Evolution is Just Junk Science

June 10, 2007

On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 21:22:39 -0700, Jason wrote:

> In article <1181270320.011847.179720@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

> Phipps <martinphipps2@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.

>>

>> Martin

>

> Martin,

> The reason I had trouble passing math 101 was because I

Have trouble thinking? Yes, we know that.

--

I spayed my pet back in ‘75. Sex is still just fine, thankyou.

• Jim Staal

June 10, 2007

[snips]

On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 11:32:37 -0700, Jason wrote:

> 2004--National Geographic. I wish that the members of this newsgroup had a

> skeptical instinct about evolution theory.

You mean like the skepticism you display? Let's see:

You keep claiming God did this, God did that, without any evidence God

even exists

You keep demonstrating a woeful ignorance of basic science

You persist in adopting unfounded beliefs in the face of cold, hard fact

that says otherwise

You hold up as worthy of respect men who are well-known to be liars and

frauds

You apologize for them as "making mistakes" when there's no mistake

involved, just outright dishonesty

You demand of science a standard of evidence far higher than science itself

does, yet when it comes to religion, you apply no standard at all

You persist in lumping distinct branches of science under the same

heading, despite being told, repeatedly, they're barely even related

You reject the most commonly held views on science - the big bang, for

example - despite mountains of evidence for them, but when it comes to

some new notion which has barely hit the presses and has not undergone

rigorous examination, you jump right in as if it's handed down from on

high

You demonstrate a complete inability to grasp the difference between

evidence of a healing and evidence of God

You lie through your teeth on a regular basis

And all of this so you can hang on to an unfounded belief you yourself

know cannot even possibly be backed up with any form of rational thought,

evidence, or anything other than assertion and wishful thinking.

Yet you have the temerity to accuse us of lacking skeptical instincts?

You have some nerve. Not much brains, but some nerve.

--

“They will not find lasting peace until the come to accept that Jesus

is the Messiah.” --- Steve Asher

“In other words, Christians just like Steve are going to continue to

rape and murder innocent people until they pretend the Jesus god

exists. Their victims deserve it, huh, Steve?” --- Fredric Rice

June 10, 2007

[snips]

On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 16:05:31 -0700, Jason wrote:

> Have you noticed that some of the people in this thread have a deep

> prejudice against people that have never a college physics course while in

> college or read books about quantum physics? They must really hate people

> that have never attended college.

We don't give a flying frig at a rolling donut if you've gone to college

or not; what matters is whether you can think and reason and back up your

claims with logic and evidence. And the fact is, Jason, you can't do any

of it.

Nobody's picking on you because you didn't go to college, they're picking

on you because you persist in displaying the most amazing levels of

stupidity and dishonesty.

--

.... Rush Limbaugh gay? That’s enough to make homosexuals homophobic.

• David Rice

June 11, 2007

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 18:02:19 -0700, in alt.atheism

Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

<Jason-1006071802190001@66-52-22-1.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>In article <dieuj4-umv.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

><kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>> [snips]

>>

>> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 14:42:20 -0700, Jason wrote:

>>

>> >> Gish is a liar and you believe him. Why would I believe your story

>> >> about Prewitt? What evidence is there that her story, if you relayed it

>> >> correctly, is correct?

>>

>> > Her testimony is enough evidence for me.

>>

>> That wasn't the question. You are a known liar, and you hold up as

>> respect-worthy other known liars, meaning that nobody can take anything

>> you say as valid. Since you are, in fact, known to associate with known

>> liars and even accept lying as perfectly acceptable behavior, this

>> suggests that anyone you report on may well also be just as much of a liar

>> as you or your other cohorts.

>>

>> Hence the question - why should we believe her ?

>

>Because she is telling the truth. However, I know that you would never

>believe her--even if she produced a mountain of physical evidence--the

>reason is because it does not fit your belief system--to believe there is

>a God and that he is still healing people today in much the same way that

>he healed people when Jesus was on this earth.

>

Since she has no idea whether any god had anything to do with it, there

is no way she could be telling the truth. The best she can be doing is

telling us what she believes happened.

She has produced no evidence. Keep your false accusations for the time

when people reject actual evidence for a god. So far, none has been

provided so the question doesn't matter.

June 11, 2007

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 17:58:36 -0700, in alt.atheism

Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

<Jason-1006071758360001@66-52-22-1.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>In article <tceuj4-umv.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

><kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>> [snips]

>>

>> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 12:36:06 -0400, Mike wrote:

>>

>> > Strange that there's so little information on such an amazing event.

>>

>> Isn't it, though? I mean, really, if there were an honest-to-goodness,

>> real-live, provable case of a miracle healing, why isn't every Christian

>> in the world screaming this from here to the end of time, as some sort of

>> absolute proof of God?

>>

>> Oh, right, because it's a steaming load of crap.

>

>Actually, God has healed lots of people. If you google "miracle healings",

>you will find out that I am correct.

>

You have no evidence to support your assertion that God had anything to

do with it.

You know that. That is why you are a liar.

June 11, 2007

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 16:21:00 -0700, in alt.atheism

Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

<Jason-1006071621010001@66-52-22-36.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>In article <29_ai.1100$R9.677@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

><mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

>> news:Jason-1006071257370001@66-52-22-1.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

>> > In article <bg8o63lsgkbuk6ioqc8gr4lcjga1roruqt@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

>> > <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>> >

>> >> On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 09:47:58 -0700, in alt.atheism

>> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

>> >> <Jason-1006070947590001@66-52-22-97.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>> >> >In article <1181469394.462447.51330@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,

>> >> >Martin

>> >> >Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> >> >

>> >> >> On Jun 10, 1:55 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>> >> >>

>> >> >> > Since testimony is considered as evidence in court, I also consider

>> >> >> > the

>> >> >> > testimony of Cheryl Prewitt as evidence. If you do not consider her

>> >> >> > testimony as evidence, that is your choice. Have you provided in

>> >> >> > evidence

>> >> >> > that indicates that it is possible for bacteria to naturally evolve

>> >> >> > into

>> >> >> > an animal cell?

>> >> >>

>> >> >> Physical evidence trumps testimony, Jason. It's the only thing that

>> >> >> can be double checked and verified.

>> >> >>

>> >> >> Martin

>> >> >

>> >> >That is true but would you acknowledge that testimony is also evidence?

>> >> >

>> >> Made up stories are not evidence.

>> >

>> > Is a testimony evidence?

>>

>> I'm sure as savvy as you are you have heard the old adage, extraordinary

>> claims require extraordinary evidence. No Jason, for someone to claim such a

>> ridiculous story is true requires more than their oral testimony.

>

>That is an excellent answer. If Cheryl Prewitt produced all of her medical

>records (eg X Rays) and written statements from the medical staff that

>were present when the doctor removed two inches of a leg bone--do you

>believe that atheists would conceed that God healed her?

>

>My answer is NO--the reason--it does not fit their "belief system" to

>believe that God healed her. They don't believe in God. They believe the

>evidence that supports their belief system and do NOT accept or believe

>evidence that does not support their belief system.

She has never produced such evidence. By your logic she is lying.

June 11, 2007

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 17:49:51 -0400, in alt.atheism

"Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in

<1m_ai.1114$R9.461@bignews6.bellsouth.net>:

>

>"Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

>news:Jason-0806072052430001@66-52-22-87.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

>> In article <ukpj63pbk2ivnu6pvi0f1a7inuf3ir30og@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

>> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>>

>>> On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 16:40:11 -0700, in alt.atheism

>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

>>> <Jason-0806071640120001@66-52-22-48.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

....

>>> >Many Christians are hoping that it will happen very soon. You are

>>> >correct-Christions were hoping that he would return when I was a child.

>>> >Even the first generation of Christians expected Jesus to rapture out

>>> >the

>>> >Christians.

>>> >Do you want to be left behind when the rapture takes place? I don't.

