Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <1181276848.770709.166770@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 8, 12:12 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <sueh63h0slh8d0oudf83vl7vb8d6tq1...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 20:12:54 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > <Jason-0706072012540...@66-52-22-14.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > >In article > > > ><DipthotDipthot-63ED4F.18324107062...@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>, > > > >655321 <DipthotDipt...@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: > > > > > >> In article > > > >> <Jason-0706071647400...@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, > > > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > >> > 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. > > > > > >> You are a sucker for a smooth-talkin' salesman, aren't you? If you had > > > >> been raised in a Hindu community, what do you think you'd believe about > > > >> who/what was responsible for "miracle healings"? > > > > > >God can heal anyone regardless of their religions. > > > > > There is no evidence that God healed anyone, no matter what their > > > religion. > > > > I disagree. I know people that have been healed. I know someone that had > > one leg that was about 3 inches shorter than other other leg. God > > God doesn't exist. You proved that yourself. > > Martin I read the following in another thread in this newsgroup. It made me think of the people in this thread that appear to not believe in God. > Professional atheists who've dedicated themselves > to eradicating the Lord do so because they hate Him. > They're the God-haters. > To which they'll invariably reply: 'How can we hate > something we don't believe in ?'. > Exactly ! It's their belief in God which drives them to > relentlessly attack Him. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <1181277449.876223.85700@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 8, 12:22 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <1181270320.011847.179...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 8, 7:47 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > This book contains lots of evidence that God exists: "Evidence That > > > > Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell. > > > > > Written words are not evidence, Jason. Can you design an experiment - > > > any experiment- that can demonstrate that there exists anything - > > > anything at all- supernatural and further show that this supernatural > > > thing which you have detected is your god? By your own admission, you > > > can barely pass Math 101. To me, that means you are a moron. Period. > > > The reason I had trouble passing math 101 was because I only had one > > algebra class while in high school. I was not planning to go to college > > until my junior year when we had to take a national test. The counselor > > told me that I had a very high score on that test and should consider > > going to college. I took college prep classes my senior year. When took > > the math 101 college class, I was competing with students that had taken > > college prep math classes for at least four or five years. I barely passed > > that class. No, I could not design the experiment that you mentioned. > > In other words, you never had any interest in going to college until > someone convinced you to go and then when you got to college you > avoided having to learn anything. > > Martin Martin, My parents were very poor and could not afford to send me to college. None of my brothers or sister went to college. A Christian organization provided me with a college scholarship. Before my senior year, I took courses in things like wood shop, metal shop and vocational agriculture. I played on the football team, baseball team and basketball team during my last three years of high school. I learned lots of information in those shop classes. You seem to be prejudiced against anyone that did not major any math related courses while in college. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <1181277828.586709.304630@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 8, 12:51 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <1181272114.692901.148...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 8, 8:20 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > 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. > > > > > STEP 1 Single cell (example: bacteria) > > > STEP 2 Single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual > > > reproduction) > > > STEP 3 Animal cell colony (with cells depending upon each other for > > > survival) > > > STEP 4 Multicelled animal (with cells differentiated according to > > > function) > > > STEP 5 Vertibrates (example: fish) > > > STEP 6 Amphibians (example: frog) > > > STEP 7 Reptiles (example: lizard) > > > STEP 8 Mammals (example: mouse) > > > STEP 9 Primates (example: chimpanzee) > > > STEP 10 Man (examples: me and you) > > > Calculate the millions of positive mutations that would have been required > > to get from step 1 to step 10. > > You asked that question before. The answer was that we have no upper > bound on how many mutations could have occured because we have no way > of knowing exactly how many mutations occured that ended up not being > beneficial. That being said, we know that mutations occur to this day > and that the rate at which mutations occur, given three and a half > billion years and multiple extinction events in the meantime, does > account for the diversity of life we see today. > > If you really respected any of us then you would respond to our > answers rather than claiming (ie lying) we never answered your > questions and asking them all over again. > > Martin Martin, Yes, we see mutations today. However, the mutations we see are VERY different than the types of mutations that would be required for a fish to evolve into a frog or for a reptile to evolve into a mammal. The end result is that bacteria continue to remain to be bacteria --even if it a unique new type of bacteria. A mouse will still be a mouse--even if it a unique new type of mouse. The reason you do not understand my point is because you WANT to believe all aspects of evolution theory even if the evidence is not present. You do not have evidence that a bacteria evolved into mankind. If you were provided information about a man that spent many years in wheelchair that was healed and is now able to walk--you would not accept that as evidence of God--even if you interviewed the doctor and the doctor told you that God healed him. However, you accept as evidence that a bacteria evolved into mankind with much LESS evidence. Show me evidence that a bacteria has evolved into an animal cell with a DNA nucleus capable of sexual reproduction--and I will consider that this aspect of evolution theory has validity. Everyone in this thread is always discussing evidence but there is very little evidence to indicate that a bacteria evolved into mankind. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <1181278136.146892.65980@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 8, 1:04 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <1181272873.968955.314...@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 8, 8:39 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > In article <2q2h63hv86u7q4pl27sr87rncg5qsg1...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 22:26:43 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > > > <Jason-0606072226440...@66-52-22-82.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > > > >In article <1181185581.562621.245...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > > Martin > > > > > >Phipps <martinphip...@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? > > > > > > > >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. > > > > > > I seem to recall that someone asked me whether or not I had taken a > > > > physics class so I provided an answer. > > > > > And the answer was you hadn't. Nor have you made any effort to learn > > > anything by yourself since then. You are, by definition, ignorant. > > > It's not too late though: stop wasting our time and yours and actually > > > learn about the subjects you know nothing about. You can start by > > > actually going back to college and taking Physics 101. You can take > > > Biology 101 over too while you are at it as you obviously didn't learn > > > anything the first time. > > > That's funny. About 10 years ago, I attended a special session that was > > entitled, creation science versus evolution seminar. It was taught by the > > professor that debated Dr. Gish > > Don't describe what he does as "teaching". It is an insult to > teachers everywhere and, as a teacher, I take that very, very > personally. I do NOT lie to my students. I tell them only the > TRUTH. I leave it up to them to make their conclusions. > > Martin Perhaps they should change the titles of "teacher". Teachers are called teachers because they te... . Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <1181278472.667002.298240@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 8, 1:08 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <1181272392.411747.212...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 8, 8:27 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > I was under the impression that the mass of material was floating in open > > > > space prior to the time that it expanded. Is that not true? > > > > > Not according to Inflationary Theory: according to inflationary theory > > > it is the metric of space that expanded. Thus, even though the > > > universe was smaller than it is now, it was still all that existed. > > > You need more than Math 101 to understand how that could be. Watching > > > Star Trek won't help you. > > > > Thanks for your post. Do all scientists accept Inflationary Theory? > > For now, just as all scientists accepted Newtonian Mechanics but it > turns out be wrong at the subatomic scale (which is governed by > quantum mechanics) and in the case of relativistic speeds or strong > gravitational fields (in which case relativity theory is more > accurate). Plus, the theory says nothing about the first 5 x 10^-44 > seconds so there's a gap right there where your little tiny god can be > placed. > > Martin Martin, Thanks. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <1181280789.106035.58590@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 8, 2:23 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > My parents were very poor and could not afford to send me to college. None > > of my brothers or sister went to college. A Christian organization > > provided me with a college scholarship. > > You took their money and failed to learn anything. Aren't you > ashamed? > > > Before my senior year, I took > > courses in things like wood shop, metal shop and vocational agriculture. I > > played on the football team, baseball team and basketball team during my > > last three years of high school. I learned lots of information in those > > shop classes. You seem to be prejudiced against anyone that did not major > > any math related courses while in college. > > You know no math, no history, no biology, no chemistry and no physics > and you are prejudiced against anyone who does. > > Martin Martin, Not true--thank goodness for doctors, engineers and people involved in all other professions. I also respect people that never even attended college. jason Quote
Guest Michael Gray Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 04:34:24 -0000, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: - Refer: <1181277264.352885.81020@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com> >On Jun 8, 11:57 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> In article <p37h6310qvbml7o4ugpurslof5iek4a...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > >> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> > On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 18:03:20 -0700, in alt.atheism >> > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> > <Jason-0706071803200...@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> > >In article <tv5h63p152eiq5lkke28hqjbr3qmes9...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> > ><l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> > >> I didn't stop learning when I left college. Why did you? >> >> > >I did not stop learning. My interests were different than your interests. >> >> > Then why do you continue to make false claims about areas of science >> > that you are ignorant of? >> >> My interests were not in subjects like quantum physics. > >The real world holds no interest for Jason. If only he could work out how to undo his jacket... -- Quote
