Guest Ralph Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0706071218570001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1181196638.095121.125260@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, George > Chen <georgechen2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 7, 1:53 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <1181186006.021056.253...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, >> > Martin >> >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> > > On Jun 7, 4:48 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > > > In article > <1181115641.136917.257...@r19g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >> > >> > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > > > > On Jun 6, 10:39 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > > > > > In article >> > > > > > <1181089796.976281.55...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, >> > Martin >> > >> > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > > > > > > On Jun 6, 4:00 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > > > > > > > In article <f441ch$9c...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> > >> > > > > > > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> > > > > > > > > Jason wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > In article <oppej4-agk....@spanky.localhost.net>, >> > > > > > > > > > Kelsey >> > Bjarnason >> > > > > > > > > > <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> [snips] >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:54:11 -0700, Jason wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > > > >>> I had one professor that had a Ph.D degree and I had >> > > > > > > > > >>> no >> > respect >> > > > > > for that >> > > > > > > > > >>> professor. I do respect Dr. Gish. >> > > > > > > > > >> On what basis? What part of his long and >> > > > > > > > > >> well-documented >> > history >> > > > > > of lies, >> > > > > > > > > >> deception and dishonesty do you find worthy of >> > > > > > > > > >> respect? >> > >> > > > > > > > > > It's a long story so I won't bore you. The bottom line > that she >> > > > > > rediculed >> > > > > > > > > > several other Christians and myself. >> > >> > > > > > > > > What part of "What part of his long and well-documented > history >> > > > of lies, >> > > > > > > > > deception and dishonesty do you find worthy of respect?" > did you >> > > > seem to >> > > > > > > > > not comprehend? >> > >> > > > > > > > > I.e. Kelsey wasn't asking why you didn't respect your > professor >> > > > but was, >> > > > > > > > > instead, asking why DO you respect Dr. Gish? >> > >> > > > > > > > > (And you claim to have a masters degree? In what? >> > > > > > > > > Illiteracy?) >> > >> > > > > > > > I respect Dr. Gish because of his accomplishments. I was >> > present when he >> > > > > > > > debated a science professor from the local state college. >> > > > > > > > In >> > my opinion, >> > > > > > > > he won that debate. Those are two of the reasons that I >> > respect him. I >> > > > > > > > debated that same professor in his office the week before >> > > > > > > > he >> > debated Dr. >> > > > > > > > Gish. He easily won the debate that he had with me. He >> > probably believed >> > > > > > > > that he could just as easily win the debate with Dr. Gish. >> > However, Dr. >> > > > > > > > Gish was an experienced debater and easily won the debate. >> > >> > > > > > > How can anyone "win" a debate without presenting any >> > > > > > > evidence? >> > >> > > > > > The main reason he won was because he remained calm while the > professor >> > > > > > from the college lost his temper and started name calling Dr. >> > Gish. People >> > > > > > in the crowd actually started "booing" the professor when he > made a fool >> > > > > > of himself. I talked to someone that attended a different > debate. That >> > > > > > science professor done his homework. He attended one of Dr. >> > > > > > Gish's >> > debates >> > > > > > and took lots of notes. He was prepared to respond to every >> > > > > > point >> > that Dr. >> > > > > > Gish made and that professor never lost his temper. The person >> > > > > > that >> > > > > > attended that debate claimed that Dr. Gish lost that debate. >> > >> > > > > There is still an onus on someone trying to prove a point to >> > > > > actually >> > > > > provide suporting evidence. You didn't answer my question. >> > >> > > > If you have attended any debates, you should know that the skills >> > > > of the >> > > > debater is even more important than the evidence. >> > >> > > Incorrect. A man who has a pleasant voice may sound better but what >> > > can he prove without evidence? You have a lot to learn about >> > > debating, Jason. >> >> > Re-read my post--they both had evidence. >> >> Re-read your own post: you merely asserted that they had evidence. >> You, Gish, Morris, none of us have EVER presented ANY evidence for >> creationism. It is 100% total bullshit from beginning to end. Your >> god doesn't even exist. > > Only 12 percent of Americans believe that humans evolved from other > life-forms without any involvement of a God. > source: page 6--National Geographic--November 2004 Well then, if that many people are sure of that then we should have some evidence to support this god. Please present some of this evidence. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 22:33:53 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0606072233530001@66-52-22-82.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1181186644.427298.236190@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin ><phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 7, 9:26 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <s4ee63l7m06snhrejmi5amp02dvhia4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> > > On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 13:04:19 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism >> > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> > > <Jason-0606071304200...@66-52-22-15.