Creationist Scum

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

Originally Posted by MollyMac

No, bigger nukes slow them down.

A weapon made solely not never have to be used.

Like the 100 megaton nuclear warhead tested in the wastelands of Russia that would yield a total blast radius roughly the size of Los Angeles county.

[viscus]

So you make one hundred nukes to intimidate potential enemies, who in turn decide to make two hundred nukes to intimidate you. You in turn make five hundred nukes, then the other guys make a thousand, then you make ten thousand...you see where this is headed?

And all the while, money is being spent on nukes instead of providing education or health care or environmental preservation for your people, and now you've got all these nukes lying around to be misplaced, stolen, or have an accident with.

*thumbs up*

[Deadmanwalking_05]

And that is how the U.S. "Won" the Cold War,the Russians went bankrupt trying to match or out match our nukes.

In the end neither side used them,both ended up getting rid of the same weapons they tried to stockpile for use against eachother.

and in turn it has put the worlds nations at risk.


I thought this was about creationism?

[Wednesday Friday Addams]

ummm they Russians went far past matching the US in the amount of nukes they have.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

It doesn't matter,who had more than who,it still bankrupted the U.S.S.R.

And I thought this thread was about creationism.

[viscus]

Well, that and the whole Afghanistan thing were big reasons. I'm not sure you can attribute the breakup of the USSR to any single factor, though. Anyways, many of those nuclear missiles they made are still sitting derelict in silos.

The thread was about creationism until this was brought up. Don't you think we've all but closed the book on creationism, though? I mean, we've pretty much established that there's nothing outside of one's subjective opinion that's going to convince anyone else that the advent of life was driven by some supernatural force.

[7734¯7IA3]

Originally Posted by viscus

Well, that and the whole Afghanistan thing were big reasons. I'm not sure you can attribute the breakup of the USSR to any single factor, though. Anyways, many of those nuclear missiles they made are still sitting derelict in silos.

The thread was about creationism until this was brought up. Don't you think we've all but closed the book on creationism, though? I mean, we've pretty much established that there's nothing outside of one's subjective opinion that's going to convince anyone else that the advent of life was driven by some supernatural force.

Yes, but you've seem to have forgotten all about the ROMAN Catholics like me LOL!

And I'm still waiting to hear Godslayer's indisputable proof (if there is any) of evolution....All I've read thus far is his falsif$^%$%&$& WTF??? kinda crap....anyways, Godslayer, youre good at intimidation but you haven't proved YOUR scientific evolutionist theories....I'm NOT convinced, LOL! I must admit you do "sound" like an intellectual but you're unconvincing...Where's the missing limk??? Can YOU provide solid evidence for this???

Yeah, I thought you and your nerdy scientific-zealots couldn't! LMAO!

Man, I feel sorry for ppl who don't believe....(from a "psychological well being" perspective)

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by 7734¯7IA3

Yes, but you've seem to have forgotten all about the ROMAN Catholics like me LOL!

I was raised in early childhood to teen as a Roman Catholic. Remember that when you read further on what I am about to say.

Originally Posted by 8675-309

And I'm still waiting to hear Godslayer's indisputable proof (if there is any) of evolution....

It isn't Godslayer's proof, it is the proof of scientists from around the world, some of them Christian.

Originally Posted by 8675-three -oh- niiii-ii-iine!

All I've read thus far is his falsif$^%$%&$& WTF??? kinda crap....

Well no wonder you can't understand what has been written, from they way you seem to read it is amazing you can post in this thread at all.

Originally Posted by Jenny Jenny You're the Girl For me

anyways, Godslayer, youre good at intimidation but you haven't proved YOUR scientific evolutionist theories....I'm NOT convinced, LOL!

Again, they are not HIS theories. And if logic and reason are intimidating, then you will be seriously whipped in this world. Good luck.

Originally Posted by I got it I got it I got your number on the waaaaaall

I must admit you do "sound" like an intellectual but you're unconvincing...Where's the missing limk???

The missing link is in your mirror.

Originally Posted by 867-5309

Can YOU provide solid evidence for this???

Anyone can. It's call fossil evidence.

Originally Posted by babbling brook

Yeah, I thought you and your nerdy scientific-zealots couldn't! LMAO!

Nerdy scientific zealots are the reason you can reveal your stupidity to the whole world without a clue as to how computers work.

Originally Posted by Tommy Two-Tone

Man, I feel sorry for ppl who don't believe....(from a "psychological well being" perspective)

I believe but I feel sorry for ignorant idiots who attempt to debate a topic for which they are not prepared in the least.

[HumanePain]

Originally Posted by HumanePain

...
from they way you seem to read ...
It's call fossil evidence.

Oh, the irony!

