24 Nov 08
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadabout as much chance as you have of opening your mind and leaving a place for someone to drop a worthwhile thought in it!
Robbie, just so that we are all clear where we stand, what exactly is the probability of having at least one winner in each of 1 million, million-dollar lottery lotteries all in a row?
24 Nov 08
Originally posted by robbie carrobiesome nerve you have. nobody thinks that their wisdom is absolute as much as you do. opening ones mind? that is funny coming from you. do you open your mind? do you accept other thoughts dropped in?
about as much chance as you have of opening your mind and leaving a place for someone to drop a worthwhile thought in it!
24 Nov 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Zahlanziactually it may have escaped your attention but i did not formulate ANY of the original thoughts in the initial post, that's right oh great and illustrious one, not a single one, i merely knew of their existence and put them together in a collage of thought, I am an artist not a biochemical engineer, but i have to admit it was rather rich, but worth every moment to see you evolutionists scrimp and scrape for every crust of adverse thought open to you, but alas you have failed, your synopsis of opposition consists of merely calling into question the credentials of the persons quoted in the source text, i had to laugh, a professor of biochemical engineering at a university, how an earth he managed to get and keep his post must be a wonder listening to your comments and secondly your futile attempts to attack creationism, which was not even the subject of the text, it was truly pitiful.
some nerve you have. nobody thinks that their wisdom is absolute as much as you do. opening ones mind? that is funny coming from you. do you open your mind? do you accept other thoughts dropped in?
so if there are no further objections i must of necessity conclude, due to lack of supporting evidence that irreducible complexity is a valid theory and as a direct consequence that life simply could not have evolved in the way that the protagonists of Darwinian evolutionary thought postulate, bbbbbbb dats all folks!
24 Nov 08
Originally posted by robbie carrobie…no this is science verses the myth of evolution debate, which has already been proven, by numerous references and attested to by the most learned of people to be unscientific…
no this is science verses the myth of evolution debate, which has already been proven, by numerous references and attested to by the most learned of people to be unscientific, please let us not delude ourselves, so far it has nothing to do with creationism, that merely shifts the emphasis away from the scientific arguments and provides a target for e ...[text shortened]... ith fairy tales and mythology masquerading in the form of science as is the case with evolution!
That is simply not true. Evolution is a proven scientific fact.
…please let us not delude ourselves, so far it has nothing to do with creationism,.…
Err -what is your alternative hypothesis to evolution -answer; creationism? -what a coincidence! (sarcasm).
…you are right, the word serious should be excluded….
When did I say that the word serious should be excluded?
24 Nov 08
2 edits
Originally posted by Andrew Hamiltonoh please it is to laugh! i thought you said a proven scientific fact! it just gets better and better!!!
[b]…no this is science verses the myth of evolution debate, which has already been proven, by numerous references and attested to by the most learned of people to be unscientific…
That is simply not true. Evolution is a proven scientific fact.
…please let us not delude ourselves, so far it has nothing to do with creationism,.…
E ...[text shortened]... rd serious should be excluded…. [/b]
When did I say that the word serious should be excluded?[/b]
and what has my alternative got to do with anything in regard to evolutionary postulation, that's right my learned friend, absolutely zeeeeero, so please if you cannot or will not make with the readies and provide evidence that irreducible complexity is not a valid theory then enough of this petty jousting and trifling over non realities, and please if you do have evidence can you use simple language so that all may understand , providing references and illustrations where possible as befits someone of your learning and ability!
and speaking of learning and ability where is black beetle?
25 Nov 08
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThere are plenty of objections but you are clearly not interested in hearing them far less understanding them.
so if there are no further objections i must of necessity conclude, due to lack of supporting evidence that irreducible complexity is a valid theory and as a direct consequence that life simply could not have evolved in the way that the protagonists of Darwinian evolutionary thought postulate, bbbbbbb dats all folks!
I find your logic to be wanting when you conclude that a Theory is valid due to lack of supporting evidence. You've been watching too many daffy duck cartoons.
