Deconversion experiences

Dont worry to much ICDESIGN, this is the MO for these fellows here at this board. They require the stictest evidence from any one elses position, but do not require the same of thiers when challenged on Macro-evolution, or the beliefe that the universe or whatever is a product of purely natural causes.When pushed on it they retreat to, well we dont worry about such things, or those are irrelevant questions.So dont be to bothered by thier double standard or thier lack of ability to provide hard evidence in those areas eitherThier also permitted to go as far off topic as they wish, belittle and demean as much as they choose without suspension or being told to quite participating in any given threadSuch is life here at the EVC forum.heres a test ICDESIGN, ask them to provide the same type of evidence for those issues I presented above and watch the excuses and complaints start to flyThe only way to engage such fellows in such questions as you have presented on design is in a public formal debate, where one is not fettered by such limitationsBut amazingly no one will step up to the plateBut to keep on topic here I can say I have never seen a single "argument" presented by evos or atheist that even began to sway my beliefs even slightly in the opposite directionI was priviledged to be raised where debate was not only practiced but encouraged to defend ones faithI was privileged to have the best debaters and apologists reason could offer, through the yearsI have seen and participated in the best of the polemic scene and have saw the skeptics positions demolished time after timeWe encourage any and all that will, to step up to the plate to debate design and anyother issues in that connectionDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

More "words without knowledge"I can certainly win any debate on design and have since I have been doing it. But isnt it amazing that the best answers always come from the Almighty's mouthMeldinoor and Articulett, If you dont listen to anything else, listen to the words and pay close attention to all the words of the lord before you make such a leapThe Bible is set apart from any other religious work. Indeed arguments seldom sway people to and from God, but when you listen to the heart of his word, it will convince youListen, Job 38The LORD Speaks1 " Then the LORD spoke to Job out of the storm. He said:
2 Who is this that obscures my plans
with WORDS WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE?
3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.4 Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone
7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels[a] shouted for joy?8 Who shut up the sea behind doors
when it burst forth from the womb,
9 when I made the clouds its garment
and wrapped it in thick darkness,
10 when I fixed limits for it
and set its doors and bars in place,
11 when I said, ‘This far you may come and no farther;
here is where your proud waves halt’?12 Have you ever given orders to the morning,
or shown the dawn its place,
13 that it might take the earth by the edges
and shake the wicked out of it?
14 The earth takes shape like clay under a seal;
its features stand out like those of a garment.
15 The wicked are denied their light,
and their upraised arm is broken.16 Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea
or walked in the recesses of the deep?
17 Have the gates of death been shown to you?
Have you seen the gates of the deepest darkness?
18 Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth?
Tell me, if you know all this.19 What is the way to the abode of light?
And where does darkness reside?
20 Can you take them to their places?
Do you know the paths to their dwellings?
21 Surely you know, for you were already born!
You have lived so many years!22 Have you entered the storehouses of the snow
or seen the storehouses of the hail,
23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?
24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?
25 Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain,
and a path for the thunderstorm,
26 to water a land where no one lives,
an uninhabited desert,
27 to satisfy a desolate wasteland
and make it sprout with grass?
28 Does the rain have a father?
Who fathers the drops of dew?
29 From whose womb comes the ice?
Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens
30 when the waters become hard as stone,
when the surface of the deep is frozen?31 Can you bind the chains[b] of the Pleiades?
Can you loosen Orion’s belt?
32 Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons[c]
or lead out the Bear[d] with its cubs?
33 Do you know the laws of the heavens?
Can you set up God’s[e] dominion over the earth?34 Can you raise your voice to the clouds
and cover yourself with a flood of water?
35 Do you send the lightning bolts on their way?
Do they report to you, ‘Here we are’?
36 Who gives the ibis wisdom[f]
or gives the rooster understanding?[g]
37 Who has the wisdom to count the clouds?
Who can tip over the water jars of the heavens
38 when the dust becomes hard
and the clods of earth stick together?39 Do you hunt the prey for the lioness
and satisfy the hunger of the lions
40 when they crouch in their dens
or lie in wait in a thicket?
41 Who provides food for the raven
when its young cry out to God
and wander about for lack of food?"Amazing, its more than words, its knowledge and inspiration"The earth takes shape like clay under a seal;
its features stand out like those of a garment. "Design baby designThis is a simple exercise in logic by the Lord. You understand nothing and I was there, he says, and you were not. Its that hard and that simpleI love those words, "Who is this that obscures my plans, with words without knowledge"I love the Lords logic, its flawlessFrom 39:26Does the hawk take flight by your wisdom
and spread its wings toward the south? "Now read 39-41Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Wow, you really missed the point of the whole chapter didnt you?. His point was you werent there, I was. You are speaking words without knowledgeWere you there M, when all this transpiredHis point is, if you werent shut your pie whole or provide knowledge that you were there and can demonstrate that you wereDawn Bertot

