Guest Martin Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 On Jul 5, 3:32 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <382dnajAcZBI0RHbnZ2dnUVZ_rPin...@sti.net>, "David V." > > <s...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > > It's not a problem related to most professors but some > > > professors are nut cases. One radio preacher told this story: > > > You dishonestly neglect the fact that the radio preacher made up > > the story and is actually the nut case. > > > Are you ready to concede that evolution is a fact? > > The person that wrote the article that appeared in the Nov/2004 issue of > National Geographic stated (on page 8) that evolution was a theory. I > agree with that author. Really? On Jun 12, 8:45 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > The title of the article was > WAS DARWIN WRONG? > the answer was: > No--the evidence for evolution is overwhelming. Oh and for my bonus point: users.ameritech.net/dennisreynolds1/GravitationalTheory.html Martin Quote
Guest Martin Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 On Jul 5, 3:35 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1183614288.256108.75...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jul 5, 8:49 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > It's not a problem related to most professors but some professors are nut > > > cases. One radio preacher told this story: The nut case professor asked > > > all Christians in his class to raise their hands. He told the rest of the > > > students to look at all of the students that had their hands raised. The > > > professor stated: "These students love their little black books more than > > > they love intellectual knowledge." > > > You told us that a friend at your college told you that about one of > > the professors teaching there! Now you're telling it as a radio > > preacher! > That was another story. There are lots of atheist professors that hate > Christians so there are lots of stories. There are a lot of Christians who hate secular professors so they make up a lot of stories that you naively believe. Either that or you're making these stories up yourself. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 On Jul 5, 3:39 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1183602912.989554.158...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Jul 5, 1:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <bsjm83tr7a70d5he8r35suvq5grq2po...@4ax.com>, John Baker > > > > <n...@bizniz.net> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:14:33 -0700, Martin <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > >On Jul 4, 9:08 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > >> I was told by advisers to never have arguments with professors > > > > >> since it could have an effect upon the final grades. > > > > > >Once again, you prove that you never got a proper education. > > > > >Qualified professors WELCOME arguments, especially during class. It > > > > >is MUCH more interesting than a dry lecture. > > > > > And often allows them to make a point much more effectively. > > > > Not always--Let' say that the professor is an athiest that is like some of > > > the members of this newsgroup in that he has some sort of deep hatred for > > > Christians. Such a professor may enjoy having an argument with that > > > Christian in class in order to better make his points. However, if written > > > reports are required, it's very likely that the professor would give that > > > Christian a lower grade than he deserved on the written reports. > > > If the truth was explained to this Christian and he still didn't get > > it then he deserved a low grade. Period. > > > We don't hate Christians: we hate the ignorance and lies they espouse. > Do you now understand why advisors tell students not to have arguments > with professors? It's because you want to remain ignorant. Well, too bad, Jason, it's our job to educate you. Your own college professors obviously failed but I'm willing to give it a shot for now. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 On Jul 5, 3:44 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <B40ji.8195$Rw1.1...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>, > b...@nonespam.com wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > In article <pan.2007.07.04.19.50...@exit.com>, Frank Mayhar > > > <f...@exit.com> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 09:48:40 +0930, Michael Gray wrote: > > > >>> On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 13:05:48 -0700, Frank Mayhar <f...@exit.com> wrote: > > >>> - Refer: <pan.2007.07.03.20.05...@exit.com> > > >>>> On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 10:39:11 -0700, Jason wrote: > > > >>>>> In article <pan.2007.07.03.17.04...@exit.com>, Frank Mayhar > > >>>>> <f...@exit.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>> On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 23:02:39 -0700, Jason wrote: > > >>>>>>> The evolution section of the biology class was a waste of time. > > >>>>>> Flunked, did you? > > >>>>> I received an A grade. > > >>>> Suuure you did. > > >>> What would YOU do if you had the misfortune to be assigned to educate > > >>> Jason? > > >>> If it were me, I'd make damn sure that I did not allow him to repeat a > > >>> year in my class! > > >> Yeah, but you can do that without giving him an A. A C- or D+ would do > > >> fine, most places. > > > >> Me, I would just flunk him. Next time, the same. And I would make sure > > >> my colleagues were aware of the situation. > > > > Now you understand why advisers tell students to not have arguments with > > > teachers or professors. I kept my opinions to myself when I was a student. > > > The only exception was when I had an argument with a professor in his > > > office. That professor was in charge of a evolution vs. creation seminar. > > > Grades were not involved related to the seminar. That same professor later > > > had a debate with Dr. Gish. I enjoyed watching Dr. Gish win that debate. > > > That professor became so upset that he made a fool of himself in front of > > > over 200 people. He was shouting like a little kid. > > > Jason > > > And you learned from him, didn't you Jason. Is that what you are > > practicing here? You seem to be very effective at making people lose > > their tempers with you. > > It's easy. Do you want to explain how you do it for anybody new to the thread? Martin Quote