>>>

>>> Most Christians reject Rapture theology. Most Christians accept

>>> scientific evidence. Most Chrstians don't repeatedly tell lies after

>>> they have been called on those lies.

>>>

>>> Is there any reason for anyone to think you are a Christian?

>>

>> 2 Thes 4:14 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout

>> with voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God and the dead in

>> Christ shall rise first and then we who are alive and remain shall be

>> caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air,

>> and thus we shall always be with the Lord.

>

>I think that point just sailed over his head.

It's liars like Jason who persuaded me to look at the evidence for God.

It turns out there is none. Maybe Jason will drive others away from his

religion, too.

June 11, 2007

On Jun 10, 6:10 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>

> You misunderstood. The evidence (testimony) is present but the problem is

> that atheists reject (or do not believe) the evidence since it does not

> "fit' their belief system.

I'm sure the former Miss America <chuckle> does indeed believe that

God healed her. That doesn't mean that is what actually happened,

though. Perhaps is was Zeus who healed her, or Vishnu, or Santa... or

perhaps her body healed itself on its own.

> On the other hand, those same atheists accept

> and believe that humans evolved from other life-forms without any

> involvement of God. They have no evidence--but they believe it because it

> fits their belief system.

That's a lie - there is plenty of evidence, and much of it has been

pointed out to you already. Why do you find it necessary to tell lies

to defend your beliefs?

- Bob T.

June 11, 2007

[snips]

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:16:04 -0700, Jason wrote:

>> I'm not aware of anyone who is confused that bacteria are animal cells,

>> other than apparently you.

>

> I was referring to these two steps:

>

> STEP 1 Single cell (example: bacteria)

> STEP 2 Single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual

> reproduction)

Yes, I know, you spewed that idiocy once already, and again, I point out,

amoeba fall firmly into what would generally be classified as "animal" and

are, in fact, cells, so whatever asinine drivel you're spewing about them

becoming "animal cells" is nonsense as they are already such.

> Testimony is considered as evidence in court.

Of the least reliable sort, and under strict and careful selection by an

actually well-informed and educated judge, who sorts out fact from fancy,

among other things - not a bit of which applies in any of your attempts to

use testimony. So stop lying.

> Let's say that the neighbors in an apartment building hear a married

> couple having an argument. They hear the husband say, "I'm going to kill

> you". The argument ends and the police are not called. The following

> day, the wife was shot as she was walking home from work. The husband

> took a shower after he shot his wife and washed his hands with bleach to

> remove any evidence. There were no witnesses present when the husband

> shot his wife. The police are not able to find a gun when they search

> the apartment and all surrounding areas. They arrest the husband and

> charge him with the murder. All of the neighbors provide testimony at

> the murder trial.

> The jury members convict the husband of first degree murder--based upon

> the testimonies of the people that heard the argument and heard him say,

> "I'm going to kill you."

>

> Do you now understand that TESTIMONY is evidence--even if there is no

> physical evidence?

You obviously never saw "Twelve Angry Men". You should. Eye witness...

someone overhearing "I'll kill you", the father found dead shortly after,

open and shut case.

You really ought to stop digging yourself in deeper; you just look more

foolish with every attempt.

--

Trust me when I tell you that if I know I’ll end up in a mason jar on

a shelf in a museum orbiting Pluto, I’ll still follow a woman around a

barroom like a cur follows a bitch in heat. Honest.

• David Rice

June 11, 2007

[snips]

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 13:24:05 -0700, Jason wrote:

> I am not a lawyer but I have attended one murder trial. I have attended

> jury training sessions.

Training is only useful if the subject possesses the ability to learn,

something you've gone to some lengths to show you don't.

--

We all know what Staal’s position on gays is. - Martin Goldberg Face

down. - David Rice

June 11, 2007

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:56:48 -0700, Jason wrote:

> In article <70mtj4-umv.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

> <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>> [snips]

>>

>> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 20:48:39 -0700, Jason wrote:

>>

>> > Kelsey,

>> > In response to another post, I decided to google this term: BEFORE THE BIG

>> > BANG.

