RE: The Historical Reliability of the New Testament
May 20, 2015 at 3:44 am
(This post was last modified: May 20, 2015 at 3:47 am by Won2blv.)
(May 20, 2015 at 2:27 am)robvalue Wrote: I assumed that was a joke. Are you actually challenging evolution here nic?
LOL, yeah it was a joke
(May 20, 2015 at 1:35 am)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:And I am supposed to believe that my great great grandpa was a monkey?
Looks like it skipped a generation and went right to you. Idiot.
I expect more from a guy whose religious views are "fuck it"
(May 20, 2015 at 1:59 am)rexbeccarox Wrote:(May 20, 2015 at 1:30 am)nicanica123 Wrote: And I am supposed to believe that my great great grandpa was a monkey? Why don't I see half men half monkey walking around? OK, so not a real feeling have but I think its on par with what you said. The difference is that maybe you're a little more intellectually foolish sounding.
Don't argue with a fool, he'll bring you down to his level and beat you with experience - Mark Twain
I get it that atheist are not evangelist but if you want to sound reasonable then avoid the ad hominem attacks. Thats my new favorite fallacy
{bold mine}
Wow. There's some irony right there. Wow.
Dude, maybe before you argue against evolution, you should learn something about it. Evolutionary Biologists would tear you to shreds. Hell, people with barely a high school education could tear you to shreds.
BTW, an ad hominem is an actual fallacy. Simply calling someone names is not an ad hom. Here's a little clue: an ad hom means the only argument is against a person's character. Calling you a moron or idiot (or whatever fun descriptor there might be), as long as it's followed with a reasoned argument, is not an ad hom.
Hey wait, I didn't put those letters in bold. What the fuck are you doing misstating what I said asshole?!