS taught, just not in science class.) > > > > > >>>> The evolutionists are the new > > > >>>>> fascist. > > > >>>> lol > > > > > >>>> Several days ago, I read about a college professor that was an > > > >>>>> advocate of creation science. He was denied tenure (spelling??). > > > >>>> That depends what class he wanted to teach. If it was sociology, h= > e can > > > >>>> be my guest. If it was biology, he is out. Nor science. Simple, ac= > tually. > > > > > >>>> Of > > > >>>>> course, if he was an advocate of evolution, he would have been gr= > anted > > > >>>>> tenure. > > > >>>> Depends. If he wanted to teach sociology, What is his qualificatio= > n? > > > > > >>>> Tokay > > > >>> I was told he taught astronomy classes. > > > > > >> Also a field in which the so called "ID-nuts" don't especially do too > > > >> good. Astonomy includes how the universe began. He probably "argued" > > > >> that "goddidit". So no wonder. Also, if he is one of those buggers t= > hat > > > >> believes the universe and/or the earth is only 6000 years old, he ru= > ns > > > >> into tons of trouble. > > > >> So, no. He is out. > > > > > >> Tokay > > > > > > Tokay, > > > > He did not get tenure but is still a professor. If they fire him, he = > could > > > > get a job as a professor at a Christian college where they don't > > > > discriminate against the advocates of creation science. Discriminatio= > n is > > > > suppose to be illegal but I guess that some of the members of this > > > > newsgroup appear to believe that it's acceptable for public colleges = > to > > > > discriminate against professors that are advocates of creation scienc= > e by > > > > not granting them tenure. How would you feel if a Christian college > > > > refused to grant tenure to a biology professor since he was an advoca= > te of > > > > evolution? > > > > > First, it's their right. Second, it is exactly what I would expect. The > > > surprise would be that they hired him in the first place. > > > > If a Christian college refused to grant a biology professor tenure since > > he was an advocate of evolution--would the college have that right?- Skju= > l tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > > - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > Probably, but one would hope that the school would not be accredited, > since it obviously is not teaching what it pretends to be teaching, > i=2Ee. science. Do you think that a college should lose their accreditation if they teach course related to withcraft? Here is proof that at least one college teaches a course related to withcraft: (ignore the question marks) I googled witchcraft professors and found this: As a cultural studies major at Columbia, sophomore Erin Polley had always been interested in women's history, so after learning about an elective class in witchcraft, she decided to sign up. Witchcraft in Colonial America, a one credit, two-day class offered on a trial basis in March, examined witchcraft in 17th century America. The course explored religious beliefs and gender issues while attempting to establish an understanding for the culture of the society. Cultural Studies instructor Teresa Prados-Torreira created the class, which attracted about 20 students, after seeing an interest in the topic among students in her previous classes. I know that students are very interested in witchcraft,? Prados-Torreira said. ?There are always students who are wanting to write papers on witchcraft and Salem in my other classes.? Students first learned the history of witchcraft in context with colonial America, such as the infamous witch trials in 17th-century Salem, Mass. Polly said she learned about the witch movement in relation to the political and economic background during that time in history in Prados-Torreira?s class. I didn"t have much history of colonial America,? Polley said. So it was interesting for me to learn another aspect of women?s history.? Students also watched excerpts from The Crucible, a film adapted from the famous Arthur Miller play depicting the Salem witch trials of 1692. The Salem witch-hunts started after 12-year-old Abigail Williams and 9-year-old Elizabeth Parris started demonstrating bizarre behavior, including screaming and seizures, in January 1692. Within months, more women and men were being accused of witchcraft, many of whom were respected members of their community. Physicians believed the girls were under the spell of Satan and by the end of February, warrants were issued for their arrests. Though Williams and Parris were not executed, more than 20 people died as a result of the trials. ?At that time women were considered irrational,? Polly said. ?The movie helped get the point across and to see the differences between the book and readings.? Prados-Torreira said it?s an important part of women?s history. ?It?s a good topic [to pursue] these days,? Prados-Torreira said. Salem State College, in Salem, Mass., developed classes in witchcraft seven years ago after professors realized most students were misinformed on that period of history. ?Being in the witchcraft capital of the world, a lot of students had a misconception of what the trials were really about,? said Emerson Baker, professor of the Magic and Witchcraft in Early Modern Europe at Salem State College. ?So we developed the curriculum because there is significant historical relevance.? There are many ways to look at witchcraft including race, gender, political views, community conflict and of course women?s history, Baker