Guest Jason Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 In article <1183036125.048890.6910@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, "Bob T." <bob@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > On Jun 27, 11:12 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <1183006804.224891.285...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > > > > > > > > > > > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 27, 5:29 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > In article <4dp583lqrr9fhgchqv0633889v7s6mt...@4ax.com>, Michael Gray > > > > > > <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 07:41:07 -0000, Martin <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > - Refer: <1182930067.182358.221...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com> > > > > > >On Jun 27, 2:25 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > >> It's obvious to me that the evolutionists are afraid that the > > > > > >> children will realize that ID makes more sense > > > > > > > >You don't seriously believe that, Jason. If you were then you would > > > > > >be calling every qualified scientist alive today a liar. > > > > > > > He has done that very thing on several occasions. > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Yes, I believe that evolutionists are afraid that the children will > > > > realize that ID makes more sense than evolution. Otherwise, they would not > > > > millions of dollars keeping ID from being taught in the public school > > > > system. > > > > > Please stop saying this. It is really stupid. We don't want ID > > > taught in school because it is a lie told by liars who are trying to > > > sneak religion in under the guise of science. Have you read about the > > > Dover trial? If you read the Wikipedia article (or any other > > > objective writeup) you will discover that the creationists lied over > > > and over again. > > > > > I have explained before that the evidence for evolution and common > > > descent is overwhelming. If there is a God who created us, He did so > > > using evolution as His tool. > > > > > - Bob T. > > > > I believe the evidence for common descent and abiogenesis is underwhelming. > > But you don't know anything about biology. Why do you believe > preachers instead of biologists when it comes to the subject of > biology? > > As has been explained before, there is a big difference between common > descent and abiogenesis. Common descent is a fact - the evidence is > crystal clear. Abiogenesis is much more speculative because it > happened so long ago, and the first living creatures were very very > small. Scientists may never know exactly how life began. > > Common descent, on the other hand, is incontrovertible. Take, for > example, the human inability to synthesize Vitamin C. There is a gene > present in most mammals that will synthesize Vitamin C so that it is > not a necessary nutrient. Humans and other apes have this gene in a > disabled form. Guinea pigs are also unable to synthesize Vitamin C, > but their gene is disabled in a different way. Why would a Creator > create humans with exactly the same genetic flaw that gorillas have, > but create guinea pigs with the same flaw in different form? It makes > no sense... ah, but if we realize that humans and gorillas have a > relatively recent common ancestor, it _does_ make sense. > > Humans share 97% of their genes with chimpanzees, slightly less with > gorillas, less than that with monkeys, etc. etc. Why did God create > us with genetic patterns that exactly match the fossil evidence for > common descent? Is He trying to trick us? Surely you don't believe > in a deity that deliberately created misleading evidence in order to > lead scientists astray, do you? > > - Bob T. Bob, The people that I listen to related to creation science have Ph.D degrees in various fields of science. These people are employed by ICR and write articles for the ICR newsletter on a regular basis: Dr. John Baumgardner--he has a Ph.D degree in geophysics (UCLA) Dr. Steve Austin--he has a Ph.D degree in geology (Penn State) Dr. John Morris--he has a Ph.D degree in Geological Engineering. This person recently wrote an article for the newsletter and is not employed by ICR: Dr. Jerry Bergman: He is on the Biology faculty at Northwest College in Ohio. In relation to Humans and chimps: I believe that God created Humans and chimps. He used some of the same features in humans and chimps. I found this sentence in National Geographic (Nov/2004--page 20): "The mouse genome effort...revealed about 30,000 genes, with 99% having direct counterparts in humans...." You mentioned this information in your post: "There is a gene present in most mammals that will synthesize Vitamin C." I have not conducted any research on this gene so will not comment. I made the mistake of guessing related to an issue like this and various people took turns telling me that my guess was wrong so for that reason will not state my guess. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 In article <5ehuo4F3867mbU1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-2706071755270001@66-52-22-70.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <mrDgi.17313$19.3321@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> news:Jason-2706071727150001@66-52-22-70.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> > In article <7rAgi.2306$K9.485@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> >> news:Jason-2706071403510001@66-52-22-67.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> >> > In article <NVzgi.2269$K9.1264@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > >> >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> >> >> news:Jason-2706071042260001@66-52-22-101.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> >> >> > In article <k3m4839mgss0cijljuel3pm2nk3jonlg9c@4ax.com>, Matt > >> >> >> > Silberstein > >> >> >> > <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:16:11 -0700, in alt.atheism , > >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com > >> >> >> >> (Jason) in > >> >> >> >> <Jason-2606072216110001@66-52-22-64.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> > >> >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >In article <fqp3839gge41v4q43tmsag4qdme6g95nts@4ax.com>, Matt > >> >> >> >> >Silberstein > >> >> >> >> ><RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 21:12:36 -0700, in alt.atheism , > >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com > >> >> >> >> >> (Jason) in > >> >> >> >> >> <Jason-2606072112370001@66-52-22-64.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> > >> >> >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >In article <vfk383lau8cr3oq9f2kglqucrlkn8mgn5s@4ax.com>, > >> >> >> >> >> >Matt > >> >> >> >> >> >Silberstein > >> >> >> >> >> ><RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:49:32 -0700, in alt.atheism , > >> >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com > >> >> >> >> >> >> (Jason) in > >> >> >> >> >> >> <Jason-2606071749330001@66-52-22-20.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> > >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> [snip] > >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >The poll indicated that over 60% of the people that live > >> >> >> >> >> >> >in > >> >> >> >> >> >> >Ohio > >> >> >> >> >> >> >wanted > >> >> >> >> >> >> >both ID and evolution be taught in the public schools. > >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> What if 60% wanted separate schools for blacks and whites? > >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >It would be illegal for a school board to do that. > >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> And it was illegal for the school board to put ID into the > >> >> >> >> >> curriculum. > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> I suggest you go and look up the history of complaint about > >> >> >> >> >> legislation from the bench. They started in the '50s pretty > >> >> >> >> >> much > >> >> >> >> >> with > >> >> >> >> >> Brown v Topeka Board of Education. When people complained > >> >> >> >> >> about > >> >> >> >> >> the > >> >> >> >> >> Court making law what they specifically meant was when the > >> >> >> >> >> Court > >> >> >> >> >> ruled > >> >> >> >> >> that separate but "equal" schools were illegal. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >Yes, we studied that case while I was in college. I understand > >> >> >> >> >your > >> >> >> >> >point. > >> >> >> >> >The ID people should have done a better job in making sure they > >> >> >> >> >had > >> >> >> >> >no > >> >> >> >> >religion mixed in--they failed. Perhaps they will do a better > >> >> >> >> >job > >> >> >> >> >the > >> >> >> >> >next > >> >> >> >> >time. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> How? I mean that. ID is religion, you admit over and over that > >> >> >> >> your > >> >> >> >> motives and goals are religious in nature and that your source > >> >> >> >> material is religious. ID is religion and any attempt by its > >> >> >> >> supporters to say otherwise is just lying. Do you support lying > >> >> >> >> to > >> >> >> >> promote Christianity? > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Matt, > >> >> >> > Yes, you are correct. However, the people in the ID movement > >> >> >> > could > >> >> >> > arrange > >> >> >> > to do it in such a way that no court could find any evidence of > >> >> >> > religion. > >> >> >> > They tried to do it in the Dover case but they failed. Perhaps > >> >> >> > they > >> >> >> > will > >> >> >> > never succeed. > >> >> >> > Jason > >> >> >> > >> >> >> They will never succeed because ID contains no science. Religion > >> >> >> abounds > >> >> >> in > >> >> >> ID and creation science for one important reason, it is there! > >> >> > > >> >> > I agree that religion abounds in ID and creation science. However, > >> >> > if > >> >> > God, > >> >> > Jesus and scriptures are NEVER mentioned in the text book or > >> >> > curriculum > >> >> > guide--it seems to me that a judge could not call it religion. For > >> >> > example, some people believe that astronauts from some other planet > >> >> > came > >> >> > to this planet millions of years ago and left behind dozens of > >> >> > people; > >> >> > some plants and some animals. Is that idea based on religion? The > >> >> > answer > >> >> > is no. In the last court case, the IDers did a terrible job since > >> >> > lawyers > >> >> > representing evolutionists found all sorts of evidence indicating > >> >> > that > >> >> > religion was involved. > >> >> > Jason > >> >> > >> >> You don't have to specifically name your religious figure in order to > >> >> find > >> >> that religion is involved. When the descriptions fit the bible then it > >> >> will > >> >> be assumed that it is the bible. > >> > > >> > Judges are to suppose to base their rulings on evidence--not > >> > assumptions. > >> > >> They do, Jason, the evidence points to religion. > > > > It did in the Dover case. My point was that the IDers will have to make > > sure there is NO evidence related to religion in the next court case. > > You mean they need to be more dishonest? You would have to understand the "rules of evidence" before you could understand the reasons for properly preparing a court case. I only know about the rules of evidence since I was recently on jury duty and we had to listen to a lecture from the judge related to the rules of evidence before we were allowed to serve on juries. I heard that same lecture several years ago. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 In article <5ehv66F38p1g2U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-2706072127100001@66-52-22-96.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <f136839av8uped9120293qqesobkbfeqtf@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:08:35 -0700, in alt.atheism > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> <Jason-2706071808350001@66-52-22-70.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >> >In article <Gr2dnTUtqYqunh7bnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@comcast.com>, John Popelish > >> ><jpopelish@rica.net> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Jason wrote: > >> >> (snip) > >> >> > Yes, a creationist school board and evolutionist both have agendas. > >> >> > >> >> I agree. How about taking a stab at summarizing what you > >> >> thing each of those agendas is about. > >> > > >> >One group wants to teach ID and evolution to the children. > >> >One group wants to teach only evolution to the the children. > >> > > >> Why would you want to teach lies to children? > > > > I would prefer that teachers not teach evolution because of the lies > > What lies? I was actully joking. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 In article <5ehv7nF38g2i7U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > "John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message > news:eeu6835ui1hmjiibc0rk2kv7rtefq2v76g@4ax.com... > > On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:27:10 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >>In article <f136839av8uped9120293qqesobkbfeqtf@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > >><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> > >>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:08:35 -0700, in alt.atheism > >>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >>> <Jason-2706071808350001@66-52-22-70.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >>> >In article <Gr2dnTUtqYqunh7bnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@comcast.com>, John > >>> >Popelish > >>> ><jpopelish@rica.net> wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Jason wrote: > >>> >> (snip) > >>> >> > Yes, a creationist school board and evolutionist both have agendas. > >>> >> > >>> >> I agree. How about taking a stab at summarizing what you > >>> >> thing each of those agendas is about. > >>> > > >>> >One group wants to teach ID and evolution to the children. > >>> >One group wants to teach only evolution to the the children. > >>> > > >>> Why would you want to teach lies to children? > >> > >>I would prefer that teachers not teach evolution because of the lies but > >>there is nothing that I can do about. > > > > There are no lies being taught, Jason, because public schools don't > > teach ID. > > > > Which reminds me ... the last time you "visited" us, I gave you a list > > of documented examples of deliberate creationist lies. To > > paraphrase one of your favorite lines, you failed to comment on them. > > Would you like me to repost them so you can have another shot? <G> > > crickets chirping > > I think that's a "no" No Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2806071001300001@66-52-22-99.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <f608fq$prp$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >> > In article <f5tl6k$535$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Jason wrote: >> >>> In article <1182914771.873163.36550@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, >> >>> Martin >> >>> <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> On Jun 27, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>> Why is there a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Muslim > mosque in >> >>>>> the world? >> >>>> Why does a halo appear on the head of every saint in pictures? Why >> >>>> does sun symbolism continue to the present day on robes, banners, >> >>>> icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames coming from the >> >>>> heart of Jesus, etc.? Who do priests bow and kiss a monstrance >> >>>> which >> >>>> is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during processions? Why >> >>>> do >> >>>> Christians go to church on Sunday when the old testament claimed >> >>>> that >> >>>> Jesus would rise after three days, ie three days after Friday and >> >>>> therefore on Monday? >> >>>> >> >>>> Answer the damn questions, Jason. >> >>>> >> >>>> Martin >> >>> I am not a Catholic so as a result have never done any research >> >>> regarding >> >>> Catholics. I don't why artists painted halos on the heads of saints. >> >>> Perhaps it was part of the culture or a rule established by a Pope. >> >>> You >> >>> may want to visit the art department and ask that question to the >> >>> professor that teaches courses related to the history of art. I >> >>> suggest >> >>> that you visit Wikipedia and type "Easter Sunday". It clearly states >> >>> that >> >>> Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. >> >> And yet your bible clearly says he would rise after THREE days. >> >> >> >> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your own >> >> bible? >> > >> > The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time >> > aspects >> > than we know today since they were witnesses. >> >> So was there some kind of "old math" in place? 3 days would be more than >> 48 hours. From Friday evening to Sunday morning was only 36 or so hours. >> So did Jesus lie or did the disciples? (this isn't an essay question. >> It's a question answered only by either "Jesus" or "the disciples.") > > Yes, only the witnesses could properly answer the question. Any answers > that I gave would only be guesses. The disciples worshipped on Sunday so > that is good enough for the millions of people that worship on Sunday. > Perhaps you could explain why people that don't believe in Jesus are so > concerned about how many days Jesus remained in the tomb. > Jason Probably to show people like you that the Holey Babble is full of holes. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 In article <5ehvohF393u9tU1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > "The Chief Instigator" <patrick@eris.io.com> wrote in message > news:szkk5tojh5c.fsf@eris.io.com... > > "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> writes: > > > >>"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@eris.io.com> wrote in message > >>news:szk4pktxc9x.fsf@eris.io.com... > >>> "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> writes: > > > >>>>"Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote in message > >>>>news:h0k383tvu4l40srqvo3k496r4ulusla2b3@4ax.com... > >>>>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 10:02:58 -0400, "Robibnikoff" > >>>>> <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > >>>>> - Refer: <5eckjeF36fh2jU1@mid.individual.net> > > > >>>>>><gudloos@yahoo.com> wrote in message > >>>>>>news:1182812811.996798.30050@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > >>>>>>> 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? > > > >>>>>>> The Bible says so of course. > > > >>>>>>Yeah, I've heard that, but I'm not buying it ;P > > > >>>>> You don't have to buy. > >>>>> You can steal one from a motel side-table. > > > >>>>Where do you think my bible came from? The husband pilfered it while on > >>>>a > >>>>business trip many moons ago > > > >>> Welcome to the club...Dale and I, on a trip to South Dakota in 1994, > >>> stayed > >>> at a motel and took the opportunity to violate a Sioux Falls ordinance > >>> by > >>> having sex on the floor between two beds (obviously, with the bible on > >>> the > >>> desk). ;-) > > > >>Wha? It's against the law there to have sex on the floor?!? > > > > It's probably still on the books, but so far, SFPD hasn't put up > > roadblocks to > > try and capture us... > > Oh my! A fugitive from justice in our very midst! Not for long--I reported him to Homeland Security. I am just kidding. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 In article <gsSgi.555$Qz4.258@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-2806071001300001@66-52-22-99.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <f608fq$prp$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > >> > In article <f5tl6k$535$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > >> > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Jason wrote: > >> >>> In article <1182914771.873163.36550@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > >> >>> Martin > >> >>> <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> On Jun 27, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>>> Why is there a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Muslim > > mosque in > >> >>>>> the world? > >> >>>> Why does a halo appear on the head of every saint in pictures? Why > >> >>>> does sun symbolism continue to the present day on robes, banners, > >> >>>> icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames coming from the > >> >>>> heart of Jesus, etc.? Who do priests bow and kiss a monstrance > >> >>>> which > >> >>>> is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during processions? Why > >> >>>> do > >> >>>> Christians go to church on Sunday when the old testament claimed > >> >>>> that > >> >>>> Jesus would rise after three days, ie three days after Friday and > >> >>>> therefore on Monday? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Answer the damn questions, Jason. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Martin > >> >>> I am not a Catholic so as a result have never done any research > >> >>> regarding > >> >>> Catholics. I don't why artists painted halos on the heads of saints. > >> >>> Perhaps it was part of the culture or a rule established by a Pope. > >> >>> You > >> >>> may want to visit the art department and ask that question to the > >> >>> professor that teaches courses related to the history of art. I > >> >>> suggest > >> >>> that you visit Wikipedia and type "Easter Sunday". It clearly states > >> >>> that > >> >>> Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. > >> >> And yet your bible clearly says he would rise after THREE days. > >> >> > >> >> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your own > >> >> bible? > >> > > >> > The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time > >> > aspects > >> > than we know today since they were witnesses. > >> > >> So was there some kind of "old math" in place? 3 days would be more than > >> 48 hours. From Friday evening to Sunday morning was only 36 or so hours. > >> So did Jesus lie or did the disciples? (this isn't an essay question. > >> It's a question answered only by either "Jesus" or "the disciples.") > > > > Yes, only the witnesses could properly answer the question. Any answers > > that I gave would only be guesses. The disciples worshipped on Sunday so > > that is good enough for the millions of people that worship on Sunday. > > Perhaps you could explain why people that don't believe in Jesus are so > > concerned about how many days Jesus remained in the tomb. > > Jason > > Probably to show people like you that the Holey Babble is full of holes. It did not work. The disciples were the witnesses and they worshipped on Sunday. Everyone knows that Easter is on Sunday and not on Monday. I trust the actions of the disciples. They believed that Jesus was in the tomb three days. They also knew more about the 1st century culture than anyone living today knows about the 1st century culture. Some of the posters appear to believe the culture was the same in those days as it is today. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 In article <2nq783hp1qahgi8f07oq7p5t8bsd52jvt7@4ax.com>, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: > In alt.atheism On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:05:56 -0700, Jason@nospam.com > (Jason) let us all know that: > > > >Not according to polls. They took a poll in Ohio and the result was that > >68% wanted both evolution and ID to be taught. > > > What if 68% of the people wanted to kill all christians? > > > Don > --- > aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde > Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert. > > "No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another" > Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" Their opinions would be ignored. Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <f5tmlm$535$7@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <1182888536.294395.68200@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, >>> gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: >>>> Why do Christians celebrate a holiday named after a pagan goddess? >>> You failed to answer the above question. >>> >>> I don't know if that is true. If it is true, I don't know the reason. I am >>> not an expert related to Bible history. A Jehovahs Witness told me >>> something about the origin of Christmas. I don't worship any pagan >>> goddesses. >> You failed to answer the above question. > > Thanks for your post. You still failed to answer the question (did you honestly think we wouldn't notice?) Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <f5u2fa$imh$4@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <f5j9aa$nq7$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Jason wrote: >>>>> In article <1182559237.898964.32770@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >>>>> Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Jun 23, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>> In article <dgtn73hm11dl8eval8ne1s1155rl2td...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>> What scientific facts can they teach about Intelligent Design? >>>>>>> They have a textbook. The teachers would use the text book and > curriculum >>>>>>> guide to teach those classes. >>>>>> You didn't answer the question, Jason. >>>>>> >>>>>> Martin >>>>> Martin, >>>>> I don't have a copy of the textbook or curriculum guide so don't know what >>>>> sort of facts are in that textbook and curriculum guide. >>>> Again, you didn't answer the question, Jason. It was "what scientific >>>> facts can they teach about ID?" and NOT "what scientific facts are >>>> contained in a specific book?" >>>> >>>> If ID is scientific, then there should be some specific scientific facts >>>> that can be taught about it. What are some of them? >>> Regardless, I don't know what scientific facts ID has. >> Then how do you know it's scientific? Still no answer to the question? >> >> Try visiting their >>> website. >> I don't need to. >> >>> You never did answer my question. >> Yes, I did and no, you didn't. >> >> You mentioned all of the research that >>> has been done on that cluster of cells. What sort of creature evolved from >>> that cluster of cells? >> All the creatures that you see around you. > > Please tell me about an experiment where a cluster of cells evolved into a > life form. How can something evolve into the same thing? A "cluster of cells" IS a life form. Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <f608fq$prp$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <f5tl6k$535$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Jason wrote: >>>>> In article <1182914771.873163.36550@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin >>>>> <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Jun 27, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Why is there a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Muslim > mosque in >>>>>>> the world? >>>>>> Why does a halo appear on the head of every saint in pictures? Why >>>>>> does sun symbolism continue to the present day on robes, banners, >>>>>> icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames coming from the >>>>>> heart of Jesus, etc.? Who do priests bow and kiss a monstrance which >>>>>> is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during processions? Why do >>>>>> Christians go to church on Sunday when the old testament claimed that >>>>>> Jesus would rise after three days, ie three days after Friday and >>>>>> therefore on Monday? >>>>>> >>>>>> Answer the damn questions, Jason. >>>>>> >>>>>> Martin >>>>> I am not a Catholic so as a result have never done any research regarding >>>>> Catholics. I don't why artists painted halos on the heads of saints. >>>>> Perhaps it was part of the culture or a rule established by a Pope. You >>>>> may want to visit the art department and ask that question to the >>>>> professor that teaches courses related to the history of art. I suggest >>>>> that you visit Wikipedia and type "Easter Sunday". It clearly states that >>>>> Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. >>>> And yet your bible clearly says he would rise after THREE days. >>>> >>>> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your own >>>> bible? >>> The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time aspects >>> than we know today since they were witnesses. >> So was there some kind of "old math" in place? 3 days would be more than >> 48 hours. From Friday evening to Sunday morning was only 36 or so hours. >> So did Jesus lie or did the disciples? (this isn't an essay question. >> It's a question answered only by either "Jesus" or "the disciples.") > > Yes, only the witnesses could properly answer the question. Any answers > that I gave would only be guesses. The disciples worshipped on Sunday so > that is good enough for the millions of people that worship on Sunday. Like I said, it's not an essay question. You have a choice; Jesus lied or the disciples lied. Which was it? > Perhaps you could explain why people that don't believe in Jesus are > so concerned about how many days Jesus remained in the tomb. Perhaps you can tell us why you can't answer a simple question? Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <gsSgi.555$Qz4.258@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-2806071001300001@66-52-22-99.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >>> In article <f608fq$prp$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Jason wrote: >>>>> In article <f5tl6k$535$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>> In article <1182914771.873163.36550@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, >>>>>>> Martin >>>>>>> <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why is there a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Muslim >>> mosque in >>>>>>>>> the world? >>>>>>>> Why does a halo appear on the head of every saint in pictures? Why >>>>>>>> does sun symbolism continue to the present day on robes, banners, >>>>>>>> icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames coming from the >>>>>>>> heart of Jesus, etc.? Who do priests bow and kiss a monstrance >>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>> is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during processions? Why >>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>> Christians go to church on Sunday when the old testament claimed >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> Jesus would rise after three days, ie three days after Friday and >>>>>>>> therefore on Monday? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Answer the damn questions, Jason. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Martin >>>>>>> I am not a Catholic so as a result have never done any research >>>>>>> regarding >>>>>>> Catholics. I don't why artists painted halos on the heads of saints. >>>>>>> Perhaps it was part of the culture or a rule established by a Pope. >>>>>>> You >>>>>>> may want to visit the art department and ask that question to the >>>>>>> professor that teaches courses related to the history of art. I >>>>>>> suggest >>>>>>> that you visit Wikipedia and type "Easter Sunday". It clearly states >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. >>>>>> And yet your bible clearly says he would rise after THREE days. >>>>>> >>>>>> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your own >>>>>> bible? >>>>> The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time >>>>> aspects >>>>> than we know today since they were witnesses. >>>> So was there some kind of "old math" in place? 3 days would be more than >>>> 48 hours. From Friday evening to Sunday morning was only 36 or so hours. >>>> So did Jesus lie or did the disciples? (this isn't an essay question. >>>> It's a question answered only by either "Jesus" or "the disciples.") >>> Yes, only the witnesses could properly answer the question. Any answers >>> that I gave would only be guesses. The disciples worshipped on Sunday so >>> that is good enough for the millions of people that worship on Sunday. >>> Perhaps you could explain why people that don't believe in Jesus are so >>> concerned about how many days Jesus remained in the tomb. >>> Jason >> Probably to show people like you that the Holey Babble is full of holes. > > It did not work. The disciples were the witnesses and they worshipped on > Sunday. Everyone knows that Easter is on Sunday and not on Monday. I trust > the actions of the disciples. So the answer is "Jesus lied" then? They believed that Jesus was in the tomb > three days. They also knew more about the 1st century culture than anyone > living today knows about the 1st century culture. Some of the posters > appear to believe the culture was the same in those days as it is today. > > Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 Jason wrote: > You would have to understand the "rules of evidence" before you could > understand the reasons for properly preparing a court case. And you don't. I only know > about the rules of evidence since I was recently on jury duty and we had > to listen to a lecture from the judge related to the rules of evidence > before we were allowed to serve on juries. I heard that same lecture > several years ago. Too bad you didn't learn anything from that lecture. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 In article <f60tng$fqm$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <f5tmlm$535$7@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > >>> In article <1182888536.294395.68200@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > >>> gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > >>>> Why do Christians celebrate a holiday named after a pagan goddess? > >>> You failed to answer the above question. > >>> > >>> I don't know if that is true. If it is true, I don't know the reason. I am > >>> not an expert related to Bible history. A Jehovahs Witness told me > >>> something about the origin of Christmas. I don't worship any pagan > >>> goddesses. > >> You failed to answer the above question. > > > > Thanks for your post. > > You still failed to answer the question (did you honestly think we > wouldn't notice?) I just checked my Bible dictionary and it does state that Easter was named after the Goddess Eastra. The dictionary states: "In the Bible, Easter is only mentioned one time but is a mistranslation. The original is pascha--the ordinary Greek word for passover." (Acts 12:4). "In the revised version of the Bible, the word "Easter" was replaced with Passover due to the translation problem related to Easter." Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 In article <f60tsr$fqm$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <f5u2fa$imh$4@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > >>> In article <f5j9aa$nq7$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>> 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: > >>>>>>>> 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. > >>>> Again, you didn't answer the question, Jason. It was "what scientific > >>>> facts can they teach about ID?" and NOT "what scientific facts are > >>>> contained in a specific book?" > >>>> > >>>> If ID is scientific, then there should be some specific scientific facts > >>>> that can be taught about it. What are some of them? > >>> Regardless, I don't know what scientific facts ID has. > >> Then how do you know it's scientific? > > Still no answer to the question? > > >> > >> Try visiting their > >>> website. > >> I don't need to. > >> > >>> You never did answer my question. > >> Yes, I did and no, you didn't. > >> > >> You mentioned all of the research that > >>> has been done on that cluster of cells. What sort of creature evolved from > >>> that cluster of cells? > >> All the creatures that you see around you. > > > > Please tell me about an experiment where a cluster of cells evolved into a > > life form. > > How can something evolve into the same thing? A "cluster of cells" IS a > life form. Good point--I should have stated "into another life form" Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 In article <f60utd$h19$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <f608fq$prp$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > >>> In article <f5tl6k$535$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>> In article <1182914771.873163.36550@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > >>>>> <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Jun 27, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Why is there a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Muslim > > mosque in > >>>>>>> the world? > >>>>>> Why does a halo appear on the head of every saint in pictures? Why > >>>>>> does sun symbolism continue to the present day on robes, banners, > >>>>>> icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames coming from the > >>>>>> heart of Jesus, etc.? Who do priests bow and kiss a monstrance which > >>>>>> is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during processions? Why do > >>>>>> Christians go to church on Sunday when the old testament claimed that > >>>>>> Jesus would rise after three days, ie three days after Friday and > >>>>>> therefore on Monday? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Answer the damn questions, Jason. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Martin > >>>>> I am not a Catholic so as a result have never done any research regarding > >>>>> Catholics. I don't why artists painted halos on the heads of saints. > >>>>> Perhaps it was part of the culture or a rule established by a Pope. You > >>>>> may want to visit the art department and ask that question to the > >>>>> professor that teaches courses related to the history of art. I suggest > >>>>> that you visit Wikipedia and type "Easter Sunday". It clearly states that > >>>>> Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. > >>>> And yet your bible clearly says he would rise after THREE days. > >>>> > >>>> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your own > >>>> bible? > >>> The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time aspects > >>> than we know today since they were witnesses. > >> So was there some kind of "old math" in place? 3 days would be more than > >> 48 hours. From Friday evening to Sunday morning was only 36 or so hours. > >> So did Jesus lie or did the disciples? (this isn't an essay question. > >> It's a question answered only by either "Jesus" or "the disciples.") > > > > Yes, only the witnesses could properly answer the question. Any answers > > that I gave would only be guesses. The disciples worshipped on Sunday so > > that is good enough for the millions of people that worship on Sunday. > > Like I said, it's not an essay question. You have a choice; Jesus lied > or the disciples lied. Which was it? > > > Perhaps you could explain why people that don't believe in Jesus are > > so concerned about how many days Jesus remained in the tomb. > > Perhaps you can tell us why you can't answer a simple question? The answer: I don't believe that Jesus or the disciples lied. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 The Easter controversy is a series of controversies about the proper date to celebrate Easter. There are four distinct phases of the dispute. First phase Main article: Quartodecimanism This was mainly concerned with whether Christians should follow Old Testament practices, see also Old Testament#Christian view of the Law. Eusebius of Caesarea (Hist. Eccl., V, xxiii) wrote: "A question of no small importance arose at that time [i.e. the time of Pope Victor I, about A.D. 190]. The dioceses of all Asia [the Eastern Mediterranean], as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should always be observed as the feast of the life-giving pasch [epi tes tou soteriou Pascha heortes], contending that the fast ought to end on that day, whatever day of the week it might happen to be. However it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this point, as they observed the practice, which from Apostolic tradition has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the Resurrection of our Saviour." Quartodecimanism ("fourteenism", derived from Latin) refers to the practice of fixing the celebration of Passover for Christians on the fourteenth day of Nisan in the Old Testament's Hebrew Calendar (for example Lev 23:5, in Latin "quarta decima"). This was the original method of fixing the date of the Passover, which is to be a "perpetual ordinance"[1]. According to the Gospel of John (for example John 19:14), this was the Friday that Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem, the Synoptic Gospels place the Friday on 15 Nisan. A letter of St. Irenaeus shows that the diversity of practice regarding Easter had existed at least from the time of Pope Sixtus I (c. 120). Further, Irenaeus states that St. Polycarp, who like the other Eastern Christians, kept Easter on the fourteenth day of the moon, whatever day of the week that might be, following therein the tradition which he claimed to have derived from St. John the Apostle. About 195, Pope Victor I excommunicated the Quartodecimans. Though this was regarded as immoderate Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2806071036540001@66-52-22-99.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <5ehuo4F3867mbU1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-2706071755270001@66-52-22-70.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <mrDgi.17313$19.3321@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> news:Jason-2706071727150001@66-52-22-70.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> > In article <7rAgi.2306$K9.485@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> >> news:Jason-2706071403510001@66-52-22-67.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> >> > In article <NVzgi.2269$K9.1264@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> >> >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> >> >> news:Jason-2706071042260001@66-52-22-101.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> >> >> > In article <k3m4839mgss0cijljuel3pm2nk3jonlg9c@4ax.com>, Matt >> >> >> >> > Silberstein >> >> >> >> > <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:16:11 -0700, in alt.atheism , >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com >> >> >> >> >> (Jason) in >> >> >> >> >> <Jason-2606072216110001@66-52-22-64.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> >> >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <fqp3839gge41v4q43tmsag4qdme6g95nts@4ax.com>, >> >> >> >> >> >Matt >> >> >> >> >> >Silberstein >> >> >> >> >> ><RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 21:12:36 -0700, in alt.atheism , >> >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com >> >> >> >> >> >> (Jason) in >> >> >> >> >> >> <Jason-2606072112370001@66-52-22-64.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >In article <vfk383lau8cr3oq9f2kglqucrlkn8mgn5s@4ax.com>, >> >> >> >> >> >> >Matt >> >> >> >> >> >> >Silberstein >> >> >> >> >> >> ><RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:49:32 -0700, in alt.atheism , >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> (Jason) in >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <Jason-2606071749330001@66-52-22-20.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> [snip] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >The poll indicated that over 60% of the people that >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >live >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >in >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Ohio >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >wanted >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >both ID and evolution be taught in the public schools. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> What if 60% wanted separate schools for blacks and >> >> >> >> >> >> >> whites? >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >It would be illegal for a school board to do that. >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> And it was illegal for the school board to put ID into the >> >> >> >> >> >> curriculum. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I suggest you go and look up the history of complaint >> >> >> >> >> >> about >> >> >> >> >> >> legislation from the bench. They started in the '50s >> >> >> >> >> >> pretty >> >> >> >> >> >> much >> >> >> >> >> >> with >> >> >> >> >> >> Brown v Topeka Board of Education. When people complained >> >> >> >> >> >> about >> >> >> >> >> >> the >> >> >> >> >> >> Court making law what they specifically meant was when the >> >> >> >> >> >> Court >> >> >> >> >> >> ruled >> >> >> >> >> >> that separate but "equal" schools were illegal. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >Yes, we studied that case while I was in college. I >> >> >> >> >> >understand >> >> >> >> >> >your >> >> >> >> >> >point. >> >> >> >> >> >The ID people should have done a better job in making sure >> >> >> >> >> >they >> >> >> >> >> >had >> >> >> >> >> >no >> >> >> >> >> >religion mixed in--they failed. Perhaps they will do a >> >> >> >> >> >better >> >> >> >> >> >job >> >> >> >> >> >the >> >> >> >> >> >next >> >> >> >> >> >time. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> How? I mean that. ID is religion, you admit over and over >> >> >> >> >> that >> >> >> >> >> your >> >> >> >> >> motives and goals are religious in nature and that your >> >> >> >> >> source >> >> >> >> >> material is religious. ID is religion and any attempt by its >> >> >> >> >> supporters to say otherwise is just lying. Do you support >> >> >> >> >> lying >> >> >> >> >> to >> >> >> >> >> promote Christianity? >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > Matt, >> >> >> >> > Yes, you are correct. However, the people in the ID movement >> >> >> >> > could >> >> >> >> > arrange >> >> >> >> > to do it in such a way that no court could find any evidence >> >> >> >> > of >> >> >> >> > religion. >> >> >> >> > They tried to do it in the Dover case but they failed. Perhaps >> >> >> >> > they >> >> >> >> > will >> >> >> >> > never succeed. >> >> >> >> > Jason >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> They will never succeed because ID contains no science. Religion >> >> >> >> abounds >> >> >> >> in >> >> >> >> ID and creation science for one important reason, it is there! >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I agree that religion abounds in ID and creation science. >> >> >> > However, >> >> >> > if >> >> >> > God, >> >> >> > Jesus and scriptures are NEVER mentioned in the text book or >> >> >> > curriculum >> >> >> > guide--it seems to me that a judge could not call it religion. >> >> >> > For >> >> >> > example, some people believe that astronauts from some other >> >> >> > planet >> >> >> > came >> >> >> > to this planet millions of years ago and left behind dozens of >> >> >> > people; >> >> >> > some plants and some animals. Is that idea based on religion? The >> >> >> > answer >> >> >> > is no. In the last court case, the IDers did a terrible job since >> >> >> > lawyers >> >> >> > representing evolutionists found all sorts of evidence indicating >> >> >> > that >> >> >> > religion was involved. >> >> >> > Jason >> >> >> >> >> >> You don't have to specifically name your religious figure in order >> >> >> to >> >> >> find >> >> >> that religion is involved. When the descriptions fit the bible then >> >> >> it >> >> >> will >> >> >> be assumed that it is the bible. >> >> > >> >> > Judges are to suppose to base their rulings on evidence--not >> >> > assumptions. >> >> >> >> They do, Jason, the evidence points to religion. >> > >> > It did in the Dover case. My point was that the IDers will have to make >> > sure there is NO evidence related to religion in the next court case. >> >> You mean they need to be more dishonest? > > You would have to understand the "rules of evidence" before you could > understand the reasons for properly preparing a court case. I only know > about the rules of evidence since I was recently on jury duty and we had > to listen to a lecture from the judge related to the rules of evidence > before we were allowed to serve on juries. I heard that same lecture > several years ago. Jason, most all of us have been on juries. many of us have taken law courses in college. Many of us understand about the rules of evidence. Since I belong in all three categories what I don't understand is how you intend to take a sow and make her into a ballerina. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2806071033370001@66-52-22-99.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1183036125.048890.6910@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, "Bob T." > <bob@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 27, 11:12 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <1183006804.224891.285...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, >> > "Bob >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: >> > > On Jun 27, 5:29 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > > > In article <4dp583lqrr9fhgchqv0633889v7s6mt...@4ax.com>, Michael >> > > > Gray >> > >> > > > <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote: >> > > > > On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 07:41:07 -0000, Martin >> > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > - Refer: >> > > > > <1182930067.182358.221...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com> >> > > > > >On Jun 27, 2:25 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > > > > >> It's obvious to me that the evolutionists are afraid that the >> > > > > >> children will realize that ID makes more sense >> > >> > > > > >You don't seriously believe that, Jason. If you were then you >> > > > > >would >> > > > > >be calling every qualified scientist alive today a liar. >> > >> > > > > He has done that very thing on several occasions. >> > >> > > > > -- >> > >> > > > Yes, I believe that evolutionists are afraid that the children will >> > > > realize that ID makes more sense than evolution. Otherwise, they > would not >> > > > millions of dollars keeping ID from being taught in the public >> > > > school >> > > > system. >> > >> > > Please stop saying this. It is really stupid. We don't want ID >> > > taught in school because it is a lie told by liars who are trying to >> > > sneak religion in under the guise of science. Have you read about >> > > the >> > > Dover trial? If you read the Wikipedia article (or any other >> > > objective writeup) you will discover that the creationists lied over >> > > and over again. >> > >> > > I have explained before that the evidence for evolution and common >> > > descent is overwhelming. If there is a God who created us, He did so >> > > using evolution as His tool. >> > >> > > - Bob T. >> > >> > I believe the evidence for common descent and abiogenesis is >> > underwhelming. >> >> But you don't know anything about biology. Why do you believe >> preachers instead of biologists when it comes to the subject of >> biology? >> >> As has been explained before, there is a big difference between common >> descent and abiogenesis. Common descent is a fact - the evidence is >> crystal clear. Abiogenesis is much more speculative because it >> happened so long ago, and the first living creatures were very very >> small. Scientists may never know exactly how life began. >> >> Common descent, on the other hand, is incontrovertible. Take, for >> example, the human inability to synthesize Vitamin C. There is a gene >> present in most mammals that will synthesize Vitamin C so that it is >> not a necessary nutrient. Humans and other apes have this gene in a >> disabled form. Guinea pigs are also unable to synthesize Vitamin C, >> but their gene is disabled in a different way. Why would a Creator >> create humans with exactly the same genetic flaw that gorillas have, >> but create guinea pigs with the same flaw in different form? It makes >> no sense... ah, but if we realize that humans and gorillas have a >> relatively recent common ancestor, it _does_ make sense. >> >> Humans share 97% of their genes with chimpanzees, slightly less with >> gorillas, less than that with monkeys, etc. etc. Why did God create >> us with genetic patterns that exactly match the fossil evidence for >> common descent? Is He trying to trick us? Surely you don't believe >> in a deity that deliberately created misleading evidence in order to >> lead scientists astray, do you? >> >> - Bob T. > > Bob, > The people that I listen to related to creation science have Ph.D degrees > in various fields of science. These people are employed by ICR and write > articles for the ICR newsletter on a regular basis: > Dr. John Baumgardner--he has a Ph.D degree in geophysics (UCLA) > Dr. Steve