Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
142 online now:
kjsimons, nwr (2 members, 140 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,311 Year: 6,423/6,534 Month: 616/650 Week: 154/232 Day: 39/54 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why Creationists' Willful Ignorance?
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2989 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 76 of 182 (629112)
08-15-2011 10:27 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Butterflytyrant
08-15-2011 9:59 PM


What part is not understood - you didn't say?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Butterflytyrant, posted 08-15-2011 9:59 PM Butterflytyrant has not replied

Panda
Member (Idle past 3034 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


(1)
Message 77 of 182 (629113)
08-15-2011 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by IamJoseph
08-15-2011 8:36 PM


IamJoseph writes:

The shock surprise in asking what is meant by seed today is disgraceful - as if its open to multi-choices.


Although all of your reply was nonsense, I thought I would focus on this particular nonsense:

Here are some of the many definitions of seed:

1) A propagative part of a plant, as a tuber or spore.
2) A small amount of material used to start a chemical reaction.
3) A source or beginning.
4) Offspring; progeny.
5) Sperm; semen.
6) A sportsman who has been seeded for a tournament, often at a given rank.
7) A capsule used interstitially in the treatment of cancer.
8) To remove the seeds from fruit.
9) A tiny flaw in glassware.

The shock surprise in thinking that seed only has a single meaning is disgraceful.
Clearly it is open to 'multi-choices'.

Only someone with a flimsy grasp of English would think that 'seed' only had one meaning.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by IamJoseph, posted 08-15-2011 8:36 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by IamJoseph, posted 08-15-2011 10:39 PM Panda has replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2989 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 78 of 182 (629114)
08-15-2011 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Panda
08-15-2011 10:30 PM


quote:
4) Offspring;

Congratulations. However, the word offspring is recent, and such a usage would negate authenticityof the text's contemporary factor. But there was never any need to do a search here; the word seed is placed in such a context there is no alternative meaning in the verse, 'A SEED SHALL FOLLOW ITS OWN KIND'; this is especially seen when 'life forms' was the text's subject.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Panda, posted 08-15-2011 10:30 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Panda, posted 08-16-2011 6:16 AM IamJoseph has not replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 3743 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(1)
Message 79 of 182 (629116)
08-15-2011 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by IamJoseph
08-15-2011 9:53 PM


Re: more of the same from IamJoseph
IamJospeh,

You continue to ignore even the most obvious problems with your ranting.

Problems that have been highlighted time and time again.

I will pick one statement from you post even at the risk that conversing with you may give you some impression that your statements are in any way valid -

It is specific, conditioning the difference to the most fundamental factors: water borne or air born are specific and stand out factors.

take these two animals - Mosquito, and penguin.

Where do they fit into your 'kinds'?

What about about land crabs and Japanese spider crabs? Are they different kinds?

What does airborne mean? Does it mean that butterflies, albatross, bats, flying fish and draco lizards are all the same kind?

What about water borne? There are species of crabs that live their whole liives on land, but spawn in the water. What about leatherback turtles, they lay their eggs on land but spend their lives in the water? How about the fact that many insects spend the majority of the life in the water, only leaving it in their adult life. Are penguins waterborne? What about seabirds like the albatross who spend most of their time on the water? What about polar bears? They spend most of their times on sea ice. Does this mean they are sea borne? Waterborne? Is there an ice borne?

I will add one other thing.

You forgot to say creationsts are not ignorant

Here are the common definitions of ignorant.

1. Lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated.
2. Lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular: "ignorant of astronomy".

The vast majority of creationists are ignorant to varying degrees of the Theory of Evolution. You can easy ascertain this from the claims the creationist websites and creationists themselves make. Simple errors like the 2nd law argument, the why are there still monkeys arguements and the plain old 'I dont need to read anything about Evolution because i know its wrong'.

You continue to very effectively make yourself look like an idiot.

Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by IamJoseph, posted 08-15-2011 9:53 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 5:41 AM Butterflytyrant has not replied

Coyote
Member (Idle past 1427 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 80 of 182 (629118)
08-15-2011 11:27 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by IamJoseph
08-15-2011 10:24 PM


The end
Sorry, I'm going to have to discontinue our discussion.

