Not only Intelligent Design - but DIVINE DESIGN!

As an author who has yet to master verb agreement, how came you to master the mind of God? Arrogant much? (That last of course is rhetorical. I can see that you do.)Did you know that:

• Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
  John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.
  ​
• Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
  John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.
  ​
• Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy.
  Kennedy's secretary was named Lincoln.
  ​
• Both Presidents were shot in the head.
  ​
• Both Presidents died on a Friday.

Did you know that if one is allowed to pick and choose which bits of data to apply/report one can pretty much make an argument for anything?Did you know that when gold was discovered at Sutter's Mill the report was not proceeded by "To get [sic] a better idea of what I am talking about, firstly let me explain more about specific density of materials that appear in all of the natural world."?Did you know that in trying to understand our world and everything that happens within and below we must first examine those data most immediately at hand and not assume the biggest most foundational source which, may or may not be our Universe if that phrase has any meaning at all, which is doubtful?Did you know that a bet (ב) made of brazing rod wrapped in bendable, machinist's wire
has properties remarkably similar those of a Fisher-Price^™ Little People^®
wrapped in bendable, machinist's wire?^‡ *This is not just a cheap shot at your English grammar; there is also style and composition: economy, precision, rhythm, voice, vocabulary, conformity But I needn't go on.
‡ Noting the pig tail extending from the upper left, this is a clear case of reporting bias information.AbE: Thought "barashith" was the name of the first letter in the Hebrew alphabet. Looked it up and found it was actually the first word in the bible, so I came back to correct my error and change "barashith" to "Bet".AbE2: Yes, I did eventually notice I made an ח (Het) rather than a ב (Bet), but I left it be because I don't really care that much about the quality of the evidence in this argument.Edited by lyx2no, : AbE.Edited by lyx2no, : AbE2.Edited by lyx2no, : Add (Het) and (Bet).

---

"Mom! Ban Ki-moon made a non-binding resolution at me." Mohmoud Ahmadinejad

Then where is my 5 message rating? (Thanks and I have a lot of you to thank for it.)

---

"Mom! Ban Ki-moon made a non-binding resolution at me." Mohmoud Ahmadinejad

I had assumed so at the time but it would be disingenuous of me not to report that as I was out mowing the lawn just now it had occurred to me that I might have been a bit naive. Therefore, I just popped off an e-mail to the director of Hawaii's State Department of Health, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, to see if she could vouch for me. I'll let you know. Can everyone see this black writing? I put this in to add things that I don't want to be intrusive. Like things that ruin jokes. I can see it plainly if I try, but might miss it if I didn't know it was there. Let me know is I should start using a bit more contrast, say teal. Thanks.It was such a toss-up between "Like things that ruin jokes." and "Things like sincerity."; but sincerity got the better of me so I went for jokes. How's that for irony?

---

"Mom! Ban Ki-moon made a non-binding resolution at me." Mohmoud Ahmadinejad

Welcome to EvC, Anita Meyer. The people who are allowed to think what they want haven't chimed in yet. Those who have are constrained in their thinking by facts and such. Your arguments so far have been designed to entice the gullible and deflect the criticism. You need to wield a spud bar for us skeptics and answer the criticism. So far you've introduced nothing to force us into line.That "[N]o credible linguistic scholar can say with any confidence just were language or writing originated from."* does not imply a default position of X. If you are familiar with the book of Ayn Rand, it mentions a motor that gets its motive force from atmospheric static electricity. Guess what. Ain't true. (This is one of those arguments that only work if you're addressing believers; i.e., those people who are allowed to think whatever they want.) Book schmook, I've got video. Everyone in Hollywood is formed from Angelina Jolie.*I'd not know if this is true one way or the other, but my money is on you're wrong.

---

---

P.S. Stop selling your book and start selling your argument.Edited by lyx2no, : (This is one of thoseEdited by lyx2no, : Post script.

---

"Mom! Ban Ki-moon made a non-binding resolution at me." Mohmoud Ahmadinejad

unique: |yoō'nēk| adj. unlike anything else; one of a kind.irrational |i'ra sh ənl| adj. (Mathematics) not expressible as a ratio of two integers, and having an infinite and nonrecurring expansion when expressed as a decimal.√2If you can't even get the little things right

---

---

Being less windyEdited by lyx2no, : Typo.Edited by lyx2no, : No reason given.Edited by lyx2no, : Swapped out my def. for "irrational" with Webster's, and removed a joke no one was going to get.