Guest Christopher Morris Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 "Martin Phipps" <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1181258112.140122.199820@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com... > 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. Just to play devil's advocate: God cannot be proven not exist by science or this thread since this is not within the realm of science or this thread so this statement is false. A belief in any God or Gods does not require that Science or anyone prove it to make it a valid belief for those that hold this view. > 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 The rest I would have to agree with you on. Quote
Guest Christopher Morris Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 Snipped for space. ">> 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 > > Still no evidence though. > > Martin This seems to be a constant issue; both science and religion have areas to which they speak very well. They each have their own forts and when they remain within their purviews, they do well. It is only when science attempts to speak to matters of religion or religion to matters of science that both fail to accomplish anything but mudding the waters. Both have a place in our society and both need to maintain within their own bulwarks and not one another's. Science does not have anything to say with regards to the existence or non-existence of any divine force it is totally outside it's realm of influence and expertise, but the same goes for religion trying to make science conform to its dogma and mythos it cannot do so without hurting itself and making all those of faith look foolish. So, let science deal with science let religion deal with matters of faith and let us all just get along. Quote
Guest Christopher Morris Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 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 > Jason all life including you started as one living cell that divided into two that divided into four and ect. Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Jun 8, 2:48 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181277828.586709.304...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 8, 12:51 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181272114.692901.148...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 8, 8:20 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > 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. > > > > > STEP 1 Single cell (example: bacteria) > > > > STEP 2 Single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual > > > > reproduction) > > > > STEP 3 Animal cell colony (with cells depending upon each other for > > > > survival) > > > > STEP 4 Multicelled animal (with cells differentiated according to > > > > function) > > > > STEP 5 Vertibrates (example: fish) > > > > STEP 6 Amphibians (example: frog) > > > > STEP 7 Reptiles (example: lizard) > > > > STEP 8 Mammals (example: mouse) > > > > STEP 9 Primates (example: chimpanzee) > > > > STEP 10 Man (examples: me and you) > > > > Calculate the millions of positive mutations that would have been required > > > to get from step 1 to step 10. > > > You asked that question before. The answer was that we have no upper > > bound on how many mutations could have occured because we have no way > > of knowing exactly how many mutations occured that ended up not being > > beneficial. That being said, we know that mutations occur to this day > > and that the rate at which mutations occur, given three and a half > > billion years and multiple extinction events in the meantime, does > > account for the diversity of life we see today. > > > If you really respected any of us then you would respond to our > > answers rather than claiming (ie lying) we never answered your > > questions and asking them all over again. > Yes, we see mutations today. However, the mutations we see are VERY > different than the types of mutations that would be required for a fish to > evolve into a frog or for a reptile to evolve into a mammal. Wrong! Look at the fossil record: we have fish with lungs, reptiles with feathers, whales with legs and men with small heads (or are they monkeys? It's so hard to tell). Evolution occurs one step at a time. Once again you are talking about a subject you obviously know NOTHING about. All you know are the lies Gish and Morris fed you. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Jun 8, 2:55 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181278136.146892.65...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 8, 1:04 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181272873.968955.314...@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 8, 8:39 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article <2q2h63hv86u7q4pl27sr87rncg5qsg1...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 22:26:43 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > > > > <Jason-0606072226440...@66-52-22-82.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > > > > >In article <1181185581.562621.245...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > > > Martin > > > > > > >Phipps <martinphip...@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? > > > > > > > >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. > > > > > > I seem to recall that someone asked me whether or not I had taken a > > > > > physics class so I provided an answer. > > > > > And the answer was you hadn't. Nor have you made any effort to learn > > > > anything by yourself since then. You are, by definition, ignorant. > > > > It's not too late though: stop wasting our time and yours and actually > > > > learn about the subjects you know nothing about. You can start by > > > > actually going back to college and taking Physics 101. You can take > > > > Biology 101 over too while you are at it as you obviously didn't learn > > > > anything the first time. > > > > That's funny. About 10 years ago, I attended a special session that was > > > entitled, creation science versus evolution seminar. It was taught by the > > > professor that debated Dr. Gish > > > Don't describe what he does as "teaching". It is an insult to > > teachers everywhere and, as a teacher, I take that very, very > > personally. I do NOT lie to my students. I tell them only the > > TRUTH. I leave it up to them to make their conclusions. > Perhaps they should change the titles of "teacher". Teachers are called > teachers because they te... . And liars are called "liars" because they lie. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Jun 8, 3:04 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181280789.106035.58...