I know navy people are slow, but I had no idea how slow. Its my name Moron Anger management classes are in order I believe, its my real name Moron Read the entire, Does the IDM follow the SM thread, Ive made it so simple a childish child, such as yourself could understand itHow about a formal public debate on design and why it should be taught in the science classroom? Be a Man and step up to the plateM has lost his faith for no reasonDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Thank you, so yours are words, without knowledge. You dont have platform to question diddly Or maybe he is speaking to someone as simple as yourself, that is, if he were to explain to you personally in a specific sense exacally how he exists and creates things, you would understand them no better, than, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"I cant really explain in specific detail exacally what the feeling or experince of combat is now can I, unless I have witnessed and experinced it personally can I?Gods point and logic stands. You dont understand diddly. Youve abandonded your belief without reason or causeDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

The key word in your above sentence is SHOW. I dont think you or most of the other fellows actually understand that you are mistakenly confusing the word Prove for the word SHOW.In the absence of that which is provable concerning matters and events that no longer available to us, all we have or can Show, is that which is logically deduced. Since order is obviously a valid deduction of design, all that needs to be demonstrated (shown)is the logical probabilites of said design, against the clearly obvious order and law in natureIn this instance, since the order cooroborates it and we no longer have absolute prove of any of the actual events of the past, all that is needed is that which is deduced logicallyWatch how it works on your side of the fence, so to speak.You have no direct absolute evidence of evolution or macro-evolution, because those events and conditions no longer exist. the best you can do from the available evidence (as order and law on my side), such as change in time,strata and change within species is DEDUCE that said evolution took placeBut you are limited to what can be logically deduced, without proving it absolutelyDesign, a designer and "evolution" are deduced, they are not and cannot be SHOWN in the way you are using the wordYou apply the word 'show' to me as if you have demonstrated or SHOWN, your position as absolute proof. Thus, unwittingly used one set of rules for yourself and another for meBoth of these positions, evo and design are demonstratable in an investigative manner, but both are conclusions with the exact same kind of "evidence"Now let anyone that thinks they can, step up and demonstrate why this is not validM, yourself, and others have abandoned you positions of faith or belief without thinking things through One would wonder why you consider design a myth. Its probably due to the fact that you dont understand how evidence we use, to formulate thoeries and hypethosis are actually constructedDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

So this is a sad, evasive way of saying you are not man enough to stand in the polemic arena, in a formal way, to defend what you believeOk, Ill take it as a concessionDawn Bertot

Its not off topic because BC, used it as an example of his deconversion process. But it would be interesting to see how you would refute logic as sound as that I have presentedDawn Bertot