said. It's a historical device so scholars can look into and teach what they want from it,? Baker said. The classes offered at Salem State are three-credit electives for graduate students. Students are interested in enrolling and the class reaches its capacity every semester, Baker said. At Wheaton College, a private interdenominational Christian institution in Wheaton, Ill., the topic of Witchcraft is briefly taught in a few history classes, but professors generally do not go into depth, said David Maas, professor of history at Wheaton. From an actual class standpoint, it would be a very interesting and legitimate topic for students,? Maas said. It"s a phenomenon that historians and students are greatly interested in and should be explored.? Maas said the concept of a two-day, 15-hour class is very interesting, but a class meeting over time provides more interaction for students. Either way, with the topic of witchcraft it would make for an interesting class, Maas said. Polley agrees, and said the class offered at Columbia was worthwhile and she was glad she enrolled. It was a great crash course in witchcraft,? Polley said. ?I feel like it should have been a longer course, like a three credit, semester class considering all the material to cover.? Freshman film major Katherine Wallace, from Salem, Mass., said she likes the idea of a witchcraft class at Columbia and would sign up if it were offered again. Personally I know a lot on witchcraft, it was taught extensively in high school,? Wallace said. ?But I know a lot of people who have no clue and I would encourage them to take the class, because it really is part of history.? Liberal Education Department Chairwoman Lisa Brock agrees and hopes to bring the class back in the spring. We may offer it again next spring, we may not,? Brock said. ?I hope we can, we?ll have to wait and see.? I want to make clear that I don?t believe in witches,? Prados-Torreira said. ?That?s the first thing I told my students on the first day.? Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 In article <1180907175.744386.265200@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > On 3 Jun., 21:08, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <f3ueed$8qe$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > Jason wrote: > > > > In article <f3t24v$7mv$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > > > >> Jason wrote: > > > >>> In article <4661add3.268...@news.east.earthlink.net>, > > > >>> lumin...@everywhere.net (Luminoso) wrote: > > > > > >>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:48:06 -0700, bramble > > > >>>> <leopoldo.perd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>>> On 31 mayo, 21:21, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >>>>>> In article <f3mkof$hbv$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > > > >>>>>> My point was that the so called founder of evolution theory was a > > > >>>>>> Christian at least during some years of his life. I only read th= > e last > > > >>>>>> chapter of his book and it was apparent that he had an excellent > > > >>>>>> understanding of the book of Genesis. He mentioned the term "cre= > ator" > > > >>>>>> several different times. I am more in agreement with Darwin than= > I > > > > am with > > > >>>>>> Evolutionists that believe that mankind evolved from a one celle= > d life > > > >>>>>> form. It's my opinion that Darwin did NOT believe that. I read t= > he last > > > >>>>>> paragraph three times and it was difficult to understand the poi= > nt > > > > that he > > > >>>>>> was making. However, he did use these words in that sentence: > > > >>>>>> "...having been originally BREATHED INTO A FEW FORMS OR INTO ONE= > ." That > > > >>>>>> appeared to me to be related to God breathing life into people. = > That is > > > >>>>>> very different than believing that mankind evolved from a one > > celled life > > > >>>>>> form. > > > >>>>>> Jason > > > >>>>> Of course, Jason. He was living in a Christian world. He had to > > > >>>>> tread very carefully as not to have problems. That is why, he le= > t in > > > >>>>> his first book the man outside of the picture. It was a time in = > which > > > >>>>> there was a certain degree of freedom. If Darwin had lived a hun= > dred > > > >>>>> years earlier, he could not have dared to write this book. So in > > spite of > > > >>>>> being the author of the book, Origins of species, he had to beha= > ve as > > > >>>>> any other high class gentleman of his time, going to church on > > > >>>>> sundays. > > > >>>> There is a myth propagated by the extreme 'creationist' faction > > > >>>> that it's impossible to be both "religious" and an "evolutionis= > t". > > > >>>> Very likely Darwin -was- religious, his culture was saturated > > > >>>> with religious ideas and perspectives. It would have been very > > > >>>> unusual for him -not- to have been religious in some way. > > > > > >>>> But he couldn't have been a strict "CHRISTIAN". His studies > > > >>>> showed that the proposed scheme of creation in the christian > > > >>>> bible was flat wrong. No "Zap ! There's an elephant, Zap ! > > > >>>> There's a chicken". A long and winding road instead. > > > > > >>>> So Darwin had to be something other than a strict "christian". > > > >>>> A "bad christian" perhaps, a deist maybe. What he had learned > > > >>>> was incompatible with christian dogma, but not with the idea > > > >>>> of -some- kind of god-entity kick-starting life on earth. > > > > > >>>> The kind of reason & evidence-based