Evolution...?

[spurraider21]

Who can give me a reason why having no God, no faith in anything is the way to go? Life without a God in it is better because.........
doesn't matter what is better.

i'm sure life would also be better if we had flying cars. that doesnt mean flying cars exist.
i'm sure life would be better if there were no diseases. yet there are

[Avante]

doesn't matter what is better.

i'm sure life would also be better if we had flying cars. that doesnt mean flying cars exist.
i'm sure life would be better if there were no diseases. yet there are

You've said a lot of dumb things, but this one is the dumbest. Hell yes it matters which is the best. Why do you think so many prefer to have a God in their life? Dude......it's makes them feel better about things, happier.

Dude, wow~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Avante]

Again a dumb question...

life with it is better because.... ?

Hey stupid, tell me why there are far more who want a God in their life than don't? What a dumb fuck!

[spurraider21]

You've said a lot of dumb things, but this one is the dumbest. Hell yes it matters which is the best. Why do you think so many prefer to have a God in their life? Dude......it's makes them feel better about things, happier.

Dude, wow~~~~~~~~~~~~
what? something being better doesn't make it more or less likely to be factual. that is my point.

i think life would be better with a cure for cancer too

[spurraider21]

Hey stupid, tell me why there are far more who want a God in their life than don't? What a dumb fuck!
im sure there are far more people who want to win the lottery in their life than don't.

stop equating what makes you happy with what is factual

[Avante]

what? something being better doesn't make it more or less likely to be factual. that is my point.

i think life would be better with a cure for cancer too

I'll go slow,,,

Those who believe in God, believe in God...ok? They think He's real so He is to them, let me guess...zoooommmm!!!!!

Can you or anyone prove without a shadow of a doubt there is no God? Of course not.

[Avante]

im sure there are far more people who want to win the lottery in their life than don't.

stop equating what makes you happy with what is factual

Stop acting like you know what's factual? Tell a pastor. rabbi, monk there is no God and then show them your proof. oh yeah there isn;t any.

[Avante]

We have religious colleges, tons and tons of churchs and different religious beliefs. Our money says what? Now add...one nation under God.

Yet, you know better, hahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!

Little man, you know anything about gospel music? Dude, intelligent people don't want to be like a dummy like you, they want more out of this life, not....bah humbug!! That's for little shits like you who don't get it.

The football coach says..."take a knee gentlemen"....yep, the pregame prayer. So what you going to do just stand there looking stupid?

Walk into any church on a Sunday and start running down your garbage and see how stupid you'd look. Tell these guys what you think.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_lrrq_opng

You really don't get it at all do ya slick, people don't want..."well you can't fool me I got smarts"....they want something else besides just this.

[spurraider21]

I'll go slow,,,

Those who believe in God, believe in God...ok? They think He's real so He is to them
i know thats a really neat idea. if i believe in santa claus, then he is real to me. right? but in the end, none of that is reality.

lets say you and i see a big garage door. the door is closed, so we can't see inside. i tell you "hey avante, i believe there is a huge blue ball in that garage." and you say "spurraider, im pretty sure that garage is empty." in that moment, the big blue ball is real to me, and it isn't real to you. but in reality, one of us is right, and one of us is wrong. this whole notion of something being real "to me" or "to them" is largely irrelevant. its a cute idea, but it has no bearings on reality


Stop acting like you know what's factual
you are the one claiming to know that its factual, that god did all this. i'm just challenging the claim. i never came out here and said "i know beyond any doubt that god doesn't exist."

by bringing up god... YOU are the one who is acting like you know what's factual.


Tell a pastor. rabbi, monk there is no God and then show them your proof. oh yeah there isn;t any.
it is literally impossible to give proof of something NOT existing. can you prove that unicorns don't exist? can you prove that there isn't a giant invisible parrot on the planet neptune?

it is a logical fallacy to attempt to do so.

[spurraider21]

people don't want to be like a dummy like you, they want more out of this life, not....bah humbug!

people don't want..."well you can't fool me I got smarts"....they want something else besides just this.
again, for some reason, you seem to imply that because people "want" something, that makes it factual. i really don't get how you keep making this mistake.

honestly, i think it would be awesome to have an afterlife. u know what, i also thing it would be really great to have an 11 inch schlong

[Uriel]

The fact that is even a question proves why America is the laughingstock of the world. :lol

[Chinook]

it is literally impossible to give proof of something NOT existing. can you prove that unicorns don't exist? can you prove that there isn't a giant invisible parrot on the planet neptune?

it is a logical fallacy to attempt to do so.

Dude ... everyone knows that ... okay?

[spurraider21]

Dude ... everyone knows that ... okay?
Sheesh~~~~~~~~~~

[Avante]

again, for some reason, you seem to imply that because people "want" something, that makes it factual. i really don't get how you keep making this mistake.

honestly, i think it would be awesome to have an afterlife. u know what, i also thing it would be really great to have an 11 inch schlong

Trust me it's not all that gret to have an 11 inch schlong. She's....now be careful with that thing ..ok? And you do have to be careful with that thing. I'd love to just be able to drill for oil...nope, too dangerous.

Anyway...

So all those people who do believe in God are wrong and you are right....right? Prove it!

[spurraider21]

Trust me it's not all that gret to have an 11 inch schlong. She's....now be careful with that thing ..ok? And you do have to be careful with that thing. I'd love to just be able to drill for oil...nope, too dangerous.

Anyway...

So all those people who do believe in God are wrong and you are right....right? Prove it!


you are the one claiming to know that its factual, that god did all this. i'm just challenging the claim. i never came out here and said "i know beyond any doubt that god doesn't exist."

by bringing up god... YOU are the one who is acting like you know what's factual.


it is literally impossible to give proof of something NOT existing. can you prove that unicorns don't exist? can you prove that there isn't a giant invisible parrot on the planet neptune?

it is a logical fallacy to attempt to do so.

[spurraider21]

Two guys sitting around a fire. Guy A (you in this scenario) says "I believe in unicorns and fairies. Guy B (me) says what? That's crazy talk. What gives you that idea? Can you bring any proof? Guy A responds with "well ya can't prove they don't exist, so I'm right until then"

it doesnt work that way. The side making the claim has the burden of proof. Get that through your skull

[Avante]

Two guys sitting around a fire. Guy A (you in this scenario) says "I believe in unicorns and fairies. Guy B (me) says what? That's crazy talk. What gives you that idea? Can you bring any proof? Guy A responds with "well ya can't prove they don't exist, so I'm right until then"

it doesnt work that way. The side making the claim has the burden of proof. Get that through your skull

Two guys sitting around a fire....

Believer...I think we are lost.
Non believer...now what?
Believer...I'm going to pray, what are you going to do?
Non believer....ah...hmmmm?

A couple days later, they find their way out.

Believer...thank You Jesus.
Non believer....nay, that wasn't it.

Six months later our non believer gets lost again, this time he's all alone. After two days he's still lost.

Non believer....ah.....well....Jesus if You're there...

A few hours later he finds his way out.

Believer...I was worried about you, so you finally found your way out.
Believer....thank God!

[spurraider21]

I feel like the purpose of my post flew right over your head. Mine has nothing to do with somebody being right or wrong. It didn't even imply either was right or wrong.

You just made made up a baseless story and acted like it is making a point

[Avante]

I feel like the purpose of my post flew right over your head. Mine has nothing to do with somebody being right or wrong. It didn't even imply either was right or wrong.

You just made made up a baseless story and acted like it is making a point

I hate it when that happens, hahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!

Little man, I know way way too many people far far FAR more intelligent people than your dumbass who believe in "something"....ok? That's why I pay no attention to you at all, you don't know shit about this and it's obvious.

[spurraider21]

Do you know what "logical fallacy" means?

[xmas1997]

There are no atheists in foxholes!

[Avante]

Do you know what "logical fallacy" means?

Why totally ignore what I said with a question? You can't ....prove...anything about this, nothing. So it comes down to which..."story"..do you want to believe. Most prefer all this came about because of a MasterDesigner, some like you wanna buy.....BIG BANG!!!!!!!!!!!

Since nobody can prove shit, it's just about what you need to believe. Dude, when we are dealing with MasterDesigners and BIG BANGS....dump this stupid "logical fallacy". This isn't about logic at all, that isn't obvious?

[spurraider21]

You can't keep saying the same thing over and over again and expect it to become true. If you are going to assert that god exists and made the earth, that magic Jesus saved us from our sins... The burden of proof lies upon you and you alone.

Otherwise like in the example I gave earlier any nut job can say unicorns and fairies are real and you can't prove me wrong. You really don't see an inherent problem in that?

When you say "this isn't about logic at all" it ust tells me you aren't interested in having a rational discussion. At that point you are just covering your ears and sayin "blablablablablablabla". Is that your motto in life?

[Avante]

You can't keep saying the same thing over and over again and expect it to become true. If you are going to assert that god exists and made the earth, that magic Jesus saved us from our sins... The burden of proof lies upon you and you alone.

Otherwise like in the example I gave earlier any nut job can say unicorns and fairies are real and you can't prove me wrong. You really don't see an inherent problem in that?

When you say "this isn't about logic at all" it ust tells me you aren't interested in having a rational discussion. At that point you are just covering your ears and sayin "blablablablablablabla". Is that your motto in life?

Is trying to sell things we have no proof of at all your way of doing business?

I have said numerous times I have no clue how all this came about and neither does anyone else but, it is far easier to believe "some???" Master Design was used. To think something like a....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....caused all this, is stupid. It didn't and only a fool would think it did.

Dude, you can prove there is no God/MasterDesigner and prove it was....BANG....? Of course not so why even bother with it?

[Chinook]

The Big Bang isn't controversial, really. I dunno why Avante is hung up on it. Rather, what's controversial is assertion that the Bang is what started the universe (that there was no existence before it). Two different things that are getting concatenated whenever it's convenient.

[Avante]

Copy

According to the standard theory, our universe sprang into existence as "singularity" around 13.7 billion years ago. What is a "singularity" and where does it come from? Well, to be honest, we don't know for sure. Singularities are zones which defy our current understanding of physics. They are thought to exist at the core of "black holes." Black holes are areas of intense gravitational pressure. The pressure is thought to be so intense that finite matter is actually squished into infinite density (a mathematical concept which truly boggles the mind). These zones of infinite density are called "singularities." Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know.

[spurraider21]

Is trying to sell things we have no proof of at all your way of doing business?

I have said numerous times I have no clue how all this came about and neither does anyone else but, it is far easier to believe "some???" Master Design was used. To think something like a....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....caused all this, is stupid. It didn't and only a fool would think it did.

Dude, you can prove there is no God/MasterDesigner and prove it was....BANG....? Of course not so why even bother with it?
What have I tried to sell you without evidence?

you are the only one doing so

[Avante]

What have I tried to sell you without evidence?

you are the only one doing so

That there is no God/MasterDesigner.

[spurraider21]

The Big Bang isn't controversial, really. I dunno why Avante is hung up on it. Rather, what's controversial is assertion that the Bang is what started the universe (that there was no existence before it). Two different things that are getting concatenated whenever it's convenient.
He's hung up on it because he is afraid of the implications it has on beliefs he has clung to for his entire life

[spurraider21]

That there is no God/MasterDesigner.
I have never said that there is no god. Go back and find a post where I definitively state "there is no god."

As ive said many times, it would not be logical to make the claim that it doesn't exist.

[Chinook]

Copy

According to the standard theory, our universe sprang into existence as "singularity" around 13.7 billion years ago. What is a "singularity" and where does it come from? Well, to be honest, we don't know for sure. Singularities are zones which defy our current understanding of physics. They are thought to exist at the core of "black holes." Black holes are areas of intense gravitational pressure. The pressure is thought to be so intense that finite matter is actually squished into infinite density (a mathematical concept which truly boggles the mind). These zones of infinite density are called "singularities." Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know.

Yep, which is why the assertion/assumption that nothing proceeded the Bang is controversial. The actual Bang itself isn't, though. It's plain as day to anyone who knows about the universe from a physical standpoint.

[spurraider21]

Yep, which is why the assertion/assumption that nothing proceeded the Bang is controversial. The actual Bang itself isn't, though. It's plain as day to anyone who knows about the universe from a physical standpoint.
The problem is Avante isn't among them.

He'll respond shortly with "so we have DNA, insects, birds, all from a........ bANG? Hahahahaha!

[Chinook]

The problem is Avante isn't among them.

He'll respond shortly with "so we have DNA, insects, birds, all from a........ bANG? Hahahahaha!

With a "little man" or two thrown in.

[spurraider21]

I'm not expecting him to understand the science behind anything. It's out of his reach.

