The Mystery Thread

[Dan From Smithville]

I believe in science, science reveals intelligent design. Why dont you believe in science?

Except it does not. It reveals facts of the physical world. It does not reveal anything about the supernatural.

 

[Jollybear]

To everyone whos goven me a post, im not ignoring you, its just time. So much back log of posts to reply too. Its hard to get to them all.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No such thing as a bad student, now, only a teacher. Take responsibility.

That is something a poor student would claim. There are poor teachers. There are poor students as well. Either you had an endless supply of poor teachers or you are a poor student. When I tried to help you if seemed that you were more interested in making excuses than learning.

 

[Prometheus85]

I believe in science, science reveals intelligent design. Why dont you believe in science?

How does science reveal intelligent design?

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑
I wonder if anyone watches a video that is posted when the poster is too lazy (or too uninformed) to make any comments on the video.

Yeah, well, you see, I've done the evolution thing here and it turned out to be a joke. It's a waste of my time.

I get it. You can't accept evolution because of your religious indoctrination. You're not educated enough to present any real arguments of your own against evolution. You feel overwhelmed. So, in response, you just find videos and articles in creo sites and link to them. It's OK. We understand.

 

[ecco]

The bible is a creation of mankind. God did not write it. In fact, when one comes to really know God, one clearly sees that mankind's holy books reflect mankind. Can you not see the petty things mankind holds dear when you read holy books?

If not the Christian Bible, then on what do you base your views of a god?

 

[ecco]

What Truth about you can I discover by watching you?? Have I really lost your understanding of what I said in this conversation?

Then I guess I have to go back to the start of this converstaion, what Truth can I learn by observing god actions. What actions?

 

[ecco]

No such thing as a bad student, now, only a teacher. Take responsibility.

That sounds like a cop-out that a bad student would try to sell to his parents.

At that point, most parents would give the kid a well-deserved smack across the head.

 

[Earthling]

I get it. You can't accept evolution because of your religious indoctrination. You're not educated enough to present any real arguments of your own against evolution. You feel overwhelmed. So, in response, you just find videos and articles in creo sites and link to them. It's OK. We understand.

Uh, wrong on every count. I rejected evolution when it was first introduced to me in school. I didn't become a believer until years later at 27. I can't accept evolution because it's stupid. Educated enough? If public education is the prerequisite for evolution you better hop up on your toes and see if you can learn for yourself how pathetic that is.

I wouldn't be caught dead at a creo site and I'm not overwhelmed. The idiots that promulgate the failed metaphysical experimentation that is laughingly called the theory of evolution can't abide questions because their "theory" is . . .

b u l l s h i t.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Uh, wrong on every count. I rejected evolution when it was first introduced to me in school. I didn't become a believer until years later at 27. I can't accept evolution because it's stupid. Educated enough? If public education is the prerequisite for evolution you better hop up on your toes and see if you can learn for yourself how pathetic that is.

I wouldn't be caught dead at a creo site and I'm not overwhelmed. The idiots that promulgate the failed metaphysical experimentation that is laughingly called the theory of evolution can't abide questions because their "theory" is . . .

b u l l s h i t.

You can't even ask proper questions. You rejected the theory out of ignorance, not out of knowledge and that ignorance is still extremely obvious today.

But go ahead. Try to ask a question. If it is an improper question I will explain why. If it is a proper one I will do my best to answer it.

 

[Earthling]

You can't even ask proper questions.

There are no improper questions but the ones you can't answer with "you're ignorant," "you're uneducated," and "you can't ask the proper questions."

Educated people are so dumb.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There are no improper questions but the ones you can't answer with "you're ignorant," "you're uneducated," and "you can't ask the proper questions."

Educated people are so dumb.

Have you stopped beating your wife yet? Answer yes or no.

Was that a proper question? I don't think so.

And please don't lie. When you openly show your ignorance you are going to get that comment. When you ask improper questions you will get that sort of response. Why did you not take me up on my challenge? Running away from a reasonable offer is a sign that you know that you are wrong.

 

[Earthling]

Have you stopped beating your wife yet? Answer yes or no.

Was that a proper question? I don't think so.

And please don't lie. When you openly show your ignorance you are going to get that comment. When you ask improper questions you will get that sort of response. Why did you not take me up on my challenge? Running away from a reasonable offer is a sign that you know that you are wrong.

Your stupid theory couldn't withstand the simple questions of an ignorant uneducated creationist. With you at it's helm. Don't blame me. Say hi to Steve, the common ancestor of elephants and pine trees.

Stupid.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your stupid theory couldn't withstand the simple questions of an ignorant uneducated creationist. With you at it's helm. Don't blame me. Say hi to Steve, the common ancestor of elephants and pine trees.

Stupid.

Wrong again. Your ignorant questions cannot refute a theory. But I like the fact that you remembered my response to your poorly asked question.

Running away only tells us that you know that you are wrong.

 

[ecco]

Uh, wrong on every count. I rejected evolution when it was first introduced to me in school. I didn't become a believer until years later at 27. I can't accept evolution because it's stupid.

Yeah, That's what you keep saying.

I wouldn't be caught dead at a creo site and I'm not overwhelmed.

Yeah, That's what you keep saying.

No Creationism. No Evolution. Just the ideas, theories, and concepts of one lone internet poster who goes by the name of Earthling.

 

[ecco]

I rejected evolution when it was first introduced to me in school.

the simple question of someone trying to learn it.

If you rejected evolution when it was first introduced to you in school, why are you pretending to be someone trying to learn it?

 

[Jollybear]

You really don't understand how if both A and Not A are possible under a scenario, you cannot use the presence or absence of A as a test for that scenario? Seriously?

Yes, seriously. Explain.

That's nothing but a circular assertion.

First, you changed your statement. Previously you said "evolutionists use logic, inference, and philosophy", but here you've added in evidence. Please try and maintain consistency.

I dont think your understanding what im saying. And i dont know if i can help you understand either.

Second, scientists use evidence and draw inferences from that evidence. You OTOH have yet to do anything like that. So far, you've merely made a series of empty assertions, made some analogies, and stated your religious beliefs. That's not science.

No, thats not what i have done. Ive done what science does. I dont know why you cant see that. This is like trying to drscribe a tree to a blind person. They cant see it.

Again, how did you establish these things to be so? Did you run some scientific tests, or are they just your religious beliefs?

Do you need to do a test in order to see design and order? No, ya dont. Vut, even those who have, still, theres design and order.

What evidence did you collect that led you to conclude that God possesses the characteristics you describe? And how did you collect it?

Logic, philosophy. And philosophy is not the same as religion. There different.

Again you've done nothing but make yet another empty assertion. You need to show where those folks have advocated "nothing+chance+time" as you claimed.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...gwA3oECAQQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1rFbeJuz5XQywuZ7OhDaMk

Theres one source for now.

You do understand the difference between saying something is so and actually showing it to be so, don't you?

You do understand the difference between being shown and actually seeing it, dont you?

There you go again, imposing your religious beliefs onto the scenario. That's not how science works.

Let me ask you, whats the difference between religion and philosophy?

You really think so? You truly think you've presented a valid, evidence-based scientific case for ID creationism in this thread?

No, i dont THINK i did, i KNOW i presented a evidence-base scientific case for ID.

Your posts in this thread are there for anyone to read, and the fact that they are completely devoid of evidence is very clear.

Anyone who already agrees with ID, will see the evidence i presented. Anyone elsr, like you, will not see it.

All you've done is try to explain one mystery (how did the universe begin) by invoking another mystery (God).

There has to be a prime reality.

Think of it this way....if I said the universe came about via a magical invisible leprechaun, how is that any different than what you're proposing?

A leprechaun is better then "nothing" creating it all. Its also better then infinite regression, which make the universes events take forever to happen, which means theyed never happen.

But hey. A leprechaun is confined to space, time and matter. The God i defined is not. Thats the difference.

Again, very circular. What tests did you carry out to determine that God is energy?

If God created it, which the evidence is there by design, then God is tge energy, logically.

ID creationism was resoundingly rejected by the scientific community over 20 years ago, and was ruled to be a variation of creationism/religion by a federal court. It is not taught in universities or high schools. No private biotech firm utilizes it.

Do you see the point? From a practical, useful standpoint ID creationism is dead. It only persists as a religious belief, the same as young-earth creationism. And the nature of your posts are a very good demonstration of why that is so.

Its not religion. People who are religioys can adhere to it. But its not religion.

 

[Milton Platt]

Take it easy. Take it slow. No fuss.

First question. Is it okay for me to reject evolution while accepting other tenets of science?

Absolutely. But there is a lot of colateral damage. You must reject major portions of biology, geology, physics, genetics, anthropology, paleontology, cosmology, just to name a few.

 

[Earthling]

Absolutely. But there is a lot of colateral damage. You must reject major portions of biology, geology, physics, genetics, anthropology, paleontology, cosmology, just to name a few.

It's of no use to me.

 

[Earthling]

If you rejected evolution when it was first introduced to you in school, why are you pretending to be someone trying to learn it?

Like I've said a few times, to be better equipped to criticize it. To debunk it.