Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

"The Origin of Specious Nonsense"

1277278280282283334

Comments

  • Moderators Posts: 51,683 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    As W2M (Worm to Man) Evolution has it's funny sides ... I never take you guys seriously!!!:):D
    I'll reply to oldrnwisr's substantial posting at the weekend.

    You guys are starting to learn Creation Science ... slowly ... and against your wills ... but ye are learning it nontheless!!!
    I was a bit like that myself, when I first discovered that I wasn't an Ape with a large Cranium ... I went into denial and had a personal faith crisis ... in W2M Evolution.:D
    ... but my pride kept me from admitting that I wasn't a descendent of a Pond-thing ... or a Monkey's Cousin!!!:D

    The peace and love of Jesus Christ to you all.:)

    Hold on. you claim that you were an evolutionary scientist and you didn't know you weren't an ape?? How the hell did you get any accrediation if you didn't know that basic fact?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,386 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    koth wrote: »
    How the hell did you get any accrediation if you didn't know that basic fact?
    By going to a creationist diploma-mill?


  • Moderators Posts: 51,683 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    robindch wrote: »
    By going to a creationist diploma-mill?

    would explain why JC has such a terrible knowledge of evolution.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,208 ✭✭✭fatmammycat


    koth wrote: »
    would explain why JC has such a terrible knowledge of evolution.

    Guys, he's not a scientist, he's not anything except THE most tedious troll to ever dis-grace this forum.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    J C wrote: »
    I'll reply to oldrnwisr's substantial posting at the weekend.

    Don't bother unless your post includes some EVIDENCE for your retarded claims. You've posted enough stupid things to keep us laughing at you for years to come we really don't need more ammunition.

    Oh, and if you could finally get around to posting up a robust mathematical definition of cfsi that'd be super. If it isn't included in one of your next 2 posts, I'll take it to mean you admit that Dembski is a lying scumbag.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,237 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    GODS DAMMIT JC STOP SAYING MONKEY!
    Learn the damn difference!

    :mad:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    GODS DAMMIT JC STOP SAYING MONKEY!
    Learn the damn difference!

    :mad:
    Meh, they're more or less the same thing. God created them both with the same wave of a tentacle.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Meh, they're more or less the same thing. God created them both with the same wave of a tentacle.

    and therein lies a tail...ba-boom-ching!:p


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    J C wrote: »
    ... and how do ye explain polystrate fossils ... like this tree fossil extending through supposed millions of years of rock layers??

    It's already been explained a few pages back. You're arguing from personal incredulity again (as per usual). 'Polystrate fossils' are well understood and do not contradict the dating of the Earth at 4.5 billion years old.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    Since J C Is so busy coming with with Dempskis proof, I feel the gap should be filled with knowledge!

    The move from asexual reproduction to sexual repoduction.

    I kind of imagine the process as moving from mitosis to a system like what plants have, to a distinct gender deal.

    Problem is I have no idea what kind of selection pressures would account for the shifts.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,334 ✭✭✭RichieC


    Every single example J C brings up is a first page Google result from some other creationist.

    The mount St Helen Strata is indeed real and formed instantly in geological terms. Just because one formed this way does not mean they all did. poor.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    RichieC wrote: »
    Every single example J C brings up is a first page Google result from some other creationist.

    The mount St Helen Strata is indeed real and formed instantly in geological terms. Just because one formed this way does not mean they all did. poor.

    A few people have tried to tell him why Mount St Helen strata doesn't back up the flood idea.
    Including pointing out the rather obvious fact that a volcano isn't a flood.
    He ignores anything he can't come up with an argument for find a creation cretin science answer for on goodle.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    koth wrote: »
    Hold on. you claim that you were an evolutionary scientist and you didn't know you weren't an ape??
    ... I know I'm not an Ape ...
    ... the point I'm making is that when I was an Evolutionist I believed that I was an Ape ...
    ... a belief that most other Evolutionists also subscribe to!!!:)
    koth wrote: »
    How the hell did you get any accrediation if you didn't know that basic fact (that Humans aren't Apes)?
    Here is what one of your fellow Evolutionists has to say about Humans supposedly being Apes:-
    Quote:-
    "All apes and humans are desceneded from a single proto-ape species that lived millions of years ago and no longer exists. Thus humans can be said to be closely related to the other apes, but we are certainly not descended from them. Actually, we are apes, no less so than chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and gibbons. Whether or not you choose to subscribe to evolutionary theory, there is no doubt that all human beings, including Jesus Christ himself, are classified, both genetically and morphologically as an ape species.
    Despite many arguments by people to the contrary, I'd never seriously questioned the fact that humans are apes. After all, I acquired that particular tidbit of knowledge from my father, who is an anthropologist and therefore should know."


