Smut for Smut

[tavarish]

"Sex is great and pornography spoils it" Very good point. That desensitization to sexual stimuli leads to porn addicts having less fun in the sack... Thank you Frodo.

"Oh, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE post these web sites that 'prove the existence of God'"
Thor, god of thunder, I don't think you've been listening fully. I made the point repetedly that I did not garnish my opinion of belief in god from reading a website or a book. I made the point that the only way I could find a website to link to as "proof" would be to make my own. I said multiple times that in my opinion, that I know of, there are no web sites I can link to to prove god. Are there any you can link to to disprove her? Are your opinions availble in full on the web?

Long and short, there are no such sites. Thank you.

-Pip

So you openly acknowledge that you're making shit up to fit a pre-determined belief.

Oh yeah, and I looked at that trial Tavarish. That is a load. It took about a minute to find the part where the opening statements were, and the guy said that a definition of ID is that fish were created with their scales on already. I am not on board with that. There is no way for that to be the case. I don't know if this is like homeopathy, that the word means far different things to different people... Or if this is that I misunderstood ID... If I did, then I redefine my own interpretation of ID theory (as if I already hadn't). But fish with scales already, not a chance. ID, to me, means that god started the top spinning, and stepped back and calmly watched it spin. That the systems are designed, but that god doesn't like to reach down and make miracles. That the real miracle is the creation of this material world. Fish with scales, I would have laughed them out of court as well...

That's deism, which has its own issues.

---

"It's "silly" to ask for evidence that your claim is true? My, my...."
So you disagree? You really think those websites you posted are evidence? Is that the best you have? I, unlike yourself, can't think of a website that encompasses what I believe. I just tried to argue ID with Tavarish, and he thought I was party to someone who argued that fish came into existence with their scales already on! I laughed and laughed. I make up my own mind, I can't just point you to Loose Change: Final Edition, and say "that is what convinced me". Please try to understand. I didn't expect you to post links, and I certainly cannot think of any. Proof that god exists, if you want to find god find her, if not then not. I don't care.

I'm glad you laughed, but you completely misunderstood the point.

You said the complexity of the world could not have come from any other means but from a divine source. I gave you specific refutation to this argument, as well as videos dealing with your exact claim (irreducible complexity of the bacterial flagellum).

Just because something is complex does not mean is was designed. I don't know how else I can explain that to you. I'll refer you to PZ Myers' example:

You see driftwood along the beach. It functions as a wall as well as an ecosystem for microorganisms and sentient life. It is, by all definitions, complex. It has no singular function, but can assume many roles as a system. Who designed this?

I am poitoing out that your logic is flawed, how did I fail? If I say I beleive there is a god that made the world, I am making a claim that demands website links as evidence. If you claim there is not god, you're not making a claim but stating a proven scientific fact. Terrible double standard.

Who the hell is claiming there is NOT a God? Who said website links are the only allowable evidence? Jesus tap-dancing Christ, get a clue.

The only thing anyone claimed here is that a God who performs miracles probably doesn't exist. Since you don't believe in such a thing, why even entertain the question, then go on a tirade of how it's a double standard?

So I thought I would try to explain that I expect no one to be able to literally 'prove' their beliefs with links to 'evidence' available on the net, and in response you post a link to whywontgodhealamputees.com. I don't think you got it. See if I am making a claim, then I need onlt wait a moment, and you will make a claim as well. Then who is the Burden upon?

Still on you, genius. It doesn't shift just because someone else posted a link.

Please don't post websites to try to convince me. If you are trying to entertain, I will be laughing about that stupid website all night. Whywongodhealamputees.com. hahahahaha that's fresh!

HAHAHAHAHAHALOLOLOLOLOLROFLZOMG

I appreciate your responses, god of thunder, but you're being difficult. To much Dawkins has made you rude and mean spirited. The point of this existance is not to try to find ways to disagree, but to try very hard to get along. I respect your beliefs, but I get the impression that favour is not returned. If you think you are right and I am wrong, and not just that we disagree, you are well on the way to fanaticism.

Thanks for the insight on what the meaning of existence is. I don't care what you believe. Just try not to write stuff that's not backed up by anything - you will be called out on it.

I also appreciate your response downbeat. but you also posted links to docu's. Please don't show me what moves you to beleive what you do, as I will likley find it laughable, and then will inadvertently make fun of things very important to you. It's not like after Loose Change I 'woke up' to the 9/11 truth, ut that from day one I knew. Because of my history with America, and what I knew of America's history, I just knew.

Yes, you sound very reasonable. "I just know".

Don't get me started on 9/11 truthers. That's a whole other shade of retarded.

How do I post a link that shows that I had studied Americana for years and years? If you guys were moved into your beliefs by web movies, I think you need to spend more time taking responsibility for you own minds.

Said the person who "knew" about 9/11 truth after watching Loose Change.

If you know something, post it. There are many reliable sources that you can use to back up your claim. If the sources don't operate on the internet, say where you CAN attain them, so people can look for themselves. That's how evidence works. You can't go into a courtroom and say "Yes, he killed her, your honor, I just KNOW".