thinking that Darwin helped > > > >>>> along eventually spawned a crop of unbelievers, but AT THE TIME > > > >>>> and given the cultural environment true athiests were few and > > > >>>> far between (and they usually didn't advertise themselves). > > > > > >>>> As for the thread title, yes, there may be an "alternative" > > > >>>> to evolution. Alas it would have to involve aliens or 'gods' > > > >>>> constantly bringing new forms of life to earth over a very > > > >>>> long period. The 'intermediate forms' not being 'intermediate' > > > >>>> but simply genetically-engineered lifeforms that didn't adapt > > > >>>> well, thus requiring a series of "improved" versions to be > > > >>>> constructed. > > > > > >>>> That scenerio, while not impossible, seems -extremely- unlikely. > > > >>>> If there are aliens involved, more likely an alien stopped-off > > > >>>> here to take a crap and some of its bacteria managed to survive, > > > >>>> and subsequently evolve. There would be a certain poetic justice > > > >>>> in discovering that egomaniacal humans were spawned from a > > > >>>> floater left by some grey-skinned alien :-) > > > >>> The problem is that evolutionists now have total control and will n= > ot > > > >>> allow any alternative theories to be taught in the public school sy= > stem. > > > >> If it's a valid theory, no problem. We explained at length what a va= > lid > > > >> scientific theory must be. Which criteria it must fulfill. ID simply= > and > > > >> plainly fails said criterias. > > > > > >>> They don't even like it when college professors teach college stude= > nts > > > >>> about creation science. > > > >> See above. > > > > > >> Many years ago, there was a famous movie about the > > > >>> Scopes Monkey Trial. I saw that movie. The Christians were accused = > of not > > > >>> allowing a teacher to teach students about evoluton. That has all c= > hanged. > > > >>> The evolutionists are now in control and will not allow intelligent= > design > > > >>> to be taught in the public schools system. > > > >> NOT in SCIENCE CLASS! It FAILS all criteria. So it is not science! T= > each > > > >> it all you like. Around here the class is termed "Religion" (pronoun= > ce > > > >> it german). Or "Ethik". (It IS taught, just not in science class.) > > > > > >> The evolutionists are the new > > > >>> fascist. > > > >> lol > > > > > >> Several days ago, I read about a college professor that was an > > > >>> advocate of creation science. He was denied tenure (spelling??). > > > >> That depends what class he wanted to teach. If it was sociology, he = > can > > > >> be my guest. If it was biology, he is out. Nor science. Simple, actu= > ally. > > > > > >> Of > > > >>> course, if he was an advocate of evolution, he would have been gran= > ted > > > >>> tenure. > > > >> Depends. If he wanted to teach sociology, What is his qualification? > > > > > >> Tokay > > > > > > I was told he taught astronomy classes. > > > > > Also a field in which the so called "ID-nuts" don't especially do too > > > good. Astonomy includes how the universe began. He probably "argued" > > > that "goddidit". So no wonder. Also, if he is one of those buggers that > > > believes the universe and/or the earth is only 6000 years old, he runs > > > into tons of trouble. > > > So, no. He is out. > > > > > Tokay > > > > Tokay, > > He did not get tenure but is still a professor. If they fire him, he could > > get a job as a professor at a Christian college where they don't > > discriminate against the advocates of creation science. Discrimination is > > suppose to be illegal but I guess that some of the members of this > > newsgroup appear to believe that it's acceptable for public colleges to > > discriminate against professors that are advocates of creation science by > > not granting them tenure. > > Would it be okay to keep a professor who taught that the Earth was > flat? They actually teach withcraft classes at Columbia. Here is the proof: (ignore the question marks.) As a cultural studies major at Columbia, sophomore Erin Polley had always been interested in women?s history, so after learning about an elective class in witchcraft, she decided to sign up. Witchcraft in Colonial America, a one credit, two-day class offered on a trial basis in March, examined witchcraft in 17th century America. The course explored religious beliefs and gender issues while attempting to establish an understanding for the culture of the society. Cultural Studies instructor Teresa Prados-Torreira created the class, which attracted about 20 students, after seeing an interest in the topic among students in her previous classes. I know that students are very interested in witchcraft,? Prados-Torreira said. ?There are always students who are wanting to write papers on witchcraft and Salem in my other classes.? Students first learned the history of witchcraft in context with colonial America, such as the infamous witch trials in 17th-century Salem, Mass. Polly said she learned about the witch movement in relation to the political and economic background during that time in history in Prados-Torreira?s class. I didn"t have much history of colonial America,? Polley said. So it was interesting for me to learn another aspect of women?s history.? Students also watched excerpts from The Crucible, a film adapted from the famous Arthur Miller play depicting the Salem witch trials of 1692. The Salem witch-hunts started after 12-year-old Abigail Williams and 9-year-old Elizabeth Parris started demonstrating