"The Origin of Specious Nonsense"

J C

robindch wrote: »

Sheesh! If it floated upwards, it would be a rotten snowflake, wouldn't it? But by falling downwards reliably, the snowflake demonstrates -- to creationists at least -- the near-infinite genius of its design.

You're the one in wonderment over snowflakes ... I have already told you that they behave in accordance with random and deterministic processes.

robindch wrote: »

Indeed, and the slightest chance that I might have to share eternity with the likes of (diploma-mill-doctor-doctor) Ken Ham, (diploma-mill-doctor and convicted felon) Kent Hovind and the rest of hooting, deceitful cretins who run the creationist movement is quite enough for me to wish to spend eternity elsewhere.

The Holy Spirit has informed me that you will have a special corner in Heaven where you will never have to meet anybody else ... if you go and get Saved!!!!;):)

... so now, are you going to go and get Saved ... or do you still want to cut off your nose ... to spite your (eternal) face?

J C

dlofnep wrote: »

It certainly wasn't in this life, because you haven't studied evolution.

Of course I have ... it seems that is you guys who haven't!!!

Ye certainly haven't provided any evidence in favour of M2M Evolution.:)

Sarky

Christ on a bike, we've been over all that. Do you have nothing new to be grossly misinformed about?

robindch

J C wrote: »

You're the one in wonderment over snowflakes ... I have already told you that they behave in accordance with random and deterministic processes.

Gravity isn't random and the shape of snowflakes isn't deterministic.

J C wrote: »

The Holy Spirit has informed me that you will have a special corner in Heaven where you never have to meet anybody else

Huh?!!

1 Corinthians 2:9 says: "But as it is written, eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." How exactly do you know that there's some special corner of heaven prepared for me where I won't ever have to engage with (diploma-mill-doctor-doctor) Ham and his cronies?

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

Of course I have ...

No J C, you haven't. Please do us the courtesy of being honest. You have demonstrated time and time again, a blissful ignorance of evolution.

J C wrote: »

Ye certainly haven't provided any evidence in favour of M2M Evolution.:)

There is no such term called M2M Evolution, so please stop making up terms that are not used in the academic or scientific community. We have provided mountains of evidence in support of Evolution.

joseph brand

It seems to me that J C just trolls this thread/ forum.

I have to be very careful what I say over in the Christianity forum, (got a warning yesterday). If any of us non-believers post anything unsavoury over there, they kindly ask us to f**k off.

I suppose it's a good thing in a way, to let J C post here, to show how Christians
think and argue.

J C

robindch wrote: »

Gravity isn't random and the shape of snowflakes isn't deterministic.

Air movement is random and gravity is deterministic.

robindch wrote: »

Huh?!!

1 Corinthians 2:9 says: "But as it is written, eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." How exactly do you know that there's some special corner of heaven prepared for me where I won't ever have to engage with (diploma-mill-doctor-doctor) Ham and his cronies?

Quite ...
... Heaven will be such a wonderful place that you probably will lose your anti-social and sectarian tendencies ... and you will mix happily with other people, including myself and Ken Ham.:)

... but, if you continue with a 'chip on your shoulder' ... Heaven is such a big place that you can stay in your very own corner, talking to yourself ... for eternity ... if that 'floats your boat'!!!;):)

J C

dlofnep wrote: »

No J C, you haven't. Please do us the courtesy of being honest. You have demonstrated time and time again, a blissful ignorance of evolution.



There is no such term called M2M Evolution, so please stop making up terms that are not used in the academic or scientific community. We have provided mountains of evidence in support of Evolution.

... long on claims ... but short (to the point of non-existence) on any evidence for M2M Evolution.

J C

joseph brand wrote: »

It seems to me that J C just trolls this thread/ forum.

I have to be very careful what I say over in the Christianity forum, (got a warning yesterday). If any of us non-believers post anything unsavoury over there, they kindly ask us to f**k off.

I suppose it's a good thing in a way, to let J C post here, to show how Christians
think and argue.

There is a long and noble tradition of liberal free-thinking amongst Atheists, as well as the opposite ... and I hope that this forum will continue to support the former point of view ... and not the latter.:)

JC, still waiting for a yes or no answer to my questions.

If you are having difficulty answering them, please let us know.
Cause just ignoring them like this makes it seem like you can't answer them and to dishonest to admit that.

J C

King Mob wrote: »

JC, still waiting for a yes or no answer to my questions.

If you are having difficulty answering them, please let us know.
Cause just ignoring them like this makes it seem like you can't answer them and to dishonest to admit that.

If you have any evidence for the spontaneous production of Liposomes ... please provide it ... and if you don't, please stop speaking in riddles ... and making unfounded Ad Hominem remarks!!!

J C

J C wrote: »

If you have any evidence for the spontaneous production of Liposomes ... please provide it ... and if you don't, please stop speaking in riddles ... and making unfounded Ad Hominem remarks!!!

I'm not speaking in riddles, I'm asking you two yes or no questions.
Can Liposomes form without intelligence?
Can micelles form without intelligence?

And I didn't make any ad hominem, I was just pointing out that avoiding and ignoring simple yes or no questions makes you look like a dishonest, ignorant crackpot.
I didn't say you were, because you are certainly going to answer these two questions without further delay.

J C

King Mob wrote: »

I'm not speaking in riddles, I'm asking you two yes or no questions.
Can Liposomes form without intelligence?
Can micelles form without intelligence?

And I didn't make any ad hominem, I was just pointing out that avoiding and ignoring simple yes or no questions makes you look like a dishonest, ignorant crackpot.
I didn't say you were, because you are certainly going to answer these two questions without further delay.

... I have already told you that Biologically active Liposomes contain large quantities of high quality CFSI ... and therefore required an ultimate input of intelligence.

This doesn't seem to have satisfied you ... and you have claimed that you weren't talking about biologically active liposomes (which are the only ones of significance in living organisms) ...
... apparently you were talking about 'any old liposome' ... so I'm asking you what exactly you are talking about ... and what evidence, if any, you have to support your contention!!

... and all you can do is to robotically repeat your meaningless questions ... with a few (thinly veiled) unfounded personal insults thrown in for good measure!!!

... methinks, you have been at the Evolution videos again!!!:D

J C

J C wrote: »

... I have already told you that Biologically active Liposomes contain large quantities of high quality CFSI ... and therefore required an ultimate input of intelligence.

This doesn't seem to have satisfied you ... and you have claimed that you weren't talking about biologically active liposomes (which are the only ones of significance in living organisms) ...
... apparently you were talking about 'any old liposome' ... so I'm asking you what exactly you are talking about ... and what evidence, if any, you have to support your contention!!

... and all you can do is to robotically repeat your meaningless questions ... with a few (thinly veiled) unfounded personal insults thrown in for good measure!!!

... methinks, you have been at the Evolution videos again!!!:D

But I'm only repeating these questions because you seem to be having trouble answering either of them. I can't imagine why that is.

And as I stated, I never said anything about biologically active anything. I'm not sure why you are bringing this in.
Nor have I made any claim that requires me to provide evidence.
I just asked you a pair of simple yes or no questions.

So again:
Can Liposomes form without intelligence?
Can micelles form without intelligence?

Delirium

but based on the last few posts that we exchanged, you've defined CFSI as a result of a mathematical equation.

It's not a property that can be examined. You haven't expanded it any further than "it's very unlikely for this to happen without God".

J C

King Mob wrote: »

But I'm only repeating these questions because you seem to be having trouble answering either of them. I can't imagine why that is.

And as I stated, I never said anything about biologically active anything. I'm not sure why you are bringing this in.
Nor have I made any claim that requires me to provide evidence.
I just asked you a pair of simple yes or no questions.

So again:
Can Liposomes form without intelligence?
Can micelles form without intelligence?

No .. not that I am aware of.

J C

J C wrote: »

No .. not that I am aware of.

JC, you still failed to address the questions. I asked you two.

Is this "no" for both of them?

And while we are at it, why did it take you nearly a page to answer these questions?
Surely someone who isn't a troll or a crank ignorant of the facts would have been able to answer those yes or no questions immediately.
So why didn't you?

J C

koth wrote: »

but based on the last few posts that we exchanged, you've defined CFSI as a result of a mathematical equation.

I haven't done so ... in fact, CFSI cannot be generated by deterministic phenomena, like mathematical equations.

koth wrote: »

It's not a property that can be examined. You haven't expanded it any further than "it's very unlikely for this to happen without God".

Scientifically speaking CFSI cannot be produced without the appliance of intelligence ... which could be you ... or God !!:)

J C

King Mob wrote: »

JC, you still failed to address the questions. I asked you two.

Is this "no" for both of them?

And while we are at it, why did it take you nearly a page to answer these questions?
Surely someone who isn't a troll or a crank ignorant of the facts would have been able to answer those yes or no questions immediately.
So why didn't you?

You were asking a general (and therefore ambiguous) question ... and I was therefore qualifying my answer.

J C

J C wrote: »

You were asking a general (and therefore ambiguous) question ... and I was qualifying my answer.

And again for some unknown reason you avoided answering my question.

Is this "no" for both of them?

And I'll have to ask another, running the risk of giving you another one to ignore.

What could have been ambiguous about a yes or no question?

Delirium

J C wrote: »

I haven't done so ... in fact, CFSI cannot be generated by deterministic phenomena, like mathematical equations.

yes you did. I asked how do you show the properties of CFSI in an organism and you said that if the probability of it evolving without intelligent design was low, then it had CFSI.

Scientifically speaking CFSI cannot be produced without the appliance of intellignce ... which could be you ... or God !!:)

no, not scientifically speaking, as you still haven't shown scientifically the proof for creationism/ CFSI.

J C

King Mob wrote: »

And again for some unknown reason you avoided answering my question.

Is this "no" for both of them?

And I'll have to ask another, running the risk of giving you another one to ignore.

What could have been ambiguous about a yes or no question?

Its a no to Liposomes ... and a yes to some bicells.

J C

koth wrote: »

yes you did. I asked how do you show the properties of CFSI in an organism and you said that if the probability of it evolving without intelligent design was low, then it had CFSI.

... CFSI cannot be generated by deterministic processes, like mathematical equations ... but CFSI can be measured by the appliance of mathematics.

Delirium

so what is CFSI then? because you still haven't defined it, other than it needs someone to create it.

do I contain CFSI? and if yes, where did it come from?

J C

J C wrote: »

Its a no to Liposomes ... and a yes to some bicells.

And again...
Wow, it's almost like you don't want to answer any of these questions at all...

What could have been ambiguous about a yes or no question?

And now another one, why if the answers where different did you only give the one answer after ignoring both questions for so long?

I am sorry for all these off topic questions JC but I'm just trying to find out how ignoring questions and other dishonest behaviour doesn't make you a troll or a crank.

J C

koth wrote: »

so what is CFSI then? because you still haven't defined it, other than it needs someone to create it.

It's Complex Functional Specified Information.

koth wrote: »

do I contain CFSI?

Yes.

koth wrote: »

and if yes, where did it come from?

Scientifically speaking ... we don't know ....

... now, if you want my considered opinion ...

Delirium

J C wrote: »

It's Complex Functional Specified Information.

and a potato is a potato:rolleyes:

I already knew what the anagram stood for, but you still haven't enlightened me as to what it is.

Yes.

Scientifically speaking ... we don't know ....

... now, if you want my opinion ...

hold on. If you don't know where CFSI came from, how can you argue that creationism is the only game in town? Might as well state that because man and woman exist, creationism is correct.

J C

koth wrote: »

and a potato is a potato:rolleyes:

Exactly!!!:)

koth wrote: »

I already knew what the anagram stood for, but you still haven't enlightened me as to what it is.

It's self-explanitory!!!

koth wrote: »

hold on. If you don't know where CFSI came from, how can you argue that creationism is the only game in town? Might as well state that because man and woman exist, creationism is correct.

Creation Science is the only game in town ... for people who really think about it.

... but there is an effective infinity of wrong ideas ... for those who 'go with the flow'!!!!:)

J C

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Stating what the letters
CFSI stands for isn't a definition J C.

It is adequate when the words are self-explanitory for everyone over five years old!!!:):D:eek:

Delirium

J C wrote: »

Exactly!!!:)

If you think that is a satisfactory way to define a potato when someone asks what a potato is, then it explains why you have problems with science.

FYI here's a definition of a potato: A starchy plant tuber that is one of the most important food crops, cooked and eaten as a vegetable.

See? a person who didn't know what a potato was now has a better understanding of the properties of a potato.

It's self-explanitory!!!

It really isn't, as I've to ask a third time for a definition.

Creation Science is the only game in town ... for people who really think about it.

... but there is an effective infinity of wrong ideas ... for those who 'go with the flow'!!!!:)

Yeah, silly me for accepting scientific evidence in preference to Christian parables. Whatever was I thinking?:rolleyes: