Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On 25 Jun., 06:29, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182735702.411891.128...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Jun 25, 9:25 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <dxAfi.41706$5j1.32...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > b...@nonespam.com wrote: > > > > Martin Phipps wrote: > > > > > On Jun 24, 11:57 am, cactus <b...@nonespam.com> wrote: > > > > >> Jason wrote: > > > > >>> In article <vs2dnZ6aP9D9weDbnZ2dnUVZ_ovin...@comcast.com>, John > Popelish > > > > >>> <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote: > > > > >>>> Jason wrote: > > > > >>>>> I consider Christianity to be a true religion and conder Jehovah > > > to be the > > > > >>>>> only God. I consider Allah to be a false God. > > > > >>>> (snip) > > > > >>>> What process, in your life, lead you to these conclusions? > > > > >>> My parents were Christians which played a role. While in > college, I took a > > > > >>> course related to the World Religions. None of those world religions > > > > >>> appealed to me. > > > > >> Then why do you act so ignorant of other faiths? > > > > > > It's yet another subject he managed to avoid learning anything about. > > > > > The frightening thing is that he claims to have taken a course in it. > > > > Maybe he is incapable of learning something that does not match what he > > > > already believes. > > > > > He no longer responds to me. I think I may have offended him. At least > > > > he no longer talks about "life evolving from non-life." If he never > > > > responds to be again, it will be worth it just for that. If everyone > > > > took a turn at the harsh education I gave him, he wouldn't have anyone > > > > to talk to, but at least maybe he wouldn't sound as stupid. > > > > I usually don't respond to posts that includes derogatory language. > > > > I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life unless it was > > > proved to me that it could happen in a scientific experiment. > > > Correction: you would never believe that life could evolve from non- > > life even though it has been proved to you that it could happen in a > > scientific experiment. You've admitted that no amount of evidence > > would change your mind so don't lie about that now (yet again). > > > Martin > > I am not qualified to judge experiments. Yet you feel qualified to both criticize the theory of evolution and to specify what scientists should have to do to demonstrate its truth. For example, if the scientists > added DNA from a frog to the experiment, I doubt that would qualify. I > would trust the judgements of the science professors that are employed by > ICR's college. If they were able to repeat the experiment, I would believe > that life could evolve from non-life. Also, if I read an article about the > experiment in a magazine such as National Geographic---I would believe > that life could evolve from non-life. You believe god created life, therefore you believe in abiogenesis. Oh, I forgot; you don't have to make any sense. > Jason- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On 25 Jun., 06:51, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <8oKdnUvAwJeWqeLbnZ2dnUVZ_qjin...@sti.net>, "David V." > > <s...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > > I disagree. Evolution is a theory. > > > As I explained to you before, you do not know the definition of > > the word 'theory,' and you got it wrong even after seeing it in a > > dictionary. > > > > I looked up the word Evolution in my Webster's Dictionary..... > > > And you still don't get it. > > > Is this feigned ignorance on purpose? > > These two words were found on page 6 of the November 2004 issue of > National Geographic: > > EVOLUTIONARY THEORY... Yes, the theories that explain the fact of evolution, just like the theory of gravity explains the fact of gravity. You do understand that, don't you? Too bad you are too dishonest and cowardly to stop lying about it. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 ABC Transcript This is a transcript from PM. The program is broadcast around Australia at 5:10pm on Radio National and 6:10pm on ABC Local Radio. Brendan Nelson suggests 'intelligent design' could be taught in schools PRINT FRIENDLY EMAIL STORY PM - Friday, 26 August , 2005 18:34:00 Reporter: Paula Kruger MARK COLVIN: Evolutionary scientists after years fighting relatively simple battles with creationists are increasingly facing a new adversary - the theory of intelligent design. It's a far more sophisticated set of arguments than the literal interpretation of the Bible. Intelligent design, or ID, suggests that some organisms are just too complicated to have evolved by the random selection process that Charles Darwin theorised nearly 150 years ago. In the United States President George W. Bush has left open the possibility that intelligent design could be taught alongside evolution in science classes in American schools. Here, the Federal Education Minister Brendan Nelson told the Press Club earlier this month that intelligent design could have a place alongside evolution in our schools if parents wished. Scientists are angry. One described intelligent design as creationism in a cheap tuxedo, but to those who support the theory, it's all about keeping an open mind. Paula Kruger prepared this special report. PAULA KRUGER: Scientists are still surprised and some are quite horrified that the debate over intelligent design has made its way to Australia. The idea basically states that Darwin's theory of evolution can't inadequately explain complex life forms and that life must have been created be some form of intelligence, or an intelligent designer. Critics