08 Jan 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou use the theory of probability verly loosely.
Anyone who condemns something without having made an evaluation of it himself needs his bum felt, especially if he simply takes it upon trust from dubious sources, he is a gullible man, putting faith in every word!
The science of mathematical probability offers striking proof that the Genesis creation account must have come from a source with know ...[text shortened]... in the right order without getting the facts from somewhere is not realistic, nor scientific!!!
Gives us the numbers, give us the calculation!
Ah, you cannot? See, there goes your so called proof.
Call the departement of mathematics at any university and aske them to help you - and the help you get is the foundation of facts - nothing.
What you think is logical is only a way to fit your myth into science, when in fact science and your religion cannot mix. You're simply guessing!
08 Jan 10
Originally posted by FabianFnasi see, you cannot refute the calculations nor their validity therefore you resort to the only avenue open to you, uttering baseless assertions. perhaps you , in your brilliance would like to show, the mathematical probability of getting ten random events in the correct order from the first try, then you shall have cause to talk, as it stands, you need your bum felt!
You use the theory of probability verly loosely.
Gives us the numbers, give us the calculation!
Ah, you cannot? See, there goes your so called proof.
Call the departement of mathematics at any university and aske them to help you - and the help you get is the foundation of facts - nothing.
What you think is logical is only a way to fit your myth into science, when in fact science and your religion cannot mix. You're simply guessing!
08 Jan 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAnd you have no foundation of your so called probability analysis. You're guessing.
i see, you cannot refute the calculations nor their validity therefore you resort to the only avenue open to you, uttering baseless assertions. perhaps you , in your brilliance would like to show, the mathematical probability of getting ten random events in the correct order from the first try, then you shall have cause to talk, as it stands, you need your bum felt!
I don't pretend to make any calculations, simply because it cannot be done with the facts we have so far. The only thing I can say for sure is that probaility of thae fact that there are life on earth is 100%. You explain it religiously and I explain it scientificly.
And that's fine with me. Because your religious truths is never scientific truths.
Religion and science cannot ever mix! Even if you try to disguise your beliefs with science in order to get credability, you should know that science cannot deal with religious fenomena.
08 Jan 10
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasscience is concerned with what is plausible, i have just shown you a plausibility, but your prejudice will not let you get over it, so be it! nor shall any amount of whining negate this fact, buckle up and get over it, plausibility may be equally applied to both religion and science, whether you like it or not!
And you have no foundation of your so called probability analysis. You're guessing.
I don't pretend to make any calculations, simply because it cannot be done with the facts we have so far. The only thing I can say for sure is that probaility of thae fact that there are life on earth is 100%. You explain it religiously and I explain it scientificly.
n order to get credability, you should know that science cannot deal with religious fenomena.
08 Jan 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOkay, let's play your game.
science is concerned with what is plausible, i have just shown you a plausibility, but your prejudice will not let you get over it, so be it! nor shall any amount of whining negate this fact, buckle up and get over it, plausibility may be equally applied to both religion and science, whether you like it or not!
Give me a scientific probability analysis of that the creation happend the way you think! And remember, don't use the bible, unless you can prove it scientifically.
If you can't you're sooo wrong in everything you say.
Can you do it? You should, it's your kind of game.
And for the record: There is nothing about plausibility in the definition of science. Did you think that up yourself? Is it in your JW cult doctrin to think that?
08 Jan 10
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasi just gave you it, i will not do so again. why must you try to insist on conditions and provisos, is your mind not yet broad enough to embrace something other than what it has been programmed to receive?
Okay, let's play your game.
Give me a scientific probability analysis of that the creation happend the way you think! And remember, don't use the bible, unless you can prove it scientifically.
If you can't you're sooo wrong in everything you say.
Can you do it? You should, it's your kind of game.
And for the record: There is nothing about pla ...[text shortened]... on of science. Did you think that up yourself? Is it in your JW cult doctrin to think that?
Never mind bad ol putty cat, once you realise that science is simply about plausibility, then you shall realise how erroneous your statement is.
we have never, nor ever will be a cult. Another obvious manifestation of your prejudice i guess.
08 Jan 10
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo you cannot. Meaning that all you belive in is lies. Creation is phoney and evolution is the truth. Right? Playing by your rules, remember?
i just gave you it, i will not do so again. why must you try to insist on conditions and provisos, is your mind not yet broad enough to embrace something other than what it has been programmed to receive?