Karma is a cruel bitch.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by 7734¯7IA3

Yes, but you've seem to have forgotten all about the ROMAN Catholics like me LOL!

And I'm still waiting to hear Godslayer's indisputable proof (if there is any) of evolution....All I've read thus far is his falsif$^%$%&$& WTF??? kinda crap....anyways, Godslayer, youre good at intimidation but you haven't proved YOUR scientific evolutionist theories....I'm NOT convinced, LOL! I must admit you do "sound" like an intellectual but you're unconvincing...Where's the missing limk??? Can YOU provide solid evidence for this???

Yeah, I thought you and your nerdy scientific-zealots couldn't! LMAO!

Man, I feel sorry for ppl who don't believe....(from a "psychological well being" perspective)

Holy shit, you're a creationist. It doesn't really surprise me, though. I'm sorry, but that's not even a personal attack. You always come up with bigoted bullshit, so it's only predictable you're also a creationist. I've met several creationists that can stand their ground sort of, but you just say whatever's the most far right you can think of.
But anyway.
Why are you being so confrontational? The whole debate in here wasn't that creationism is bullshit (which it is)
It was merely that creationism is clearly not science, as proved by the definition of science and its inherent property of falsifiability (which, despite you saying you read over and over and over in my posts you couldn't even spell. Hilarious)

Instead of talking about the fact that creationism is not science, do you want to expand the conversation into the fact that creationism is bullshit all the way?
It would be a nice conversation, but I think I'll pass. You're just not a person I'm interested in having a conversation.
Every time someone is having a thoughtful conversation you just come in and start spewing bullshit and unbased opinions and conservative rhetoric. It's just something that doesn't appeal me.
If you decide to take this as that "I'm just scared and I'm dumb and I can't prove that evolution is true" then so be it. For once, I'm not interested in convincing someone of the truth.

On the other hand, if you can make one sole post without an idiotic personal attack, with based opinions, and with an actually thought-out premise, then I will gladly go step by step in disproving creationism.
There, let that be your filter. If you're really wanting to have an actual debate with me, then just do that and I'll respect you. On the other hand if you're just trying to shout louder than me, which I fear you are, I really don't have a need to fall into that.

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by 7734¯7IA3

All I've read thus far is his falsif$^%$%&$& WTF??? kinda crap....

If you'd bothered to look up the definition of the word, you'd understand why it's not "crap." Of course, given your arguments so far, you'd probably still dismiss it.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

The "theory" of Evolution as I take it is fact,there is too much not to notice.

Those that go the creationist route are more than welcome to ignore the facts as much as they want,it doesn't change the way individuals see things,it's really up to the person.

[viscus]

Originally Posted by 7734¯7IA3

Yes, but you've seem to have forgotten all about the ROMAN Catholics like me LOL!

And I'm still waiting to hear Godslayer's indisputable proof (if there is any) of evolution....All I've read thus far is his falsif$^%$%&$& WTF??? kinda crap....anyways, Godslayer, youre good at intimidation but you haven't proved YOUR scientific evolutionist theories....I'm NOT convinced, LOL! I must admit you do "sound" like an intellectual but you're unconvincing...Where's the missing limk??? Can YOU provide solid evidence for this???

Yeah, I thought you and your nerdy scientific-zealots couldn't! LMAO!

Man, I feel sorry for ppl who don't believe....(from a "psychological well being" perspective)

You're a troll. Pure and simple.

But like an idiot, I'm going to indulge you anyway.

With no outstanding evidence to the contrary, evolution is a sound theory and we can safely reason it to be true. Now, there's nothing to disprove creationism either, but creationism is fucked to begin with because it can be twisted to suit any possible scenario. INFALLIBLE = INVALID.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Another thing is the whole question of inbreeding,If the world started with one man and one woman (Christian) would'nt we still be waging war with sticks,stones,and handfuls of thrown shit?

[Duane]

Not really, because when Eve ate the fruit, and they were kicked out of paradise((Not how it went in the bible, excactly, but I don't read it)) They gave in to tempation, and began Dancing the "dance", they danced all day, and all night long. They were joined by others who joined in the "dance", this went on until dozens of people were dancing the dance, and the more they went from sticks, stones and shit, to swords, staffs, and dung bombs. THEN THE WORLD BEGAN ON THE ROAD DOWN THE SHITTAH!!!

[x-deviant-x]

Ok, that right there doesn't even make sense because if adam and eve were the first humans, who the hell were they "dancing" with?

[Jaye Jang]

Jilly,

There are creationists who are scientists (i.e. Duane Gish, who was an anthropologist, and there was an astrophysicist, I think Otto Orville. Saw him awhile back). Duane Gish not only utilizes the Bible, he also discusses everything from the first and second laws of thermodynamics to discrepancies in the fossile record. The astrophysicist discussed everything from the time-space continuum to the 'Big Bang Theory." Not to be confrontatinal, but there quite a few creationistis who are scientists, and more than a few scientists who are creationists.

DMW, I studied, some time back, a group of people living at the same time as 'Adam and Eve', who not only had burial rituals, but -- I believe-- used metal tipped tools. Unfortunately, I don't remember what the name was anymore, and that textbook is no longer in print.

[Jaye Jang]

Sorry, just remembered. Otto Orvile designed car engines. The scientist's name was Otto Berg. He was an astrophysicist with the Max Planck Institute in Germany.

[x-deviant-x]

There are too many creation myths with too many different characters and story lines. If creation were to be taught in a science class, which creation myth would be the "right" one to teach? What makes the story of Adam and Eve any more valid than the story of Dayuni'si (cherokee creation myth) or Nu Kua (chinese creation myth) or any of the myriad of other creation myths, many of which have vastly different ideas and reasons behind why things happened as they did.

In order to teach creationism with any validity, it would have to be taught as a mythology or literature class in an attempt to compare the various stories and concepts in those stories with each other. There's several branches it could take and purposes that studying creationism serves - far beyond religion - but I don't think science has a lot to do with it.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Jaye Jang

There are creationists who are scientists

In a number so small that they're insignificant.
Seriously, the number of creationist scientists in regards to the total number of scientists is so ridiculously small that it pisses me off(and many others) that people think there's a legitimate debate on these two. It's too much emphasis in a small number of people.
By the way, I've heard all the arguments. I cannot believe scientists still try to justify creationism with the law of entropy.
The law of entropy means shit in an open system, and higher complexity does not mean higher order anyway. It's quite sad that that's still the more 'scientific' arguments for creationism.

[7734¯7IA3]

Originally Posted by viscus

You're a troll. Pure and simple.

But like an idiot, I'm going to indulge you anyway.

With no outstanding evidence to the contrary, evolution is a sound theory and we can safely reason it to be true. Now, there's nothing to disprove creationism either, but creationism is fucked to begin with because it can be twisted to suit any possible scenario. INFALLIBLE = INVALID.

Yee Haw! Drill baby drill! LMFAO!

[Mealla]

Creationism should not be taught in science classes because it isn't a science. Though I do have my own spiritual beliefs, religion in and of itself is a philosophy, not cold, hard fact. Evidence of evolution can be seen, however, therefore it is a scientific reasoning.

Rather than go into extensive detail and dig up links on what was covered in my college Geology and Biology classes, however, I'll give an example of evolution in action right now: antibiotic resistance.

Though it takes far longer for more complex organisms, the process of evolution can be observed in bacteria. They have been introduced to antibiotics for so long now that they have begun to adapt. Bacteria that survive introduction to antibiotics due to immunity or limited exposure have produced new generations of bacteria that are resistant to previous antibiotics.

Could the process of evolution be a tool used by god(s) or goddess(es)? Yes, but this can not be proven or disproven, so it is the realm of philosophy.

And I don't understand how creationism doesn't involve a god figure. Creationism is just that, the belief that humans were created by a divine hand. The only other idea that could be potentially construed as creationism that I know of is that aliens created us...

Though I have heard similar theories, such as that of one of my ex boyfriends that the genesis story was a metaphor for humans fecking up the planet they originally came from before coming here and interbreeding with the locals.

[LittleStrangeling]

I went to a Christian school, and though they taught Creationism as the acceptable thing we also learned about evolution, the big bang theory, etc.
It seems to me that you are misinformed though, scientist have not the foggiest idea as to how we began, as none of our theories can be proved or disproved. For all they know it could have been freaking aliens. (Which I actually have seen a few scientists propose. Watch 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, it was hilariously educational.) I, honestly, cannot tolerate people such as yourself who think that just because it seems like a majority believes in something it is correct. The majority of people at my school smoke/do drugs, and they don't think it'll hurt them in the long run. Does that make them right? I thought not.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by LittleStrangeling

It seems to me that you are misinformed though, scientist have not the foggiest idea as to how we began, as none of our theories can be proved or disproved.

Are you refering to evolution?

[LittleStrangeling]

Originally Posted by Raptor

Are you refering to evolution?

I'm referring to all the theories.
I know that all creatures have adapted from what they originally were, because I've seen proof of it, but it's nothing so tremendous that you could never tell that they were that. There is no solid proof of where we actually began. The oldest homo sapien we have is Lucy, and you can see the similarities between her and us, and 500 years ago the average height was four foot something, I won't deny change in species over time, but I'm not believing that we were originally fish or something ridiculous like that.

I should not have to explain why I don't believe in the big bang theory, but I'll put it into simple terms: when you add nothing to nothing, the outcome is still nothing.