say this belief doesn't even classify as a theory, but the case is put in educational DVD being distributed within Australia. DVD EXCERPT: 150 years ago Charles Darwin transformed science with his theory of natural selection. Today, that theory faces a formidable challenge. PAULA KRUGER: 'Unlocking the Mysteries of Life' is a slick American production featuring impressive computer graphics and an array of prominent scientists. They each take turns in explaining why they no longer support Darwin's theory of evolution. One of these scientists is Dean Kenyon, who wrote a respected textbook on chemical evolution, but has since seen the light in intelligent design. DEAN KENYON: We have not the slightest chance of a chemical evolutionary origin for even the simplest of cells, so the concept of the intelligent design of life was immensely attractive to me and made a great deal of sense. PAULA KRUGER: This documentary style production caught the attention of a Christian group called 'Focus on the Family', which now distributes the DVD in Australia. Executive Director Colin Bunnett is among those impressed by its arguments. COLIN BUNNETT: I think if you look at that DVD, every man on there is a doctor. You've got Dean, Dr Dean Kenyon, who was an evolutionist, now he's turned around and said I was wrong. PAULA KRUGER: Less impressed are members of Australia's science community, including Senior Lecturer in evolutionary biology at the University of New South Wales Rob Brook. He says intelligent design is all about religion, not science. ROB BROOK: I think the fact that somebody has a PhD in science, or even works in a particular area of science, in itself isn't really acceptable evidence that something is scientific. So from the point of view of Kenyon, I don't really know what is it that's motivating him, and I don't think that we're told publicly what it is that's motivating him, but a lot of the prime people in the intelligent design movement appear to have had religious conversions of some type or another. They all seem to be people of deep religious faith, so one has to argue, is it their religious faith that's driving the agenda, or is it their science and the scientific process? And I'd say it's the former. PAULA KRUGER: So how did intelligent design become an issue for debate in Australia? It seems another Christian group called 'Campus Crusade for Christ' gave a copy of Unlocking the Mysteries of Life to Federal Education Minister Brendan Nelson during a recent meeting in Canberra. It was a very brief meeting and the group didn't even expect the Minister to watch the DVD, but it appears he did. Earlier this month, during an address to the National Press Club Dr Nelson was asked about intelligent design and he said while current theories on evolution shouldn't be replaced, intelligent design could be taught in schools if parents approve. Reports of these comments shocked scientists like Rob Brook. ROB BROOK: The Minister Nelson has said that he thinks there may be a place for it in schools. The question I would ask about that is in what curriculum? If it were in a religious instruction curriculum, I'd be perfectly happy to see intelligent design discussed there. That would be the proper place for it, because it is essentially a religious and a creationist argument. If it were in the science class, I'd have huge problems with that, because it's not a scientific theory. PAULA KRUGER: Dr Brendan Nelson has given assurances that intelligent design does not belong in the science class, and that it may be more appropriate if it was discussed as part of a religious curriculum. But Focus on the Family says it should be taught to science students as a way of encouraging them to keep an open mind. COLIN BUNNETT: I think it gives a meaning to life, and I think that's the tremendous story of intelligent design. It's hey, you're not an accident, you're here for a purpose, and our children today are crying out for meaning to life. PAULA KRUGER: In the United States the issue has received far more prominence. President George W. Bush gave his personal stamp of approval to intelligent design, saying it should be discussed in American schools along side established theories on evolution. The devout Christian says both sides of the debate need to be taught so children can understand what the debate is about. A rural high school in Dover Pennsylvania will soon have intelligent design incorporated into its science curriculum. Unless the Federal Court intervenes, ninth graders will have the following announcement read to them by the superintendent of schools: "Because Darwin's theory is a theory, it is still being tested as new evidence is discovered. The theory is not fact. Gaps in the theory exist for which there is no evidence. Intelligent design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view. As true with any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind." PAULA KRUGER: After the announcement is read, the lesson on evolution theory can begin. But it is unlikely similar scenes will be played out in Australian schools. Labor's spokeswomen on Education, Jenny Macklin, says new theories must withstand tough scientific scrutiny before being taught in our classrooms. JENNY MACKLIN: Each of the states and territories have individual curriculum authorities, and they make the assessments about what will or won't be taught in each of the science syllabuses that each of the states and territories are responsible for. PAULA KRUGER: But that doesn't mean that she is opposed to children being exposed to different views. JENNY MACKLIN: Personally, I think that it's a good thing for children to understand a variety of religious views and beliefs. I think that's a positive