>>

>> And you found one as-yet unverified mathematical model. One which, I

>> should note, says that if the concept of "before the BB" is established as

>> meaningful, it tosses you right into another universe... thus negating the

>> need for God to explain the BB or the cosmic egg.

>>

>> Bully for you; you've just removed yet another gap to sneak God into. Not

>> sure the point you were trying to achieve, but somehow I suspect that

>> wasn't it.

>

> Do you still believe that no experts believe that time did not exist prior

> to the Big Bang?

Let me respond by asking you this: what, if any, relationship is there

between time and entropy?

--

“Land of milk and honey?” Great...I’m a lactose intolerant diabetic.

June 11, 2007

In article <f8euj4-umv.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

<kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

> [snips]

>

> On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 20:55:07 -0700, Jason wrote:

>

> >> You forgot to point out how God was involved.

> >>

> >> I assume that is because you have absolutely no evidence that God was

> >> involved.

> >

> > How do you explain why her legs are now the same size?

>

> Because I said they should be, and caused them to magically grow to

> equal length.

>

> My proof? The very same you give for your claim that God dunnit

That is not true. The evidence that she gave to me was her testimony. In

her testimony--she mentioned that God healed her. Her evidence (testimony)

did not mention you or that you had healed her.

- not a

> single shred.

>

> Now, since you believe, absolutely, in claims without a shred of evidence,

> you will, of course, immediately believe that I was, in fact, responsible

> for her healing. Any other course requires that you invalidate your own

> standard of "evidence", namely accepting any half-assed claim that comes

> along as long as there's no justification for doing so.

>

> So, which way do you lie? Do you lie by asserting that it really was God,

> just cuz? Do you lie by pretending that her saying it was God means

> anything? Do you lie by invalidating your own position and expecting me

> to demonstrate I was responsible? Or do you pick a different mode of

> lying?

June 11, 2007

In article <tceuj4-umv.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

<kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

> [snips]

>

> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 12:36:06 -0400, Mike wrote:

>

> > Strange that there's so little information on such an amazing event.

>

> Isn't it, though? I mean, really, if there were an honest-to-goodness,

> real-live, provable case of a miracle healing, why isn't every Christian

> in the world screaming this from here to the end of time, as some sort of

> absolute proof of God?

>

> Oh, right, because it's a steaming load of crap.

Actually, God has healed lots of people. If you google "miracle healings",

you will find out that I am correct.

June 11, 2007

In article <dieuj4-umv.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

<kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

> [snips]

>

> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 14:42:20 -0700, Jason wrote:

>

> >> Gish is a liar and you believe him. Why would I believe your story

> >> about Prewitt? What evidence is there that her story, if you relayed it

> >> correctly, is correct?

>

> > Her testimony is enough evidence for me.

>

> That wasn't the question. You are a known liar, and you hold up as

> respect-worthy other known liars, meaning that nobody can take anything

> you say as valid. Since you are, in fact, known to associate with known

> liars and even accept lying as perfectly acceptable behavior, this

> suggests that anyone you report on may well also be just as much of a liar

> as you or your other cohorts.

>

> Hence the question - why should we believe her ?

Because she is telling the truth. However, I know that you would never

believe her--even if she produced a mountain of physical evidence--the

reason is because it does not fit your belief system--to believe there is

a God and that he is still healing people today in much the same way that

he healed people when Jesus was on this earth.

June 11, 2007

In article <PB%ai.24256$dy1.22072@bigfe9>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

> news:Jason-1006071621010001@66-52-22-36.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> > In article <29_ai.1100$R9.677@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

> >

> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

> >> news:Jason-1006071257370001@66-52-22-1.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> >> > In article <bg8o63lsgkbuk6ioqc8gr4lcjga1roruqt@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

> >> > <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> >> >

> >> >> On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 09:47:58 -0700, in alt.atheism

> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> >> >> <Jason-1006070947590001@66-52-22-97.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> >> >> >In article <1181469394.462447.51330@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,

> >> >> >Martin

> >> >> >Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote:

> >> >> >

> >> >> >> On Jun 10, 1:55 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> > Since testimony is considered as evidence in court, I also

> >> >> >> > consider

> >> >> >> > the

> >> >> >> > testimony of Cheryl Prewitt as evidence. If you do not consider

> >> >> >> > her

> >> >> >> > testimony as evidence, that is your choice. Have you provided in

> >> >> >> > evidence

> >> >> >> > that indicates that it is possible for bacteria to naturally

> >> >> >> > evolve

> >> >> >> > into

> >> >> >> > an animal cell?

> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> Physical evidence trumps testimony, Jason. It's the only thing

> >> >> >> that

> >> >> >> can be double checked and verified.

> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> Martin

> >> >> >

> >> >> >That is true but would you acknowledge that testimony is also

> >> >> >evidence?

> >> >> >

> >> >> Made up stories are not evidence.

> >> >

> >> > Is a testimony evidence?

> >>

> >> I'm sure as savvy as you are you have heard the old adage, extraordinary

> >> claims require extraordinary evidence. No Jason, for someone to claim

> >> such a

> >> ridiculous story is true requires more than their oral testimony.

> >

> > That is an excellent answer. If Cheryl Prewitt produced all of her medical

> > records (eg X Rays) and written statements from the medical staff that

> > were present when the doctor removed two inches of a leg bone--do you

> > believe that atheists would conceed that God healed her?

> >

> > My answer is NO--the reason--it does not fit their "belief system" to

> > believe that God healed her. They don't believe in God. They believe the

> > evidence that supports their belief system and do NOT accept or believe

> > evidence that does not support their belief system.

>

> Then as you have admitted above, there is no evidence that god healed her.

> That's all I have been saying all along.

You misunderstood. The evidence (testimony) is present but the problem is

that atheists reject (or do not believe) the evidence since it does not

"fit' their belief system. On the other hand, those same atheists accept

and believe that humans evolved from other life-forms without any

involvement of God. They have no evidence--but they believe it because it

fits their belief system.

June 11, 2007

"Jason" <Jason@nospam.com>snip

>

> Cheryl Prewitt and the thousands of Christians that have heard her

> testimony believe that she was healed by God.

So what? Doesn't mean it actually happened.

--

Robyn

Resident Witchypoo

BAAWA Knight!

#1557

June 11, 2007

"Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> writes:

>"Jason" <Jason@nospam.com>snip

>> Cheryl Prewitt and the thousands of Christians that have heard her

>> testimony believe that she was healed by God.

>So what? Doesn't mean it actually happened.

You're not supposed to point that out to the TrueBelievers

June 11, 2007

In article <ly%ai.24229$dy1.19382@bigfe9>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

> news:Jason-1006071622440001@66-52-22-36.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> > In article <6i_ai.1111$R9.256@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

> >

> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

> >> news:Jason-0906072014530001@66-52-22-86.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> >> > In article <8kdm63t5jf41ougrgl7o47pmd7ams2ofkg@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

> >> > <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> >> >

> >> >> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 17:06:02 -0700, in alt.atheism

> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> >> >> <Jason-0906071706030001@66-52-22-81.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> >> >> >In article <0g9m63t8iakctu9orvkjpa1msg390daulc@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> >> >> >

> >> >> >> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 15:06:01 -0700, in alt.atheism

> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> >> >> >> <Jason-0906071506020001@66-52-22-98.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> >> >> >> >In article <li3m63djdskll0r6g1am2pr4mm92vela03@4ax.com>, Free

> >> >> >> >Lunch

> >> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> >> >> >> >

> >> >> >> >> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 14:13:26 -0700, in alt.atheism

> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> >> >> >> >> <Jason-0906071413260001@66-52-22-98.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> >> >> >> >> >In article <j8vl63dgeb7gaek2iucf548hn3td0kqicc@4ax.com>, Free

> >> >> >> >> >Lunch

> >> >> >> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> >> >> >> >> >

> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 12:19:10 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

> >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> >> >> >> >> >> <Jason-0906071219110001@66-52-22-50.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> ...

> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> >> >What caused that leg to get longer if God did not heal her?

> >> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> >> Natural processes.

> >> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> >> God has never claimed credit for anything. People make

> >> >> >> >> >> unsupported

> >> >> >> >> >> assertions on His behalf.

> >> >> >> >> >

> >> >> >> >> >Do you have any evidence that anyone else (other than Cheryl

> >> > Prewitt) has

> >> >> >> >> >had a leg that was 2 or more inches shorter than the other leg

> >> > grow to the

> >> >> >> >> >point that it was identical to the size of the other leg. I

> >> >> >> >> >know

> >> > someone

> >> >> >> >> >that has one leg that is shorter than the other leg. One of his

> >> > shoes is a

> >> >> >> >> >platform shoe. Despite wearing that special shoe, he limps when

> >> > he walks.

> >> >> >> >> >Why has his short leg not grown to the point that it is

> >> >> >> >> >identical

> >> > to the

> >> >> >> >> >size of his other leg?

> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> I don't have evidence that Cheryl Prewitt had a leg that was 2

> >> >> >> >> inches

> >> >> >> >> shorter and grew to the same length. I have an assertion about

> >> >> >> >> something

> >> >> >> >> that happened under what are described as unusual circumstances.

> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> If God did this, as you assert, why is He so evil to other

> >> >> >> >> people?

> >> >> >> >> Why

> >> >> >> >> does He refuse to answer their prayers? Why doesn't He allow you

> >> >> >> >> to

> >> >> >> >> learn about science?

> >> >> >> >

> >> >> >> >Do you believe that Cheryl Prewitt is lying about her healing?

> >> >> >> >

> >> >> >> I have no evidence that she actually said this or that anything

> >> >> >> about

> >> >> >> it

> >> >> >> was true.

> >> >> >

> >> >> >This information was taken from the report that I posted yesterday:

> >> >>

> >> >> That's not the same as evidence. Don't keep repeating it. I asked for

> >> >> evidence. You've offered stories.

> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> >After a car accident at age 11, Cheryl

June 11, 2007

In article <vsduj4-umv.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

<kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

> [snips]

>

> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 20:14:53 -0700, Jason wrote:

>

> > A testimony is evidence in court houses in America almost every week day.

> > Her testimony is evidence.

>

> Even in courts, testimony is regarded as the least reliable source, as

> people lie, forget, misremember and on and on and on. They also tend to

> say things that are simply not supported by fact.

>

> A perfect example of that last bit is you - or her - claiming her leg was

> healed by God. Yes, fine, her leg healed, we'll buy that for the nonce,

> but you haven't demonstrated that God even exists, so any testimony that

> it was healed _by God_ is simply not supported by the facts, and thus is

> discarded.

>

> Feel free to demonstrate God exists. Until you do, you have no basis to

> claim he did anything.

And in some states, people place there hands on Bibles and swear to tell

the truth. In those states, why would anyone need to spend time proving

that God exists. If there was a court case related to this issue, Cheryl

Prewitt could produce her medical records (eg X-Rays). All of medical

staff that were present when a doctor removed two inches of a leg bone

would testify. Showing a film of the Miss America beauty contest--would

prove that she was walking gracefully and was not wearing a platform shoe

on one foot.

If it was a rural area of a state in the Bible Belt--the jury would rule

that Cheryl was telling the truth.

June 11, 2007

On Jun 11, 1:02 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <f4gu9b$a4...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

>

> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

> > Jason wrote:

> > > In article <mkorj4-ugf....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

> > > <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

> > >> [snips]

>

> > >> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 18:01:13 -0700, Jason wrote:

>

> > >>>> Thus to assert that space or time exist in or before the

> singularity is to

> > >>>> attempt to impose rules which apply _within_ a system, to something which

> > >>>> is not, itself, part of that system and for which there is no

> foundation n

> > >>>> which to build a case that it, too, follows the same or similar rules.

> > >>> Martin told me something about this in one of his posts.

> > >> So have I. The question is when are you going to turn on your brain and

> > >> let that information filter in, then process it and deal with the

> > >> consequences of it?

>

> > > Kelsey,

> > > In response to another post, I decided to google this term: BEFORE THE BIG

> > > BANG. I did not write down the number of sites that showed up but it was

> > > over 10. I copied and pasted this from one of the sites that I found:

>

> > > What happened

> > > before the Big Bang long has frustrated cosmologists, both amateur and

> > > professional.

> > > Though Einstein's theory of general relativity does an excellent job of

> > > describing the universe almost back to its beginning, near the Big Bang

> > > matter becomes so dense that relativity breaks down, says Penn State

> > > physicist Abhay Ashtekar. "Beyond that point, we need to apply quantum

> > > tools that were not available to Einstein."

>

> > > Now Ashtekar and two of his post-doctoral researchers, Tomasz Pawlowski

> > > and Parmpreet Singh, have done just that. Using a theory called loop

> > > quantum gravity, they have developed a mathematical model that skates

> > > right up to the Big Bang -- and steps through it. On the other side,

> > > Ashtekar says, exists another universe with space-time geometry similar to

> > > our own, except that instead of expanding, it is shrinking. "In place of a

> > > classical Big Bang, there is in fact a quantum Bounce," he says.

>

> > > Loop quantum gravity, one of the leading approaches to the unification of

> > > general relativity with quantum physics, was pioneered at the Institute of

> > > Gravitational Physics and Geometry at Penn State, which Ashtekar directs.

> > > The theory posits that space-time geometry itself has a discrete "atomic"

> > > structure, Ashtekar explains. Instead of the familiar space-time

> > > continuum, the fabric of space is made up of one-dimensional quantum

> > > threads. Near the Big Bang, this fabric is violently torn, and these

> > > quantum properties cause gravity to become repulsive, rather than

> > > attractive.

>

> > A few points.

>

> > 1: That still doesn't help your ideas of "can a time traveller go back

> > in time, could they observe the big bang?" idea since there's still no

> > way to be OUTSIDE of the universe to observe it.

>

> > 2: That doesn't show that anything could survive intact through the big

> > bang (so we still can't travel past it back in time.)

>

> > 3: This idea is still in the very initial stages of being developed and

> > might not even pan out.

>

> > 4: Many mathematical models can be run in reverse and yet not reflect

> > reality. Relativity equations don't prohibit time travel, for example,

> > but there's other models that show time travel is probably unlikely.

>

> > 5: This actually eliminates any need for your god since it gives a valid

> > answer to "what caused the big bang to 'bang'?" Are you REALLY so sure

> > you want to eliminate the last gap your "god of the gaps" existed in?

>

> People in this newsgroup seemed to believe that time and physics did not

> exist prior to the Big Bang. They implied that anyone that believed that

> did not know anything about science. I googled "What Happened Before the

> Big Bang" and found out that several different experts believed that time

> and physics did exist prior to the Big Bang.

Let me get this straight. You googled "What happened before the Big

Bang" and you got articles about what might have happened before the

big bang? That's amazing.

Martin

June 11, 2007

On Jun 11, 12:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181482040.626659.311...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,

>

> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote:

> > On 10 Jun., 00:03, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > In article <4ODai.777$s9....@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

>

> > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message

> > > >news:Jason-0906071313520001@66-52-22-50.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> > > > > In article

> > > > > <DipthotDipthot-294445.11505509062...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>,

> > > > > 655321 <DipthotDipt...@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote:

>

> > > > >> In article

> > > > >> <Jason-0906071219110...@66-52-22-50.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>,

> > > > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>

> > > > >> > What caused that leg to get longer if God did not heal her?

>

> > > > >> Ahem.

>

> > > > >> You are assuming that we accept your telling of the story.

>

> > > > >> I, for one, do not. Provide an authoritative source to support it.

> > > > >> Otherwise, my position is one of doubt.

>

> > > > > Do you believe the lady (a former Miss America) was lying when she st=

> > ated

> > > > > that she was healed by God?