You are apparently immune to logic and reason, as well as fact and theory.

[Smiley of beating head against brick wall.]


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by IamJoseph, posted 08-15-2011 10:24 PM IamJoseph has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1813 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(2)
Message 81 of 182 (629119)
08-15-2011 11:31 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by IamJoseph
08-15-2011 6:49 AM


Ok, I won't give you any more word salad:

1. Pls tell us the first recording of life form groupings by category?

You KEEP coming back to this as though it were a convincing argument.

You claim that the Bible is the first recording of this stuff because you claim that the Bible predates everything else.

It DOESN'T.

Cave painting CLEARLY demonstrate different animal groups and predate the Bible (and in fact the ENTIRE UNIVERSE according to your 6,000 yr calendar) but tens of thousands of years.

You need to pick an argument which hasn't been so completely destroyed so many times.

We're starting to think you might be mentally disabled in your ability to retain other people's arguments. It's almost like you don't understand that once you say something and it's shown to be wrong, it stays wrong no matter how many times you bring it up.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by IamJoseph, posted 08-15-2011 6:49 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Butterflytyrant, posted 08-16-2011 12:11 AM Nuggin has not replied
 Message 84 by Pressie, posted 08-16-2011 12:37 AM Nuggin has not replied
 Message 85 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 2:58 AM Nuggin has replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 3743 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(1)
Message 82 of 182 (629120)
08-16-2011 12:11 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Nuggin
08-15-2011 11:31 PM


Hey Nuggin,

I will supply the most likely response you will get from IamJoseph re the bible being the first recording comment.

He will tell you that cave paintings are not a book. He will tell you that he means an alphabetical book. Then he will tell you that it has to be a book with pages. Then he will tell you they have to be paper pages.

He will continue to more the goal posts until you give up in frustration.

Then he will claim he has won. Won at what exactly no one will ever know.

He will tell you that you have not countered his arguement (even if you have) and refuse to acknowledge any problems with his language and logic. He will ignore comments that his position is irrelevant, pointless, unrelated to the topic, has not been supported by any evidence, is not stated clear enough to know exactly what he is talking about or has not actually answered any comment or question that you put forward.

Just a prediction.

Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Nuggin, posted 08-15-2011 11:31 PM Nuggin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Coyote, posted 08-16-2011 12:23 AM Butterflytyrant has not replied

Coyote
Member (Idle past 1427 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 83 of 182 (629121)
08-16-2011 12:23 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Butterflytyrant
08-16-2011 12:11 AM


Creation "science" again
He will tell you that cave painting are not a book. He will tell you that he means an alphabetical book. Then he will tell you that it has to be a book with pages. Then he will tell you they have to be paper pages.

He will continue to more the goal posts until you give up in frustration.

Then he will claim he has won. Won at what exactly no one will ever know.

He will tell you that you have not countered his arguement (even if you have) and refuse to acknowledge any problems with his language and logic. He will ignore comments that his position is irrelevant, pointless, unrelated to the topic, has not been supported by any evidence, is not stated clear enough to know exactly what he is talking about or has not actually answered any comment or question that you put forward.

Creation "science" as usual, eh?


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Butterflytyrant, posted 08-16-2011 12:11 AM Butterflytyrant has not replied

Pressie
Member
Posts: 2102
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 84 of 182 (629122)
08-16-2011 12:37 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Nuggin
08-15-2011 11:31 PM


Nuggin writes:

We're starting to think you might be mentally disabled in your ability to retain other people's arguments. It's almost like you don't understand that once you say something and it's shown to be wrong, it stays wrong no matter how many times you bring it up.

I concluded this about IamJoseph a long time ago. Therefore it's not worth trying to engage in a meaningful conversation with him.

From Ed Brayton

Ed Brayton writes:

Anyone who has dealt with creationists can tell you about the game of creationist whack-a-mole. Whack-a-mole is that game where you have a mallet and these moles pop out of various holes and you have to whack them with the mallet, but as soon as you whack one of them, another one comes up in another hole. It never seems to end. That is exactly what it's like dealing with creationists. No matter how many times you disprove a creationist claim, it simply pops up in another hole and you have to whack it all over again.


The 'mentally disabled in your ability to retain other people's arguments' also explains the willful ignorance of a large percentage of creationists very accurately. For them it is physically impossible to remember arguments countering their interpretations of their chosen holy book(s). They believe their holy book(s); no matter how obviously reality contradicts that book.

How did Dawkins put it? Something about a brain virus.....

Edited by Pressie, : Spelling and added a sentence


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Nuggin, posted 08-15-2011 11:31 PM Nuggin has not replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2989 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 85 of 182 (629135)
08-16-2011 2:58 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Nuggin
08-15-2011 11:31 PM


quote:
Ok, I won't give you any more word salad:
1. Pls tell us the first recording of life form groupings by category?

You KEEP coming back to this as though it were a convincing argument.


You keep running away from it because it is a convincing arguement. The first recording of life form groupings is in Genesis - how far can you run?

quote:

You claim that the Bible is the first recording of this stuff because you claim that the Bible predates everything else.


I never said that. The Hebrew bible is a late comer in the ancient world. Abraham emerged some 1200 years after the pyramids were built; the Hebrew bible 400 years thereafter.

quote:

Cave painting CLEARLY demonstrate different animal groups and predate the Bible


That's bunk and bogus, based on the age of the cave - not the painting. Colour was not invented in writings till 5,500 years ago, and it came from India. Check the population and mental prowess grads of your cave painters again. If Australian aboriginals are 60K years old, their popilation would be at least 5 trillion. Bite the bullet - your dates have no proof nor any graduating imprints; the Hebrew bible has, wth no vacuous gaps.

quote:

(and in fact the ENTIRE UNIVERSE according to your 6,000 yr calendar) but tens of thousands of years.


That is not a Hebrew understanding but an embarrassing Christian one. Genesis lists a host of actions before life emerged, accounting for billions and millions of years: separation of light and darkness; water from land; etc. Darwin forgot to list these critical factors. As if!

quote:

You need to pick an argument which hasn't been so completely destroyed so many times.


There has not been even a small dent of disproof of anything in the Hebrew bible. You are halucinating with other anti-creationsists. I am making you froth.

quote:

We're starting to think you might be mentally disabled in your ability to retain other people's arguments. It's almost like you don't understand that once you say something and it's shown to be wrong, it stays wrong no matter how many times you bring it up.


You have not been right in any responsa as yet.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Nuggin, posted 08-15-2011 11:31 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Nuggin, posted 08-16-2011 3:19 AM IamJoseph has replied
 Message 87 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-16-2011 3:24 AM IamJoseph has replied
 Message 94 by Parasomnium, posted 08-16-2011 7:27 AM IamJoseph has replied
 Message 95 by Pressie, posted 08-16-2011 7:45 AM IamJoseph has replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1813 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(1)
Message 86 of 182 (629137)
08-16-2011 3:19 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by IamJoseph
08-16-2011 2:58 AM


Call 911
You keep running away from it because it is a convincing arguement. The first recording of life form groupings is in Genesis - how far can you run?

Except it's not. The book of Genesis doesn't even come CLOSE. The caves in France alone are easily 5x older than the oldest possible copy of Genesis. Most likely far older even than that.

I never said that. The Hebrew bible is a late comer in the ancient world. Abraham emerged some 1200 years after the pyramids were built; the Hebrew bible 400 years thereafter.

Heiroglyphics are another fine example of writing about life forms prior to Genesis then. You just admitted the pyramids were older. The pyramids contain these images. Done.

That's bunk and bogus, based on the age of the cave - not the painting.

False. The caves outdate the paintings often by hundreds of thousands if not millions of years. Caves take a LONG time to form. No one dates the paintings by the age of the cave - ever.

Colour was not invented in writings till 5,500 years ago, and it came from India.

Perhaps one of the ********* things you've ever suggested, and that's saying a lot.

If Australian aboriginals are 60K years old, their popilation would be at least 5 trillion.

Only to be outdone by this gem. WTF are you talking about?!?!

Don't use words if you don't know what they mean, it makes you sound ****** or crazy.

separation of light and darkness; water from land; etc. Darwin forgot to list these critical factors. As if!

Wow, you are on a roll and it's all down hill.

Taco Word Salad Supreme.

I am making you froth.

You need to look up "froth". It's not the same thing as "laugh".

Seriously Joseph, you need to seek medical help. You are quite possibly schitzophrenic. You are certainly suffering from some sort of brain damage, likely brought on by a series of strokes.

Your ability to reason and communicate has be severely compromised.

Seek help.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 2:58 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 5:53 AM Nuggin has replied

Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3884
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001


(1)
Message 87 of 182 (629139)
08-16-2011 3:24 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by IamJoseph
08-16-2011 2:58 AM


There is no such thing as a suitable subtitle
The first recording of life form groupings is in Genesis...

The "kinds" thing is pretty thin on details. Are you sure someone, say the Chinese, didn't earlier come up with at least as good of a life form groupings?

If Australian aboriginals are 60K years old, their popilation would be at least 5 trillion.

Trillion? Billion would be absurd. You think the Australian continent could ever support a billion people, much less 5 trillion?

Genesis lists a host of actions before life emerged, accounting for billions and millions of years: separation of light and darkness; water from land; etc. Darwin forgot to list these critical factors.

Genesis also had plant life before the creation of the sun. Not only thin on the details, but flat out wrong.

Moose


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 2:58 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by IamJoseph, posted 08-16-2011 5:48 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2989 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 88 of 182 (629147)
08-16-2011 5:41 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Butterflytyrant
08-15-2011 11:07 PM


Re: more of the same from IamJoseph
quote:
take these two animals - Mosquito, and penguin.

Where do they fit into your 'kinds'? What about about land crabs and Japanese spider crabs? Are they different kinds?

What does airborne mean? Does it mean that butterflies, albatross, bats, flying fish and draco lizards are all the same kind?


Absolutely, and with the correct wording, listing groups within groups; including creepy crawlies and virus and bacteria:

Genesis 1/20. ' the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures [the twice repeated refers to nono life unseen with the naked eye]; , and every living creature that creepeth, wherewith the waters swarmed [crabs], after its kind, and every winged fowl after its kind. 24 'Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, and creeping thing [insects], and beast of the earth after its kind.'

Air borne refers to winged fowl.

quote:
Here are the common definitions of ignorant.

1. Lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated.
2. Lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular: "ignorant of astronomy".

The vast majority of creationists are ignorant to varying degrees of the Theory of Evolution.


How would you rate yourself based on the responses to what are clearly ignorance of what you accuse of: check mate to Mosquito and penguin?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Butterflytyrant, posted 08-15-2011 11:07 PM Butterflytyrant has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Panda, posted 08-16-2011 6:27 AM IamJoseph has replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2989 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 89 of 182 (629148)
08-16-2011 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by Minnemooseus
08-16-2011 3:24 AM


Re: There is no such thing as a suitable subtitle
quote:
The first recording of life form groupings is in Genesis...

The "kinds" thing is pretty thin on details.


Not so. It is brimming with details. How else would you put it, suitable for all generations' understanding - have a go?

quote:

Genesis also had plant life before the creation of the sun. Not only thin on the details, but flat out wrong.

Moose


Incorrect. Only luminosity was focused on the earth; the stars and sun and moon are not mentioned:

14/'Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth.'


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-16-2011 3:24 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2989 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 90 of 182 (629149)
08-16-2011 5:53 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by Nuggin
08-16-2011 3:19 AM


Re: Call 911
Your out done. You cannot admit absolute hard copy proof of the first recording of life form groups, while you leap elsewhere with similar nonsense. The French 30K year claims have been blasted as a forgery. It has red color - a dead giveaway since even te Egyptians never had red dye 5000 years ago - the colors which were on the pyramids were got it from India.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Nuggin, posted 08-16-2011 3:19 AM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Nuggin, posted 08-16-2011 9:58 AM IamJoseph has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022