Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,748 Year: 4,005/9,624 Month: 876/974 Week: 203/286 Day: 10/109 Hour: 1/2


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Creationist Shortage

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationist Shortage
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 310 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 218 of 415 (668170)
07-17-2012 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by marc9000
07-17-2012 8:55 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
You wouldn’t know that by their titles or their authors, would you?
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by marc9000, posted 07-17-2012 8:55 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 310 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 272 of 415 (668448)
07-21-2012 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 265 by marc9000
07-20-2012 11:10 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
If that’s all you want there to be evidence for, then that’s all you’re going to see. A large part of human existence is working with, and observing order and complexity. Order and complexity come about in two different ways, what humans did with their intelligence, and what humans didn’t do, like the origins of life, or the paths of the planets around the sun. With no supernatural, the order and complexity we see that humans didn’t do, had to happen by some sort of mindless rearrangement. When you stand outside on a clear night and see the full moon, knowing that humans didn’t put it there, there’s only one possibility right? An explosion put it there! Explosions can explain a lot of things, can’t they? Is there evidence that explosions can produce perfectly round objects? If atheists want there to be, I’m sure they claim evidence for it.
If you don't know why the moon is round, you could save yourself embarrassment by not making stuff up.
Or by being indifferent to making a fool of yourself in public, so I guess you're good.
That goes both ways — the Bible accurately records historical details about people, groups, cities, and customs. Archaeological finds continue to confirm these details. If they contradict evolutionary beliefs, the scientific community doesn’t consider them evidence.
In what strange fantasy world could the existence of a people, group, city or custom contradict evolutionary beliefs?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by marc9000, posted 07-20-2012 11:10 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 310 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 275 of 415 (668547)
07-22-2012 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by marc9000
07-07-2012 9:00 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
Right now, a current thread title on the main page reads What variety of creationist is Buzsaw? The new evolution/atheism forum could have a thread titled What variety of atheist is Panda?. Or What variety of atheist is dwise1?
People have in fact started threads along these lines.
If, for example, you want to know why I am an atheist, you will find my explanation here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by marc9000, posted 07-07-2012 9:00 PM marc9000 has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 310 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 302 of 415 (669319)
07-29-2012 5:50 AM


This thread was called "Creationist Shortage", not "Marc9000 Will Commit Random Factual Errors And We Will Laugh At Him". I suggest that it be shut down, at least until he stops spamming it with his customary delusions, and that if marc wants to be wrong about any particular topic, he should start a thread on it.

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 310 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 370 of 415 (669655)
08-01-2012 1:31 AM
Reply to: Message 320 by Bolder-dash
07-30-2012 1:39 AM


Re: levels and levels and levels
{Hide off-topic snark (or something like that). - Adminnemooseus}
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Hide and banner.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 320 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-30-2012 1:39 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 310 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 395 of 415 (669735)
08-02-2012 4:03 AM
Reply to: Message 385 by Bolder-dash
08-01-2012 7:14 PM


Re: Revisionist Revisionist history;
That's very interesting research you did there nonukes. And gee, it almost gives the revisionist appearance that it was ME being trite and insulting, if one were to completely ignore what I was responding to..i.e Dr. A calling another poster a conceited i d i o t. Of course, I don't call people ****** here, because the software doesn't allow me to (insults are reserved for evolutionists use only). Fortunately that doesn't stop Dr. A , as he has the green badge to insult all he wants.
This is, of course, not true.
So yes, sure I was being provocative. Who else is going to point out the duplicitous-ness of how this site is run? You? We don't want the fence sitters to be confused and think this is an actual debate site, where BOTH sides get to present their opinions with equal rules do we?
Otherwise all those fence sitters might start to get confused and think that the reason creationists don't post much here is because they have nothing to say, or because they are ******-since Dr. A always gets to call them that-rather than the truth.
As I pointed out, and will now point out again, the poster I was debating is in fact an atheist who dismisses the existence of God as "pure fiction", and "perfectly contradictory and absurd", and is, therefore, not a creationist. I doubt that many creationists are deterred from posting here by the fear that someone might say something mean to an atheist.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 7:14 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 310 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(5)
Message 409 of 415 (669826)
08-03-2012 10:48 AM


Summary
Well, I think we can all see where Bolder-dash went wrong.
Yes, he keeps telling us again and again how the big problem is biased moderation. Which, to use his own analogy, is like the wife seeking a divorce explaining again and again that the problem is that her husband loves her less that he loves his flock of winged pigs. It's either a deliberate lie or a psychotic delusion.
That said, he may be right about why creationists steer clear of this forum. After all, the defining characteristic of creationists is that they suffer from similar delusions. That's what makes them creationists. I suppose it is possible that creationists look at these forums which offer them all possible indulgence, and they see that the evolutionists always get banned or suspended for getting out of line, and they are stupid and crazy enough to think --- OMG, this forum is sooooo hostile to creationists.
They do not apply similar reasoning to traffic lights being red and green, because when it's a matter of life or death they use the same reasoning as the rest of us.
---
As to Buzsaw --- as usual, he's so crazy that I hardly know what to say. His own personal sense of smugness seems to have made him forget that he's wrong about everything in particular. We have shown him, we have even convinced him, that every particular thing he says is rubbish, yet he still esteems himself one of God's prophets.
---
As to the shortage of creationists, it's clear that none of the creationists posting on this forum could really know why creationists don't post enough. After all, they do in fact post on this forum while their fellow-creationists do not. They do so in an obsessive, futile, and ridiculous manner, but they still post here. Also, they claim that this forum is moderated so that they will never be allowed to make their case, and they are allowed to shout this as loud as they please. We watch with derision while they shout at the top of their lungs: "I CANNOT SPEAK! I AM BEING SILENCED!"
---
In the end, it seems to me that by and large creationists don't want to engage in debate. If any creationist reads this and thinks it doesn't apply to him, then get over here. Bring us your best shot. Do what "Bolder-dash" and "marc9000" have so signally failed to do, and bring us an actual argument for creationism.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024