Guest Mike Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 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? Assuming the person even earned my respect to begin with, yes, if they were an absolute conman and liar, I'd lose all respect for them. Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <Q62ai.28573$JQ3.11226@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news: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? >> If I see that he no longer deserves my respect. Are you the type of person >> who is so blinded by your suppositions that you fail to notice the flaws? > > I usually continue to respect them despite their flaws since I have flaws > of my own. I don't require perfection. There are exceptions. I once had a > co-worker (nat a close friend) that committed a crime and went to prison. > I never visited him in prison. I.e. you turned your back on him. Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On 8 Jun., 08:48, 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. > > > 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. They are? What is the difference? 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. Gosh that's right. Did anybody say that? >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. How could the doctor possibly know that? I just know you will explain it to us. >However, you accept as evidence that > a bacteria evolved into mankind with much LESS evidence. I know this will be beyond you, but a doctor's opinion about miracles is not 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. One does not know whether to laugh or cry, but one thing must be admitted; your ignorance is invincible. Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 Jason wrote: > 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. And that just goes to show how stupid you really are. What part of "you can't hate something that you don't believe exists" do you not understand? Some atheists might hate the IDEA of god or they might hate that OTHERS believe in a god but they can't hate god itself and remain atheists. Quote
Guest Bob T. Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Jun 8, 11:32 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181301145.679146.227...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > 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 > > I read an issue of National Geographic last week that had a detailed > article related to evolution. Abiogenesis issues were mentioned in the > article. They mentioned a man in that article named Phil Ginerich. Phil is > an advocate of evolution. He has a "skeptical instinct" about evolution > theory. He is not satisfied until he sees solid data. Source: Page 31--Nov > 2004--National Geographic. I wish that the members of this newsgroup had a > skeptical instinct about evolution theory. We do. We have every bit as much skepticism about scientific claims as we do about religious claims. However, it turns out that the physical evidence for evolution is so vast that it is impossible for a reaonable person who studies the subject to deny the reality of evolution. We may never know all the details, but there is no questoin that human beings, along with apes, snails and redwood trees, all have a common ancestor. > It appears that that many > members have a high standard for evidence in regard to whether or not a > person was healed by God. However, those same people have a LOW standard > of evidence when it involves evidence related to bacteria evolving into > mankind. Wrong. We have a high standard of evidence for everything, and even by that standard evolution is an unquestionable fact. If God created humans, it is crystal clear that evolution is the tool He used. > Research that involved bacteria was discussed in the article > mentioned above. There was no information in that article that indicated > that bacteria (in those experiments) has ever evolved into a higher life > form. I read an article about George W. Bush the other day, and it didn't mention that his mother's name was "Barbara". In other words, not every article mentions every true fact about a subject. We know that bacteria evolves - people have died because of bacteria that have evolved immunity to antibiotics. - Bob T. > Jason > J- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Quote
Guest Bob T. Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Jun 8, 11:44 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181308684.166476.160...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > > > > > > > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > > 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 - > > Bob, > I agree that lots of Christians believe in God and evolution. I believe in > God and in evolution. However, lots of Christians (myself included) don't > accept all aspects of evolution theory. For example, only about 12 percent > of us believe that mankind evolved from other life forms without any > involvement from God. Whether God was involved or not cannot be judged scientifically because His interference would be magical, and need not leave a physical trace. What we do know is that humans have common ancestors with chimps, cheetahs and chives. The physical evidence is overwhelming. If there was a separate "creation" for human beings, that creations was of a spiritual nature, because our physical beings clearly show that we are the same kind of creature as the other Great Apes. - Bob T. > Jason- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <1181301145.679146.227390@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > 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 I read an issue of National Geographic last week that had a detailed article related to evolution. Abiogenesis issues were mentioned in the article. They mentioned a man in that article named Phil Ginerich. Phil is an advocate of evolution. He has a "skeptical instinct" about evolution theory. He is not satisfied until he sees solid data. Source: Page 31--Nov 2004--National Geographic. I wish that the members of this newsgroup had a skeptical instinct about evolution theory. It appears that that many members have a high standard for evidence in regard to whether or not a person was healed by God. However, those same people have a LOW standard of evidence when it involves evidence related to bacteria evolving into mankind. Research that involved bacteria was discussed in the article mentioned above. There was no information in that article that indicated that bacteria (in those experiments) has ever evolved into a higher life form. Jason J Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <46692e3a$0$11765$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, "Christopher Morris" <Draccus@roadrunner.com> wrote: > "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. That is true but is unrelated to abiogenesis. According to evolution theory, the first living cells evolved naturally. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <1181308684.166476.160950@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob T." <bob@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > 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 - Bob, I agree that lots of Christians believe in God and evolution. I believe in God and in evolution. However, lots of Christians (myself included) don't accept all aspects of evolution theory. For example, only about 12 percent of us believe that mankind evolved from other life forms without any involvement from God. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <f4blou$991$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > 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. I understand the point. I was under the impression that the mass of energy was floating in open space. Several people told me that I was wrong. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <1181300770.241675.218250@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > 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 It would be great if more of the advocates of evolution had skeptical instincts and had high standards of evidence. They have a high standard of evidence when evaluating whether or not God healed a young man that once needed a wheelchair but is now able to walk. However, they have a low standard for evidence when they evaluate research projects that have been done in relation to bacteria. If they done that, they would realize that none of those research projects have proved that bacteria has evolved into a single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual reproduction). Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <1181324999.455581.39630@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, "Bob T." <bob@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > On Jun 8, 11:32 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <1181301145.679146.227...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > 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 > > > > I read an issue of National Geographic last week that had a detailed > > article related to evolution. Abiogenesis issues were mentioned in the > > article. They mentioned a man in that article named Phil Ginerich. Phil is > > an advocate of evolution. He has a "skeptical instinct" about evolution > > theory. He is not satisfied until he sees solid data. Source: Page 31--Nov > > 2004--National Geographic. I wish that the members of this newsgroup had a > > skeptical instinct about evolution theory. > > We do. We have every bit as much skepticism about scientific claims > as we do about religious claims. However, it turns out that the > physical evidence for evolution is so vast that it is impossible for a > reaonable person who studies the subject to deny the reality of > evolution. We may never know all the details, but there is no > questoin that human beings, along with apes, snails and redwood trees, > all have a common ancestor. > > > It appears that that many > > members have a high standard for evidence in regard to whether or not a > > person was healed by God. However, those same people have a LOW standard > > of evidence when it involves evidence related to bacteria evolving into > > mankind. > > Wrong. We have a high standard of evidence for everything, and even > by that standard evolution is an unquestionable fact. If God created > humans, it is crystal clear that evolution is the tool He used. > > > Research that involved bacteria was discussed in the article > > mentioned above. There was no information in that article that indicated > > that bacteria (in those experiments) has ever evolved into a higher life > > form. > > I read an article about George W. Bush the other day, and it didn't > mention that his mother's name was "Barbara". In other words, not > every article mentions every true fact about a subject. We know that > bacteria evolves - people have died because of bacteria that have > evolved immunity to antibiotics. > > - Bob T. The article that I read confirmed what you stated in your post about bacteria. My point was that the experiments with bacteria have never provided evidence which indicate that bacteria can evolve into a single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual reproduction). Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 In article <1181325227.330987.16000@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, "Bob T." <bob@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > On Jun 8, 11:44 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <1181308684.166476.160...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > > > 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 - > > > > Bob, > > I agree that lots of Christians believe in God and evolution. I believe in > > God and in evolution. However, lots of Christians (myself included) don't > > accept all aspects of evolution theory. For example, only about 12 percent > > of us believe that mankind evolved from other life forms without any > > involvement from God. > > Whether God was involved or not cannot be judged scientifically > because His interference would be magical, and need not leave a > physical trace. What we do know is that humans have common ancestors > with chimps, cheetahs and chives. The physical evidence is > overwhelming. If there was a separate "creation" for human beings, > that creations was of a spiritual nature, because our physical beings > clearly show that we are the same kind of creature as the other Great > Apes. > > - Bob T. I was asked about this once before. My answer is that God created mankind and apes. He used some of the features in mankind and apes such as tooth patterns. Perhaps God should have apes to be vastly different than humans so as not to confuse the advocates of evolution. Jason Quote
