|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why Creationists' Willful Ignorance? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
marc9000 writes:
Do you really think that the answer should be 'no'? That’s what education is — to learn things that may be false? Ah yes - you are a devout believer.There can be no doubt in what you learn else you have nothing. Meanwhile, back at the lab:"Eureka! I have successfully over-turned an established scientific theory !!" *accepts Nobel Peace Prize*
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined:
|
IamJoseph writes:
Please post in your native language and then we can use GoogleTranslate to get a better translation.
Correct. And facts are that which is manifest, observable, repeatable. Read, not subject to eons of years: the difference between Genesis and Darwin's evolution premises. Only one of the latter can be classified as FACT, not subject to unprovable time spans. Its not a fact to say your proof is on another galaxy under a red rock?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
It is your responsibility to communicate successfully. I was just testing your comprehension levels, actually.You are unable to do that using English. Please post in your native language.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined:
|
Pressie writes:
To claim that our mobile phones could reproduce is beyond crazy.
IamJoeseph writes:
Listen to yourself. A programme on a mobile certainly won’t let the mobiles to reproduce. Companies producing mobiles would love to hear how they can ‘programme’ a mobile to reproduce. Mobiles do not reproduce because they are not programmed to do so with a directive program. But IamJoseph will refuse to admit that he writes utter nonsense. I expect him to change the subject rather than confront how messed up his posts are.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
You aren't raising the bar. If I lower the bar how will you ever improve?You don't even have a bar. Please post in your native language.It will benefit us all. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Pressie writes:
He is the kind of debater that will always change the subject rather than support their nonsense claims. Is it worth even to try and have a rational conversation with people like him or her?So I expect the answer is 'no'. Remember: He thinks that his English is perfectly understandable and that he doesn't post word salad.Do you really want to debate with someone that deluded?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined:
|
IamJoseph writes:
Here is what other people think of your English: Otherwise I would gladly say it in a native language of your own, seeing you have issues with english. "Could you care to explain what you meant; preferably without the word salad?""What the fucking hell are you talking about?" "Since we don't need any more nonsense posing as English than we already have..." "I'll take that as a no to my request to make a coherent argument." "I had no idea what topic he was or wasn't on. How does one tell? I was just seeing if I could speak Josephish." "Actually, grammar, as well as terminology, is a big part of the problem in understanding your posts. Your grammar and terminology are often incorrect. Understanding your intended meaning by reading what you've written is often very difficult." "Talking to you is like having a conversation with a random word generator." I suggest you look towards yourself.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined:
|
IamJoseph writes:
Although all of your reply was nonsense, I thought I would focus on this particular nonsense: The shock surprise in asking what is meant by seed today is disgraceful - as if its open to multi-choices. Here are some of the many definitions of seed:
1) A propagative part of a plant, as a tuber or spore. 2) A small amount of material used to start a chemical reaction. 3) A source or beginning. 4) Offspring; progeny. 5) Sperm; semen. 6) A sportsman who has been seeded for a tournament, often at a given rank. 7) A capsule used interstitially in the treatment of cancer. 8) To remove the seeds from fruit. 9) A tiny flaw in glassware. The shock surprise in thinking that seed only has a single meaning is disgraceful.Clearly it is open to 'multi-choices'. Only someone with a flimsy grasp of English would think that 'seed' only had one meaning.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
I looked up this verse that you like to shout. the word seed is placed in such a context there is no alternative meaning in the verse, 'A SEED SHALL FOLLOW ITS OWN KIND';It doesn't seem to exist. There are several results in google - but they are all links to you shouting about seeds. Whatever Bible you think you are quoting from: it appears to only be in your head.Which also explains why it makes so little sense.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
Try again. This time, try to answer the question.
Butterflytyrant writes:
Absolutely... take these two animals - Mosquito, and penguin. Where do they fit into your 'kinds'? Where do mosquitoes fit into your 'kinds'?Are they land kind; are they water kind or are the airborne kind? Edited by Panda, : Simplified
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
Do you need more time to answer the question? 'Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let fowl fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.'That says a transit sea life form can adapt to a bird - the word 'and' indicates that. Where do mosquitoes fit into your 'kinds'?Are they land kind; are they water kind or are the airborne kind? {abe}I think I will just focus on this very simple question. I will continue to ask it until you answer it. To give you a clue: the answer is either 'Land', 'Water' or 'Airborne'. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
Do you need more time to show where you plucked the sentence: "A SEED SHALL FOLLOW ITS OWN KIND" from? Do you require more time to admit the first listing of life form groupings is Genesis?Are you quoting the bible?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
Why are you asking me what kind it is? How about 'winged creatures.'Do you not know? But since 'winged creatures' is not a 'kind' listed in the bible - I would expect that you are wrong. Where do mosquitoes fit into your 'kinds'?Are they land kind; are they water kind or are the airborne kind?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
'Homeosaps' is not a real word. Homeosaps...What language do you think you are speaking?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4031 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
I suggest "Narmer", an Egyptian Pharaoh of both Upper and Lower Egypt who lived in the 32nd century BC. What's the oldest human NAME on record? What do you think is the oldest name on record? Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025