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"

Options
1…183184186188189…334

Comments

  • Options
    #5552
    Mr. Boo
    Registered Users Posts: 347 ✭✭Mr. Boo


    J C wrote: »
    I have asked where exactly the summary statements are grounded in the body of the paper ... and so far ... silence!!!

    The 'summary points', or conclusions as academics call them, summarise the work. They give a brief summaryof what has gone before.

    As we obviously have to go back to basics in order to move forward:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_journal


  • Options
    #5553
    IrishKnight
    Registered Users Posts: 922 ✭✭✭IrishKnight


    2007-01-15-science-vs-faith.png

    Good to see that this topic is still going strong, and I use the word good quite wrongly!

    By the by J C, did you ever get a chance to answer my question? You know, the one asking which version of the creation story you follow...


  • Options
    #5554
    Genghiz Cohen
    Registered Users Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    J C wrote: »
    I have asked where exactly the summary statements are grounded in the body of the paper ... and so far ... silence!!!

    So you don't know?
    Because if you did read the paper you probably should know.
    So you lied about reading it?


  • Options
    #5555
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Genghiz Cohen wrote: »
    So you don't know?
    Because if you did read the paper you probably should know.
    So you lied about reading it?

    The commandment about bearing false witness only applies to us, not to JC. He got a dispensation.


  • Options
    #5556
    Genghiz Cohen
    Registered Users Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    Monty Burnz wrote: »
    The commandment about bearing false witness only applies to us, not to JC. He got a dispensation.

    Even so, no true saved Christian would lie though, would they?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5557
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Genghiz Cohen wrote: »
    Even so, no true saved Christian would lie though, would they?
    For the greater glory of the cosmic duck god? I'm sure they could justify that to themselves. And sure they'll be forgiven anyway, won't they? Not like those other sinners...


  • Options
    #5558
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    IrishKnight wrote: »
    2007-01-15-science-vs-faith.png
    Excellent flow charts for Creation Science ... and Evolutionist Faith allright!!!:)


  • Options
    #5559
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Monty Burnz wrote: »
    The commandment about bearing false witness only applies to us, not to JC. He got a dispensation.
    It also applies to me ... but I don't break it.:)


  • Options
    #5560
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Another lie, J C. You lie all the time. You still haven't read that paper, have you? And you're never going to tell us why you think it's flawed besides asserting that it just is.

    You'll just keep claiming that cfsi is proof of god, ignoring all the evidence even one little paper found that shows it to be complete rubbish, peddled by a clueless hack.

    You're so scared of facing the inadequacies of your own claims you'll ignore anything that casts doubt on them. That's so sad.


  • Options
    #5561
    IrishKnight
    Registered Users Posts: 922 ✭✭✭IrishKnight


    J C wrote: »
    Excellent flow charts for Creation Science ... and Evolutionist Faith allright!!!:)

    Good to see you are still ignoring my question.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5562
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    IrishKnight wrote: »
    By the by J C, did you ever get a chance to answer my question? You know, the one asking which version of the creation story you follow...
    Theologically speaking 6 Day Creation.

    Scientifically speaking ID plus Creation Science.


  • Options
    #5563
    IrishKnight
    Registered Users Posts: 922 ✭✭✭IrishKnight


    J C wrote: »
    Theologically speaking 6 Day Creation.

    And which 6 day creation are we talking about here?


  • Options
    #5564
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    IrishKnight wrote: »
    And which 6 day creation are we talking about here?
    Days 1 to 6.


  • Options
    #5565
    IrishKnight
    Registered Users Posts: 922 ✭✭✭IrishKnight


    J C wrote: »
    Days 1 to 6.

    As in are we talking about the Adam and Eve 6 day creation?


  • Options
    #5566
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    J C wrote: »
    Theologically speaking 6 Day Creation.

    Scientifically speaking ID plus Creation Science.

    Can ID and creation science explain the type of fish that Jonah lived in for some days, and the exact mechanism of his survival inside the fish? What species of fish was it exactly, would you speculate? Presumably something bigger than a trout or a salmon I'm sure you will agree.

    Unless of course the Bible is not literally true, which, I realise, is preposterous...


  • Options
    #5567
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Monty Burnz wrote: »
    Can ID and creation science explain the type of fish that Jonah lived in for some days, and the exact mechanism of his survival inside the fish? What species of fish was it exactly, would you speculate? Presumably something bigger than a trout or a salmon I'm sure you will agree.