Guest Martin Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 On Jul 5, 3:48 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <L90ji.8198$Rw1.7...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>, > b...@nonespam.com wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > Do you think that professsor would grade my written reports the same way > > > that he would grade the written reports of students that were atheists? > > > He'd better, unless he wants to be censured by the academic authorities > > at the school. Grades should not be religion-based, just based on the > > content of the reports. > > That's the way it is suppose to work. I doubt that many atheist professors > even realize that they judge the written reports of Christian students > more harshly than they grade the papers of atheist students. Oh no I'm sure they suspect the reason why some students simply don't get it. I noticed the same lack of ability to think outside the box with Muslim students. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 On Jul 5, 4:00 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <LImdncfn-ookBxHbnZ2dnUVZ_vvin...@comcast.com>, John Popelish > > <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote: > > Jason wrote: > > > > How many times do I have to tell you about the fossil and bone evidence > > > that is mentioned in two different books? > > > Except that you haven't told us anything about it. What is > > it, and how does it support creation better than evolution? > > Upon your request, I'll google fossil evidence and find an article and post it. This is another example of your dishonesty, Jason. We've been asking you to show fossil evidence of your god from the very beginning. Martin Quote
Guest Mike Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <f6gk8n$v9f$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <5euviqF3a5qs7U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" >>> <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: >>> >>>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> >>>> >>>> snipo >>>>> I see it different. I see evolutionists that that rush to court to stop >>>>> any school systems from teaching Intelligent Design. They do not want any >>>>> competition. >>>> Why do you keep telling this lie? >>> It's my opinion that if evolutionists honestly believed that childen would >>> laugh at creation science and would understand that evolution made much >>> more sense than creation science--that they would not ever be concerned >>> when many school systems started teaching intelligent design. That is NOT >>> the case. >> Correct, that's not the case. Why? Because children are suggestible and >> can't always tell the difference between fact and "fiction presented as >> fact." That's why we don't teach them that "the earth is flat" is a >> viable theory, nor to we teach them that "man never went to the moon" >> could possibly be true. >> >> We do teach them what's supported by evidence, however. > > What is your opinion about teachers teaching historical revisionism > instead of historical facts? What is your opinion about the point that was made? Quote
Guest Mike Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 Ralph wrote: > Years ago I paid good money for a book that turned out to be > a collection of some idiots musings. Didn't make that mistake again. Jason wrote a BOOK? Oh, wait, you mean some OTHER idiot's musings. Quote
Guest Mike Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <f6gpv4$6pc$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <1183429476.650037.52430@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >>> Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> According to the 2005 American Community Survey >>>> (See > http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/STTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-qr_name=ACS_2005_EST_G00_S0101&-ds_name=ACS_2005_EST_G00_) >>>> 16.6% of the American population is over sixty. By your own >>>> admission, these people never learned evolution is high school. The >>>> number of people who know the truth can only go up as people your age >>>> and older pass on. >>>> >>>> Martin >> Key phrase here is "The number of people who know the truth can only go >> up as people your age and older pass on." >> >>> As long as the evolutionists are able to prevent the teaching of ID in >>> public high schools, you are correct. >> So Jason finally admits that evolution is the truth. >> >> However, if children in high school >>> were allowed to learn about Intelligent Design, the statistics would run >>> in our favor. >> Now he admits that if ID was taught, then the stats would run in his >> favor and NOT in the direction of "The number of people who know the >> truth can only go up." >> >>> The evolutionists don't want a competing theory to be taught since they >>> know the children would realize that ID makes more sense. >> Yes, children are highly suggestible and tend to "realize" the wrong >> thing when taught lies. >> >> If evolutionists >>> honestly believed the children would see it as a lie--they would not even >>> care whether or not ID was taught in the public schools. >> Yes, they realize sometimes when a lie is presented as being the truth, >> children start to believe it. That's why they won't teach it as being true. >> >> Glad to see you come to your senses, Jason. > > Have you done any research on brainwashing? If so, you would understand > the real reason why evolutionists will rush to court to prevent any school > system from teaching intelligent design. So in one breath, you admit that evolution is the truth and should be taught and in the next you claim it's brainwashing. Please make up your mind. <snip remaining crap> Quote
Guest Mike Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <f6gp3f$5q5$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Do you want them to teach flat-earth and round-earth and let the kids >> decide? How about "bad vapors" and "germ theory"? Or "earth-centered" vs >> "sun centered"? You probably don't want those choices all offered, do >> you? Then why offer a choice here between "crap" and fact? Even if you >> think ID is the fact and evolution is the crap, why would you want crap >> being taught? It makes no logical sense. >> >> (And I'm going to keep asking this every time you come up with this >> "teach them both" nonsense.) > > I answered similar questions in other posts. In those cases, I would write > letters to the members of the school board but would not hire a lawyer and > take the school system to court. I.e. you don't want them to teach nonsense along with the real facts. So why would you ever want both evolution and ID both taught? OBVIOUSLY, one is wrong and the other is right. So why teach the one that's wrong (which ever one that is?) BTW, you did NOT answer the question asked. That's why I asked it again. In fact, I'll separate it out for you so it's not surrounded by other text: Why do you want something that is wrong taught along with something that is right (without trying to decide which is which here)? Quote
Guest Mike Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 cactus wrote: > This behavior is effective for polemical debate, which is his paradigm. > He is not here to learn, he is here to get his viewpoint out into > aetherspace. The best we can hope for is to counteract his polemical > drivel with ours. "Counteract his polemical drivel with [our polemical drivel]"? Quote
