"The Origin of Specious Nonsense"

J C

FionnMatthew wrote: »

The only person guilty of misogyny is John J. May, for being so cynical and downright crude as to try to raise the profile of his stupid circus act by paying women to wear very little at it.

In effect, his poster said, "come along, there'll be a man in a monkey suit and two pairs of tits there."

I don't see anything misogynistic about pointing it out ironically by acknowledging that these women effectively were, for the purposes of the show, "pairs of tits."

The poster advertised 'Gorillas and Girls' ... which was a pun on the Evolutionist belief that Man and Gorilla are equivalent animals ... something that John May is challenging.

... and these women, going along to a 'Gorillas and Girls' party/launch, have the right to not be leered at or described by the number or size of their breasts.

... speaking man to man ... this is outrageous ... and you are completely out of order here.

The two women wore T-shirts and Jeans. It is standard PR and marketing practice to have slogans on T-shirts ... and, because of this, you appear to think that it is acceptable to crudely describe these two modestly dressed women as 'four tits'?

Of course Evolutionists believe that we are just animals ... like any other animal ... so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that you defend this crude animalistic description of these women.

... it's a typical example of the increasing crudeness and coarseness that happens in a society when Evolutionism takes hold.

... the irony is that Materialistic Evolution is a scientific nonesense ... and this fact was established beyond doubt at the Pajaro Dunes Conference nearly twenty years ago

Bucklesman

Can't believe this thread is still going. JC, you may be crazy, but at least you're tenacious.

Ghost Buster

JC sir.
You keep asking for people to present you with evidence of evolution.
If you are going to either:
Swat evidence away with passages from a much edited, much translated iron age text written by a nomadic desert tribe
or
Dismiss an entire planet full of evidence ranging from carbon dating to fossil records to geology as an elaborate hoax and conspiracy theory.

Then what will you accept as evidence?

J C

King Mob wrote: »

I've repeated it three times now, with increasing clarity.
So you are either not reading people's posts, favouring instead to parrot off arguments you're copy pastaing from some inane website. Or you're just too dense to actually understand a very simple question.

Either way it shows people the level of debate you anti science cranks engage in.

So here it is again: Why did science choose Darwinian Evolution to promote rather than any other non-theistic theories?

It was the 'best' of a bad lot!!!

sponsoredwalk

J C wrote: »

... it's a typical example of the increasing crudeness and coarseness that happens in a society when Evolutionism takes hold.

... the irony is that Materialistic Evolution is a scientific nonesense ... and this fact was established beyond doubt at the Pajaro Dunes Conference

You still haven't a clue what you're talking about. How do you think
evolution is scientific nonsense when there are so many examples of
materialistic evolution in this very thread? I still don't understand how you
can say this after admitting you believed evolution explains life's
diversity.

J C wrote: »

The truth will set you free ... even if it may be painful at first.

:rolleyes:

Show us how Michael Behe & Jonathan Wells proved the existence of
intelligent design @ Pajaro :cool:

MagicMarker

Going by JC's logic, the DNA similarities among the cousins on my mother's side is evidence for a divine creator and not evidence for a common grandparent.

King Mob

J C wrote: »

It was the 'best' of a bad lot!!!

Whoa... a detailed and nuanced reply that took you all of a day to come up with?
Is it hard to form an idea not spoon-feed to you by your creationist cranks?

So what exactly made Darwinian evolution the "best of a bad lot"?

Do you include space alien ID in this bad lot?
If so, why? Seems it's exactly the same as the bull**** you believe just with a different man in the sky.
What differentiates it form your delusions?

J C

Dougla2 wrote: »

how do you know that?, why is it that god created the earth and aliens didn't , maybe "nobody" did it but something? , what's your evidence that a "god " did it the bible does not count as evidence.

... Like I said, I know that 'Aliens' exist ... but they are incapable of creating life.

... I you don't believe me, then, for the sake of argument, let's say that 'Aliens' did create life on Earth ... then the question arises as to WHO Created the 'Aliens' ... or the 'creator' of the 'Aliens' ... and we end up concluding that an ultimate cause was responsible for the initial Creation ... and that 'ultimate cause' would be transcendant and omnipotent i.e. God.

... you just can't get away for the 'Big Fellow' ... and all logic ultimately ends up with Him.

King Mob

J C wrote: »

... Like I said, I know that 'Aliens' exist ... but they are incapable of creating life.

How do you know this?

I may as well make the claim God can't create life.

Also LOL at the fact you're totally oblivious to the irony of your own argument.

Ghost Buster

King Mob wrote: »

How do you know this?

I may as well make the claim God can't create life.

Also LOL at the fact you're totally oblivious to the irony of your own argument.

ET could heal with his (sacred?) heart light and glowing finger thingy AND he rose from the dead. I bet he could create life as well.;)

FionnMatthew

Ghost Buster wrote: »

JC sir.
You keep asking for people to present you with evidence of evolution.
If you are going to either:
Swat evidence away with passages from a much edited, much translated iron age text written by a nomadic desert tribe
or
Dismiss an entire planet full of evidence ranging from carbon dating to fossil records to geology as an elaborate hoax and conspiracy theory.

Then what will you accept as evidence?

I asked JC this question, and he completely prevaricated in answering it, but it was funneled into the other thread when they were split.

His answers as regards it make it very doubtful that he has even a gram of intellectual honesty.

FionnMatthew

The question as it was asked.

FionnMatthew wrote: »

J C wrote:

fionnmatthew wrote:

J C wrote:

fionnmatthew wrote:

J C wrote:

Either it is wrong or it is right ... if it is wrong lets all decently join the A & A ... or some other faith that has a modicum of truth to it

What would it take to convince you it was wrong? The smoking gun?

... as far as I see all of the evidence and logic stacks up in favour of the Genesis account!!!

You didn't answer the question. Answer the question.

I did ... just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean that I didn't answer your question.

You did not answer the question. You prevaricated. You avoided answering the question.

An answer to my question would look like,

"The only thing that would convince me Genesis was false is God telling me it is false"

or

"I would be convinced Genesis was wrong if we found incontrovertible fossil evidence of transitional species."

or even

"It is impossible for there ever to be any evidence that would convince me that Genesis is wrong."

As in, an answer that says what sort of evidence, if any, would convince you Genesis was wrong. I don't have to like it, but it does have to be an actual answer to the question I asked, which was, just to make it really really clear:

FIONNMATTHEW wrote:

WHAT SORT OF EVIDENCE WOULD CONVINCE YOU THE ACCOUNT IN GENESIS IS FALSE?

Now please answer the question, and stop being a git.

sponsoredwalk

I can't believe JC would use Behe's old Flagellum argument as a justification
for intelligent design! Here is the controversey & subsequent resolution
in favour of evolutionary pathways. Surely you must have known this was
an old & discredited argument on behalf of ID? You're obviously not even a
lacky of the ID movement, merely someone with very little education in
anything ignoring evidence.

MagicMarker

FionnMatthew wrote: »

His answers as regards it make it very doubtful that he has even a gram of intellectual honesty.

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

You're obviously not even a
lacky of the ID movement, merely someone with very little education in
anything ignoring evidence.

You guys are only figuring this out now? :eek:

J C

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Eh, where did I have a problem with the time of your post JC? I think
you're confusing me with the Mad Hatter in your quest to try to insult
atheists. Is an apology from you worth anything from you? I doubt it
seeing as you're so fond of posting one thing only to post later on saying
the exact opposite...

I have no desire to insult anybody ... I just proclaim the truth ... to set you free.

You certainly didn't correct TMH time mix-up in this post!!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68063195&postcount=581

Ghost Buster

J C wrote: »

I have no desire to insult anybody ... I just proclaim the truth ... to set you free.

You certainly didn't correct TMH time mix-up in this post!!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68063195&postcount=581

Ghost Buster wrote: »

JC sir.
You keep asking for people to present you with evidence of evolution.
If you are going to either:
Swat evidence away with passages from a much edited, much translated iron age text written by a nomadic desert tribe
or
Dismiss an entire planet full of evidence ranging from carbon dating to fossil records to geology as an elaborate hoax and conspiracy theory.

Then what will you accept as evidence?

Please answer my question JC.
Thanks

J C

Ghost Buster wrote: »

JC sir.
You keep asking for people to present you with evidence of evolution.
If you are going to either:
Swat evidence away with passages from a much edited, much translated iron age text written by a nomadic desert tribe
or
Dismiss an entire planet full of evidence ranging from carbon dating to fossil records to geology as an elaborate hoax and conspiracy theory.

Then what will you accept as evidence?

The evidence must stand up to scrutiny ... and 'handwaving' simply won't 'pass muster'!!

MagicMarker

J C wrote: »

The evidence must stand up to scrutiny ... and 'handwaving' simply won't 'pass muster'!!

You still didn't answer the question.

Ghost Buster

J C wrote: »

The evidence must stand up to scrutiny ... and 'handwaving' simply won't 'pass muster'!!

Ghost Buster wrote: »

JC sir.
You keep asking for people to present you with evidence of evolution.
If you are going to either:
Swat evidence away with passages from a much edited, much translated iron age text written by a nomadic desert tribe
or
Dismiss an entire planet full of evidence ranging from carbon dating to fossil records to geology as an elaborate hoax and conspiracy theory.

Then what will you accept as evidence?

No. That is not an answer.
The evidence has stood up to scrutiny and only you and your ilk perceive hand waving.
Again i ask if you will either bible bash the evidence or proclaim elaborate conspiracy and / or hoax about the evidence WHAT WILL YOU ACCEPT ?

J C

King Mob wrote: »

How do you know this?

I may as well make the claim God can't create life.

Also LOL at the fact you're totally oblivious to the irony of your own argument.

I'm sorry, but you are going to have to trust me on this ... and I have presented an alternative argument ... for those who believe that 'Aliens' are capable of Creation ...
... here :-

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68092710&postcount=729

sponsoredwalk

J C wrote: »

I have no desire to insult anybody ... I just proclaim the truth ... to set you free.

You certainly didn't correct TMH time mix-up in this post!!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68063195&postcount=581

What is your problem? I posted two videos on the proofs of evolution, &
after you watched them you admitted evolution explained the diversity of
life btw, but I later edited my post to add the third video that is in that
thread. That makes 30 minutes of video, I'm sure you'll be able to figure
that out with the maths you were talking about earlier :rolleyes:
You responded with the post of yours that admitted evolution explained
the diversity of life about 20 minutes after I posted.
How could you watch 30 minutes of videos on evolution in 20 minutes?
Unless the whole world except for you sped up to near the speed of
light there is no way this could have happened JC.
TMH responded saying that you couldn't have watched all 3 videos in 20
minutes but I replied telling TMH that you must have opened the page
when I only had 2, not 3, videos in my post & it's understandable that
you would reply to the two you watched. Did you watch the third?

J C wrote: »

The truth will set you free ... even if it may be painful at first.

J C wrote: »

I have no desire to insult anybody ... I just proclaim the truth ... to set you free.

The only bit of truth you've spoken in this thread is the following:

J C wrote: »

Evolution may explain the 'survival of the fittest' (via NS/SS of existing genetic information)

which completely invalidates everything else you've written.
It just shows you to be a confused & lying hypocrite.

Dougla2

J C wrote: »

... Like I said, I know that 'Aliens' exist ... but they are incapable of creating life.

... I you don't believe me, then, for the sake of argument, let's say that 'Aliens' did create life on Earth ... then the question arises as to WHO Created the 'Aliens' ... or the 'creator' of the 'Aliens' ... and we end up concluding that an ultimate cause was responsible for the initial Creation ... and that 'ultimate cause' would be transcendant and omnipotent i.e. God.

... you just can't get away for the 'Big Fellow' ... and all logic ultimately ends up with Him.

WHO CREATED GOD ? ??? once again epicurus



and man is capable to create life now Watch this

King Mob

J C wrote: »

I'm sorry, but you are going to have to trust me on this

Unfortunately you're not exactly the most trustworthy, what with all the intellectual dishonesty and all.

Then you'll have to trust me that God cannot create life either.

J C wrote: »

... and I have presented an alternative argument ... for those who believe that 'Aliens' are capable of Creation ...
... here :-

Which can equally apply to the bull**** you swallow.
But you don't seem to notice the hypocrisy in your argument....

And any chance you're going to answer my other question?
Or the other ones you've been asked?

Or does the "truth" you're pushing involve ignoring tough questions?

J C

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Show us how Michael Behe & Jonathan Wells proved the existence of
intelligent design @ Pajaro :cool:

Please look at the video that I linked to here

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68091342&postcount=722

Ghost Buster

J C wrote: »

Please look at the video that I linked to

And please answer my question.
If you will use either a supernatural beings book (edited, translated from ancient Greek, Roman, Welsh, Klingon etc etc) or claims of hoax / conspiracy to ignore evidence what sort of evidence will you accept?

Please answer.:o

J C

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

What is your problem? I posted two videos on the proofs of evolution, &
after you watched them you admitted evolution explained the diversity of
life btw, but I later edited my post to add the third video that is in that
thread. That makes 30 minutes of video, I'm sure you'll be able to figure
that out with the maths you were talking about earlier :rolleyes:
You responded with the post of yours that admitted evolution explained
the diversity of life about 20 minutes after I posted.
How could you watch 30 minutes of videos on evolution in 20 minutes?
Unless the whole world except for you sped up to near the speed of
light there is no way this could have happened JC.
TMH responded saying that you couldn't have watched all 3 videos in 20
minutes but I replied telling TMH that you must have opened the page
when I only had 2, not 3, videos in my post & it's understandable that
you would reply to the two you watched. Did you watch the third?

I watched the two videos that you posted at about 11 am ... and my post was responding to these two videos.

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

The only bit of truth you've spoken in this thread is the following:

Originally Posted by J C
Evolution may explain the 'survival of the fittest' (via NS/SS of existing genetic information) ...... but it doesn't explain the 'arrival of the fittest' i.e. the origin of the specified functional complex information present in living systems.


... which completely invalidates everything else you've written.

Here is the Post you have referred to:-
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68063053&postcount=578

How does this invalidate anything I have written?

sponsoredwalk

J C wrote: »

Please look at the video that I linked to here

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68091342&postcount=722

Yes JC, I don't know about you but I do watch/check the videos and links
people give when making a point. Did you watch that video?
How do you think I was able to be so specific when I mentioned the
bacterial flagella? How do you think I was able to provide a link, which you
obviously didn't check, that invalidated the ID explanation of the flagella.
I'll make it simple, ID said the flagella was too complex so god did it,
scientists found an explanation for the flagella in terms of evolutionary
pathways & found multiple pieces of evidence to support the evolutionary
explanation.

This is the strangest thing you've done, offer a video that gives no
evidence as evidence and refer to it as evidence
I was even able to give you a serious explanation that scientists found
over many years, just read the writing in the link I gave.
TO READ ME CLICK ME

I asked you a specific question, how did Michael Behe & Jonathan Wells
et al give unquestionable evidence for ID at the Pajaro converence?
The evidence given was about the flagella? Is that what you're saying?
If that is the case then their evidence has been scientifically proven to
be false & ridiculous. If the video you gave is the sole evidence then
you've just shown ID to be a joke & every point you make in favour of ID
is incorrect. I feel sorry for you JC, to fall for such ridiculous arguments
on behalf of John May, Michael Behe, Jonathan Wells, seriously

J C

Ghost Buster wrote: »

No. That is not an answer.
The evidence has stood up to scrutiny and only you and your ilk perceive hand waving.
Again i ask if you will either bible bash the evidence or proclaim elaborate conspiracy and / or hoax about the evidence WHAT WILL YOU ACCEPT ?

The enormous amount of 'heat' ... and the paucity of 'light' (in relation to Evolution) ... on this ... and every other thread on which Evolution is debated shows that there is no evidence for 'Pondkind to Mankind' Evolution.

Please also note that I have neither 'bible bashed' nor claimed the existence of a conspiracy in relation to Evolution on this thread.

Ghost Buster

JC. Can I ask.
You are obviously very happy and comforted by your beliefs and the fuzzy endorphin-ated (?) feelings they give you.
Is that why you dont click on the links, engage meaningfully with the difficult questions you are asked or watch the videos?
You dont want to know as your comfortable illusions will be shattered.
There is no evidence you will accept is there?

Ghost Buster

J C wrote: »

The enormous amount of 'heat' ... and the paucity of 'light' (in relation to Evolution) ... on this ... and every other thread on which Evolution is debated shows that there is no evidence for 'Pondkind to Mankind' Evolution.

Please also note that I have neither 'bible bashed' nor claimed the existence of a conspiracy in relation to Evolution on this thread.

Again I ask. What evidence will you accept?
You keep asking for it., People keep supplying it. You brush it aside with some juvenile comment about your God or discrimination/ hoax/ conspiracy.
Please tell me what evidence can possible get through this screening process of your.?