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 8, 2:23 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > My parents were very poor and could not afford to send me to college. None > > > of my brothers or sister went to college. A Christian organization > > > provided me with a college scholarship. > > > You took their money and failed to learn anything. Aren't you > > ashamed? > > > > Before my senior year, I took > > > courses in things like wood shop, metal shop and vocational agriculture. I > > > played on the football team, baseball team and basketball team during my > > > last three years of high school. I learned lots of information in those > > > shop classes. You seem to be prejudiced against anyone that did not major > > > any math related courses while in college. > > > You know no math, no history, no biology, no chemistry and no physics > > and you are prejudiced against anyone who does. > Not true--thank goodness for doctors, engineers and people involved in all > other professions. I also respect people that never even attended college. I respect everybody, Jason, until such time as they lie to my face... as you have. How many papers on abiogenesis did you say you'd read? Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Jun 8, 5:55 pm, "Christopher Morris" <Drac...@roadrunner.com> wrote: > "Martin Phipps" <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:1181258112.140122.199820@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com... > > > 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. > > Just to play devil's advocate: God cannot be proven not exist by science or > this thread since this is not within the realm of science or this thread so > this statement is false. A belief in any God or Gods does not require that > Science or anyone prove it to make it a valid belief for those that hold > this view. Jason himself proved that his god didn't exist when he listed a bunch of artifacts that showed how people used to believe in a wide variety of gods, including his own. Unless Jason also believes in Zeus, Shamash and Amon-Ra in addition to his own god then they must all be mythological. QED > > 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. > > The rest I would have to agree with you on. Gee, thanks. He actually doesn't know anything about psycology either: I almost forgot about the time he argued that he had free will because he doesn't kill ten people every day. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Jun 8, 7:16 pm, Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > psycology psychology Martin Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On 8 Jun., 12:21, "Christopher Morris" <Drac...@roadrunner.com> wrote: > Snipped for space. > ">> 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 > > > Still no evidence though. > > > Martin > > This seems to be a constant issue; both science and religion have areas to > which they speak very well. They each have their own forts and when they > remain within their purviews, they do well. It is only when science attempts > to speak to matters of religion or religion to matters of science that both > fail to accomplish anything but mudding the waters. Both have a place in our > society and both need to maintain within their own bulwarks and not one > another's. Science does not have anything to say with regards to the > existence or non-existence of any divine force it is totally outside it's > realm of influence and expertise, but the same goes for religion trying to > make science conform to its dogma and mythos it cannot do so without hurting > itself and making all those of faith look foolish. So, let science deal with > science let religion deal with matters of faith and let us all just get > along. How is that done without religions giving up nearly all of their doctrines beyond claiming that some kind of god exists? Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 Jason wrote: > 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$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Jason wrote: >>>>> Martin, >>>>> I would like for you to tell me how that young man was able to walk >>>>> unless >>>>> God had healed him? His doctor confirmed that he was healed. >>>> Jason, >>>> >>>> I'd like for you to tell me how that young man was able to walk unless >>>> I had healed him? His doctor confirmed that he was healed. >>> Are you claiming that you healed the man? What is your evidence? >> It's as good as yours, Jason, that's the point. > > Do you have the name of a doctor that can confirm the healing? I have the > name of a doctor that can confirm that young man was healed. That doctor's > name is > Dr. Dino Delaportas, MD I'm talking about the same healing. Prove that it wasn't I who healed this young man who's doctor was Dr. Dino Delaportas. Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 Ralph wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-0706071711380001@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> In article <nUZ9i.460$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. Hey, wait, it was I (Mike) who healed him, not Martin!!!!!! Now let's see Jason prove it wasn't me. Quote
Guest Bob T. Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Jun 7, 11:48 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181200807.202359.9...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 6 Jun., 20:48, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181116070.776867.269...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 6, 11:13 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > I googled "miracle healings" and found lots of sites. This was my > favorit= > > > > e: > > > > > > About & Contact this project > > > > > en espanol > > > > > Search =80 Miracles =80 Prayer =80 Power =80 Science =80 Home > > > > > THE MIRACLE HEALING TESTIMONY > > > > > OF WILLIAM A. KENT > > > > > Giving all the Praise, Honor and Glory unto the Lord through whom this > > > > > testimony is made possible this eleventh day of November 2000. > > > > > Edited this 20th day of December to include the following quote from my > > > > > Doctor, Dr. Dino Delaportas, MD > > > > > > "I rejoice in awe of you and the miracles the Lord has performed." > > > > > What "Lord"? God? Jesus? Neither of them ever existed. > > > > > Martin > > > > Martin, > > > I would like for you to tell me how that young man was able to walk unless > > > God had healed him? > > > Not knowing how something happened does not mean it was a miracle. > > That should be fairly easy to understand. > > > >His doctor confirmed that he was healed. > > > Assuming it happened, the doctor could not know that it was a miracle. > > Scenario: > An atheist attends an open casket funeral. > > The dead man climbs out of the casket and states, "God raised me from the