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> > > >In article <1181115259.911064.176...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >> > > >Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> > > ... >> > >> > > >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics >> > >> > > >> Aren't you embarassed by your lack of knowledge of physics? It's not >> > > >> something a normal person would flaunt. >> >> > > >No--there are millions of us. >> > >> > > At times you seem to be proud of your ignorance. Apparently the Parable >> > > of the Talents is one of Jesus' parables that you do not know. >> > >> > Do you believe that everyone that has never taken a college physics class >> > is ignorant? >> >> By definition, yes. Can you point me to a college that doesn't offer >> any physics classes so that a student wouldn't have had an opportunity >> to take one? >> >> Martin > >Martin, >Believe it or not--lots of students do not enjoy math classes as much as >you did when you was a college student. I hated math classes in high >school and hated Math 101 even more. >Jason > Do you reject the math that you chose not to learn? Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 22:26:43 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0606072226440001@66-52-22-82.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1181185581.562621.245160@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> In response to: >> >> > In article <1181115259.911064.176...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >> > > Aren't you embarassed by your lack of knowledge of physics? It's not >> > > something a normal person would flaunt. >> >> On Jun 7, 4:04 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > No--there are millions of us. >> >> Apparently it is okay to be ignorant as long as there are millions of >> other people who are also ignorant. >> >> Seconds? >> >> Martin > >Are you saying that anyone that has not taken a college course in physics >is ignorant? If you went to college you should be quite competent to learn throughout your life on a wide range of topics. There is no excuse for anyone who has been to college to spout off on topics that he is completely ignorant of. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 22:52:45 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0606072252450001@66-52-22-82.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1181186215.390621.266680@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin ><phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 7, 5:24 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <prC9i.28164$JQ3....@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> >> > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message >> > >news:Jason-0506071933390001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > > > In article <lkub639s9o4sq1h4n626gtsm5qasut3...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> > >> > > >> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 13:00:56 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism >> > > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> > > >> <Jason-0506071300570...@66-52-22-62.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> > > >> >In article <f441ch$9c...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> > > >> ><prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> > >> > > >> >> Jason wrote: >> > > >> >> > In article <oppej4-agk....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason >> > > >> >> > <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > >> >> >> [snips] >> > >> > > >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:54:11 -0700, Jason wrote: >> > >> > > >> >> >>> I had one professor that had a Ph.D degree and I had no respect >> > > > for that >> > > >> >> >>> professor. I do respect Dr. Gish. >> > > >> >> >> On what basis? What part of his long and well-documented history >> > > > of lies, >> > > >> >> >> deception and dishonesty do you find worthy of respect? >> > >> > > >> >> > It's a long story so I won't bore you. The bottom line that she >> > > >> >> > rediculed >> > > >> >> > several other Christians and myself. >> > >> > > >> >> What part of "What part of his long and well-documented history of >> > > >> >> lies, >> > > >> >> deception and dishonesty do you find worthy of respect?" did >you seem >> > > >> >> to >> > > >> >> not comprehend? >> > >> > > >> >> I.e. Kelsey wasn't asking why you didn't respect your professor but >> > > >> >> was, >> > > >> >> instead, asking why DO you respect Dr. Gish? >> > >> > > >> >> (And you claim to have a masters degree? In what? Illiteracy?) >> > >> > > >> >I respect Dr. Gish because of his accomplishments. >> > >> > > >> Claims like this cause me not to respect you because you are so easily >> > > >> gulled, but refuse to admit it. >> > >> > > >> >I was present when he >> > > >> >debated a science professor from the local state college. In my >opinion, >> > > >> >he won that debate. >> > >> > > >> You are wrong. Gish may have conned you, but he didn't win a debate. >> > >> > > > Unless you attended that same debate that I attended, how would >you know. >> > >> > > Because he knows Gish. Gish is a liar and a fraud. You can see that here: >> > >http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/cre-error.html >> > >> > > >> >Those are two of the reasons that I respect him. I >> > > >> >debated that same professor in his office the week before he >debated Dr. >> > > >> >Gish. He easily won the debate that he had with me. He probably >believed >> > > >> >that he could just as easily win the debate with Dr. Gish. >However, Dr. >> > > >> >Gish was an experienced debater and easily won the debate. >> > >> > > >> Gish lied. You bought his lies. >> > >> > > No comment Jason? We are asserting that Bullfrog Gish is a liar. We have >> > > evidence to support that assertion. Yet you still respect him???? >> > >> > Let's say that you lived in a different city than your father lived. You >> > have a great deal of respect for your father. You meet someone that starts >> > to tell you how evil your father is and that he had all sorts of evidence >> > about your father. >> > >> > You would have two options: >> > option 1: Agree agree that man and agree with the evidence. >> > option 2: Continue to have respect for your father and disregard the >evidence. >> > >> > I would choose option 2. >> > option 2 >> >> 1) Gish is not your father. >> >> 2) You are a fool to discount evidence on a whim. >> >> Martin > >However, in much the same way that I respect my father, I also don't turn >my back on people that I respect. > Why do you respect someone who made his living lying to people and getting them to give him money because he was lying? Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:11:10 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0706071211110001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1181196120.632387.197210@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin ><phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 7, 1:52 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <1181186215.390621.266...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> > > On Jun 7, 5:24 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > > > In article <prC9i.28164$JQ3....@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> > >> > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > > > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message >> > > > >news:Jason-0506071933390001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > > > > > In article <lkub639s9o4sq1h4n626gtsm5qasut3...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> > > > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> > >> > > > > >> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 13:00:56 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism >> > > > > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> > > > > >> <Jason-0506071300570...@66-52-22-62.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> > > > > >> >In article <f441ch$9c...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> > > > > >> ><prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> > >> > > > > >> >> Jason wrote: >> > > > > >> >> > In article <oppej4-agk....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey >Bjarnason >> > > > > >> >> > <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > > > >> >> >> [snips] >> > >> > > > > >> >> >> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:54:11 -0700, Jason wrote: >> > >> > > > > >> >> >>> I had one professor that had a Ph.D degree and I had >no respect >> > > > > > for that >> > > > > >> >> >>> professor. I do respect Dr. Gish. >> > > > > >> >> >> On what basis? What part of his long and >well-documented history >> > > > > > of lies, >> > > > > >> >> >> deception and dishonesty do you find worthy of respect? >> > >> > > > > >> >> > It's a long story so I won't bore you. The bottom line >that she >> > > > > >> >> > rediculed >> > > > > >> >> > several other Christians and myself. >> > >> > > > > >> >> What part of "What part of his long and well-documented >history of >> > > > > >> >> lies, >> > > > > >> >> deception and dishonesty do you find worthy of respect?" did >> > you seem >> > > > > >> >> to >> > > > > >> >> not comprehend? >> > >> > > > > >> >> I.e. Kelsey wasn't asking why you didn't respect your >professor but >> > > > > >> >> was, >> > > > > >> >> instead, asking why DO you respect Dr. Gish? >> > >> > > > > >> >> (And you claim to have a masters degree? In what? Illiteracy?) >> > >> > > > > >> >I respect Dr. Gish because of his accomplishments. >> > >> > > > > >> Claims like this cause me not to respect you because you are >so easily >> > > > > >> gulled, but refuse to admit it. >> > >> > > > > >> >I was present when he >> > > > > >> >debated a science professor from the local state college. In my >> > opinion, >> > > > > >> >he won that debate. >> > >> > > > > >> You are wrong. Gish may have conned you, but he didn't win a >debate. >> > >> > > > > > Unless you attended that same debate that I attended, how would >> > you know. >> > >> > > > > Because he knows Gish. Gish is a liar and a fraud. You can see >that here: >> > > > >http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/cre-error.html >> > >> > > > > >> >Those are two of the reasons that I respect him. I >> > > > > >> >debated that same professor in his office the week before he >> > debated Dr. >> > > > > >> >Gish. He easily won the debate that he had with me. He probably >> > believed >> > > > > >> >that he could just as easily win the debate with Dr. Gish. >> > However, Dr. >> > > > > >> >Gish was an experienced debater and easily won the debate. >> > >> > > > > >> Gish lied. You bought his lies. >> > >> > > > > No comment Jason? We are asserting that Bullfrog Gish is a liar. >We have >> > > > > evidence to support that assertion. Yet you still respect him???? >> > >> > > > Let's say that you lived in a different city than your father lived. You >> > > > have a great deal of respect for your father. You meet someone >that starts >> > > > to tell you how evil your father is and that he had all sorts of >evidence >> > > > about your father. >> > >> > > > You would have two options: >> > > > option 1: Agree agree that man and agree with the evidence. >> > > > option 2: Continue to have respect for your father and disregard the >> > evidence. >> > >> > > > I would choose option 2. >> > > > option 2 >> > >> > > 1) Gish is not your father. >> > >> > > 2) You are a fool to discount evidence on a whim. >> >> > However, in much the same way that I respect my father, I also don't turn >> > my back on people that I respect. >> >> Again, you are just making excuses for being ignorant. The fact that >> you respect Gish and Morris does not change the fact that they are >> lying frauds. >> >> Martin > >Are you the type of person that would turn your back on a person that you >respected? > If I knew that someone I respected had made his living as a con man, I would no longer respect him. There is absolutely no reason for anyone, particularly a Christian to respect someone who makes his living lying to Christians. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:12:10 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0706071212100001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <f49bfr$q8c$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike ><prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >> > Let's say that you lived in a different city than your father lived. You >> > have a great deal of respect for your father. You meet someone that starts >> > to tell you how evil your father is and that he had all sorts of evidence >> > about your father. >> > >> > You would have two options: >> > option 1: Agree agree that man and agree with the evidence. >> > option 2: Continue to have respect for your father and disregard the >evidence. >> > >> > I would choose option 2. >> >> >> So you disregard the evidence and believe whatever you want to believe. >> That explains a lot. > >Are you the type of person that would you turn your back on a person that >you respected? > The more you defend Gish's lies, the less respect you deserve. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:42:49 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0706071642500001@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <7j2mj4-917.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason ><kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > >> [snips] >> >> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:11:10 -0700, Jason wrote: >> >> >> Again, you are just making excuses for being ignorant. The fact that >> >> you respect Gish and Morris does not change the fact that they are >> >> lying frauds. >> >> >> >> Martin >> > >> > Are you the type of person that would turn your back on a person that you >> > respected? >> >> He, like me, is presumably the sort of person who grants respect to those >> worthy of it. Gish is not such a person. > >You failed to answer this question: > >Are you the type of person that would turn your back on a person that you >respected? > You have yet to give us a reason that you would respect such a liar and con man. Your defense of Gish makes it clear that people should not trust you. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:47:39 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0706071647400001@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <57_9i.476$s9.474@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" ><mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: .... >> Well then, if that many people are sure of that then we should have some >> evidence to support this god. Please present some of this evidence. > >I requested that you google "miracle healings" and if you had done that, >you would know that God is healing people today in much the same way that >God healed people while Jesus was on this earth. No, I would not. There is absolutely no evidence that any god has anything to do with any healing. >This book contains lots of evidence that God exists: "Evidence That >Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell. Mr. McDowell is even more corrupt and dishonest than Gish. You are truly misled by con men. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0706071640220001@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <j3_9i.473$s9.345@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0706071208340001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <f498d2$n31$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Jason wrote: >> >> > In article <1181115307.232390.182910@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, >> >> > Martin >> >> > Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> On Jun 6, 10:22 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >>> In article <2j8hj4-b76....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>>> [snips] >> >> >>>> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 15:44:19 -0700, Jason wrote: >> >> >>>>> Someone just tried to convince me that time did not exist prior >> >> >>>>> to >> >> > the Big >> >> >>>>> Bang. Do you believe there is EVIDENCE for that? >> >> >>>> It is more correct to say that we cannot measure time before the >> > Big Bang. >> >> >>>> The Big Bang is what caused our spacetime to exist. That >> >> >>>> spacetime >> >> >>>> is >> >> >>>> what we measure space - and time - in; it provides the events, >> >> >>>> the >> >> >>>> observable things, the change in entropy, which allows us to >> >> >>>> determine >> >> >>>> that time actually passes. >> >> >>>> "Prior" to this - if such a phrase even makes sense - we have no >> >> >>>> way >> >> >>>> to >> >> >>>> measure events, as we are inside a "bubble" of spacetime and our >> >> >>>> measurements are solely able to meaningfully discuss the events >> >> >>>> we >> >> >>>> can >> >> >>>> observe - namely, events which, like us, are inside that >> >> >>>> "bubble". >> >> >>>> To speak of "before" is to imply something which existed or >> >> >>>> occurred >> >> >>>> before this bubble ever existed, but we cannot really speak >> >> >>>> meaningfully >> >> >>>> of it, as there is no way for us to observe it - it is _outside_ >> >> >>>> the >> >> >>>> bubble, we are _inside_. >> >> >>>> Thus to even say "time did (or didn't) exist prior to the Big >> >> >>>> Bang" >> >> >>>> is to >> >> >>>> assume that the very concept "before the big bang" is itself >> >> >>>> meaningful, >> >> >>>> but that implies duration - time - and that, in turn, implies >> > something we >> >> >>>> can in some way measure, some sequence of events; if, however, we >> >> >>>> are >> >> >>>> limited to seeing events inside the bubble, we cannot measure >> >> >>>> such >> >> >>>> events outside, so we cannot say that the concept of time itself >> >> >>>> had >> >> >>>> any >> >> >>>> meaning "before", or that "before" has any meaning. >> >> >>>> All we can do is examine what happened after - and even there, we >> > can only >> >> >>>> examine so far, as "prior" to that (again, if