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. Twelve years on. Still going. Answer soon.

Options
14243454748106

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    J C wrote: »
    A healthy imagination is no liability ... as every everybody who imagines that they are directly descended from Pondslime (via deep time and selected mistakes), can verify ... I'm sure.:)

    Life orientated in the oceans, not some woodland pond ffs


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    J C wrote: »
    A healthy imagination is no liability ... as every everybody who imagines that they are directly descended from Pondslime (via deep time and selected mistakes), can verify ... I'm sure.:)

    From the guy who claims to have had contact with alien lifeforms :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    _Redzer_ wrote: »
    Life orientated in the oceans, not some woodland pond ffs
    Says who ... and how?


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    bumper234 wrote: »
    From the guy who claims to have had contact with alien lifeforms :D
    They aren't descended from Pondslime either!!!:D


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    J C wrote: »
    Says who ... and how?
    For that to be true the woodland would have had to evolve from the life that originated in itself for a start...

    JC after today I've finally made up (I think) my opinion of you. I can't state it though as it's against the boards charter. You're very good at it though!


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


    TheChizler wrote: »
    For that to be true the woodland would have had to evolve from the life that originated in itself for a start...
    I was referring to 'Pondslime' ... which would be some kind of primordial green goo in the supposed era before higher plants and therefore forest trees supposedly evolved.
    The current conventional theory postulates that life initiated its suposed evolution in ponds, possibly close to hot springs.
    TheChizler wrote: »
    JC after today I've finally made up (I think) my opinion of you. I can't state it though as it's against the boards charter. You're very good at it though!
    I'm not really that good ... it's just much easier for me ... because what I'm claiming to have happened, actually did.:)

    It's the same with this 'alien' stuff ... I have the advantage of actually having observed them and their technology, at first hand ... whereas you guys all seem to be relying on what somebody else (who has never seen them either) has told you about them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    J C wrote: »
    It's the same with this 'alien' stuff ... I have the advantage of actually having observed them and their technology, at first hand ... whereas you guys all seem to be relying on what somebody else (who has never seen them either) has told you about them.

    I really want to know more about this. What did it look like?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    I really want to know more about this. What did it look like?

    He can't say, apparently after talking about it for the last few days he has now decided it's all hush hush and top secret :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    I really want to know more about this. What did it look like?
    You don't really ... you just want to laugh ... and if I hadn't seen them myself, I'd probably be just the same as you guys, in this regard.
    Anyway, there are strong protocols about such discussions ... but most of the time they don't need to be applied because everyone is 'self-censoring' on this issue.
    ... and I'll just leave it at that, if that is OK.;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    J C wrote: »
    You don't really ... you just want to laugh ... and if I hadn't seen them myself, I'd probably be just the same as you guys, in this regard.
    Anyway, there are strong protocols about such discussions ... but most of the time they don't need to be applied because everyone is 'self-censoring' on this issue.
    ... and I'll just leave it at that, if that is OK.;)

    Trust me, I'm not laughing.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 276 ✭✭Bellatori


    J C wrote: »
    A healthy imagination is no liability ...

    Indeed it is not. This is how science moves forward through the judicious use of imagination BUT then followed by ... well I'll leave it to Richard Feynman to explain.

    It's that little bit at the end that causes problem for the religious.

    "If it disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are who made the guess, or what his name is… If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”

    It's the lack of evidence for the 'invisible friend' that makes it unbelievable and the inconsistencies with nature, for example, the existence of evil or the nature of free will both of which are at odds with the claims of omnipotence, omniscience and beneficence of the invisible friend.

    The evidence for evolution is, however, extensive.


  • Registered Users Posts: 276 ✭✭Bellatori


    Trust me, I'm not laughing.

    I am a great admirer of those with good self control. Yours must be epic. :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,192 ✭✭✭housetypeb


    J C wrote: »

    ... I have the advantage of actually having observed them and their technology, at first hand ...

    ...whereas you guys all seem to be relying on what somebody else (who has never seen them either) has told you about them.

    Normally,your position is the opposite,you dismiss any advancements in science.
    While relying yourself on the secondhand tales of the bible.


  • Moderators Posts: 51,805 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    It's the same with this 'alien' stuff ... I have the advantage of actually having observed them and their technology, at first hand ... whereas you guys all seem to be relying on what somebody else (who has never seen them either) has told you about them.
    Knew I had something to do.....


    Neuralizer1.png

    :P

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



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    SW wrote: »
    Knew I had something to do.....


    Neuralizer1.png

    :P
    ... be afraid ... be very afraid ... or not, if you are Saved.:):p


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Bellatori wrote: »
    Indeed it is not. This is how science moves forward through the judicious use of imagination BUT then followed by ... well I'll leave it to Richard Feynman to explain.

    It's that little bit at the end that causes problem for the religious.

    "If it disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are who made the guess, or what his name is… If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”
    ... what is the experiment that shows that CFSGI (Complex Functional Specified Genetic Information) can be spontaneously created?


  • Moderators Posts: 51,805 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    ... what is the experiment that shows that CFSGI (Complex Functional Specified Genetic Information) can be spontaneously created?

    Are you going to post any evidence in support of creationism?

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



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    SW wrote: »
    Are you going to post any evidence in support of creationism?

    That would be a first, have yet to see him answer a question directly never mind post evidence of anything.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    SW wrote: »
    Are you going to post any evidence in support of creationism?
    That would be somewhat off-topic ... as the thread is about the origin Specious Nonesense AKA Spontaneous Evolution.:);)


  • Moderators Posts: 51,805 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    That would be somewhat off-topic ... as the thread is about the origin Specious Nonesense AKA Spontaneous Evolution.:);)

    So no evidence then.

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



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    SW wrote: »
    Knew I had something to do.....


    Neuralizer1.png

    :P

    Don't work on me no more, you've done me too often.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Here you go JC, your evidence won't be off topic here.

    MrP


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    J C wrote: »
    That would be somewhat off-topic ... as the thread is about the origin Specious Nonesense AKA Spontaneous Evolution.:);)
    Here you go then, knock yourself out.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90278122&postcount=1

    MrP


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    MrPudding wrote: »
    I never thought there was such a 'hunger' for Creation Science on the A & A.

    ... but, of course, it stands to reason ... when you think about it.:)


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Don't work on me no more, you've done me too often.
    I was talking about the MIB.:)


  • Moderators Posts: 51,805 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    I never thought there was such a 'hunger' for Creation Science on the A & A.

    ... but, of course, it stands to reason ... when you think about it.:)

    less talk, more evidence

    *cracks whip*

    :P

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



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    SW wrote: »
    Are you going to post any evidence in support of creationism?

    He added to his abbreviation,isn't that enough? CFSI is no more and CFGSI is born, further bollocks with a slightly different name. :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 35,524 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    MrPudding wrote: »
    Here you go JC, your evidence won't be off topic here.

    MrP
    Because bible.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Something tells me he will choose to ignore this thread.


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


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    He added to his abbreviation,isn't that enough? CFSI is no more and CFGSI is born. :rolleyes:
    Good point Corkfeen ... it's the evolution of the Modern Creation Synthesis ... happening right here on the A & A.

    No wonder Mr P is even hungering for more ... and impulsively created a special thread dedicated to Creation Science.

    I couldn't ask for more, guys ... it's just like all of my birthdays have come together.

    Hugs all around ... including you, Mr P.

    BTW ... it's CFSGI ... but no worries.


Advertisement