Intelligent Design support letter to the editor

[six7s]

Do you actually understand some of that? Wow! You really do ROCK!

 

[articulett]

Do you actually understand some of that? Wow! You really do ROCK!

You didn't know I speak woo?

 

[DrBaltar]

Look at like this,"Sombody lite the torch after that big noise called THE BIG/BANG and he's still in here and we are out of the dark".

Who made that somebody? Who made that torch? How do you know?

Look at like this,"Sombody created the God who lites the torch after that big noise called THE BIG/BANG and he's still in here and we are out of the dark".

Who made that somebody? Who made that torch? How do you know?

Look at like this,"Sombody created the creator who created the God who lites the torch after that big noise called THE BIG/BANG and he's still in here and we are out of the dark".

 

[six7s]

Ahaa! Now I see the picture!

Turkeys

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles

Turtles
[QUOTE=Pyrrho]Turtles
[QUOTE=Aristotle]Turtles
[QUOTE=Euclid]Turtles
[QUOTE=Plato]Turtles
[QUOTE=Socrates]Turtles
[QUOTE=Xeno]Turtles
[QUOTE=Pythagoras]Turtles

[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]

 

[NobbyNobbs]

Evolution is not observable like tides and rust.
Evolution is a theory we think is/was, observable through great amounts of time, with leaps of faith to make up for the gaps in the fossil record.

Consider an acorn, a young sapling, and a full grown oak tree. To my knowledge, no one has ever sat around and watched the entire cycle. According to you, we can't know for sure that an acorn develops into an oak tree, unless we have a sample from each and every stage of development.

If Neanderthals weren’t related to us what in the world makes you think that more primitive apes are related to us?
It’s your theory I forgot.

Neandertals are related to us, but they are cousins, rather than ancestors.

I would have to say that the world has more good in it than bad, so your theory doesn’t wash.

What about your theory that people are inherently evil? You seem to have contradicted yourself.

 

[edge]

Consider an acorn, a young sapling, and a full grown oak tree. To my knowledge, no one has ever sat around and watched the entire cycle. According to you, we can't know for sure that an acorn develops into an oak tree, unless we have a sample from each and every stage of development.

You are not even close in a time line of occurrence.
On a short time line you can make up for the gaps because the tree isn’t going anywhere.

Neanderthals are related to us, but they are cousins, rather than ancestors.

I guess I have never met a Neanderthal cousin.
I guess that gorillas are second cousins twice removed what about chimps?

Originally Posted by edge
I would have to say that the world has more good in it than bad, so your theory doesn’t wash.
What about your theory that people are inherently evil? You seem to have contradicted yourself.

It just means that there are more people that make the right choices right now and that comes from various beliefs and conscience.
The evil choices are still there and we all have to make choices in the respect to which paths we take.
Revelations tells us that balance is going to change and it will come from lack of belief and skepticism of the word of God brought on from non-believers.
Shall I show you where it says that?
Or do you know and refuse to listen?
It doesn’t mean we have to stop progressing it means we need to change our hearts.

 

[six7s]

It just means that there are more people that make the right choices right now and that comes from various beliefs and conscience

So... is the 'inherent evil' like 'inherent toothlessness' (something humans grow out of, naturally) or 'inherent illiteracy' (something we learn to overcome)?*

and that comes from various beliefs and conscience

So, considering that well over half of the people on the planet live between Tehran and Tokyo, which belief systems qualify?*

Revelations tells us that balance is going to change

Correction. Revelations tells YOU that balance is going to change.

and it will come from lack of belief and skepticism of the word of God brought on from non-believers.

You do know that scepticism is not synonymous with cynicism, don't you?

If so, are you suggesting that the word of God can't bear the scrutiny of those searching for the truth?*



____________________________________________________
*TIP OF THE DAY: When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging

 

[PBTree]

Revelations tells us that balance is going to change and it will come from lack of belief and skepticism of the word of God brought on from non-believers.

You could show me where it states the date of this change, so I can prepare. Even the year, or the century would be good.

I find it amazing that believers like to use the book as a source of reference but always in an obtuse sort of way. Never giving out the "when answer" to any question.

eg.
"Its going to rain like heck (sometime in the next brazillian years), so start wearing your faith based water-wings now, just to be on the safe side".

"jesus will return".
"When?"
"Never you mind when, just know that he will, sometime".
"How do you know he's coming?"
"I've got this special book and it tells me everything. Can't understand half of what's in it and there appears to be heaps of violence but I am sure it tells me he is coming back"
"Got a date for this event"
"jesus will return."
"When?"
etc etc etc...

 

[six7s]

"jesus will return".

Evidence that he ever left?

 

[PBTree]

Evidence that he ever left?

I have seen the picture of him raising up to heaven from the mount on a beam of light. That has to be evidence of his 'leaving'.

+

Funny thing was though, he looked more like a swedish tennis player than someone from the middle east.

 

[Jeff Corey]

...Revelations tells us that balance is going to change and it will come from lack of belief and skepticism of the word of God brought on from non-believers.
Shall I show you where it says that?
Or do you know and refuse to listen?
It doesn’t mean we have to stop progressing it means we need to change our hearts.

Your Revelations are old writings by deluded people. You seem to have been infected by their delusions. I picture you standing on a milk crate down in the town square blathering this crap to the uninterested.

 

[Drewbot]

How do you know ... (insert religious question here)?

It says so in the book

But how do you KNOW?

It says so in the book

BUT HOW DO YOU KNOW?!?!?!

It says so in the book

I UNDERSTAND IT IS IN THE BOOK! BUT HOW DO YOU KNOW?!!

It says so in the book...

... to infinity ...

 

[Radrook]

Evolution is not observable like tides and rust.
Evolution is a theory we think is/was, observable through great amounts of time, with leaps of faith to make up for the gaps in the fossil record.

The following creationist site has an interesting article which addresses the punctuated equilibrium as opposed to gradualist evolutionist approach and makes reference to the gaps in the fossil record you mention.

Article
http://av.rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyK...ww.godandscience.org/evolution/evolution.html

 

[edge]

You do know that scepticism is not synonymous with cynicism, don't you?

Only in the real world face to face then skeptics are more humble.

If so, are you suggesting that the word of God can't bear the scrutiny of those searching for the truth?*

Heck NO.

*TIP OF THE DAY: When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging

If there’s gold at the bottom you must hit bottom to get the gold/knowledge.


Eldredge and Gould not only showed that paleontologists had been out-of-step with biologists for decades, but also that they had unconsciously trying to force the fossil record into the gradualistic mode. The few supposed examples of gradual evolution were featured in the journals and textbooks, but paleontologists had long been mum about their 'dirty little trade secret:' most species appear suddenly in the fossil record and show no appreciable change for millions of years until their extinction."2
Dr. Donald Prothero


I like that site it’s very informative.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

You are not even close in a time line of occurrence.
On a short time line you can make up for the gaps because the tree isn’t going anywhere.

Sigh.

I guess I have never met a Neanderthal cousin.

Sigh, again.

I guess that gorillas are second cousins twice removed what about chimps?

Considering what I've heard so far, I'd say that chimps are a step up from you, evolutionary-wise.

 

[edge]

Considering what I've heard so far, I'd say that chimps are a step up from you, evolutionary-wise.

Look, skeptyspeak, whatever...

 

[articulett]

Ewwww....this thread has been totally infested by creationist woos... there's no escaping the stupid... and they haven't the intelligence to correct their vast ignorance. They think their head is filled with "higher truth"... they don't need facts or anything.

(Let this serve as a warning to others as to how creationism encourages brain damage. Don't let your babies be taught by creationists...)