the concept of >> >> >>>> "prior" >> >> >>>> or >> >> >>>> time has any meaning at all in such cases) it is suggested that >> >> >>>> the >> >> >>>> expansion was simply too hot to sustain things in a manner which >> > allow for >> >> >>>> observation. >> >> >>>> In essence, at some point, according to the hypothesis and the >> > evidence we >> >> >>>> do have, there was a singularity, a point at which the laws of >> >> >>>> physics as >> >> >>>> we know them break down. If they do, in fact, break down then we >> >> >>>> cannot >> >> >>>> rely on them to probe further. >> >> >>>> Was there time "prior to the big bang"? Wrong question. The >> >> >>>> proper >> >> >>>> question is what does "prior to the big bang" mean, unless you >> >> >>>> can >> >> >>>> establish that time actually did exist, and in a manner which we >> >> >>>> would be >> >> >>>> able to detect? >> >> >>> Thanks for your post. It's my opinion that time did exist prior to >> >> >>> the Big >> >> >>> Bang. Saying "it is more correct to say that we can not measure >> >> >>> time >> >> >>> before the Big Bang" makes much more sense than saying that "time >> >> >>> did >> >> >>> not >> >> >>> exist prior to Big Bang." >> >> >> Do you think clocks existed before the big bang? >> >> >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> > >> >> > Martin, >> >> > No. I was a fan of the original Star Trek show. They had several >> >> > episodes >> >> > that involved going faster than the speed of light (or it may have >> >> > been >> >> > going thru a worm hole) and going back in time. In some episodes, >> >> > they >> >> > would go back in time. I wondered what would happen if a thousand >> >> > years >> >> > from now--a space ship went back in time to the time period >> >> > preceding >> >> > the >> >> > Big Bang. >> >> >> >> Can a ship go north of the north pole? Of course not. For the SAME >> >> reason, a ship/person can't go back in time before the big bang. It's >> >> simply meaningless. >> >> >> >> I don't know what a mass of energy would look like--but let's >> >> > say that it was visible due to solid materials that were a part of >> >> > the >> >> > mass of energy. Regardless, their electronic intruments would be >> >> > able >> >> > to >> >> > detect the mass of energy. It was my guess that those people on that >> >> > space >> >> > ship would be able to take a film of the mass of energy and be able >> >> > to >> >> > record the exact time. If you are not a fan of Star Trek, you >> >> > probably >> >> > don't understand my point. I already know that time travel is a >> >> > controversial issue. >> >> >> >> And where, exactly, would these people be AT when they're taking a >> >> picture of this mass of energy (since they are a part OF the mass of >> >> energy?) >> > >> > Thanks for your answer. It would be interesting to know how other >> > members >> > of this newsgroup would answer this question. >> >> Well, when an honest person asks we will tell them. > > That an excellent attempt at avoiding to answer my question. I don't blame > you for not answering it since it's a difficult question to answer. It has no answer, Jason, it was a stupid question and has already consumed more of my time than it's worth. Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Jun 8, 2:23 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > Scenario: > An atheist attends an open casket funeral. > > The dead man climbs out of the casket and states, "God raised me from the dead." What is this supposed to prove, Jason? That you, like the writers of the Bible, are capable of coming up with fairy stories? Grow up. Martin Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 >> >> Re-read your own post: you merely asserted that they had evidence. >> >> You, Gish, Morris, none of us have EVER presented ANY evidence for >> >> creationism. It is 100% total bullshit from beginning to end. Your >> >> god doesn't even exist. >> > >> > Only 12 percent of Americans believe that humans evolved from other >> > life-forms without any involvement of a God. >> > source: page 6--National Geographic--November 2004 >> >> Well then, if that many people are sure of that then we should have some >> evidence to support this god. Please present some of this evidence. > > I requested that you google "miracle healings" and if you had done that, > you would know that God is healing people today in much the same way that > God healed people while Jesus was on this earth. Miracle healings are anecdotal stories and as such are not evidence. > This book contains lots of evidence that God exists: "Evidence That > Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell. > Jason ETDAV has been thoroughly refuted. Here is one place: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/preposterous.html Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Jun 8, 2:42 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > You mentioned one of the problems with the Big Bang theory. There are > about 29 other problems so scientists still have a lot of work to do > related to this theory. Assertion. Martin Quote
Guest Kelsey Bjarnason Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 [snips] On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:38:17 -0700, Jason wrote: >> Measurements would be meaningless as there's insufficient structure to >> measure anything; everywhere you look, it is noise and chaos. > Thanks for your post. Are you stating that the star ship would be inside > the energy mass? Obviously. The concepts of "space ship" and "time" and "travel" are all things defined in terms of the operations of physics within our spacetime, thus any such ship would, of necessity, have to be also inside our spacetime in order for it to be a meaningful concept to us. Thus, as it approaches T=0, it is inside the expanding ball of superheated energy just after Planck time. > Would it be possible for the star ship to be about five > thousand miles (outside) the huge energy mass when the long range > electronic scanning instruments detected the presence of