Austin--he has a Ph.D degree in geology (Penn State) > Dr. John Morris--he has a Ph.D degree in Geological Engineering. > This person recently wrote an article for the newsletter and is not > employed by ICR: Dr. Jerry Bergman: He is on the Biology faculty at > Northwest College in Ohio. Jerry has been writing creationist clap-trap for years. I don't think his Ph.D. and his status of teaching at a two year college has a large influence on anyone who knows shit from shinola about biology. An interesting statistic for you, Jason, biologists the lowest ranked group of scientists when it comes to belief in god. Only 7% of biologists believe in god. A very interesting statistic. IT looks more and more like Bergman is a bottom feeder. > In relation to Humans and chimps: I believe that God created Humans and > chimps. He used some of the same features in humans and chimps. I found > this sentence in National Geographic (Nov/2004--page 20): "The mouse > genome effort...revealed about 30,000 genes, with 99% having direct > counterparts in humans...." > You mentioned this information in your post: "There is a gene present in > most mammals that will synthesize Vitamin C." I have not conducted any > research on this gene so will not comment. I made the mistake of guessing > related to an issue like this and various people took turns telling me > that my guess was wrong so for that reason will not state my guess. > Jason So god used the same genetic defect when he created chimps and humans. Amazing, isn't it. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2706072141260001@66-52-22-96.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1182997554.014108.315410@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 28, 8:44 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <jjk5835ml389gjcsnj4kbkiisposlq1...@4ax.com>, Don Kresch >> > <ROT13.qxer...@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: >> > > In alt.atheism On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 13:52:48 -0700, J...@nospam.com >> > > (Jason) let us all know that: >> > >> > > >In article <BUzgi.2268$K9....@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> > > ><mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> > > >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message >> > > >>news:Jason-2706071037190001@66-52-22-101.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > > >> > In article <f5tl6k$53...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> > > >> > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> > >> > > >> >> Jason wrote: >> > > >> >> > In article >> > > >> >> > <1182914771.873163.36...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, >> > > >> >> > Martin >> > > >> >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > >> >> >> On Jun 27, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > >> > > >> >> >>> Why is there a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every >> > > >> >> >>> Muslim >> > > >> >> >>> mosque in >> > > >> >> >>> the world? >> > > >> >> >> Why does a halo appear on the head of every saint in > pictures? Why >> > > >> >> >> does sun symbolism continue to the present day on robes, >> > > >> >> >> banners, >> > > >> >> >> icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames coming >> > > >> >> >> from the >> > > >> >> >> heart of Jesus, etc.? Who do priests bow and kiss a > monstrance which >> > > >> >> >> is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during > processions? Why do >> > > >> >> >> Christians go to church on Sunday when the old testament > claimed that >> > > >> >> >> Jesus would rise after three days, ie three days after >> > > >> >> >> Friday and >> > > >> >> >> therefore on Monday? >> > >> > > >> >> >> Answer the damn questions, Jason. >> > >> > > >> >> >> Martin >> > >> > > >> >> > I am not a Catholic so as a result have never done any >> > > >> >> > research >> > > >> >> > regarding >> > > >> >> > Catholics. I don't why artists painted halos on the heads of > saints. >> > > >> >> > Perhaps it was part of the culture or a rule established by a >> > Pope. You >> > > >> >> > may want to visit the art department and ask that question to >> > > >> >> > the >> > > >> >> > professor that teaches courses related to the history of art. >> > > >> >> > I >> > suggest >> > > >> >> > that you visit Wikipedia and type "Easter Sunday". It > clearly states >> > > >> >> > that >> > > >> >> > Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. >> > >> > > >> >> And yet your bible clearly says he would rise after THREE >> > > >> >> days. >> > >> > > >> >> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over > your own >> > > >> >> bible? >> > >> > > >> > The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the > time aspects >> > > >> > than we know today since they were witnesses. >> > > >> > Jason >> > >> > > >> What time aspects Jason? Three days and three nights is the same >> > today as it >> > > >> was two thousand years ago. >> > >> > > >Our days end at 12 midnight. Are you 100% sure that was the way is >> > > >was in >> > > >the first century? >> > >> > > Sundown-sundown. >> > >> > > That still doesn't make three days and three nights. >> >> > Does the Bible state that Jesus was in the tomb 72 hours or three days? >> > If Jesus was placed in the tomb prior to sundown on Friday that would > be day 1 >> > Saturday would be day 2 and Sunday-after sun-up would be day 3. That >> > would >> > not be 72 hours but as far as the deciples were concerned--it would >> > count >> > as the third day. >> >> but not "three days and three nights" as stated in Matthew. >> >> IF Jesus was entombed late Friday afternoon then you can't say that he >> had spent Friday in the tomb. Nor could you say that Jesus spent >> Sunday in the tomb IF he rose at sunset on Sunday. >> >> Your attempt to wiggle out of this proves your intellectual >> dishonesty. >> >> Martin > > I am not trying to wiggle out--The deciples are the witnesses and I tried > to look at it from their point of view. What makes you think that the disciples were witnesses? Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2706072112120001@66-52-22-96.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1182996100.383023.275930@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 28, 8:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> > I explained why I use the term 'evolutionist' in another post. Summary >> > version: I found the term on page 8 of the Nov/2004 issue of National >> > Geographic. >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism >> >> "Scientists object to the terms evolutionism and evolutionist because >> the -ism and -ist suffixes accentuate belief rather than scientific >> study. Conversely, creationists use those same two terms partly >> because the terms accentuate belief, and partly perhaps because they >> provide a way to package their opposition into one group, seemingly >> atheist and materialist, designations which are irrelevant to >> science." >> >> To use the term "evolutionist" makes as much sense as calling >> scientists who believe in gravity "gravitationists" as if gravity were >> something that one had to believe in. >> >> Learn. >> >> Martin > > Based on the above information, evolutionist is a great term. It is for those who are scientifically illiterate, which would include you. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2706072213310001@66-52-22-96.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1183006015.234811.244140@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 28, 12:23 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <1182999837.081663.66...@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, >> > Martin >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> > > On Jun 28, 10:42 am, John Popelish <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote: >> > > > Martin Phipps wrote: >> > > > > On Jun 28, 8:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > >> > > > >> I explained why I use the term 'evolutionist' in another post. > Summary >> > > > >> version: I found the term on page 8 of the Nov/2004 issue of >> > > > >> National >> > > > >> Geographic. >> > >> > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism >> > >> > > > > "Scientists object to the terms evolutionism and evolutionist >> > > > > because >> > > > > the -ism and -ist suffixes accentuate belief rather than >> > > > > scientific >> > > > > study. Conversely, creationists use those same two terms partly >> > > > > because the terms accentuate belief, and partly perhaps because >> > > > > they >> > > > > provide a way to package their opposition into one group, >> > > > > seemingly >> > > > > atheist and materialist, designations which are irrelevant to >> > > > > science." >> > >> > > > > To use the term "evolutionist" makes as much sense as calling >> > > > > scientists who believe in gravity "gravitationists" as if gravity >> > > > > were >> > > > > something that one had to believe in. >> > >> > > > Or studies. I can't get too offended by someone calling a >> > > > scientist who studies evolution, an evolutionist. Not when >> > > > other scientists are called chemists, physicists, >> > > > cosmologists and biologists. >> > >> > > Perhaps, but the sciences are called chemistry, physics, cosmology >> > > and >> > > biology and not "chemistrism", "physicism", "cosmologism" or >> > > "biologism". Scientists who study evolution are studying evolution >> > > and not "evolutionism". The latter is a clear attempt of trying to >> > > paint science as religion. >> > >> > For some people, evolution appears to me to be their religion. >> >> And yet you admit... >> >> On Jun 27, 2:34 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > We are in agreement--evolution is a theory. Yes, the theory explains >> > the >> > facts that are backed up with evidence. >> >> Evolution is not a religion if it "explains the facts" and is "backed >> up with evidence". >> >> > However, many of the advocates of evolution do not treat evolution as >> > their religion and as a result can discuss my criticisms without > becoming upset. >> >> You've never provided any criticism of evolution, Jason. All you said >> was that you didn't believe in "abiogenesis and common descent". >> Well, Jason, Natural Selection says nothing about abiogenesis: you've >> been told that over and over again. Besides, the mere fact that you >> don't believe in something is not a criticism: you keep telling us >> that you don't believe in common descent as if you were some sort of >> expert and your opinion should matter to us. There's a reason why >> most people choose to bow to the authority of experts: it's because >> the experts actually know what they are talking about. >> >> Martin > > Martin, > Unlike you, I don't always trust the experts. For hundreds of years, the > experts believed the earth was the center of the universe. Copernicus and > Galileo proved that the experts were wrong. The experts claimed that man > could not fly--the Wright brothers proved they were wrong. Just because > experts tell me that life evolved from non-life, I don't automatically > believe them unless they can prove it in a lab experiment. I did not > believe and accept Natural Selection until a biology professor proved it > to me and I also later read research results that proved it to me. > Jason Glad to see that you are an evolutionist. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2706072123380001@66-52-22-96.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1182999837.081663.66570@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, Martin > <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 28, 10:42 am, John Popelish <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote: >> > Martin Phipps wrote: >> > > On Jun 28, 8:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > >> > >> I explained why I use the term 'evolutionist' in another post. >> > >> Summary >> > >> version: I found the term on page 8 of the Nov/2004 issue of >> > >> National >> > >> Geographic. >> > >> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism >> > >> > > "Scientists object to the terms evolutionism and evolutionist because >> > > the -ism and -ist suffixes accentuate belief rather than scientific >> > > study. Conversely, creationists use those same two terms partly >> > > because the terms accentuate belief, and partly perhaps because they >> > > provide a way to package their opposition into one group, seemingly >> > > atheist and materialist, designations which are irrelevant to >> > > science." >> > >> > > To use the term "evolutionist" makes as much sense as calling >> > > scientists who believe in gravity "gravitationists" as if gravity >> > > were >> > > something that one had to believe in. >> > >> > Or studies. I can't get too offended by someone calling a >> > scientist who studies evolution, an evolutionist. Not when >> > other scientists are called chemists, physicists, >> > cosmologists and biologists. >> >> Perhaps, but the sciences are called chemistry, physics, cosmology and >> biology and not "chemistrism", "physicism", "cosmologism" or >> "biologism". Scientists who study evolution are studying evolution >> and not "evolutionism". The latter is a clear attempt of trying to >> paint science as religion. >> >> Martin > > For some people, evolution appears to me to be their religion. Then you would be wrong. > If you went in to some churches and criticized their religion, they may > get very upset with you. Connection??? > When I criticize aspects of evolution, some people in this newsgroup get > so upset that they call me childest names. One person became so upset over > a minor criticism of evolution that he told me he would never again > respond to my posts. For those sorts of people, evolution is their > religion since they act just like religious people when you criticize > their religion. No, they are just dealing with scientific illiterate's like you. It does make you made when someone with the low level of scientific knowledge that you posses, criticizes scientists who have spent their lives in their chosen fields. > However, many of the advocates of evolution do not treat evolution as > their religion and as a result can discuss my criticisms without becoming > upset. Many of those sorts of people would discard evolution if a better > theory became available. Any true advocate of science would discard a theory if it were proven wrong. Unfortunately for you and your kind, ID and creation science are not scientific theories. In fact, evolution has no scientific challengers. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2706072105460001@66-52-22-96.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1182999220.492790.130940@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 28, 9:08 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <Gr2dnTUtqYqunh7bnZ2dnUVZ_gWdn...@comcast.com>, John >> > Popelish >> > >> > <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote: >> > > Jason wrote: >> > > (snip) >> > > > Yes, a creationist school board and evolutionist both have agendas. >> > >> > > I agree. How about taking a stab at summarizing what you >> > > thing each of those agendas is about. >> > >> > One group wants to teach ID and evolution to the children. >> > One group wants to teach only evolution to the the children. >> >> One group wants to lie to children whereas the "evolutionists" only >> want to teach the truth. >> >> Martin > > Guess which group will rush to court if they don't get their way? Guess which group will be right :-). Quote
Guest 655321 Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <5ehv7nF38g2i7U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > >> "John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message >> news:eeu6835ui1hmjiibc0rk2kv7rtefq2v76g@4ax.com... >>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:27:10 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>> >>>> In article <f136839av8uped9120293qqesobkbfeqtf@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >>>> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:08:35 -0700, in alt.atheism >>>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >>>>> <Jason-2706071808350001@66-52-22-70.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >>>>>> In article <Gr2dnTUtqYqunh7bnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@comcast.com>, John >>>>>> Popelish >>>>>> <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>> (snip) >>>>>>>> Yes, a creationist school board and evolutionist both have agendas. >>>>>>> I agree. How about taking a stab at summarizing what you >>>>>>> thing each of those agendas is about. >>>>>> One group wants to teach ID and evolution to the children. >>>>>> One group wants to teach only evolution to the the children. >>>>>> >>>>> Why would you want to teach lies to children? >>>> I would prefer that teachers not teach evolution because of the lies but >>>> there is nothing that I can do about. >>> There are no lies being taught, Jason, because public schools don't >>> teach ID. >>> >>> Which reminds me ... the last time you "visited" us, I gave you a list >>> of documented examples of deliberate creationist lies. To >>> paraphrase one of your favorite lines, you failed to comment on them. >>> Would you like me to repost them so you can have another shot? <G> >> crickets chirping >> >> I think that's a "no" > > No Jason: "Keep those inconvenient facts away from me. I'll just ignore them anyway. I only believe what I read and hear from the proven liars I respect, anyway." -- 655321 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.