Guest Martin Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 2:55 am, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > news:Jason-2906071048220001@66-52-22-46.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > And so are many advocates of evolution. Various posters have told me that > > there is evidence of life evolving from non-life. > > Show me just one, you damn liar! He's confusing chemical evolution with biological evolution. There is, in fact, a Journal of Molecular Evolution dealing with the field of abiogenesis. It's been going for at least 32 years and contains approximately 4000 articles to date. Jason would, of course, argue that not a single article contains evidence. http://www.springerlink.com/content/100107/ Martin Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 4:23 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <f63of0$e3...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > I understand your point: This is how I would ask the questions: > > > > Do you believe humans evolved from other life-forms without any > > > involvement of god? yes or no > > > > Do you believe that both evolution and intelligent design should be taught > > > in the public schools or just evolution? > > > Do you believe something should be taught in schools that has no > > scientific backing? > > If you are referring to Intelligent Design, it does have fossil evidence > as scientific backing. Again, show us a fossil of your god or stop lying. Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 In article <s4cb83dcef6ojpeq98o3o2c4ctu5fm6q87@4ax.com>, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:42:48 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > <Jason-2806071942490001@66-52-22-115.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >In article <e0l883t608fc0d1nfsgeqg3ccqh8s5efpk@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:59:57 -0700, in alt.atheism > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> <Jason-2806071659570001@66-52-22-101.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >> >In article <tsVgi.1516$ca.481@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > >> ><mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> "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. > >> > > >> >Yes, I accept Natural Selection but not common descent and abiogenesis. > >> > > >> Yet your rejection of these entails rejecting evidence. Why do you > >> reject evidence? > > > >I don't reject evidence. I have stated in other posts that I would accept > >abiogenesis if scientists could conduct a lab experiment that proved that > >life could evolve from non-life. Someone referred me to a site that > >discussed an experiment that proved that some genetic material could be > >produced from non-genetic material. As you know, there is a vast amount of > >difference between genetic material and life. > >Jason > > > You reject evidence. You are not a scientist. You don't get to tell > scientists what evidence you accept and what you reject. You don't even > know what evidence is. The point is that any experiment that was done would have to be repeatable. That means that any of the science professors that teach at the ICR graduate school or Oral Roberts University could repeat the experiment and write a report in their newsletters or on their websites about the results of that experiment. I could also read about it in Discovery Magazine, National Geographic magazine or the Journal of Molecular Evolution website. I may not be able to personally analyze the results of such an experiment but there are lots of other people that could do it. The above mentioned people and organizations know what evidence is. Jason Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 4:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <BRdhi.18042$19.4...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-2906071317290001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <DHchi.6375$09.4...@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > >>news:Jason-2906071053290001@66-52-22-46.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > >> > In article <5eklksF39dc2...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > >> > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > >> >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> > > > >> >> snip > > > >> >> > If people choose not to believe the information in the Bible, that > > >> >> > is > > >> >> > their choice. According to the Time Almanac (2005), 1.9 billion > > >> >> > people > > >> >> > are > > >> >> > Christians so they do believe the information in the Bible. > > > >> >> So? That doesn't make it true. > > > >> > Many of the advocates of evolution believe that life evolved from > > >> > non-life. That doesn't make it true. > > > >> Nice subject shift there Jason. > > > > Thanks for the compliment. > > > No problem. I checked your posting history Jason, and I see that you go back > > to 2005 with the bullshit you have been posting here. Same MO, same results. > > You need to get closer to Jesus. > > You have to much free time on your hands. I was hoping that scientists had > found some new evidence since 2005 but I was wrong. One poster referred me > to a site which indicated that a scientist had been able to design an > experment that caused genetic material to be developed from non-genetic > material. That was an interesting experiment. However, as you know, there > is a vast amount of difference between genetic material and Life. Really? Explain to us, oh great fountain of scientific knowledge, what exactly is the difference between something which is alive and something which reproduces itself chemically? What qualities do your individual cells possess that cause you to say they are "alive"? The evidence that you requested is already available but you lack the scientific know-how to realize it and so you dismiss it out of hand even after promising you wouldn't! Martin Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2906071707530001@66-52-22-15.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <ncfhi.18090$19.11659@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-2906071446190001@66-52-22-78.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <Xvehi.18060$19.16542@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> news:Jason-2906071349500001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> > In article <Q_dhi.18049$19.2518@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> >> news:Jason-2906071331170001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> >> > In article <6Vdhi.18044$19.13430@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> >> >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> >> >> news:Jason-2906071316160001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> >> >> > In article <SGchi.6374$09.2830@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, >> >> >> >> > "Ralph" >> >> >> >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> >> >> >> news:Jason-2906071056190001@66-52-22-46.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> >> >> >> > In article <5ekkkiF386fk4U1@mid.individual.net>, >> >> >> >> >> > "Robibnikoff" >> >> >> >> >> > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> snip >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > There were thousands of people attending the >> >> >> >> >> >> > crucifixion. >> >> >> >> >> >> > The >> >> >> >> >> >> > disciples >> >> >> >> >> >> > were probably part of the crowd. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> How would you know? Were you there? >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > It's speculation based upon the fact that at least three of >> >> >> >> >> > the >> >> >> >> >> > disciples >> >> >> >> >> > discussed aspects of the crucifixion in their gospels. The >> >> >> >> >> > Bible >> >> >> >> >> > does >> >> >> >> >> > indicate that one disciple and the two Marys were present >> >> >> >> >> > when >> >> >> >> >> > the >> >> >> >> >> > body >> >> >> >> >> > of >> >> >> >> >> > Jesus was placed in the tomb. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The disciples didn't write the gospels. In addition, no >> >> >> >> >> disciple >> >> >> >> >> was >> >> >> >> >> present >> >> >> >> >> when the he was placed in the tomb. This is, of course, >> >> >> >> >> calling >> >> >> >> >> a >> >> >> >> >> spade a >> >> >> >> >> spade. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > According to the Bible, one disciple and the two Marys were >> >> >> >> > present >> >> >> >> > when >> >> >> >> > Jesus was placed in the tomb. Of course, if you do not believe >> >> >> >> > the >> >> >> >> > Bible >> >> >> >> > is true than you will not believe that one disciple and the >> >> >> >> > two >> >> >> >> > Marys >> >> >> >> > were >> >> >> >> > present when the body of Jesus was placed in the tomb. >> >> >> >> > Jason >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Gee Jason, I read the gospels to see which disciple was there >> >> >> >> and I >> >> >> >> saw >> >> >> >> no >> >> >> >> reference to one. Perhaps you can give a reference for your >> >> >> >> assertion. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Matthew 27: 57-61 >> >> >> >> >> >> Sorry Jason, no disciple here. >> >> > >> >> > I copied these words from the King James verison of the Bible: >> >> > >> >> > When the evening was come, there came a rich man of Arimathea, named >> >> > Joseph, who also himself was Jesus's diciple. >> >> >> >> The word 'disciple' isn't used in several versions of the bible. In >> >> addition, where I said above 'calling a spade a spade was aimed >> >> directly >> >> at >> >> the scenario. The use of the word disciple is a connotation that it is >> >> one >> >> of the twelve. Joseph of Arimathea was mentioned only once in the >> >> bible >> >> and >> >> it was at this spot. Not much of a disciple, was he? I guess that is >> >> why >> >> some versions say, 'one of Jesus' followers'. Amazing what you can get >> >> the >> >> bible to say, isn't it? >> > >> > As a result of your post, I checked my other Bible which is the "New >> > American Standard" version. It states: >> > >> > And when it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named >> > Joseph, who himself had also became a disciple of Jesus. >> > >> > I don't know whether or not Joseph was an official disciple of Jesus. I >> > looked up the word "disciple" in my Bible dictionary and it did not >> > have a >> > list of the original 12 disciples. >> > >> > Paul was never an official disciple of Jesus but I seem to recall (and >> > could be wrong) that he was also referred to as an apostle (or >> > disciple) >> > of Christ. >> > >> > Some of the disciples stayed in the background. >> > >> > Jason >> >> Tell you what Jason. Since the story of Joseph is in all four gospels, >> why >> don't you read what Mark calls Joseph. You know Jason,to be a rabid >> Christian you know very little about the bible. > > I have never claimed to be a Bible scholar. I learn new things almost > every time I listen to another sermon. Well, then read Mark and learn something. Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 4:42 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <f63pn1$fk...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > In article > > > <DipthotDipthot-677E57.20063928062...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>, > > > 655321 <DipthotDipt...@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: > > >> How many of the numerous creation [myths] do you want to bring into > > >> the ID curriculum? One? A dozen? Two hundred? (Don't worry, there are > > >> that many -- scores more, in fact.) > > > > Only one--Visit the Discovery Institute website for details. They have > > > already published a textbook entitled, "Of Pandas and People". > > > Why that one instead of one of the other hundred or so? > > Because it's the best one. Shouldn't that be for teachers and students to decide? They could have an entire course about the various creation myths from around the world. It would be very enlightening. I would recommend it be part of the elementary school program. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 4:58 am, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > news:Jason-2906071337310001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <BRdhi.18042$19.4...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >>news:Jason-2906071317290001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> > In article <DHchi.6375$09.4...@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > >> > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> >>news:Jason-2906071053290001@66-52-22-46.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> >> > In article <5eklksF39dc2...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > >> >> > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > > >> >> >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> > > >> >> >> snip > > >> >> >> > If people choose not to believe the information in the Bible, > >> >> >> > that > >> >> >> > is > >> >> >> > their choice. According to the Time Almanac (2005), 1.9 billion > >> >> >> > people > >> >> >> > are > >> >> >> > Christians so they do believe the information in the Bible. > > >> >> >> So? That doesn't make it true. > > >> >> > Many of the advocates of evolution believe that life evolved from > >> >> > non-life. That doesn't make it true. > > >> >> Nice subject shift there Jason. > > >> > Thanks for the compliment. > > >> No problem. I checked your posting history Jason, and I see that you go > >> back > >> to 2005 with the bullshit you have been posting here. Same MO, same > >> results. > >> You need to get closer to Jesus. > > > You have to much free time on your hands. I was hoping that scientists had > > found some new evidence since 2005 but I was wrong. One poster referred me > > to a site which indicated that a scientist had been able to design an > > experment that caused genetic material to be developed from non-genetic > > material. That was an interesting experiment. However, as you know, there > > is a vast amount of difference between genetic material and Life. > > No, you weren't hoping that. In the first place you have placed your entire > faith on the hope that life won't be developed. In the second place you have > posted continuously during that time so you haven't been away from the > happenings in abiogenesis, In other words Jason, you're just another liar > for god. He's also had time to make up for his lack of education and actually learn something about evolution and abiogenesis. He hasn't. He says it's "boring". Martin Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 5:50 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > there is no evidence to indicate that > life ever natually evolved from non-life. It's based on speculation > and not evidence. How do you type with your eyes closed? In 1953, the Miller-Uley experiment showed that amino acids could form spontaneously from elements present in the "primorial soup". (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment ) Other experiments showed that bilipid membranes can form spontaneously. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_bilayer ) Sidney Fox's research showed that amino acids can spontaneously form protein chains. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_W._Fox ) Protein chains can then guide the formation of RNA chains just as RNA chains are known to guide the formation of protein chains. (See \http:// http://www.hhmi.org/news/lindquist2.html ). German scientists have already produced molecules in the laboratory that are capable of reproducing themselves and are therefore alive. (See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/217054.stm ). Primative cells would have formed as a way to prevent the contents of the cell from drying out. (See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/239787.stm ). The simplest cells would have been prokaryote cells (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prokaryote ) which would have been the ancestors of modern bacteria and archaea while more advanced eukaryotic cells (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eukaryotic ) would have been the ancestors of modern animal, plant and fungis cells. Eukaryotic cells could have formed through a process known as viral eukaryogenesis (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_eukaryogenesis ) in which a virus forms an endosymbiosic relationship with a host prokaryote cell. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endosymbiotic_theory ) Mitochondria and plastids are also believed to have arisen as a result of endosymbiosis, the evidence being that mitochondria and plastids share characteristics with bacteria cells, the only difference being that they cannot survive independent of the rest of the cell, but that's fine because human cells cannot survive independent of the rest of the body either. In both cases, the parts have evolved to depend on the whole. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Major_Transitions_in_Evolution which has links to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sex and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_multicellularity Martin Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 19:00:01 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-2906071900010001@66-52-22-115.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <s4cb83dcef6ojpeq98o3o2c4ctu5fm6q87@4ax.com>, Free Lunch ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:42:48 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> <Jason-2806071942490001@66-52-22-115.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >In article <e0l883t608fc0d1nfsgeqg3ccqh8s5efpk@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: .... >> >> Yet your rejection of these entails rejecting evidence. Why do you >> >> reject evidence? >> > >> >I don't reject evidence. I have stated in other posts that I would accept >> >abiogenesis if scientists could conduct a lab experiment that proved that >> >life could evolve from non-life. Someone referred me to a site that >> >discussed an experiment that proved that some genetic material could be >> >produced from non-genetic material. As you know, there is a vast amount of >> >difference between genetic material and life. >> >Jason >> > >> You reject evidence. You are not a scientist. You don't get to tell >> scientists what evidence you accept and what you reject. You don't even >> know what evidence is. > >The point is that any experiment that was done would have to be >repeatable. Yes, but not necessarily in the way you insist. > That means that any of the science professors that teach at >the ICR graduate school They don't teach science. Stop lying about that. >or Oral Roberts University could repeat the >experiment and write a report in their newsletters or on their websites >about the results of that experiment. Your point? Oral Roberts is a member of North Central Association. That means they are a real college. I am confident that you would be able to find a qualified Biologist in their faculty. Don't lump them in with the liars of ICR and DI. >I could also read about it in >Discovery Magazine, National Geographic magazine or the Journal of >Molecular Evolution website. I may not be able to personally analyze the >results of such an experiment but there are lots of other people that >could do it. The above mentioned people and organizations know what >evidence is. ICR doesn't. You know they are liars. The rest have no problem with real science. Quote
Guest Martin Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 6:43 am, Brian E. Clark <r...@newsgroup.only.please> wrote: > On 25 Jun., 03:35, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > 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 [Muslim] Mosque > > in the world? > > For those who believe that the god of the Hebrews > and the god of the Christians are the same God -- > please explain why there is a symbol of a cross > in every Christian church. I can answer that: the Christian cross was inspired by the Egyptian ankh cross which honoured Osiris, the Egyptian god famous for having risen from the dead who, in turn, was originally based on the Sumerian god Tammuz for whom the pagan holiday Easter was originally created. Martin Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 13:42:56 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-2906071342570001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <f63pn1$fka$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike ><prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >> > In article >> > <DipthotDipthot-677E57.20063928062007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>, >> > 655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: >> > >> >> In article >> >> <Jason-2806071932410001@66-52-22-115.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >> >>> Do you believe humans evolved from other life-forms without any >> >>> involvement of god? yes or no >> >> That's easy: Why should I? There has been no good reason to do so. >> >> That's the main point for being an atheist. No one has set forth a good >> >> reason to believe in any gods. >> >> >> >> When posed with question whose answer is unknown, the skeptic is pretty >> >> darned comfortable with the answer, "As yet, the answer to that question >> >> is unknown." >> >> >> >> We don't feel the need to fill in the void with invented gods who, >> >> amazingly, fit the void so precisely that they, suddenly, simply must be >> >> true -- looking back post-invention, that is. >> >> >> >>> Do you believe that both evolution and intelligent design should be taught >> >>> in the public schools or just evolution? >> >> ID isn't something someone can teach, because there is no teachable >> >> element of it. It's all preaching when it comes to ID. You have to >> >> invent a god(s) concept to teach; you have to invent the process by >> >> which the god(s) did the creating, and then, perhaps the purpose. >> >> >> >> All this invention has nothing to do with observation. And that's what >> >> makes it unscientific. No "textbook" of any number of pages can conceal >> >> that fact. >> >> >> >> And teaching post-invention is PREACHING, pure and simple. >> >> >> >> So "teaching" ID has no place in public schools. Sunday School, >> >> perhaps. (Bad ones.) >> >> >> >> But you have run away from one of my questions. I'll repeat it here, >> >> and you'll probably run again, or pretend you didn't read it: >> >> >> >> How many of the numerous creation theories do you want to bring into >> >> the ID curriculum? One? A dozen? Two hundred? (Don't worry, there are >> >> that many -- scores more, in fact.) >> > >> > Only one--Visit the Discovery Institute website for details. They have >> > already published a textbook entitled, "Of Pandas and People". >> >> Why that one instead of one of the other hundred or so? > >Because it's the best one. What makes the myths taught in Pandas better than other myths? >> >> In other words, how far down the twisted, branched theological path do >> >> you want to take your 'science' students before you admit to them that >> >> you're NOT teaching them science at all? >> > >> > It's a basic course related to the basics of Intelligent Design. When I >> > took a high school biology class, we only spent about two weeks on >> > evolution. The teacher could cover Intelligent Design in about two weeks. >> >> No, they could cover it in 2 seconds: "Goddidit." > >That's illegal to say in a public school classroom. The teachers would >have to say that an Intelligent Designer done it. When the teachers >covered evolution, the teachers would have to say, "Life evolved from >non-life". That's not part of evolution. -- "Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn." -- Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 8:09 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <MPG.20ef550998157ce198a...@216.196.97.136>, Brian E. Clark > > <r...@newsgroup.only.please> wrote: > > On 25 Jun., 03:35, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > 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 [Muslim] Mosque > > > in the world? > > > For those who believe that the god of the Hebrews > > and the god of the Christians are the same God -- > > please explain why there is a symbol of a cross > > in every Christian church. > > Because Jesus was crucified on a cross. No. He never existed. The story was all made up. Martin Quote
Guest Brian E. Clark Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 In article <Jason-2906071709210001@66-52-22- 15.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, Jason said... > > > 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 [Muslim] Mosque > > > in the world? > > > > For those who believe that the god of the Hebrews > > and the god of the Christians are the same God -- > > please explain why there is a symbol of a cross > > in every Christian church. > > Because Jesus was crucified on a cross. Jewish places of worship do not have crosses on display. Still, Christians insist that the God of the Torah is the God of the Gospels. In other words, the identity of the gods of Judaism and Christianity is asserted even though the Christian religion has particularities, including idiosyncratic symbolisms. Now apply that to your comment about Muslims and crescent moons. -- ----------- Brian E. Clark Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 In article <1183168775.672682.49010@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 30, 4:23 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <f63of0$e3...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > Jason wrote: > > > > I understand your point: This is how I would ask the questions: > > > > > > Do you believe humans evolved from other life-forms without any > > > > involvement of god? yes or no > > > > > > Do you believe that both evolution and intelligent design should be taught > > > > in the public schools or just evolution? > > > > > Do you believe something should be taught in schools that has no > > > scientific backing? > > > > If you are referring to Intelligent Design, it does have fossil evidence > > as scientific backing. > > Again, show us a fossil of your god or stop lying. > > Martin Martin, I've already told you about two books that discuss the evidence. Upon request, I'll try to find an article on the net that provides a summary of the evidence. Jason Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 12:00 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1183168775.672682.49...@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, Martin > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 30, 4:23 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <f63of0$e3...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > > Jason wrote: > > > > > I understand your point: This is how I would ask the questions: > > > > > > Do you believe humans evolved from other life-forms without any > > > > > involvement of god? yes or no > > > > > > Do you believe that both evolution and intelligent design should > be taught > > > > > in the public schools or just evolution? > > > > > Do you believe something should be taught in schools that has no > > > > scientific backing? > > > > If you are referring to Intelligent Design, it does have fossil evidence > > > as scientific backing. > > > Again, show us a fossil of your god or stop lying. > I've already told you about two books that discuss the evidence. I've asked about fossil evidence for your god, Jason, and all you've given me is the title of two books, one which you no longer have and the other which you've never seen. Put up or shut up. Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 In article <1183169797.701414.298060@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 30, 4:42 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <f63pn1$fk...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > Jason wrote: > > > > In article > > > > <DipthotDipthot-677E57.20063928062...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > 655321 <DipthotDipt...@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: > > > > >> How many of the numerous creation [myths] do you want to bring into > > > >> the ID curriculum? One? A dozen? Two hundred? (Don't worry, there are > > > >> that many -- scores more, in fact.) > > > > > > Only one--Visit the Discovery Institute website for details. They have > > > > already published a textbook entitled, "Of Pandas and People". > > > > > Why that one instead of one of the other hundred or so? > > > > Because it's the best one. > > Shouldn't that be for teachers and students to decide? They could > have an entire course about the various creation myths from around the > world. It would be very enlightening. I would recommend it be part > of the elementary school program. > > Martin Would you be in favor of such a course? I posted an article about a public school where Muslim children have a special recess so the Muslim students can have a group prayer session. That same public school has a special class that only has Muslim girls. No boys are allowed to enter that class room. What is your opinion about that public school? Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 In article <abfb83pgo2i5676l16o4ldmbemvoajj8ei@4ax.com>, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 19:00:01 -0700, in alt.atheism > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > <Jason-2906071900010001@66-52-22-115.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >In article <s4cb83dcef6ojpeq98o3o2c4ctu5fm6q87@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:42:48 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> <Jason-2806071942490001@66-52-22-115.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >> >In article <e0l883t608fc0d1nfsgeqg3ccqh8s5efpk@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > ... > > >> >> Yet your rejection of these entails rejecting evidence. Why do you > >> >> reject evidence? > >> > > >> >I don't reject evidence. I have stated in other posts that I would accept > >> >abiogenesis if scientists could conduct a lab experiment that proved that > >> >life could evolve from non-life. Someone referred me to a site that > >> >discussed an experiment that proved that some genetic material could be > >> >produced from non-genetic material. As you know, there is a vast amount of > >> >difference between genetic material and life. > >> >Jason > >> > > >> You reject evidence. You are not a scientist. You don't get to tell > >> scientists what evidence you accept and what you reject. You don't even > >> know what evidence is. > > > >The point is that any experiment that was done would have to be > >repeatable. > > Yes, but not necessarily in the way you insist. > > > That means that any of the science professors that teach at > >the ICR graduate school > > They don't teach science. Stop lying about that. > > >or Oral Roberts University could repeat the > >experiment and write a report in their newsletters or on their websites > >about the results of that experiment. > > Your point? Oral Roberts is a member of North Central Association. That > means they are a real college. I am confident that you would be able to > find a qualified Biologist in their faculty. Don't lump them in with the > liars of ICR and DI. > > >I could also read about it in > >Discovery Magazine, National Geographic magazine or the Journal of > >Molecular Evolution website. I may not be able to personally analyze the > >results of such an experiment but there are lots of other people that > >could do it. The above mentioned people and organizations know what > >evidence is. > > ICR doesn't. You know they are liars. The rest have no problem with real > science. Not a problem: I would visit the Oral Roberts University website and read about the results of such an experiment. I would buy Discorvery Magazine and National Geographic Magazine and read about the results of such an experiment. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 In article <1183168297.334598.41430@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 30, 1:50 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <f63eh0$3v...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > > Then you believe two contradictory things. > > > > > Jesus said "3 days and 3 nights." The disciples said "less than 48 > > > hours." Three days and 3 nights would have to be more than 48 hours. > > > It's simple math (oh, wait, I forgot how boring math is to you.) > > > > The deciples believed it > > The disciples never existed. Nor did Jesus. Nor did the Marys. It > was all a story and the contradictions prove that it was a story. > That's the point. > > Martin Martin, 1.9 million people are Christians. They believe the Easter story. The fact that atheists don't believe the Easter story is not really a problem for those 1.9 million people. Jason Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 12:17 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1183168297.334598.41...@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, Martin > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 30, 1:50 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <f63eh0$3v...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > > > Then you believe two contradictory things. > > > > > Jesus said "3 days and 3 nights." The disciples said "less than 48 > > > > hours." Three days and 3 nights would have to be more than 48 hours. > > > > It's simple math (oh, wait, I forgot how boring math is to you.) > > > > The deciples believed it > > > The disciples never existed. Nor did Jesus. Nor did the Marys. It > > was all a story and the contradictions prove that it was a story. > > That's the point. > 1.9 million people are Christians. They believe the Easter story. The fact > that atheists don't believe the Easter story is not really a problem for > those 1.9 million people. The fact that we don't believe the Easter story is not a problem. The fact that they DO believe the Easter story is a problem for THEM because it is not healthy to believe in lies. Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 In article <60jhi.2311$ca.2082@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-2906071707530001@66-52-22-15.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <ncfhi.18090$19.11659@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> news:Jason-2906071446190001@66-52-22-78.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> > In article <Xvehi.18060$19.16542@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> >> news:Jason-2906071349500001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> >> > In article <Q_dhi.18049$19.2518@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > >> >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> >> >> news:Jason-2906071331170001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> >> >> > In article <6Vdhi.18044$19.13430@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > >> >> >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> >> >> >> news:Jason-2906071316160001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> >> >> >> > In article <SGchi.6374$09.2830@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, > >> >> >> >> > "Ralph" > >> >> >> >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> >> >> >> >> news:Jason-2906071056190001@66-52-22-46.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> >> >> >> >> > In article <5ekkkiF386fk4U1@mid.individual.net>, > >> >> >> >> >> > "Robibnikoff" > >> >> >> >> >> > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote > >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> snip > >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> > There were thousands of people attending the > >> >> >> >> >> >> > crucifixion. > >> >> >> >> >> >> > The > >> >> >> >> >> >> > disciples > >> >> >> >> >> >> > were probably part of the crowd. > >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> How would you know? Were you there? > >> >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> > It's speculation based upon the fact that at least three of > >> >> >> >> >> > the > >> >> >> >> >> > disciples > >> >> >> >> >> > discussed aspects of the crucifixion in their gospels. The > >> >> >> >> >> > Bible > >> >> >> >> >> > does > >> >> >> >> >> > indicate that one disciple and the two Marys were present > >> >> >> >> >> > when > >> >> >> >> >> > the > >> >> >> >> >> > body > >> >> >> >> >> > of > >> >> >> >> >> > Jesus was placed in the tomb. > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> The disciples didn't write the gospels. In addition, no > >> >> >> >> >> disciple > >> >> >> >> >> was > >> >> >> >> >> present > >> >> >> >> >> when the he was placed in the tomb. This is, of course, > >> >> >> >> >> calling > >> >> >> >> >> a > >> >> >> >> >> spade a > >> >> >> >> >> spade. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > According to the Bible, one disciple and the two Marys were > >> >> >> >> > present > >> >> >> >> > when > >> >> >> >> > Jesus was placed in the tomb. Of course, if you do not believe > >> >> >> >> > the > >> >> >> >> > Bible > >> >> >> >> > is true than you will not believe that one disciple and the > >> >> >> >> > two > >> >> >> >> > Marys > >> >> >> >> > were > >> >> >> >> > present when the body of Jesus was placed in the tomb. > >> >> >> >> > Jason > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Gee Jason, I read the gospels to see which disciple was there > >> >> >> >> and I > >> >> >> >> saw > >> >> >> >> no > >> >> >> >> reference to one. Perhaps you can give a reference for your > >> >> >> >> assertion. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Matthew 27: 57-61 > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Sorry Jason, no disciple here. > >> >> > > >> >> > I copied these words from the King James verison of the Bible: > >> >> > > >> >> > When the evening was come, there came a rich man of Arimathea, named > >> >> > Joseph, who also himself was Jesus's diciple. > >> >> > >> >> The word 'disciple' isn't used in several versions of the bible. In > >> >> addition, where I said above 'calling a spade a spade was aimed > >> >> directly > >> >> at > >> >> the scenario. The use of the word disciple is a connotation that it is > >> >> one > >> >> of the twelve. Joseph of Arimathea was mentioned only once in the > >> >> bible > >> >> and > >> >> it was at this spot. Not much of a disciple, was he? I guess that is > >> >> why > >> >> some versions say, 'one of Jesus' followers'. Amazing what you can get > >> >> the > >> >> bible to say, isn't it? > >> > > >> > As a result of your post, I checked my other Bible which is the "New > >> > American Standard" version. It states: > >> > > >> > And when it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named > >> > Joseph, who himself had also became a disciple of Jesus. > >> > > >> > I don't know whether or not Joseph was an official disciple of Jesus. I > >> > looked up the word "disciple" in my Bible dictionary and it did not > >> > have a > >> > list of the original 12 disciples. > >> > > >> > Paul was never an official disciple of Jesus but I seem to recall (and > >> > could be wrong) that he was also referred to as an apostle (or > >> > disciple) > >> > of Christ. > >> > > >> > Some of the disciples stayed in the background. > >> > > >> > Jason > >> > >> Tell you what Jason. Since the story of Joseph is in all four gospels, > >> why > >> don't you read what Mark calls Joseph. You know Jason,to be a rabid > >> Christian you know very little about the bible. > > > > I have never claimed to be a Bible scholar. I learn new things almost > > every time I listen to another sermon. > > Well, then read Mark and learn something. I just read Mark 15: 43-47. It refers to Joseph as a prominent member of the council. He must have been one of those people that was a follower of Jesus but not one of the official 12 disciples of Jesus. I would refer to him as an "unofficial disciple" of Jesus. Paul was also what I refer to as an "unofficial disciple" of Jesus. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 In article <1183168962.712319.241720@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 30, 4:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <BRdhi.18042$19.4...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > >news:Jason-2906071317290001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > > In article <DHchi.6375$09.4...@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > > >>news:Jason-2906071053290001@66-52-22-46.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > >> > In article <5eklksF39dc2...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > > >> > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > > > >> >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> > > > > > >> >> snip > > > > > >> >> > If people choose not to believe the information in the Bible, that > > > >> >> > is > > > >> >> > their choice. According to the Time Almanac (2005), 1.9 billion > > > >> >> > people > > > >> >> > are > > > >> >> > Christians so they do believe the information in the Bible. > > > > > >> >> So? That doesn't make it true. > > > > > >> > Many of the advocates of evolution believe that life evolved from > > > >> > non-life. That doesn't make it true. > > > > > >> Nice subject shift there Jason. > > > > > > Thanks for the compliment. > > > > > No problem. I checked your posting history Jason, and I see that you go back > > > to 2005 with the bullshit you have been posting here. Same MO, same results. > > > You need to get closer to Jesus. > > > > You have to much free time on your hands. I was hoping that scientists had > > found some new evidence since 2005 but I was wrong. One poster referred me > > to a site which indicated that a scientist had been able to design an > > experment that caused genetic material to be developed from non-genetic > > material. That was an interesting experiment. However, as you know, there > > is a vast amount of difference between genetic material and Life. > > Really? Explain to us, oh great fountain of scientific knowledge, > what exactly is the difference between something which is alive and > something which reproduces itself chemically? What qualities do your > individual cells possess that cause you to say they are "alive"? > > The evidence that you requested is already available but you lack the > scientific know-how to realize it and so you dismiss it out of hand > even after promising you wouldn't! > > Martin Martin, Thanks for the compliment. I will believe that life can evolve from non-life when I read an article about it in National Geographic Magazine, the ICR newsletter, The Discover Magazine or on the Oral Roberts University website. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 In article <1183169960.120696.327380@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 30, 4:58 am, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > > > news:Jason-2906071337310001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <BRdhi.18042$19.4...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > >>news:Jason-2906071317290001@66-52-22-103.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > >> > In article <DHchi.6375$09.4...@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > >> > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > >> >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > >> >>news:Jason-2906071053290001@66-52-22-46.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > >> >> > In article <5eklksF39dc2...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > >> >> > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > > >> >> >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> > > > > >> >> >> snip > > > > >> >> >> > If people choose not to believe the information in the Bible, > > >> >> >> > that > > >> >> >> > is > > >> >> >> > their choice. According to the Time Almanac (2005), 1.9 billion > > >> >> >> > people > > >> >> >> > are > > >> >> >> > Christians so they do believe the information in the Bible. > > > > >> >> >> So? That doesn't make it true. > > > > >> >> > Many of the advocates of evolution believe that life evolved from > > >> >> > non-life. That doesn't make it true. > > > > >> >> Nice subject shift there Jason. > > > > >> > Thanks for the compliment. > > > > >> No problem. I checked your posting history Jason, and I see that you go > > >> back > > >> to 2005 with the bullshit you have been posting here. Same MO, same > > >> results. > > >> You need to get closer to Jesus. > > > > > You have to much free time on your hands. I was hoping that scientists had > > > found some new evidence since 2005 but I was wrong. One poster referred me > > > to a site which indicated that a scientist had been able to design an > > > experment that caused genetic material to be developed from non-genetic > > > material. That was an interesting experiment. However, as you know, there > > > is a vast amount of difference between genetic material and Life. > > > > No, you weren't hoping that. In the first place you have placed your entire > > faith on the hope that life won't be developed. In the second place you have > > posted continuously during that time so you haven't been away from the > > happenings in abiogenesis, In other words Jason, you're just another liar > > for god. > > He's also had time to make up for his lack of education and actually > learn something about evolution and abiogenesis. He hasn't. He says > it's "boring". > > Martin Martin, Yes, it is boring to read a twenty page article that was written for scientists. On the other hand, it's easy to read articles about such subjects in magazines such as National Geographic and Discover Magazine because the audience of those authors are not scientists but college graduates that have degrees in many different fields. Jason Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 12:05 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1183169797.701414.298...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 30, 4:42 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <f63pn1$fk...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > > Jason wrote: > > > > > In article > > > > > <DipthotDipthot-677E57.20063928062...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > > 655321 <DipthotDipt...@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: > > > > > >> How many of the numerous creation [myths] do you want to bring into > > > > >> the ID curriculum? One? A dozen? Two hundred? (Don't worry, > there are > > > > >> that many -- scores more, in fact.) > > > > > > Only one--Visit the Discovery Institute website for details. They have > > > > > already published a textbook entitled, "Of Pandas and People". > > > > > Why that one instead of one of the other hundred or so? > > > > Because it's the best one. > > > Shouldn't that be for teachers and students to decide? They could > > have an entire course about the various creation myths from around the > > world. It would be very enlightening. I would recommend it be part > > of the elementary school program. > Would you be in favor of such a course? I posted an article about a public > school where Muslim children have a special recess so the Muslim students > can have a group prayer session. That same public school has a special > class that only has Muslim girls. No boys are allowed to enter that class > room. What is your opinion about that public school? I tolerate religious practices up to the point where people tell me that I have to believe what they believe. I am very consistent in this regard. It is you who are inconsistent because you would insist that secular schools have prayer sessions which all students are required to participate in regardless of their religious background. Obviously Christians can and do pray in private in school and you have no problem with that but you apparently have a problem with Moslems wanting to do the same thing. As for wanting young children to learn about mythology in elementary school, I did learn about Greek and Norse mythology in elementary school. Look how I turned out. Of course I want other children to get the same exposure so that they can more easily separate fact and fiction when they become adults. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 On Jun 30, 12:40 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article > Yes, it is boring to read a twenty page article that was written for > scientists. On the other hand, it's easy to read articles about such > subjects in magazines such as National Geographic and Discover Magazine > because the audience of those authors are not scientists but college > graduates that have degrees in many different fields. And what degree did you actually graduate with, Jason? What job did you get? Somebody once posted that you drove a cab for a living. Is that true? Now that you're retired perhaps you can make something of your life and actually learn some science. It's not too late. Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 In article <MPG.20ef8d91891daf5098a6d2@216.196.97.136>, Brian E. Clark <reply@newsgroup.only.please> wrote: > In article <Jason-2906071709210001@66-52-22- > 15.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, Jason said... > > > > > 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 [Muslim] Mosque > > > > in the world? > > > > > > For those who believe that the god of the Hebrews > > > and the god of the Christians are the same God -- > > > please explain why there is a symbol of a cross > > > in every Christian church. > > > > Because Jesus was crucified on a cross. > > Jewish places of worship do not have crosses on > display. Still, Christians insist that the God of > the Torah is the God of the Gospels. > > In other words, the identity of the gods of > Judaism and Christianity is asserted even though > the Christian religion has particularities, > including idiosyncratic symbolisms. > > Now apply that to your comment about Muslims and > crescent moons. Thanks for your excellent post. If you have a point related to Muslims and the crescent moon--please make it. I continue to believe that the main reason there is a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every mosque 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. However, Muslims believe that Allah and Yahweh are the same Gods. I suggest that you read this book. It was written by Mark Gabriel, a former devout Muslim that is now a Christian. The title of his book is "Jesus and Muhammad". Jason 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.