Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth

[Esquilax]

[Whateverist]

You are so full of shit, instead of answering the vital pointy of Pappy's post, you just took offence.

Staff will take the context of each insult into consideration before taking action --- This rule does not cover attacking someone's argument. It's perfectly reasonable to say, "That argument is stupid", but it is recommended to back it up with sound reasoning.

Try again, you ignorant crybaby without the slightest idea what you're talking about. And try putting me on ignore, bitch

Anyone who gets K this pissed off deserves what she gets.

[Cyberman]

Absolutely! That final line conjured up the image of Ripley in the powerloader prior to the climactic one-on-one against the Alien Queen!

I suggest we book A2E an appointment with A&E, just to save time!

[Esquilax]

Absolutely! That final line conjured up the image of Ripley in the powerloader prior to the climactic one-on-one against the Alien Queen!

I suggest we book A2E an appointment with A&E, just to save time!

And I suggest we start taking donations for a low budget, shot for shot remake of Aliens starring Kay as Ripley.

Aliens: Atheist Forum edition!

[Cyberman]

We'd save a ton of money by not having to use fake blood.

Oh, and another major selling point? A2E as the Queen doesn't get to say anything!

[LostLocke]

You are so full of shit, instead of answering the vital pointy of Pappy's post, you just took offence.


Try again, you ignorant crybaby without the slightest idea what you're talking about. And try putting me on ignore, bitch

Anyone who gets K this pissed off deserves what she gets.

[Kayenneh]

[Mister Agenda]

ALTER2EGO -to- POPEYES PAPPY:
Unfortunately, popeyespappy, when the moderator Stimbo referred to me as a "maroon," it was because Stimbo thought I was the one making the fallacious claim that evolution "theory" is fact. It turns out that Esquilax was the one making that fallacious claim about "theory" being fact and I was merely correcting Esquilax.

The theory of gravity is a theory that explains how gravity works. That gravity exists/happens is a fact. Does this analogy help you get the point being made? The theory of evolution explains how evolution works. That evolution exists/happens is a fact.

In other words, the title of "maroon" was misdirected. It was intended for the person (Esquilax) who was making the claim about "theory" being a fact. Notice again what Stimbo said at Post 126. This time, keep your eyes on the words that are bolded in light blue.

Not so. You misunderstood both Stimbo and Esquilax. Esquilax did not claim a theory is a fact. Neither did Stimbo. Their claim is that evolution is a fact, and the theory of evolution is the explanation for that fact.

@ popeyespappy:
Did you see why Stimbo used to word "maroon"? It was directed at the person who argued that evolution "theory" is fact, and Stimbo thought I was the one arguing it. As you can see, I was arguing against evolution theory being fact.

I'm not sure whether it is worse to be this obtuse authentically or deceptively.

Now you have also made the same fallacious claim about "theory" being "fact." According to Stimbo, a person who thinks "theory" is fact is a "maroon". You follow my drift?

Maroon may not be a strong enough word to describe how thick you're being. Such a word may not exist in English.

If I misunderstood the theory of evolution and the evidence for it as badly as you do, I wouldn't believe it either.

---

Explaining evolution to a creationist is like teaching calculus to someone who failed high school algebra. It's a waste of time.

I was a creationist once. It doesn't happen before your eyes, but Alter2Ego can't escape learning something here. She has to read at least enough to make a retort out of. We're planting a seed that may take years to sprout...or never germinate. But our time isn't wasted.

---

As for your views on Charles Darwin's philosophy, during which he flip-flopped between atheism and paganism, I have him pegged as atheist for several reasons. One important reason is that he attempted to kick Jehovah to the curb by pushing abiogenesis theory (the believe that life can come from non-life by itself). Even after abiogenesis theory was debunked by Louis Pasteur in 1859, Charles Darwin persisted in speculating abiogenesis theory.

The 'abiogenesis' that Pasteur disproved was the folklore that things like baby mice and flies and maggots and worms could form spontaneously under the proper conditions. His work didn't address 'abiogenesis' of a barely functional protocell over 3 billion years ago at all.

[Esquilax]

Oh, and another major selling point? A2E as the Queen doesn't get to say anything!

But by the same token, we'd have to watch her slicing our equivalent of Lance Henriksen in half, and that just seems insulting, somehow.

Lance Henriksen's the man.

[Cyberman]

Technically, this version of Lance Henriksen is an android (though he prefers the term 'synthetic person', of course) and doesn't care who knows it, unlike the undercover Ian Holm of the original. Let's see - do we know anyone around here who enjoys telling us that he's a created being? A 'child' of his 'god' so to speak, who presumably would revel being called Bishop?

---

Incidentally: Mister Agenda, are you still able to correctly attribute the quote in your post above, or do you want me to do it? Like Einstein before me, I never said half that crap.