    It would seem that it is ye guys who have the question mark hanging over your Evolutionist credentials ... and not me ... on the issue of Humans supposedly being 'Naked Apes'!!!:D


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    RichieC wrote: »
    The mount St Helen Strata is indeed real and formed instantly in geological terms. Just because one formed this way does not mean they all did.
    It proves that catastrophic interactions between water and tectonic explosions (such as happened with Mount St Helens, (which we all observed) ... and in the Flood, (which we didn't observe) can produce fine stratification within the resultant sedimentary rocks.
    ... and it can do so within hours ... rather than millions of years.:)


  • Moderators Posts: 51,683 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    ... I know I'm not an Ape ...
    ... the point I'm making is that when I was an Evolutionist I believed that I was an Ape ...
    ... a belief that most other Evolutionists also subscribe to!!!:)
    I seriously doubt that actual evolutionists believe they are apes. Even a 5 year old can tell the difference between an ape and a human. It really is shocking that primary, secondary and a college education was needed before you had that realisation.:eek:
    Here is what one of your fellow Evolutionists has to say about Humans being Apes:-
    Quote:-
    "All apes and humans are desceneded from a single proto-ape species that lived millions of years ago and no longer exists. Thus humans can be said to be closely related to the other apes, but we are certainly not descended from them. Actually, we are apes, no less so than chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and gibbons. Whether or not you choose to subscribe to evolutionary theory, there is no doubt that all human beings, including Jesus Christ himself, are classified, both genetically and morphologically as an ape species.
    Despite many arguments by people to the contrary, I'd never seriously questioned the fact that humans are apes. After all, I acquired that particular tidbit of knowledge from my father, who is an anthropologist and therefore should know."

    More distorting of what people say.

    for anyone who is interested, here's the complete quote that JC dishonestly presented in edited form:
    Humans did not come from apes. No qualified person in the scientific community has ever made that claim, including Darwin. All apes and humans are desceneded from a single proto-ape species that lived millions of years ago and no longer exists. Thus humans can be said to be closely related to the other apes, but we are certainly not descended from them. Actually, we are apes, no less so than chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and gibbons. Whether or not you choose to subscribe to evolutionary theory, there is no doubt that all human beings, including Jesus Christ himself, are classified, both genetically and morphologically as an ape species.
    Source

    Truly shameful stuff, JC.

    and btw, you still have to explain why you dismissed the article about the worm being an ancestor to modern man.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    dlofnep wrote: »
    It's already been explained a few pages back. You're arguing from personal incredulity again (as per usual). 'Polystrate fossils' are well understood and do not contradict the dating of the Earth at 4.5 billion years old.
    ... I'm arguing from damning evidence against millions of years being represented by rock layers that are several metres deep!!
    ... so how exactly do ye guys explain polystrate fossils ???
    ... or is is yet another Evolutionist miracle ... that just happened to happen ???


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    koth wrote: »
    I seriously doubt that actual evolutionists believe they are apes. Even a 5 year old can tell the difference between an ape and a human. It really is shocking that primary, secondary and a college education was needed before you had that realisation.:eek:
    It's even more shocking that guys with third level education believe Humans are Apes!!!
    koth wrote: »
    More distorting of what people say.
    I've distorted nothing!!
    for anyone who is interested, here's the complete quote that JC dishonestly presented in edited form:
    Humans did not come from apes. No qualified person in the scientific community has ever made that claim, including Darwin. All apes and humans are desceneded from a single proto-ape species that lived millions of years ago and no longer exists. Thus humans can be said to be closely related to the other apes, but we are certainly not descended from them. Actually, we are apes, no less so than chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and gibbons. Whether or not you choose to subscribe to evolutionary theory, there is no doubt that all human beings, including Jesus Christ himself, are classified, both genetically and morphologically as an ape species.


