(February 2, 2012 at 5:31 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: I can tell you the way to eternal life.

We already know about Valhalla.

I have sad news Ace, I just went to a historical documentary showing how Valhalla is burned down and its gods destroyed. It's called Götterdammerung by the historical author Richard Wagner.

(February 13, 2012 at 11:03 am)leo-rcc Wrote: I have sad news Ace, I just went to a historical documentary showing how Valhalla is burned down and its gods destroyed. It's called Götterdammerung by the historical author Richard Wagner.

He lies! He LIES!!!

All one has to do to get into Valhalla is to accept Odin as your lord and saviour!
All who don't go to hel. Ha ha Christians! Sucks to be you

(February 13, 2012 at 11:11 am)Ace Otana Wrote: All who don't go to hel.

I want Baldur back.

(February 13, 2012 at 11:17 am)Phil Wrote:

(February 13, 2012 at 11:11 am)Ace Otana Wrote: All who don't go to hel.

I want Baldur back.

He's on holiday.

(February 2, 2012 at 7:23 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: Do you have any evidence that God does not exist?

You keep asking me this like I hadn't answered it for you before, and as though it had any bearing on the validity of your claims. I have, and it does not

(February 2, 2012 at 7:23 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: Do you have any evidence that God does not exist

As far as the Judeo-Christian/Islamic myth, sure do, it's called logic.

(February 2, 2012 at 7:23 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: Do you have any evidence that God does not exist?

Well, it's not exactly evidence that would stand up in a court of law, but it's certainly food for thought; the fact that apologists seem to need to lie to bolster their position. Viz:

(February 13, 2012 at 10:02 am)brotherlylove Wrote: I do not want to believe in God, therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible: spontaneous generation arising to evolution

George Wald - Harvard Professor
Nobel Laureate

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/m...rt1-4.html

(February 13, 2012 at 10:02 am)brotherlylove Wrote: evolution became a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to bend their observations to fit in with it.

H S Lipso
Physics professor

??? This one's a bit of a puzzler. About the only instances of this quote I can find are from creationist sites, aside from one sceptic site which appears to have foundered. Does that make it genuine? Perhaps... the lack of independent confirmation seems odd however.

(February 13, 2012 at 10:02 am)brotherlylove Wrote: we take the side of evolutionary science because we have a prior commitment to materialism. it is not that the methods..of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation..on the contrary..we cannot allow a divine foot in the door.

richard lewontin

harvard professor of zoology and biology

http://evolutionwiki.org/wiki/Lewontin_on_materialism

(see also my previous response here.)

(February 13, 2012 at 10:02 am)brotherlylove Wrote: If I were you, these quotations would disturb me.

If I were you, I'd be more disturbed by all the lies and contortions being passed off as truth I'd have been forced to swallow. It's not even so much that these quotes have been twisted into contexts their authors never dreamed of; what's really insulting to the intelligence is that they are so easily exposed.

(February 13, 2012 at 2:26 pm)Stimbo Wrote: If I were you, I'd be more disturbed by all the lies and contortions being passed off as truth I'd have been forced to swallow. It's not even so much that these quotes have been twisted into contexts their authors never dreamed of; what's really insulting to the intelligence is that they are so easily exposed.

I'll admit, quote #1 does not appear to be accurate. I apologize and retract it. It is sad that some would make things up to make a point, but I find this on both sides of the equation. For instance, the numerous frauds perpetrated by evolutionists, such as piltdown man and haekels embroyoes, frauds which served to insinuate evolution into the culture and curriculum. As far as the rest, Quote 2 is uncontested and Quote 3 is actually more revelent to my point because I was referring to science in general, and not evolutionary science in particular. There is no twisting on context for either of the other quotes; they plainly mean what they say they mean.

The inaccuracy in quote 3 is the insertion of the word "evolutionary", but it doesn't detract at all from the meaning of the quote to remove it. I have some more interesting quotes for you..Consider what they are saying:

“does acknowledge that scientists inescapably rely on ‘rhetorical’ proofs (authority, tradition) for most of what they care about; they depend on theoretical assumptions unprovable by hard science, and their promises are often absurdly overblown … Only the most simple-minded and philosophically naive scientist, of whom there are many, thinks that science is characterized entirely by hard inference and mathematical proofs based on indisputable data"

Richard Lewontin

“Could it be that, like ‘primitive’ myths, theories of human evolution reinforce the value-system of their creators by reflecting historically their image of themselves and of the society in which they live?’…This is precisely what we would expect of a scientific myth

“paleoanthropology alone among all the sciences operates within the fourth dimension, with humanity’s self-image invisibly but constantly influencing the profession’s ethos.

Roger Lewin (quoting John Durant)

Scientists are generally aware of the influence of theory on observation. Seldom do they recognize, however, that many scientific theories are essentially narratives … they may be unaware of the narrative presuppositions which inform their science … Multiple interpretations and ambiguity are no strangers to readers of evolutionary biology … by comparing the narrative ‘roles’ played by fossils, scientists may become more explicit about the subjective—and often highly imaginative—ways in which they reconstruct human ancestors.”

“Metaphors cast powerful spells not only in everyday life but also in science … When Stern and Sussman say that ‘A. afarensis had traveled well down the road toward fulltime bipedality,’ not only do they speak in metaphor, they also tell a story

Misia Landau

“If any of the rest of the scientific community is inclined to snigger at the embarrassment of paleoanthropologists over all this [the identification of theory as narrative], pause and reflect. I bet that the same basic findings would apply to the origin of mammals, or of flowering plants, or of life … or even the big bang and the cosmos

Glynn Isaac

we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations.”

Franklin M. Harold

I'm not even going to bother researching the veracity or otherwise of all that; I'm not so easily impressed by quotemining as some others might be. I've already demonstrated, and you have conceded, that those who are promoting this stuff have a proven track record of lying, or at least twisting the facts which amounts to the same thing. I shall leave it to you to do your own research into why resorting to the tactic of quotemining is a deceitful practise at best. Or others will probably enlighten you. Either way I suspect you may already be aware of this anyway, since I don't reckon you are so naïve.