RE: How old is the Earth?
October 13, 2010 at 11:13 pm
(This post was last modified: October 13, 2010 at 11:36 pm by Statler Waldorf.)
(October 13, 2010 at 8:42 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:That's just sad.
Not to mention typical.
I guess he believes in a world-covering flood that killed all but 8 people, too?
There are two classes of xtians. One thinks that the Garden of Eden is allegorical and Noah's Ark was part of the folklore of the region. The second bunch swears that its all TOTALLY FUCKING REAL. The second group is truly worth nothing more than being used as a floor mat.
Sadly for you, the one who belongs to the second group has been walking all over you in this discussion. You have done NOTHING to prove your position. I was right when I first saw your posts. you are a mud slinger who needs others to tell him what to believe because he doesn't know why he believes what he believes.
(October 13, 2010 at 8:47 pm)TheDarkestOfAngels Wrote:(October 13, 2010 at 8:42 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Not to mention typical.
I guess he believes in a world-covering flood that killed all but 8 people, too?
There are two classes of xtians. One thinks that the Garden of Eden is allegorical and Noah's Ark was part of the folklore of the region. The second bunch swears that its all TOTALLY FUCKING REAL. The second group is truly worth nothing more than being used as a floor mat.
You are right and I respect christians who recognize the bible for what it is, but remember - this man - a young-earth creationist, according to what he's divulged, has taugt science. SCIENCE!
... I'm guessing he taught in Kansas or Texas, where facts are optional and believing is the same thing as knowing something to be true.
Why would I take theological advice from an Atheist? That's like a woman taking child bearing advice from a male. Of course you respect compromising Christians, because they are weak in their beliefs.
Yup I taught Science, and as I pointed out earlier my classes dominated using what I taught them. Now you are a bigot towards what state people are born in? You really are sickening. FYI, I taught in neither of those States. I taught in one of the most Liberal States in the Union and that is probably one reason my classes ripped up the other schools so badly.
Quite frankly I wouldn't want my children having you as a teacher, no doubt their text books would be replaced with Wikipedia and they'd be watching youtube in class lol. Sad.
(October 13, 2010 at 9:29 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I'm guessing he didn't teach it very well.
Or, he taught it somewhere like a xtian "academy" which thinks religion is more important than knowledge.
Haha no, but this post right here shows your ignorance on the subject. It's well documented that Private School kids (majority of which are Christian Schools) receive far better educations than public school kids (all of which are Secular). They attend better universities and score higher on the SAT and other Standardized tests. So funny you would even bring that up considering the data that is not in your favor. I can totally tell you were a public school student huh? lol.
(October 13, 2010 at 11:06 pm)Cego_Colher Wrote:Quote:Oh brother. Football Team A claims to be the best football team in the League. Only one problem, they refuse to play anyone. Football Team B claims to also be the best football team in the league and will play anyone, no matter where. They will even pay all the costs for the game and will even play the game at the Football Team A's Stadium. Football Team A still refuses and just says, "Football Team B is just not good enough to play us, we are not scared." Which football team is most likely the better team? Team B of course. Well that was almost too easy.
is the cat dead or alive? you can't honestly know which team is better. of course you would naturally take the guess that B is better, but since they have not played a game you cannot know which one is better.
Well which team appears better to you? It's the same argument schools use to not play Boise State. They put out an open invitation to play anyone anywhere in 2011 and nobody took them up on it. Why? Well it was not because people thought Boise State was "too crummy of a team", even though some said that. It's obvious they are worried about losing to Boise State- so they would rather just avoid them. It would also be a huge embarrassment to them if they lost to Boise State because they get more funding and have more students than Boise Stete.
It's the exact same situation here. Evolutionists get way more funding and there is way more of them, but for some odd reason they are afraid to death to debate Creationists. They know they could lose that debate and this would be a HUGE embarrassment. If Creationists thoguht they could not back their position up, then why would they want to debate it so badly? If I knew I would lose a game I would rather not play it. They know their arguments are sound, and their science is sound. Dawkins likes to only debate in front of friendly audiences and against non-creation opponents for this very reason. He is afraid to debate guys who actually earned their Ph.Ds and did not just get Honorary Doctorates lol. He's small time.