    Truly shameful stuff, JC.
    Nothing shameful about it ... the quote clearly states that Humans didn't come from Apes ... but that they are Apes.
    If you recall, that was my original point (that I believed myself to be an Ape when I was an Evolutionist.
    J C wrote:
    You guys are starting to learn Creation Science ... slowly ... and against your wills ... but ye are learning it nontheless!!!
    I was a bit like that myself, when I first discovered that I wasn't an Ape with a large Cranium ... I went into denial and had a personal faith crisis ... in W2M Evolution.
    As ye are now saying that ye don't believe yourselves to be Apes ... this is another indication that ye are moving in the direction of Creationism ... and away from Evolutionism.:)
    That was also my first step towards Creationism ... when I stopped believing that I was an Ape!!!
    Welcome to the world of Creation Science ... but don't say anything to your fellow Evolutionists ... they tend to get very emotional if they are told that somebody is rejecting W2M Evolution.:eek:
    koth wrote: »
    and btw, you still have to explain why you dismissed the article about the worm being an ancestor to modern man.
    Missing CFSI !!!!:D


  • Moderators Posts: 51,683 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    It's even more shocking that guys with third level education believe Humans are Apes!!!
    Descended from a common ancestor, and not a silver-back in a suit.
    Nothing shameful about it ... the quote clearly states that Humans didn't come from Apes ... but they are Apes.
    If you recall, that was my original point (that I believed myself to be an Ape when I was an Evolutionist.
    It says that we're descended from a common ancestor.
    As ye are now saying that ye don't believe yourselves to be Apes ... this is another indication that ye are moving in the direction of Creationism ... and away from Evolutionism.:)
    That was also my first step towards Creationism ... when I stopped believing that I was an Ape!!!
    Sorry, I'm not Christian and I've no plans to convert.
    Missing CFSI !!!!:D
    well first you best define what CFSI is, and I don't mean what each word means. I mean what the actual term means. And then you can explain what exactly is missing that backs up your claim.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    koth wrote: »
    Descended from a common ancestor, and not a silver-back in a suit.

    It says that we're descended from a common ancestor.
    It also says that we are Apes!!!

    ... but it's nice to see that ye don't believe that ye are Apes ... progress in the direction of Creation Science at last!!!!:)
    koth wrote: »
    Sorry, I'm not Christian and I've no plans to convert.
    You have the freedom to choose to be Saved ... or lost.
    koth wrote: »
    well first you best define what CFSI is, and I don't mean what each word means. I mean what the actual term means. And then you can explain what exactly is missing that backs up your claim.
    CFSI is the stuff that causes the difference between a worm and a Human!!!:)
    Happy now???:eek::)


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    J C wrote: »
    It's even more shocking that guys with third level education believe Humans are Apes!!!

    I'll take my third level education over the inane ramblings of cretinist nutjobs anyway, thanks.
    Nothing shameful about it ... the quote clearly states that Humans didn't come from Apes ... but that they are Apes.
    If you recall, that was my original point (that I believed myself to be an Ape when I was an Evolutionist.

    But J C, surely even from a creationist viewpoint there must be some evidence that humans and apes are related. If all big cats (which can look quite different while sharing genetic and physical traits) came from the 'big cat baramin' or whatever the fuck you called it, then surely to be consistent you must also believe that humans and apes (which look quite different while sharing genetic and physical traits) are also related. Either that or you're just being inconsistant and picking and choosing when you want to bring any form of science into the debate.
    Wait, actually, im starting to see a pattern here....

    As ye are now saying that ye don't believe yourselves to be Apes ... this is another indication that ye are moving in the direction of Creationism ... and away from Evolutionism.:)
    That was also my first step towards Creationism ... when I stopped believing that I was an Ape!!!

    All this word twisting is getting a bit tiresome.
    I'd say it's more likely your first step to creationism was when you got a blow to the head.

    Missing CFSI !!!!:D

    Which, as any sane person knows, isn't even a real thing.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,386 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    J C wrote: »
    It's even more shocking that guys with third level education believe Humans are Apes!!!
    Shocking to a creationist perhaps, but I think that's probably ok with most people here.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    No definition of cfsi in the last few of J C's posts.

    It's official then- he has admitted he can't do it, and that Dembski was lying.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    I'll take my third level education over the inane ramblings of cretinist nutjobs anyway, thanks.
    No argument ... just an unfounded Ad Hominem.

    But J C, surely even from a creationist viewpoint there must be some evidence that humans and apes are related. If all big cats (which can look quite different while sharing genetic and physical traits) came from the 'big cat baramin' or whatever the fuck you called it, then surely to be consistent you must also believe that humans and apes (which look quite different while sharing genetic and physical traits) are also related. Either that or you're just being inconsistant and picking and choosing when you want to bring any form of science into the debate.
    Wait, actually, im starting to see a pattern here....
    Many of the Cat species are interfertile to some degree and they all share an almost identical anatomy and body proprtions. Humans and Apes aren't interfertile to any degree ... and their anatomy and body proportions are distinctly different.
    So the Creation Science position is objectively correct and consistent.