    This guy maybe?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leedsichthys


  • Options
    #5568
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Scarily bringing the thread back towards the original topic, got a chance to get a peek at the book at Skeptics in the Pub on Saturday (which everyone should come to next month).
    There was a book swap and someone brought in for a laugh.

    And though I can't remember any outstandingly hilarious quotes, I can say with confidence that the writing style is that of a barely literate internet troll.
    (though no random ellipses in the middle of sentances.)


  • Options
    #5569
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,779 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    Excellent flow charts for Creation Science ... and Evolutionist Faith allright!!!:)

    your unwillingness to discuss the paper puts creationism in the faith category;)

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



  • Options
    #5570
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Apparently saying you reject something without examining it IS discussion, and is perfectly ok in creation science.

    Their "peer review" process must be hilarious.


  • Options
    #5571
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Galvasean wrote: »
    This guy maybe?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leedsichthys
    Did they find fossilized living quarters inside it, I wonder? An organic submarine, of sorts?

    A great bit of design there.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5572
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    And how did Jonah avoid the digestive juices and the muscular spasms that force food through the digestive tract? And if there were no digestive juices to take him apart amino acid by amino acid, how come the fish/whale/whatever didn't starve? Did it live on whatever Jonah excreted? Because that just leads to further questions about how Jonah never got pooped out. Not to mention how they both avoided picking up bacterial infections from each other. I'm pretty sure E. coli was around back then, too, not to mention a host of other species that had no antibiotics to treat them back then.

    And if it was a fish what the hell was it doing with all that air in its belly? did Jonah actually live in one of the ballast bladders? Did he have to move very slowly and keep low so as not to unbalance the fish? And how did the fish get new air for Jonah? Gills only work in water, and I doubt they could produce enough oxygen for a fish AND a warm-blooded mammal parasite. And how come Jonah didn't get the bends or nitrogen poisoning whenever the fish/whale/whatever went deeper or shallower in the sea?

    So many questions. How do creationists find enough time to avoid them all..?


  • Options
    #5573
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,416 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    King Mob wrote: »
    the writing style is that of a barely literate internet troll.
    The book is comical -- he didn't even spell-check it before blowing, I suppose it must have been ten grand, in getting it printed in a vanity publishing house.


  • Options
    #5574
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    King Mob wrote: »
    Scarily bringing the thread back towards the original topic, got a chance to get a peek at the book at Skeptics in the Pub on Saturday (which everyone should come to next month).
    There was a book swap and someone brought in for a laugh.
    robindch wrote: »
    The book is comical -- he didn't even spell-check it before blowing, I suppose it must have been ten grand, in getting it printed in a vanity publishing house.
    ... skeptics taking peeks at the book ... and setting up a book club to share it ... amazing!!!

    ... and I understand Robin, that you got John May's autograph ... for your 'granny' ... but your secret (and barely contained) admiration for the great John J May is safe with me.;);)

    ... the excitement of it all ... is really too much!!!:)

    ... sometimes when we touch ... the honesty's too much ...:D


  • Options
    #5575
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    So... Are you going to debunk any of that paper that shows Dembski's cfsi to be utter rubbish?


  • Options
    #5576
    IrishKnight
    Registered Users Posts: 922 ✭✭✭IrishKnight


    Also in the event you missed it, just wondering which 6 Day creation we are talking about, as in are we talking about the Adam and Eve 6 day creation or some other one?


  • Options
    #5577
    liamw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,780 ✭✭✭liamw


    IrishKnight wrote: »
    Also in the event you missed it, just wondering which 6 Day creation we are talking about, as in are we talking about the Adam and Eve 6 day creation or some other one?

    What other one is there?


  • Options
    #5578
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Sarky wrote: »
    So... Are you going to debunk any of that paper that shows Dembski's cfsi to be utter rubbish?
    I've done it here -
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74257371&postcount=5486


  • Options
    #5579
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,779 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    I've done it here -
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74257371&postcount=5486

    No you haven't and you know this. 5 days and you still refuse to discuss the paper.

    I'm thinking we'll break 7 days and you'll still be ignoring it.

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



  • Options
    #5580
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    koth wrote: »
    No you haven't and you know this. 5 days and you still refuse to discuss the paper.

    I'm thinking we'll break 7 days and you'll still be ignoring it.
    ... on the seventh day I'll be resting!!!!:)

    ... so you'd better get your response in quickly!!!:D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5581
    liamw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,780 ✭✭✭liamw


    You know J.C. your actually quite a funny character (provided I'm not engaging in debate with you). Any chance you'll post a pic of yourself proudly holding May's book?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement