What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?

[Banned]

Apparently allegory is above you .Odd for people who embrace it when comparing evolution to a tornado .And living things to man made objects .And it was a request shown to be in flawed .And rejected by better examples of your ideology then you .I suggest you try their model .Instead of more games .What was that about Einstein and insanity again .Nope .That assumes for no reason there was an inventor
Banned's silly dodge on ID summed up by the movie Dragonslayer...

You sound like you are shaking, what's happening?

---

Well, I see He Lives is running from the realities of probability and Banned is just plain trolling.

Business as usual, then?

Probabilities are governed by factors which are not probable.

[Ravenshire]

Apparently allegory is above you .Odd for people who embrace it when comparing evolution to a tornado .And living things to man made objects .And it was a request shown to be in flawed .And rejected by better examples of your ideology then you .I suggest you try their model .Instead of more games .What was that about Einstein and insanity again .Nope .That assumes for no reason there was an inventor
Banned's silly dodge on ID summed up by the movie Dragonslayer...

You sound like you are shaking, what's happening?

---

Well, I see He Lives is running from the realities of probability and Banned is just plain trolling.

Business as usual, then?

Probabilities are governed by factors which are not probable.

Really? Care to elaborate, or are you just trying to blow smoke up my ass? POE.

[Amarok]

You sound like you are shaking, what's happening?

Nope i can't imagine where you would get such an impression 

As for what's happening . I have shown your challenge to be  a silly irrelevant dodge . Shown better than you have defended  ID without it .And actually provide evidence and case for ID and answers it critics without it.(thou these efforts are still wrong they are a least worthy efforts  ) And shown you don't seem to understand allegories despite using them. Oh and that quote about insanity might actually apply to you . Yeah that sums it it up i think 

---

Probabilities are governed by factors which are not probable.

  WTF

[Banned]

Really? Care to elaborate, or are you just trying to blow smoke up my ass? POE.

From your perspective, it's not safe for you to listen to someone who you think is from a "dangerous cult." We don't want you to be so dulled only to wake up years later finding yourself totally duped.
Surely there's some more soup to sell yourself for?
Or just keep licking the bowl you've got.

[Amarok]

From your perspective, it's not safe for you to listen to someone who you think is from a "dangerous cult." 

Where did he ever say such a thing ? You seem to love telling people what they think or what their perspective is. 

We don't want you to be so dulled only to wake up years later finding yourself totally duped.

Again same 

Surely there's some more soup to sell yourself for?

Yay more of absurd prattle that we live in "Undesirable circumstances " I wonder when your going to get around backing that pretentious personnel attack . Oh right you have super secret magic crime solving skills . 

Or just keep licking the bowl you've got.

Same as above

[Banned]

You sound like you are shaking, what's happening?

Nope i can't imagine where you would get such an impression .As for what's happening .I have shown your challenge to be a silly irrelevant dodge .Shown better than you have defended  ID without it .And actually provide evidence and case for ID and answers it critics without it. (thou these efforts are still wrong they are a least worthy efforts .) And shown you don't seem to understand allegories despite using them .Oh and that quote about insanity might actually apply to you .Yeah that sums it it up i think WTF

I understand that you would like a discussion about what others say about ID, but I was interested in what YOU have to say about ID.
What experience have you had with designing and doing something intelligent?

Or can't you relate to that?

It's not an offense to have nothing to show for it, you can always start something new if you put your mind to it,
unless of course...
you are just a well developed worm with eyes that grew from irritated warts.

---

Where did he ever say such a thing ? You seem to love telling people what they think or what their perspective is. 

You can't relate to what's being said, because I wasn't writing to you.

If you can just focus on what's yours it may help unravel your confusion.

[Amarok]

 understand that you would like a discussion about what others say about ID, but I was interested in what YOU have to say about ID.

I have already said what i think of ID and others have discussed it with me without your absurd challenge.So the challenge does not matter To discussing ID or being convinced of it .  

What experience have you had with designing and doing something intelligent?

And as i have said it's not a prerequisite to discussing ID . So it's of no consequence to talking about ID . Or being convinced of it . 

Or can't you relate to that?

See above 

It's not an offense to have nothing to show for it, you can always start something new if you put your mind to it, 
unless of course...

Again not relevant to discussing ID you can either compelling  evidence based case or you can't . So again this challenge is irrelevant. To discussing ID or being convinced of it .  

you are just a well developed worm with eyes that grew from irritated warts.

That's not how eyes evolved .And  having evolved does not mean one cannot discuss intelligent design . Nor be convinced by an actual case for it .

---

You can't relate to what's being said, because I wasn't writing to you.

Yes i can because i read the original quote your twisting here . Thus it does not matter who your writing too . 

If you can just focus on what's yours it may help unravel your confusion

Nope not confused and i will comment on what i know . And i will not abide your slander here .

[Ravenshire]

Really? Care to elaborate, or are you just trying to blow smoke up my ass? POE.

From your perspective, it's not safe for you to listen to someone who you think is from a "dangerous cult." We don't want you to be so dulled only to wake up years later finding yourself totally duped.
Surely there's some more soup to sell yourself for?
Or just keep licking the bowl you've got.

Trying to blow smoke up my ass. Ok.

Let me tell you something, little POE. You know fuck all about my perspective. Absolutely nothing. That you think your cult could dupe me at all, let alone for years proves that.

All that aside, I don't give two shits about the source of facts. I care about the facts and whether or not they will stand up to examination. Nothing you've proposed here will do that.

Funny, you came here hoping to blow smoke up our asses and only managed to blow it out your own.

Now, either provide some support for your assertions or go fuck yourself, POE.

---

From your perspective, it's not safe for you to listen to someone who you think is from a "dangerous cult." 

Where did he ever say such a thing ? You seem to love telling people what they think or what their perspective is. 

We don't want you to be so dulled only to wake up years later finding yourself totally duped.

Again same 

Surely there's some more soup to sell yourself for?

Yay more of absurd prattle that we live in "Undesirable circumstances " I wonder when your going to get around backing that pretentious personnel attack . Oh right you have super secret magic crime solving skills . 

Or just keep licking the bowl you've got.

Same as above

Doncha just love his posting history devoid of personal attacks? Or, so he claimed in another thread.

[Whateverist]

It might be thought … that evolutionary arguments would play a large part in guiding biological research, but this is far from the case. It is difficult enough to study what is happening now. To figure out exactly what happened in evolution is even more difficult. Thus evolutionary achievements can be used as hints to suggest possible lines of research, but it is highly dangerous to trust them too much. It is all too easy to make mistaken inferences unless the process involved is already very well understood. 

— Francis Crick

I can well understand why you did not quote the preceding sentence in this quote, as it rather undermines your point.  The prior sentence reads, "Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved."  But thanks for showing that you're simply yet another quote mining creatard.

Idiots who deliberately mislead are best placed on ignore.  Bye bye HL.

[GrandizerII]

It might be thought … that evolutionary arguments would play a large part in guiding biological research, but this is far from the case. It is difficult enough to study what is happening now. To figure out exactly what happened in evolution is even more difficult. Thus evolutionary achievements can be used as hints to suggest possible lines of research, but it is highly dangerous to trust them too much. It is all too easy to make mistaken inferences unless the process involved is already very well understood. 

— Francis Crick

And the Bible says "There is no God"!

What's the context of the quote? It's not like context doesn't matter, dude. But you know what, even just reading this one quote is clear that he wasn't debating the concept of evolution itself. So perhaps you should reread the quote you pasted, or at least provide some damn context next time.

Happenstance is just another word meaning abiogenesis. The whole premise behind abiogenesis is happenstance.

Depends on what you mean by "happenstance". Abiogenesis could be gradual, not sudden.

The hypothesis is that conditions were just right for life to come about by extraordinary means.

What extraordinary means are you talking about? You're the one positing supernatural causes here.

However due to the amazing complexity of the DNA molecule, abiogenesis is an impossibility just like it is an impossibility for nature to create a encyclopedia when there is a windstorm with lightening.

That's not how scientists think abiogenesis happened on this planet. It's not like life suddenly was switched on just like that. You know the line between "non-life" and "life" is fuzzy and arbitrary, right? And we're not arguing life is a supernatural soul. It's an abstract that describes some mechanism that gradually emerged from molecules and such via very natural processes. And it started out as something really basic, way more basic than an encyclopedia. So your analogy is false.

I don't think you really understand just how improbable abiogenesis is.

I don't think you really understand the distinction between impossible and improbable. If something is improbable, then it still can be possible (so long as the probability isn't exactly 0). It's improbable that you would win the lottery prize, but it doesn't mean it's impossible. You might get lucky and actually win, not just once, but two or even three times during your lifetime.

---

He didn't argue that things create themselves. The argument is that chemistry is a thing ... that happens ... naturally, without the need for divine intervention.

So God can't create something which works by itself?
An automatic gearbox doesn't cancel the inventor does it?

What's the point of positing God if things can work by themselves anyway? Learn to use some Occam's razor when you get the chance.

Life and automatic gearbox are two different things.