Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)

[The Valkyrie]

And Odin will die during Ragnarrok.

[soldierofGod]

And Odin will die during Ragnarrok.

Each Prophet warned his people of the Antichrist (in this case, the Nordic peoples probably). Odin is one-eyed, that is, Satan is one-eyed. In other words the Nordic knew Satan as Odin. The Ragnarrok is the war of the end times (World War III) known by the ancient Nordics. The last Prophet, Muhammad, warned of the signs of the end times.

I haven't found the original video (maybe deleted) but I found this video of a Catholic picked up by him (video reaction).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hIvVvPe-y4

[LadyForCamus]

Do you believe that Christ died for your sins, and was resurrected after three days by God the Father?  Every time you ignore this question you’re making yourself appear to be a terrible messenger of god, and a terrible Christian. Why are you here instead of here:

http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewforum.php?f=98

I don’t doubt that there are several members of AF who are professionally
qualified to discuss this topic with you. I’m merely pointing out your obviously dishonest motivation for being here, John Breezy, the self-described Christian.

Motivation is an interesting word to use; particularly when combined with the word dishonest. I personally want to see how high you'll build this sand castle before it toples over. So you have my permission to continue.

Motivation is interesting, isn’t it? It’s also relevant in discussions like these. And every time you ignore the questions I’ve asked you above, you are tacitly admitting your dishonesty.  Also, I don’t need your permission to continue; this is an open, public forum, and I’ll be happy to continue just as soon as we can get past the first waypoint of you honestly answering the questions I’ve asked you. 

I'll look into the new forum you linked. Is there a particular reason for the recommendation? Have you used it previously? I like being an informed buyer; it looks rather ghetto lol, but I dont want to judge a book by its cover.

It looks “ghetto”? I don’t know what you mean by that, but it is a science forum, which we are not. You are free to use the google function on your phone or computer to find a site more to your liking.

[LadyForCamus]

Do you believe that Christ died for your sins, and was resurrected after three days by God the Father?  Every time you ignore this question you’re making yourself appear to be a terrible messenger of god, and a terrible Christian. Why are you here instead of here:

http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewforum.php?f=98

I don’t doubt that there are several members of AF who are professionally
qualified to discuss this topic with you. I’m merely pointing out your obviously dishonest motivation for being here, John Breezy, the self-described Christian.

Jesús no murió, él descenderá de los Cielos para matar al Anticristo (Dayyal en árabe). Antes de que el Profeta Jesús descienda Dios advirtió con señales la aproximación del Día del Juicio a través de los labios del Profeta Muhammad.

---

Do you believe that Christ died for your sins, and was resurrected after three days by God the Father?  Every time you ignore this question you’re making yourself appear to be a terrible messenger of god, and a terrible Christian. Why are you here instead of here:

http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewforum.php?f=98

I don’t doubt that there are several members of AF who are professionally
qualified to discuss this topic with you. I’m merely pointing out your obviously dishonest motivation for being here, John Breezy, the self-described Christian.

sorry, this is in english

Jesus did not die, he will descend from the Heavens to kill the Antichrist (Dayyal in Arabic). Before the Prophet Jesus descends God warned with signs the approach of the Day of Judgment through the lips of the Prophet Muhammad.

Sure he will, you little scamp. 😉

[John 6IX Breezy]

Motivation is an interesting word to use; particularly when combined with the word dishonest. I personally want to see how high you'll build this sand castle before it toples over. So you have my permission to continue.

Motivation is interesting, isn’t it? It’s also relevant in discussions like these. And every time you ignore the questions I’ve asked you above, you are tacitly admitting your dishonesty.  Also, I don’t need your permission to continue; this is an open, public forum, and I’ll be happy to continue just as soon as we can get past the first waypoint of you honestly answering the questions I’ve asked you. 

Yup, one interesting thing about motivation is that it generally has no effect on the truth of a proposition. If I say cats can fly, that statement is false regardless if my motivation for saying it comes from greed, money, revenge, sex, entertainment, religion, and the list goes on. And if the statement is true, then it will likewise be true regardless of me being classified as an honest or dishonest person.

Here's another example of a false statement: "Motivation is relevant in discussions like these."

[The Grand Nudger]

There isn’t much left to discuss when objections are handled and johnism refuses to offer any further insights or evidence for consideration.

Ofc a discussion ends up swirling around whatever remains.

Then, there’s the fact of having had every one of these mini convos countless times before. With that in mind, there was never anything but motivation to discuss in the first place.

[John 6IX Breezy]

There isn’t much left to discuss when objections are handled and johnism refuses to offer any further insights or evidence for consideration.

I asked you several times to link me your favorite journal article on model based control so we can continue the discussion. The conversation is obviously going to halt until that happens.

[The Grand Nudger]

I told you a few pages back that you didn’t need my help to hop from one set of ridiculous assertions to the next, in an endless game.

That’s still true. You don’t need me to mama bird for you, and it’s not as if it would have any effect on you if I did.

If -you- want to know why -you- were wrong, -you- now possess all that -you- need to figure it out for yourself.

An actual conversation can follow from that, after you’ve put in the time, but it won’t be any batshit argument you hope to launch. We work from a common basis of facts, or we don’t.

[LadyForCamus]

Motivation is interesting, isn’t it? It’s also relevant in discussions like these. And every time you ignore the questions I’ve asked you above, you are tacitly admitting your dishonesty.  Also, I don’t need your permission to continue; this is an open, public forum, and I’ll be happy to continue just as soon as we can get past the first waypoint of you honestly answering the questions I’ve asked you. 

Yup, one interesting thing about motivation is that it generally has no effect on the truth of a proposition. If I say cats can fly, that statement is false regardless if my motivation for saying it comes from greed, money, revenge, sex, entertainment, religion, and the list goes on. And if the statement is true, then it will likewise be true regardless of me being classified as an honest or dishonest person.

Here's another example of a false statement: "Motivation is relevant in discussions like these."

You are right that personal motivations are irrelevant to the truth or falsehood of a proposition, however, they are quite insightful with regard to examining how a person judges the quality of available evidence for one particular proposition compared to another. Motivation can have implications with regard to erroneous reasoning, which is why I dig. I notice you’ve ignored my questions for a third time now. I’ll try drawing closer to my point a quicker way. Do you accept the current scientific theory of evolution as the best explanation for the diversity of life on planet earth?

[John 6IX Breezy]

I told you a few pages back that you didn’t need my help to hop from one set of ridiculous assertions to the next, in an endless game.

That’s still true.  You don’t need me to mama bird for you, and it’s not as if it would have any effect on you if I did.

If -you- want to know why -you- were wrong, -you- now possess all that -you- need to figure it out for yourself.

I'm sure that's the case. The discussion still halts until you share that paper. Earlier on the thread Nakara shared their article on the evolution of the eye with no problem, but I guess I shouldn't force someone to participate in the exchange of ideas.