Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Jun 23, 3:18 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <bk3o73lml7a9vikfoalkm00u625st6a...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 10:59:01 -0700, in alt.atheism > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > <Jason-2206071059010...@66-52-22-34.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >In article <f5gfvc$sa...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > ><prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > > >> > In article <1182476566.139983.309...@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, > Martin > > >> > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> >> On Jun 22, 1:47 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >> >>> A body is evidence. Two legs that are the same size are evidence. Her > > >> >>> medical records (eg X-rays) related to the car accident are evidence. > > >> >> You admitted to never seeing her medical records. You said you didn't > > >> >> have to, that you believed her anyway. Don't lie now about having > > >> >> seen X-rays. > > > >> >>> The > > >> >>> testimony of the doctor that removed two inches of crushed leg bone is > > >> >>> evidence. > > >> >> What testimony? Only evil men lie, Jason. > > > >> >> Martin > > > >> > I did not state that I had seem her medical records in the above post. > > >> > Re-read the above post. > > > >> You claimed that the x-rays are evidence. They are not if they don't > > >> exist. Have you seen them? > > > >No--but that does not mean they don't exist. The doctor that removed the > > >two inches of leg bone has the X-rays. I don't know whether or not Cheryl > > >Prewitt has copies of her X-rays. > > > You seem to be violently opposed to one of the fundamental concepts of > > logic that has been used by science: It is wrong to assume that > > something exists when there is no evidence to support your assumption. > > That applies to the law of parsimony and to the null hypothesis. If you > > refuse to use both of those concepts, you will be unable to think > > critically. > > Unlike you, I heard Cheryl Prewitt give her detailed testimony. I posted a > summary version of her testimony in this newsgroup. Her name is mentioned > in over 700 websites. You know that hospitals and doctors keep the medical > records of their patients--mainly for legal reasons. She would be entitled to request copies. You do realize that medical journals exist and that a story like this, if it were true, would be in a medical journal, don't you? You'd expect far more than 700 hits on google in that case. My name gets 1,130,000 hits. Is Phipps really that common? Is Martin? Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <75ro73lv0419941tqo8qkse203jtsc993n@4ax.com>, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:38:25 -0700, in alt.atheism > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > <Jason-2206071738260001@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >In article <1182558421.950316.128660@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin > >Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> On Jun 23, 2:39 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > In article <f9un73t8fle3mlf54s3ofrobmm5ahm0...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > >> > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> > > On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:15:00 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > >> > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> > > <Jason-2006072215010...@66-52-22-112.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > ... > >> > > >It's a Bible doctrine based on a commandment--"Thou shalt have no other > >> > > >gods before me." > >> > > >> > > But, according to you, that commandment was given by a different god > >> > > than the one you believe in. > >> > > >> > I did not state that. > >> > >> He's claiming that Allah gave the commandments to Moses. > >> > >> Martin > > > >Jehovah gave the commandments to Moses. > > > And no one but you claims there is a difference between Jehovah and > Allah. Everyone agrees that that the difference comes from the languages > being used, nothing else. Both are names for the God of Abraham. > > You claim otherwise, but have no evidence to support your claim. John Hagee, a famous television preacher, wrote a book entitled, "Jerusalem Countdown". I read the book. He appeared to me to believe that Allah was a false God. He did not have any positive things to write (unless I missed it) about the Quran or Muhammad. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <1182559106.758289.191060@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 23, 2:46 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <f5gmf8$o92$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > > > > > > > > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > Jason wrote: > > > > In article <f5flf3$v8t$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > > > >> Jason wrote: > > > >>> In article <f58ol9$qs...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > >>> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>> Jason wrote: > > > >>>>> In article <5Hidi.1090$P8....@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > >>>>> <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > > >>>>>>news:Jason-1606072200250001@66-52-22-34.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > >>>>>>> source: National Geographic--Nov 2004--article: "Was Darwin Wrong" > > > >>>>>> Since that appears to be the only NG that you have it appears that you > > > >>>>>> purchased it based on the article "Was Darwin Wrong"? Of course we > > > >>> both know > > > >>>>>> that the answer in the NG was a resounding NO! > > > >>>>> Yes, you are correct. I still enjoyed the article. Actually, the > > > > answer was: > > > >>>>> No: the evidence for Evolution is overwhelming. > > > >>>> If the article disagrees with your position, why do you insist on > > > >>>> mentioning it? > > > >>> There was some information in the article that I had not seen before and I > > > >>> had some questions about those issues. The experiments re: abiogenesis > > > >>> seemed to me to support creation science instead of supporting evolution. > > > >>> The advocates of creation science claim that evolution does take place but > > > >>> only within "kinds". For example, a horses may evolve (or change) but they > > > >>> continue to be horses. Fruit flies may evolve into a new species of fruit > > > >>> flies but they will not evolve into another type or "kind" of insect. The > > > >>> advocates of creation science usually call it adaption instead of > > > >>> evolution. > > > > > >>> The author of the article mentioned the results of hundreds (or perhaps > > > >>> thousands) of experiments that had been done on fruit flies and bacteria. > > > >>> The end result of all of those experiments was that the fruit flies > > > >>> continues to be fruit flies and the bacteria continued to be bacteria. > > > > > >> Um... you do realize that "bacteria" is an incredibly huge family? That > > > >> would be like "mammals will be mammals and bacteria will be bacteria". > > > > > >> Tokay > > > > > > The advocates of evolution claim that a one celled life form evolved into > > > > mankind. I don't think that it happened. It's more likely that the one > > > > celled life form evolved into another one celled life form. > > > > See my point? > > > > > I do see were you are driving at but the evolutionary steps between > > > single cell and multicell are quite easy. single cell organisms > > > reproduce by fusion. So, if these "new" cells then stick together? > > > Simple mutation of membrane proteins could do that. Suddenly you have a > > > cluster of cells that sticks together and can't be eaten so fast. > > > > > Simple, see? > > > > Yes, I see. A scientist should take a cluster of these cells and do > > experiments to determine if they evolve. > > Over the past 32 years, thousands of papers have been published > showing that this does, indeed, happen. > > http://www.springerlink.com/content/100107/ > > If every volume contains more than sixty papers then we are talking > about almost 4000 papers published over a 32 year period. Are you > going to read them all? > > Martin I'll speed read them--just joking. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <1182559195.385132.141620@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 23, 2:50 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <f5gm99$o92$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > Jason wrote: > > > > In article <f5fm59$rbc$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote: > > > > > >> Jason wrote: > > > >>> In article <1182348090.555329.173...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, > > > >>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > >>>> On 19 Jun., 18:47, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >>>>> In article <f58ol9$qs...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > > > >>>>> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>> Jason wrote: > > > >>>>>>> In article <5Hidi.1090$P8....@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > >>>>>>> <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > > >>>>>>>>news:Jason-1606072200250001@66-52-22-34.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > >>>>>>>>> source: National Geographic--Nov 2004--article: "Was Darwin Wrong" > > > >>>>>>>> Since that appears to be the only NG that you have it appears that y= > > > >>>> ou > > > >>>>>>>> purchased it based on the article "Was Darwin Wrong"? Of course we > > > >>>>> both know > > > >>>>>>>> that the answer in the NG was a resounding NO! > > > >>>>>>> Yes, you are correct. I still enjoyed the article. Actually, the answ= > > > >>>> er was: > > > >>>>>>> No: the evidence for Evolution is overwhelming. > > > >>>>>> If the article disagrees with your position, why do you insist on > > > >>>>>> mentioning it? > > > >>>>> There was some information in the article that I had not seen > > before and I > > > >>>>> had some questions about those issues. The experiments re: abiogenesis > > > >>>>> seemed to me to support creation science instead of supporting > > evolution. > > > >>>>> The advocates of creation science claim that evolution does take > > place but > > > >>>>> only within "kinds". For example, a horses may evolve (or change) > > but they > > > >>>>> continue to be horses. Fruit flies may evolve into a new species > > of fruit > > > >>>>> flies but they will not evolve into another type or "kind" of > > insect. The > > > >>>>> advocates of creation science usually call it adaption instead of > > > >>>>> evolution. > > > > > >>>>> The author of the article mentioned the results of hundreds (or perhaps > > > >>>>> thousands) of experiments that had been done on fruit flies and > > bacteria. > > > >>>>> The end result of all of those experiments was that the fruit flies > > > >>>>> continues to be fruit flies and the bacteria continued to be > > bacteria.- S= > > > >>>> kjul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > >>>>> - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > >>>> The experiment with fruit flies produced speciation. You have been > > > >>>> told that, but, as usual, you ignore facts. > > > >>> Yes, that is true. The researchers involved in fruit fly research did > > > >>> produce a new species. Did the fruit flies evolve into a different type of > > > >>> insect? The answer is NO. They produced a new species of fruit flies. > > > > > >>> If the fruit flies had evolved into a different type of insect--that would > > > >>> be evidence for evolution. > > > > > >>> Most everyone has seen that famous chart that is inside many biology class > > > >>> rooms. The chart shows a creature that looks like a monkey on the left > > > >>> side of the chart and a human being on the right side of the chart. > > > >> We know it. It is for schoolbooks to get the idea across. Actual > > > >> scientists certainly would not bother with this. > > > > > >> The > > > >>> advocates of evolution do NOT claim that the monkey type creature evolved > > > >>> into various other monkey type creatures. > > > >> Firstly, apes, not monkeys. And secondly, not really apes but the > > > >> ancestors of apes and humans. > > > > > >> Instead, they claim that it > > > >>> eventually evolved (after many steps) into human beings. > > > >> Yes. Apes evolve into different apes, and still different apes that walk > > > >> on hind legs, then apes with less hair, than apes with bigger brain > > > >> cases and bigger brains... than apes we now call homo sapiens. > > > > > >> The fruit fly > > > >>> experiments are not evidence for evolution. If the fruit flies had evolved > > > >>> into a different type insect > > > >> Firstly, what insect would you like? > > > >> Secondly, repeat that experiment for a few thousand years.... and you > > > >> WILL have a different type of insect. > > > > > >> --that would have been evidence for evolution. > > > >>> That leads me to believe that the monkey type creature NEVER evolved into > > > >>> mankind > > > >> Apes, but never mind. > > > >> Yes, we know that you knowingly ignore evidence because of your > > > >> belief-system. Which hardly justifies it. You admitted that. > > > > > >> --instead--those creatures evolved into a new species of monkeys in > > > >>> much the same way that the fruit flies evolved into a new species of fruit > > > >>> flies. > > > >> The offspring in the first generations look very much like the parent > > > >> generation. With time, the differences become greater.... You know this, > > > >> you admit this (here!). So where is the problem? > > > >> Show me ONE mayor difference between the great APES (not monkeys) and > > > >> humans that can't be explained by evolution. > > > > > >> (I know one... but I am interested if you can find it... not unsolvable. > > > >> I know the problem and I know the answer. So lets see if you can find > > > >> the question. A major difference between the great apes and humans. Not > > > >> hard. Google will help) > > > > > > I believe the evidence that indicates that a vagely horselike creature > > > > named Hyracotheriums evolved (after 4 steps) into Equus (the modern genus > > > > of horse). > > > > > > I won't take a guess related to your other question. I am not a biologist. > > > > > Oh, firstly, it was not "four steps". Quite a few more. > > > > > And secondly, the question I asked you need not guess. It is so simple > > > to find. Google "difference ape human". First hit has it. And the > > > explanation. > > > > > You don't need to be a biologist to answer that one. Around here EVERY > > > pupil learns about chromosomes. And most of them even know how many > > > humans have. > > > > > So, need any more hints? > > > If you know the answer, provide it. > > It's a test, Jason. You know, like you presumably had back when you > were at school. > > Martin Yes--I hated taking tests in those days and don't plan to take any more tests that I don't want to take. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <1182559237.898964.32770@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 23, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <dgtn73hm11dl8eval8ne1s1155rl2td...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:51:19 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > <Jason-2106071151200...@66-52-22-87.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > >In article <1182427767.298489.13...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > ><phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> On Jun 21, 3:56 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > ... > > > >> > Remember learning about the Scopes Monkey Trial. The Christians were > > > >> > trying to keep out the teaching of evolution in the public schools. I do > > > >> > believe that the advocates of evolution are doing the same thing those > > > >> > Christians done--keeping out the competition. They have the judges on > > > >> > their side so they will probably succeed. > > > > > >> The Judges of today are in place to prevent such a travesty of justice > > > >> from occuring again: Scopes LOST the right to teach the truth about > > > >> evolution to his students. Eventually teachers won the right to teach > > > >> the truth: you want to take that right away from them and have them > > > >> teach creationism instead. > > > > >They can teach evolution and Intellegent Design. > > > > > What scientific facts can they teach about Intelligent Design? > > > > They have a textbook. The teachers would use the text book and curriculum > > guide to teach those classes. > > You didn't answer the question, Jason. > > Martin Martin, I don't have a copy of the textbook or curriculum guide so don't know what sort of facts are in that textbook and curriculum guide. jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <1182559470.259255.81470@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 23, 2:58 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > Public school teachers would teach ID--if it was legal in that state. > > Then they would no longer be teachers but priests and priestesses > working for the government. There would no longer be a separation of > church and state. The lies of religion are rightfully kept in church > where they belong and where people are not required to go if they > don't want to.. > > Martin There is no Biblical content in that textbook. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:00:41 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-2206071800410001@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1182559195.385132.141620@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin >Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: .... >> It's a test, Jason. You know, like you presumably had back when you >> were at school. >> >> Martin > >Yes--I hated taking tests in those days and don't plan to take any more >tests that I don't want to take. So, if you can't be bothered to learn about science, why do you keep shooting your mouth off about things that you neither understand or care about. Why don't you just stop acting like a total jerk who wants to make Christians look like fools? We all know that you are ignorant and pig-headed. Unless you reform, there is nothing else you can teach us. We know that the doctrines you are teaching have been proven wrong by evidence. You refuse to look at that evidence or learn why you are wrong. Keep worshipping yourself and your claims, we don't care. Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Jun 23, 3:51 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <ms5o73ttf78o2scnk7qtvk1v2njahsf...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 11:39:21 -0700, in alt.atheism > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > <Jason-2206071139220...@66-52-22-34.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >In article <f9un73t8fle3mlf54s3ofrobmm5ahm0...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > ><l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:15:00 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> <Jason-2006072215010...@66-52-22-112.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> >In article <28kj73pr3bpr6c01kt81cl1b3pdae1g...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > >> ><l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> >> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 19:10:26 -0700, in alt.atheism > > >> >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> >> <Jason-2006071910260...@66-52-22-67.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> >> >In article <igij73lncmssoprskphcef08i3nd0db...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > >> >> ><l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> >> >> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 18:44:35 -0700, in alt.atheism > > >> >> >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> >> >> <Jason-2006071844360...@66-52-22-67.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> >> >> >In article > > ><1182380497.144640.154...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > >> >> >> >Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> >> >> >> On Jun 21, 3:13 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> >> >> >> > In article > > <1182348318.114973.155...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > > >> >> >> >> > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > >> >> >> >> > > On 19 Jun., 19:08, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> >> >> >> > > > In article <4677E977.68603...@osu.edu>, Jim Burns > > >> >> >> ><burns...@osu.edu> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> > > > > Jason wrote: > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > In [respose to] article > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > <1182230648.471813.37...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > George Chen <georgech...@yahoo.com> > > >> >> >> >> > > > > [...] > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > I feel sorry for all of the people that will go to hell > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > instead of going to heaven. > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > How do you feel when you realize you are more > compassionate, > > >> >> >> >> > > > > a BETTER PERSON, than the God you believe in, even as > > >> >> >> >> > > > > sinful as you are? > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > Jason, a lot of people have told you that creationism is > > >> >> >> >> > > > > bad science, and it is. But, beyond that, you should be > > >> >> >> >> > > > > able to realize, even without a single science course, > > >> >> >> >> > > > > that biblical literalism is much worse theology than > > >> >> >> >> > > > > it is science. > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > Jim Burns > > > >> >> >> >> > > > Jim, > > >> >> >> >> > > > I understand your point but disagree with you. God does > > >not want > > >> >> >> >people to > > >> >> >> >> > > > go to hell (John 3:16). If people go to hell, it is NOT > > >> >God's fault. > > > >> >> >> >> > > Of course it is. He created hell. He can let everybody out. > > > >> >> >> >> > > > Instead, it is the fault of the people that turned > their backs > > >> >> >on God. > > >> >> >> >> > > > Would atheists be happy in heaven? I doubt it. Heaven is for > > >> >> >people that > > >> >> >> >> > > > enjoy worshipping God. I doubt that atheists would enjoy > > >> >> >worshipping God > > >> >> >> >> > > > or following his rules. > > > >> >> >> >> > > Atheists do not turn their backs on god. > > > >> >> >> >> > They don't even believe that God exists which is even worse than > > >> >turning > > >> >> >> >> > their backs on God. > > > >> >> >> >> Are you turing you back on Zeus? > > > >> >> >> >> Martin > > > >> >> >> >Yes--and every other false God. > > > >> >> >> Could you explain to us what standard of evidence you use for > > >> >> >> determining which gods are true and which are false? > > > >> >> >It's mainly based on faith. Books have been written on this subject. > > > >> >> So you claim that the god you believe in is true but the ones you don't > > >> >> believe in are false. Why should anyone be persuaded? > > > >> >It's a Bible doctrine based on a commandment--"Thou shalt have no other > > >> >gods before me." > > > >> But, according to you, that commandment was given by a different god > > >> than the one you believe in. > > > >I did not state that. > > > Do you worship the God of Israel or the Triune God? You are the one who > > insisted, contrary to the doctrines of Judaism, Christianity, Islam and > > Bahai, that they don't all worship the God of Abraham. Since you insist > > on that, you'll have to come up with a better explanation of your > > doctrine than "I say so, so there" which is where you are right now. > > The Bible is the only evidence that I have. Your book is not evidence. > The Bible makes it clear that > the God of Abraham is the true God. The Bible contains the word of God. If > people have a different holy book other than the Bible--they are > worshipping a false God. Why do you not consider THEIR book to be evidence supporting their beliefs. Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <1182559318.400394.79270@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 23, 2:55 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <sbtn73187me30fr561n1btfpo0u3sho...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 16:33:19 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > <Jason-2106071633200...@66-52-22-97.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > >In article <BnBei.158$n9...@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > ><mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > > >>news:Jason-2106071151200001@66-52-22-87.