25 Nov 08
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHere I am, this miserable atheist studies endgame theory whilst he tries to win Mathurine, Ulysses the Greek, Paulbachmanfromfics and some other ghoulies and ghosties and long-leggedy beasties and things that go bump in the night;
oh please it is to laugh! i thought you said a proven scientific fact! it just gets better and better!!!
and what has my alternative got to do with anything in regard to evolutionary postulation, that's right my learned friend, absolutely zeeeeero, so please if you cannot or will not make with the readies and provide evidence that irreducible comp ...[text shortened]... ne of your learning and ability!
and speaking of learning and ability where is black beetle?
Why should I participate ere? Mr. Hamilton, twhitehead, Deep Thoughtless, Big Z and the other rational forces they have already made some haggis outtave ye, my de'er trusty feer, so why should I press further joinin this bright, ruthless band which anyway is easily dispatchin ye? And, alas, I cannot help you either, for you freely choose to bang repeatedly this empty skull of yours right on the wall ye numptie🙂
The evidence is plain to see but ye 're hangin around blindfolded it seems, the theory of the evolution is well established but ye cling to false interpretations like Behe's. The scientist which will bring up a different theory will be rewarded with a precious Nobel prize, s/he will create a whole New horizon and s/he will be glorified by countless millions of theists, regardless their religion, and atheists alike. What do ye think ye leggedy beastie, ye realy think that the theory of evolution is a consirancy fabricated by a bunch of sinners??
This is the reason why Bosse de Nage proposed you earlier to tack (needless to add that his kindness and patience amazed me, normally my obnoxious brother would just had you beheaded on the spot). For it's wise to use the Knowledge and the Science in order to back up your philosophy whilst it 's useless to use fractals of cooked up "theories" and shopisms in order to back up your "religion".
The theory of the evolution has to do solely with Knowledge and Science, and it stands allright thanks to this fact. Nothing holy😵
25 Nov 08
Originally posted by robbie carrobieexactly. you have no thoughts, you just repeat what certain people tell you. so if your pastor says that any knowledge besides creationism(i use the term knowledge loosely) is evil, you will not question any of it, nor will you listen to what other people have to tell you. this is how a debate works, one claims something, the other brings counter-arguments, not repeats his position again.
actually it may have escaped your attention but i did not formulate ANY of the original thoughts in the initial post, that's right oh great and illustrious one, not a single one, i merely knew of their existence and put them together in a collage of thought, I am an artist not a biochemical engineer, but i have to admit it was rather rich, but worth ...[text shortened]... way that the protagonists of Darwinian evolutionary thought postulate, bbbbbbb dats all folks!
and how on earth DID he manage to obtain and maintain his position? can you say filthy rich fundamentalist christian college donor?
25 Nov 08
Originally posted by black beetleactually you are wrong. we are not easily dispatching him. we are no match for him. sadly he cheats. by not submitting himself to the basic rules of common sense, that someone else's opinion might be worth something that oneself might be wrong, that there is no absolute truth and everyone might have a point, that one should admit one is lacking knowledge(the real kind) if he cannot answer a question, in short rules for a decent and polite conversation, he has made himself impervious to our ideas.
Here I am, this miserable atheist studies endgame theory whilst he tries to win Mathurine, Ulysses the Greek, Paulbachmanfromfics and some other ghoulies and ghosties and long-leggedy beasties and things that go bump in the night;
Why should I participate ere? Mr. Hamilton, twhitehead, Deep Thoughtless, Big Z and the other rational forces they have a ...[text shortened]... with Knowledge and Science, and it stands allright thanks to this fact. Nothing holy😵
he is superman and we did not find any kriptonite yet. and even if we will find it, he will just close his eyes and go "i can't see the kriptonite so by my logic it is not there". and foil our evil plan to lead him into temptation once again. alas, he is better than us.
25 Nov 08
Originally posted by black beetlebig z hehe
Here I am, this miserable atheist studies endgame theory whilst he tries to win Mathurine, Ulysses the Greek, Paulbachmanfromfics and some other ghoulies and ghosties and long-leggedy beasties and things that go bump in the night;
Why should I participate ere? Mr. Hamilton, twhitehead, Deep Thoughtless, Big Z and the other rational forces they have a ...[text shortened]... with Knowledge and Science, and it stands allright thanks to this fact. Nothing holy😵
hey i am not fat, i am fluffy.