But whats annoying is that he can't grasp the concept of the null. I've tried to be very clear in that nobody can prove the lack if existence of god. I have stated many times quite clearly that I am not making the claim that god doesn't exist. And then I see his most recent post and it's literally him covering his ears going "blablablablablablabla"

[Chinook]

Well, he's doing a poor job at explaining the same argument that I used (that it's more reasonable to assume something set the universe into motion rather than assuming that nothing did). In such a case, asserting that the universe/existence began spontaneously, is actually the alternate (which is why he's arguing you have the burden of proof). So I obviously sympathize with his point of view. I just think he's going about defending it the wrong way.

Not that I want to get into that, of course. I've had my rodeo already.

[Avante]

I'm not expecting him to understand the science behind anything. It's out of his reach.

But whats annoying is that he can't grasp the concept of the null. I've tried to be very clear in that nobody can prove the lack if existence of god. I have stated many times quite clearly that I am not making the claim that god doesn't exist. And then I see his most recent post and it's literally him covering his ears going "blablablablablablabla"

Oh hell yes totally out of my reach? Dude....stop it ok? What it is is that it makes no sense and it cannot be proved. So why keep trying to peddle something you can't prove?

[Avante]

The problem is Avante isn't among them.

He'll respond shortly with "so we have DNA, insects, birds, all from a........ bANG? Hahahahaha!

Wow!

Not much for the obvious are ya slugger. I was ....OBVIOUSLY...talking about howe so many things that take some complexities coming into existence over something as chaotic as a huge explosion. What are the odds?

So the day after...BIG BANG..what was there?

[Chinook]

Oh hell yes totally out of my reach? Dude....stop it ok? What it is is that it makes no sense and it cannot be proved. So why keep trying to peddle something you can't prove?

There's a difference between asserting that god doesn't exist and asserting that people shouldn't believe god exists. The first one is unknowable and unprovable logically. The second one is a debate topic. Spurraider is arguing the second one.

[Avante]

There's a difference between asserting that god doesn't exist and asserting that people shouldn't believe god exists. The first one is unknowable and unprovable logically. The second one is a debate topic. Spurraider is arguing the second one.

When you know a lot of very intelligent and successful people who wouldn't be caught dead doing this silly messgeboard trip beliving in a God, what chance does some guy in hiding have trying to sell...no it's evolution, the big bang....? Yep, none!

[spurraider21]

Well, he's doing a poor job at explaining the same argument that I used (that it's more reasonable to assume something set the universe into motion rather than assuming that nothing did). In such a case, asserting that the universe/existence began spontaneously, is actually the alternate (which is why he's arguing you have the burden of proof). So I obviously sympathize with his point of view. I just think he's going about defending it the wrong way.

Not that I want to get into that, of course. I've had my rodeo already.
i don't think he's using the same argument you did. his insistence on the big bang not making sense tells me he's making a fundamentally different argument than yours. you have no issue with the big bang and its ramifications.

[Avante]

So it's better to raise your children to not believe in any God....right? They need to believe in.....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!....right?

[Chinook]

i don't think he's using the same argument you did. his insistence on the big bang not making sense tells me he's making a fundamentally different argument than yours. you have no issue with the big bang and its ramifications.

There are differences, for sure. I don't see science and theism as conflicting, so I have no problem accepting scientific findings. He does. But I think we agree that there are more reasons to believe things than empirical evidence.

[spurraider21]

There are differences, for sure. I don't see science and theism as conflicting, so I have no problem accepting scientific findings. He does. But I think we agree that there are more reasons to believe things than empirical evidence.
sure, but i dont think that's been his argument at all. most of his argument seems to just be questioning the bang and what followed and using the judeo-christian god as a substitute

[spurraider21]

So it's better to raise your children to not believe in any God....right? They need to believe in.....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!....right?
if feel-good stories are better, why dont you raise your kids and have them believe that disease, statutory rape, and war don't exist.

[Avante]

if feel-good stories are better, why dont you raise your kids and have them believe that disease, statutory rape, and war don't exist.

So you think it's better that kids have no God in their life, right?

[spurraider21]

So you think it's better that kids have no God in their life, right?
i don't think its better or worse either way. hopefully i can teach them to be good people without having to scare them into it, though. based on family custom, they'll grow up with the christian holidays and some traditions, the same way i did. i'm not going to force anything upon them and if they ask for my opinion i'd share it honestly without forcing a view on them one way or the other

[Avante]

i don't think its better or worse either way. hopefully i can teach them to be good people without having to scare them into it, though. based on family custom, they'll grow up with the christian holidays and some traditions, the same way i did. i'm not going to force anything upon them and if they ask for my opinion i'd share it honestly without forcing a view on them one way or the other


So when asked.....hey dad is there a God, you tell them what? Especially since granny wants to take them to her church.

[spurraider21]

So when asked.....hey dad is there a God, you tell them what? Especially since granny wants to take them to her church.
my family hasn't regularly attended church as far as i can remember. my father's father was a priest, but even then my immediate family never was into the weekly thing. we'd basically go for weddings/funerals/baptisms... and maybe for easter. so that wouldn't really factor in much.

if my kid asked me, i would just turn it around and ask him what he thinks, and then ask him why he thinks that way. what makes sense to them. get 'em into critical thinking. when it comes to religion, politics, i dont want to be the kind of father that imposes my beliefs. i'm sure there will be some regardless of my intentions, its human nature. same approach my old man took with me. anytime i asked him a question about religion or politics, he would ask me how i got to my thought process, and challenge it. even if i had the same view he did, he challenged me to defend it. i think it was a good exercise and something i'd go for as well

[Avante]

my family hasn't regularly attended church as far as i can remember. my father's father was a priest, but even then my immediate family never was into the weekly thing. we'd basically go for weddings/funerals/baptisms... and maybe for easter. so that wouldn't really factor in much.

if my kid asked me, i would just turn it around and ask him what he thinks, and then ask him why he thinks that way. what makes sense to them. get 'em into critical thinking. when it comes to religion, politics, i dont want to be the kind of father that imposes my beliefs. i'm sure there will be some regardless of my intentions, its human nature. same approach my old man took with me. anytime i asked him a question about religion or politics, he would ask me how i got to my thought process, and challenge it. even if i had the same view he did, he challenged me to defend it. i think it was a good exercise and something i'd go for as well

I see, ok how about this?

son...dad, I think there is a God, I lost Joey (dog) today, thought he was gone. So I started crying. Grandma said maybe if I prayed Joey would come back, so I did and in about fifteen minutes there was Joey at the door. There is a God isn't there dad?

Ok so what do you tell him?

[spurraider21]

I see, ok how about this?

son...dad, I think there is a God, I lost Joey (dog) today, thought he was gone. So I started crying. Grandma said maybe if I prayed Joey would come back, so I did and in about fifteen minutes there was Joey at the door. There is a God isn't there dad?

Ok so what do you tell him?
son...dad, I don't think there is a God, I lost Joey (dog) today, thought he was gone. So I started crying. Grandma said maybe if I prayed Joey would come back, so I did and Joey never came back. There is no God, is there dad?

what do you say?

this is trivial... and none of this bears any relevance to the conversation we had been having. that being said, i dont think my kid would be growing up in an environment where god (at least in the biblical sense) is being shoved down his throat on a daily basis, where that would be his first reaction

[Avante]

son...dad, I don't think there is a God, I lost Joey (dog) today, thought he was gone. So I started crying. Grandma said maybe if I prayed Joey would come back, so I did and Joey never came back. There is no God, is there dad?

what do you say?

this is trivial... and none of this bears any relevance to the conversation we had been having. that being said, i dont think my kid would be growing up in an environment where god (at least in the biblical sense) is being shoved down his throat on a daily basis, where that would be his first reaction

I expected that, you want to leave emotions and real life out of this.

Ok guy, I feel better about things thinking something is behind all this, I see too many things that simply couldn't just happen without a design. So I'd be better off if I went with your approach?

[spurraider21]

I expected that, you want to leave emotions and real life out of this.
wait, what? if any kid is raised in a very religious environment, his first reaction to things like that will always be "god was on our side" or something like that. that's not a revelation. i responded to your question by saying my household probably wouldn't function that way, just like the household i grew up in didn't.

similarly, if you take a kid who grew up in an environment (on the other end of the spectrum) where not only was the family not religious at all, but they never even mentioned the word god... like the kid has never even heard the word god before and has absolutely no clue what that is... its not like he's going to be asking religious questions.

in the scenario you brought up, you mentioned a grandmother that told the child to pray to god to have his situation resolved. that alone is bending the story.

and you didn't answer my scenario either


Ok guy, I feel better about things thinking something is behind all this
thats fine. but just because something gives you warm fuzzy feelings, that doesn't mean it is any more likely to be true. i'm sure children feel better about things when they believe there is santa claus and a tooth fairy. that doesn't make those things any more true than they would be otherwise.


I see too many things that simply couldn't just happen without a design
this is because you have virtually no practical understanding of physics, chemistry, or biology


So I'd be better off if I went with your approach?
as i've said dozens of times, this is completely irrelevant. there is no "better off" or "worse off." what makes us feel better doesn't make it any more or less true.

[Avante]

wait, what? if any kid is raised in a very religious environment, his first reaction to things like that will always be "god was on our side" or something like that. that's not a revelation. i responded to your question by saying my household probably wouldn't function that way, just like the household i grew up in didn't.

similarly, if you take a kid who grew up in an environment (on the other end of the spectrum) where not only was the family not religious at all, but they never even mentioned the word god... like the kid has never even heard the word god before and has absolutely no clue what that is... its not like he's going to be asking religious questions.

in the scenario you brought up, you mentioned a grandmother that told the child to pray to god to have his situation resolved. that alone is bending the story.

and you didn't answer my scenario either


thats fine. but just because something gives you warm fuzzy feelings, that doesn't mean it is any more likely to be true. i'm sure children feel better about things when they believe there is santa claus and a tooth fairy. that doesn't make those things any more true than they would be otherwise.


this is because you have virtually no practical understanding of physics, chemistry, or biology


as i've said dozens of times, this is completely irrelevant. there is no "better off" or "worse off." what makes us feel better doesn't make it any more or less true.


So forget all the reasons people believe in a God, right?

Alright....

So the truth is there is no God....right?

[spurraider21]

So forget all the reasons people believe in a God, right?

Alright....

So the truth is there is no God....right?
why do you insist upon putting words in my mouth?

i have made it explicity clear that i have NEVER said "there is no god." but you keep making it seem like i said that. are you literally retarded?

[Avante]

why do you insist upon putting words in my mouth?

i have made it explicity clear that i have NEVER said "there is no god." but you keep making it seem like i said that. are you literally retarded?

No not literally retarde just curious as to why anyone would work so hard at trying to prove evolution/BIG BANG and then say..."I never said there was no God". So we had evolution/BIG BANG and God?

Dude, do you think there is a God? No song and dance bullshit ok? Do you think there is a God, a yes or no will work?

[Chinook]

No not literally retarde just curious as to why anyone would work so hard at trying to prove evolution/BIG BANG and then say..."I never said there was no God". So we had evolution/BIG BANG and God?

Dude, do you think there is a God? No song and dance bullshit ok? Do you think there is a God, a yes or no will work?

Nothing hard to understand about that. Nothing about believing in god excludes anything scientific.

Anyway, SR will say no to your question, but you'll misinterpret that to mean that he's saying, "There is no god."

[Avante]

Nothing hard to understand about that. Nothing about believing in god excludes anything scientific.

Anyway, SR will say no to your question, but you'll misinterpret that to mean that he's saying, "There is no god."

So how do we go with Adam and Eve and it took God six days and He rested on the seventh....AND...evolution/BIG BANG?

[spurraider21]

No not literally retarde just curious as to why anyone would work so hard at trying to prove evolution/BIG BANG and then say..."I never said there was no God". So we had evolution/BIG BANG and God?

Dude, do you think there is a God? No song and dance bullshit ok? Do you think there is a God, a yes or no will work?
well if we're talking about the christian god as portrayed in the bible and all the tales, like adam and eve, abraham, noah, moses, jesus, and all that... its a different story. i dont buy that one. i dont think the tales of the bible are consistent with each other and with what we know about the earth and the cosmos. as for a more general version of a god, its another thing entirely.

you can ask chinook about it though. he's one of the guys here that is fine with the concept of the big bang, evolution, and is also a believer in god (again, not the christian, biblical god).

as for me... there is all sorts of evidence for the big bang, for evolution. as i've explained to you (and you claim to understand), the only reason those theories exist is because of evidence. where i disagree with theists is:

i dont think we need to assume that there is a god behind all of it (even though there are different definitions of a god, i would characterize god as a sentient, conscious 'being' that set the universe into motion, starting with the bang). the way i see it, our understanding of everything (though nowhere near complete) is rapidly increasing. right now there are questions that science can't definitively answer. a lot of them. and some people... when they reach an unanswered question, turn to god. i dont do so. years ago, scientists thought the earth was the center of the universe, and all the stars and the sun revolved around the earth. the orbits didn't make sense that way though, with the laws of gravity. they didn't add up. it was something science at the time couldn't answer... so it was an accepted idea that the "hand of god" moved the stars and planets, which was their explanation for their unusual motion. of course, the heliocentric (earth revolves around the sun) model fixed all the mathematical inconsistencies, and removed the "hand of god" idea. similarly, while we don't know certain things right now, like the exact cause of the bang... its easy to just place the "hand of god" there again.

there might be... but i dont think the default position would be to assume its existence. i'm open to the idea of it. if would be a logical fallacy to be certain that it doesn't exist.

