"The Origin of Specious Nonsense"

Delirium

J C wrote: »

Just imagine a rugby match between the Evolutionsists and the Creationists with 15 Evolutionists out on the pitch playing against one Creationist ... and the Creationist is running solo runs around the pitch, scoring drop goals and tries at will ... and eventually the referee (who is also an Evolutionst) takes the ball and runs for the Creationst line ... to try and score for the Evolutionists when they are clearly unable to do so themselves ... and he still slips and falls on his face ... and loses the ball to ... to probably the best Creation Scientist Creationist in the World.

... you have just imagined what has actually been happening on this thread.:)

If we were to use the rugby match analogy correctly. The evolutionist team are on the pitch wondering when the creationist is going to show up, only for someone to point out that he hasn't figured out how to get off the bus he arrived on :P:pac:

Doctor Jimbob

After that last post, I'm even more convinced this is just trolling on a massive scale.

Sarky

koth wrote: »

If we were to use the rugby match analogy correctly. The evolutionist team are on the pitch wondering when the creationist is going to show up, only for someone to point out that he hasn't figured out how to get off the bus he arrived on :P:pac:

And when he finally gets onto the pitch, everyone is trying not to laugh at the badminton racket in his hand.

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by J C
Natural Selection of what?

Doctor Jimbob

I note that you haven't answered my question ... which goes to the heart of the issue.

I have already said that Creation Scientists accept that Natural Selection occurs ... the key question is where the CFSI in genetic information came from (for Natural Selection to work on).

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

Natural Selection of what?

Jesus Christ.

I decline to continue this charade with you. When you are mature enough to have a real debate, let me know - until then - you're being placed on ignore.

J C

Sarky wrote: »

And when he finally gets onto the pitch, everyone is trying not to laugh at the badminton racket in his hand.

Yes, Robin ... as a Mod/referee should have had a whistle in his hand ... and if what you say is true, that he had a badminton racket in his hand, he obviously didn't even know what game he was refereeing ... or even that, as a referee, he shouldn't try to score for one of the teams!!!:):eek:

J C

dlofnep wrote: »

Jesus Christ.

Are you calling on Jesus Christ to Save you ... or to judge you? ... if you want Him to Save you you need to believe on Him.

dlofnep wrote: »

I decline to continue this charade with you. When you are mature enough to have a real debate, let me know - until then - you're being placed on ignore.

Please answer my question ... which goes to the heart of the issue.

J C

robindch wrote: »

Yes, unfortunately it is. However I was talking about (diploma-mill-doctor) Ken Ham's desperately unfunny "After Eden" cartoon series for dim-witted creationists which is at

http://www.answersingenesis.org/aftereden/

...and which is down. As I said, no loss to civilization.

After Eden is also working fine
http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/image/cartoons/after-eden

... it must be a 'mutation' on your hard drive that's causing your problem, Robin.

BTW I'd leave the badminton racket at home, next time you go to a Old Wesley game, Robin!!!:):D

... not good for your 'street cred'.:eek:

Doctor Jimbob

J C wrote: »

I note that you haven't answered my question ... which goes to the heart of the issue.

I have already said that Creation Scientists accept that Natural Selection occurs ... the key question is where the CFSI in genetic information came from (for Natural Selection to work on).

And I note that you haven't answered mine from a few pages ago. You know, when I asked you to define CFSI? That's the key questin here.

robindch

J C wrote: »

After Eden is also working fine
http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/image/cartoons/after-eden

Thanks for the link.

I'll let Google know that the first link they return is broken, if you tell (diploma-mill-doctor-doctor) Ham that his site's search facility can't find After Eden on his site.

Doctor Jimbob

J C wrote: »

After Eden is also working fine
http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/image/cartoons/after-eden

... it must be a 'mutation' on your hard drive that's causing your problem, Robin.

BTW I'd leave the badminton racket at home, next time you go to a Old Wesley game, Robin!!!:):D

... not good for your 'street cred'.:eek:

Perfect example of an advantageous mutation right there

Sarky

So, J C, I know you're busy with snide and terribly thought out insults to detract attention away from the admittedly rather deserved mockery you're undergoing, and I'm sure you haven't forgotten the dozen or more times I've asked this previously, but...

Do you have any evidence to suggest cfsi isn't a pile of horsesh*t? Seeing as you've never managed to post any (well, none that wasn't already shown to be false over a decade ago anyway), and 90% or more of what I charitably refer to as "your arguments" rely on cfsi not being crap, It is kind of important for you to come up with something.

Or you could keep trying to hide your ignorance and never just come clean and admit you don't know what you're talking about. Really, we're fine with either. One leads to an actual real life grown up debate, the other leads to your conscience getting even filthier. Or hey, here's an idea: You could actually come clean and admit you don't know what you're talking about!

But seriously, some evidence or an admission you don't have any. Any time now would be nice.

Galvasean

robindch wrote: »

Yes, unfortunately it is. However I was talking about (diploma-mill-doctor) Ken Ham's desperately unfunny "After Eden" cartoon series for dim-witted creationists which is at

http://www.answersingenesis.org/aftereden/

...and which is down. As I said, no loss to civilization.

I found this one a tad amusing...

sephir0th

Sarky

Oh my, those are awful.

What is it with Christianity and not being able to do funny?

sephir0th

Poe's Law in action right there!

Sarky

The whole creationist movement does seem to be designed to demonstrate the incredible stupidity of the whole creationist movement. Like some kind of anti-anthropic principle.

J C

Sarky wrote: »

The whole creationist movement does seem to be designed to demonstrate the incredible stupidity of the whole creationist movement. Like some kind of anti-anthropic principle.

Did anybody ever tell you that you are very 'sarky' ... Sarky?:)

Sarky

Yes. You. You're repeating yourself. We KNOW you can do that. What you're SUPPOSED to be doing is providing a shred of evidence for you claims. They'd overturn modern science if they were even a little bit valid. Why haven't you got anything? Are you not actually a scientist? If you ARE a scientist, are you just a really bad one?

sephir0th

But JC do you actually believe that the scenario depicted in the comic could have happened?

sponsoredwalk

The only reason I'm not quoting any posts is because to convey the
sheer hypocrisy in this thread would require the longest post in boards.ie
history & not to quote to it's full effect is an awful shame - do it right or
don't do it at all (I tried but gave up the thing was so big - and that was
just illustrating how the latest posts are so full of nonsense when
compared to the actual words JC posted, nothing going back further
than that [of which there's tons]).
It's no small surprise that those screaming the loudest for evidence while
simultaneously flaunting scientific credentials left right & center are the
ones who totally ignore every hint of evidence once given a chance -
I equate it to a wife beater who beats his wife for doing what he told her
to do after months of beating her for not doing it, JC wouldn't have
enough exclamation marks to accompany the post he really should be
posting right now.
The simple fact is that this thread was totally derailed by that ridiculous
paper, made totally - that's why I stopped reading this thread -
uninteresting (but of course that's a statement of pure logic, not something
you can actually prove - something the majority of JC's posts are
exemplary of [though you'd never guess it if you submitted to the scientific authority in this
thread & assumed, by virtue of authority, that all he wrote was nonsense] - but I mean
after so long, such painstaking effort, put into getting JC to respond &
then to just totally ignore every single word he writes once he finally
does it - I mean my wife beater analogy really doesn't do it justice...
I'm surprised no one else noticed it immediately, & even more surprised
only one person was honest enough to admit it after it being pointed
out...
JC if you have any self respect you really shouldn't entertain that paper
any longer, you really should never have responded in the first place...

The Mad Hatter

As if this thread ever made interesting reading.

Wibbs

robindch wrote: »

Yes, unfortunately it is. However I was talking about (diploma-mill-doctor) Ken Ham's desperately unfunny "After Eden" cartoon series for dim-witted creationists which is at

http://www.answersingenesis.org/aftereden/

...and which is down. As I said, no loss to civilization.

Good god, how can people be that cretinous? I mean really? I'm no hardline atheist, I figure whatever floats your boat and if having some spiritual element to your life does the floating, I say good luck to you. However, when you see stuff like that on various mostly US christian sites you do have to wonder is there some retardation compound in the water. It's really troubling to see this stuff aimed at kids, aimed to set their brains into a "them V us" mindset from a very early age.

robindch

Wibbs wrote: »

Good god, how can people be that cretinous? I mean really? [...] you do have to wonder is there some retardation compound in the water. It's really troubling to see this stuff aimed at kids, aimed to set their brains into a "them V us" mindset from a very early age.

When parents abandon their responsibilities to disgraceful shits like (diploma-mill-doctor-doctor) Ken Ham, it's little wonder you end up with cretins.

Here's the diploma-mill-doctor-doctor lecturing a roomful of young kids:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiV39cR2jgc

The man ought to be ashamed of himself.

Galvasean

I find his (biblically influenced) description of a sauropod appalling. It doesn't even mention it's unique selling point.

J C

robindch wrote: »

When parents abandon their responsibilities to disgraceful shits like (diploma-mill-doctor-doctor) Ken Ham, it's little wonder you end up with cretins.

Here's the diploma-mill-doctor-doctor lecturing a roomful of young kids:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiV39cR2jgc

The man ought to be ashamed of himself.

Robin, you really do need to start respecting diversity of opinion and faith.

I respect your faith in Evolution ... and I respect your right to publicly express it and promote it ...
... I would just ask that you respect the right of people of other faiths to do the same ... without being called 'cretins' and other prejudicial names.
By all means, point out any claims made by Ken, with which you disagree ... but leave the unfounded Ad Hominem remarks at home.

Ken Ham is quite entitled to promote the basic facts of Genesis ... just like 'M2M' Evolutionists are also quite entitled to promote their faith in Materialism ... and it's 'origins stories' (Abiogenesis and M2M Evolution).

It's what used to be called religious freedom and the right to free-speech ... and having your children taught your faith.:)

18AD

But you don't respect his freedom to criticise others and insult others, to judge a condemn as he pleases? What has the world come to.

J C

18AD wrote: »

But you don't respect his freedom to criticise others and insult others, to judge a condemn as he pleases? What has the world come to.

I totally respect his right to criticise and judge as he pleases.

... but calling people with whom you disagree prejudicial names gets us all nowhere.

18AD

I don't mean to speak on behalf of anyone here, but I will. I don't think it was a 'pre'-judicial remark.

Where exactly are we going?

Sarky

It's hardly prejudiced. There's a very good reason why he's referred to as (diploma-mill doctor) Ken Ham.

It's because he's a charlatan. He's being called all this AFTER it arose that his qualifications have the weight of a fart when it comes to what he's trying to preach.

Honestly J C, you can't get all upset about people laughing at you when you do or say stupid things. That in itself is a stupid thing, and will only lead to more laughter directed towards you. But you can break this vicious circle of shame. Can you guess how?