---

"Mom! Ban Ki-moon made a non-binding resolution at me." Mohmoud Ahmadinejad

So, your god is a liar, is he? I could understand a god who made an O₂ enriched atmosphere right-off-the-bat instead of an O₂ depleted one that would take a hundred million years for the garden to ready for A&Es arrival. But why did it create each, separate radioactive isotope in the proportions that would imply a 4.5 billion year old Earth? There should be twice as much U²³⁸if the Earth were >10kyo. And there should be plenty of Np²³⁷ around , but there is none. Nor anything else with a half-life of less than 100 million years (unless it is being constantly replenished) .By the way, that's what's called a refutation of your bologna. I knew you wouldn't recognize one without it being labeled as such, so I thought I'd help you out. There should be a comma proceeding the "and" in that compound sentence, Ms. Author-my-eye Meyer. Educate that!P.S. How do you explain √2 being irrational if π is unique in that regard? I'd really like to know; because we know it couldn't have been you being wrong. Right? I mean, that would have been somebody here making some sort of strong dent in one of your claims (Admittedly, not a substantial claim). Which, again, refutes the claim that no one has refuted a single one of your claims.Please try to show a little integrity.

---

"Mom! Ban Ki-moon made a non-binding resolution at me." Mohmoud Ahmadinejad

This is one of those statements that you could do more then blab about. Cite where you got this from and show us you're not pulling it out of your butt. How hard would that be? This is one of those statements that demonstrate the you don't really have a clue. As if you were in a Canadian sports bar and walked up to a group of guys wearing Maple Leaf jerseys and announced "Hockey players score points by hitting the puck into the goal." It's that you aren't right. It's that you think your point is worth making. By the way, your English still sucks: "equal to roughly"? What the heck is that? And as you've been told, with citations, it was. How do you come to believe that you know what's going on in the lab than those in the lab? Are your wild guesses handed down from on high? The oldest coal is from 390 million years ago in the Silurian Period. Not impressive.Lituya Bay, Alaska was not created in 1958. There was a tsunnami in 1958 caused by a landslide on one side of the existing bay that eroded the soils all around the bay.Surtsey is an island not a canyon.Lake Peigneur is the result of a man made sink hole, and consequently looks like a sink hole.A rain storm in southern Brazil, 1974, is not an erosional feature.And blah, blah, blah.It should be noted that all of these (save for the rain clouds) are features in unconsolidated sediments. I find that if I take my hose pipe I can drill a hole in my lawn very quickly. Strangely, the same doesn't happen in the driveway. You'd have done better had you'd chosen erosional features that were rapidly crated in consolidated materials. There are several excellent examples that I'll not look up for you, but those wouldn't help you either. High speed erosion in solid rock occurs through plucking. Plucking is easily distinguished from the slow, abrasive erosion as seen in the 99&⁴⁴/₁₀₀% of the world's rock canyons. Why would we do that? It would be totally irrelevant. Oh! You don't know that, do you? We don't know that We don't know that We don't know that Girl, get over yourself. You not knowing something is not equivalent to "we" not knowing something. To me how babies are made is only a "theory". And look up the word "theory" already. This has been answered. You didn't understand the answer, did you? The gist was that it is well know that select methods produce these select errors in select materials so we don't date select materials with select methods. We instead use methods that don't produce errors. Kind of like not using microwave ovens to dry kittens. It produces errors, so we use towels instead.Edited by lyx2no, : Non-substantial.Edited by lyx2no, : Non-substantive. Yeah, better word.

---

"Mom! Ban Ki-moon made a non-binding resolution at me." Mohmoud Ahmadinejad

Check the scale on those microscopic worms of yours. You'll find "The structures found on ALH 84001 are 20-100 nanometres in diameter, similar in size to the theoretical nanobacteria, but smaller than any known cellular life at the time of their discovery." They couldn't have been Earth parasites. But You didn't know that, did you?

---

"Mom! Ban Ki-moon made a non-binding resolution at me." Mohmoud Ahmadinejad