[Relevancy]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SNuZ4OE6vCk

[Avante]

well if we're talking about the christian god as portrayed in the bible and all the tales, like adam and eve, abraham, noah, moses, jesus, and all that... its a different story. i dont buy that one. i dont think the tales of the bible are consistent with each other and with what we know about the earth and the cosmos. as for a more general version of a god, its another thing entirely.

you can ask chinook about it though. he's one of the guys here that is fine with the concept of the big bang, evolution, and is also a believer in god (again, not the christian, biblical god).

as for me... there is all sorts of evidence for the big bang, for evolution. as i've explained to you (and you claim to understand), the only reason those theories exist is because of evidence. where i disagree with theists is:

i dont think we need to assume that there is a god behind all of it (even though there are different definitions of a god, i would characterize god as a sentient, conscious 'being' that set the universe into motion, starting with the bang).

there might be... but i dont think the default position would be to assume its existence. i'm open to the idea of it. if would be a logical fallacy to be certain that it doesn't exist.

So you are pinned beneath a car, yep a wreck and it's not looking good, will you pray to God to be saved?

[spurraider21]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SNuZ4OE6vCk
:lol... if avante was younger i think this conversation would go a lot easier. asking somebody to reconsider something that has been accepted so firmly for decades is unreasonable, and i get that

[spurraider21]

So you are pinned beneath a car, yep a wreck and it's not looking good, will you pray to God to be saved?
if i could choose to reach for a bible or a cell phone, i'd choose the cell phone.

also i edited my previous comment and added some content... check it out

but please... this sort of questioning does absolutely nothing to enhance the conversation

[Chinook]

So how do we go with Adam and Eve and it took God six days and He rested on the seventh....AND...evolution/BIG BANG?

You've already admitted the bible is bullshit made up by humans. So don't try jumping back to it now. You can believe god created the universe without believing the spit-balling written by some guys thousands of years ago.

You can't possibly think that the Christian interpretation of god is the only one we have to go on.

[Chinook]

well if we're talking about the christian god as portrayed in the bible and all the tales, like adam and eve, abraham, noah, moses, jesus, and all that... its a different story. i dont buy that one. i dont think the tales of the bible are consistent with each other and with what we know about the earth and the cosmos. as for a more general version of a god, its another thing entirely.

you can ask chinook about it though. he's one of the guys here that is fine with the concept of the big bang, evolution, and is also a believer in god (again, not the christian, biblical god).

as for me... there is all sorts of evidence for the big bang, for evolution. as i've explained to you (and you claim to understand), the only reason those theories exist is because of evidence. where i disagree with theists is:

i dont think we need to assume that there is a god behind all of it (even though there are different definitions of a god, i would characterize god as a sentient, conscious 'being' that set the universe into motion, starting with the bang). the way i see it, our understanding of everything (though nowhere near complete) is rapidly increasing. right now there are questions that science can't definitively answer. a lot of them. and some people... when they reach an unanswered question, turn to god. i dont do so. years ago, scientists thought the earth was the center of the universe, and all the stars and the sun revolved around the earth. the orbits didn't make sense that way though, with the laws of gravity. they didn't add up. it was something science at the time couldn't answer... so it was an accepted idea that the "hand of god" moved the stars and planets, which was their explanation for their unusual motion. of course, the heliocentric (earth revolves around the sun) model fixed all the mathematical inconsistencies, and removed the "hand of god" idea. similarly, while we don't know certain things right now, like the exact cause of the bang... its easy to just place the "hand of god" there again.

there might be... but i dont think the default position would be to assume its existence. i'm open to the idea of it. if would be a logical fallacy to be certain that it doesn't exist.

... did you just pull an Xmas?

[spurraider21]

... did you just pull an Xmas?
i answered the question... its in there somewhere. i said my default position is not to assume the existence of a god.

but if you wanted me to lay it out right now in a yes or no format, it would be a no at this point... while reserving the right to incorporate new informations into new opinions/beliefs

[Chinook]

i answered the question... its in there somewhere. i said my default position is not to assume the existence of a god

I know. You've been clear enough throughout the threads. I just meant responding to a questions that was specifically labeled yes/no with a long response.

[Avante]

:lol... if avante was younger i think this conversation would go a lot easier. asking somebody to reconsider something that has been accepted so firmly for decades is unreasonable, and i get that

Have you paid any attentioon at all? I don't believe in any of that stuff and have said so numerous times.

[spurraider21]

I know. You've been clear enough throughout the threads. I just meant responding to a questions that was specifically labeled yes/no with a long response.
:lol gotcha. but i did include the yes/no in somewhere in the jumbled mess

[spurraider21]

Have you paid any attentioon at all? I don't believe in any of that stuff and have said so numerous times.
lol what? you are flip flopping on this point.

let me ask you this. do you believe jesus, the actual son of god, was alive and crucified?

[Avante]

You've already admitted the bible is bullshit made up by humans. So don't try jumping back to it now. You can believe god created the universe without believing the spit-balling written by some guys thousands of years ago.

You can't possibly think that the Christian interpretation of god is the only one we have to go on.

I was....obviously...talking about how God is perceived by Christians. So there can be a God, evolution and BIG BANG....right? There just can't be the God of the The Bible....right?

[Avante]

lol what? you are flip flopping on this point.

let me ask you this. do you believe jesus, the actual son of god, was alive and crucified?

I'm not flip flopping at all, I assumed you knew my stance on this. Hell no there was no Jesus, that's simply Hebrew mythology that for some reason we accepted over all the others.

But......there was "something" behind all this and it wasn;t....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[spurraider21]

so you don't believe that god made the earth in 7 days... that adam and eve were the first two, etc.

this is actually eye opening

[Chinook]

I was....obviously...talking about how God is perceived by Christians. So there can be a God, evolution and BIG BANG....right? There just can't be the God of the The Bible....right?

Pretty much. The idea of god is compatible with science. The idea of religion, whether theistic or atheistic, isn't.

[spurraider21]

Pretty much. The idea of god is compatible with science. The idea of religion, whether theistic or atheistic, isn't.
http://media.giphy.com/media/fPkWsBe1wWPtu/giphy.gif

[Chinook]

so you don't believe that god made the earth in 7 days... that adam and eve were the first two, etc.

this is actually eye opening

From that Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism thread a couple of months back.


Only an idiot buys all that bullshit [biblical interpretation of god], that's all man man crap. I'm just not dumb enough like you to think this just all happens without some mastrer design. What if we were 1000 miles closer to the sun or 1000 miles further away? What if we rotated faster or slower? Way way too many things have to work in perfect concert to pull this off. Are you really stupid enough o think....yep it just happened.....come on man pull your head out of your ass, ok?


Science? Back in the 40's science came up with just how fast a human could run. They did all their research, did all their studies and came up with.....an Olympic sprinter in peek condition could run a 100m in 9.90 seconds, and that was it.

The world record is 9.58.


Never seen so many dumb posts in one thread before, wow!

If you've delved into evolutuion you know of how weak it all is. Where are all the ...in the process....species? Where are all the gorillas before we got todays gorilla?

I doubt most believers buy the Bible word for word, I don't think anyone really thinks Moses parted the Red Sea. It's not about all that, it's about something above and beyond us.

Only a 100% dumb fuck would think humans evolved from apes and all this just....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yes there is a Master Designer, but I do doubt it's anything like "God" of the Bible, that's just us humans fucking things up....again. Something......is behind all this and it's real real obvious.

[Avante]

so you don't believe that god made the earth in 7 days... that adam and eve were the first two, etc.

this is actually eye opening


I assumed you understood I was playing the part of the Christian and asking what they would ask. I have talked about my belief on this many times. It's.............I don't have a clue just like everyone else but I can see "something" designing all this before I would....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's it.

[Chinook]

I assumed you understood I was playing the part of the Christian and asking what they would ask. I have talked about my belief on this many times. It's.............I don't have a clue just like everyone else but I can see "something" designing all this before I would....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's it.

Why can't you see both then?

[Avante]

Why can't you see both then?

Why do I need to?

[Chinook]

http://media.giphy.com/media/fPkWsBe1wWPtu/giphy.gif

Obviously, I mean the idea of religion in terms of origin stories and history. The idea of it as a general moral compass is pretty much agnostic to science, though it's still full of problems.

[spurraider21]

From that Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism thread a couple of months back.
i know, but he refers to churchgoing (and has a few times in this thread)... and having a full blown creation model without a religious basis seems more unlikely than just about any other view. and then you have his constant bashing of islam, while never really going after christians... his thread about the christian movie "God's Not Dead", etc.

[Chinook]

Why do I need to?

You wouldn't seem like an ostrich with its head in the sand. There's a ton of evidence for the Bang. It doesn't make sense to disbelieve it if you don't have a stake in a dogma. It's like not believing in the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs.

[spurraider21]

Obviously, I mean the idea of religion in terms of origin stories and history. The idea of it as a general moral compass is pretty much agnostic to science, though it's still full of problems.
i know.

i thought the post was very well put, and the gif was my way of saying i agree

[Avante]

You wouldn't seem like an ostrich with its head in the sand. There's a ton of evidence for the Bang. It doesn't make sense to disbelieve it if you don't have a stake in a dogma. It's like not believing in the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs.

So if not for the Big Bang none of this would have happened, right? God/something couldn't have done it alone....right?

[Chinook]

i know.

i thought the post was very well put, and the gif was my way of saying i agree

I thought it was your way of telling me that you crawled through 500 yards of shit and came out clean on the other end.

[Chinook]

So if not for the Big BAang none of this would have haapened, right? God/something couldn't have done it alone....right?

That doesn't make sense. The Bang is a physical event. It didn't make anything. It just happened. If god created the universe, the Bang was just a step in the process, like toasting bread before putting jam on it.

[spurraider21]

I thought it was your way of telling me that you crawled through 500 yards of shit and came out clean on the other end.
that's the length of 5 football fields

[Chinook]

that's the length of 5 football fields

Just shy of half a mile.

[Avante]

That doesn't make sense. The Bang is a physical event. It didn't make anything. It just happened. If god created the universe, the Bang was just a step in the process, like toasting bread before putting jam on it.

It makes all the sense in the world since some think there was no God and it was the Big Bang that was responsible for all this.

So if not for God or the Big Bang we'd still have what we do today?

[spurraider21]

Just shy of half a mile.
football field is 120 yards long :bang

its my favorite movie ever, but as a football fanatic that always bothered me more than it should have, since i know what he meant :lol

[Chinook]

It makes all the sense in the world since some think there was no God and it was the Big Bang that was responsible for all this.

The Bang is responsible in the sense that an accelerator is responsible for your car going faster. It's a chain reaction, like dominoes.


So if not for God or the Big Bang we'd still have what we do today?

I guess not. The Bang is an event that led to the universe as we know it. I believe god set the universe into motion, including the Bang. Without it, the universe would at least be different (provided the laws of physics were the same as they are now).

[Chinook]

football field is 120 yards long :bang

its my favorite movie ever, but as a football fanatic that always bothered me more than it should have, since i know what he meant :lol

Yeah, and 500 feet is nowhere near a half-mile. Do you really expect a life-long prisoner to know all this complicated math stuff?

[spurraider21]

yeah, 500 yards is about 1/4 ~ 1/3 a mile

[Avante]

The Bang is responsible in the sense that an accelerator is responsible for your car going faster. It's a chain reaction, like dominoes.



I guess not. The Bang is an event that led to the universe as we know it. I believe god set the universe into motion, including the Bang. Without it, the universe would at least be different (provided the laws of physics were the same as they are now).

Why would any Superior Being/God/Whatever need a Big Bang to do anything? Sort of a barbaric, primitive way of doing things wouldn't you think. More trouble than it's worth. There had to be a better way than that.

[Avante]

yeah, 500 yards is about 1/4 ~ 1/3 a mile

440 yards in 1/4 of mile.

The mile relay consists of 4 sprinters each running 440 yards.

[Chinook]

Why would any Superior Being/God/Whatever need a Big Bang to do anything? Sort of a barbaric, primitive way of doing things wouldn't you think. More trouble than it's worth. There had to be a better way than that.

First, who said god needed to do anything the way it was done? Do you need to do everything you do in the exact way you do it?

Second, even if you think god is all-powerful, that doesn't mean that his actions can't have physical effects. I mean, you have to accept physics to a certain extent, right? Why is there gravity? Why is there matter? Doesn't matter. There are all those things.

Third, I don't think there's such a thing as "more trouble than it's worth" to an all-powerful being. If he could speak the universe into existence, he could just as easily speak the Bang into existence.

Finally, you don't think a huge burst of light and energy is a good way to start something? It's like the ultimate fireworks show. I can't imagine I'd do it any differently.

[Avante]

First, who said god needed to do anything the way it was done? Do you need to do everything you do in the exact way you do it?

Second, even if you think god is all-powerful, that doesn't mean that his actions can't have physical effects. I mean, you have to accept physics to a certain extent, right? Why is there gravity? Why is there matter? Doesn't matter. There are all those things.

Third, I don't think there's such a thing as "more trouble than it's worth" to an all-powerful being. If he could speak the universe into existence, he could just as easily speak the Bang into existence.

Finally, you don't think a huge burst of light and energy is a good way to start something? It's like the ultimate fireworks show. I can't imagine I'd do it any differently.

Well even in the Biblical God after six days he needed a rest.....right? So it appears He had limits.

I can see no reason at all to go the Big Bang route when it simply wasn't needed. When you already know how things will end up why delay them with...BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!

[spurraider21]

Well even in the Biblical God after six days he needed a rest.....right? So it appears He had limits.

I can see no reason at all to go the Big Bang route when it simply wasn't needed. When you already know how things will end up why delay them with...BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!
well, if you're a god/supreme being technically the universe isn't needed either.

doesn't mean he didn't make one

[Avante]

well, if you're a god/supreme being technically the universe isn't needed either.

doesn't mean he didn't make one

We can see the stars, and know for a fact we have a Universe, so Something was responsible.

Sure a lot of this out there...


http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/07/big-bang-never-happened.html

[Silver&Black]

Do you really expect a life-long prisoner to know all this complicated math stuff?

Yeah..Andy Dufresne prolly would. After all, he helped a few guys get their high school diplomas. I mean why do you think the warden let's him do those things. To keep him happy doing the laundry....money that is.

The Count of Monte Crisco....by Alexandree Dumb-ass.

Shawshank is da cat's meow....and da bee's knees. Gotta be a top 10 of all time kinda movie....

[spurraider21]

We can see the stars, and know for a fact we have a Universe, so Something was responsible.
im not denying that there is a universe :lol

you said "why would a god make a big bang. he doesn't need to"

i'm just saying that if you really think about it, why does god even need to make a universe? with the ultimate point being that a god doesn't "have" to do anything... so a god putting forth a big bang is perfectly plausible


http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/07/big-bang-never-happened.html
that's a 4 year old article... and while that in itself is an unimportant detail, it is significant to note that it hasn't really gained traction among the scientific community. the article itself maintains that there is already a scientific consensus, and that this guys model has no explanation for the cosmic microwave background... which is considered to be among the strongest pieces of evidence of the big bang theory.

i also like how it says "Shu's idea is that time and space are not independent entities but can be converted back and forth between each other. In his formulation of the geometry of spacetime, the speed of light is simply the conversion factor between the two."

that's not Shu's idea. that's been around for over 50 years and is part of the theory of relativity.

the next sentence is pretty confusing... "Similarly, mass and length are interchangeable in a relationship in which the conversion factor depends on both the gravitational constant G and the speed of light, neither of which need be constant."

so its depending on a constant... that isn't necessarily a constant. that seems to contradict itself. that's not necessarily an indictment on the scientist, but probably on the writer of the article who must have missed something

[spurraider21]

Yeah..Andy Dufresne prolly would. After all, he helped a few guys get their high school diplomas. I mean why do you think the warden let's him do those things. To keep him happy doing the laundry....money that is.

The Count of Monte Crisco....by Alexandree Dumb-ass.

Shawshank is da cat's meow....and da bee's knees. Gotta be a top 10 of all time kinda movie....
yeah, but Defresne wasn't a life-long prisoner like Red

[Silver&Black]

yeah, but Defresne wasn't a life-long prisoner like Red

Well from hanging around Andy everyday for close to two decades...you would think some knowledge would rub off right??? At least simple things like distances. I mean for christ's sake...he basically lived in a library with Andy.

You guys are selling Red's intelligence level a lil' short imo. I mean yeah....it did take him 40 years to finally figure out that he needed to be an asshole to the parole board...but who's keeping score??? :lol

[spurraider21]

Well from hanging around Andy everyday for close to two decades...you would think some knowledge would rub off right??? At least simple things like distances. I mean for christ's sake...he basically lived in a library with Andy.

You guys are selling Red's intelligence level a lil' short imo. I mean yeah....it did take him 40 years to finally figure out that he needed to be an asshole to the parole board...but who's keeping score??? :lol
http://vimeo.com/50587555

jump to 6:08 :lol

the whole thing is great, but thats the scene of reference

[Silver&Black]

http://vimeo.com/50587555

jump to 6:08 :lol

the whole thing is great, but thats the scene of reference

"Well that's our show...Thank you Stephen King...we'll see you in court"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Epic Family Guy episode........

[Chinook]

Yeah..Andy Dufresne prolly would. After all, he helped a few guys get their high school diplomas. I mean why do you think the warden let's him do those things. To keep him happy doing the laundry....money that is.

It was Red who made that claim.

EDIT: I see SR got to it already. Yeah, Red clearly wasn't dumb. But that doesn't mean he was learned.

[Chinook]

Well even in the Biblical God after six days he needed a rest.....right? So it appears He had limits.

I can see no reason at all to go the Big Bang route when it simply wasn't needed. When you already know how things will end up why delay them with...BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!

It wasn't needed. It just happened. It's like saying why god would have it rain when water could just show up in the ground. We know it does rain, and we know with a high level of confidence that the Bang happened. Again, it's not a myth some people are trying to push; it's the theory based on all the physical evidence we've collected. In fact, the universe is still "banging" as we speak.

The point is that essentially we know the Bang happened, so there's no reason to make it seem like there's a choice of whether to believe in it or not. If you have no reason to disbelieve it (some religion telling you things didn't happen that way), I find it hard to justify challenging it too much. As I said because, the Bang is much less controversial than evolution. Denying it is like denying that the Earth moves around the sun.

[spurraider21]

i have a bad feeling this is going to end like The Notebook

by tomorrow or the next day, avante will revert to "how can anybody believe all this came from... BANG. hahahahahahahaha"

all progress made here will be lost

[boutons_deux]

i have a bad feeling this is going to end like The Notebook

by tomorrow or the next day, avante will revert to "how can anybody believe all this came from... BANG. hahahahahahahaha"

all progress made here will be lost

yep, silly stuff like "from big bang DIRECT to humans!" :lol

[Avante]

It wasn't needed. It just happened. It's like saying why god would have it rain when water could just show up in the ground. We know it does rain, and we know with a high level of confidence that the Bang happened. Again, it's not a myth some people are trying to push; it's the theory based on all the physical evidence we've collected. In fact, the universe is still "banging" as we speak.

The point is that essentially we know the Bang happened, so there's no reason to make it seem like there's a choice of whether to believe in it or not. If you have no reason to disbelieve it (some religion telling you things didn't happen that way), I find it hard to justify challenging it too much. As I said because, the Bang is much less controversial than evolution. Denying it is like denying that the Earth moves around the sun.


Hmmmm?

http://bigbangneverhappened.org/

[Avante]

yep, silly stuff like "from big bang DIRECT to humans!" :lol

I have a wife and two children because of a backgammon game. And two granddaughters because of that game.

How can that be?

[spurraider21]

Hmmmm?

http://bigbangneverhappened.org/
Anybody can list links they haven't read or don't even understand. http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/lerner_errors.html

This one refutes what you posted, for instance. When a scientist breaks the mold and claims something new, it gets peer reviewed. The ones who's work survives the peer review processes get nobel prizes. The ones who don't... Are considered refuted

[Avante]

Anybody can list links they haven't read or don't even understand. http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/lerner_errors.html

This one refutes what you posted, for instance. When a scientist breaks the mold and claims something new, it gets peer reviewed. The ones who's work survives the peer review processes get nobel prizes. The ones who don't... Are considered refuted

Do you honestly believe there aren't others talking about how the Big Bang never happened? And.....when did you ever get this idea I can't read?

[spurraider21]

Do you honestly believe there aren't others talking about how the Big Bang never happened? And.....when did you ever get this idea I can't read?
I never said you couldn't read. I said you didn't read what you posted. You just googled "Big Bang didn't happen" and posted one of the links that came up.

Im in sure there are others who don't think the Big Bang happened. There are also a lot of people who believe in the bible literally. But even you acknowledge that it's full of shit. A lot of people believe in the Quran. Just because there is a group of people that believes something, that doesn't make it more likely to be true

[Chinook]

Do you honestly believe there aren't others talking about how the Big Bang never happened? And.....when did you ever get this idea I can't read?

Of course there are people who disagree with the current scientific view. Some of them are even relatively competent individuals. But that doesn't mean a whole lot. A guy makes claims, and they get tested. That this guy's claims haven't really taken hold is a sign that they didn't test out favorably for him. I'd like to see his work and to compare it with the works of others.

[Avante]

I never said you couldn't read. I said you didn't read what you posted. You just googled "Big Bang didn't happen" and posted one of the links that came up.

Im in sure there are others who don't think the Big Bang happened. There are also a lot of people who believe in the bible literally. But even you acknowledge that it's full of shit. A lot of people believe in the Quran. Just because there is a group of people that believes something, that doesn't make it more likely to be true

Do you really think this is the first time I've ever talked about this? I've already read all those articles, this is an old topic.

The bottom line is everyone believes what they want and nobody is ever going to change their mind, especially on an internet messageboard

[mouse]

Big Bang or not, It doesn't really matter we are on page 71 and no one has posted any evidence man Evolved form an ape.

I don't lose any sleep over it I think its one of the worst theories ever made up. I do have an issue with people who claim the Universe is 12 Billion years old just because they read it in a school text book. And those individuals I seek out to try and educate them with real Science.

Change in size and color of Saturn & Neptune's rings:

Years of observation were confirmed by Voyager 1 that Saturn's rings are expanding and cannot be billions of years old.10 The distinct colors and edges within Saturn's rings are also evidence of a young age. Collisions within planetary rings cause the belts to be even; however, Neptune has regions of thick and thin rings indicating they are not billions of years old.

http://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/images/esa_multimedia/images/2004/05/enhanced-colour_image_of_saturn_s_rings/10149553-2-eng-GB/Enhanced-colour_image_of_Saturn_s_rings.jpg

[Avante]

Nobody really knows a damn thing about this, and it's fucking obvious. So you can hope there is some God or act stupid and believe in total silliness.

Then there's this one....

All this has simply always been here and there is no explanation for it.

[spurraider21]

Nobody really knows a damn thing about this, and it's fucking obvious.
please. just because nobody knows "everything" about it doesn't mean you can go around saying "nobody knows a damn thing." this is called being ignorant


So you can hope there is some God or act stupid and believe in total silliness.
and here you go reverting to your old self. "i'm right and everyone else is wrong and stupid"


basically you are back to covering your ears and saying "blablablabla"

[Avante]

please. just because nobody knows "everything" about it doesn't mean you can go around saying "nobody knows a damn thing." this is called being ignorant


and here you go reverting to your old self. "i'm right and everyone else is wrong and stupid"


basically you are back to covering your ears and saying "blablablabla"

Give me a list of everything science knows for a "fact" about the origins of life and earth. Not talking theories here, I'm talking undisputable facts. Things that have been proven.

Go ahead.

[Chinook]

Give me a list of everything science knows for a "fact" about the origins of life and earth. Not talking theories here, I'm talking undisputable facts. Things that have been proven.

Go ahead.

That's some deep-assed water right there, man. Depending on what you're actually asking for, the thread might run right off the rails.

[Avante]

That's some deep-assed water right there, man. Depending on what you're actually asking for, the thread might run right off the rails.

It's the "theory" of evolution, it's the BIG BANG "theory". Then we have the Bible and stories about long hairs whipping up on 1000 soldiers. We have the Koran and Angels talking to Mohammad in caves. Yet none of that has ever been actually proven to where there was no shadow of a doubt at all, like knowing the sun will be there in the morning. Sure we have...probably...but we don't have...and that's a fact. The only fact is that we don't know for sure what did go down.

So we look for whatever story we need to make us feel the best about it all. Some like to play.."I'm too smart for fairy tales" others prefer "God works in mysterious ways".

Nobody ever changes anyone mind about this. For the simple reason your story can no more be proven than theirs.

[Chinook]

It's the "theory" of evolution, it's the BIG BANG "theory". Then we have the Bible and stories about long hairs whipping up on 1000 soldiers. We have the Koran and Angels talking to Mohammad in caves. Yet none of that has ever been actually proven to where there was no shadow of a doubt at all, like knowing the sun will be there in the morning. Sure we have...probably...but we don't have...and that's a fact. The only fact is that we don't know for sure what did go down.

So we look for whatever story we need to make us feel the best about it all. Some like to play.."I'm too smart for fairy tales" others prefer "God works in mysterious ways".

Nobody ever changes anyone mind about this. For the simple reason your story can no more be proven than theirs.

Oh, nevermind. You actually meant the regular old boring stuff. Thought you were going deeply philosophical for a minute.

[Avante]

Oh, nevermind. You actually meant the regular old boring stuff. Thought you were going deeply philosophical for a minute.

Well there is one other ...???...to toss in the pot. What if this is that one thing where there is no reason for it and it can't be explained? We don't know the answer because there is none. There is no God/Whatever, there was a big bang but it had little to do with anything. The earth has always been here, and we did evolve somewhat but we didn't come from the sea.

The Sun is actually the most powerful and important part of this, without it there is none of this. Easy to say it's far more important than any God.

[ChumpDumper]

Well there is one other ...???...to toss in the pot. What if this is that one thing where there is no reason for it and it can't be explained? We don't know the answer because there is none. There is no God/Whatever, there was a big bang but it had little to do with anything. The earth has always been here, and we did evolve somewhat but we didn't come from the sea.

The Sun is actually the most powerful and important part of this, without it there is none of this. Easy to say it's far more important than any God.Are you drunk?

[spurraider21]

Well there is one other ...???...to toss in the pot. What if this is that one thing where there is no reason for it and it can't be explained? We don't know the answer because there is none. There is no God/Whatever, there was a big bang but it had little to do with anything. The earth has always been here, and we did evolve somewhat but we didn't come from the sea.

The Sun is actually the most powerful and important part of this, without it there is none of this. Easy to say it's far more important than any God.
science has never claimed "there is no god." i've told you this many times. this is why i ask if you are retarded. either that or your memory has seriously gotten fucked with age.

[mouse]

Give me a list of everything science knows for a "fact" about the origins of life and earth. Not talking theories here, I'm talking undisputable facts. Things that have been proven.

Go ahead.k

Well let's start with the basics.

We do know the earth rotates ever 24 hours.

We know man needs water food and oxygen to survive

We know the earth requires sunlight

We do know the earth not only has water oxygen food plants animals and sunlight it has gravity.


(Here's were it gets foggy)

All of this is a result of nothing exploding (according to science)

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/files/2012/04/a-universe-from-nothing1.jpg

[mouse]

The problem (in my view) mankind has what is called limited thinking (not sure if theirs a legit reason or not) after all you want your cat to not only know your masturbating but offers to lick your taint? (not that it wouldn't be a bad idea although it might be the beer talking) but seriously there is a reason a cat has limited thinking.

My issues are having to somehow locate the 2% of humans who look outside the box and it's a struggle I deal with everyday but I refuse to give up.

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/th_Alternative-Design-007.mp4 (http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/Alternative-Design-007.mp4)

[mouse]

Then there's this one....

All this has simply always been here and there is no explanation for it.

If Avante ever decides to drop the Bible and just use his unlimited thinking he could be part of the 2% his mind has the capability, after all who here knows anything about his music? That $hit blows me away not to mention his knowledge on human strength and fitness, could you imagine him and Chris Duel working for QVC we would all be broke.

The truth is the only people who cling to Science don't want to go to church and I understand you can support intelligent design and not support the Bible.

It's called Alternative Design and It's the new black.
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/th_Evolution-dead-proof-003.mp4 (http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/Evolution-dead-proof-003.mp4)

[Avante]

science has never claimed "there is no god." i've told you this many times. this is why i ask if you are retarded. either that or your memory has seriously gotten fucked with age.

Where did I ever say science says there is no God? What are you fucking retarded? And in case ya haven't noticed little guy I have a memory on a whole other level than normal people. You do know all that talk of primitive blues, old football and track is right off the top of my head....right?

Yep, wrong again as usual.

[Avante]

If Avante ever decides to drop the Bible and just use his unlimited thinking he could be part of the 2% his mind has the capability, after all who here knows anything about his music? That $hit blows me away not to mention his knowledge on human strength and fitness, could you imagine him and Chris Duel working for QVC we would all be broke.

The truth is the only people who cling to Science don't want to go to church and I understand you can support intelligent design and not support the Bible.

It's called Alternative Design and It's the new black.
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/th_Evolution-dead-proof-003.mp4 (http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/Evolution-dead-proof-003.mp4)

I have never bought into the Bible, I do believe it's not unlike Greek/Roman/Norse mythology that for some reason we accepted as reality***

*** those who do believe

[mouse]

I have never bought into the Bible, I do believe it's not unlike Greek/Roman/Norse mythology that for some reason we accepted as reality.

That is refreshing to read you see the facts speak for themselves....that is why no one dares address your questions they choose to ridicule you and to be honest you know how to bait a hook....I would recommend a different screen name so Shit starter attention whore Avante doesn't take away from high IQ Avante.

or else you will be subject to unnecessary remarks that can hijack or detour a topic.

my 4 cents

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/th_Alternative-Design-MIT.mp4 (http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/Alternative-Design-MIT.mp4)

[mouse]

I have never bought into the Bible, I do believe it's not unlike Greek/Roman/Norse mythology that for some reason we accepted as reality***

*** those who do believe

Sorry I stand corrected, I was maybe thinking of Xmas1997 or someone else...


the truth is there is a huge crowd that doesn't give a shit about the Coke and Pepsi challenge they drink Dr. Pepper or Sprite.

/Thread

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/th_MIT-on-Evolution-22_zpsf6e8801c.mp4 (http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/MIT-on-Evolution-22_zpsf6e8801c.mp4)

[Avante]

That is refreshing to read you see the facts speak for themselves....that is why no one dares address your questions they choose to ridicule you and to be honest you know how to bait a hook....I would recommend a different screen name so Shit starter attention whore Avante doesn't take away from high IQ Avante.

or else you will be subject to unnecessary remarks that can hijack or detour a topic.

my 4 cents

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/th_Alternative-Design-MIT.mp4 (http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/Alternative-Design-MIT.mp4)

I use a lot of pro rasslin' mentality, the crowd loves to hate the arrogant, cocky heel. But they are the ones who put butts in the seat, nobody goes to the shows to cheer the babyfaces, they go to boo the heels. All it takes is..."I'm really good at..."...and here they come and they keep coming, it's real real important that terrible heel gets put in his place, hahahaha!!!!!!!! I could post...Boo!...that will go three pages.

It's far more fun for me playing the heel role, being a babyface would bore me. Sure I'll play..."oh stop it, stop it, I'm no pedo"...BOOM!!..here they come, hahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have fun with it all.

[mouse]

I use a lot of pro rasslin' mentality,


Then you release your opponent when you already won the match.

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/th_Evolution-checkmate.mp4 (http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/Evolution-checkmate.mp4)

[Avante]

Then you release your opponent when you already won the match.

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/th_Evolution-checkmate.mp4 (http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/Evolution-checkmate.mp4)

The bottom line is like the rasslin' you want to get the crowd into it, so you work them. You want to get them involved, if you can't you won't be at Wrestlemania and making the big $$$$. You'll be just a stooge that those who do generate that excitement use as a heavy bag.

I post on boards about them blues/track, there it's all about the knowledge of the topic not personalities of the posters. While interesting, it's not as much fun as ..."look ya little shit, stop humping my leg"....hahaha!!!!! Obviously over there you do deal with a whole other level of intelligence/maturity.

This is my favorite....

Clubber....would somebody pink this fuck? (me)

That coming from those who follow me everywhere I go, hahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[mouse]

Then when it comes to championship belts of space yours is the Van Allen belt!
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/huge-lie-text-book.jpg

[mouse]

The bottom line is like the rasslin' you want to get the crowd into it, so you work them. You want to get them involved, if you can't you won't be at Wrestlemania and making the big $$$$. You'll be just a stooge that those who do generate that excitement use as a heavy bag.

I post on boards about them blues/track, there it's all about the knowledge of the topic not personalities of the posters. While interesting, it's not as much fun as ..."look ya little shit, stop humping my leg"....hahaha!!!!! Obviously over there you do deal with a whole other level of intelligence/maturity.

This is my favorite....

Clubber....would somebody pink this fuck? (me)

That coming from those who follow me everywhere I go, hahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


TOTY!

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/bigbang-lie-113.jpg

[spurraider21]

maybe rackthemouse should expand his photobucket collection instead of posting the same stuff over and over again

[Avante]

It's 1936 and Alabama born Jesse Owens has won 4 Olympic gold medals at the Berlin Olympics, he has shit all over Hitlers superior race.

Jesse was the fastest human in the world (no not really that was fellow Alabama born Eulace Peacock, but he was injured, he owned Jesse in the 100) he runs a 10.2 which is 10.44 electric. If in 36 someone would have told the scientific world that someday someone would run a 9.58, they'd called them crazy. Science wasn't ready for that in 1936.

Hmmm?

[spurraider21]

non scientific folks also thought the sun revolved around the earth until pretty recently

look at all that scientific advancement has brought in the last 200 years. it doesn't come from being absolutely right 100% of the time.

[Avante]

non scientific folks also thought the sun revolved around the earth until pretty recently

look at all that scientific advancement has brought in the last 200 years. it doesn't come from being absolutely right 100% of the time.

Back in the 80's, The Frig at 320 was an oddity, we see HS DL that size now. Every team in the NFL has a dozen 300 pounders. Who would have believed that in 1985?

The thing is science can only work with what they have available to them "now". We see HS kids running faster than the great Jesse Owens. Tell that to the scientists of 1936.

[spurraider21]

Back in the 80's, The Frig at 320 was an oddity, we see HS DL that size now. Every team in the NFL has a dozen 300 pounders. Who would have believed that in 1985?

The thing is science can only work with what they have available to them "now". We see HS kids running faster than the great Jesse Owens. Tell that to the scientists of 1936.
i dont understand the underlying point you are trying to make. science isn't a dogma or a set of beliefs. its a method of analyzing evidence

[ChumpDumper]

It's 1936 and Alabama born Jesse Owens has won 4 Olympic gold medals at the Berlin Olympics, he has shit all over Hitlers superior race.

Jesse was the fastest human in the world (no not really that was fellow Alabama born Eulace Peacock, but he was injured, he owned Jesse in the 100) he runs a 10.2 which is 10.44 electric. If in 36 someone would have told the scientific world that someday someone would run a 9.58, they'd called them crazy. Science wasn't ready for that in 1936.

Hmmm?What scientist said that was crazy?

List them.

You are so quick to makes lists -- I bet you will never make a list of scientists who said what Jess Owens did was impossible.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

[ChumpDumper]

Back in the 80's, The Frig at 320 was an oddity, we see HS DL that size now. Every team in the NFL has a dozen 300 pounders. Who would have believed that in 1985?

The thing is science can only work with what they have available to them "now". We see HS kids running faster than the great Jesse Owens. Tell that to the scientists of 1936.Tell us what scientist said that would be impossible in 80 years.

Make a list.


Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

[mouse]

Tell us what scientist said that would be impossible in 80 years.

Make a list.


For starters getting you to admit mouse was right.

[xmas1997]

For starters getting you to admit mouse was right.

You can forget that, his ego is bigger than his brain. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

For starters getting you to admit mouse was right.Did you quote the wrong thing?

That made no sense whatsoever.

But xmas sure took the time to not ignore me again.

crofl

[ohmwrecker]

For starters getting you to admit mouse was right.

log in/log out bads

[mouse]

Page 73 approaching feel free to post any evidence of Evolution.


http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/th_alternative-Design-odds.mp4 (http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/MIT-on-Evolution/alternative-Design-odds.mp4)

[Blake]

You're blind or illiterate

[Avante]

Where are all those different stages of evolution for the hummingbird?

[ChumpDumper]

Where are all those different stages of evolution for the hummingbird?In books you haven't read.

Get crackin.

[spurraider21]

dogs have only existed after humans. where did they come from? did the creator say "oh shit, i forgot an animal. there."

[Avante]

Where are all those stages of evolution is what I'm saying? We own a parrot, so where are all those stages of parrots before we got to this parrot?

[RandomGuy]

Do you honestly believe there aren't others talking about how the Big Bang never happened? And.....when did you ever get this idea I can't read?

Why do you keep talking about the Big Bang in a thread about evolution?

You do realize they are two separate theories, yes?

[ChumpDumper]

Where are all those stages of evolution is what I'm saying? We own a parrot, so where are all those stages of parrots before we got to this parrot?In the book you won't read.

[RandomGuy]

I know. Which is why I am correcting his mistakes. The only way to get at the truth is to get at what is accurate and observed.

Because the evidence so strongly supports evolution, the people who want to push the kinds of supernatural explanations that such holy books talk about, MUST lie about it, and distort what it says.[emphasis post-edit mine-RG]

If they were honest about it, and understood it, they and their worldview would stand no chance, which is why they are so actively dishonest.


Also remember, that Avante has been lied TO. He and Rob have been actively given false information, and really bad arguments.

Once you realize that it isn't entirely his fault, it is easier to be patient about such things. He is simply shackled by his own ignorance, and that is easily changed.

http://www.blacksteel.com/hcs/Yossie/Iron-Masters_HC.jpg

The shackles of course, are invisible, but I am simply trying to point out that they exist, and that he is holding the key.

All he has to do is learn a little. The evidence, the REAL evidence, speaks for itself.




So all those who believe some God created all this are 100% wrong and you know what really happened.....right?

Google......Evolution is a farce......or ...fake...or bogus...and you will find tons and tons of this sort of thing....why?


http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v13i8f.htm

Thank you.

The link is a case in point, and exactly the kind of thing I was talking about. My brief run through of the electrical engineer critiquing the biological sciences counted 12 factual mistakes, and two logical fallacies before I stopped trying to identify them all.


Coyne so easily goes from “guess” to “know.” Even if the fossil record showed that a particular reptile died before a particular bird, it doesn’t prove that the bird is a biological descendant of the reptile. It is an indisputable fact that Big Brown (the horse that won the 2008 Kentucky Derby) died in 2008, and President George Washington died in 1799. Does that prove that Big Brown was a biological descendant of George Washington? Of course not!

This is what is known as a strawman logical fallacy. Coyne would say nothing of the sort.

http://churchm.ag/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Logical-Fallacies-strawman-620x391.jpg

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To answer your question:

Evolution is a farce......or ...fake...or bogus...and you will find tons and tons of this sort of thing....why?

Because it gives gullible, lazy people quick links to post on message boards to make it seem like evolution is flawed. The only thing it really does though, is shows how completely ignorant creationists actually are about the evidence and theories.


Do you think it was a good critique of Coyne's book?



Anyone intelligent is not going to buy....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....then perfection. Way too many things having to work together to pull this off, noway in hell it happened because of.....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Put the arth 5000 miles further away from the sun, no what? Dirt with no nutrients in it....now what? The rotation of the earth, what if it didn't rotate? So a....BANG!!!!!!!!!....caused that rotation, how?

Not really an answer to my question. Just restating something already addressed.

Do you think that you posted a good critique of Coyne's book?



[many non-answers]

Again, I don't see it as a hard question.

You said it was easy to find. I was wondering how much time you spent reading it or spend any time evaluating whether it was a good source.

I will ask for a third time:

Do you think that you posted a good critique of Coyne's book?

[RandomGuy]

Where are all those stages of evolution? Where are all those Eagles before we got todays Eagle? And while we'll read....Dogs came from the wolf. we don't get anything really believable about how we came up with all the different kinds of dogs.

I don't care if 100 billion goes by ya can't change a fish into a bird.

You can if the changes are gradual.




Fundamental to the process is genetic variation upon which selective forces can act in order for evolution to occur. This section examines the mechanisms of evolution focusing on:

Descent and the genetic differences that are heritable and passed on to the next generation;

Mutation, migration (gene flow), genetic drift, and natural selection as mechanisms of change;

The importance of genetic variation;

The random nature of genetic drift and the effects of a reduction in genetic variation;

How variation, differential reproduction, and heredity result in evolution by natural selection; and

How different species can affect each other’s evolution through coevolution.
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/IIIMechanisms.shtml


Offspring inherit traits and genes from their parents.

I assume you understand and accept this happens.

That is all you need.

Heritable traits and time.

http://hihg.med.miami.edu/code/http/modules/education/Design/Print.asp?CourseNum=1&LessonNum=3


3.1 Modes of Inheritance

Inheritance patterns describe how a disease is transmitted in families.

These patterns help to predict the recurrence risk for relatives.

In general, inheritance patterns for single gene disorders are classified based on whether they are autosomal or X-linked and whether they have a dominant or recessive pattern of inheritance. These disorders are called Mendelian disorders, after the geneticist Gregor Mendel.

.2 Autosomal Dominant Inheritance

In autosomal dominant inheritance, only one copy of a disease allele is necessary for an individual to be susceptible to expressing the phenotype.

With each pregnancy, there is a one in two (50%) chance the offspring will inherit the disease allele.

Unless a new mutation has occurred, all affected individuals will have at least one parent who carries the disease allele.

Autosomal dominant inheritance is often called vertical inheritance because of the transmission from parent to offspring.

Across a population, the proportion of affected males should be equal to the proportion of affected females.

Male-to-male transmission can be observed.

Examples of diseases with autosomal dominant inheritance include myotonic muscular dystrophy and Huntington disease.
http://hihg.med.miami.edu/code/http/modules/education/Design/images/G103020.gif


Click on the link above, for more info, I left about 80% of the lesson and material out.

[RandomGuy]

Mutations can occur spontaneously owing to several different mechanisms, including errors of DNA replication and spontaneous damage to the DNA.

Mutagens are agents that increase the frequency of mutagenesis, usually by altering the DNA.

Potentially mutagenic and carcinogenic compounds can be detected easily by mutagenesis tests with bacterial systems.

Biological repair systems eliminate many potentially mutagenic alterations in the DNA.

Cells lacking certain repair systems have higher than normal mutation rates.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK21933/


We have gained a huge understanding of the process of mutation that happens.

Once you understand the mechanisms that can be clearly shown to change DNA, you now have evolution, when you have natural selection picking out traits that offer benefits, or weeding out animals that have deleterious genes.


Intraspecific Polymorphism to Interspecific Divergence: Genetics of Pigmentation in Drosophila
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/326/5952/540/F3.large.jpg
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/326/5952/540.figures-only


We have figured out what genes do what, and it is kind of not a big leap to say that if you are a moth whose species lives in a forest with trees that have white bark, and you inherit the mutations for dark coloration, your odds getting eaten before being able to reproduce go way up.

http://www.hsu.edu/uploadedImages/bachelors_degree/majors/Bachelor_of_Science/Biology/Nature_Trivia/Animals/Moths_and_Butterflies/Moths_of_Arkansas/Crambidae/grape%20leaffolder%20moth%20fg.jpg

[RandomGuy]

I'll give it a try:

"rat" includes a lot of different species.

The circular gif given did includ the order mamalia.

"rat" refers to a subclass of the family rodentia.

Early rodents branched off into two clads, and then further differentiated from there into quite a few different groupings that includes.

Rodentia->Superfamily-Muroidea> Family: Muridae> Subfamily:Murinae >Genus:Rattus

That is the order in which "rats" evolved from the original early family.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodent

Not hard to find if you know what you are looking for, and how things evolved from earlier "stages".

(edit)

http://oi39.tinypic.com/21b69o4.jpg


Rattus is in the blue line most of the way down.

This picture is a much blown up section showing JUST the rodentia family.

[RandomGuy]

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1302593/thumbs/o-ANCIENT-MAMMAL-570.jpg?8
"The fossil of Rugosodon eurasiaticus is preserved in two shale slabs in part (left) and counterpart (right). It is about 6.5 inches (17 cm) long from head to rump, and is estimated to have weighed about 2.8 ounces (80 grams)."

Ancient rodents, among the earliest mammals.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/16/early-mammals-fossil-rodent-reigned_n_3766913.html

[RandomGuy]

Anybody want me to keep marching through the family tree of rattus?

I found a bunch of wonderful fossil pictures, and read a bunch more about it.

I guess, Avante, if you really wanted to know, you could have done the same thing. None of the stuff I found was hard to find, nor particularly difficult, I thought.

Here is an interesting excerpt from a paper on early Muroidea
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs13358-011-0038-z#page-1

YOu can find pictures of the fossils of early types of muroidea here, mentioned in the above study:
http://www.authormapper.com/search.aspx?val=journal%3ASwiss+Journal+of+Palaeon tology&size=20&P=2

[Avante]

Anybody want me to keep marching through the family tree of rattus?

I found a bunch of wonderful fossil pictures, and read a bunch more about it.

I guess, Avante, if you really wanted to know, you could have done the same thing. None of the stuff I found was hard to find, nor particularly difficult, I thought.

Here is an interesting excerpt from a paper on early Muroidea
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs13358-011-0038-z#page-1

YOu can find pictures of the fossils of early types of muroidea here, mentioned in the above study:
http://www.authormapper.com/search.aspx?val=journal%3ASwiss+Journal+of+Palaeon tology&size=20&P=2


We'd have to start with the very first hummingbird to be and then show where it evolved into this, that evolved into that, then this, then that and then.....the hummigbird we see today who is also evolving????

So all the creatures we see today are just in another stage of evolution? There is no end to it?

[ChumpDumper]

We'd have to start with the very first hummingbird to be and then show where it evolved into this, that evolved into that, then this, then that and then.....the hummigbird we see today who is also evolving????

So all the creatures we see today are just in another stage of evolution? There is no end to it?You didn't read any of his posts.

[tlongII]

We'd have to start with the very first hummingbird to be and then show where it evolved into this, that evolved into that, then this, then that and then.....the hummigbird we see today who is also evolving????

So all the creatures we see today are just in another stage of evolution? There is no end to it?

That is essentially correct in my opinion.

[RandomGuy]

I know. Which is why I am correcting his mistakes. The only way to get at the truth is to get at what is accurate and observed.

Because the evidence so strongly supports evolution, the people who want to push the kinds of supernatural explanations that such holy books talk about, MUST lie about it, and distort what it says.[emphasis post-edit mine-RG]

If they were honest about it, and understood it, they and their worldview would stand no chance, which is why they are so actively dishonest.


Also remember, that Avante has been lied TO. He and Rob have been actively given false information, and really bad arguments.

Once you realize that it isn't entirely his fault, it is easier to be patient about such things. He is simply shackled by his own ignorance, and that is easily changed.

http://www.blacksteel.com/hcs/Yossie/Iron-Masters_HC.jpg

The shackles of course, are invisible, but I am simply trying to point out that they exist, and that he is holding the key.

All he has to do is learn a little. The evidence, the REAL evidence, speaks for itself.




So all those who believe some God created all this are 100% wrong and you know what really happened.....right?

Google......Evolution is a farce......or ...fake...or bogus...and you will find tons and tons of this sort of thing....why?


http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v13i8f.htm

Thank you.

The link is a case in point, and exactly the kind of thing I was talking about. My brief run through of the electrical engineer critiquing the biological sciences counted 12 factual mistakes, and two logical fallacies before I stopped trying to identify them all.


Coyne so easily goes from “guess” to “know.” Even if the fossil record showed that a particular reptile died before a particular bird, it doesn’t prove that the bird is a biological descendant of the reptile. It is an indisputable fact that Big Brown (the horse that won the 2008 Kentucky Derby) died in 2008, and President George Washington died in 1799. Does that prove that Big Brown was a biological descendant of George Washington? Of course not!

This is what is known as a strawman logical fallacy. Coyne would say nothing of the sort.

http://churchm.ag/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Logical-Fallacies-strawman-620x391.jpg

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To answer your question:

Evolution is a farce......or ...fake...or bogus...and you will find tons and tons of this sort of thing....why?

Because it gives gullible, lazy people quick links to post on message boards to make it seem like evolution is flawed. The only thing it really does though, is shows how completely ignorant creationists actually are about the evidence and theories.


Do you think it was a good critique of Coyne's book?



Anyone intelligent is not going to buy....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....then perfection. Way too many things having to work together to pull this off, noway in hell it happened because of.....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Put the arth 5000 miles further away from the sun, no what? Dirt with no nutrients in it....now what? The rotation of the earth, what if it didn't rotate? So a....BANG!!!!!!!!!....caused that rotation, how?

Not really an answer to my question. Just restating something already addressed.

Do you think that you posted a good critique of Coyne's book?



[many non-answers]




Again, I don't see it as a hard question.

You said it was easy to find. I was wondering how much time you spent reading it or spend any time evaluating whether it was a good source.

I will ask for a third time:

Do you think that you posted a good critique of Coyne's book?


[restates previously addressed concepts and questions]

Again, not really an answer.

For a forth time:

Do you think that you posted a good critique of Coyne's book?

[RandomGuy]

You didn't read any of his posts.

No he did not. First it was rats, then dogs, now hummingbirds. I have given at least a dozen links, including links to very basic evolution courses and online material.

If he cared about what was true with any intellectual curiosity at all and wasn't a lazy shit, he would have done some reading.

Lazy and stupid.

[Avante]

No he did not. First it was rats, then dogs, now hummingbirds. I have given at least a dozen links, including links to very basic evolution courses and online material.

If he cared about what was true with any intellectual curiosity at all and wasn't a lazy shit, he would have done some reading.

Lazy and stupid.

I was talking about this topic 10 years ago on these boards, and been in many of these...."I know better, just read about it"......debates. Yet it is....The BIG BANG...theory, the theory of evolution......right? Nobody is lazy or stupid asshole...ok? It's just that you have no proof of any kind that there was a BIG BANG, or no MasterDesigner.

So you are dumb enought to think all those churchs that are filled on Sunday mornings are full of idiots and you know what realy went down, hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ChumpDumper]

I was talking about this topic 10 years ago on these boards, and been in many of these...."I know better, just read about it"......debates. Yet it is....The BIG BANG...theory, the theory of evolution......right? Nobody is lazy or stupid asshole...ok? It's just that you have no proof of any kind that there was a BIG BANG, or no MasterDesigner.

So you are dumb enought to think all those churchs that are filled on Sunday mornings are full of idiots and you know what realy went down, hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Ten years and you are still conflating the big bang theory and the theory of evolution?

That is pretty stupid, dude.

[spurraider21]

So you are dumb enought to think all those churchs that are filled on Sunday mornings are full of idiots and you know what realy went down, hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
all those people in church are there to worship the book that you yourself called bullshit. so what's your point?

this is why i never buy it when you keep denying your christianity when convenient during arguments

[Avante]

all those people in church are there to worship the book that you yourself called bullshit. so what's your point?

this is why i never buy it when you keep denying your christianity when convenient during arguments

My point is most people realize this all didn't just happen, especially from...BANG!...so they are looking for the answer. The way most people do that is by accepting God or some God. That is the answer for them and I'm cool with it. I also think something was behind all this I just don;t have any need to think it was that God or any other we humans have come up with.

I don't know what happened, you don't know what happened and neither does anyone else. So we pick which theory/story makes us feel the best about it. Most go with some God.

[spurraider21]

My point is most people realize this all didn't just happen, especially from...BANG!...so they are looking for the answer.
no. they aren't "looking for the answer." they already have their minds made up without ANY regard for evidence. similar to what you have shown in this thread

The way most people do that is by accepting God or some God.[/quote]
its all from the same belief system that led a majority of the planet to believe the sun revolved around the earth, despite evidence to the contrary.


That is the answer for them and I'm cool with it.
you've brought this up a few times and i dont get why you keep doing so. its just like when you say "well the idea of a god makes me feel better."

first of all, there is no such thing as being true "for them" or "for me" or "for you." if you and i walked down the street and we see a closed garage door, neither of us know whats inside. you can talk about how "i think there's a shiny red sports car. thats the truth for me. guess what, that's completely irrelevant. the only thing that matters is what is ACTUALLY inside the garage. so just because people get a warm fuzzy feeling over the idea of a loving god, that has nothing to do with whether or not it is factually true.


I also think something was behind all this I just don't have any need to think it was that God or any other we humans have come up with
that's fine. there's no issue with holding a belief in a god. it can be rationally and philosophically argued for, as Chinook does.


I don't know what happened, you don't know what happened and neither does anyone else.
ah yes, and this is where evidence and scientific theory comes in. unfortunately, you haven't even demonstrated an elementary level understanding of physics, astronomy, chemistry, or biology. all you say is "its complex" and leave it at that. the evidence overwhelmingly points to what we describe as the big bang theory. if you are going to cover your ears and eyes and say "blablablabla" in the face of evidence, then that's your choice and you can go live under a rock. just know that you are under a rock



So we pick which theory/story makes us feel the best about it.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

For the hundredth time, it has nothing, I repeat, NOTHING to do with what "makes us feel the best about it." Our feeling is completely irrelevant. Do you think when people first came up with the big bang theory that it made them "feel better." do you think the theory of gravity made Newton "feel better?" do you think einstein's theory of relativity made him feel better?

you need to abandon this notion that your "feeling" makes something true or untrue.


Most go with some God.
again, that's fine. the concept of a god is completely compatible with the overwhelmingly supported big bang theory or the theory of evolution here on earth. the only time where those two ideas conflict are when you get religious and start subscribing to the books like the Bible

[ChumpDumper]

My point is most people realize this all didn't just happen, especially from...BANG!...so they are looking for the answer.How did they scientifically disprove the big bang theory?

I'd like to at least read the abstract.

[Avante]

As usual ya haven't a clue and it's frustrating wasting my time on you. I grew up around religion and those who believed in a God, and I know tons and tons of people totally unlike what you are "trying" to talk about. Obviously you know nothing about what real religion is, you make that obvious.

So there is no doubt of any kind that yes the BIG BANG is how we got all this.....right? That is a proven fact...right?



http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/BB-top-30.asp

[ChumpDumper]

As usual ya haven't a clue and it's frustrating wasting my time on you. I grew up around religion and those who believed in a God, and I know tons and tons of people totally unlike what you are "trying" to talk about. Obviously you know nothing about what real religion is, you make that obvious.

So there is no doubt of any kind that yes the BIG BANG is how we got all this.....right? That is a proven fact...right?It's the theory supported most by the available scientific evidence.

What is the scientific evidence backing your theory?

List it.

[Avante]

Hmmmm?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUwytm8K0jI

[ChumpDumper]

Hmmmm?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUwytm8K0jIHey, Avante posted a video he hasn't watched!

Golly!

That'll show us!

[Avante]

Hey, Avante posted a video he hasn't watched!

Golly!

That'll show us!

Just this one time stupid...

How about our tennis player at the end of the video? Yep, wrong as usual.

[ChumpDumper]

Just this one time stupid...

How about our tennis player at the end of the video? Yep, wrong as usual.What does a tennis player have to do with anything?

I'd rather read a peer reviewed article from an astrophysics/astronomy journal.

Can you give me a link to one from the filmmaker?

Thanks in advance.

[spurraider21]

However, when accretion disc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accretion_disc) energy-production mechanisms were successfully modeled in the 1970s, the argument that quasars were too luminous became moot and today the cosmological distance of quasars is accepted by almost all researchers.

[spurraider21]

what i find incredible about avante's mockery of science is that science has always been its own harshest critic

[Avante]

However, when accretion disc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accretion_disc) energy-production mechanisms were successfully modeled in the 1970s, the argument that quasars were too luminous became moot and today the cosmological distance of quasars is accepted by almost all researchers.

So I need to find some article or video talking about how many scientists now debunk the Big Bang theory, right?

Be right back.

This took mere seconds, and I had a choice..

http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/BB-top-30.asp

In a nutshell.....

Anyone doubting the Big Bang in its present form (which includes most astronomy-interested people outside the field of astronomy, according to one recent survey) would have good cause for that opinion and could easily defend such a position. This is a fundamentally different matter than proving the Big Bang did not happen, which would be proving a negative – something that is normally impossible. (E.g., we cannot prove that Santa Claus does not exist.) The Big Bang, much like the Santa Claus hypothesis, no longer makes testable predictions wherein proponents agree that a failure would falsify the hypothesis. Instead, the theory is continually amended to account for all new, unexpected discoveries. Indeed, many young scientists now think of this as a normal process in science! They forget or were never taught that a model has value only when it can predict new things that differentiate the model from chance and from other models before the new things are discovered. Explanations of new things are supposed to flow from the basic theory itself with at most an adjustable parameter or two, and not from add-on bits of new theory.

[ChumpDumper]

what i find incredible about avante's mockery of science is that science has always been its own harshest criticRight. That's how science got to where it is today -- by challenging and often shitting on the science that came before it.

Creationism and the backdoor creationism of intelligent design start with a conclusion, not a hypothesis and any evidence that doesn't support the foregone conclusion is ignored or condemned. That's why to is subject to ridicule from anyone working in actual science.

[ChumpDumper]

So I need to find some article or video talking about how many scientists now debunk the Big Bang theory, right?

Be right back.Just a peer reviewed article from an astrophysics/astronomy journal by your hastily Googled hero filmmaker..

[spurraider21]

avante should i waste my time posting youtube's that debunk creationism too? then this can turn into a spamfest.

or you can just look at peer reviewed work or the scientific consensus.
:lol you can't have a 70+ page discussoin, then post a random 10 minute video you didn't even watch (nor would you understand if you did) and then say "debate over"

[Avante]

So once upon there was nothing, just a huge black void, then out of nowhere.....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.....that was the start of it all. So here came the Earth and seas and inthose seas were little fishy thing, those littlefishy things got tired of being goobled up by big fishy things sone day a male and a female decided to see what was on that beach, from these little fishy things we got the rat, the tosd, the ant, the spider, the goart, the fly, the eagle the Watusi, the pgymy........hahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh hell ye that's fr easier to buy than a Master Designer.

[ChumpDumper]

So once upon there was nothing, just a huge black void, then out of nowhere.....BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.....that was the start of it all. So here came the Earth and seas and inthose seas were little fishy thing, those littlefishy things got tired of being goobled up by big fishy things sone day a male and a female decided to see what was on that beach, from these little fishy things we got the rat, the tosd, the ant, the spider, the goart, the fly, the eagle the Watusi, the pgymy........hahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh hell ye that's fr easier to buy than a Master Designer.Well, go ahead and post the peer reviewed work supporting your brand of creationism.

We'll wait.

[Avante]

avante should i waste my time posting youtube's that debunk creationism too? then this can turn into a spamfest.

or you can just look at peer reviewed work or the scientific consensus.
:lol you can't have a 70+ page discussoin, then post a random 10 minute video you didn't even watch (nor would you understand if you did) and then say "debate over"

How many times have I said.....nobody knows what really happened? As we can see there are tons of.....yes there is a God, God doesn't exist, yes the Big Bang happened, the Big Bang never happened, hahahaha!!!!!!!!!

Come on man, it isn't real real obvious we simply don't know about anything ....really. Nobody can...PROVE..shit and we all know it so why all the crap about it?

I've talked to some religioius freaks far far FAR more intelligent than you are, they believe in God.

[ChumpDumper]

How many times have I said.....nobody knows what really happened? As we can see there are tons of.....yes there is a God, God doesn't exist, yes the Big Bang happened, the Big Bang never happened, hahahaha!!!!!!!!!

Cone on man, it isn't real real obvious we simply don't know about anything ....really. Nobody can...PROVE..shit and we all know it so why all the crap about it?If you aren't curious about any of this, fine.

Shut up and leave it to the people who are.

Go make an almanac list somewhere and let the adults talk.

[spurraider21]

How many times have I said.....nobody knows what really happened? As we can see there are tons of.....yes there is a God, God doesn't exist, yes the Big Bang happened, the Big Bang never happened, hahahaha!!!!!!!!!

Cone on man, it isn't real real obvious we simply don't know about anything ....really. Nobody can...PROVE..shit and we all know it so why all the crap about it?
you can't pretend the "yes the big bang happened" and the "the big bang never happened" voices are equal, at least among the scientific community, ie people actually in the know

[Avante]

you can't pretend the "yes the big bang happened" and the "the big bang never happened" voices are equal, at least among the scientific community, ie people actually in the know

BINGO BANGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!

Voices are equal because we can't prove anything, which is my point. So we just latch on to what story we need to make us feel better about things.

[spurraider21]

BINGO BANGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!

Voices are equal because we can't prove anything, which is my point. So we just latch on to what story we need to make us feel better about things.
the only reason the big bang theory exists IS the evidence. without the evidence, there would be no theory to begin with

[ChumpDumper]

BINGO BANGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!

Voices are equal because we can't prove anything, which is my point. So we just latch on to what story we need to make us feel better about things.But you say your theory is better, even though you have yet to produce one iota of peer-reviewed support.

Turns out you know less than most and your opinion is easily dismissed.

[Avante]

the only reason the big bang theory exists IS the evidence. without the evidence, there would be no theory to begin with

So how come we see soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much of this?


Black holes do NOT exist and the Big Bang Theory is wrong, claims scientist - and she has the maths to prove it

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2769156/Black-holes-NOT-exist-Big-Bang-Theory-wrong-claims-scientist-maths-prove-it.html#ixzz3GwUTT5Xq
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=MailOnline) | DailyMail on Facebook (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail)

[Avante]

There is no end to this...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efIpleLsnvM

[ChumpDumper]

So how come we see soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much of this?


Black holes do NOT exist and the Big Bang Theory is wrong, claims scientist - and she has the maths to prove it

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2769156/Black-holes-NOT-exist-Big-Bang-Theory-wrong-claims-scientist-maths-prove-it.html#ixzz3GwUTT5Xq
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=MailOnline) | DailyMail on Facebook (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail)What do you mean "sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooo much of this?"

That's the only one you found, and it hasn't even been peer reviewed yet.

You're in way over your head, dude. Stick to the lane assignment almanacs OK?

[ChumpDumper]

There is no end to this...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efIpleLsnvMIs Mason Googling for you?

You are just making another list.

[Avante]

No end in sight...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_2vw88fhUc

[spurraider21]

her work is relatively new and hasn't been reviewed yet... here's an interesting article discussing it. and avante... this is the last sentence of it.


“They might have trouble adapting, but that’s the beautiful thing about science,” he said. “We, as scientists and astronomy educators, are excited for change.

here is the article in full: http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/09/30/4196212/unc-professor-pokes-theoretical.html

[spurraider21]

No end in sight...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_2vw88fhUc
:lol this one was funny

[ChumpDumper]

her work is relatively new and hasn't been reviewed yet...Apparently it was.


A scientist's work will gain acceptance if it is published in a high-impact refereed journal. The paper by Laura Mersini-Houghton on the nonexistence of black holes was rejected by the referees of the prestigious journal Physics Letters. The article can be found on arXiv, an online repository of physics papers that is not peer-reviewed.
http://www.thedailystar.net/black-holes-do-exist-46160

So we're still waiting for something peer reviewed, Avante.

[Avante]

They just keep coming....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXOy49snsKw

[spurraider21]

ok so Avante is officially mouse now

[ChumpDumper]

Sorry, Avante. YouTubes don't count.

Just post one peer reviewed paper to back up your claim.

[ChumpDumper]

ok so Avante is officially mouse nowIt's just another list, but yes -- Avante will never watch any of these either.

[Avante]

So we need to ignore what all these modern opinions say and go with what was said decades ago, oh hell yes that makes sense,.

[Avante]

ok so Avante is officially mouse now

Nope, just a guy who prefers to go with what is being said today instead of way back in the day.

[spurraider21]

So we need to ignore what all these modern opinions say and go with what was said decades ago, oh hell yes that makes sense,.
you didn't even watch or read anything you posted :lol

the last one talks about superclusters, which is something that was supposed to "debunk" the big bang theory but is actually rather adequately explained now that we know the universe is not only expanding but also accelerating. forces of gravity could very easily have created superclusters early on

[spurraider21]

Nope, just a guy who prefers to go with what is being said today instead of way back in the day.
you will also probably be able to find lots of links or videos that say obama was born in kenya. you will find links about the loch ness monster, about bigfoot, etc. you can find whatever you look for if you search hard enough.

do you understand what consensus means though?

[ChumpDumper]

So we need to ignore what all these modern opinions say and go with what was said decades ago, oh hell yes that makes sense,.No, we need peer reviewed papers that reflect real, legitimate research.

Established science is challenged all the time. But it has to withstand scrutiny itself. If you had bothered to look anywhere past the first Google entry about Laura Mersini-Houghton, you would have found out that her theory did not withstand scrutiny.

Why didn't you do that, Avante?

[ChumpDumper]

Nope, just a guy who prefers to go with what is being said today instead of way back in the day.Big bang is being said today. Creationism was said back in the day way before big bang.

Do you even think about anything before you type?

[Avante]

How come we see so much of this?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86mM6106ypM

[Avante]

you didn't even watch or read anything you posted :lol

the last one talks about superclusters, which is something that was supposed to "debunk" the big bang theory but is actually rather adequately explained now that we know the universe is not only expanding but also accelerating. forces of gravity could very easily have created superclusters early on

Wrong as usual, I watched all the videos, I find them interesting. You sure are wrong a lot

[spurraider21]

Wrong as usual, I watched all the videos, I find them interesting. You sure are wrong a lot
you posted a 9 minute video 5 minutes after your previous post. this is inconsistent with your claim

you posted a lengthy article, and then 4 minutes later you put up a video of 7+ minutes

[Avante]

you will also probably be able to find lots of links or videos that say obama was born in kenya. you will find links about the loch ness monster, about bigfoot, etc. you can find whatever you look for if you search hard enough.

do you understand what consensus means though?

Consensus.....like in most humans on earth believe in a God? That consensus?

[ChumpDumper]

How come we see so much of this?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86mM6106ypMBecause you are posting multiple parts of the same video.

[spurraider21]

Consensus.....like in most humans on earth believe in a God? That consensus?
i have been very clear in that i am referring to a consensus among those in the scientific community

[Avante]

you posted a 9 minute video 5 minutes after your previous post. this is inconsistent with your claim

you posted a lengthy article, and then 4 minutes later you put up a video of 7+ minutes

Do you think at all before posting? Do you really think this is the first time I've had this discussion? I post on other sites guy. Seen all these videos, that's why I'm showing you.

[ChumpDumper]

Do you think at all before posting? Do you really think this is the first time I've had this discussion? I post on other sites guy. Seen all these videos, that's why I'm showing you.So why haven't you posted any peer reviewed papers yet?

You know -- science?

[Avante]

i have been very clear in that i am referring to a consensus among those in the scientific community

So you can prove that...right?

[spurraider21]

Do you think at all before posting? Do you really think this is the first time I've had this discussion? I post on other sites guy. Seen all these videos, that's why I'm showing you.
so the guy who says we shouldn't waste time arguing about "what we don't know" is now saying he's had these same discussions on other sites... ok

one of your videos talked about red shifts and their supposed inconsistencies in quasars. can you explain this in your own words? you know, since you've seen the video before, and apparently remembered it enough to find the link really quickly.

:corn:

[spurraider21]

So you can prove that...right?
just trying to get you to understand the difference between consensus and outlier opinions that have not been peer reviewed

[Avante]

so the guy who says we shouldn't waste time arguing about "what we don't know" is now saying he's had these same discussions on other sites... ok

one of your videos talked about red shifts and their supposed inconsistencies in quasars. can you explain this in your own words? you know, since you've seen the video before, and apparently remembered it enough to find the link really quickly.

:corn:

I bring up why waste tiime on this over there also.

I;m not playing this game with ya slick, I love music but have no idea how a CD is made, ok?

[Avante]

just trying to get you to understand the difference between consensus and outlier opinions that have not been peer reviewed


Speaking of consensus...


http://www.space.com/25581-big-bang-theory-poll.html

[ChumpDumper]

Speaking of consensus...


http://www.space.com/25581-big-bang-theory-poll.htmlNot scientists.

[ChumpDumper]

I bring up why waste tiime on this over there also.

I;m playing this game with ya slick, I love music but have no idea how a CD is made, ok?You don't know how science works at all, ok?

[Avante]

So much of this it's ridiculous.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXOtBAECkx0

[ChumpDumper]

So much of this it's ridiculous.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXOtBAECkx0So many parts of one video.

Is this what you've sunk to?

[spurraider21]

So much of this it's ridiculous.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXOtBAECkx0
you've posted part 4, part 9, and now part 5.

why did you watch these out of order?

[Avante]

Hmmmmm?

In fact, the signs are strong that exactly that is happening, and that those who have ‘bought’ the big bang for its allegedly irrefutable science have been ‘sold a pup’. A bombshell ‘Open Letter to the Scientific Community’ by 33 leading scientists has been published on the internet (www.cosmologystatement.org (http://www.spurstalk.com/redirect.php?target=http://www.cosmologystatement.org/)) and in New Scientist (Lerner, E., Bucking the big bang, New Scientist 182(2448)20, 22 May 2004). An article on www.rense.com titled ‘Big bang theory busted by 33 top scientists’ (27 May 2004) says, ‘Our ideas about the history of the universe are dominated by big bang theory. But its dominance rests more on funding decisions than on the scientific method, according to Eric Lerner, mathematician Michael Ibison of Earthtech.org, and dozens of other scientists from around the world.’

[mouse]

Big Bang or no Big Bang you still can't produce DNA from exploding rocks.

FDN6un3x7E4

[Avante]

you've posted part 4, part 9, and now part 5.

why did you watch these out of order?

Dude, what do you think about what is being said, well?

[ChumpDumper]

Hmmmmm?

In fact, the signs are strong that exactly that is happening, and that those who have ‘bought’ the big bang for its allegedly irrefutable science have been ‘sold a pup’. A bombshell ‘Open Letter to the Scientific Community’ by 33 leading scientists has been published on the internet (www.cosmologystatement.org (http://www.spurstalk.com/redirect.php?target=http://www.cosmologystatement.org/)) and in New Scientist (Lerner, E., Bucking the big bang, New Scientist 182(2448)20, 22 May 2004). An article on www.rense.com titled ‘Big bang theory busted by 33 top scientists’ (27 May 2004) says, ‘Our ideas about the history of the universe are dominated by big bang theory. But its dominance rests more on funding decisions than on the scientific method, according to Eric Lerner, mathematician Michael Ibison of Earthtech.org, and dozens of other scientists from around the world.’rense.com

The conspiracy website?

crofl

http://www.cosmologystatement.org/ isn't even a working website -- proof positive you didn't even check.

lol busted

[Avante]

Big Bang or no Big Bang you still can't produce DNA from exploding rocks.

FDN6un3x7E4


You nailed it mouse, and that's what I was saying, only an idiot would think...BIG BANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....then...DNA.

[ChumpDumper]

Dude, what do you think about what is being said, well?Tell us what they said in each of them.

Use your own words and explain each to us.

[Avante]

Once again.....why so much of this stuff?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJ3_M8cbRHs

[ChumpDumper]

Once again.....why so much of this stuff?Because YouTubes without any peer reviewed supporting documentation is as lazy as you are.

Do you seriously think you are scoring points posting YouTubes you haven't seen and can't explain?

[spurraider21]

:lmao the electric universe

[spurraider21]

Because YouTubes without any peer reviewed supporting documentation is as lazy as you are.

Do you seriously think you are scoring points posting YouTubes you haven't seen and can't explain?
but there's ominous music in the background

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao the electric universelol thunderbolts.info

Another defunct website.

Seriously Avante, have you vetted any of this or is it just copypasta?

[Avante]

As We can see so many are thinking the same thing I am, the BIG BANG is actually the BIG BULLSHIT.

As these two losers try their best to.......those scientists way back when knew more than these modern scientists do today....hahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ChumpDumper]

As We can see so many are thinking the same thing I am, the BIG BANG is actually the BIG BULLSHIT.I just see a lot of people who aren't published scientists and can't pay their website registration renewals.


As these two losers try their best to.......those scientists way back when knew more than these modern scientists do today....hahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Avante, just how old do you think the big bang theory is?

How old do you think creationism is?

Just answer these two questions.

[Avante]

What banged?" Sean Carroll, CalTech -Moore Center for Theoretical Cosmology & Physics
Several of the worlds leading astrophysicists believe there was no Big Bang that brought the universe and time into existence. Before the Big Bang, the standard theory assumes, there was no space, just nothing. Einstein merged the universe into a single entity: not space, not time, but spacetime.

[spurraider21]

so avante now likes science... as long as its not peer reviewed or generally authentic.

seems about right

[ChumpDumper]

What banged?" Sean Carroll, CalTech -Moore Center for Theoretical Cosmology & Physics
Several of the worlds leading astrophysicists believe there was no Big Bang that brought the universe and time into existence. Before the Big Bang, the standard theory assumes, there was no space, just nothing. Einstein merged the universe into a single entity: not space, not time, but spacetime.lol this one certainly doesn't support intelligent design.

Of course, you didn't read it to find out.

You just keep shitting all over yourself, Avante.

[Avante]

so avante now likes science... as long as its not peer reviewed or generally authentic.

seems about right

The bottom line is there are far far too many intelligent people that simply don't buy it. As you are seeing.

You do know there really was never an explosion ....right? Nothing ever went....BANG!....right?

[mouse]

I just see a lot of people who aren't published scientists and can't pay their website registration renewals.
.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/dictionary/astronomy-terms/big-bang-theory7.

http://www.inquisitr.com/1504854/big-bang-theory-wrong-and-black-holes-dont-exist-scientists-say-the-math-doesnt-add-up/


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2769156/Black-holes-NOT-exist-Big-Bang-Theory-wrong-claims-scientist-maths-prove-it.html

[ChumpDumper]

The bottom line is there are far far too many intelligent people that simply don't buy it. As you are seeing.I've seen one so far, and the theory he suggests is closer to a big bang than your creationism.


You do know there really was never an explosion ....right? Nothing ever went....BANG!....right?You just said no one knows.

Why do you keep shitting on own argument?

[spurraider21]

the big crunch model is cool, more poetic. futurama had a good spin on it. but the mechanics behind it are much harder to compensate for, considering the expansion is accelerating

[Avante]

lol thunderbolts.info

Another defunct website.

Seriously Avante, have you vetted any of this or is it just copypasta?

At what point does it dawn on you that you aren't wanted here? I don't even read you freak, ok? Dude, go away, go away....scram, go.......sheesh!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is this one sick shit or what, damn!