>

> > > > > If not, how do you explain why her legs are now the same size?

>

> > > > It certainly wasn't god, since he doesn't exist. Tell me Jason, you are

> > > > quick to ascribe all good things to god, what do you do with the many b=

> > ad

> > > > things? Are those also in the province of your god?

>

> > > Good and bad things happen. People have free will and in most cases, good

> > > things and bad things happen as a result of people expressing their free

> > > will.

>

> > > In relation to natural disasters such as earthquakes and hurricanes--I

> > > don't blame God. It's my opinion that God created the solar system and the

> > > earth. In most cases, those things are natural and are not caused by God.

> > > However, I do believe God can intervene in relation to those sorts of

> > > things if he chooses to do so. In those cases, they could be considered to

> > > be "acts of God". For example, a group of Christian farmers may pray for

> > > rain--God could intervene and cause it to rain.

>

> > And you know it is all true, because somebody told you; and, as you

> > have stated, that is enough for you.

>

> I had no reason to doubt her. I still believe she is telling the truth.

We have every reason to doubt her and believe that she is lying, just

as we have every reason to doubt you and believe that you are lying...

given your track record here.

Martin

June 11, 2007

"Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote

snip

>

> Yes, Cheryl Prewitt does indeed believe that God healed her.

So?

--

Robyn

Resident Witchypoo

BAAWA Knight!

#1557

June 11, 2007

[snips]

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 16:22:44 -0700, Jason wrote:

>> > A testimony is evidence in court houses in America almost every week day.

>> > Her testimony is evidence.

>>

>> It is to certain things Jason, but not to stories such as the one she is

>> telling.

>

> It's good enough for most of the Christians that have heard her testimony.

Only to the ones who are stupid or dishonest. Which are you? Oh right,

you're both.

--

What the Bible says..[sic] – Ken Young

....depends on who’s reading it. - David Rice

June 11, 2007

[snips]

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 13:49:26 -0700, Jason wrote:

> Cheryl Prewitt could probably produce the physical evidence such as the

> X-Rays that were done in relation to accident and surgery.

Which might go towards establishing an injury and a subsequent healing,

but does nothing at all towards establishing that a god exists and did

anything in the case.

> I doubt that physical evidence or even the doctor's written statement

> would convince atheists that she was healed by God.

Not until you demonstrate God exists. Feel free. Any time now.

--

“We didn’t send you to Washington to make intelligent decisions.

We sent you to represent us.” --- Kent York, Baptist minister to US

Rep. Bill Sarpalius.

June 11, 2007

On Jun 11, 2:49 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181468997.468707.40...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin

>

> Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > On Jun 10, 11:58 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > In article <1181434272.409582.286...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

>

> > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > On Jun 10, 2:58 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > > > In article

>

> <1181371371.821396.211...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

>

> > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > > On Jun 9, 7:07 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > > > > > In article <Qjjai.676$s9....@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

>

> > > > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message

> > > > > > > >news:Jason-0706072057150001@66-52-22-14.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> > > > > > > > > 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.

>

> > > > > > > > Then why do you attempt to disparage the results of such subjects?

>

> > > > > > > I have a skeptical instinct

>

> > > > > > And yet you swallow all the bullshit that Gish, Morris and your

> > > > > > preachers spew.

>

> > > > > Any yet you swallow all of aspects of evolution and abiogenesis despite

> > > > > the lack of evidence.

>

> > > > Stop being a lying scumbag, Jason. The evidence was posted and you

> > > > ignored it.

>

> > > > Tell you what, Jason: what you are is someone who can't do math or

> > > > even perform simple reasoning. Human beings can perform math and do

> > > > simple reasoning. Prove to me that you are related to the human race

> > > > and have shown that the human race did evolve from a lower life form.

>

> > > > Are you related to the rest of humanity, Jason? If that is your claim

> > > > then where is your evidence? What is the missing link between Jason

> > > > and mankind?

>

> > > > Martin

>

> > > I would like your opinions about this article that I found on the web when

> > > I did a google search for BEFORE THE BIG BANG.