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > > > ... > > > > > >> > They can teach evolution and Intellegent Design. > > > > > >> You never did tell me what science there is in ID. I assume that as an ID > > > >> supporter you would know such things. For example, what is the difference > > > >> between intelligent and non-intelligent design? How do we test for a > > theory > > > >> of ID? How do we search for the designer? What steps can we use to > > find the > > > >> designer? This is an honest question and one that all ID proponents must > > > >> answer if there is to be a theory of ID. > > > > > >The course would be to cover the basics of Intelligent Design. They have a > > > >textbook entitled, "Of Panda and People". The textbook has 170 pages and > > > >no Biblical content. The textbook contains interpretations of classic > > > >evidences in harmony with the creation model. As far as I know, God is not > > > >mentioned as the intelligent designer as far as the course is concerned. > > > >Instead, the term "intelligent designer" is used instead of "God". This > > > >was done so the book and course could not be called "religion" by the > > > >advocates of evolution. The plan did not work. The advocates of evolution > > > >do not would children to learn about intelligent design since they are > > > >afraid that children would realize that it makes more sense than > > > >evolution. The advocates of evolution do not want competition. > > > > > So it doesn't bother you that the authors of _Of Pandas and People_ are > > > liars? It doesn't bother you that they don't care at all about the First > > > Amendment? It doesn't bother you that they lied to a judge in a federal > > > trial? > > > > > Tell me again why you claim to be a Christian. > > > > There is a law. There goal was to comply with the law. > > No, their goal was to get around the law, but they didn't fool > anybody. As you said yourself, even children would know that > "intelligent design" is religion in disguise. > > Martin Martin, You failed to tell me your opinion about the Roman Empire site that I referred you to. jason Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Jun 23, 3:56 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <f5h830$ll...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > In article <dqtn7352n0b5t4j7lumloc1fqbobot5...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 10:47:14 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> <Jason-2106071047150...@66-52-22-87.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >>> In article <f5dto1$74...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > >>> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >>>> Jason wrote: > > >>>>> In article <1182379707.534130.141...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > Martin > > >>>>> Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>> On Jun 21, 3:11 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >>>>>>> In article <1182348182.409232.265...@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > > >>>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > >>>>>>>> On 19 Jun., 18:50, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> In article <f58p6o$rf...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > >>>>>>>>> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> Jason wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> In article <dhia73p7j846pbim1ektn3h75dm58dr...@4ax.com>, > Free Lunch > > >>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 21:50:26 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > >>>>>>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <Jason-1606072150260...@66-52-22-34.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <7c29735s3e2ff7nlm8mqtbeq7lnihmu...@4ax.com>, > > >>>>> Free Lunch > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ... > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Belief is _never_ evidence under any circumstance. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you comprehend that simple fact? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> When I was called for jury duty, we all had to listen to the > > >>>>> judge = > > >>>>>>>> tell us > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> some of the same information that you mentioned in your post. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Yet your posts show a total disregard for justice. You have > > > made it > > >>>>>>>>>>>> clear that you would rather hang an innocent man than not > > >>>>> find anyone > > >>>>>>>>>>>> guilty of a crime. > > >>>>>>>>>>> I would make the judgement based on the physical evidence and the > > >>>>>>>>>>> testimonies of the witnesses. I agree that I would be > > >>>>> pro-prosecution= > > >>>>>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>>>> would not want to be responsible for sending an innocent man > > >>>>> to priso= > > >>>>>>>> n=2E > > >>>>>>>>>>> That is the reason I would listen to the testimony and examine the > > >>>>>>>>>>> physical evidence. > > >>>>>>>>>> What physical evidence? You already claimed you'd send the man > > >>>>> to prison > > >>>>>>>>>> for life based on nothing more than 8 people saying "we heard > > > him say > > >>>>>>>>>> 'I'll kill her' and then saw him walk into the room and fire > a gun." > > >>>>>>>>> In that case, there would have been NO physical evidence to > > > examine. In > > >>>>>>>>> the above post, the question appeared to me to be unrelated to the > > >>>>>>>>> scenario that I mentioned in another post. In most cases, physical > > >>>>>>>>> evidence is involved. Yes, I would have voted to convict the > > > husband of > > >>>>>>>>> that murder. > > >>>>>>>> You have totally and, no doubt, delibrately missed the point that > > >>>>>>>> there was no evidence of a murder let alone evidence against the > > >>>>>>>> person charged. > > >>>>>>> I disagree. > > >>>>>> You can disagree that 2+2=4 but that doesn't make it 5. > > >>>>> That is true. Even if all other members of the jury disagreed with me--I > > >>>>> would still have voted to convict him based on the testimony > > > (evidence) of > > >>>>> the witnesses that observed him enter the apartment with a gun and > > > hearing > > >>>>> a shot. The O.J. defense of "some other guy did it" would not work with > > >>>>> me. > > >>>> There wasn't even evidence in your hypothetical (if ALL there was was 8 > > >>>> people saying "we heard a threat and a gunshot.") that anything was done > > >>>> to begin with. You seem to keep ignoring the fact that a body IS > > >>>> evidence. So was there evidence here or JUST testimony? > > >>> A body is evidence. Two legs that are the same size are evidence. Her > > >>> medical records (eg X-rays) related to the car accident are evidence. The > > >>> testimony of the doctor that removed two inches of crushed leg bone is > > >>> evidence. > > > >> Where is the evidence? All I have is your hearsay and you've > > >> demonstrated that you cannot be trusted. > > > > I don't have the evidence. Cheryl Prewitt and the doctor that removed two > > > inches of leg bone have the evidence. > > > They do? How do you know? Have you seen it? > > > She has written a book and her > > > testimony is on the internet. > > > So? Joanne Rowling wrote a book (several of them, in fact) about a young > > wizard named "Harry Potter." Does that mean broomsticks can fly and > > there's a cloak of invisibility? > > > > Her name is mentioned in over 700 websites. > > > And mine is mentioned on over 728,000. Your point is? > > Are you saying Stop asking what people are saying and read what they've said. > that you have evidence indicating that the doctor that > removed two inches of leg bone destroyed her X-rays and medical records? Do you? Do you have any evidence at all supporting her supposed claim that any bone whatsoever was removed? Martin Quote