bizarre behavior, including screaming and seizures, in January 1692. Within months, more women and men were being accused of witchcraft, many of whom were respected members of their community. Physicians believed the girls were under the spell of Satan and by the end of February, warrants were issued for their arrests. Though Williams and Parris were not executed, more than 20 people died as a result of the trials. ?At that time women were considered irrational,? Polly said. ?The movie helped get the point across and to see the differences between the book and readings.? Prados-Torreira said it?s an important part of women?s history. ?It?s a good topic [to pursue] these days,? Prados-Torreira said. Salem State College, in Salem, Mass., developed classes in witchcraft seven years ago after professors realized most students were misinformed on that period of history. ?Being in the witchcraft capital of the world, a lot of students had a misconception of what the trials were really about,? said Emerson Baker, professor of the Magic and Witchcraft in Early Modern Europe at Salem State College. ?So we developed the curriculum because there is significant historical relevance.? There are many ways to look at witchcraft including race, gender, political views, community conflict and of course women?s history, Baker said. It's a historical device so scholars can look into and teach what they want from it,? Baker said. The classes offered at Salem State are three-credit electives for graduate students. Students are interested in enrolling and the class reaches its capacity every semester, Baker said. At Wheaton College, a private interdenominational Christian institution in Wheaton, Ill., the topic of Witchcraft is briefly taught in a few history classes, but professors generally do not go into depth, said David Maas, professor of history at Wheaton. From an actual class standpoint, it would be a very interesting and legitimate topic for students,? Maas said. It"s a phenomenon that historians and students are greatly interested in and should be explored.? Maas said the concept of a two-day, 15-hour class is very interesting, but a class meeting over time provides more interaction for students. Either way, with the topic of witchcraft it would make for an interesting class, Maas said. Polley agrees, and said the class offered at Columbia was worthwhile and she was glad she enrolled. It was a great crash course in witchcraft,? Polley said. ?I feel like it should have been a longer course, like a three credit, semester class considering all the material to cover.? Freshman film major Katherine Wallace, from Salem, Mass., said she likes the idea of a witchcraft class at Columbia and would sign up if it were offered again. Personally I know a lot on witchcraft, it was taught extensively in high school,? Wallace said. ?But I know a lot of people who have no clue and I would encourage them to take the class, because it really is part of history.? Liberal Education Department Chairwoman Lisa Brock agrees and hopes to bring the class back in the spring. We may offer it again next spring, we may not,? Brock said. ?I hope we can, we?ll have to wait and see.? I want to make clear that I don?t believe in witches,? Prados-Torreira said. ?That?s the first thing I told my students on the first day.? The Columbia Chronicle articles, photos, and graphics are the property of the Columbia Chronicle and may not be reproduced or published without written permission from the staff, editors, or faculty advisor. The Columbia Chronicle is a student produced publication of Columbia College Chicago and does not necessarily represent, in whole or in part, the views of Columbia College administrators, faculty or students. Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 On Jun 4, 3:42 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > These are some of the differences: > the use of fire People have to cook their food. Animals don't. > burying the dead So? My cat can use a litter box. > the ability to communicate by talking Parrots can communicate by talking. > differences in DNA Humans and gorillas are 97% identical. > differences in IQ No difference between you and a chimpanzee as far as I can tell. > the ability to worship This implies that animals are more intelligent than most humans. Martin Quote
Guest Tokay Pino Gris Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <RoF8i.15298$JQ3.14669@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0306071236540001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >>> In article <1180864433.482133.263330@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >>> Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Jun 3, 9:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>> In article <f3t1f1$i75$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: >>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>> In article <f3rg71$rer$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris >>>>>>> <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>>>> In article <s9j163tfd53h20c63pfengglsdqakrb...@4ax.com>, Free >>>>>>>>> Lunch >>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:29:51 -0700, in alt.atheism >>>>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >>>>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071829510...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >>>>>>>>>>> In article <bqc163pt6i3gfpq0oi8u9lp5rr85pmd...@4ax.com>, Free >>>>>>>>>>> Lunch >>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:01:10 -0700, in alt.atheism >>>>>>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071801100...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.com>, >>> Free Lunch >>>>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism >>>>>>>>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article >>> <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Except those who are educated and are not idiots. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that they keep >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>> apes and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo, they >>> kept the >>>>>>>>> gorilla >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a facility that made it impossible for him to escape or >>>>> throw fecal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have created and >>> designed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> monkeys and apes to be vastly different than humans so as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not to >>>>>>>>> confuse >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the advocates of evolution. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jason >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What does California keep in the cages at San Quentin? >>>>>>>>>>>>> People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and >>>>>>>>>>>>> gorillas >>>>> use fire? >>>>>>>>>>>> Does your entire theology rely on the fact that humans >>> learned to tame >>>>>>>>>>>> fire and other animals did not? >>>>>>>>>>>> Wow.... >>>>>>>>>>> No--I was only pointed out one of the major difference between >>>>> mankind and >>>>>>>>>>> animals. >>>>>>>>>> It's a trivial behavioral difference. >>>>>>>>>>> I also pointed out in another post that mankind worships God >>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>> that animals do not worship God. Of course, not all humans >>> worship God. >>>>>>>>>> Another trivial difference. >>>>>>>>> Another major difference: >>>>>>>>> IQ levels--much lower than normal people. >>>>>>>>> also: Animals can not have conversations with people by talking. >>>>>>>> Actually, they can. You should really start reading some >>>>>>>> scientific >>>>>>>> stuff. They taught some bonobos to use a kind of sign language. So >>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>> can't "talk" by language. But conversation is not limited to >>>>>>>> sound. >>>>>>>> What was your point again? >>>>>>>> Tokay >>>>>>> My point is that they can not have converations with people BY >>>>>>> TALKING. >>>>>> I hope you do not fix this on language. Language, i.e. sounds. We are >>>>>> communicating by internet. No sound? >>>>>>> Of course, they can communicate. One lady had a bird feeder outside >>>>> her window. >>>>>>> When the bird feeder became empty, the birds would peck on her >>>>>>> window to >>>>>>> let her know that she needed to refill the bird feeder. After she >>> refilled >>>>>>> the feeder, the birds would stop pecking on her window. Dogs let >>>>>>> their >>>>>>> owners know when they are hungry. Yes, apes can use sign language. >>> Do you >>>>>>> think that an ape would be able to win a chess game with a 12 year >>>>>>> old >>>>>>> child? >>>>>> Hardly. But that is not the question. >>>>>> Do you think that an ape would be able to figure out the solution >>>>>>> to an algebra problem? One of the other differences is a low IQ. >>>>>>> jason >>>>>> Ah, so the difference is one of IQ? >>>>>> You are on very thin ice, let me tell you..... >>>>> I have provided three separate reasons. >>>> The point is, Jason, that your IQ is hardly that much more than that >>>> of an ape, based on what you've posted here. I'm sure an ape could >>>> also learn to cut and paste, especially if there was no requirement >>>> for him to understand what he was cutting and pasting. >>>> >>>> You really do need to have things spelled out for you, don't you? >>>> >>>> Martin >>> Martin, >>> You have told me that life evolved from non-life. Yes, spell it out for >>> me. Explain how life evolved from non-life. >>> Jason >> It's really simple Jason, once the earth was uninhabitable. Now there is >> life. Life doesn't 'evolve' from non-life. Life can begin from non-life. >> Regardless of how life started, evolution now directs the distribution and >> diversity of life on earth. > > Spell it out, explain how life can begin from non-life. > > What? Again? Never mind, you won't read it anyway. Like I said. You either claim there never was a time without life or life came from non-life. You cannot have both. Tokay -- Weinberg's Second Law: If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 In article <1180907895.450122.123050@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > On 3 Jun., 21:42, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <1180863203.738843.244...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > On 2 Jun., 03:01, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > > > <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > > > >In article <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > >gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > >> Except those who are educated and are not idiots. > > > > > > > >Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that they keep the apes= > and > > > > > >monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo, they kept the = > gori=3D > > > lla > > > > > >in a facility that made it impossible for him to escape or throw f= > ecal > > > > > >material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have created and designed > > > > > >monkeys and apes to be vastly different than humans so as not to c= > onfu=3D > > > se > > > > > >the advocates of evolution. > > > > > >Jason > > > > > > > What does California keep in the cages at San Quentin? > > > > > > People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and gorillas use fi= > re?-=3D > > > Skjul tekst i anf=3DF8rselstegn - > > > > > > - Vis tekst i anf=3DF8rselstegn - > > > > > Does using fire mean that you are not related to other apes? No > > > Jason, it does not mean that. You zoo example was completely > > > meaningless. > > > > > > These are some of the differences: > > the use of fire > > burying the dead > > the ability to communicate by talking > > differences in DNA > > The DNA in dogs is not the same as that in cats. Does that mean that > dogs are not animals or is it cats? I cannot wait for your answer. The DNA is one of the reason that dogs are different than cats. > > > differences in IQ > > > > > the ability to worship- Skjul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > > > > > > > - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - Quote
Guest Tokay Pino Gris Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <4sF8i.15341$JQ3.14436@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0306071242230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >>> In article <1180863203.738843.244120@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, >>> gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: >>> >>>> On 2 Jun., 03:01, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>> In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism >>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >>>>>> <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >>>>>>> In article <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, >>>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> Except those who are educated and are not idiots. >>>>>>> Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that they keep the apes >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo, they kept the >>>>>>> gori= >>>> lla >>>>>>> in a facility that made it impossible for him to escape or throw >>>>>>> fecal >>>>>>> material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have created and designed >>>>>>> monkeys and apes to be vastly different than humans so as not to >>>>>>> confu= >>>> se >>>>>>> the advocates of evolution. >>>>>>> Jason >>>>>> What does California keep in the cages at San Quentin? >>>>> People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and gorillas use >>>>> fire?-= >>>> Skjul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - >>>>> - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - >>>> Does using fire mean that you are not related to other apes? No >>>> Jason, it does not mean that. You zoo example was completely >>>> meaningless. >>> These are some of the differences: >>> the use of fire >>> burying the dead >>> the ability to communicate by talking >>> differences in DNA >>> differences in IQ >>> the ability to worship >> Explain to me how chimps and humans share the same defect gene as explained >> here: >> >> http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0500450102v1.pdf > > Sorry, I have never taken any classes related to genes or read any books > or articles about genes. > > So how can you then argue? This is what this is about, after all. So you just admitted that you have no idea about genetics. You have now two choices. You can either learn. Or you can choose not to learn. If you choose not to learn, then why should anyone try to explain anything to you? Tokay -- Weinberg's Second Law: If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 3, 2007 Posted June 3, 2007 In article <1180909414.014982.158970@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > On 4 Jun., 01:07, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <RoF8i.15298$JQ3.14...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > > > > > > > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > >news:Jason-0306071236540001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > > In article <1180864433.482133.263...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, M= > artin > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > >> On Jun 3, 9:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >> > In article <f3t1f1$i75$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > > > >> > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > >> > > Jason wrote: > > > >> > > > In article <f3rg71$rer$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > >> > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> Jason wrote: > > > >> > > >>> In article <s9j163tfd53h20c63pfengglsdqakrb...@4ax.com>, Free > > > >> > > >>> Lunch > > > >> > > >>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> > > >>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:29:51 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > >> > > >>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > >> > > >>>> <Jason-0106071829510...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net= > >: > > > >> > > >>>>> In article <bqc163pt6i3gfpq0oi8u9lp5rr85pmd...@4ax.com>, F= > ree > > > >> > > >>>>> Lunch > > > >> > > >>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> > > >>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:01:10 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > >> > > >>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > >> > > >>>>>> <Jason-0106071801100...