thing for children to learn, but these are matters that the state governments regulate. Evolutionary biologists Rob Brook says if students are given the opportunity to have an open mind about intelligent design, this should include its weaknesses. ROB BROOK: One of the things that makes evolution really quite a strong theory is that it explains a lot of exceptions, it explains the imperfection in the natural world, just as much as it explains perfection. Intelligent design is all about how perfect the world is, and it has been ever since pre-Darwinian times about how perfect the world is, and that itself might be evidence for design. But the imperfections in the world are a good example of why evolution works so well. PAULA KRUGER: There is as yet no scientific proof supporting the belief that life was created by an intelligent designer, but that is something some academics are trying to change. To resolve the debate tearing apart America and now creeping into Australia, Harvard University is launching an ambitious scientific assault on the age-old questions surrounding the theory of evolution. The project is called 'the Origins of Life in the Universe Initiative'. But after 150 years of debating Darwinism, many aren't holding their breath for a definitive answer. MARK COLVIN: Paula Kruger. PRINT FRIENDLY EMAIL STORY back to ABC Online Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On 25 Jun., 08:14, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182748750.948199.94...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 25, 12:51 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <8oKdnUvAwJeWqeLbnZ2dnUVZ_qjin...@sti.net>, "David V." > > > > <s...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > Jason wrote: > > > > > > I disagree. Evolution is a theory. > > > > > As I explained to you before, you do not know the definition of > > > > the word 'theory,' and you got it wrong even after seeing it in a > > > > dictionary. > > > > > > I looked up the word Evolution in my Webster's Dictionary..... > > > > > And you still don't get it. > > > > > Is this feigned ignorance on purpose? > > > > These two words were found on page 6 of the November 2004 issue of > > > National Geographic: > > > > EVOLUTIONARY THEORY... > > >http://users.ameritech.net/dennisreynolds1/GravitationalTheory.html > > > If gravity is only a theory then how come we aren't floating off to > > space? > > > Martin > > Gravity and evolution are theories. You already know the answer to your > question.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 26, 1:40 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <pqqv73dlrf1q1bh1gc99es8oqpsoe8u...@4ax.com>, John Baker > > <n...@bizniz.net> wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:34:55 -0400, "Robibnikoff" > > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > >"Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote > > > >snip > > > >> If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true God. > > > >What makes your god the "true" one?s > > > Why, because Jason says so, of course. <G> > > Funny--There are 1.9 billion Christians in the world. Many of them will > also say so--of course. There are just as many muslims. So what? Martin Quote
Guest 655321 Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <pqqv73dlrf1q1bh1gc99es8oqpsoe8uosg@4ax.com>, John Baker > <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote: > >> On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:34:55 -0400, "Robibnikoff" >> <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: >> >>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote >>> >>> snip >>> >>>> If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true God. >>> What makes your god the "true" one?s >> Why, because Jason says so, of course. <G> > > Funny--There are 1.9 billion Christians in the world. Many of them will > also say so--of course. Truth is not a popularity contest. -- 655321 Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 26, 1:45 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182774522.884760.309...@u2g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 25 Jun., 03:35, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1182718201.208602.124...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > On 24 Jun., 03:43, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article <409r73h3qtei0prif7536hc0fu1h1p9...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > > > snip > > > > > > > Jason has spoken. All Arabic-speaking Christians are worshipping > a false > > > > > > god because they use the word "Allah" when referring to God. > > > > > > If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true God.- > Skjul = > > > > tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > > > Their Bibles are written in Arabic, in which the equivalent to the > > > > English word "God" is "Allah". That would apply to Christian Arabs of > > > > all sects. Furthermore the first Christians did not call their god > > > > "God", since "god" is an English word derived from German. Apparently > > > > you think that only the English language Bibles are valid. I am not > > > > surprised. > > > > No, I do not believe that only Bibles written in English are valid. Even > > > if Allah is the word that is used for God in Bibles written in > > > Arabic--that is not a problem. After reading their Bibles, they will > > > realize that the God mentioned in the Holy Bible is the true God and that > > > the moon god is a false God. > > > Since they are Christians they already believe that. There is no > > evidence in the Bible that it is true. > > > > For those people that believe Yahweh and Allah are the same God--please > > > explain why there is a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Mormon > > > Mosque in the world? > > > Or why many people like mustard. You certainly do like non sequiturs. > > You failed to answer the question. You failed to answer the question of why Christians consider Sunday the Lord's day or why saints are depicted as having halos over their head (where Helios was the Roman sun god). But then you always do fail to answer our questions. Martin Quote
Guest 655321 Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <5ea5jrF383thsU1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote >> >> snip >> >>> If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true God. >> What makes your god the "true" one? > > Books have been written on that subject. Being written about does not make a thing true. Anyway, books have been written debunking your god, too. -- 655321 Quote
Guest 655321 Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Jason wrote: > Gallup Poll: Two Thirds of Americans .... are deluded about at least one thing. -- 655321 Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On 25 Jun., 08:31, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182751329.065068.288...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > > > > > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > > On Jun 24, 9:31 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1182738013.400195.243...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > > > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 24, 6:35 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > Here is some information about the Christians in Iran. > > > > > <snip article> > > > > > Iran is an excellent example of what happens when religious nutcases > > > > are allowed to rule a country. And you, Jason, clearly wish that > > > > America was more like Iran. > > > > > - Bob T. > > > > Yes, it would be wonderful if everyone in the world were Christians. > > > Yes, then the world would be just like Iran - run by superstitious > > fools who allow no dissent. How would you like to live under Muslim > > religious law, Jason? Well, that's what the world you envision would > > be like - we would all have to worry about the Inquisition knocking on > > our door at any moment to check on our sex lives. > > > I much prefer to live in America, which is still a land of freedom, > > including freedom from religion. > > > - Bob T. > > I also like living in America. The end goal of the Muslims are to take > over the world--one country at a time. It is also the goal of Christians. You said so. They are presently committing > genocide on the people that live in Darfur. All the Moslems are doing that? Even the ones that are at war with each other? Stop being such a fool. After they take over control > of the Sudan, they will use the Sudan as a staging ground to take over > surrounding countries. The Sudan is a Moslem country and has been for many centuries. One expert believes they will eventually take over > Spain without firing a shot. Mullahs are encouraging young followers to > move to Spain. After 55% of the population of Spain are Muslims, they will > vote only for Muslims. Those politicians will vote to establish the same > sorts of laws they now have in Moslem countries. > jason- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 26, 2:04 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182770555.111873.24...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Jun 25, 2:31 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1182751329.065068.288...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 24, 9:31 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article <1182738013.400195.243...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > > > > > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 24, 6:35 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > > Here is some information about the Christians in Iran. > > > > > > > <snip article> > > > > > > > Iran is an excellent example of what happens when religious nutcases > > > > > > are allowed to rule a country. And you, Jason, clearly wish that > > > > > > America was more like Iran. > > > > > > > - Bob T. > > > > > > Yes, it would be wonderful if everyone in the world were Christians. > > > > > Yes, then the world would be just like Iran - run by superstitious > > > > fools who allow no dissent. How would you like to live under Muslim > > > > religious law, Jason? Well, that's what the world you envision would > > > > be like - we would all have to worry about the Inquisition knocking on > > > > our door at any moment to check on our sex lives. > > > > > I much prefer to live in America, which is still a land of freedom, > > > > including freedom from religion. > > > > > - Bob T. > > > > I also like living in America. The end goal of the Muslims are to take > > > over the world--one country at a time. > > > Oddly enough I don't see that many Muslim missionaries today. How > > many countries have muslims invaded over the past ten years? None. > > How many muslim countries has the US invaded over the past ten years? > > Two. > > > If at all possible, try to make statements actually supported by > > facts, Jason. > > Good point--our troops will eventually leave Iraq and Afghanistan. If the > leaders of either of those countries asked Bush to remove our troops from > their countries--Bush would do it. You mean the leaders your government put in power in the first place? You're funny, Jason. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 26, 2:06 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182769454.887093.152...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > Being a "scientist" and having a "firm belief in God" is a clear > > contradiction in terms. > > I disagree You're hardly qualified to judge. Martin Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On 25 Jun., 13:09, Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 25, 2:04 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1182747944.169313.258...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 25, 11:03 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > I googled > > > > "miracle healings" and read about dozens of other cases that provided > > > > evidence. > > > > Testimony is not evidence, Jason, especially when the people involved > > > are known liars. > > > funny--they are not known liars. > > They are to us. The fact that you are unaware of the fact that they > are liars doesn't mean we don't know that they are and thus that they > are known liars, as I said. > > Martin And your testimony is evidence that they are liars. I will add my testimony: They are liars. There, it is established. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 In article <1182811351.557959.227380@u2g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > On 25 Jun., 06:51, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <8oKdnUvAwJeWqeLbnZ2dnUVZ_qjin...@sti.net>, "David V." > > > > <s...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > Jason wrote: > > > > > > I disagree. Evolution is a theory. > > > > > As I explained to you before, you do not know the definition of > > > the word 'theory,' and you got it wrong even after seeing it in a > > > dictionary. > > > > > > I looked up the word Evolution in my Webster's Dictionary..... > > > > > And you still don't get it. > > > > > Is this feigned ignorance on purpose? > > > > These two words were found on page 6 of the November 2004 issue of > > National Geographic: > > > > EVOLUTIONARY THEORY... > > Yes, the theories that explain the fact of evolution, just like the > theory of gravity explains the fact of gravity. You do understand > that, don't you? Too bad you are too dishonest and cowardly to stop > lying about it. I re-read the article related to evolution that was published in the Nov/2004 issue of National Geographic. The author of the article made it clear that evolution was a theory. He made this statement on page 8: "Evolution is both a beautiful concept and an important one, more crucial nowadays to human welfare, to medical science, and to our understanding of the world than ever before. It's also deeply persuasive--a theory you can take to the bank...." Various members of this newsgroup appear to believe that evolution is a fact but the author of the article that was printed in National Geographic disagrees with you. Jason Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 26, 2:22 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182772972.682583.273...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 25 Jun., 00:13, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:32:09 GMT, in alt.atheism > > > cactus <b...@nonespam.com> wrote in > > > <dxAfi.41706$5j1.32...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>: > > > > >Martin Phipps wrote: > > > >> On Jun 24, 11:57 am, cactus <b...@nonespam.com> wrote: > > > >>> Jason wrote: > > > >>>> In article <vs2dnZ6aP9D9weDbnZ2dnUVZ_ovin...@comcast.com>, John Pope= > > lish > > > >>>> <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote: > > > >>>>> Jason wrote: > > > >>>>>> I consider Christianity to be a true religion and conder Jehovah t= > > o be the > > > >>>>>> only God. I consider Allah to be a false God. > > > >>>>> (snip) > > > >>>>> What process, in your life, lead you to these conclusions? > > > >>>> My parents were Christians which played a role. While in college, I = > > took a > > > >>>> course related to the World Religions. None of those world religions > > > >>>> appealed to me. > > > >>> Then why do you act so ignorant of other faiths? > > > > >> It's yet another subject he managed to avoid learning anything about. > > > > >The frightening thing is that he claims to have taken a course in it. > > > >Maybe he is incapable of learning something that does not match what he > > > >already believes. > > > > >He no longer responds to me. I think I may have offended him. At least > > > >he no longer talks about "life evolving from non-life." If he never > > > >responds to be again, it will be worth it just for that. If everyone > > > >took a turn at the harsh education I gave him, he wouldn't have anyone > > > >to talk to, but at least maybe he wouldn't sound as stupid. > > > > Maybe he will take offense at everyone who points out correctly that he > > > is a liar who has no desire to learn the truth.- Skjul tekst i anf=F8rsel= > > stegn - > > > > - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > He has a "through the looking glass" concept of such things as truth > > and evidence. When people are behaving rationally their judgements of > > what is true are influenced by evidence. Jason is the first person I > > have encountered who actually openly states that he does it in > > reverse, that he judges evidence based on what he already believes. > > It appears that I am not the only one. When I posted evidence indicating > that Cheryl Prewitt and William Kent were healed by God God doesn't exist. >, people rejected > that evidence. What evidence? You never presented any. ev Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On 25 Jun., 17:34, "Robibnikoff" <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote > > snip > > > If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true God. > > What makes your god the "true" one? > -- > Robyn > Resident Witchypoo > BAAWA Knight! > #1557 The Bible says so of course. Quote
Guest John Popelish Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Jason wrote: > The next time that I visit Barnes and Noble, I'll see if they have any copies. > Please list the title of his best book and the name of the author. I > forgot to write down that info. when I read the review. > Jason The historian/cartoonist/author is Larry Gonick The book I was recommending to you is "The Cartoon History of the Modern World, part 1, from Columbus to the U.S. Constitution". Once you read that one, you will almost certainly want these: "The Cartoon History of the Universe, Volumes 1-7" "The Cartoon History of the Universe, Volumes 8-13" "The Cartoon History of the Universe, Volumes 14-19" He has also produced 7 or 8 other books. Just ask where the Larry Gonick section is. Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On 25 Jun., 19:35, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <5ea5kqF37urq...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > > > > > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-2406072131550001@66-52-22-6.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <1182738013.400195.243...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > > > >> On Jun 24, 6:35 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >> > Here is some information about the Christians in Iran. > > > >> <snip article> > > > >> Iran is an excellent example of what happens when religious nutcases > > >> are allowed to rule a country. And you, Jason, clearly wish that > > >> America was more like Iran. > > > >> - Bob T. > > > > Yes, it would be wonderful if everyone in the world were Christians. > > > Which sect? > > Protestant- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 26, 2:46 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182769286.811353.191...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Jun 25, 1:43 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1182748554.698371.315...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 25, 12:32 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article > > <1182735889.944828.206...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 25, 9:35 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > In article <1182718201.208602.124...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > > > > On 24 Jun., 03:43, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > > > In article <409r73h3qtei0prif7536hc0fu1h1p9...@4ax.com>, > Free Lunch > > > > > > > > > snip > > > > > > > > > > > Jason has spoken. All Arabic-speaking Christians are > worshipping > > > > > a false > > > > > > > > > > god because they use the word "Allah" when referring to God. > > > > > > > > > > If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the > true God.- > > > > > Skjul = > > > > > > > > tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > > > > > > > Their Bibles are written in Arabic, in which the equivalent to the > > > > > > > > English word "God" is "Allah". That would apply to > Christian Arabs of > > > > > > > > all sects. Furthermore the first Christians did not call > their god > > > > > > > > "God", since "god" is an English word derived from German. > Apparently > > > > > > > > you think that only the English language Bibles are valid. > I am not > > > > > > > > surprised. > > > > > > > > No, I do not believe that only Bibles written in English are > valid. Even > > > > > > > if Allah is the word that is used for God in Bibles written in > > > > > > > Arabic--that is not a problem. After reading their Bibles, they will > > > > > > > realize that the God mentioned in the Holy Bible is the true God > > > and that > > > > > > > the moon god is a false God. > > > > > > > Why doesn't Christian sun worship render it a pagam religion in your > > > > > > eyes? > > > > > > I don't know any Christians that worship the sun. > > > > > So why do Christians go to church on SUNday? Why don't they go to > > > > church on Saturday which is, according to the old testament, the day > > > > to worship God, ie the Sabbath? Why do Christians ignore the > > > > commandment to remember the Sabbath and keep it holy? > > > > Some Christians (Seventh Day Adventist) do go to church on Saturday. Most > > > Christians go to church on Sunday since it is the Lord's Day--the day that > > > Jesus rose from the dead. > > > Read your Bible, Jason: Jesus was supposedly buried on a Friday (the > > day before the Jewish Sabbath) and it is said that he rose again after > > THREE DAYS. Three days after Friday is Monday, not Sunday, Jason. No > > wonder you only barely passed Math 101. > I copied the following information from a book entitled, "The Bible Has > the Answer" by Dr. Henry M. Morris > > "The worship on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7 and 1 Cor 16:2) > follows the practice of the early Christians, who evidently began it in > commemoration of Christ's resurrection on that day (Luke 24:1, John 20: > 19, 26). That day is highly apropriate, since the completion of His great > work of redemption was demonstred on that day...." Thank you for proving that Henry Morris ia a liar whom you are willing to believe ahead of your own Bible. Martin Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On 25 Jun., 19:38, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <5ea5jrF383th...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote > > > snip > > > > If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true God. > > > What makes your god the "true" one? > > Books have been written on that subject. If it is in a book it is true? Do you drool a lot? Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On 25 Jun., 19:40, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <pqqv73dlrf1q1bh1gc99es8oqpsoe8u...@4ax.com>, John Baker > > <n...@bizniz.net> wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:34:55 -0400, "Robibnikoff" > > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > >"Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote > > > >snip > > > >> If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true God. > > > >What makes your god the "true" one?s > > > Why, because Jason says so, of course. <G> > > Funny--There are 1.9 billion Christians in the world. Many of them will > also say so--of course. How many have to believe something before it is true? Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 26, 3:03 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182770284.342110.232...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Jun 25, 2:16 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1182747192.236018.205...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 25, 10:53 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article <1182735087.582175.135...@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, M= > > artin > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 25, 9:16 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > In article <FM2dnSEybe2qW-PbnZ2dnUVZ_qLin...@sti.net>, "David V." > > > > > > > > <s...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > kmurphy...@houston.rr.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Ultimatims are not logical. Being forced to choose between > > > > > > > > > two options doesn't exclude the possibility that a third > > > > > > > > > option exists. Neither creationism nor evolution is correct. > > > > > > > > > Inventing a third option doesn't mean it's the correct one. > > > > > > > > Evolution is a fact. It's not an option. > > > > > > > > Evolution is a theory > > > > > > > Evolution is a fact and natuaral selection is the theory that expla= > > ins > > > > > > how it works. You've had this explained to you before, Jason. > > > > > > I disagree. Evolution is a theory. I looked up the word Evolution in = > > my > > > > > Webster's Dictionary and it stated that evolution was a theory. > > > > > the=3DB7o=3DB7ry > > > > Function: noun > > > > 1 : the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, > > > > or an art <the theory and practice of medicine> > > > > 2 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body > > > > of principles offered to explain natural phenomena <a theory of > > > > organic evolution> -see ATOMIC THEORY, CELL THEORY, GERM THEORY > > > > 3 : a working hypothesis that is considered probable based on > > > > experimental evidence or factual or conceptual analysis and is > > > > accepted as a basis for experimentation > > > > > Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, =3DA9 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc. > > > > > Yes, Webster's says Natural Selection is a theory. > > > > > id=3DB7i=3DB7ot > > > > Function: noun > > > > : one affected with idiocy; especially : a mentally retarded person > > > > having a mental age not exceeding three years and requiring complete > > > > custodial care > > > > > Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, =3DA9 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc. > > > > > Webster's also says you're an idiot. Don't blame me: take it up with > > > > Webster's. > > > > Post what it states about EVOLUTION > > > Okay. I'll look up "natural selection" too while I'm at it. > > > evo=B7lu=B7tion > > noun > > 1 : a process of change in a certain direction <there has been much > > discussion as to ... the possible evolution of benign adenomas into > > invasive carcinoma -Journal of the American Medical Association> > > 2 a : the historical development of a biological group (as a race or > > species) : PHYLOGENY b : a theory that the various types of animals > > and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the > > distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive > > generations -evo=B7lu=B7tion=B7ari=B7ly /-sh&-"ner-&-lE/ adverb - > > evo=B7lu=B7tion=B7ary /-sh&-"ner-E/ adjective > > Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, =A9 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc. > > > natural selection > > noun > > : a natural process that results in the survival of individuals or > > groups best adjusted to the conditions under which they live and that > > is equally important for the perpetuation of desirable genetic > > qualities and for the elimination of undesirable ones as these are > > produced by recombination or mutation of genes > > Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, =A9 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc. > > > You must be a gluton for punishment, Jason. > These words were taken from the above definition: > > EVOLUTION > "...a theory that the various types of animals > and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the > distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive > generations...." > > Please note the word THEORY in the above definition. That was b. This is a. "the historical development of a biological group (as a race or species)" Please note the word HISTORICAL in the above definition. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 26, 3:08 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182770400.015623.172...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Jun 25, 2:17 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1182747255.256358.183...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 25, 10:58 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article > > <1182735594.401238.200...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 25, 9:18 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > In article > > > > > > > <DipthotDipthot-A725FE.16174624062...