Guest Mike Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 Michael Gray wrote: > On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 03:53:01 -0700, gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > - Refer: <1183373581.914529.222960@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> >> On 1 Jul., 00:31, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>> I don't believe they tell lies or are dishonest. They have a different >>> point of view.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote snip > > I doubt that teachers in America are teaching false information about the > Holocaust. However, they are teaching false information about such things > as Thanksgiving. "Thanking God" is no longer mentioned when the teachers > discuss Thanksgiving with children. And you know this "how", exactly? Not to mention that the pilgrims should have been thanking the native americans, not some god. And, of course, we all know how the native americans were repaid for their kindness. -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote snip > Martin, > However, if the settlers and Indians did give the THANKS to God during the > first Thanksgiving--that should be what is taught to children. Why? Because you say so? Guess again, deary. > In that case, it would be teaching a lie Wrong. --if teachers told the class that > the reason it is called THANKSgiving is because it was a ceremony for the > settlers to THANK the Indians for their help. Which is just as it should be. -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0307072150250001@66-52-22-113.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <AeydndR-J_x_ZhfbnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@sti.net>, "David V." > <spam@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> Martin Phipps wrote: >> > On Jul 4, 1:47 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > >> >> In article <A5idnfhzXpow_BfbnZ2dnUVZ_hWdn...@sti.net>, >> >> "David V." >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <s...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Jason wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> "David > V." <s...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>>>> Jason wrote: >> >> >> >>>>>> If the cell colony had evolved into a multicelled >> >>>>>> life form--we all would have seen these words on the >> >>>>>> cover of National Geographic magazine: >> >> >> >>>>>> EVOLUTION FINALLY PROVED TO BE A FACT >> >> >> >>>>> Do you know why you'll never see those words? >> >>>>> Evolution has been proven as a fact for some time now. >> >>>>> The only objections are religious. >> >> >> >>>> Evolution is a theory >> >> >> >>> Evolution is a fact. Get over it. >> >> >> >>> ...... >> >>> Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts >> >>> and theories are different things, not rungs in a >> >>> hierarchy of increasing certainty. ..... >> >> [snip for brevity] >> >>> - Stephen J. Gould, " Evolution as Fact and Theory"; >> >>> Discover, May 1981 >> >> >> >> Does Stephen Gould believe that evolution is an imperfect >> >> fact? >> > >> > >> > Why don't you read what he says. You should understand it: >> > you got an A in college biology, remember? XD >> >> I have absolutely no doubt that he read none of it and understood >> even less of it. > > I only read whatever the professor told us to read. Obviously. -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote snip > I disagree. I have had to deal with one nut case professor that seemed to > hate Christians. There are probably other nut case professors in other > colleges that also try to humiliate Christians. What makes you think your experience is a universal one. BTW, in all my years of college (have a BA in English Lit), I don't recall religion being mentioned once. Where the heck did you go to school? -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> snip > That was another story. There are lots of atheist professors that hate > Christians so there are lots of stories. Really? Prove it. Show some cites. -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote snip > That's the way it is suppose to work. I doubt that many atheist professors > even realize that they judge the written reports of Christian students > more harshly than they grade the papers of atheist students. Where's your evidence that atheists professors do this? -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com>snip > Martin, > I doubt that you would humiliate any of your students--at least I hope > not. Most professors are decent people. I only had one nut case > professors. So why are you claiming that all atheist professors would behave the way you claim this one did? -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in snip > Big Brother brainwashed the children by teaching the students what he > wanted them to learn. He did not allow the students to learn two different > theories. Do you honestly think that kids can't learn anything on their own? -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in snip > Believe it or not, more people in America agree with me than agree with > you. About 88% of Americans agree with me and about 12% of Americans agree > with you. So? -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-0507070025170001@66-52-22-38.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <pan.2007.07.05.04.01.13@exit.com>, Frank Mayhar > <frank@exit.com> wrote: snip >> Better, perhaps, than making a fool of yourself in front of uncounted >> thousands, as _you_ are doing. > > The reality is that about 88% of Americans agree with me and about 12% of > Americans agree with you. So what? That doesn't make you right. -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote snip > The advocates of creation science know that God created life. No, that's what they BELIEVE. -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Don Kresch Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 In alt.atheism On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 00:13:11 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) let us all know that: >I suggest that you visit Wikipedia to find out about the Law of Biogenesis. I suggest you visit a biology textbook and find out that there is no such thing as the law of biogenesis. 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" Quote
Guest Don Kresch Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 In alt.atheism On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 00:32:38 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) let us all know that: >The person that wrote the article that appeared in the Nov/2004 issue of >National Geographic stated (on page 8) that evolution was a theory. I >agree with that author. And in the Dover court case, the judge said that ID isn't science, but rather it is religion. I agree with the judge. 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" 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.