Guest Bob T. Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Jun 8, 12:19 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > Whether God was involved or not cannot be judged scientifically > > because His interference would be magical, and need not leave a > > physical trace. What we do know is that humans have common ancestors > > with chimps, cheetahs and chives. The physical evidence is > > overwhelming. If there was a separate "creation" for human beings, > > that creations was of a spiritual nature, because our physical beings > > clearly show that we are the same kind of creature as the other Great > > Apes. > > > - Bob T. > > I was asked about this once before. My answer is that God created mankind > and apes. He used some of the features in mankind and apes such as tooth > patterns. Perhaps God should have apes to be vastly different than humans > so as not to confuse the advocates of evolution. "Some of the features"??? You clearly don't understand. Humans and chimps share 97% of our DNA. Gorillas are only slightly less related to humans, then the other apes are slightly less similar, then the other primates are still slightly less similar, etc. etc. All of life on this planet is clearly related, including humans. There was no separate creation of the humans species - our relatedness to the other apes is clearly established by the facts. Why are you clinging so tightly to the Genesis myth? There is no need to believe in it in order to believe that God created everything. Humans are clearly apes who passed a certain threshold of intelligence and became self-aware and able to think abstract thoughts like "who created us". If you want to believe that God nudged evolution so as to produce beings intelligent enough to believe in Him, that's fine - but to believe in a separate Creation for humans you have to leave logic and reason behind. - Bob T. > Jason- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0806071138310001@66-52-22-99.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <46692e3a$0$11765$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, "Christopher > Morris" <Draccus@roadrunner.com> wrote: > >> "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. > > That is true but is unrelated to abiogenesis. According to evolution > theory, the first living cells evolved naturally. > Jason Evolution theory doesn't address that point. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0806071219000001@66-52-22-99.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1181325227.330987.16000@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > T." <bob@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 8, 11:44 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <1181308684.166476.160...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, >> > "Bob >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: >> > > 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 - >> > >> > Bob, >> > I agree that lots of Christians believe in God and evolution. I believe >> > in >> > God and in evolution. However, lots of Christians (myself included) >> > don't >> > accept all aspects of evolution theory. For example, only about 12 >> > percent >> > of us believe that mankind evolved from other life forms without any >> > involvement from God. >> >> Whether God was involved or not cannot be judged scientifically >> because His interference would be magical, and need not leave a >> physical trace. What we do know is that humans have common ancestors >> with chimps, cheetahs and chives. The physical evidence is >> overwhelming. If there was a separate "creation" for human beings, >> that creations was of a spiritual nature, because our physical beings >> clearly show that we are the same kind of creature as the other Great >> Apes. >> >> - Bob T. > > I was asked about this once before. My answer is that God created mankind > and apes. He used some of the features in mankind and apes such as tooth > patterns. Perhaps God should have apes to be vastly different than humans > so as not to confuse the advocates of evolution. > Jason Makes you wonder why he didn't, doesn't it Jason. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0806071132380001@66-52-22-99.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1181301145.679146.227390@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> 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 > > I read an issue of National Geographic last week that had a detailed > article related to evolution. Abiogenesis issues were mentioned in the > article. They mentioned a man in that article named Phil Ginerich. Phil is > an advocate of evolution. He has a "skeptical instinct" about evolution > theory. He is not satisfied until he sees solid data. Source: Page 31--Nov > 2004--National Geographic. I wish that the members of this newsgroup had a > skeptical instinct about evolution theory. It appears that that many > members have a high standard for evidence in regard to whether or not a > person was healed by God. However, those same people have a LOW standard > of evidence when it involves evidence related to bacteria evolving into > mankind. Research that involved bacteria was discussed in the article > mentioned above. There was no information in that article that indicated > that bacteria (in those experiments) has ever evolved into a higher life > form. > Jason > J I wish our Christians had at least a clue as to the existence of god. Quote
Guest Bob T. Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 On Jun 8, 1:54 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181331557.751428.128...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > > > > > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > > On Jun 8, 12:19 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > Whether God was involved or not cannot be judged scientifically > > > > because His interference would be magical, and need not leave a > > > > physical trace. What we do know is that humans have common ancestors > > > > with chimps, cheetahs and chives. The physical evidence is > > > > overwhelming. If there was a separate "creation" for human beings, > > > > that creations was of a spiritual nature, because our physical beings > > > > clearly show that we are the same kind of creature as the other Great > > > > Apes. > > > > > - Bob T. > > > > I was asked about this once before. My answer is that God created mankind > > > and apes. He used some of the features in mankind and apes such as tooth > > > patterns. Perhaps God should have apes to be vastly different than humans > > > so as not to confuse the advocates of evolution. > > > "Some of the features"??? You clearly don't understand. Humans and > > chimps share 97% of our DNA. Gorillas are only slightly less related > > to humans, then the other apes are slightly less similar, then the > > other primates are still slightly less similar, etc. etc. All of life > > on this planet is clearly related, including humans. There was no > > separate creation of the humans species - our relatedness to the other > > apes is clearly established by the facts. > > > Why are you clinging so tightly to the Genesis myth? There is no need > > to believe in it in order to believe that God created everything. > > Humans are clearly apes who passed a certain threshold of intelligence > > and became self-aware and able to think abstract thoughts like "who > > created us". If you want to believe that God nudged evolution so as > > to produce beings intelligent enough to believe in Him, that's fine - > > but to believe in a separate Creation for humans you have to leave > > logic and reason behind. > > > - Bob T. > > > Jason- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > Only about 12 percent of Americans would agree with you. I copied the > following information from page 20 of the Nov 2004 issue of National > Geograhic: > > "The mouse genome effort, according to Nature Magazine's editors, had > revealed about 30,000 genes, with 99 percent having direct conterparts in > humans". > > Do you believe that one of our closest relatives are mice? Close compared to most living things, yes. Not as close as apes and monkeys. > > The same God created Humans, Apes and mice--it's only logical to conclude > that he would use some of the same features in mankind, apes, mice and > various other life forms. That does make a certain amount of sense. If it's true, it is absolutely clear that the method He used was evolution. You have been misinformed by people who desperately want to believe in the literal truth of Genesis. If you free yourself from this constraint, you might find yourself open to the view that the majority of Christians hold: God created everything, including evolution. - Bob T. > Jason- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0806070004200001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > 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 It doesn't show in your posts. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0706072310450001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > 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. You must have stolen this from your Christian brother, Stooge. Take it from me, I'm an atheist and you can't hate what doesn't exist. You can hate his ignorant followers and there I just might dislike a few of them intensely. Your brother Rayturd, for example, I wouldn't lift a finger to help him. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0706072112310001@66-52-22-14.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <sueh63h0slh8d0oudf83vl7vb8d6tq1vd7@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 20:12:54 -0700, in alt.atheism >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> <Jason-0706072012540001@66-52-22-14.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >In article >> ><DipthotDipthot-63ED4F.18324107062007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>, >> >655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: >> > >> >> In article >> >> <Jason-0706071647400001@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, >> >> Jason@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 healed > her and now both of her legs are the same size. That is evidence to me but > I know that you would not consider it as evidence--even if you seen her > X-rays and medical records. > Jason How is it evidence that god did it? Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0706072012540001@66-52-22-14.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article > <DipthotDipthot-63ED4F.18324107062007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>, > 655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: > >> In article >> <Jason-0706071647400001@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, >> Jason@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. God can't heal anyone because he doesn't exist. If you take a look at the world and it's condition that is a pretty clear indicator that there is no benevolent god. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 "Atheist are Stooges" <Atheist.Stooges@Yahoo.com> wrote in message news:4668b765$0$502$815e3792@news.qwest.net... > > > "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:Q62ai.28573$JQ3.11226@bignews5.bellsouth.net... >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news: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? >> >> If I see that he no longer deserves my respect. Are you the type of >> person who is so blinded by your suppositions that you fail to notice the >> flaws? >> >> > So tell us howler monkey where are the labs and invisible observations > supporting your magic rocks and flying > pigs?.....crickets.....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz A groupie!! I've got my own groupie. Too bad it isn't human :-(. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 "Atheist are Stooges" <Atheist.Stooges@Yahoo.com> wrote in message news:4668b71f$0$507$815e3792@news.qwest.net... > > > "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:l51ai.551$s9.53@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-0706071730240001@66-52-22-47.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >>> In article <693h63l4ncitvvq8shj0783968cf3un28p@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >>> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>> >>>> 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. >>> >>> I respect Dr. Gish because of his accomplishments. >> >> What? Lying and leading others astray? What accomplishments! > Right..... let's all worship evolutions talking rocks and magic monkeys... > Most microwave repair manuals are far more interesting than you, and far > less turgid to read. Any friend of yours is a lousy judge of character. > Seriously, I've come across decomposing dog meat that is less offensive to > the senses than you are. Maybe you wouldn't be such an idiot if you had > enough brains to find water after falling down a well. Wow. Is that supposed to be a form of put-down? It reads like a warped mind made an attempt to speak. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 8, 2007 Posted June 8, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0706072355390001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > 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... . Nope, let's just not call Bullfrog Gish a teacher. 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.