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.n= > et>: > > > >> > > >>>>>>> In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.com>, > > > > Free Lunch > > > >> > > >>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> > > >>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > >> > > >>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > >> > > >>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse= > .net>: > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> In article > > > > <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > >> > > >>>>>>>> ... > > > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Except those who are educated and are not idiots. > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that they k= > eep > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> the > > > >> > apes and > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo, th= > ey > > > > kept the > > > >> > > >>> gorilla > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> in a facility that made it impossible for him to escap= > e or > > > >> > throw fecal > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have created= > and > > > > designed > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> monkeys and apes to be vastly different than humans so= > as > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> not to > > > >> > > >>> confuse > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> the advocates of evolution. > > > >> > > >>>>>>>>> Jason > > > > > >> > > >>>>>>>> What does California keep in the cages at San Quentin? > > > >> > > >>>>>>> People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and > > > >> > > >>>>>>> gorillas > > > >> > use fire? > > > >> > > >>>>>> Does your entire theology rely on the fact that humans > > > > learned to tame > > > >> > > >>>>>> fire and other animals did not? > > > > > >> > > >>>>>> Wow.... > > > >> > > >>>>> No--I was only pointed out one of the major difference bet= > ween > > > >> > mankind and > > > >> > > >>>>> animals. > > > >> > > >>>> It's a trivial behavioral difference. > > > > > >> > > >>>>> I also pointed out in another post that mankind worships G= > od > > > >> > > >>>>> and > > > >> > > >>>>> that animals do not worship God. Of course, not all humans > > > > worship God. > > > >> > > >>>> Another trivial difference. > > > >> > > >>> Another major difference: > > > >> > > >>> IQ levels--much lower than normal people. > > > > > >> > > >>> also: Animals can not have conversations with people by talk= > ing. > > > > > >> > > >> Actually, they can. You should really start reading some > > > >> > > >> scientific > > > >> > > >> stuff. They taught some bonobos to use a kind of sign languag= > e=2E So > > > >> > > >> they > > > >> > > >> can't "talk" by language. But conversation is not limited to > > > >> > > >> sound. > > > >> > > >> What was your point again? > > > > > >> > > >> Tokay > > > > > >> > > > My point is that they can not have converations with people BY > > > >> > > > TALKING. > > > > > >> > > I hope you do not fix this on language. Language, i.e. sounds. W= > e are > > > >> > > communicating by internet. No sound? > > > > > >> > > > Of course, they can communicate. One lady had a bird feeder ou= > tside > > > >> > her window. > > > >> > > > When the bird feeder became empty, the birds would peck on her > > > >> > > > window to > > > >> > > > let her know that she needed to refill the bird feeder. After = > she > > > > refilled > > > >> > > > the feeder, the birds would stop pecking on her window. Dogs l= > et > > > >> > > > their > > > >> > > > owners know when they are hungry. Yes, apes can use sign langu= > age. > > > > Do you > > > >> > > > think that an ape would be able to win a chess game with a 12 = > year > > > >> > > > old > > > >> > > > child? > > > > > >> > > Hardly. But that is not the question. > > > > > >> > > Do you think that an ape would be able to figure out the solut= > ion > > > >> > > > to an algebra problem? One of the other differences is a low I= > Q=2E > > > >> > > > jason > > > > > >> > > Ah, so the difference is one of IQ? > > > > > >> > > You are on very thin ice, let me tell you..... > > > > > >> > I have provided three separate reasons. > > > > > >> The point is, Jason, that your IQ is hardly that much more than that > > > >> of an ape, based on what you've posted here. I'm sure an ape could > > > >> also learn to cut and paste, especially if there was no requirement > > > >> for him to understand what he was cutting and pasting. > > > > > >> You really do need to have things spelled out for you, don't you? > > > > > >> Martin > > > > > > Martin, > > > > You have told me that life evolved from non-life. Yes, spell it out f= > or > > > > me. Explain how life evolved from non-life. > > > > Jason > > > > > It's really simple Jason, once the earth was uninhabitable. Now there is > > > life. Life doesn't 'evolve' from non-life. Life can begin from non-life. > > > Regardless of how life started, evolution now directs the distribution = > and > > > diversity of life on earth. > > > > Spell it out, explain how life can begin from non-life.- Skjul tekst i an= > f=F8rselstegn - > > > > - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn > > How could it not? You claim that it happened. Therefore, explain to me how it happened. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.