the energy mass > and/or radiation. No, because the ships is inside the ball. As time goes backwards, the ball condenses. It's not like standing beside a ball on the floor, looking at it; you - and the ship - are inside the ball, which is shrinking and heating, with the ship inside it. How do you stand off 5,000 miles from something that you're inside of, which itself is less than 5,000 miles across - assuming we're talking about winding time back as close to 0 as we can theoretically get. -- I would give all I owned to the Church. I know Jesus Christ directs the affairs of the Church and would without question give it all. • Ric Remington (Mormon) Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:09:22 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0706071709230001@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <tTZ9i.459$s9.243@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" ><mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: .... >> Sorry Jason, you're confusing belief in god with a basis in evolution. There >> are hundreds of millions of Christians that support the science that has >> brought us into the 21st century. > >That is true. However, it does not mean that they support all aspects of >evolution theory such as the concept that mankind evolved from a living >cell. > The vast majority belong to denominations that do accept the discoveries about evolution, including the fact that mankind shares a common ancestry with other life on earth. You reject that fact, but the fact won't change just because you don't like it. Quote
Guest Kelsey Bjarnason Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:42:49 -0700, Jason wrote: > In article <7j2mj4-917.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > >> [snips] >> >> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:11:10 -0700, Jason wrote: >> >> >> Again, you are just making excuses for being ignorant. The fact that >> >> you respect Gish and Morris does not change the fact that they are >> >> lying frauds. >> >> >> >> Martin >> > >> > Are you the type of person that would turn your back on a person that you >> > respected? >> >> He, like me, is presumably the sort of person who grants respect to those >> worthy of it. Gish is not such a person. > > You failed to answer this question: > > Are you the type of person that would turn your back on a person that you > respected? If he earned that by, say, consistently spewing known falsehoods, absolutely. -- Now, if Foxtrot would like to have his head handed to him yet again, let him post his drivelous rantings and I will oblige in his verbal decapitation. - Marty Leipzig Quote
Guest Kelsey Bjarnason Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 [snips] On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:47:39 -0700, Jason wrote: >> Well then, if that many people are sure of that then we should have some >> evidence to support this god. Please present some of this evidence. > > I requested that you google "miracle healings" He said evidence of god , not evidence of healing . We know healing happens. Try again. -- There comes a point in every tyrany where the police no longer feel the need to justify their excesses. - David Rice Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Jun 8, 2:46 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > It's my opinion that colleges should not discriminate professors that are > advocates of creation science. No such thing. Look, Jason, why are you here. In this thread, it has been proven that 1) God doesn't exist. 2) There is NO evidence for creationism and in particular NO evidence on the ICR site. 3) You are not interested in evidence and are only interested in hearing people tell you what you want to believe. 4) You know nothing of math, physics, biology, chemistry or history. 5) You have lied to us over and over again telling us you want answers to your stupid questions when the truth is that all you want to do is swallow the lies of others. Bugger off, Jason. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Jun 8, 2:50 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <f48ss5$at...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > Martin, > > > I would like for you to tell me how that young man was able to walk unless > > > God had healed him? His doctor confirmed that he was healed. > > > Jason, > > > I'd like for you to tell me how that young man was able to walk unless > > I had healed him? His doctor confirmed that he was healed. > > Are you claiming that you healed the man? What is your evidence? Bingo. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Jun 8, 3:00 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181195590.769451.101...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 7, 1:29 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181185722.008538.173...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 7, 4:20 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article > > <1181115544.492024.188...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 6, 10:25 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > In article > > > > <1181089702.526388.254...@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > So you admit that the IRC website contains NO evidence for > > > > > > > > creationism. > > > > > > > > > We are finally making progress. > > > > > > > > I believe the ICR website contains some excellent information. I > > > disagree > > > > > > > with them in regard to the earth being only 10,000 years old. > > > > > > > So you are not believe the Bible is the literal word of your god. > > > > > > > We ARE making progress. > > > > > > > Now, perhaps you can identify what "information" you found on the ICR > > > > > > website because all I found were lies, assertions and suppositions. I > > > > > > read an entire article by Henry Morris and even posted it here and > > > > > > refuted it entirely. I didn't even see you acknowledge that. Do you > > > > > > accept that Morris is a liar then? > > > > > > I don't agree with everything that Dr. Gish or Dr. Morris has written. > > > > > That does not bother me since I don't agree with everything that many > > > > > people have written. > > > > > You didn't answer the question. Yes or no, is Morris a liar? > > > > I have stated things that turned out to be not true and it's my guess that > > > Dr. Morris, Dr. Gish and almost everyone else in the world has done the > > > same thing. > > > Let him that is without sin cast the first stone. > > > I am not a liar though. And I never claimed to be an expert in a > > field that I knew nothing about. > > > Martin > > Martin, > You still have not answered my question related to the Big Bang. You're a liar, Jason. I've answered all your questions and you've answered none of mine. I'm not playing with you anymore. Go home. Martin Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0706071720230001@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <4m5mj4-917.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > >> [snips] >> >> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 13:10:45 -0700, Jason wrote: >> >> > The doctor confirmed that he pronounced that he was dead since he had >> > NO >> > blood pressure, no pulse and had achieved room temperature. >> >> Something just occurred to me... that the above indicates yet another of >> your basic problems; you have really lousy standards of evidence. You >> see >> a guy crawl out of a casket and conclude "miracle" rather than "someone's >> playing tricks." You use the least reliable means of determining issues >> such as death and then conclude "miracle". In each case you present, you >> demonstrate a complete inability to examine the case in a critical light, >> choosing the least analytical, most credulous approach you can find. >> >> Your case of the "healing", for example. You see that he was >> (supposedly) >> healed. Fine, great, marvelous... but you don't even consider possible >> natural causes, you simply discard even the possibility of a non-theistic >> explanation and conclude "god dunnit". >> >> What's funny about this in a sad and pathetic sort of way is that you >> absolutely refuse to apply that credulity in an even-handed manner. You >> demand that science prove beyond doubt every jot and tittle of its >> claims, >> you reject the evidence out of hand when it's presented, but when it >> comes >> to god notions, you require virtually no actual support before you'll >> believe absolutely. >> >> I'm not sure what you get out of this; it is certainly neither an >> education nor the simple ability to say to yourself "Today, I acted in a >> good, honest way that shows the power of my faith", because you don't; >> you >> demonstrate the faith to be fragile, shallow, sitting atop a bed of >> dishonesty. >> >> Personally, I couldn't base my entire life on a lie and still look at >> myself in the morning. Maybe you can, but why would you want to? > > Your have high standards for evidence. Evolutionists claim that mankind > evolved from a living cell. Please tell me all of the steps that took > place between the the living cell and mankind. Since you have a high > standard for evidence, you should be able to tell me each of those steps. > Otherwise, you should stop claiming that evolutionist have evidence to > indicate that mankind evolved from living cells. If you have a statistics > program on your computer, calculate the mutations that were needed for > living cells to evolve into mankind. > Jason Right after you give even a clue that the god described in the Hebrew bible actually exists in reality. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0706071709230001@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <tTZ9i.459$s9.243@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0706071258340001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <glvlj4-917.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason >> > <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 23:08:00 -0700, Jason wrote: >> >> >> >> > In article <kt5kj4-ofp.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason >> >> > <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> [snips] >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 19:14:21 -0700, Jason wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > I have a copy of the November 2004 issue of National Geographic >> >> >> > magazine. >> >> >> > On page 6, poll results were mentioned. "According to a Gallup >> >> >> > Pole >> >> >> > that >> >> >> > was conducted in Feb., 2001, no less than 45 percent of >> >> >> > responding >> >> >> > US >> >> >> > adults agreed that God created humans pretty much in their >> >> >> > present >> >> >> > form >> >> >> > within the last 10,000 years or so." ...."Only 12 percent >> >> >> > believed >> >> >> > that >> >> >> > humans evolved from other life forms without any involvement from >> >> >> > God." >> >> >> > >> >> >> > It appears to me that more people in America agree with me than >> > agree with >> >> >> > you. In fact, only about 12 percent of Americans agree with you. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Are you really so stupid you think that you can vote God into >> >> >> existence? >> >> > >> >> > I don't recall stating that I think that I can vote God into >> >> > existence. >> >> > Are you assuming that I stated something that I did not state? >> >> >> >> If you're not trying to do that, then it doesn't matter whether two >> >> people >> >> or twenty billion believe, the numbers are absolutely irrelevant. Yet >> >> you >> >> bring them up as if they do mean something, so yes, you do seem to >> >> think >> >> that simply counting noses establishes reality - that you can vote God >> >> into existence. >> > >> > I did not conduct the poll. Several people in various posts implied >> > that I >> > was ignorant for not believing that humans evolved from a living cell. >> > My >> > point was that millions of people agree with me. In fact, only about 12 >> > percent of the people agree with you. You may believe that your oldest >> > ancestor is a cell but I believe that my oldest ancestors were all >> > human >> > beings. >> > Jason >> >> Sorry Jason, you're confusing belief in god with a basis in evolution. >> There >> are hundreds of millions of Christians that support the science that has >> brought us into the 21st century. > > That is true. However, it does not mean that they support all aspects of > evolution theory such as the concept that mankind evolved from a living > cell. Which aspects do they deny? Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0706071711380001@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <nUZ9i.460$s9.377@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0706071150260001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <f48ss5$at5$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Jason wrote: >> >> > Martin, >> >> > I would like for you to tell me how that young man was able to walk >> >> > unless >> >> > God had healed him? His doctor confirmed that he was healed. >> >> >> >> Jason, >> >> >> >> I'd like for you to tell me how that young man was able to walk unless >> >> I had healed him? His doctor confirmed that he was healed. >> > >> > Are you claiming that you healed the man? What is your evidence? >> >> It's as good as yours, Jason, that's the point. > > Do you have the name of a doctor that can confirm the healing? I have the > name of a doctor that can confirm that young man was healed. That doctor's > name is > Dr. Dino Delaportas, MD You missed the point again, Jason. If the man was healed and Dr. Dino Delaportas says he was healed, then there is as much evidence that Martin healed him as that god healed him. Quote
Guest Don Kresch Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 In alt.atheism On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:23:00 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) let us all know that: >In article <207f63l1vndqjhd4th6c3ppe842gtur3o6@4ax.com>, Michael Gray ><mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 19:05:54 -0700, Kelsey Bjarnason >> <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: >> - Refer: <2p5kj4-ofp.ln1@spanky.localhost.net> >> >[snips] >> > >> >On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 18:15:44 -0700, Jason wrote: >> > >> >> I posted information about a man that was healed by God. >> > >> >No, you didn't. You posted a story about a man who was healed. You >> >> He posted a story about a man who some say was healed of a disease >> that he claimed to have. >> >> >completely failed to demonstrate that God even exists , let alone had any >> >part in the healing, other than by fiat of assertion. >> > >> >Try again. This time think before posting. >> >> Impossible for Jason the Indoctrobot. >> >> -- > >Scenario: >An atheist attends an open casket funeral. > >The dead man climbs out of the casket and states, "God raised me from the dead." Not possible. Don --- aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert. "No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another" Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 On Jun 8, 3:03 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181196012.613482.158...@r19g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 7, 1:33 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181186644.427298.236...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 7, 9:26 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article <s4ee63l7m06snhrejmi5amp02dvhia4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 13:04:19 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > > > > <Jason-0606071304200...@66-52-22-15.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > > > > >In article > > <1181115259.911064.176...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > > > > >Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics > > > > > > > >> Aren't you embarassed by your lack of knowledge of physics? > It's not > > > > > > >> something a normal person would flaunt. > > > > > > > >No--there are millions of us. > > > > > > > At times you seem to be proud of your ignorance. Apparently the > Parable > > > > > > of the Talents is one of Jesus' parables that you do not know. > > > > > > Do you believe that everyone that has never taken a college > physics class > > > > > is ignorant? > > > > > By definition, yes. Can you point me to a college that doesn't offer > > > > any physics classes so that a student wouldn't have had an opportunity > > > > to take one? > > > > Believe it or not--lots of students do not enjoy math classes as much as > > > you did when you was a college student. I hated math classes in high > > > school and hated Math 101 even more. > > > Most -if not all- universities offer a basic level physics class that > > requires only a basic level of mathematics. You're just making > > excuses. Perhaps you went to a substandard college that did offer a > > full range of courses but in all the years since you attended college > > did you ever try to make up for this shortfall by actually doing some > > of your own reading? There are plenty of books available for laymen > > such as yourself that do not require any math background either. > They had physics classes at the state college that I attended. I did not > take the physics class since I had a difficult time passing the math 101 > required math class. I did enjoy taking the required biology 101 class. But you obviously didn't learn anything. Martin Quote
Guest Don Kresch Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 In alt.atheism On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:48:32 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) let us all know that: >Scenario: How many times are you going to post that bullshit? And why won't you address the answers I gave to your 20 questions? Don --- aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert. "No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another" Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" 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.