Since none of the above is true in any form or fashion, you can drop the usual intimidation tactics, they dont and have never worked on me. Your wasting precious time and space with alot of verbage that is rolling off of my back, like the water off a ducks back Im sorry, where did I have, "no intention of engaging in an actual debate"Where is the line that suggest as much? I been begging you to do it and all I get is complaints about one thing and another Not only have I done this numerous times now, no argument has been offered as to why any methodical investigation such as that I have offered or something in the nature of Behe's is not a scientific investigationAnd thats the point isnt it?There is no such thing as a SM or an IDM, it just an investigation of a physical and scientific venture.Just as there is no such thing as 'reverse prejudice', because it is just 'prejudice', there is also no SM and IDM, its just investigation with physical properties to the conclusion of this or thatMost "scientist" like to make this big distinction for basically two reasons.1. To make it appear as though they have something superior and therefore better in the nature of investigation. They do not2. They like to make the imaginary distinction, because they dont like what the design conclusion implies or involvesThere are not two methodologies, there is just a scientific investigation, with results and conclusions on both sides I have no idea what this means, so Ill wait for your replyDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Why would you make such a comment when order and law can be directly observed. Order and law in nature and the laws it follows dont need your approval for it to be correct and demonstratable any more than change in species needs a theory for it to be correct, visible and demonstratableWhat you are missing BC is that these "scientists", teach and conclude evolution and macro-evolution as a part of thier science in the classroom. As such they are teaching conclusions that are not provable.Yet, they believe the conclusion is justified, given the evidence. Order and law follow the same rule,of fact gathering and evidence in this connection. As such it carries the same weight as any theory derived using the exact same methodYour conclusions of evo and macro evo follow all the same rules concerning events where the direct evidence is no longer directly available, correct?If not show me whyDawn Bertot

Your wasting your time son, intimidation is not a substitute for an actual response to an argument.Try actually responding to an argument, you might like it. Its called debating, you might remember itDawn Bertot

And I have explained to you to many times now, that complaining about something and demonstrating it are two different thingsI have also asked you to provide the line or sentence that is not understandable. As of yet all you do is complain and bitch. No dewise, those were a list of things you complained that I had done or did not do. You never provided evidence of any of those claims, they were simply bitch type complaints, with no essence or substance. Why should I, or why do I need to, respond to something for which you have provided no evidence. provide the evidence of 'gibberish', then I will respond to it, as a substantiated assertionThe above quote from you is quite possibly the silliest thing I have ever read. Me not meeting your imaginary tenets is not the same as me refusing to debate. so where is the line or sentence where I refused to debate design You did not read or quote the entirity of my last post Dewise. I stated that no argument was put forth to demonstrate that what I had offered in that connection was not a scientific test.Admin has the right to remove anyone for any reason they see fit. But that is not the same as providing an argument, as to why what I or Marc9000, was or is not a scientific testNo one should lose thier faith or belief in a designer, simply because they believe our research is not a SM. One needs to provide arguments and reasons, why such are not actual tests and valid conclusionsStraggler made an attempt but it failed in the respect that all tests do not need to be complicated or involved to be a test or scientific in natureDawn Bertot

So what exacally is IT, that THEY are teaching?The immediate evidence of a physical nature, will only allow that change took placeThe immediate evidence of a physical nature, will only allow that order and law are presentThose are the only demonstratable facts that are provable, from immediate and present evidence Right here BC is where your reasoning falls apart and your double standard beginsI know you honestly believe that evolution is a better explanation, than design or creation, but in neither instance, outside of direct revelation, can one make a "best answer", because both positions suffer from the same limitationsBoth positions are forced to use the same physical evidence and scientific methods to come to very valid conclusions in both instancesIt would be funny, if it were not so serious, that you accuse me of having ID colored glasses, when neither position has an advantage over the other, when left to the evidenceProvide the particle of evidence or argument that will allow you conclusions to be better than design. Do this from the physical evidence or in a logical form and I will show you that it is not possibleits all the same method and the conclusions are based n the same methodsDawn Bertot

I dont see a line in this post , that says do not respond to this post, so I hope I am not out of order here.So, as not to deviate from Ms present discussion, is there a place I can respond to post 193, 194 and 203, that have been presented in this thread?I don't want to go further off topicThanks for your consideration in this matterDawn Bertot

Hopefully Admin will provide a place for the posts I have mentioned to be discussed in detail. I truely dont mean to be rude, but it is becoming increasingly obvious you fellas dont even understand simple reasoning practices and are unable to understand the concepts of indirect and indirect implications and logical conclusions of simple argumentsIl say it one more time, then let admin decide a place or not.In the absence of that which is absolutely provable, due to the fact that the direct evidence of those events no longer exist, one is forced to proceed with what can be logically deduced, against any physical realites.Order and change follow the same rules and produce the same type of evidence, for thier conclusionsThis simple point cannot be demonstrated to be false or refuted. Its as simple and hard as thatDawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : Warning