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > > > > > 655321 <DipthotDipt...@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: > > > > > > > > In article > > > > > > > > <Jason-2306071116110...@66-52-22-111.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, > > > > > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I want to make it legal for teachers > > > > > > > > > to teach ID > > > > > > > > > But it is legal to do that... > > > > > > > > > ... in a comparative religions, class, for example. > > > > > > > > > So what's your problem? > > > > > > > > I was referring to high school science and biology classes. Of > course, > > > > > > > evolution should also be taught in those same classes. > > > > > > > "Intelligent design" has no place in a biology class, Jason, because > > > > > > "Intelligent design" is reliogion and not science. You admitted that > > > > > > yourself when you said that even a child would know that the > > > > > > "designer" was supposed to be God (or Allah as the case may be). > > > > > > That is true--even children could figure it out. Martin, it will > probably > > > > > never happen. The advocates of evolution will not let it happen. > They will > > > > > take states to court that want to teach ID. They do not want > evolution to > > > > > have to compete with ID. They are afraid that children will realize that > > > > > ID makes more sense than Evolution. > > > > > Religion only makes sense to diseased brains like your own, Jason. > > > > Overwhelming Support in Ohio For Teaching Both Sides of Evolution, Zogby > > > Poll Shows > > > Which proves what, exactly? Religion is a disease, Jason, and > > education is the cure. > It proves that more people in Ohio agrees with me Stop calling people in Ohio idiots, Jason. Martin Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On 25 Jun., 19:45, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182774522.884760.309...@u2g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 25 Jun., 03:35, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1182718201.208602.124...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > On 24 Jun., 03:43, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article <409r73h3qtei0prif7536hc0fu1h1p9...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > > > snip > > > > > > > Jason has spoken. All Arabic-speaking Christians are worshipping > a false > > > > > > god because they use the word "Allah" when referring to God. > > > > > > If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true God.- > Skjul = > > > > tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > > > Their Bibles are written in Arabic, in which the equivalent to the > > > > English word "God" is "Allah". That would apply to Christian Arabs of > > > > all sects. Furthermore the first Christians did not call their god > > > > "God", since "god" is an English word derived from German. Apparently > > > > you think that only the English language Bibles are valid. I am not > > > > surprised. > > > > No, I do not believe that only Bibles written in English are valid. Even > > > if Allah is the word that is used for God in Bibles written in > > > Arabic--that is not a problem. After reading their Bibles, they will > > > realize that the God mentioned in the Holy Bible is the true God and that > > > the moon god is a false God. > > > Since they are Christians they already believe that. There is no > > evidence in the Bible that it is true. > > > > For those people that believe Yahweh and Allah are the same God--please > > > explain why there is a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Mormon > > > Mosque in the world? > > > Or why many people like mustard. You certainly do like non sequiturs. > > You failed to answer the question. If you read the report, you will know > the reason there is a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Muslim > Mosque in the world is because the name Allah came from an Arabic word > that had to do with the worship of the moon god in pre-Islamic Arabia. > > > > > Does that mean that Christian Arabs are not really Christians? You are not making any sense - needless to say. Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 26, 3:17 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182773965.426707.320...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 25 Jun., 03:18, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article > > > <DipthotDipthot-A725FE.16174624062...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > 655321 <DipthotDipt...@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: > > > > In article > > > > <Jason-2306071116110...@66-52-22-111.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > I want to make it legal for teachers > > > > > to teach ID > > > > > But it is legal to do that... > > > > > ... in a comparative religions, class, for example. > > > > > So what's your problem? > > > > I was referring to high school science and biology classes. Of course, > > > evolution should also be taught in those same classes. > > > Why should a person with no understanding of science (self-admitted) > > decide what should be taught in a science class? Why should the US > > give up religious freedom? > > I posted a poll yesterday which indicated that most of the people that > live in Ohio want ID and Evolution to be taught in the public schools. I > believe the people in Ohio should decide what subjects should be taught in > the public schools. What if people in Ohio wanted teachers to teach that the Earth was flat? Do you think teachers should go along with it? I'd quit outright. Their loss. Martin 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.