|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Question for creationists: Why would you rather believe in a small God? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined:
|
Good thing none of that is true or else there would be a problem. Whew! The "guesstimate" yenmor spoke of was the number of stars in our galaxy, not the hodgepodge of wrongness you purported. The study of light and it's speed is very well documented and contains no guess work. Nice try, though.
As a christian, what does your god say about misrepresentation of others and lying? Based on creationists writing, I'd say he/she/it is all for it and commands it.
Creationists the world over have been emplored to provide a way to study the supernatural. You've all failed. Science studies what it CAN study and that is nature.
That is a lie. As a matter of fact, the whole paragraph surrounding that is wrong and a lie.
Oh, look, another lie. "Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
You can't even agree with the few YEC's here, on EvC, yet you think you are THE representative for all YEC's? "Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
You could clear this all up by pointing to one bit of "real" science you accept. As of now, you've simply asserted that you (and all YEC's, apparently) actually do accept some science even though the evidence ("real" evidence, that is) strongly indicates otherwise.
So, let us have it. What actual science that can be found in a science text do you accept? Since you claim to accept 90% of it, I expect you to not toss a softball and offer up some hard science that you accept. Do you accept or deny this challenge? "Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
Have you ever recieved an influenza vaccination?
"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
Kindly answer the question. It's not a trick.
"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
Fair enough. Do you dispute the efficacy or the methodolgy of the administration of the flu vaccine? Do you accept that it works for it's stated purpose?
"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
Are you aware that the administration of the flu vaccine is based on evolutionary biology? You don't sincerely think they just guess, do you?
::edit:: if you doubt me, here you go: http://www.livescience.com/...ryday-evolution-flu-shots.html http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/130201_flu Those are two pretty esteemed science sources. Since you claim to not object to 99% of science AND you admitted to accepting the science behind the flu vaccine, you have yourself quite a pickle. Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given. "Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined:
|
What is your point? I wasn't talking about smallpox or any other vaccine since they are not all the same.
I don't need to make claims. I have evidence and I just showed you the science that you have made an entire thread about accepting, but since it goes against your beliefs, you are going to call upon all your cognitive dissonance to now deny it. Can you go ahead and admit to only accepting science that has been properly vetted against your religious beliefs? Also, could you finally point me/us to science you actually accept?
Ahh, I see. The goalposts weren't adequately shifted. I certainly hope I have proven a point to onlookers or at the very least, taught someone a valuable lesson in honesty. "Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
That is a distinction witout a difference, Faith. Only science haters make that distinction. Also of note is that you only care about this distinction now that I have created an internal problem for you. Previously, you were fine calling ALL evolution just evolution. If we put forth miniml effort, we can point to where you have objected to forms of microevolution.
quote:Sausage quote:(bolding mine) Sausage (note: you previously accepted this as a source, so no bias for you) quote: Finally: Can you once and for all make this easier and point to science you DO accept? "Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
Go dig something up. Is what you now hold in your hand conjecture? No? THAT is how the geologic column is determined. Your window of available sciences that you claim to accept is rapidly dwindling. Quick! Tell us what sciences you DO accept so we can dash your hopes and dreams and destroy any notion that they are compatible with your goat herder mentality. Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given. "Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
So let me get this straight: YOU see a very great distinction between MICROevolution and MACROevolution, yet in dealing with EVOLUTION, you don't bother to make clear this distinction and you repeatedly use the word evolution as your word choice to state the science you object to even though there is already a word for that with which you object to which is different from evolution? And you do not see how this is dishonest?
That is the most honest thing you've said in this whole thread... just not for the reason you intended. For the 4th or 5th time now: will you identify what sciences you Do accept and DO believe are compatible with the YEC worldview? ::abe::
You DO realize that there is only one theory, right? You either accept evolutionary theory or you don't. In Message 96, you said: quote: Well, evolution "builds" influenza vaccines. Not the "theory of MICROevolution, the theory of evolution. So, since you admitted to accepting the science behind the flu vaccine, you by proxy accept evolution. Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given. "Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
So how does this message jice with your goalpost shifting of now claiming you were talking about "MICROevolution"? Those "useful conclusions and comparisons" in biology use.....EVOLUTION. One theory. You should stop lying. "Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
Hmm. I would have to take a guess at your meaning of "evolutionist" but my guess is that it refers to people that accept evolution and DO NOT make distinction between macro and micro and realize they use the same science. If I extrapolate further, I can see that you accept science that has not been "contaminated" by "evolutionists". You previously accepted the science behind the influenza vaccine. You admit that vaccine is the result of evolution. You claim to accept science that is not "contaminated" by "evolutionists". These have been YOUR admissions. I am not making any of this up. It must be a real pain to be you. However, i am seriously doubting that you believe a word you type. This level of trolling gives /b/ a run for their money. "Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
They both use the same science, the same methodology, the same theory. There is zero functional difference. None. Accept one, you accept the other. Period.
"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 97 days) Posts: 3188 Joined: |
No. The problem is that you are a dishonest liar and I have proven THAT beyond a reasonable doubt by using your very own words against you.
Why do you have such a problem saying "I do not like any science"? Why do you feel the need to pander to some sciences? It would be far more honest of you. Why don't you tell us what sciences you claim to accept and feel are compatible with YEC? You have dodged that question more times than I care to count. "Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021