The Ten Laws of Creationism and Intelligent Design

Ah, so you've never, ever worked as a scientist?

I did start a new thread. I await your participation and evidence, if you have any.

Now that you know this is false, please stop lying about it. If the mere fact that lying is wrong doesn't dissuade you, then consider the fact that you're not going to deceive anyone.

We know that you do not love truthfulness; this is not a subject on which you can hope to deceive us. So, not a scientist then. If you had listened to them, you would not now be so hopelessly ignorant.

Whilst I'm normally one to criticise those who question other posters' motives, I'll indulge myself since we're in the 'Free For All' forum.It's tough to take seriously someone who declares their agreement with a parody mocking their position.

quote:

---

The sun does never rise nor set? When people think the sun is setting it is not so. For after having arrived at the end of the day, it makes itself produce two opposite effects, making night to what is below and day to what is on the other side.

​

When they believe it rises in the morning this supposed rising is thus to be accounted for. Having reached the end of the night, it makes itself produce two opposite effects, making day to what is below and night to what is on the other side.

​

Aitareya Brahmana 3.44, Translator : J. S. Speyer (1906). "A remarkable Vedic Theory about Sunrise and Sunset " , Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland. Cambridge University Press. Pages 35-37. ISBN 978-0-521-43878-0.

---

This text was put into writing much llater but apparently was composed by 600 BC.Carl Sagan, in Cosmos, stated that the ancient Hindus were unintentionally displaying humility in the way they expressed doubt and uncertainty among the issues that now can be tested scientifically. The "most sophisticated" scientific concepts and theories came from Asia and "particularly from India".Sagan couldn't have helped but notice that the ancient Indian faiths stood all alone in putting the age of the Universe in the billions of years as opposed to other competing religion's cosmologies either being silent on the world age or placing its beginning in the thousands of years.Interesting to watch and hope for honest, accurate, and informative analysis of the various ancient texts, commentaries, allusions, theories, etc. to be presented for our indulgence and consumption. I'm not so sure we have gotten it to date. There has to be an interest out there. Isn't the generally (or overwhelmingly) Christian Creation Science movement evidence of a certain amount of interest? Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

Uh, excuse me, but I never did any such thing. Why do you feel motivated to lie like that?From Message 46: Did I ever call you a "blithering idiot"? No frakking way! Stop lying about what others say! Because when you have to resort to such lying, you have conceded that you have absolutely no position at all.Look at what you had said: "Birds becoming mammals becoming fishes, with spouts on the tops of their heads, as with mamalian whales..."Do you actually believe that that is what evolution says? Whoever says such absolute nonsense? Except for you?That is blitheringly idiotic nonsense. And anyone who believes that is a blithering idiot. So by indicating that you believe in such blithering nonsense, you are yourself calling yourself a blithering idiot.I'm just pointing out that that is what you are doing to yourself.

I especially like this one: I have seen it used far too many times as those lying hypocritical creationists keep using the same old false claims over and over again, even when they had personally acknowledged those claims to be false. Lies serving their god, the Prince of Lies. Oh yeah, Christian doctrine identifies the Prince of Lies as being Satan. And those creationists carry on happily and zealously serving their god, the Prince of Lies, to their dying day.Edited by dwise1, : very first qs block

They aren't lies, they are "Alternate Truths".

His name was Sir Peter Medawar. Wikipedia has an article about him - Peter Medawar - Wikipedia, and he is mentioned many times in Richard Dawkins's books.

Yes Dwise you called me a blithering idiot... all evolutionists can do is deny denyHeres your own words... "Davidjay, you have already proven that you know nothing about evolution. There is no need for you to prove that you are a blithering idiot as well!""
Message 48 herein)Jesus wins again, honesty wins again !!Edited by Davidjay, : No reason given.

Yes, evolution says that all creatures, came from a branching out via magic mutaions and then an even more magical SELECTION nonrandom God.Birds became mamals etc etc etc etc.In this case, Evolution of Whales thread..... fish became mamalls are started having spouts on the tops of their heads after they figured out it would be easier to swim and breathe that way.
It took zillions of years waiting for the spout to finally mutate up to the tops of their heads according to the insane theory of evolution.

Another stupid Davidjay assertion showing that he does not know what a mammal is, does not know what a bird is, does not even have a clue about what either the fact of evolution entails or the Theory of Evolution says. He is as ignorant of reality as he is of the Bible or Christianity or honesty and also simply not bright enough to stop making posts that make him appear a blithering idiot. Yet he continues posting falsehoods that are really really really really stupid comments like the above.Edited by jar, : are ---> that are

Evolutionists consider explaining your theory rather than continually saying no one understands your theory except you yourselves.You say species differentiated, from signle cells onward, into fish mamals etc etc.So explain, how fish became mamals. How whales evolved. How whales got their spout holes in the right position as breathing mammals..You have a lot of explaining to do. Begin now !Edited by Davidjay, : No reason given.

Do your own homework for a change:Evolution 101 - Understanding Evolution