    All this word twisting is getting a bit tiresome.
    I'd say it's more likely your first step to creationism was when you got a blow to the head.




    Which, as any sane person knows, isn't even a real thing.
    No argument ... just two more unfounded Ad Hominems.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    J C wrote: »
    It also says that we are Apes!!!
    Which makes more sense to a lot of people than the whole 'magically appeared out of thin air' argument put forward by your lot.
    ... but it's nice to see that ye don't believe that ye are Apes ... progress in the direction of Creation Science at last!!!!:)
    I don't think the word 'progress' should ever be used with the words 'creation science'
    You have the freedom to choose to be Saved ... or lost.
    Yes J C we get it, you're scared of dying so you're kissing god's ring in the hope it gets you into the afterlife. Good luck with that. Meanwhile, I'll just enjoy my life.
    CFSI is the stuff that causes the difference between a worm and a Human!!!:)
    Happy now???:eek::)

    Even for you that's a breathtakingly idiotic statement.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    J C wrote: »
    No argument ... just an unfounded Ad Hominem.
    I wouldn't say unfounded.

    Many of the Cat species are interfertile to some degree and they all share an almost identical anatomy and body proprtions. Humans and Apes aren't interfertile to any degree ... and their anatomy and body proportions are distinctly different.
    So the Creation Science position is objectively correct and consistent.
    How about the relationship between big cats and ehhhh....small cats then. They can't get it on. Are they related? Or did the big man just like the design so much he used it twice. Perhaps he was hungover one morning, couldn't really be arsed thinking up something new, and just said 'right, fuck it lads we'll just use this one again. But make it smaller. Yeah sure, that works'

    No argument ... just two unfounded Ad Hominems.
    You've avoided about 90% of the arguments put to you in this thread.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    wrote:
    Originally Posted by J C
    It's even more shocking that guys with third level education believe Humans are Apes!!!


    robindch
    Shocking to a creationist perhaps, but I think that's probably ok with most people here.

    Koth seems to think that Evolutionists don't believe they are Apes ... and is shocked that even a 5 year old would believe such nonesense!!!
    ... whereas you seem to think that most people on the thread think they are Apes.

    wrote:
    Originally Posted by koth
    I seriously doubt that actual evolutionists believe they are apes. Even a 5 year old can tell the difference between an ape and a human. It really is shocking that primary, secondary and a college education was needed before you had that realisation
    Ye really are a mixed up bunch of dudes ... not knowing your Apes from your elbows ... to coin a phrase!!!:D


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    Ye really are a mixed up bunch of dudes ... not knowing your Apes from your elbows ... to coin a phrase!!!:D

    Straight from the Richie Kavanagh school of comedy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Which makes more sense to a lot of people than the whole 'magically appeared out of thin air' argument put forward by your lot.
    ... so which is it?
    ... do ye believe ye are Apes ... just like I said ... and if ye do what have ye been arguing about for the past two pages? ... or do ye not know your Apes from your elbows???:)

    I don't think the word 'progress' should ever be used with the words 'creation science'
    Wait until you become a Creation Scientist ... that will change your mind !!!:)

    Yes J C we get it, you're scared of dying so you're kissing god's ring in the hope it gets you into the afterlife. Good luck with that. Meanwhile, I'll just enjoy my life.
    Why should I be scared? ... I'm Saved.
    ... now, if I were like you ... and still Lost ... I might be afraid ... very afraid!!!:)

    wrote:
    J C
    CFSI is the stuff that causes the difference between a worm and a Human!!!

    Doctor Jimbob
    Even for you that's a breathtakingly idiotic statement.
    No argument ... just another unfounded Ad Hominem.
    ... and CFSI is indeed the stuff that causes the difference between a worm and a Human!!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Straight from the Richie Kavanagh school of comedy.
    ... ye don't have a focail at all !!! :):eek:


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    J C wrote: »
    ... I'm arguing from damning evidence against millions of years being represented by rock layers that are several metres deep!!
    ... so how exactly do ye guys explain polystrate fossils ???
    ... or is is yet another Evolutionist miracle ... that just happened to happen ???

    Firstly - the correct term for them is 'upright fossils'. Only Creationists use the term polystrate fossils. But they are easily explained - And I have already done so.

    I'll entertain the discussion if you tell me why you believe that upright fossils are not possible or explainable by traditional geology and palaeontology. If you can't explain it, I will conclude that you are arguing from ignorance and personal incredulity once again.

    I'll await your answer. I expect you to parrot off something from AiG, so be creative - I will be cross-checking your reply.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement