Evolution is Just Junk Science

June 14, 2007

"Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote

snip

>

> Bramble,

> You explained your point of view very well. Please tell me whether you

> think the other members of this newsgroup view abiogenesis as a theory

> that will be discarded when a better theory is developed?.

Why are you requesting that he speak for others?

--

Robyn

Resident Witchypoo

BAAWA Knight!

#1557

June 14, 2007

In article <f4rd13$5bc$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

<prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

> Jason wrote:

> > In article <f4otjc$j2u$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

> > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

> >

> >> Jason wrote:

> >>> 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)

> >> And leaving out the millions of steps that came before and between.

> >>

> >>> Testimony is considered as evidence in court. Someone pointed out that

> >>> physical evidence (eg gun, bloody knife) is more important than testimony.

> >>> I agreed with that person that made that statement.

> >>>

> >>> 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."

> >> No, they wouldn't. You'd never even find a DA that would even think

> >> about arresting the guy to begin with, much less prosecuting him, based

> >> on simply an "I'm going to kill you." Was there even a body?

> >>

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

> >>> physical evidence?

> >> Testimony is simply evidence that the person says he

> >> saw/heard/tasted/smelled/felt something but NOT evidence that the

> >> something actually exists.. But if the neighbor claimed "Yeah, I saw him

> >> shoot her and bury her body right here" and yet there was no body found

> >> (or better yet, the wife is actually standing there, alive and well) the

> >> testimony would likely be ignored.

> >

> > Let's try again:

> > A woman's husband is observed by 8 witnesses going inside their apartment

> > with a gun in his hand and shouting, "I am going to kill that woman." The

> > witnesses hear a gunshot and see the man running from the building. The

> > husband had watched over a hundred episodes of CSI and followed his plan:

> > He was able to get rid of all physical evidence--including the gun. The

> > only evidence at the murder trial is the testimony of the witnesses. The

> > body of the woman is found.

> >

> > If you was on the jury, would you find him guilty? I would

>

> Let's try again:

>

> Several people say they overheard a man say "I'm going to kill my wife."

> No shot is heard, no gun is found, no bullet, no blood, no body, no wife

> has ever been seen (dead OR alive,) there's no woman's clothes in the

> apartment, there's a single twin bed, the guy is a flaming gay man.

>

> Would you convict him of murder. Yes, YOU would but any sane person

> wouldn't.

You failed to answer this question in relation to my scenario:

If you was on the jury of the man that 8 witnesses claimed to have heard

the husband state: "I am going to kill that woman", would you find him

guilty him guilty?

In relation to your scenario, I would find him not guilty since a dead

body was not found.

June 14, 2007

In article <f4re3n$6nr$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

<prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

> Jason wrote:

> > I heard the story on a Christian radio show. I found this story on the web:

> >

> > Vietnam Police Kill Christian Prisoners And Relatives, Investigators Say

> > Added: May 29th, 2007 2:47 AM

> >

> > By Stefan J. Bos, Chief International Correspondent BosNewsLife with

> > reporting from Vietnam

> >

> > HANOI, VIETNAM (BosNewsLife) -- Vietnamese security forces have tortured

> > and killed at least two Christian Degar Montagnards in Vietnam's Central

> > Highlands in recent months and allegedly murdered relatives of religious

> > prisoners, representatives said Monday, May 28.

>

> Amazing that this story never appeared on any reputable news site and

> even searching for the words "Christian Degar Montagnards vietnam killed

> tortured" in google (leaving out the quotes so it would search for the

> words individually) only finds 460 pages (by contrast the words

> "astronaut kidnapped" found 199,000 hits.)

>

> Oh, wait, it's that conspiracy at work again, trying to cover up this event.

Stories like this are covered by Christian News organizations that are

broadcast on Christian radio shows. The regular news media does not

usually cover stories like this one. The national news media usually bury

stories about the genocide in Darfur. In the local newspaper, a story

about Darfur was on page 5--it should have been on page 1.

jason

June 14, 2007

In article <f4rce1$54j$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

<prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

> Jason wrote:

> > Cheryl Prewitt told me that she was healed by God. She stated that she saw

> > her leg bone grow two inches. I believed her testimony. She has gave her

> > testimony at many different churches. Her name is mentioned on over 700

> > websites.

>

> "UFO" is mentioned on 37,800,000 websites. Are they real?

>

> The words "Jason" "owes" and "money" match to 467,000 websites. Does

> that mean you're a deadbeat?

>

> The phrase "pigs fly" matches to 432,000 and "flying pigs" match to

> 204,000 sites. Are pigs now flying?

>

> "Jason is smart" matched to 3,560 sites. Well, that proves the number of

> sites google matches is worthless for proving something.

>

> Oh, wait, "Jason is an idiot" matched 6,490 sites. Maybe there really IS

> something to this whole "mentioned on over XXXXX sites" thing.

Google your full name and determine if it is mentioned on over 700 websites.

June 14, 2007

In article <5dd120F32b338U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff"

<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:

> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote i

>

> snip

> >

> > Cheryl Prewitt told me that she was healed by God.

>

> So? You believe every thing you're told?

In relation to some people, including Chery Prewitt, I do believe what

they say. I don't believe everything that many people say---such as Bill

Clinton. Did you believe him when he stated, "I did not have sex with that

woman"?

June 14, 2007

Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said:

>Thanks for your excellent post. It is one of the most informative posts

>that I have read. I don't believe the earth is only 6,000 years old.

>Do you agree that abiogenesis will not become a valid theory unless

>experiments such as the ones you mentioned are successful?

Yes. It will not be recognized as established scientific theory until

demonstrated in repeatable experiments that are shown to be free of

error.

However, even before then, we have no scientific reason to think that

the chemistry of life is substantially different from the chemistry of

non-life, or that life cannot arise from non-life.

June 14, 2007

Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said:

>In article <5dd120F32b338U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff"

><witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:

>

>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote i

>>

>> snip

>> >

>> > Cheryl Prewitt told me that she was healed by God.

>>

>> So? You believe every thing you're told?

>

>In relation to some people, including Chery Prewitt, I do believe what

>they say. I don't believe everything that many people say---such as Bill

>Clinton. Did you believe him when he stated, "I did not have sex with that

>woman"?

>

Some people think fellatio is not sex.

June 14, 2007

In article <k9h273p8806sfnq9i3hevsje8qufrapnca@4ax.com>, Don Kresch

<ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote:

> In alt.atheism On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 00:24:58 -0700, Jason@nospam.com

> (Jason) let us all know that:

>

> >In article <eig17358isldvc4vhf9pg2rromvhsrn7q2@4ax.com>, Don Kresch

> ><ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote:

> >

> >> In alt.atheism On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 16:22:05 -0700, Jason@nospam.com

> >> (Jason) let us all know that:

> >>

> >> >In article <46n0735npa5v05vudinp6rpte4i50rr7p3@4ax.com>, Don Kresch

> >> ><ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote:

> >> >

> >> >> In alt.atheism On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 13:03:30 -0700, Jason@nospam.com

> >> >> (Jason) let us all know that:

> >> >>

> >> >> >In article <f4pa1r$vpv$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

> >> >> ><prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

> >> >> >

> >> >> >> Jason wrote:

> >> >> >> > In article <opc3k4-7or.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

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

> >> >> >> >

> >> >> >> >> [snips]

> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:42:26 -0700, Jason wrote:

> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >>> Yes, that is true. If I provided physical evidence which

> >indicated that

> >> >> >> >>> her leg bone grew 2 inches--how would you explain how it

happened?

> >> >> >> >> Honestly, by stating the cause - if any, you haven't validated

> >> >even this

> >> >> >> >> much yet - simply isn't known yet.

> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> "I don't know" is not the same as "Yes, there really is a super

> >> >being who,

> >> >> >> >> of all the thousands of such beings described, just happens to

> >> >match this

> >> >> >> >> particular one and he really does heal people, but does it

magically

> >> >> >> >> without leaving any evidence he did it - or even that he exists."

> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> You see how those differ? Maybe, some day, you'll let it sink in.

> >> >> >> >

> >> >> >> > Have you considered that God is giving you evidence that he

exists by

> >> >> >> > healing people? Maybe, some day, you'll let it sink in.

> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> Are all the people that aren't healed evidence that there is no god?

> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> BTW, if I went to a doctor that had as bad of a healing rate as your

> >> >> >> god, I'd sue him for malpractice.

> >> >> >

> >> >> >The people (like Cheryl Prewitt) that are healed by God

> >> >>

> >> >> She was healed by god because you say so. That doesn't fly.

> >> >

> >> >Cheryl Prewitt told me that she was healed by God.

> >>

> >> So what?

> >>

> >> And I reposted my responses to your 20 questions. Are you

> >> going to address them?

> >>

>

> >Thank you for answering the questions.

> >

> When will you address them? Here: let me repost them AGAIN. In

> fact, every response to you from now on will include those answers.

> Every. Single. Response. From. Me.

>

> > 20 Questions for Evolutionists

> >

> > 1. Where has macro evolution ever been observed?

>

> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

>

> > What's the mechanism

> >for getting new complexity such as new vital organs?

>

> Mutation. Natural selection

>

> >How, for example,

> >could a caterpillar evolve into a butterfly?

>

> It transforms, dumbshit.

>

> >

> > 2. Where are the billions of transitional fossils that should be there

> >if your theory is right?

>

> http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC200.html

>

> > 3. Who are the evolutionary ancestors of the insects?

>

> http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC220_1.html

>

> > 4. What evidence is there that information, such as that in DNA, could

> >ever assemble itself?

>

> http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF003.html

>

> > 5. How could organs as complicated as the eye

>

> http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB301.html

>

> > or the ear

>

> http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB302.html

>

> > or the brain of even a tiny bird ever come about by chance or natural

processes?

>

> http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB303.html

>

> > How could a bacterial motor evolve?

>

> http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB200_1.html

>

> >

> > 6. If the solar system evolved, why do three planets spin backwards?

>

> Oh for fucks sake, Hovind: this has nothing to do with

> evolution. 7 and 8 have nothing to do with evolution, either. That is

> in the field of COSMOLOGY and ASTROPHYSICS, moron. Stop believing Kent

> Hovind. He's a liar and a con-artist.

>

> > 9. How did sexual reproduction evolve?

>

> http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/feedback/dec98.html

>

> >

> > 10. If the big bang occurred, where did all the information

>

> It's not information.

>

> > 11. Why do so many of the earth's ancient cultures have flood legends?

>

> Because the started near rivers.

>

> >

> > 12. Where did matter come from?

>

> Where did god come from?

>

> > What about space, time, energy, and even the laws of physics?

> >

> > 13. How did the first living cell begin?

>

> No one really knows, but it's not a miracle.

>

> How did god begin? Yes, god began. No, god didn't not begin.

> Yes, god began. No, god didn't not begin. I'll keep repeating that

> until you understand that you can't special plead.

>

> > 14. Just before life appeared, did the atmosphere have oxygen or did

> >it not have oxygen?

>

> Didn't.

>

> >

> > 15. Why aren't meteorites found in supposedly old rocks?

>

> We do find them there in their remnants. Search for "iridium

> layer" in google. You'll find something interesting.

>

> >

> > 16. If it takes intelligence to make an arrowhead, why doesn't it take

> >vastly more intelligence to create a human?

>

> Why doesn't it take vastly more intelligence than that to

> create god?

>

> > Do you really believe that

> >hydrogen will turn into people if you wait long enough?

>

> Only if you want to strawman evolution, which clearly you do.

>

> >

> > 17. Which came first, DNA or the proteins needed by DNA--which can

> >only be produced by DNA?

>

> http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB015.html

>

> >

> > 18. Can you name one reasonable hypothesis on how the moon got

> >there

>

> http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/moon/moon_formation.html

>

> >--any hypothesis that is consistent with all the data? Why aren't

> >students told the scientific reasons for rejecting all the evolutionary

> >theories for the moon's origin?

>

> There AREN'T any evolutionary theories for it because IT'S NOT

> PART OF EVOLUTION, YOU IGNORANT FUCK. IT'S PART OF

> ASTROPHYSICS/COSMOLOGY, YOU IGNORANT FUCK.

>

> > 19. Why won't qualified evolutionists enter into a written, scientific

> >debate?

>

> Because they don't want to dirty themselves with the laughable

> bullshit of creationists.

>

> >

> > 20. Would you like to explain the origin of any of the following

> >twenty-one features of the earth:

>

> No. I've humored you enough

>

> > If so, I will point out some obvious problems with your

> >explanation

>

> No, you won't. You will just point us to a place that closes

> its eyes and screams "gawddidit" over and over.

> ---

> aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde

> Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

>

> "No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"

> Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"

thanks for your answers--you get a grade of A.

June 14, 2007

In article <f4rc1o$46b$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

<prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

> Jason wrote:

> > In article <WgYbi.3170$s8.2400@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

> >

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

> >> news:Jason-1306071303300001@66-52-22-31.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> >>> The people (like Cheryl Prewitt) that are healed by God are evidence that

> >>> there is a God. Even when Jesus was on this earth, he did not heal

> >>> everyone that needed to be healed.

> >> Mighty convenient Jason, your god doesn't heal all just select ones.

I guess

> >> you need it that way to fit what we all know to be reality.

> >

> > If God healed all people of all medical problems--people would never die.

>

> Then why heal ANY of them? Your "logic" just doesn't pass muster.

Because he enjoys answering the prayers of his servants--such as Christian

farmers praying for rain.

June 14, 2007

In article <g71373dfcekim64ogjoeu0v9but8ngnqr6@4ax.com>, Jim07D7

<Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote:

> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said:

>

> >Bramble,

> >You explained your point of view very well. Please tell me whether you

> >think the other members of this newsgroup view abiogenesis as a theory

> >that will be discarded when a better theory is developed?

>

> If no minds are changed in this discussion, at least they can be

> informed of what science does and doesn't do.

>

> As a chemist, I believe the idea that biological life came about by

> chemical reactions involving only energy and non-living matter

> interacting in accordance with their physical properties (what you

> call abiogenesis) is properly classified as a hypothesis, or a set of

> hypotheses. There are several different hypothetical models for how

> this might have happened, but none of them has been used in a

> laboratory experiment to yield living organisms. If abiogenesis

> happened on earth, it should not be particularly difficult to repeat

> in a lab setting, once the correct conditions are set up.

>

> One reason this field is moving slowly is that there are no obvious

> commercial applications that cannot be satisfied by starting with

> biological materials.

>

> Note: proving abiogenesis can happen will not prove it did happen.

> And even proving it did happen will not prove it was unguided or

> undesigned.

>

> quoting from:

>

> http://servercc.oakton.edu/~billtong/eas100/scientificmethod.htm

>

> Below is a generalized sequence of steps taken to establish a

> scientific theory:

>

> 1. Choose and define the natural phenomenon that you want to figure

> out and explain.

> 2. Collect information (data) about this phenomena by going where

> the phenomena occur and making observations. Or, try to replicate

> this phenomena by means of a test (experiment) under controlled

> conditions (usually in a laboratory) that eliminates interference's

> from environmental conditions.

> 3. After collecting a lot of data, look for patterns in the data.

> Attempt to explain these patterns by making a provisional explanation,

> called a hypothesis.

> 4. Test the hypothesis by collecting more data to see if the

> hypothesis continues to show the assumed pattern. If the data does

> not support the hypothesis, it must be changed, or rejected in favor

> of a better one. In collecting data, one must NOT ignore data that

> contradicts the hypothesis in favor of only supportive data. (That is

> called "cherry-picking" and is commonly used by pseudo-scientists

> attempting to scam people unfamiliar with the scientific method. A

> good example of this fraud is shown by the so-called "creationists,"

> who start out with a pre-conceived conclusion - a geologically young,

> 6,000 year old earth, and then cherry-pick only evidence that supports

> their views, while ignoring or rejecting overwhelming evidence of a

> much older earth.)

> 5. If a refined hypothesis survives all attacks on it and is the

> best existing explanation for a particular phenomenon, it is then

> elevated to the status of a theory.

> 6. A theory is subject to modification and even rejection if there

> is overwhelming evidence that disproves it and/or supports another,

> better theory. Therefore, a theory is not an eternal or perpetual

> truth.

>

> unquote

Jim,

Thanks for your excellent post. It is one of the most informative posts

that I have read. I don't believe the earth is only 6,000 years old.

Do you agree that abiogenesis will not become a valid theory unless

experiments such as the ones you mentioned are successful?

Jason

June 14, 2007

Jason wrote:

>

> In article <5dd120F32b338U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff"

> <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:

>

> > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote i

> >

> > snip

> > >

> > > Cheryl Prewitt told me that she was healed by God.

> >

> > So? You believe every thing you're told?

>

> In relation to some people, including Chery Prewitt, I do believe what

> they say. I don't believe everything that many people say---such as Bill

> Clinton. Did you believe him when he stated, "I did not have sex with that

> woman"?

--------------------

Well, he didn't! Even Monica admits that!

Steve

June 14, 2007

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

news:Jason-1406071420340001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <5ddithF340ot4U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff"

> <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:

>

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

>> news:Jason-1406071240170001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

>> > In article <5dd120F32b338U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff"

>> > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:

>> >

>> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote i

>> >>

>> >> snip

>> >> >

>> >> > Cheryl Prewitt told me that she was healed by God.

>> >>

>> >> So? You believe every thing you're told?

>> >

>> > In relation to some people, including Chery Prewitt, I do believe what

>> > they say.

>>

>> Why? Because they're christians?

>

> In this case, it played a role.

Obviously. 'Nuff said.

--

Robyn

Resident Witchypoo

BAAWA Knight!

#1557

June 14, 2007

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

news:Jason-1406071246330001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <f4rc1o$46b$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>

>> Jason wrote:

>> > In article <WgYbi.3170$s8.2400@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

>> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> >

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

>> >> news:Jason-1306071303300001@66-52-22-31.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

>> >>> The people (like Cheryl Prewitt) that are healed by God are evidence

>> >>> that

>> >>> there is a God. Even when Jesus was on this earth, he did not heal

>> >>> everyone that needed to be healed.

>> >> Mighty convenient Jason, your god doesn't heal all just select ones.

> I guess

>> >> you need it that way to fit what we all know to be reality.

>> >

>> > If God healed all people of all medical problems--people would never

>> > die.

>>

>> Then why heal ANY of them? Your "logic" just doesn't pass muster.

>

> Because he enjoys answering the prayers of his servants--such as Christian

> farmers praying for rain.

Why did he deny them the rain in the first place?

June 14, 2007

>> > If so, I will point out some obvious problems with your

>> >explanation

>>

>> No, you won't. You will just point us to a place that closes

>> its eyes and screams "gawddidit" over and over.

>> ---

>> aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde

>> Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

>>

>> "No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"

>> Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"

>

> thanks for your answers--you get a grade of A.

Just how would a scientific illiterate like you know??

June 14, 2007

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

news:Jason-1406071236480001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <f4rce1$54j$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>

>> Jason wrote:

>> > Cheryl Prewitt told me that she was healed by God. She stated that she

>> > saw

>> > her leg bone grow two inches. I believed her testimony. She has gave

>> > her

>> > testimony at many different churches. Her name is mentioned on over 700

>> > websites.

>>

>> "UFO" is mentioned on 37,800,000 websites. Are they real?

>>

>> The words "Jason" "owes" and "money" match to 467,000 websites. Does

>> that mean you're a deadbeat?

>>

>> The phrase "pigs fly" matches to 432,000 and "flying pigs" match to

>> 204,000 sites. Are pigs now flying?

>>

>> "Jason is smart" matched to 3,560 sites. Well, that proves the number of

>> sites google matches is worthless for proving something.

>>

>> Oh, wait, "Jason is an idiot" matched 6,490 sites. Maybe there really IS

>> something to this whole "mentioned on over XXXXX sites" thing.

>

> Google your full name and determine if it is mentioned on over 700

> websites.

Jason, you need to read the sites, not just count them. For example if you

had done a little research you would have found this blurb from a Christian

apologetic web site:

"In the closing paragraph of certain editions of The Origin of Species,

there appears a reference by Charles Darwin to a

June 14, 2007

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

news:Jason-1406071417560001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <f4s36c$se9$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>

>> Jason wrote:

>> > In article <f4rce1$54j$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

>> > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>> >

>> >> Jason wrote:

>> >>> Cheryl Prewitt told me that she was healed by God. She stated that

>> >>> she saw

>> >>> her leg bone grow two inches. I believed her testimony. She has gave

>> >>> her

>> >>> testimony at many different churches. Her name is mentioned on over

>> >>> 700

>> >>> websites.

>> >> "UFO" is mentioned on 37,800,000 websites. Are they real?

>> >>

>> >> The words "Jason" "owes" and "money" match to 467,000 websites. Does

>> >> that mean you're a deadbeat?

>> >>

>> >> The phrase "pigs fly" matches to 432,000 and "flying pigs" match to

>> >> 204,000 sites. Are pigs now flying?

>> >>

>> >> "Jason is smart" matched to 3,560 sites. Well, that proves the number

>> >> of

>> >> sites google matches is worthless for proving something.

>> >>

>> >> Oh, wait, "Jason is an idiot" matched 6,490 sites. Maybe there really

>> >> IS

>> >> something to this whole "mentioned on over XXXXX sites" thing.

>> >

>> > Google your full name and determine if it is mentioned on over 700

>> > websites.

>> >

>>

>> Personalized Results 1 - 100 of about 577,000 English pages for "Michael

>> Anderson".

>>

>> Your point is, again?

>

> Your first name and last name are common names.

>

> One more try--I found this name in the phone book-try it:

> John Pietrzak

You can't just count web sites, you have to read them. I think I established

that point very clearly in my prior post.

June 14, 2007

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

news:Jason-1406071240170001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <5dd120F32b338U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff"

> <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:

>

>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote i

>>

>> snip

>> >

>> > Cheryl Prewitt told me that she was healed by God.

>>

>> So? You believe every thing you're told?

>

> In relation to some people, including Chery Prewitt, I do believe what

> they say. I don't believe everything that many people say---such as Bill

> Clinton. Did you believe him when he stated, "I did not have sex with that

> woman"?

Quit shifting the subject. What was or wasn't thought about Bill Clinton has

nothing to do about Cheryl Pruitt. Remember extraordinary evidence, Jason

June 14, 2007

On 14 jun, 20:02, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181819353.150364.70...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, bramble

>

> <leopoldo.perd...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > On 14 jun, 01:14, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > In article

> > Yes and not. Abiog=E9nesis is an expeculation, or a theory, with and

> > without any experiments. A theory is nothing more than an

> > expeculation accepted by a majority of scientists. It is nothing

> > more. It is valid in the intelligence that is nothing more than

> > that. An idea that we accept as "probably true", or an idea that

> > "looks pleasant or reasonable". Any real scientists knows that we

> > cannot be sure 100% of any theory. We know that anytime in the

> > future, this or that theory would be discarded. We cannot believe in

> > theories as if they were written in a holy book by someone inspired by

> > god. This is only the case of religious people. They think their

> > holy books are like a chest full of knowledge, with not any errors in

> > them. Other modern religious people, think that in the holy books are

> > mixed some human ideas, quite wrong, with some good ones, inspired by

> > god. This religious people are more sensible. They can evolve with

> > the times, and can correct their ideas as most people are doing.

> > Bramble

>

> Bramble,

> You explained your point of view very well. Please tell me whether you

> think the other members of this newsgroup view abiogenesis as a theory

> that will be discarded when a better theory is developed?

I dont know. Most of the people interested in science know that

theories can be discarded if there are reasons to do it. Many science

theories are defended

with passion, in a similar way religious people defend their dogmas.

But if the persona has a basic knowledge of how science works, then he

knows that any theory is a temporary way to explain something. We

like to have answers, theories that explain phenomena. Sometimes, we

have not the slightess idea about a subject, but sometimes it seems

that we have attractive ideas. We like them and put passion to defend

them. We are humans, remember? We like to have answers.

What you say about fundamentalist churches, I don't like it a little

bit. You are working a lot to create the party of god. You want to

reconquer the state, and to found a fundamentalist dictatorship. And

these are very bad news for me.

Hitler started with much less that you, and look at the misery and

death he begot. You are creating the very foundations for the next

civil war in the US.

Bramble

> Believe it or

> not, Bible scholars do make revisions in regard to church doctrines as a

> result of mistakes made by Chrisitians in past generations. We no longer

> burn witches at the stake. Most churches no longer ex-communicate members

> that don't conform to a long list of church rules. I could discuss various

> other doctrines that are understood in a different way than they were

> understood in the 1700's and 1800's. I won't bore you by explaining how

> they understood those doctrines in the 1700's and 1800's versus how we now

> understand those same important doctrines today. Some denominiations (eg

> Unity) are now nothing more than social organizations and don't even

> preach about the Bible. You may think that is wonderful but many

> Christians believe that is harmful. There is actually a prophecy in the

> Bible that states that in the last days, people [Christians] would call to

> themselves teachers [and preachers] that will teach them not what the

> truth is but instead what they want to hear. That is already starting to

> happen. Watch a television show that is broadcast on Sunday called, "The

> Hour of Power". You will note that the preacher rarely if ever mentions

> Bible doctrines. He is more like a psychologist (like Dr. Phil) than a

> real preacher.

> Jason

June 14, 2007

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

news:Jason-1406071420340001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <5ddithF340ot4U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff"

> <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:

>

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

>> news:Jason-1406071240170001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

>> > In article <5dd120F32b338U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff"

>> > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:

>> >

>> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote i

>> >>

>> >> snip

>> >> >

>> >> > Cheryl Prewitt told me that she was healed by God.

>> >>

>> >> So? You believe every thing you're told?

>> >

>> > In relation to some people, including Chery Prewitt, I do believe what

>> > they say.

>>

>> Why? Because they're christians?

>

> In this case, it played a role. I don't trust all people that are

> Christians such as Jimmy Swaggart. I trust the members of my family and

> one of them is a Moslem--my niece married a man that is a Moslem and she

> decided to become a Moslem.

How do you know which Christians to trust and which ones not to?

June 14, 2007

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

news:Jason-1406071220410001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <f4rbvv$46b$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>

>> Jason wrote:

>> > In article <f4pa1r$vpv$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

>> > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>> >

>> >> Jason wrote:

>> >>> In article <opc3k4-7or.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

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

>> >>>

>> >>>> [snips]

>> >>>>

>> >>>> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:42:26 -0700, Jason wrote:

>> >>>>

>> >>>>> Yes, that is true. If I provided physical evidence which indicated

>> >>>>> that

>> >>>>> her leg bone grew 2 inches--how would you explain how it happened?

>> >>>> Honestly, by stating the cause - if any, you haven't validated even

> this

>> >>>> much yet - simply isn't known yet.

>> >>>>

>> >>>> "I don't know" is not the same as "Yes, there really is a super

> being who,

>> >>>> of all the thousands of such beings described, just happens to match

>> >>>> this

>> >>>> particular one and he really does heal people, but does it magically

>> >>>> without leaving any evidence he did it - or even that he exists."

>> >>>>

>> >>>> You see how those differ? Maybe, some day, you'll let it sink in.

>> >>> Have you considered that God is giving you evidence that he exists by

>> >>> healing people? Maybe, some day, you'll let it sink in.

>> >> Are all the people that aren't healed evidence that there is no god?

>> >>

>> >> BTW, if I went to a doctor that had as bad of a healing rate as your

>> >> god, I'd sue him for malpractice.

>> >

>> > The people (like Cheryl Prewitt) that are healed by God are evidence

>> > that

>> > there is a God. Even when Jesus was on this earth, he did not heal

>> > everyone that needed to be healed.

>>

>> Let's try to answer the question asked this time:

>>

>> "Are all the people that aren't healed evidence that there is no god?"

>

> no

I don't understand Jason, if people who are healed are evidence there is a

god why aren't those who are not healed evidence of the opposite position?

June 14, 2007

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

news:Jason-1406071426080001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <f4s386$se9$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>

>> Jason wrote:

>> > In article <f4rbvv$46b$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

>> > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>> >

>> >> Jason wrote:

>> >>> In article <f4pa1r$vpv$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

>> >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>> >>>

>> >>>> Jason wrote:

>> >>>>> In article <opc3k4-7or.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

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

>> >>>>>

>> >>>>>> [snips]

>> >>>>>>

>> >>>>>> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:42:26 -0700, Jason wrote:

>> >>>>>>

>> >>>>>>> Yes, that is true. If I provided physical evidence which

> indicated that

>> >>>>>>> her leg bone grew 2 inches--how would you explain how it

>> >>>>>>> happened?

>> >>>>>> Honestly, by stating the cause - if any, you haven't validated

>> >>>>>> even

>> > this

>> >>>>>> much yet - simply isn't known yet.

>> >>>>>>

>> >>>>>> "I don't know" is not the same as "Yes, there really is a super

>> > being who,

>> >>>>>> of all the thousands of such beings described, just happens to

> match this

>> >>>>>> particular one and he really does heal people, but does it

>> >>>>>> magically

>> >>>>>> without leaving any evidence he did it - or even that he exists."

>> >>>>>>

>> >>>>>> You see how those differ? Maybe, some day, you'll let it sink in.

>> >>>>> Have you considered that God is giving you evidence that he exists

>> >>>>> by

>> >>>>> healing people? Maybe, some day, you'll let it sink in.

>> >>>> Are all the people that aren't healed evidence that there is no god?

>> >>>>

>> >>>> BTW, if I went to a doctor that had as bad of a healing rate as your

>> >>>> god, I'd sue him for malpractice.

>> >>> The people (like Cheryl Prewitt) that are healed by God are evidence

>> >>> that

>> >>> there is a God. Even when Jesus was on this earth, he did not heal

>> >>> everyone that needed to be healed.

>> >> Let's try to answer the question asked this time:

>> >>

>> >> "Are all the people that aren't healed evidence that there is no god?"

>> >

>> > no

>>

>> Then by what logic are those who ARE healed "evidence for god?"

>

> It's a case by case basis. In the case of Cheryl Prewitt and William Kent,

> it is my opinion that it is evidence of God. That does not mean that all

> healings are evidence for God. For example, if someone develops a common

> cold and the man prays--and the cold goes away in three weeks---that is

> not evidence for God.

Then what is?? You are so illogical and inconsistent in your application of

your rules.

June 14, 2007

On 14 jun, 19:32, Jim07D7 <Jim0...@nospam.net> wrote:

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