dead." > > The atheist stands up and states in a loud voice, "There is no evidence > that man was really dead." > > The doctor of the man stands up and states in a loud voice, "I am the > doctor that determined that he was dead--he did not have a pulse, had no > blood pressure and had acheived room temperature." > > The atheist replies, "That is NOT evidence." > > I should note that the patient (that was mentioned in the story that I > posted) and the patient's doctor both claimed that he was healed. The > evidence is: That man was unable to walk before he was healed and is now > able to walk. He no longer needs to use a wheel chair. If you do not > believe me, call that man and call his doctor. Jason, you don't seem to understand how Usenet works. When you post the same story in reply to five people, everybody has to read the same story five times. It's really irritating. Plus, it's a stupid story and it shows you don't understand how atheists think. - Bob T. > Jason Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 Martin Phipps wrote: > On Jun 8, 5:55 pm, "Christopher Morris" <Drac...@roadrunner.com> > wrote: >> "Martin Phipps" <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> >> news:1181258112.140122.199820@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com... >> >>> 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. >> Just to play devil's advocate: God cannot be proven not exist by science or >> this thread since this is not within the realm of science or this thread so >> this statement is false. A belief in any God or Gods does not require that >> Science or anyone prove it to make it a valid belief for those that hold >> this view. > > Jason himself proved that his god didn't exist when he listed a bunch > of artifacts that showed how people used to believe in a wide variety > of gods, including his own. Unless Jason also believes in Zeus, > Shamash and Amon-Ra in addition to his own god then they must all be > mythological. QED No, it just shows that they're LIKELY to all be mythological. It's possible that there's really a god out there (but I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to appear.) As long as the proposed god is logically possible (doesn't have contradictory properties and ones like Zeus don't that I can see) we can't completely rule out it's existence (but we can show the odds are stacked greatly against it.) Quote
Guest Bob T. Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Jun 7, 12:58 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <glvlj4-917....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > > > > > > > > <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 23:08:00 -0700, Jason wrote: > > > > In article <kt5kj4-ofp....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > > > <kbjarna...@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. Actually, I believe you are mistaken. Many of the 88% from your poll seem to believe in both God _and_ evolution, which is the mainstream Christian position. You are also mistaken about reality - your oldest ancestors lived billions of years before anything like a human being existed. - Bob T. > Jason- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <l52mj4-917.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > >> [snips] >> >> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 22:46:53 -0700, Jason wrote: >> >>> Let me ask a question a different way. For the sake of discussion, let's >>> say that 100 years from now--a star ship (like the one in the Star Trek TV >>> show) travels back in time. The goal of the Star Ship captain is to >>> conduct research related to the Big Bang theory. The electronic scanning >>> instruments detect a huge energy mass. They start traveling toward it. >>> >>> Question: Will they be able to travel to the area that is very near the >>> energy mass? >>> >>> Will they be able to determine the year and the time that they observed >>> the energy mass on their scanning instruments? >> They would be able to get to a point considerably _after_ Planck time, >> when temperatures are low enough for complex matter to exist. They'd see >> a lot of random radiation and not much else, sort of like being _inside_ a >> sun, except vastly hotter and less structured. >> >> 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? 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. Is it possible for your eyes to be outside of yourself and observe yourself? Of course not. Likewise for something that is part of the universe; it can't be outside of the universe and observe the universe. Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 Jason wrote: > Thanks for your post. I hope that other people also answer the question. I > was under the impression that the mass of material was floating in open > space prior to the time that it expanded. Is that not true? No. Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 Jason wrote: > Unlike yourself, I don't always believe what the scientists tell me to > believe. Nor do we. I done that when I was a college biology student since I did not > know as much in those days as I know today. The Big Bang theory is an > excellent theory. You mean it's TRUE? That it's possible for someone to have NEGATIVE knowledge (since you know nothing now and you knew even less before)????? Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 Michael Gray wrote: > On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 04:34:24 -0000, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> > wrote: > - Refer: <1181277264.352885.81020@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com> >> On Jun 8, 11:57 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>> In article <p37h6310qvbml7o4ugpurslof5iek4a...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 18:03:20 -0700, in alt.atheism >>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >>>> <Jason-0706071803200...@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >>>>> In article <tv5h63p152eiq5lkke28hqjbr3qmes9...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>> I didn't stop learning when I left college. Why did you? >>>>> I did not stop learning. My interests were different than your interests. >>>> Then why do you continue to make false claims about areas of science >>>> that you are ignorant of? >>> My interests were not in subjects like quantum physics. >> The real world holds no interest for Jason. > > If only he could work out how to undo his jacket... Those extra long wrap-around arms can be tricky to undo by one's self. 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.