(August 25, 2010 at 6:39 pm)NoGodaloud ? Wrote: Nope, you are a farce. You have not been able to backup your position whatsoever and answer my questions. I call that blind faith.

...sigh...

You have yet to present any actual arguement or counter-arguement to anything we've presented to you that actually relies on experts or scientists. This arguement hasn't failed because of anything we've showed you or haven't showed you. The question you asked me, for example, wasn't even a valid question and you didn't bother to actually answer the answers I did give, the overall point, or the questions I presented to you.

You've proven though your statements and actions that you are clearly not interested in anything we have to offer you. You're interested in proving creationism, damning all the evidence, backed by studies and years of work going into the those papers, and putting all of the work on us because you found some idiots somewhere that can make shit up on some christian forums because you can't tell the difference between fact based on evidence and faith.

Quote:I believe it has been established that his "yardstick" (if you will) for measuring the space between humans and those animal thingies is the existence of a soul.

His view seems based on C19th 'quaint customs' view of anthropologists such as Fraser (The Golden Bough)

C19th Victorian England considered itself the acme of civilisation due to its technology. Relative cultural value was judged by technology. (and still is by many of the great unwashed) Culture which did not have the same level of technology,such as say China and India AND were not Christian,were considered inferior.

Under educated persons such as Godthingy are more to be pitied than abused. They have not only failed to develop critical thinking skills,but also apparently did not reach high school or simply did not pay attention.

Such people not only demonstrate Dawkins' claim that science and religion are incompatible, but you can add ANYTHING which conflictst with a narrowly dogmatic world view.

I have just gone through all 13 pages of this thread and have lost count of the amount of facepalms I have gone through with this guy pathetically trying to discredit evolution in favour of his fairy tale.

He came into the forum trying to challenge TheDarkestOfAngels and others to "prove" evolution is a fact. He has been given a bunch of links and documents supporting evidence for evolution but somehow chooses to ignore it all since they are not compatible with his "goddidit" views and has the cynicism to keep asking for evidence.

If you are going to ask for "proof" or evidence supporting evolution it would help if you would fucking read it and stop ignoring it when it's given to you before you keep asking for proof that convinces you. Obviously that is going to be impossible since you already made up your mind that the bible must be right and everything that contradicts it has to be wrong.

Seriously, I don't know why we waste our time with this kind of people. They have obviously subscribed themselves to their dogma and no matter how much evidence is put in front of their faces, they will cover their eyes and ears, tell us we're wrong and keep believing in their bullshit. This thread therefore has no point.

He had no chance as he did not know what the Theory of Evolution meant. Nor, did he want to learn.
No loss. The ignorant will always be with us.

(August 25, 2010 at 10:07 pm)Minimalist Wrote: He had no chance as he did not know what the Theory of Evolution meant. Nor, did he want to learn.
No loss. The ignorant will always be with us.

But not this one.

Glad he's gone.

It was getting a little TOO repititious.

True, but the next asshole to come along will demand to see a crocoduck fossil, too.

These people aren't just stupid. They are intentionally stupid.

(August 26, 2010 at 4:00 pm)Minimalist Wrote: True, but the next asshole to come along will demand to see a crocoduck fossil, too.

These people aren't just stupid. They are intentionally stupid.

I honestly think that this is where everything would lead. I think it's why Nogodaloud didn't bother to state his own position on several of these matters because it would be far more apparent of his illogical superstitions than his fallacious arguementation style.

Self-induced ignorance. He didn't come here to learn, to honestly debate, or have an open mind. He came here to prove god by telling us what proof we can show and limiting the debate so it was intentionally designed for our position to fail.

His one question concerning the MIT paper was proof of that. He wasn't interested in hearing that the entire paper was about evolution. He wanted one quote from it that proved evolution for me.
I said it was invalid and he wouldn't accept that answer as anything other than "I don't have proof." Pure strawman. You can't prove or disprove something based on one piece or one quote of one paper. It'd be like being forced to prove that a working Boeing 747 can fly based on one piece of its design, independantly of the rest of the plane.
I can't prove a plane can fly based on one jet engine, one wing, one fin, or the cockpit, or any other piece until I at least have enough of a plane to prove the concept any more than I can prove evolution because of one quote from one paper. I can at least make the case based on the overall paper but I can't prove evolution on any one part of it.

I would still be willing to bet that if this debate had continued and he did bother to actually state what we would need to do to prove 'macro-evolution' that we would have needed to prove croc-a-duck.
... or that brocolli can give birth to a girbil. (A video that I cannot unwatch.)

It was utterly ridiculous.

EDIT: By the by, what's the difference between being "Banned" and being "The Condemned"?

(August 25, 2010 at 8:32 pm)DiRNiS Wrote: He came into the forum trying to challenge TheDarkestOfAngels and others to "prove" evolution is a fact.

i have done so, because TheDarkestOfAngels asserted, it was a proven fact. Unfortunately, he failed miserably to show his assertion was true.

Quote:He has been given a bunch of links and documents supporting evidence for evolution but somehow chooses to ignore it all since they are not compatible with his "goddidit" views and has the cynicism to keep asking for evidence.

I did choose ONE of his presented papers. He was unable to show how it provided unquestionable proof, how human language arose through natural selection, and mutation.

Quote:If you are going to ask for "proof" or evidence supporting evolution it would help if you would fucking read it and stop ignoring it when it's given to you before you keep asking for proof that convinces you.

It has NOT given to me. Proof should convince ANYONE without doubt of its trueness, in the same way, as mathematical formulas do.

Quote:Obviously that is going to be impossible since you already made up your mind that the bible must be right and everything that contradicts it has to be wrong.

If the bible said, 2 + 2 = 5, do you think i would be unreasonable enough, and believe rather the bible, than the fact, the result of the formula was false ?

Quote:Seriously, I don't know why we waste our time with this kind of people.

You don't, unless you are not willing to LISTEN as well, and maibe consider why i believe , what i believe.

Quote:They have obviously subscribed themselves to their dogma and no matter how much evidence is put in front of their faces

In this case, you should be able to solve something, i am questioning everybody here, and nobody gave me a reasonable answer yet. How did thought, and the ability of speech, arise through evolution ? If evolution is a proven fact, where is the proof ?

http://www.icr.org/article/einsteins-gul...-cross-it/

Albert Einstein, one of the greatest scientists of all time, described the "gulf" that logically separates the concrete world of hard objects on the one hand from the abstract world of ideas on the other. He wrote:

Quote:We have the habit of combining certain concepts and conceptual relations (propositions) so definitely with certain sense experiences that we do not become conscious of the gulf—logically unbridgeable—which separates the world of sensory experiences from the world of concepts and propositions (1944, p. 289).

At any rate, no one who has offered a denial (Cziko, 1995), has given even a slightly plausible account of how material objects can be spontaneously forced to enter the realm of articulate and intelligent thought.

Quote: they will cover their eyes and ears, tell us we're wrong and keep believing in their bullshit. This thread therefore has no point.

I promise, i will not cover my eyes and ears, if you can answer above thougtfully, and convincingly. Please try.

---

(August 25, 2010 at 7:09 pm)TheDarkestOfAngels Wrote: You have yet to present any actual arguement or counter-arguement to anything we've presented to you that actually relies on experts or scientists.

Honestly. I think you don't even know what you believe. You believe, what you believe is true, because some experts or scientits said it. So it must be true. Thats blind faith. Do you realise that ? You have not been able, to explain in own words, what leads you to believe in ONE of the papers you presented. You simply failed. Thats why to debate you, is a waste of time. You make assertions, without back them up. Open your mind, and start to THINK. Thats my advice to you. Peace.

---

(August 25, 2010 at 6:51 pm)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: There's evidence for evolution. You just have faith in your faith.

absolutely. I agree. I think microevolution ans speciation is true. It happens. What i do not believe, is in common ancestry. I don't think evidence leads to this direction.

I predict a visitation from the Great God BANHAMMER!!!





All hail his large hammer!

(August 27, 2010 at 1:13 am)Tsidkenu Wrote: >Everything you said in your previous post<

... and you don't read posts... yadda yadda yadda...

You've done this song and dance before and it's beyond tiresome. I find it difficult to understand why you'd have bothered to create a sock puppet account, Nogodaloud, but the reason I couldn't answer your question is because you asked a question that's impossible to answer.
Now, I'll ask you about something that I covered in another post I made that you didn't read.

How about you prove that a boeing 747 can fly by telling me what individual component of a boeing 747 convinced you that this could happen.
How about you give me one sentence of the bible that convinced you that god exists that's indesputably provable evidence.
How about you tell me how a piece of wood can evolve into fire without any of that 'heat' crap that I've never seen seen.
How about you tell me about how you became convinced that football (american or otherwise) is a sport by quoting me only one sentence out of the official rulebook whilst ignoring everything else.

Perhaps if you understand those questions above and why they don't work, you might understand how ridiculous your standards really are.