Never mind bad ol putty cat, once you realise that science is simply about plausibility, then you shall realise how erroneous your statement ...[text shortened]... we have never, nor ever will be a cult. Another obvious manifestation of your prejudice i guess.
I never mix religion and religion. You can have your religion. You can believe in anything, that doesn't bother me. But when you bring in science and mathematics to prove your thing, then you're dead wrong.
JW is a cult. And you're proud in it. Have you googled "Jehovas Witness child molestation" yet? And "Jehovas Witness paedophilia"? Still proud?
08 Jan 10
2 edits
Originally posted by FabianFnasok, believe what you want but dont try to convince others of it, and will you, for Gods sake, stop repeating that worn out pathetic mantra of science and religion cannot mix, its just so intellectually devoid of anything.
So you cannot. Meaning that all you belive in is lies. Creation is phoney and evolution is the truth. Right? Playing by your rules, remember?
I never mix religion and religion. You can have your religion. You can believe in anything, that doesn't bother me. But when you bring in science and mathematics to prove your thing, then you're dead wrong.
JW "Jehovas Witness child molestation" yet? And "Jehovas Witness paedophilia"? Still proud?
you dont even know what a cult is, nor do i know of any Jehovahs witness who has molested anyone, although i suspect that if there are any cases that come to light, the matter shall be handled over to the police. I doubt in your great ignorance you know anything about it, for as one who self evidently simply gives vent to anything, without actually examining it as to its validity, you'll probably swallow anything that bolsters your prejudice. you are surely the greatest ignoramus of the entire redhotpawn community.
why someone with no knowledge of, nor interest in spirituality, should frequent the spirituality forum is quite beyond me.
you may reply to this if you like, but it is the last thing i shall say to you, goodbye and good riddance.
08 Jan 10
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo now you're telling me that you're not proud of being a JW culter? Because of the great number of chold molesters and paedophiles in the cult? Oh, that's a good first step.
ok, believe what you want but dont try to convince others of it, and will you, for Gods sake, stop repeating that worn out pathetic mantra of science and religion cannot mix, its just so intellectually devoid of anything.
you dont even know what a cult is, nor do i know of any Jehovahs witness who has molested anyone, although i suspect that if t ly to this if you like, but it is the last thing i shall say to you, goodbye and good riddance.
You didn't like me using your method of proving things scientifically? So it's the wrong method when using it aginst you, but the right method when you're using it to prove your weird things?
You cannot prove creation scientifically and you know why? Becuase you cannot prove religious things scientifically. And guess what? - Religion and science cannot mix. Ever. Try and you fail.
Now, go and be a good christian. Not a fundamentalistic culter. And open your eyes within JW and you'll find the people who are in the headlines of the newspapers.
08 Jan 10
Originally posted by FabianFnasyou lost dude.
So now you're telling me that you're not proud of being a JW culter? Because of the great number of chold molesters and paedophiles in the cult? Oh, that's a good first step.
You didn't like me using your method of proving things scientifically? So it's the wrong method when using it aginst you, but the right method when you're using it to prove your w ...[text shortened]... our eyes within JW and you'll find the people who are in the headlines of the newspapers.
08 Jan 10
1 edit
Originally posted by wolfgang59Robbie hate to lose a debate. One method he uses to avoid it is to make us dizzy. Never to be clear. Always avoid the question.
I'm getting dizzy Robbie.
Please YES or NO
were man and woman created on the 6th day?
Genesis 1:27
so God created man,
in his own image,
in the image of God
created he him;
male and female
created he them
When he don't want to be caught in the act he uses the answer "This I have already answered, and I don't want to do it again."
See the sixth posting on this page: "i just gave you it, i will not do so again." 🙂
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
09 Jan 10
Originally posted by wolfgang59The are two creation stories. They have different views of God, different creation starting materials, different views of men and women, and different sequences of creation. They can only be called the same, or aligned, or congruent, by the most irrational of thought that wishes to ignore one for the other.
I'm getting dizzy Robbie.
Please YES or NO
were man and woman created on the 6th day?
Genesis 1:27
so God created man,
in his own image,
in the image of God
created he him;
male and female
created he them
09 Jan 10
Originally posted by FabianFnasStill waiting on his reply.
Robbie hate to lose a debate. One method he uses to avoid it is to make us dizzy. Never to be clear. Always avoid the question.
We know he had read it because he has given other postings about other things, but he is doing his best to avoid to answer this one.
Because he knows that he have to admit that he is wrong. Because he is wrong.
According to the infamous 'robbie retorics': "Always avoid the question."