Guest 655321 Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <Jason-2106071912040001@66-52-22-113.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > They have a 170 page textbook Argumentum ad paginum. -- 655321 "We are heroes in error" -- Ahmad Chalabi Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <1182560140.987141.276660@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 23, 3:18 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <bk3o73lml7a9vikfoalkm00u625st6a...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 10:59:01 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > <Jason-2206071059010...@66-52-22-34.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > >In article <f5gfvc$sa...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > ><prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Jason wrote: > > > >> > In article <1182476566.139983.309...@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, > > Martin > > > >> > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > >> >> On Jun 22, 1:47 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > >> >>> A body is evidence. Two legs that are the same size are evidence. Her > > > >> >>> medical records (eg X-rays) related to the car accident are evidence. > > > >> >> You admitted to never seeing her medical records. You said you didn't > > > >> >> have to, that you believed her anyway. Don't lie now about having > > > >> >> seen X-rays. > > > > > >> >>> The > > > >> >>> testimony of the doctor that removed two inches of crushed leg bone is > > > >> >>> evidence. > > > >> >> What testimony? Only evil men lie, Jason. > > > > > >> >> Martin > > > > > >> > I did not state that I had seem her medical records in the above post. > > > >> > Re-read the above post. > > > > > >> You claimed that the x-rays are evidence. They are not if they don't > > > >> exist. Have you seen them? > > > > > >No--but that does not mean they don't exist. The doctor that removed the > > > >two inches of leg bone has the X-rays. I don't know whether or not Cheryl > > > >Prewitt has copies of her X-rays. > > > > > You seem to be violently opposed to one of the fundamental concepts of > > > logic that has been used by science: It is wrong to assume that > > > something exists when there is no evidence to support your assumption. > > > That applies to the law of parsimony and to the null hypothesis. If you > > > refuse to use both of those concepts, you will be unable to think > > > critically. > > > > Unlike you, I heard Cheryl Prewitt give her detailed testimony. I posted a > > summary version of her testimony in this newsgroup. Her name is mentioned > > in over 700 websites. You know that hospitals and doctors keep the medical > > records of their patients--mainly for legal reasons. > > She would be entitled to request copies. > > You do realize that medical journals exist and that a story like this, > if it were true, would be in a medical journal, don't you? You'd > expect far more than 700 hits on google in that case. My name gets > 1,130,000 hits. Is Phipps really that common? Is Martin? > > Martin I spelled her name Cheryl Pruitt instead of the proper spelling of Cheryl Prewitt and got over 20 hits. Her story might be in medical journals. I would not even know how to find out. It would be a waste of time since I doubt if anyone in this newsgroup would ever believe anyone was healed by God. If you googled "miracle healings" you would find hundreds of cases of miracle healings but you don't accept that sort of evidence. jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <1182560940.754588.25260@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 23, 3:56 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <f5h830$ll...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > Jason wrote: > > > > In article <dqtn7352n0b5t4j7lumloc1fqbobot5...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 10:47:14 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > >> <Jason-2106071047150...@66-52-22-87.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > >>> In article <f5dto1$74...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > >>> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>> Jason wrote: > > > >>>>> In article <1182379707.534130.141...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > > Martin > > > >>>>> Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>> On Jun 21, 3:11 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >>>>>>> In article <1182348182.409232.265...@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > > > >>>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> On 19 Jun., 18:50, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>> In article <f58p6o$rf...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > >>>>>>>>> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>> Jason wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>> In article <dhia73p7j846pbim1ektn3h75dm58dr...@4ax.com>, > > Free Lunch > > > >>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 21:50:26 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <Jason-1606072150260...@66-52-22-34.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <7c29735s3e2ff7nlm8mqtbeq7lnihmu...@4ax.com>, > > > >>>>> Free Lunch > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ... > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Belief is _never_ evidence under any circumstance. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you comprehend that simple fact? > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> When I was called for jury duty, we all had to listen to the > > > >>>>> judge = > > > >>>>>>>> tell us > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> some of the same information that you mentioned in your post. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Yet your posts show a total disregard for justice. You have > > > > made it > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> clear that you would rather hang an innocent man than not > > > >>>>> find anyone > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> guilty of a crime. > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I would make the judgement based on the physical evidence and the > > > >>>>>>>>>>> testimonies of the witnesses. I agree that I would be > > > >>>>> pro-prosecution= > > > >>>>>>>> but > > > >>>>>>>>>>> would not want to be responsible for sending an innocent man > > > >>>>> to priso= > > > >>>>>>>> n=2E > > > >>>>>>>>>>> That is the reason I would listen to the testimony and examine the > > > >>>>>>>>>>> physical evidence. > > > >>>>>>>>>> What physical evidence? You already claimed you'd send the man > > > >>>>> to prison > > > >>>>>>>>>> for life based on nothing more than 8 people saying "we heard > > > > him say > > > >>>>>>>>>> 'I'll kill her' and then saw him walk into the room and fire > > a gun." > > > >>>>>>>>> In that case, there would have been NO physical evidence to > > > > examine. In > > > >>>>>>>>> the above post, the question appeared to me to be unrelated to the > > > >>>>>>>>> scenario that I mentioned in another post. In most cases, physical > > > >>>>>>>>> evidence is involved. Yes, I would have voted to convict the > > > > husband of > > > >>>>>>>>> that murder. > > > >>>>>>>> You have totally and, no doubt, delibrately missed the point that > > > >>>>>>>> there was no evidence of a murder let alone evidence against the > > > >>>>>>>> person charged. > > > >>>>>>> I disagree. > > > >>>>>> You can disagree that 2+2=4 but that doesn't make it 5. > > > > >>>>> That is true. Even if all other members of the jury disagreed with me--I > > > >>>>> would still have voted to convict him based on the testimony > > > > (evidence) of > > > >>>>> the witnesses that observed him enter the apartment with a gun and > > > > hearing > > > >>>>> a shot. The O.J. defense of "some other guy did it" would not work with > > > >>>>> me. > > > >>>> There wasn't even evidence in your hypothetical (if ALL there was was 8 > > > >>>> people saying "we heard a threat and a gunshot.") that anything was done > > > >>>> to begin with. You seem to keep ignoring the fact that a body IS > > > >>>> evidence. So was there evidence here or JUST testimony? > > > >>> A body is evidence. Two legs that are the same size are evidence. Her > > > >>> medical records (eg X-rays) related to the car accident are evidence. The > > > >>> testimony of the doctor that removed two inches of crushed leg bone is > > > >>> evidence. > > > > > >> Where is the evidence? All I have is your hearsay and you've > > > >> demonstrated that you cannot be trusted. > > > > > > I don't have the evidence. Cheryl Prewitt and the doctor that removed two > > > > inches of leg bone have the evidence. > > > > > They do? How do you know? Have you seen it? > > > > > She has written a book and her > > > > testimony is on the internet. > > > > > So? Joanne Rowling wrote a book (several of them, in fact) about a young > > > wizard named "Harry Potter." Does that mean broomsticks can fly and > > > there's a cloak of invisibility? > > > > > > Her name is mentioned in over 700 websites. > > > > > And mine is mentioned on over 728,000. Your point is? > > > > Are you saying > > Stop asking what people are saying and read what they've said. > > > that you have evidence indicating that the doctor that > > removed two inches of leg bone destroyed her X-rays and medical records? > > Do you? Do you have any evidence at all supporting her supposed claim > that any bone whatsoever was removed? > > Martin No--just her testimony. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:58:14 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-2206071758150001@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <75ro73lv0419941tqo8qkse203jtsc993n@4ax.com>, Free Lunch ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:38:25 -0700, in alt.atheism >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> <Jason-2206071738260001@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >In article <1182558421.950316.128660@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin >> >Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> >> On Jun 23, 2:39 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> > In article <f9un73t8fle3mlf54s3ofrobmm5ahm0...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> >> > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> > > On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:15:00 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism >> >> > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> > > <Jason-2006072215010...@66-52-22-112.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> ... >> >> > > >It's a Bible doctrine based on a commandment--"Thou shalt have >no other >> >> > > >gods before me." >> >> > >> >> > > But, according to you, that commandment was given by a different god >> >> > > than the one you believe in. >> >> > >> >> > I did not state that. >> >> >> >> He's claiming that Allah gave the commandments to Moses. >> >> >> >> Martin >> > >> >Jehovah gave the commandments to Moses. >> > >> And no one but you claims there is a difference between Jehovah and >> Allah. Everyone agrees that that the difference comes from the languages >> being used, nothing else. Both are names for the God of Abraham. >> >> You claim otherwise, but have no evidence to support your claim. > >John Hagee, a famous television preacher, wrote a book entitled, >"Jerusalem Countdown". I read the book. He appeared to me to believe that >Allah was a false God. Since you are an unreliable witness, I have no idea if it is true or not that he wrote this, but it is wrong. Allah is the Arabic name for the God of Abraham, nothing else. >He did not have any positive things to write >(unless I missed it) about the Quran or Muhammad. You are confusing the religion with the God it worships. They worship the God of Abraham. If you think that the God of Abraham is a false god, just say so. The Quran is not God. Muhammed is not God. Learn to understand words and concepts before you spout off. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <1182560736.318058.6100@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 23, 3:51 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <ms5o73ttf78o2scnk7qtvk1v2njahsf...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 11:39:21 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > <Jason-2206071139220...@66-52-22-34.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > >In article <f9un73t8fle3mlf54s3ofrobmm5ahm0...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > ><l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:15:00 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > >> <Jason-2006072215010...@66-52-22-112.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > >> >In article <28kj73pr3bpr6c01kt81cl1b3pdae1g...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > >> ><l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 19:10:26 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > >> >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > >> >> <Jason-2006071910260...@66-52-22-67.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > >> >> >In article <igij73lncmssoprskphcef08i3nd0db...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > >> >> ><l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 18:44:35 -0700, in alt.atheism > > > >> >> >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > >> >> >> <Jason-2006071844360...@66-52-22-67.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > >> >> >> >In article > > > ><1182380497.144640.154...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > >> >> >> >Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> >> On Jun 21, 3:13 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >> >> >> >> > In article > > > > <1182348318.114973.155...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > > > >> >> >> >> > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > >> >> >> >> > > On 19 Jun., 19:08, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >> >> >> >> > > > In article <4677E977.68603...@osu.edu>, Jim Burns > > > >> >> >> ><burns...@osu.edu> wrote: > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > Jason wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > In [respose to] article > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > <1182230648.471813.37...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > George Chen <georgech...@yahoo.com> > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > [...] > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > I feel sorry for all of the people that will go to hell > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > > instead of going to heaven. > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > How do you feel when you realize you are more > > compassionate, > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > a BETTER PERSON, than the God you believe in, even as > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > sinful as you are? > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > Jason, a lot of people have told you that creationism is > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > bad science, and it is. But, beyond that, you should be > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > able to realize, even without a single science course, > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > that biblical literalism is much worse theology than > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > it is science. > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > > Jim Burns > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > Jim, > > > >> >> >> >> > > > I understand your point but disagree with you. God does > > > >not want > > > >> >> >> >people to > > > >> >> >> >> > > > go to hell (John 3:16). If people go to hell, it is NOT > > > >> >God's fault. > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > Of course it is. He created hell. He can let everybody out. > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > > Instead, it is the fault of the people that turned > > their backs > > > >> >> >on God. > > > >> >> >> >> > > > Would atheists be happy in heaven? I doubt it. Heaven is for > > > >> >> >people that > > > >> >> >> >> > > > enjoy worshipping God. I doubt that atheists would enjoy > > > >> >> >worshipping God > > > >> >> >> >> > > > or following his rules. > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > Atheists do not turn their backs on god. > > > > > >> >> >> >> > They don't even believe that God exists which is even worse than > > > >> >turning > > > >> >> >> >> > their backs on God. > > > > > >> >> >> >> Are you turing you back on Zeus? > > > > > >> >> >> >> Martin > > > > > >> >> >> >Yes--and every other false God. > > > > > >> >> >> Could you explain to us what standard of evidence you use for > > > >> >> >> determining which gods are true and which are false? > > > > > >> >> >It's mainly based on faith. Books have been written on this subject. > > > > > >> >> So you claim that the god you believe in is true but the ones you don't > > > >> >> believe in are false. Why should anyone be persuaded? > > > > > >> >It's a Bible doctrine based on a commandment--"Thou shalt have no other > > > >> >gods before me." > > > > > >> But, according to you, that commandment was given by a different god > > > >> than the one you believe in. > > > > > >I did not state that. > > > > > Do you worship the God of Israel or the Triune God? You are the one who > > > insisted, contrary to the doctrines of Judaism, Christianity, Islam and > > > Bahai, that they don't all worship the God of Abraham. Since you insist > > > on that, you'll have to come up with a better explanation of your > > > doctrine than "I say so, so there" which is where you are right now. > > > > The Bible is the only evidence that I have. > > Your book is not evidence. > > > The Bible makes it clear that > > the God of Abraham is the true God. The Bible contains the word of God. If > > people have a different holy book other than the Bible--they are > > worshipping a false God. > > Why do you not consider THEIR book to be evidence supporting their > beliefs. > > Martin Their book (the Quran) does support their beliefs. I am stating that I believe Allah is a false God. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:27:44 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-2206071827450001@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1182560736.318058.6100@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin ><phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: .... >> Why do you not consider THEIR book to be evidence supporting their >> beliefs. >> >> Martin > >Their book (the Quran) does support their beliefs. I am stating that I >believe Allah is a false God. Allah is the Arabic name for the God of Abraham. You are telling us that the God of Abraham is a false god. Does that square with your religious beliefs? Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:02:55 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-2206071802550001@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1182559237.898964.32770@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 23, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <dgtn73hm11dl8eval8ne1s1155rl2td...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> > > On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:51:19 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism >> > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> > > <Jason-2106071151200...@66-52-22-87.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> > > >In article <1182427767.298489.13...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin >> > > ><phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > >> On Jun 21, 3:56 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > >> > > ... >> > > >> > Remember learning about the Scopes Monkey Trial. The Christians were >> > > >> > trying to keep out the teaching of evolution in the public >schools. I do >> > > >> > believe that the advocates of evolution are doing the same >thing those >> > > >> > Christians done--keeping out the competition. They have the judges on >> > > >> > their side so they will probably succeed. >> > >> > > >> The Judges of today are in place to prevent such a travesty of justice >> > > >> from occuring again: Scopes LOST the right to teach the truth about >> > > >> evolution to his students. Eventually teachers won the right to teach >> > > >> the truth: you want to take that right away from them and have them >> > > >> teach creationism instead. >> >> > > >They can teach evolution and Intellegent Design. >> > >> > > What scientific facts can they teach about Intelligent Design? >> > >> > They have a textbook. The teachers would use the text book and curriculum >> > guide to teach those classes. >> >> You didn't answer the question, Jason. >> >> Martin > >Martin, >I don't have a copy of the textbook or curriculum guide so don't know what >sort of facts are in that textbook and curriculum guide. >jason > Yet you defend the people who wrote the lies in that book even though you've never looked at it. Your hypocrisy is shocking, but far too common. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:04:50 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-2206071804510001@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1182559470.259255.81470@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 23, 2:58 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> > Public school teachers would teach ID--if it was legal in that state. >> >> Then they would no longer be teachers but priests and priestesses >> working for the government. There would no longer be a separation of >> church and state. The lies of religion are rightfully kept in church >> where they belong and where people are not required to go if they >> don't want to.. >> >> Martin > > >There is no Biblical content in that textbook. > If you had said there was no scientific content in that textbook you would have been correct. Religious doctrines control what was written in that book, even if they didn't put bible verses in. Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Jun 23, 7:28 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <hhjo73978tqo0uuvim7590a8ou2qkj1...@4ax.com>, John Baker > <n...@bizniz.net> wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 14:17:30 -0700, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >In article <kkeo73dv42oar8dbei02rgecphkfkav...@4ax.com>, John Baker > > ><n...@bizniz.net> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 15:26:44 -0400, Mike <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> > > >> wrote: > > > >> >Jason wrote: > > >> >> In article <f5gft7$sa...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > >> >> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >> >>> Jason wrote: > > >> >>>> A body is evidence. Two legs that are the same size are evidence. Her > > >> >>>> medical records (eg X-rays) related to the car accident are > evidence. The > > >> >>>> testimony of the doctor that removed two inches of crushed leg bone is > > >> >>>> evidence. > > >> >>> But there's no evidence of this god. That's the step that you're > > >> >>> skipping over. > > > >> >>> 1: prove that something happened (such as this leg growing.) > > > >> >>> 2: prove that a god exists. > > > >> >>> 3: prove that this god is the most likely explanation for #1. > > > >> >>> You haven't even done step 1 but even if you had, you still haven't > > >> >>> begun on #2. You just want to jump from claiming step 1 is true to > > >> >>> claiming step 3 is true. > > > >> >> That is a good point. However, the point was that the body was evidence > > >> >> and that Cheryl also has evidence. > > > >> >She does? Where? Did you see any xrays? Did you see any "before and > > >> >after" pictures? Remember, testimony is NOT evidence. > > > >> <PIGGYBACKING> > > > >> >> In both cases, the evidence might not > > >> >> be enough to convince a jury-- > > > >> Then why should it be enough to convince you? > > > >> >>but it is evidence. > > > >> Is it? Have you actually seen it? > > > >No, I believed her testimony. > > > Yes, you've made that abundantly clear. > > > >I also know that doctors and hospitals keep > > >copies of medical records for many years. > > > Yes they do. But unless you've actually seen the records pertaining to > > Prewitt's (alleged) case, you have no proof her story is true. And > > given the tendency you've displayed thus far toward shameless > > dishonesty, if you want to convince us of the truth of Prewitt's > > claims, you're going to have to show us those records. Your word, > > I'm afraid, isn't good enough. > > > In fact, given your posting history, if you told me grass is green, > > I'd look out the window for confirmation. > > Several posters have told me that even if I proved to them that both of > legs are now the same size despite having two inches of bone removed from > one leg--they would still not believe that God healed her leg. Because the pieces of bone were never removed: that's not something a doctor would do to a young girl's leg. Consider the Hippocratic Oath: "I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous. I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and in like manner I will not give to a woman a pessary to produce abortion. With purity and with holiness I will pass my life and practice my Art. I will not cut persons laboring under the stone, but will leave this to be done by men who are practitioners of this work. Into whatever houses I enter, I will go into them for the benefit of the sick, and will abstain from every voluntary act of mischief and corruption; and, further from the seduction of females or males, of freemen and slaves. Whatever, in connection with my professional practice or not, in connection with it, I see or hear, in the life of men, which ought not to be spoken of abroad, I will not divulge, as reckoning that all such should be kept secret. While I continue to keep this Oath unviolated, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and the practice of the art, respected by all men, in all times! But should I trespass and violate this Oath, may the reverse be my lot!" See http://www.doctorslounge.com/oath.htm A doctor could get charged with malpractice for removing bone from a young girl's leg. After all, a young girl's leg will heal naturally, given time. And this would have been what happened. You have no evidence that the doctors did such a thing as you claim. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Jun 23, 8:03 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > Cheryl Prewitt is a former Miss America. Google her name if you don't > believe me. Her name is listed in over 700 websites. My name appears on 1,130,000 websites. Martin Phipps Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <1pto739o23u86h6hi2okq3kje2oi5jfk1f@4ax.com>, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:27:44 -0700, in alt.atheism > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > <Jason-2206071827450001@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >In article <1182560736.318058.6100@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > ><phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > ... > > >> Why do you not consider THEIR book to be evidence supporting their > >> beliefs. > >> > >> Martin > > > >Their book (the Quran) does support their beliefs. I am stating that I > >believe Allah is a false God. > > Allah is the Arabic name for the God of Abraham. You are telling us that > the God of Abraham is a false god. Does that square with your religious > beliefs? I'll give one example from the Quran. The Muslims believe that Jesus did not die on the cross and that he did not rise from the dead: Here is a quotation from the Quran: That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah--but they did not kill him, nor crucified him, but it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they did not kill him. Summary Islam says that Jesus did not die on the cross. The Bible states that Christ died on the cross and rose from the dead. Related to Allah--It's my opinion that he is a false God. If anyone in this newsgroup chooses to believe that Allah and Jehovah are the same God--that is up to them Jason Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Jun 23, 8:38 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182558421.950316.128...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > He's claiming that Allah gave the commandments to Moses. > > Jehovah gave the commandments to Moses. Which is irrelevent because modern Jewish tradition claims they are the same God anyway. Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 In article <9fso731v5rsiaem27pgc8qlmho8jcrarl8@4ax.com>, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:58:14 -0700, in alt.atheism > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > <Jason-2206071758150001@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >In article <75ro73lv0419941tqo8qkse203jtsc993n@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:38:25 -0700, in alt.atheism > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> <Jason-2206071738260001@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >> >In article <1182558421.950316.128660@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin > >> >Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Jun 23, 2:39 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> >> > In article <f9un73t8fle3mlf54s3ofrobmm5ahm0...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > >> >> > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> >> > > On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:15:00 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > >> >> > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> >> > > <Jason-2006072215010...@66-52-22-112.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >> ... > >> >> > > >It's a Bible doctrine based on a commandment--"Thou shalt have > >no other > >> >> > > >gods before me." > >> >> > > >> >> > > But, according to you, that commandment was given by a different god > >> >> > > than the one you believe in. > >> >> > > >> >> > I did not state that. > >> >> > >> >> He's claiming that Allah gave the commandments to Moses. > >> >> > >> >> Martin > >> > > >> >Jehovah gave the commandments to Moses. > >> > > >> And no one but you claims there is a difference between Jehovah and > >> Allah. Everyone agrees that that the difference comes from the languages > >> being used, nothing else. Both are names for the God of Abraham. > >> > >> You claim otherwise, but have no evidence to support your claim. > > > >John Hagee, a famous television preacher, wrote a book entitled, > >"Jerusalem Countdown". I read the book. He appeared to me to believe that > >Allah was a false God. > > Since you are an unreliable witness, I have no idea if it is true or not > that he wrote this, but it is wrong. Allah is the Arabic name for the > God of Abraham, nothing else. > > >He did not have any positive things to write > >(unless I missed it) about the Quran or Muhammad. > > You are confusing the religion with the God it worships. They worship > the God of Abraham. If you think that the God of Abraham is a false god, > just say so. > > The Quran is not God. Muhammed is not God. Learn to understand words and > concepts before you spout off. If you choose to believe that Allah and Jehovah are the same God--that is up to you but don't expect me to agree with you. Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Jun 23, 9:02 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182559237.898964.32...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Jun 23, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <dgtn73hm11dl8eval8ne1s1155rl2td...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:51:19 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > > > <Jason-2106071151200...@66-52-22-87.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > > >In article <1182427767.298489.13...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > ><phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> On Jun 21, 3:56 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > ... > > > > >> > Remember learning about the Scopes Monkey Trial. The Christians were > > > > >> > trying to keep out the teaching of evolution in the public > schools. I do > > > > >> > believe that the advocates of evolution are doing the same > thing those > > > > >> > Christians done--keeping out the competition. They have the judges on > > > > >> > their side so they will probably succeed. > > > > > >> The Judges of today are in place to prevent such a travesty of justice > > > > >> from occuring again: Scopes LOST the right to teach the truth about > > > > >> evolution to his students. Eventually teachers won the right to teach > > > > >> the truth: you want to take that right away from them and have them > > > > >> teach creationism instead. > > > > > >They can teach evolution and Intellegent Design. > > > > > What scientific facts can they teach about Intelligent Design? > > > > They have a textbook. The teachers would use the text book and curriculum > > > guide to teach those classes. > > > You didn't answer the question, Jason. > I don't have a copy of the textbook or curriculum guide so don't know what > sort of facts are in that textbook and curriculum guide. Have you even seen this book you are recommending? Do you remember it containing any scientific facts? What were they? Martin Quote
Guest hhyapster@gmail.com Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 On Jun 23, 9:05 am, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:00:41 -0700, in alt.atheism > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > <Jason-2206071800410...@66-52-22-3.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >In article <1182559195.385132.141...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin > >Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > ... > >> It's a test, Jason. You know, like you presumably had back when you > >> were at school. > > >> Martin > > >Yes--I hated taking tests in those days and don't plan to take any more > >tests that I don't want to take. > > So, if you can't be bothered to learn about science, why do you keep > shooting your mouth off about things that you neither understand or care > about. Why don't you just stop acting like a total jerk who wants to > make Christians look like fools? > > We all know that you are ignorant and pig-headed. Unless you reform, > there is nothing else you can teach us. We know that the doctrines you > are teaching have been proven wrong by evidence. You refuse to look at > that evidence or learn why you are wrong. Keep worshipping yourself and > your claims, we don't care. Yes, correct. And request Jason not to post again to show his naive thinking and believe to this world. When sensible person pointed out his mistakes, he couldn't careless to reflect back to right himself. He is just a diehard bible-believer, regardless of the lies/falsehood content. 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.